57–547 PDF 

Calendar No. 478 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–228 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

BILL, 2011 

JULY 22, 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3635] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 3635) making appropriations for energy and water development and related 

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for 

other purposes, favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

Amount in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2011 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $35,073,700,000 

Amount of 2010 appropriations ............................... 33,978,000,000 

Amount of 2011 budget estimate ............................ 35,878,274,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2010 appropriations .......................................... ∂1,095,700,000 

2011 budget estimate ........................................ ¥804,574,000 
(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 ....................................................................... 14 

Construction, General ........................................................................ 29 

Flood Control, Mississippi River, and Tributaries .......................... 41 

Operation and Maintenance, General .............................................. 44 

Regulatory Program ........................................................................... 66 

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ......................... 66 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies .......................................... 67 

General Expenses ............................................................................... 67 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) .......... 68 

General Provisions—Corps of Engineers—Civil .............................. 68 

Title II: 

Department of the Interior: 

Central Utah Project Completion Account .............................................. 70 

Bureau of Reclamation: 

Water and Related Resources ........................................................... 72 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ......................................... 80 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ...................................................... 80 

Policy and Administration ................................................................. 80 

General Provisions—Department of the Interior .................................... 80 

Title III: 

Department of Energy: 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ............................................... 83 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability ..................................... 90 

Nuclear Energy .................................................................................. 91 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ....................................... 93 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ........................................ 95 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve ............................................................. 95 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve .............................................. 96 

Energy Information Administration ................................................. 96 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup ..................................................... 96 

Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund .. 97 

Science ........................................................................................................ 98 

Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy ........................................ 103 

Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program .................................. 103 

Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program ............. 104 

Departmental Administration .................................................................. 104 

Office of the Inspector General ................................................................ 105 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons Activities ...................................................................... 105 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ............................................. 112 

Naval Reactors ............................................................................ 112 

Office of the Administrator ........................................................ 116 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities: 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ...................................................... 116 

Other Defense Activities .................................................................... 119 

Power Marketing Administrations: 

Operation and Maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration ....................................................................................... 119 
Page

3 

Title III—Continued 

Department of Energy—Continued 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities—Continued 

Power Marketing Administrations—Continued 

Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration ....................................................................................... 120 

Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance, 

Western Area Power Administration ..................................... 120 

Falcon and Amistad Operations and Maintenance Fund ........ 120 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Salaries and Expenses .. 120 

General Provisions—Department of Energy ........................................... 143 

Title IV: 

Independent Agencies: 

Appalachian Regional Commission .......................................................... 144 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ................................................. 144 

Delta Regional Authority .......................................................................... 145 

Denali Commission ................................................................................... 145 

Northern Border Regional Commission ................................................... 145 

Southeast Crescent Regional Commission .............................................. 145 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission .............................................................. 145 

Office of Inspector General ................................................................ 146 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board .................................................. 147 

Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects ........................................................................................ 147 

Tennessee Valley Authority: Office of the Inspector General ................ 147 

Title V: General Provisions ..................................................................................... 148 

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

Senate ................................................................................................................... 149 

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

Senate ................................................................................................................... 149 

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

Senate ................................................................................................................... 150 

Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... 158 

Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items ...................................... 158 

Comparative Statement of Budget Authority ........................................................ 212 
(4) 

PURPOSE 

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

year 2011 beginning October 1, 2010, and ending September 30, 

2011, 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 2011 budget estimates for the bill total 

$35,878,274,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The recommendation of the Committee totals $35,073,700,000. This is 

$804,574,000 below the budget estimates and $1,095,700,000 above 

the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year. 

SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

The Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water held 

three sessions in connection with the fiscal year 2011 appropriation 

bill. Witnesses included officials and representatives of the Federal 

agencies under the subcommittee’s jurisdiction. 

The recommendations for fiscal year 2011 therefore, have been 

developed after careful consideration of available data. 

VOTES IN THE COMMITTEE

By a vote of 17 to 12 the Committee on July 22, 2010, 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 U.S. Army 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); and 

—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 290 military officers are responsible for this nationwide mission. 

It is important to realize that while the Corps Civil Works programs impact all 50 States and virtually every citizen of our Nation, they are a relatively minor part of the Federal budget. It is 

instructive to understand the Federal budget and the resources 

that go into the various programs in order to determine the proper 

value that perhaps should be placed on these programs. 

For fiscal year 2010, the overall Federal budget amounted to 

$3,540,000,000,000. Discretionary spending made up 

$1,250,000,000,000 or just over 35 percent of the overall budget. 

The remaining nearly 65 percent of the budget consists of mandatory spending not subject to annual appropriations. 

Of the $1,250,000,000,000 in discretionary spending, 

$530,000,000,000 is referred to as non-defense discretionary spending. This amounts to 15 percent of the Federal budget and is what 

the administration has proposed to freeze for 3 years to reduce the 

annual budget deficit. 
6 

The $530,000,000,000 in non-defense discretionary spending in 

fiscal year 2010 was where 97.5 percent of the funds for the Corps 

of Engineers was appropriated. In fiscal year 2010, the Corps nondefense budget amounted to just more than $5,300,000,000. That 

means that the Corps’ budget makes up about 1 percent of the nondefense discretionary spending or about 0.15 percent of the overall 

budget. 

A logical question to ask would be what does the Nation receive 

for an investment of that magnitude? 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; 

—Regulatory oversight; and 

—Water supply. 

In fiscal year 2010, 1,167 projects were under construction. These 

included 434 projects specifically authorized by Congress and 733 

projects, comprising 9 authorities, of the Continuing Authorities 

Program. 

Of the specifically authorized projects, 191 were flood risk management; 5 were for hydropower; 147 were for navigation; 39 were 

for environmental restoration; and 52 were for environmental infrastructure. 

Forty-one States are served by Corps of Engineers ports and waterways including all States east of the Mississippi River. The 

Corps operates and maintains 12,000 miles of commercial inland 

channels. Sixteen percent of U.S. domestic freight was carried by 

water in 2007 (by ton-miles, excluding air and pipeline). In 2007, 

2,734 U.S. companies were operating on U.S. waterways. The 

Corps operates and maintains 926 harbors on the coasts, inland 

waterways, and the Great Lakes. Nearly 2.5 billion tons of cargo 

were handled by U.S. ports and waterways in 2008 (998.7 million 

tons inbound from foreign sources, 522.1 million tons outbound and 

956.3 million tons shipped domestically. The value of the foreign 

commerce handled at U.S. ports in 2008 was $1,624,000,000,000. 

More than 43 percent of the tonnage consisted of shipments of 

crude oil and petroleum products. The Corps also operates 238 lock 

chambers on the inland waterway system. The average age of these 

facilities is 58 years. 

To maintain these navigation channels, the Corps dredges approximately 263 million cubic yards of material at a cost of 

$1,344,000,000. More than 82 percent of this dredging is done by 

51 private firms (33 of which are small businesses). To augment 

the private commercial dredge fleet, the Corps owns 11 dredges— 

4 hopper dredges and 7 others. 

The Corps manages structures for flood risk management at 674 

sites including 563 at Corps of Engineers-owned and -operated dam 

projects. The Corps also oversees a network of about 11,750 miles 

of levees either built or controlled by the Corps. The average an-
7 

nual damages prevented by these flood risk management projects 

for the 10 year period from 1999–2008 was $22,300,000,000. 

The Corps has 75 hydropower projects in operation with 350 generating units. The installed generating capacity of these units is 

21,747 megawatts. Seventy billion nine hundred million kilowatthours of electricity are generated annually providing $800,000,000 

in revenue to the Treasury. The Corps owns and operates 24 percent of the U.S. hydropower capacity and provides 3 percent of the 

total U.S. electric capacity. There are another 90 non-Federal 

power plants located at Corps facilities providing an additional 

2,300 megawatts of capacity. 

The Corps owns more than 76 million acres and manages an additional 4 million acres at various Corps projects. The total surface 

area, at full pool level, of all Corps lakes totals 26,300,000 acres, 

or an area slightly larger than the State of Kentucky. 

The total capacity of Corps lakes is 329.2 million acre-feet of 

storage. Of that amount, the Corps has a total of 9.76 million acrefeet of authorized municipal and industrial water supply storage in 

136 projects. These projects are located in 25 States as well as 

Puerto Rico. Forty-eight Corps project also have authorized irrigation storage. The total investment in municipal and industrial 

water supply storage is $1,500,000,000. 

The Corps is the top provider for recreation within the Federal 

Government. Ten percent of the U.S. population visits a Corps 

project at least once a year—that is more than 370 million visits 

per year. The Corps has 4,641 recreation sites at 422 Corps 

projects (mostly lakes). Seventy percent of the U.S. population live 

within 50 miles of a Corps lake. Twelve million acres of land and 

water controlled by the Corps is used for recreation. The Corps 

hosts 20 percent of the visits to Federal recreation areas on 2 percent of Federal lands. Corps projects provide 56,964 miles of shoreline (which is longer than the coastline of the continental United 

States). The Corps maintains 94,964 campsites, 6,487 miles of 

trails, and 3,522 boat launch ramps. The Corps has one-third of all 

U.S. freshwater fishing and 20,000 fishing tournaments are held 

annually at Corps projects. Visitors spend $18,000,000,000 annually at Corps projects. Visitation at Corps projects supports more 

than 350,000 full- or part-time jobs. There are more than 500 concessionaires on Corps projects with gross fixed assets of 

$1,000,000,000. 

In fiscal year 2009, the Corps acted on 71,260 permit requests 

through the Corps regulatory program. There were 4,240 individual 

permits and letters of permission; 18,680 regional general permits; 

and 26,540 nationwide permits. Two hundred and sixty permits 

were denied and the applications were withdrawn for 9,750 requests. The Corps also made some 80,000 jurisdictional wetland determinations in fiscal year 2009. 

The Corps continues to provide support to local, State, and Federal agencies before, during, and after major disasters. Major disasters responded to in 2009: North Dakota/Minnesota Floods; Continued support to Hurricane Katrina, Gustaf, and Ike recovery operations. 

The Corps also supports more than 70 other (non-defense) Government agencies. In fiscal year 2009, the expenditures for this ef-
8 

fort topped $2,000,000,000 and were paid for by the agencies requesting the assistance. The biggest customers for the Corps’ services are: Department of Homeland Security—Customs and Border 

Protection; Department of Homeland Security—FEMA; Department 

of State; Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]; and U.S. Agency 

for International Development. 

OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST

The fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Corps of Engineers is composed of $4,939,000,000 in new budget authority. This is a 

decrease of $186,000,000 from the fiscal year 2010 request. The 

budget request is $506,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount. 

The Committee is disappointed that the administration has proposed to invest less in our Nation’s water infrastructure in fiscal 

year 2011 than they did in fiscal year 2010. The Committee is very 

concerned about the continued large gap between the administration’s budget proposal and the annual appropriations provided by 

this Committee. The Committee would like to find a constructive 

way to work with the administration to narrow this gap. 

The Committee is concerned that the administration is not placing the proper economic value on the Corps’ Civil Works program 

when budgetary resources are parceled out. 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. Infrastructure budgets have to be increased. If 

not, the Nation will continue to face unscheduled outages, damaged 

and incomplete infrastructure, and other emergency situations that 

must be dealt with through ever-increasing emergency appropriations. The situations in New Orleans and south Louisiana in the 

aftermath of Hurricane Katrina should have been a wake-up call 

to the Nation as to how we should be making investment decisions. 

A few billion dollars more of investment in advance of Hurricane 

Katrina would have reduced the outlay of the tens of billions of dollars that the Nation has had to invest since the hurricane. 

The Corps Civil Works program means jobs for our citizens in 

the form of design and construction of the projects, materials and 

supplies for construction and maintenance not to mention the ancillary services that are provided for all aspects of the Civil Works 

programs. Just as important to the Nation as the jobs created and 

retained by these investments are the taxes paid to local, State, 

and Federal coffers as a result of these investments. 

Over the last decade, the infrastructure provided by the Civil 

Works program has provided more than $500,000,000,000 in benefits to the Nation as well as revenues to the Treasury through prevention of flood damages, transportation savings, recreation benefits, hydropower revenues, water supply benefits, and environmental benefits. This is a very conservative estimate based on 

readily quantifiable data. These benefits were achieved on an in-
9 

vestment of less than $70,000,000,000 (including the funds provided in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Yet this return on investment seems 

not to be considered when parceling out budgetary resources. 

The Committee urges the administration to assess the value of 

the Corps’ programs to the national economy and derive a level of 

investment from that impact that is commensurate with the outputs of this critical infrastructure. 

Unfortunately, this budget proposal, like many previous budget 

proposals, is woefully inadequate in funding national infrastructure 

needs. It ignores studies and projects that are ongoing and funded 

in the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water Appropriations Act, that 

was agreed to by the Congress and signed into law by the President, in favor of a select group of studies and projects that comport 

to budgetary criteria devised by the administration. While this is 

the prerogative of the administration, it should be noted that the 

criteria utilized is not based in law. It is simply the administration’s choice and as such has changed from year to year and from 

administration to administration. 

The Committee differs with the administration concerning benefit-to-cost ratios being utilized to establish priority for funding. 

The Flood Control Act of 1936 established that project benefits 

should exceed projects costs. This has been the Corps’ longstanding 

water resource policy and legislative attempts to change this requirement have been unsuccessful. However, the administration 

has arbitrarily decided that benefits simply exceeding the costs is 

not a sufficient measure of a project’s worth. For fiscal year 2011, 

the administration has chosen 2.5 to be the threshold for projects 

to be included in the budget. Yet the administration has even chosen to ignore this requirement. 

Of the 95 projects recommended by the administration in the 

construction account for fiscal year 2011, only 40 had a benefit-tocost ratio above the arbitrary 2.5 threshold chosen for fiscal year 

2011. An additional nine projects with benefit-to-cost ratios of less 

than 2.5 were included based on ‘‘substantial life saving benefits’’. 

These 49 projects account for only $570,000,000 or 34 percent of 

the requested $1,690,000,000 for construction. That means that the 

other 46 projects funded at more than $1,100,000,000 were chosen 

by other criteria established by the administration. Some of these 

criteria, such as dam safety/seepage stability correction and environmental compliance are criteria where the administration and 

the Congress are in agreement. However, other criteria utilized by 

the administration are more subjective. 

The criteria for determining which studies to budget for appears 

to be even murkier than the criteria for determining which construction projects to fund. What is obvious is the result. Fewer 

studies are funded every year than are enacted in the previous appropriation act. These studies provide the information needed to 

make vital investments in our water resources infrastructure. However, they are de-emphasized in the budget request. 

The Regulatory Program is proposed at $193,000,000 for fiscal 

year 2011. This is an increase of $3,000,000 to this program that 

provides the funding for the Corps nationwide regulatory roles pri-
10 

marily under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and section 10 of 

the River and Harbor Act of 1899. 

The Committee is disappointed that funding for the Formerly 

Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program [FUSRAP] was cut by 

$4,000,000 from the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount of 

$134,000,000. This is a $10,000,000 cut to the program over the 

last 2 years. 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 proposed at $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. These funds are proposed for 

readiness and preparedness activities for the Corps of Engineers. 

The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) is proposed as a separate account for $6,000,000. 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 agrees 

that the office should be funded 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 General Expenses [GE] account is proposed at $185,000,000 

for fiscal year 2011. This is the same as the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount. With inflation, this is a cut to the management and 

oversight functions of the headquarters of the Corps. 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 headquarters as opposed to 10 percent 

or more for comparable agencies in the National Capital region. 

PLANNING PROGRAM

The Committee is very concerned about the Corps planning program. The Committee believes that the Corps should have a robust 

planning program to not only address new water resource needs 

but also to evaluate changes throughout the project development 

process. Over the last 10 years, the Committee has provided more 

than $1,500,000,000 to the Corps for planning studies versus just 

over $1,000,000,000 as proposed by the administration for the same 

period. 

As this Committee has noted in the past, planning in the Corps 

is a specialized skill set and once that ability is lost, it is difficult 

to re-establish. Most of the criticisms of the Corps’ project development process in recent years have centered on problems in the 

planning process. The Committee has attempted to maintain consistent planning funding in order to retain these skills. Even within the meager planning budgets provided by the administration, 

some improvements to the planning program such as the Planning 

Associates Program and Planning Centers of Expertise have been 

initiated. However, the Planning Centers of Expertise have not 

been funded to the extent necessary to develop them into an effective planning tool. The Committee has provided additional funding 
11 

for these centers in fiscal year 2011 and strongly urges the administration to provide the necessary resources in future budget submissions. 

However, somewhere the planning process is breaking down. Despite relatively stable planning budgets, the number of reports by 

the Chief of Engineers has declined precipitously. In the run-up to 

the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, 26 Chief of Engineers’ reports were completed in 2005 and 2006. However since 

2007, only six Chief of Engineers’ reports have been completed. 

Complex planning studies seem to take unbelievable amounts of 

time. 

A General Reevaluation Report [GRR] of an approximately $1,250,000,000 flood risk management/environmental restoration 

project in the West has been ongoing since 1998 and has received 

nearly $30,000,000 in Federal funds to date. According to the latest 

schedule, a Chief of Engineers’ report is not expected until late 

2012. At the other extreme, in the Upper Great Plains, a roughly 

$1,250,000,000 flood risk management feasibility study was initiated in 2009 and a draft Chief’s report is currently scheduled for 

December 2010 at a Federal cost of about $7,000,000. At this rate, 

the preconstruction engineering and design on the second study 

may be completed before the GRR on the first. 

These are just two of the extremes in the planning program 

across the Corps Civil Works program. Another problem area is 

deep draft navigation. These studies also seem to extend for unusually long periods of time and suffer from dramatically increased 

study costs. Two east coast DOEP draft studies have been underway for more than 10 years with no end in sight to the study process. Across the planning spectrum, studies with shorter schedules 

are far outweighed by those with unusually long schedules. While 

inconsistent funding is a reason for some drawn out schedules, it 

is not the only reason. Some planning efforts seem to go on forever, 

regardless of the amount of funding provided. 

The Committee understands that the planning process is the 

most difficult phase of the project development process and that a 

myriad of factors can lengthen or derail a planning study. However, a planning study that lasts longer than 10 years seems excessive. One would think that studies of this length would be limited 

to the largest, most complex projects that the Corps expects to undertake. Proper planning is critical to the success of every Corps 

project; however, planning for planning’s sake leads to frustration 

with the planning process. 

The Corps is directed to report to this Committee by September 

30, 2010, on ways to improve the planning program to reduce these 

extended planning schedules. This report should address funding 

needs, process changes, management changes and other elements 

required to improve the timeliness of the planning process. 

THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA], 

enacted on February 17, 2009, was an attempt to combat the severe economic downturn by putting our citizens back to work rebuilding our Nation’s water resource infrastructure. The Corps was 

provided $4,600,000,000 to stimulate job growth by addressing 
12 

needed water resource infrastructure needs. The Corps project list 

was not approved by the administration until May 2009. However, 

even with this delayed start, the Corps has obligated more than 85 

percent of the ARRA funding. More than 44 percent of the funding 

has gone to small businesses. The Corps is on track to obligate all 

of this funding before it expires on September 30, 2010. 

BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Committee notes that the budget justifications arrived nearly concurrently with the administration’s budget rollout. This is a 

considerable improvement over the past 2 years. The Committee 

appreciates the traditional layout of the justifications and notes 

that information was provided for all accounts. 

INLAND WATERWAY TRUST FUND

The Committee was first made aware of the precipitous decline 

of revenues in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund [IWTF] when the 

fiscal year 2008 budget was submitted to Congress. At that time, 

the Committee was told a legislative proposal would be forthcoming. It was developed as a part of the fiscal year 2009 budget 

request. As such, there was no stakeholder involvement in the proposal. When it was finally presented to Congress—some 12 months 

later—it was universally panned by the navigation industry. The 

fiscal year 2009 budget request was predicated on this proposal 

being enacted. Congress demurred and indicated that a more equitable proposal was needed. 

The fiscal year 2011 budget repeats the proposal to phase out the 

existing fuel tax that funds the IWTF and phase in a lockage fee. 

Fortunately, the budget was not predicated on this proposal being 

enacted. The administration proposal only expends existing revenues available in the IWTF and deposits assumed revenues from 

the lockage fee into the IWTF to be used in subsequent years. This 

is a much more prudent way to budget with these limited funds. 

The Committee is aware of a Government-industry working 

group that is working to find acceptable ways to enhance revenues 

in the IWTF while providing an overhaul in the way that IWTF 

projects are prioritized and budgeted. Much of this group’s work 

will require legislation to effect the changes needed to enhance the 

funding for these projects. The Committee looks forward to the 

final product from this working group and the appropriate authorizing committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate 

acting on this proposal. 

Until new revenues are introduced into the IWTF, the Committee will only provide funds for inland waterway projects that 

can be accommodated within the approximately $90,000,000 annually that the current fuel tax generates. The Committee has again 

included legislative text 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. 

It should be noted that the Committee has waited through four 

budget cycles for a viable proposal to more robustly fund the investments that need to be made in the inland waterway system. 

The Committee continues to support the current cost-shared approach for these projects with half of the funds derived from gen-
13 

eral revenues and half from the IWTF. However, the Committee is 

only willing to wait so long for the appropriate committees to fulfill 

their responsibilities and provide the necessary legislation to resolve this issue. Ultimately, this Committee may be forced to act 

in order to address the serious needs of the inland waterway system. 

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. 

The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation provided in the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water Development Act. 

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. 

DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

The budget for the Corps of Engineers consists of individual line 

items of projects. As presented by the President, the budget contains 975 specific line-item requests for directed spending by the 

administration. Additional funding is requested by the administration for nationwide line items. All of these line items were specific 

requests by the administration or the Congress to be funded in fiscal year 2011. They did not request these funds programmatically, 

they requested them for a specific project in a specific location for 

a specific purpose. 

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. 
14 

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. 

Two tables are provided at the back of this report for disclosure. 

The first table provides the congressionally directed spending items 

requested by Members of Congress requiring disclosure under the 

provisions of Rule 44 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. If the 

Member requested the budget request or if only the budget request 

was provided, Member names are not listed next to these items because under the provisions of Rule 44 this would not be considered 

congressionally directed spending. The second table lists the Presidentially directed spending items. While this table is not required 

under the disclosure provisions of Rule 44, the Committee believes 

that it is prudent to provide this additional disclosure information. 

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, 2010 ............................................................................. $160,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 104,000,000 

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 amount 

proposed in the budget is generally the same as what has been proposed in previous budgets. Nationwide studies and programs consume almost half of the administration’s GI request. This budget 

asserts that the Nation should concentrate scarce resources on 

completing studies but not carrying forward ongoing studies. 

The Committee has provided for a robust and balanced planning 

program for fiscal year 2011. However, no new starts are included 

in this recommendation. To provide additional transparency in the 

budget process, the Committee is pleased that the administration 

has maintained the structure of this account from how it was displayed in the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water Act. 

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 represents the preconstruction engineering and design phase. These 

detailed cost-shared designs are prepared while the project recommended to Congress is awaiting authorization for construction. 
15 

The Committee believes that by segregating the table in this 

manner, 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 budget request and the recommended Committee allowance 

are shown on the following table: 
16 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RECON FEAS PED RECON FEAS PED 

ALASKA 

HOMER HARBOR NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, AK ......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK ............................................................................................................................................................... ................ 100 ................ ................ 100 ................VALDEZ NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, AK ....................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK ..................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 450 ................ ................ 450 ................

ARKANSAS 

LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & TN ................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, AR ................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO ........................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR ............................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

CALIFORNIA 

ALISO CREEK, CA ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................ARROYO SECO WATERSHED, CA ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA ...................................................................................................................................... ................ 900 ................ ................ 900 ................CENTRAL VALLEY INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA .................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................COYOTE AND BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA ........................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 500 ................ .................. 500 COYOTE DAM, CA ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA (LACDA) WATER CONSERVATION AND SUPPLY, WHITTIER NARROWS DAM, CA ............................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA ..................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY, CA .......................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA ............................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 210 ................ ................ 210 ................MATILIJA DAM, CA ............................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 100 MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................MIDDLE CREEK, CA .......................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 400 PAJARO RIVER, CA ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 300 REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA .......................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL (GRR), CA (SYSTEM EVALUATION) ..................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 600 ................SAC-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA ......................................................................................................................... ................ 468 ................ ................ 750 ................
17 

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA (OCEANSIDE) ........................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK, CA ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, FRAZIER CREEK, CA ........................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, CA ....................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WEST STANISLAUS COUNTY, ORESTIMBA CREEK, CA ........................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 223 ................SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WHITE RIVER AND DRY CREEK, CA ................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED, CA ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA ................................................................................................................................................................ ................ 307 ................ ................ 307 ................SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................ST HELENA-NAPA RIVER, CA ........................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................SUN VALLEY WATERSHED, CA ......................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................SUTTER COUNTY, CA ....................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 339 ................ ................ 339 ................TIJUANA RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, CA ....................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 50 .................. ................UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 177 ................ ................ 177 ................WESTMINSTER, EAST GARDEN GROVE, CA ...................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 279 ................

COLORADO 

CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER BASIN, GREELEY, CO ............................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................CHATFIELD REALLOCATION STUDY, CO ........................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 267 ................ADAMS AND DENVER COUNTIES, CO ............................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 50 .................. ................

CONNECTICUT 

WESTCHESTER COUNTY STREAMS, BYRAM RIVER FLOOD REDUCTION, CT & NY .......................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 300 ................CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CT, MA, NH & VT ............................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

DELAWARE 

RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, DE .................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................

FLORIDA 

CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................FLAGLER COUNTY, FL ...................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 287 ................LAKE WORTH INLET, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL .............................................................................................................................................. ................ 340 ................ ................ 340 ................MILE POINT, FL ................................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 375 100 SARASOTA, LIDO KEY BEACH, FL ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 WALTON COUNTY, FL ....................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 

GEORGIA 

AUGUSTA, GA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 578 ................ ................ 578 ................SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA ............................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 600 ................ .................. 600 TYBEE ISLAND, GA ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................
18 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RECON FEAS PED RECON FEAS PED 

HAWAII 

ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 408 ................ ................ 408 ................HILO HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, HI ................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................WEST MAUI WATERSHED, MAUI, HI ................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................

ILLINOIS 

DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II) .................................................................................................................................................................. ................ 500 ................ ................ 500 ................ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ 400 ................ ................ 750 ................INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-MISSISSIPPI RIVER AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH, WI .................................................. ................ 400 ................ ................ 750 ................PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE AND SANITARY DISTRICT AND FISH LAKE DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 850 ................UPPER MISS RIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IL, IA, MO, MN & WI ................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 750 .................. ................UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER-ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI ........................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 4,000

INDIANA 

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

IOWA 

CEDAR RIVER, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA ................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 700 3,000 HUMBOLDT, IA ................................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 175 ................

KANSAS 

BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................MANHATTAN, KS ............................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................TOPEKA, KS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 100 ................ .................. 500 UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS .............................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 90 

LOUISIANA 

AMITE RIVER—ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ............................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA ................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ 2,000 ................ .................. 2,000 BOSSIER PARISH, LA ....................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................CALCASIEU LOCK, LA ....................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 1,000 ................ ................ 1,000 ................CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA ........................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 
19 

CROSS LAKE, LA .............................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 50 ................LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ............................................................................................................................ ................ 16,595 ................ ................ 16,595 ................PORT OF IBERIA, LA ........................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 1,000 SOUTHWEST COASTAL LOUISIANA HURRICANE PROTECTION, LA .................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................ST CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA ......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 350 ................WEST SHORE-LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA ........................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

MAINE 

SEARSPORT HARBOR, ME ................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

MARYLAND 

ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, MD & DC (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) .................................................................................................... ................ 183 ................ ................ 183 ................ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY LEVEE, MD & DC ................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN WATER RESOURCES, MD .................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 50 .................. ................CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD & VA ..................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................CHESAPEAKE BAY MARSHLANDS, MD .............................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 50 .................. ................CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, PA, MD & VA ............................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD ................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 483 ................ .................. 169 MIDDLE POTOMAC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD, VA, PA, WV & DC ................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 68 ................SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND LOW FLOW MANAGEMENT, NY, PA & MD .............................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA .................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,800 ................PILGRIM LAKE, TRURO & PROVINCETOWN, MA ............................................................................................................................................... ................ 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

MICHIGAN 

CLINTON RIVER RIPARIAN CORRIDOR, MI ....................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................ECORSE CREEK, MI ......................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 200 GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA & WI .............................................................................................. 400 ................ ................ 400 .................. ................GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS & SEDIMENT REMEDIATION, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA & WI ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................LANSING GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI ............................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

MINNESOTA 

MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, MN & SD ......................................................................................................................................... ................ 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

MISSISSIPPI 

PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

MISSOURI 

KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS ................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ 500 ................ ................ 500 ................
20 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RECON FEAS PED RECON FEAS PED 

MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION, MO & KS ..................................................................................................................................................... ................ 600 ................ ................ 600 ................MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L–455 & R 460–471, MO & KS ..................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 RIVER DES PERES, MO .................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 45 

MONTANA 

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

NEVADA 

TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV .................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 4,500 

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA ........................................................................................................................................ ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER TURNING BASIN, NH .......................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 

NEW JERSEY 

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, NJ ............................................................................................................................................... ................ 290 ................ ................ 290 ................HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ..................................................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ ............................................................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................LOWER SADDLE RIVER, NJ ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 200 NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, HEREFORD INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ ............................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM NOURISHMENT, NJ ........................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ & NY ............................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 125 ................PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 160 PECKMAN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ .......................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 620 ................RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ .................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 207 ................RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ ................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NJ .............................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 125 SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ ....................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 200 STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ ................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

NEW MEXICO 

ESPANOLA VALLEY, RIO GRANDE AND TRIBUTARIES, NM ............................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................
21 

RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO AND TX (SECTION 729) .................................................................................................................................... ................ 500 ................ ................ 500 ................

NEW YORK 

DUTCHESS COUNTY WATERSHEDS, NY ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................FORGE RIVER WATERSHED, NY ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 400 ................HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH, NY ................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 170 ................ .................. 170 LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY .......................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 172 ................ ................ 172 ................NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, ASHAROKEN, NY ......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................SOUTH SHORE OF STATEN ISLAND, NY ........................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................TEN MILE RIVER, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NY AND LITCHFIELD COUNTY, CT ...................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 100 ................

NORTH CAROLINA 

CURRITUCK SOUND, NC ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 300 ................ ................ 300 ................NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC ................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ 200 ................ .................. 200 NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL, NC .......................................................................................................................................... 104 ................ ................ 11 393 ................SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC .................................................................................................................................................. ................ 300 ................ ................ 300 ................

NORTH DAKOTA 

FARGO-MOORHEAD METRO STUDY, ND & MN (RRN BASIN AUTHORITY) ........................................................................................................ ................ 150 15,000 ................ 150 15,000 FARGO-MOORHEAD UPSTREAM STUDY, ND & MN (RRN BASIN AUTHORITY) .................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................JAMES RIVER, ND ............................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, ND, MN, SD & MANITOBA, CANADA ........................................................................................................ ................ 433 ................ ................ 1,896 ................MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS & MO ............................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 5,000 ................SHEYENNE RIVER, ND ...................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

OHIO 

WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI ..................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 2,000 ................

OKLAHOMA 

ARKANSAS RIVER CORRIDOR, OK .................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,650 ................GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, KS, MO & AR ................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 190 ................SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK .................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 325 ................WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK .............................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 325 ................

OREGON 

LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ................................................................................................................... ................ 300 ................ ................ 300 ................WALLA WALLA WATERSHED, OR & WA ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OR ..................................................................................................................................... ................ 220 ................ ................ 220 ................WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR ....................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ 153 ................ .................. 153 
22 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RECON FEAS PED RECON FEAS PED 

PENNSYLVANIA 

BLOOMSBURG, PA ............................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA, DE & NJ ................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, WISSAHICKON WATERSHED, PA ............................................................................................................................ ................ 214 ................ ................ 214 ................UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION SYSTEM STUDY, PA ................................................................................................................................................ ................ 749 ................ ................ 1,200 ................WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, PA ........................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 4 ..................

SOUTH CAROLINA 

EDISTO ISLAND, SC .......................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 114 ................ ................ 114 ................

TENNESSEE 

MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN ......................................................................................................................................... ................ 50 ................ ................ 50 ................

TEXAS 

ABILENE, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN-ELM CREEK) .......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................................................................. ................ 726 ................ ................ 726 ................DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX ................................................................................................................................... ................ 700 ................ ................ 2,300 ................GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENTS, TX .......................................................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX ........................................................................................................................................ ................ 600 ................ ................ 600 ................LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX .............................................................................................................................................................. ................ 425 ................ ................ 425 ................NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 250 ................ ................ 250 ................SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 400 SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX .......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

VIRGINIA 

CHOWAN RIVER, VA & NC ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 124 .................. ................CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................DISMAL SWAMP & DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA ............................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 22 ................FOUR MILE RUN, VA ........................................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 53 ................GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA ...................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................JOHN H KERR DAM & RESERVOIR, VA & NC (SEC 216) ................................................................................................................................ ................ 300 ................ ................ 300 ................
23 

LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA ............................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ 50 ................ .................. 50 NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BASIN, VA ...................................................................................................................................................... ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................

WASHINGTON 

CENTRALIA, CHEHALIS RIVER, LEWIS COUNTY, WA ........................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA ............................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................ELLIOT BAY SEAWALL, WA ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................MT. ST. HELENS ............................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 225 ................ ................ 225 ................PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, WA .................................................................................................................. ................ 400 ................ ................ 400 ................PUYALLUP RIVER, WA ...................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 450 ................SKAGIT RIVER, WA ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,137 ................SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA ......................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

WEST VIRGINIA 

OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY, OH, PA, IL, IN, VA, AL, TN, NY, MD, NC, MS & GA .................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 3,000 ................

SUBTOTAL PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES .................................................................................................................................... 504 34,323 19,556 1,489 77,840 37,762 

NATIONAL PROGRAMS 

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA: 

AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT TRI–CADD ...................................................................................................................... ................ 350 ................ ................ 350 ................COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................................................ ................ 1,400 ................ ................ 3,400 ................ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................................. ................ 75 ................ ................ 75 ................FLOOD DAMAGE DATA PROGRAM ........................................................................................................................................................... ................ 220 ................ ................ 220 ................FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES .................................................................................................................................................. ................ 8,000 ................ ................ 11,000 ................

DELAWARE DAM SAFETY, DE ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (250 ) ................NUUANU (OAHU), HI ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................WAIOHULI GULCH (MAUI), HI ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................WAIMEA (KAUAI), HI ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................ANAHOLA (KAUAI), HI ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES, HI .......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (300 ) ................DES MOINES RIVER REGULATED FREQUENCY CURVE AND SAYLORVILLE AND RED ROCK RESERVOIRS POOL ELEVATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES, IA ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (80 ) ................IOWA LIDAR, IA .............................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................URBAN LEVEE EVALUATIONS, MUSCATINE, IA ............................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (60 ) ................WICHITA AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN, KS ................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (300 ) ................CHITIMACHA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA, LA [GIS] ................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (400 ) ................CITY OF ALEXANDRIA, LA [GIS] ..................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (400 ) ................EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA [GIS] ......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................
24 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RECON FEAS PED RECON FEAS PED 

LIVINGSTON PARISH, LA [GIS] ....................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (500 ) ................AU TRAIN, MI ................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (75 ) ................PAPILLION CREEK WATERSHED, NE ............................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (430 ) ................OTERO COUNTY, NM ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................SOUTHEASTERN, PA ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (250 ) ................ABINGDON, VA ............................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (55 ) ................

HYDROLOGIC STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................................................ ................ 250 ................ ................ 250 ................INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE) ...................................................................................................................... ................ 225 ................ ................ 225 ................REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT .................................................................................................... ................ 150 ................ ................ 150 ................SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS ............................................................................................................................ ................ 50 ................ ................ 50 ................STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY) ....................................................................................................................................... ................ 600 ................ ................ 600 ................TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES: 

ACCESS TO WATER DATA ........................................................................................................................................................................ ................ 750 ................ ................ 750 ................COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................................ ................ 100 ................ ................ 100 ................OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS: 

CALFED .......................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 100 ................ ................ 100 ................CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ 75 ................ ................ 75 ................COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES ........................................................................................................................................ ................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................GULF OF MEXICO ........................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 100 ................ ................ 100 ................INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT .............................................................................................................................. ................ 700 ................ ................ 700 ................INTERAGENCY WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................................... ................ 955 ................ ................ 955 ................INVENTORY OF DAMS ..................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 400 ................ ................ 400 ................LAKE TAHOE ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 100 ................ ................ 1,000 ................NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM ...................................................................................................................................................... ................ 50 ................ ................ 50 ................NORTH AMERICAN WATERFOWL MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................. ................ 50 ................ ................ 50 ................PACIFIC NW FOREST CASE ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 50 ................ ................ 50 ................SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS .............................................................................................................................................................. ................ 1,550 ................ ................ 1,550 ................

PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES ........................................................................................................................................................ ................ 7,000 ................ ................ 9,000 ................

AUGUSTA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, AR ................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................DELAWARE DAM SAFETY, DE ......................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (250 ) ................SUSUPE/CHALAN KANOA DRAINAGE PLAN (CNMI) ......................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (160 ) ................
25 

PALA LAGOON (AMERICAN SAMOA) ............................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT, HI .................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (250 ) ................HE’EIA WATERSHED, HI .................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................PALMYRA ATOLL ............................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................STATE OF HAWAII GENERAL FLOOD CONTROL PLAN UPDATE ....................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (190 ) ................GREENWAYS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DES MOINES, IA ................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................LOWER NISHNABOTNA RIVER BASIN, IA ........................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................MIDDLE AMANA, IA ........................................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (74 ) ................SHUNGANUNGA CREEK, KS ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................CHOCTAW COUNTY RESERVOIR, MS .............................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................JONES COUNTY RESERVOIR, MS ................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (450 ) ................GENESEE RIVER SEDIMENT STUDY, NY ......................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (250 ) ................OKLAHOMA COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN, OK ............................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ (500 ) ................DRIFT CREEK RESERVOIR PROJECT, OR ....................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ (20 ) ................

OTHER: 

FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT (FEMA/MAP MOD COORDINATION) .............................................................................................................. ................ 2,000 ................ ................ 2,000 ................INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW .................................................................................................................................................................. ................ 700 ................ ................ 700 ................NATIONAL SHORELINE STUDY ................................................................................................................................................................. ................ 375 ................ ................ 375 ................PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM .............................................................................................................................................................. ................ 2,100 ................ ................ 3,000 ................TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ............................................................................................................................................................ ................ 1,000 ................ ................ 1,600 ................WATER RESOURCES PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................................... ................ 500 ................ ................ 500 ................WATER RESOURCES PRIORITY STUDY .................................................................................................................................................... ................ 2,000 ................ ................ .................. ................

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 5,000 ................

BASIC RESEARCH ................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 1,689 ................ ................ 1,689 ................ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND RESTORATION ..................................................................................................................................... ................ 2,597 ................ ................ 2,597 ................FLOOD AND COASTAL SYSTEMS .............................................................................................................................................................. ................ 2,714 ................ ................ 2,714 ................NAVIGATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH .......................................................................................................................................................... ................ 3,439 ................ ................ 3,439 ................SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION, MD & VA ...................................................................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................SYSTEM-WIDE WATER RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................................ ................ 6,083 ................ ................ 6,083 ................URBAN FLOOD DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, DRI, NV ............................................................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ ................ 2,000 ................WATER RESOURCE INFRASTRUCTURE (FLD & CSTL SYS) ...................................................................................................................... ................ 370 ................ ................ 370 ................

SUBTOTAL NATIONAL PROGRAMS ....................................................................................................................................................... ................ 49,617 ................ ................ 65,017 ................TOTAL ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 504 83,940 19,556 1,489 142,857 37,762 

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE .................................................................................................................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ ¥16,108 ................

GRAND TOTAL ..................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ 104,000 ................ ................ 166,000 ................
26 

Homer Harbor Modification, Alaska.—The Committee recommends $300,000 to continue feasibility studies of a new harbor 

basin. The current harbor basin at the Port and Harbor of Homer 

is utilized beyond its capacity, with boats rafting three and four 

abreast at many locations in the harbor. Additionally, Homer is experiencing more demand every year for servicing larger fishing vessels, as a delivery port for these vessels to sell their catch, acquire 

ice, effect repairs, and for outfitting and provisioning as well as lay 

up between seasons. 

Valdez Harbor Expansion, Alaska.—The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to continue preconstruction engineering and design studies. Rafting during the commercial fishing 

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

The problem is highly seasonal, requiring a large need for transient 

space primarily during the summer months. 

May Branch, Arkansas.—Flooding causes an estimated 

$1,800,000 in average annual damages. The proposed project would 

remove 127 structures from the 100-year floodplain, decrease expected annual flood damage by more than 96 percent, reduce highway and railroad traffic interruptions, and decrease the threat of 

loss of life attendant to flash flooding in urban settings. The Committee recommends $250,000 is provided to continue 

preconstruction engineering and design. 

Middle Creek, California.—The Committee recommends $400,000 

for preconstruction engineering and design studies. Clear Lake is 

the largest natural lake entirely within the borders of California. 

The project would restore the natural functions of the Middle 

Creek/Clear Lake ecosystem and contribute to the goals of the 

North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 

Chatfield Lake Reallocation Study, Colorado.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $267,000 to complete the feasibility studies on reallocation a portion of the flood control storage in the lake 

to water supply. 

Connecticut River Ecosystem Restoration, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont.—The Committee recommends 

$350,000 for feasibility studies to identify and evaluate measures 

to reduce stream bank erosion, restore anadramous fisheries migratory corridors and spawning habitat, restore degraded wetlands 

and riverine habitat and improve the overall fish and wildlife habitat of the Connecticut River. The study will also identify opportunities to modify the management of the dams and water systems to 

address ecological concerns while maintaining their intended purposes. 

Mile Point, Florida.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$475,000 to complete feasibility studies and initiate preconstruction 

engineering and design studies to determine the source of erosion 

along the Mile Point shoreline and identify solutions to which velocities in the area restrict deep draft navigation to Jacksonville 

Harbor. 

Walton County, Florida.—The Committee recommendation includes $250,000 to initiate preconstruction engineering and design 

activities. This project is a test bed for the Institute of Water Resources Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction model. 
27 

Interbasin Control of Great Lakes—Mississippi River Aquatic 

Nuisance Species, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin.—The Committee has included $750,000 for these studies. Within the funds 

provided, the Committee expects the Corps to include interim studies providing the costs and benefits of hydrologic separation of the 

Great Lakes watershed from the Mississippi River watershed. Alternatives that would provide cost-effective means to prohibit 

interbasin transfer of species should be investigated while allowing 

current projects to continue to provide the benefits of flood control, 

transportation savings, and recreation uses of the current system. 

Prairie Dupont Levee, Illinois.—The Committee recommends 

$190,000 for the feasibility study to assess the potential for reconstruction of deteriorated features such as gates and culverts. The 

recommendation also includes $660,000 for the deficiency correction preconstruction engineering and design studies to investigate 

solutions such as rehabilitation/replacement of existing relief wells 

and the construction of additional relief wells. 

Upper Mississippi River—Illinois Waterway Navigation System, 

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin.—The Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000 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. 

Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration, Louisiana.—The 

Committee recommends $16,595,000 for these important studies. 

The Committee notes that the Science activities are included within the overall line item rather than being budgeted separately. 

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 $250,000 to initiate feasibility studies to examine the impact of the Lower Susquehanna 

River Dams on sediment transport into the Bay. 

Boston Harbor (45-foot channel), Massachusetts.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $1,800,000 to continue studies for this 

harbor deepening project. The Committee notes that the feasibility 

phase of this study was initiated in June 2002. Study costs have 

increased from $3,500,000 to the current $6,500,000 while project 

construction still seems to be years away. This is another example 

of the extended planning studies that the Corps must resolve. 

Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans and Sediment Remediation, 

Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$500,000 for these remedial action plans to include studies on the 

Black, Cuyahoga and Maumee Rivers, Ohio. 
28 

Peckman River and Tributaries, New Jersey.—The Committee 

recommends $620,000 to complete the feasibility studies of this 

flood risk management and environmental restoration of the watershed. 

Western Lake Erie Basin, Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan.—The 

feasibility studies will provide a framework for sustainable development in the watershed by examining ecosystem restoration including habitat and wetland restoration, prevention of future environmental losses, elimination of bacterial loadings and pollutants of 

concern, improvements to navigation channels, and analysis of 

flood control operations to ensure that they are meeting evolving 

conditions. Within the funds recommended, work should continue 

on the Blanchard River Multipurpose Feasibility Study. 

Upper Ohio Navigation Study, Pennsylvania.—The Committee 

recommends $1,200,000 to continue feasibility studies to evaluate 

alternatives to maintain safe, reliable, efficient, and environmentally sustainable navigation on the Upper Ohio River. 

Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas.—The Committee recommendation includes $400,000 to initiate preconstruction engineering and 

design efforts for navigation modifications up to the Port of Beaumont to improve the efficiency and safety of navigation on the waterway. 

Skagit River, Washington.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,137,000 to continue feasibility studies for flood risk management in the cities of Mount Vernon, Burlington, and La Conner 

in Skagit County, Washington. 

Coastal Field Data Collection.—The Committee has recommended $3,400,000 for this nationwide program. In addition to 

budgeted funds of $1,400,000, $1,000,000 has been included for 

Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies, Hawaii and $1,000,000 

for the Pacific Island Land Ocean Typhoon Experiment Program. 

The Wave Data Study should also be continued within this overall 

funding amount. The Committee notes that the Coastal Data Information Program has been moved to a new line item in the Operation and Maintenance account under the remaining items. 

Flood Plain Management Services Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $11,000,000. 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. However, the 

Corps should view these amounts as guides and reprogram funds 

as appropriate to move these studies forward as rapidly as possible. 

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. However, the Corps 

should view these amounts as guides and reprogram funds as appropriate to move these studies forward as rapidly as possible. 

Planning Support Program.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $900,000 over the budget request. As the Committee has 

noted in the introduction, the Corps has a number of Planning 

Centers of Expertise, however, these Centers do not have the resources necessary to make them truly effective. The additional 
29 

funds provided should be utilized to ensure the effectiveness of 

these Centers and the Corps is urged to budget necessary resources 

in future budgets to ensure that these Centers of Expertise remain 

viable assets for the Corps’ planning program. 

Tribal Partnership Program.—Within the funds provided studies 

with tribes in New Mexico and with the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe 

in South Dakota should be undertaken. 

Water Resources Priorities Study.—No funds are provided for this 

study as proposed by the administration. 

Research and Development.—The Committee has recommended 

$24,892,000 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 $5,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee 

believes that some of this additional funding should be applied to 

global climate change research initiated in fiscal year 2010 particularly concentrating on the effects of sea level rise. The Committee 

has also recommended $1,000,000 to continue submerged aquatic 

vegetation research in the Chesapeake Bay and $2,000,000 to continue the Urban Flood Demonstration Program in cooperation with 

the Desert Research Institute. 

National Shoreline Study.—The Committee recommends an additional $375,000 for the national Planning Center of Expertise for 

Coastal Storm Damage Reduction for continuing 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. 

CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $2,031,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 1,690,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,780,000,000 

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 administration request for the Construction, General account 

is $1,690,000,000, a decrease of $341,000,000 from the fiscal year 

2010 enacted amount. By the Committee’s estimate, less than 60 

percent of the needed funding is available in this account. The administration request adequately funds only eight projects; the rest 

are funded at much less than optimum levels. Construction levels 

will slip due to constrained funding and benefits to the national 

economy will be deferred. The Committee is concerned that this 

lack of investment will inevitably lead to another Katrina-style disaster somewhere in the Nation, whether it is a catastrophic failure 

on the inland waterway system or overwhelmed incomplete or dam-
30 

aged flood control or shore protection infrastructure. The aftermath 

of Hurricane Katrina should have taught us, if nothing else, that 

more robust investment before the fact would have led to considerably smaller payouts after the disaster. Yet, based on the budget 

requests in the intervening 5 years, it is obvious that no lesson has 

been learned. 

The Committee recommendation includes $1,780,000,000 in new 

budget authority for this account. The Committee is aware that 

execution problems in the Continuing Authorities Program have resulted in considerable unobligated balances in this program that 

are to be carried into fiscal year 2011 and 2012. The Committee 

has utilized $120,000,000 of these unobligated balances from this 

program toward the remainder of the account for fiscal year 2011. 

Therefore the Construction, General program for fiscal year 2011 

is based on a total available amount of $1,900,000,000. This is 

$210,000,000 above the budget request but is still $131,000,000 

below the enacted level. The Committee recognizes that this is considerably less than the needs in the program, but is the best that 

can be accomplished in this constrained fiscal environment. The 

Committee will continue to seek additional resources as the bill 

progresses toward enactment. 

The Committee deleted the new construction starts requested by 

the administration as sufficient funding does not exist in the current budget nor is there reasonable assurance that sufficient funds 

will be available in the future to accommodate these new items as 

well as ongoing work. 

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 (section 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 

TUSCALOOSA, AL ................................................................................................................. .......................... 8,240 

ALASKA 

AKUTAN HARBOR, AK .......................................................................................................... 7,000 7,000 

ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK ........................................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

BETHEL RIVER BANK STABILIZATION, AK ............................................................................ .......................... 3,000 

HAINES HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

KENAI RIVER BLUFF EROSION, AK ...................................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

ARKANSAS 

OZARK-JETA TAYLOR POWERHOUSE, AR ............................................................................. .......................... 12,900 

RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM, AR, LA, & TX ............................................................... .......................... 2,500 
31 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR, LA, OK, & TX ........................................ .......................... 2,000 

CALIFORNIA 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON FEATURES), CA ................................................. 4,200 4,200 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA .................................. 78,000 78,000 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE & BRIDGE), CA ............................... 500 500 

CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM, CA ............................................................................ .......................... 5,000 

CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA ................................................................................................ .......................... 500 

FARMINGTON RECHARGE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, CA ................................................ .......................... 500 

GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ....................................................................................................... .......................... 200 

HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA ............................................................ 20,000 11,750 

HARBOR/SOUTH BAY WATER RECYCLING PROJECT, LOS ANGELES, CA ............................. .......................... 2,000 

LOS ANGELES RIVER DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS, CA ....................................................... .......................... 1,000 

MID-VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA ............................................................... .......................... 1,500 

MURRIETA CREEK, CA ......................................................................................................... .......................... 3,500 

NAPA RIVER, CA .................................................................................................................. .......................... 2,100 

NAPA RIVER, SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CA .................................................................... 12,000 12,000 

OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA ....................................................................... 4,330 4,330 

PLACER COUNTY, CA ........................................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CA ............................................................................ .......................... 500 

SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA .................................................................. 12,500 12,500 

SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA ...................................................... 10,000 10,000 

SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA ...................................... .......................... 700 

SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA .................................................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

SAN RAMON VALLEY RECYCLED WATER, CA ...................................................................... .......................... 459 

SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA ...................................................................................... 25,000 25,000

SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA ..................................................................... 4,800 4,800 

SUCCESS DAM AND RESERVOIR, CA (DAM SAFETY) .......................................................... 500 1,000 

TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA & NV ............................................................................... .......................... 4,000 

UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ........................................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

WEST SACRAMENTO, CA ...................................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 

YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA ....................................................................................................... .......................... 3,500 

DELAWARE 

DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, BROADKILL BEACH, DE ......................................................... .......................... 250 

DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES BEACH, DE ............................. 350 350 

DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE ................................................................................... .......................... 390 

DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, BETHANY BEACH TO SOUTH 

BETHANY, DE .................................................................................................................. .......................... 4,700 

DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, FENWICK ISLAND, DE ............ .......................... 150 

DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, REHOBOTH BEACH AND 

DEWEY BEACH, DE ......................................................................................................... .......................... 150 

DELAWARE RIVER MAINSTEM AND CHANNEL DEEPENING, DE, NJ & PA ............................ .......................... 7,000 

FLORIDA 

BREVARD COUNTY, FL ......................................................................................................... 350 350 

DADE COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................................... 11,000 11,000 

DUVAL COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................................. 7,500 7,500 

FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, FL .......................................................... .......................... 2,800 

FORT PIERCE BEACH, FL ..................................................................................................... 350 350 

HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL) ............................................................. 104,800 104,800 

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................. 6,000 6,000 

MANATEE COUNTY, FL ......................................................................................................... 100 100 

MANATEE HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................ .......................... 100 

MARTIN COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................................ 8,000 8,000 

NASSAU COUNTY, FL ........................................................................................................... 350 350 

PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL (DELRAY BEACH REIMBURSEMENT) ......................................... .......................... 680 

PINELLAS COUNTY, FL ......................................................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ........................................... 180,000 155,000 

CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL ..................................................................... (152,330 ) (127,330 ) 

EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL .......................... (5,170 ) (5,170 ) 
32 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

KISSIMMEE RIVER PROJECT, FL ................................................................................. (22,500 ) (22,500 )

ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FL ....................................................................................................... 350 350 

TAMPA HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................. 1,000 1,200 

GEORGIA 

ATLANTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, GA .............................................................. .......................... 1,000 

RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM & LAKE, GA & SC .................................................................... 1,000 1,000 

SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA .................................................................................. 400 1,000 

HAWAII 

HAWAII WATER MANAGEMENT, HI ....................................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

KAHUKU, HI .......................................................................................................................... .......................... 4,590 

IDAHO 

LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, ID ..................................................................................... .......................... 150 

RURAL IDAHO, ID ................................................................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

ILLINOIS 

ALTON TO GALE ORGANIZED LEVEE DISTRICT, IL & MO (DEF CORR) ................................ 150 150 

CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (DEF CORR) ........................................... 5,385 5,385 

CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL ........................................ 5,200 11,100 

DES PLAINES RIVER, IL ....................................................................................................... 6,500 10,000 

EAST ST. LOUIS, IL .............................................................................................................. 1,000 2,000 

LOCK AND DAM 27, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (MAJOR REHAB) ............................................. 350 350 

MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL ......................................................................... 40,000 40,000 

NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL .................................................................. .......................... 300 

OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY ............................................................. 136,000 136,000 

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI ........................................ 21,150 19,000 

WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL ....................................................................................................... 1,098 1,098 

INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE, ST. MARY’S AND MAUMEE RIVERS, IN (GREENWOOD AVENUE TOE 

DRAIN) ............................................................................................................................ .......................... 165 

INDIANA HARBOR, CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY, IN ........................................................ 8,000 8,000 

LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN ................................................................................................. 10,000 10,000 

IOWA 

DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA .................................................. .......................... 3,200 

MISSOURI RIVER FISH MITIGATION, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD ................................... 78,400 74,000 

MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (UNIT L–385), IA, NE, KS, MO ....................................... .......................... 1,500 

KANSAS 

TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KANSAS CITY, KS & MO ................................................................ 8,000 8,000 

KENTUCKY 

KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY ........................................................... 2,868 2,868 

MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY (MAJOR REHAB) ............................................................. 5,400 5,400 

WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .................................... 134,000 134,000 

LOUISIANA 

ASCENSION PARISH ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, LA ............................................. .......................... 160 

CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, DMMP, LA ........................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

COMITE RIVER, LA ............................................................................................................... .......................... 8,000 

EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, LA ............................... .......................... 500 

EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH (FC), LA ................................................................................ .......................... 3,000 

J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ............................................................................... 1,500 7,000 

LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (HURRICANE PROTECTION) .......................................... 5,500 5,500 

LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ................................................ 19,000 19,000 

OUACHITA RIVER LEVEES, LA .............................................................................................. .......................... 1,000 

WEST BANK AND VICINITY, NEW ORLEANS, LA ................................................................... 5,000 5,000 
33 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MARYLAND 

ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD ................................................................................................... 1,000 1,000 

ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD .................................................................................. .......................... 3,100 

BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN WATER RESOURCES, GWYNNS FALLS, MD ............................. .......................... 200 

CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, MD, VA & PA ........ .......................... 1,000 

CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA .............................................................. 5,000 5,000 

POPLAR ISLAND, MD ............................................................................................................ 1,530 1,530 

MASSACHUSETTS 

MUDDY RIVER, MA .............................................................................................................. 500 2,500 

MICHIGAN 

GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI .............................................. .......................... 2,000 

HAMILTON DAM, FLINT RIVER, FLINT, MI ............................................................................ .......................... 1,000 

OAKLAND COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MI ............................................... .......................... 500 

SAULT STE MARIE (REPLACEMENT LOCK), MI .................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR MANAGEMENT PLAN, MI ........................................ .......................... 300 

MINNESOTA 

BRECKENRIDGE, MN ............................................................................................................ .......................... 407 

ROSEAU, MN (RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN) .............................................................. .......................... 2,500 

MISSISSIPPI 

DESOTO COUNTY, MS .......................................................................................................... .......................... 12,000 

MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MS ........................................................ .......................... 18,000 

MISSOURI 

BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO ............................................................................... .......................... 550 

BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO .......................................................................... 4,500 4,500 

CHESTERFIELD, MO ............................................................................................................. 3,439 3,939 

CLEARWATER LAKE, MO (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .................................................................... 40,000 40,000 

KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS .................................................................................................... 700 700 

MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY PARK LEVEE, MO ........................................................... .......................... 2,000 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG WORKS), 

MO & IL .......................................................................................................................... 4,345 4,345 

MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT, MO ..................................... .......................... 1,200 

ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO .................................................................................... 100 200 

SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO ........................................................... .......................... 5,330 

MONTANA 

FORT PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT ................................................................................. .......................... 1,000 

RURAL MONTANA, MT .......................................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

NEBRASKA 

ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NE ......................................................................................... .......................... 315 

WESTERN SARPY COUNTY AND CLEAR CREEK, NE ............................................................ .......................... 2,470 

NEVADA 

RURAL NEVADA, NV ............................................................................................................. .......................... 20,000 

NEW JERSEY 

BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR INLET, NJ ......................................................... .......................... 7,600 

BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, ABSECON ISLAND, NJ ........................ .......................... 400 

BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, BRIGANTINE ISLAND, NJ .................... .......................... 80 

CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ ....................................................................... 200 200 

DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DE & NJ, OAKWOOD BEACH .................................................. .......................... 250 

GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET AND PECK BEACH, NJ ............................................................. 500 500 

GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NJ ...................................................... .......................... 2,000 

HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ....................................................................................... .......................... 300 

JOSEPH G. MINISH PASSAIC RIVER WATERFRONT, NJ ........................................................ .......................... 3,000 

LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ .......................................................... 8,920 8,920 
34 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NJ ............................................................... .......................... 500 

RARITAN & SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ ........................................................ .......................... 1,500 

RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ ...................................................... 1,000 1,000 

SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ............................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ ...................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

NEW MEXICO 

ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM ................................................................................... .......................... 2,770 

ALAMOGORDO, NM .............................................................................................................. .......................... 4,200 

CENTRAL NEW MEXICO, NM ................................................................................................ .......................... 1,000 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELEN, NM ........................... .......................... 500 

RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM ............................... 10,000 1,500 

SOUTHWEST VALLEY, FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, ALBUQUERQUE, NM ........................... .......................... 5,809 

NEW YORK 

ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND, JONES INLET TO EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, LONG 

BEACH ISLAND, NY ......................................................................................................... .......................... 300 

ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NY ................................ 300 300 

EAST ROCKAWAY INLET TO ROCKAWAY INLET AND JAMAICA BAY, NY ............................... .......................... 1,000 

FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY ...................................................................... 1,100 4,600 

LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY .................................................................................................... 300 300 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ ............................................................... 57,000 57,000 

NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY ....................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

ONONDAGA LAKE, NY .......................................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

NORTH CAROLINA 

BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC ................................................................................... .......................... 350 

WEST ONSLOW BEACH AND NEW RIVER INLET, TOPSAIL BEACH, NC ................................ .......................... 722 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. 1,800 2,100 

WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC .................................................................................................. .......................... 300 

NORTH DAKOTA 

FARGO, ND—MOORHEAD, MN ............................................................................................ .......................... 20,000 

GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND (REPLACEMENT) ................................................. 11,088 11,088 

GRAFTON, ND ...................................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND ................................................................................... .......................... 500 

NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ND ................................................... .......................... 14,300 

OHIO 

DOVER DAM MUSKINGUM RIVER, OH .................................................................................. 36,000 36,000 

HOLES CREEK, WEST CARROLLTON, OH ............................................................................. .......................... 1,000 

OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, OH .................................................................... .......................... 2,600 

EUCLID, OH (EI) ......................................................................................................... .......................... (1,100 ) 

PORTSMOUTH CSO MITIGATION, OH ........................................................................... .......................... (500 ) 

TOLEDO WATERWAYS INITIATIVE PHASE 2, OH .......................................................... .......................... (1,000 ) 

OHIO RIVERFRONT, CINCINNATI, OH ................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

OKLAHOMA 

CANTON LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY) ....................................................................................... 24,334 24,334 

YUKON, OK (EI) ................................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

OREGON 

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR & WA ............................................ 500 500 

LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ....................................... 4,700 4,700 

PENNSYLVANIA 

EMSWORTH LOCKS & DAM, OHIO RIVER, PA (STATIC INSTABILITY CORRECTION) ............. 11,500 11,500 

LACKAWANNA RIVER, SCRANTON, PA .................................................................................. .......................... 500 

LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3, AND 4 MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ................................................ 2,000 2,000 

PRESQUE ISLE PENINSULA, PA (PERMANENT) .................................................................... 1,000 1,000 

WYOMING VALLEY, PA (LEVEE RAISING) ............................................................................. .......................... 1,500 
35 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PUERTO RICO 

PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR ............................................................................... 39,539 39,539 

RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR ..................................................................................................... 12,000 12,000 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD ................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, SD ................................................................................... .......................... 300 

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL DAM, TN (SEEPAGE CONTROL) ...................................................................... 77,800 77,800 

CUMBERLAND COUNTY WATER SUPPLY, TN ....................................................................... .......................... 210 

TEXAS 

FORT BEND COUNTY (ARCOLA-FRESNO REGIONAL WASTEWATER), TX (EI) ........................ .......................... ..........................

BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX ............................................................................................. 7,740 3,740 

CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX ....................................... .......................... 4,815 

DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX ............................................ .......................... 20,500 

JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX ................................................. .......................... 500

LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN (WHARTON/ONION), TX ................................................... 10,000 

RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX & OK .............................................................. .......................... 2,800 

UTAH 

RURAL UTAH, UT ................................................................................................................. .......................... 25,000 

VERMONT 

LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATIVE, VT .................................................................... .......................... 500 

VIRGINIA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AT DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, VA ....................................................................................................................... 1,590 1,590 

JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (REPLACEMENT) ...................................... 6,000 6,000 

NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA ........................................................ .......................... 1,000 

NORFOLK HARBOR, CRANEY ISLAND, VA ............................................................................ 1,000 1,000 

ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA ................................................... 1,075 1,075 

SANDBRIDGE, VA ................................................................................................................. .......................... 300 

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA (HURRICANE PROTECTION) ................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

WASHINGTON 

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM GAS ABATEMENT, WA .......................................................................... 200 200 

COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR, & ID ............................................................ 137,615 116,000 

DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA ......................................................................... 5,500 5,500 

HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA ................................................................................................ 500 500 

LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMPENSATION, WA, OR, & ID ........................ 1,500 1,500 

MOUNT ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA .................................................................... 800 1,800 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA (FISH PASSAGE) ........................................................................ 1,000 1,000 

PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, WA ............................................... .......................... 3,000 

SHOALWATER BAY, WA ........................................................................................................ .......................... 3,000 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV (DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE) ............................................................ 15,000 15,000 

GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV .......................................................................................... .......................... 1,500 

ISLAND CREEK, LOGAN, WV ................................................................................................ .......................... 5,000 

LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA, & KY ....................... 19,500 22,250 

LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV ........................................................................................ .......................... 1,500 

SUBTOTAL .............................................................................................................. 1,571,596 1,867,693 

NATIONAL PROGRAMS 

AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL ................................................................................................... 4,000 5,000 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM: 

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206) ................................................. 7,273 7,273 
36 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204, 207, 993) ........................ 2,195 2,195 

EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SECTION 14) ................. 4,993 4,993 

FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205) .............................................................. 6,635 6,635 

MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111) ..................................................... 8,300 8,300 

NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107) ...................................................................... 1,227 1,227 

PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 

1135) ..................................................................................................................... 7,046 7,046 

SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103) .......................................................................... 3,100 3,100 

SNAGGING AND CLEARING (SECTION 208) ................................................................ 200 200 

DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM ........................................ 49,100 49,100 

EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION FUND ..................................................................................... 19,000 19,000 

ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (Public Law 106–457) ................................................ 5,000 2,500 

INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (BOARD EXPENSES) .................................................... 60 60 

INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (COE EXPENSES) ......................................................... 275 275 

SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION .............................. .......................... 2,500 

RESTORATION OF ABANDONED MINES ................................................................................ .......................... 500 

SUBTOTAL .............................................................................................................. 118,404 119,904 

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ...................................................................................................... .......................... ¥87,597 

USE OF PRIOR-YEAR BALANCES ......................................................................................... .......................... ¥120,000 

TOTAL ..................................................................................................................... 1,690,000 1,780,000 

Tuscaloosa, Alabama.—The Committee recommends $8,240,000 

to complete the relocation project at Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 

Ozark-Jeta Taylor, Arkansas.—This is another case where Administration investments in our infrastructure seem to be pennywise and pound-foolish. The budget request provided no funds for 

this on-going continuing contract. Termination costs for this continuing contract are estimated to be $20,000,000. Energy losses 

over the past 3 fiscal years exceed $25,000,000 due to forced outages of the hydropower units. The Committee has recommended 

$12,900,000 to complete the rehabilitation work on turbine unit 3. 

The Committee urges the administration to budget for this contract 

in future budget submissions. 

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 $2,000,000 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. 

Hamilton Airfield Wetlands Restoration, California.—The Committee recommendation includes $11,750,000 for this tidal wetland 

restoration project. This reduction from the budget request is based 

on updated information from the Corps. 

Mid Valley Area Levee Reconstruction, California.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 to complete the design 

of areas two and four of the reconstruction of this flood control 
37 

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.—Within the Committee’s recommendation, $2,087,000 is recommended as a repayment to the 

Port of Oakland to settle the port’s payments in excess of the local 

cost share on the 42-foot construction project DACW07–95–003. 

Tahoe Basin Restoration, California.—The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for planning, design, and construction assistance for environmental restoration, resource protection and development projects in Lake Tahoe Basin. These projects are part of 

the $2,500,000,000 local, State, Federal and private watershed restoration effort referred to as the Lake Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program [EIP]. Of the funds provided, $2,700,000 are 

recommended for construction of the Incline and Third Creek restoration project. 

Delaware Coast, Cape Henlopen to Fenwick Island, Bethany 

Beach to South Bethany Beach, Delaware.—The Committee has recommended $4,700,000 for the second nourishment cycle on this 

shore protection project. 

Delaware Coast Protection, Delaware.—The Committee recommendation includes $390,000 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. It is the Committee’s understanding that the Corps cannot utilize all of the funding requested 

for the Site one project in fiscal year 2011 due to the need to complete a post authorization change report on the remaining features 

of this project due to cost growth. Therefore, the Committee has reduced The Central and Southern Florida element by $25,000,000 to 

account for this change. This lowers the overall committee recommendation for the Everglades to $155,000,000. 

Tampa Harbor, Florida.—$200,000 is provided above the budget 

request to complete the General Reevaluation Report of the Federal 

project. 

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Illinois.—The Committee recommends $11,100,000 for the aquatic nuisance species Barriers I 

and II and for interim measures for potential barrier bypasses. 

Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River, Illinois and Kentucky.—The 

Committee recommends $136,000,000 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. 

Missouri Fish and Wildlife Recovery, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, 

Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.—The Committee recommends $74,000,000 for this project. Within the recommended funds, $12,000,000 is to be used for modifications to the 

Intake Dam to provide additional habitat for the pallid sturgeon. 
38 

Wolf Creek Dam, Lake Cumberland, Kentucky.—The Committee 

recommends $134,000,000 for continuation of seepage control measures at Wolf Creek Dam. It is the Committee’s understanding that 

this is the Corps’ full funding capability for this project in fiscal 

year 2011. 

Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana.—The Committee has recommended $5,500,000 to continue efforts to provide 100-year flood 

protection for this project. Surveys show the levee grade is deficient 

by 12–18 inches. 

Chesapeake Bay Environmental Program, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.—The Committee has recommended $1,000,000 

for continuation of this project that is integral to the clean-up of 

the Chesapeake Bay. 

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, Maryland and Virginia.—The 

Committee recommends $5,000,000 to continue oyster recovery efforts in the Chesapeake Bay. 

Muddy River, Massachusetts.—The Committee recommends 

$2,500,000 for the Muddy River, Boston and Brookline, Massachusetts project, $500,000 of which is to be used along with fiscal year 

2010 carryover funds to award a fully funded contract to construct 

the flood risk management features of Phase I of the project, and 

$2,000,000 of which is to be used to complete design of Phase II, 

including the environmental restoration elements of the project. 

Oakland County, Michigan.—The Committee recommends 

$500,000 for the George W. Kuhn drain project. 

Meramec River Basin, Valley City, Missouri.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $2,000,000 for additional flood risk management features to address problems that became apparent during the 2008 flood. 

Fort Peck Dam and Lake, Montana.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 for continuation of the disposition of Fort Peck cabins. 

Rural Nevada, Nevada.—The Committee recomendation includes 

$20,000,000 for this project. Within the funds provided, the Corps 

should give consideration to the Spanish Springs Valley Sewering 

Project, Phase II; the Indian Springs Wastewater Collection and 

Treatment System Project; the Moapa Valley Wastewater Collection System Project; Searchlight Water System Improvements 

Project; Minden Arsenic Compliance Project; Tonopah Water Treatment Project; River Oaks Water and Wastewater Collection System; Murray Creek Storm Drain; Incline Village Wastewater Effluent Pipeline; and also to projects at: Boulder City; Lyon County; 

Douglas County; Gerlach; Esmeralda County; Fallon; Goldfield; 

Churchill County; West Wendover; Yerington; Virgin Valley Water 

District; Lovelock; Truckee Meadows Water Authority; Eldorado 

Valley; Ely; and Carson City. Other communities that meet the 

program criteria should be considered as funding allows. 

Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg Harbor Inlet, New Jersey.—The Committee recommends $7,600,000 for construction on this shore protection project. 

Acequias Irrigation System, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $2,770,000 to continue restoration of these historic irrigation distribution systems. 
39 

Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina.—$300,000 is recommended 

above the budget request to initiate a general reevaluation study 

to investigate modification of the anchorage basin. 

North Dakota [EI], North Dakota.—The Committee has recommended $14,300,000 for this program. $1,600,000 is recommended for the Mandan Raw Water Intake; $75,000 for the 

Southeast Water Users District SEWUD; $1,700,000 for the Grafton Water Treatment Plant Improvements; $1,375,000 for the 

North Prairie Rural Water District; $1,575,000 for the Park River 

Water Distribution System Improvements; $900,000 for the Walsh 

Rural Water District Ground Storage Expansion; $1,500,000 for the 

Grand Forks Water Treatment Plant—Pilot Testing and Design; 

$275,000 for the Fargo Water Treatment Plant Facility Study Plan; 

$1,825,000 for the McKenzie County Regional Water Service; 

$750,000 for the Williams Rural Water Phase I; $1,500,000 for the 

Greater Ramsey Water District—expansion; $100,000 for the 

Williston Waste Water Treatment System Improvements; $425,000 

for the LaMoure Sanitary Sewer Lining Project; and $700,000 for 

the Traill Rural Water District Phase III project. 

Ohio [EI], Ohio.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$2,600,000. $1,100,000 is recommended for the Euclid project; 

$500,000 for the Portsmouth CSO project and $1,000,000 for the 

Toledo Waterways Initiative Phase II. 

Presque Isle, Pennsylvania.—The Committee recommends 

$1,000,000 to continue this project to mitigate flood and coastal 

storm damage. 

Red River Basin Chloride Control, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, 

and Louisiana.—The Committee recommends $2,800,000 to continue construction of the project. Within the funds recommended, 

$800,000 should be used for the Elm Fork, Area VI element. 

Rural Utah, [EI], Utah.—The Committee recommendation includes $25,000,000 to continue construction of eligible projects. 

Within the funds provided, the Corps should give consideration 

to Duchesne County Water Conservancy District; Uintah County 

Whiterocks Projects; Emery Town water delivery project; 

Cedarview Water Conservancy District; Bear River Water Conservancy District; Eureka Town water and sewer project; Monticello 

City water system project; Long Canal Project, Garfield County; 

Cottonwood Irrigation Project, Emery County; and Coalville Town 

water treatment project. Other communities that meet the program 

criteria should be considered as funding allows. 

Lake Champlain Watershed Initiative, Vermont.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $500,000 for continuation of this project. 

Columbia River Fish Mitigation, Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho.—The Committee recommendation includes $124,385,000 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. 

Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and Cumberland 

River, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Virginia.—The Committee recommends $22,250,000 for the continuation of the project. Within 

the funds recommended, the Committee includes $19,500,000 for 

the Buchanan County, Dickenson County, and Grundy, Virginia 
40 

elements. Further, the recommendation includes $2,750,000 for 

Kermit, Lower Mingo County, McDowell County, Upper Mingo, and 

Wayne County, West Virginia. 

Aquatic Plant Control Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for this program. Funds above the budget 

request are included for cost-shared programs: $150,000 for Black 

Rock Lake, Odensburg, New York and $500,000 for Lake Champlain, Vermont. 

Estuary Restoration Program.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $2,500,000 for this nationwide program. Within the funds 

provided, $1,000,000 is for the Colorado Lagoon, California, project. 

Shore Line Erosion Control Development and Demonstration Program.—The Committee has recommended $2,500,000 for construction of a shoreline erosion abatement device at Oil Piers in Ventura 

County, California, as well as monitoring programs and other appropriate activities under this authority. 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM

The Committee will no longer list individual projects in the CAP 

program in the table. The priority system that has been established 

will guide the execution of the projects. 

For each Continuing Authorities Program [CAP] section, available funds shall be allocated utilizing this sequence of steps until 

the funds are exhausted: 

—capability-level funds for ongoing projects that have executed 

cost-sharing agreements for the applicable phase; 

—capability-level funds for projects that are ready for execution 

of new cost-sharing agreements for the applicable phase and 

for which Corps Headquarters authorizes execution of the 

agreements; 

—funds, as permitted by Corps policies, for other projects previously funded for the applicable phase but not ready for execution of new cost-sharing agreements; and 

—funds as permitted by Corps policies, for projects not previously funded for the applicable phase. 

Funds shall be allocated by headquarters to the appropriate 

Field Operating Agency [FOA] for projects requested by that FOA. 

If the FOA finds that the study/project for which funds were requested cannot go forward, the funds are to be returned to Corps 

headquarters to be reallocated based on the nationwide priority 

listing. In no case should the FOA retain these funds for use on 

a different project than the one for which the funds were requested 

without the explicit approval of the Corps’ Headquarters. 

Within the step at which available funds are exhausted for each 

CAP section, funds shall be allocated to the projects in that section 

that rank high according to the following factors: high overall performance based on outputs; high percent fiscally complete; and 

high unobligated carry-in. Section 14 funds shall be allocated to the 

projects that address the most significant risks and adverse consequences, irrespective of phase or previous funding history. 

The Corps shall continue the ongoing process for suspending and 

terminating inactive projects. Suspended projects shall not be reactivated or funded unless the sponsor reaffirms in writing its sup-
41 

port for the project and establishes its willingness and capability 

to execute its project responsibilities. 

In order to provide a mix of studies, design and construction 

within each CAP section, the Corps is directed to divide the funding generally 80/20 between the Design and Implementation and 

the Feasibility phases within each authority. The Chief of Engineers shall provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations 

within 30 days of enactment of this Act detailing how funds will 

be distributed to the individual items in the various CAP sections 

for the fiscal year. The Chief shall 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. 

The Corps may initiate new continuing authorities projects in all 

sections as funding allows. New projects may be initiated after an 

assessment is made that such projects can be funded over time 

based on historical averages of the appropriation for that section 

and after prior approval by the Committees on Appropriations. 

FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS, IL- LINOIS, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, AND TEN- NESSEE

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $340,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 240,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 335,000,000 

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 budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 

shown on the following table: 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget request Committee recommendation 

INVESTIGATIONS 

SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR ..................................................................................................... ........................ 300 

DONALDSONVILLE TO THE GULF, LA ....................................................................................... ........................ 400 

MORGANZA TO THE GULF, LA ................................................................................................. ........................ 2,600 

SPRING BAYOU, LA .................................................................................................................. ........................ 81 

COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ...................................................... 246 246 

QUIVER RIVER, MS .................................................................................................................. ........................ 100 

MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT STUDY, TN ....................................... 100 100 

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .............................. 500 1,400 

CONSTRUCTION 

BAYOU METO BASIN, AR ......................................................................................................... ........................ 4,000 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ........................................................ 47,209 47,209 

GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR ................................................................................................... ........................ 16,000 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .................................................... 29,150 36,038 

ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO ................................................................................................. ........................ 4,000 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ........................................................................ 2,631 2,631 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ......................................................................................................... 6,300 15,000 

ST JOHNS BAYOU & NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MO ................................................................ ........................ 200 

YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ........................................................................... ........................ 2,200 

YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS ............................................................................................... ........................ 25 
42 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget request Committee recommendation 

YAZOO BASIN, MISSISSIPPI DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT, MS ............................................. ........................ 23,200 

YAZOO BASIN, REFORMULATION, MS ...................................................................................... ........................ 1,600 

YAZOO BASIN, UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS ......................................................................... ........................ 13,300 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU, MS ................................................ ........................ 575 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ........................................................ 66,008 66,008 

HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR ................................................................................ 198 600 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ................................................................................ 190 190 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR .......................................................................... 223 223 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR .......................................................................... 200 200 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .................................................... 7,582 11,843 

ST FRANCIS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, AR & MO ................................................................... 6,293 10,000 

TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA ......................................................... 2,374 2,374 

WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR ................................................................................................ 1,276 1,276 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ................................................................................. 100 100 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ................................................................................ 20 20 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ........................................................................ 1,878 1,878 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ......................................................................................................... 12,398 12,398 

BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA ........................................................................... 42 42 

BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA ............................................................................... 47 47 

BONNET CARRE, LA ................................................................................................................. 2,300 3,500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ................................................................................ 586 586 

LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA ....................................................................... 377 377 

MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION—CAERNARVON, LA .................................................................... 921 921 

OLD RIVER, LA ......................................................................................................................... 9,255 9,255 

TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA .......................................................................... 3,286 3,286 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ............................................................................... 185 185 

WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................... 4,966 4,966 

GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS ....................................................................................................... 18 1,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ............................................................................... 109 109 

VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS ........................................................................................................ 32 750 

YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ..................................................................................... 5,961 7,961

YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ........................................................................... 184 1,684 

YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS ................................................................................................ 5,784 7,784 

YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS ............................................................................................ 790 790 

YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS ......................................................................................... 6,301 8,301 

YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS ............................................................................................... 1,469 1,469 

YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS ............................................................................................ 7,113 9,113 

YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS ............................................................................................ 967 1,017 

YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS ............................................................ 377 400 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS ........................................................................ 583 733 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS .............................................................................................. 731 831 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN ................................................................................ 70 70 

MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN ............................................................................... 1,433 1,433 

REMAINING ITEMS 

MAPPING .................................................................................................................................. 1,237 1,237 

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE .......................................................................................................... ........................ ¥11,162 

TOTAL ......................................................................................................................... 240,000 335,000 

GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS

Morganza to the Gulf, Louisiana.—The Committee has recommended $2,600,000 to continue development of the Post Authorization Change report and Revised Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement [RPEIS]. Fiscal year 2011 efforts will focus on 

selecting a recommended plan, completing feasibility-level designs 
43 

and costs for the recommended plan, and developing a RPEIS that 

reflects the recommended plan. 

Collection and Study of Basic Data, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $900,000 above the budget request for 

LIDAR mapping in the Yazoo Basin, Mississippi. 

CONSTRUCTION

Grand Prairie, Arkansas.—The Committee has recommended 

$16,000,000 for continued construction of the project. This project 

will provide for agricultural water supply, ground water protection, 

and fish and wildlife restoration and enhancement. 

Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.—Additional funds above the 

budget request could be used to continue the preparation of additional NEPA documentation in association with the MRL features 

of the St. Johns New Madrid, Missouri project; fully fund relief 

wells at Tunica, Mississippi, Parcel 2; Rena Lara, Mississippi; 

Magna Vista-Brunswick, Mississippi, Item 463–L; Item 465–L; 

Reid Bedford-King, Item 422–R; continue ongoing construction contracts; Duncan Point Seepage; and Avondale Ramps. 

Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower Basin, Mississippi.—The Committee 

recognizes the need to control bank erosion and reduce sedimentation and headcutting in watersheds of the Yazoo Basin for purposes 

of improving water quality, fisheries, and reducing maintenance. 

The Committee recommends $2,200,000 for continued construction 

of the Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River Project. Not more than 

$2,200,000 should be used for the continued construction of these 

water quality and sedimentation reduction measures. The Committee expects the water quality funds to be used for the monitoring and establishment of water quality reference indicators and 

the development of total maximum daily loads target loads on 

Yazoo Basin projects. 

Yazoo Basin, Delta Headwaters Project, Mississippi.—The Committee has recommended $23,200,000 for continuation of a joint effort by the Corps of Engineers and the Natural Resources Conservation Service in the Yazoo Basin of Mississippi. Funds are provided for the Corps to undertake construction work in the following 

watersheds: Abiaca Creek, Batupan Bogue, Black Creek, Coldwater 

River, Cane-Mussacana Creek, Hurricane-Wolfe Creek, HickahalaSenatobia Creek, Hotophia Creek, Long Creek, Pelucia Creek, 

Otoucalofa Creek, Toby-Tubby Creek, Yalobusha River, and Skuna 

River. The Committee expects the Corps to design and construct future work, acquire real estate, and monitor results for all watersheds in fiscal year 2011 and for future work as required for completion of the total program. The Committee expects the administration to request funds for this vital project. 

MAINTENANCE

Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.—Funds above the budget request could be used to resurface the mainline levee below West 

Memphis, Arkansas; periodic inspections at locations in Arkansas, 

Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee; installation of 
44 

levee mile posts at various locations; critical slide repairs; placement of crushed stone surfacing on levees; mitigation; bank stabilization; levee surfacing material and operation and maintenance 

of the motor vessel Mississippi. 

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, 2010 ............................................................................. $2,400,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 2,361,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,495,000,000 

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 

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. 

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. The Committee is concerned about the administration’s O&M request. In fiscal year 2010, the administration proposed a budget of $2,504,000,000 for operation and maintenance. 

For fiscal year 2011, the request is $143,000,000 less. The Committee understands that the O&M budget fluctuates from year to 

year due to periodic maintenance dredging requirements, however, 

the general trend should be for this budget to increase. Nearly 75 

percent of the O&M budget consists of labor and dredging costs in 

most years. Labor costs rarely decrease for the Corps as it takes 

roughly the same amount of manpower to operate Corps projects 

on a yearly basis. That means that when the budget request is reduced as it is for fiscal year 2011, the only areas available to reduce are dredging and real maintenance items. 

This is the wrong trend for this program. The Corps is to be commended for managing to keep as much of their infrastructure operable as they have with the O&M budgets that have been put forward and enacted. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009 was a tremendous boost to clear out some of the worst of 

the backlogged maintenance items and dredging, however, more 

needs to be done. The Committee recommendation of 

$2,495,000,000, $134,000,000 above the budget request, is a step in 

the right direction. The Committee urges the administration to 

commit to a more realistic budget for O&M in fiscal year 2012 and 

beyond to avoid problems such as occurred on the Ohio River in fiscal year 2010. 
45 

In late 2009 and early 2010, transportation was disrupted on the 

Ohio River twice due to unexpected lock closures. First a miter 

gate fell off its mounts and into the river at the Markland Lock, 

closing the main lock chamber for about 6 months. Shippers’ costs 

increased dramatically as tows had to be broken down to move 

through the much smaller auxiliary lock. Fortunately, there was a 

smaller redundant lock at the site. If not the river would have been 

closed above Markland for 6 months. That would mean no shipping 

by water of any commodities in or out of the Ohio River Valley 

from Cincinnati, Ohio, to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 

To add insult to injury, in January 2010, the mount for the miter 

gate at the Greenup Lock failed. That lock was out of service for 

a number of weeks as well. With more than half of the Corps locks 

more than 50 years old, unscheduled lock closures may be the 

norm, if more funding is not invested in the infrastructure. With 

more than 600 million tons of cargo moved on the inland waterway 

system, these closures would have significant impacts on the national economy. Maintenance of this infrastructure is too important 

to our national economy to allow it to fail due to short term budget 

goals. 

The budget request and the Committee recommendation are 

shown on the following table: 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

ALABAMA 

ALABAMA-COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL ...................................................... 253 253 

ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL ................................................................................................. 15,745 18,745 

BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL .................................................................. 20,751 20,751 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL .................................................................................. 5,230 5,230 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORK, AL .............................................................................. 30 30 

MOBILE HARBOR, AL ........................................................................................................... 23,560 23,560 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL ..................................................................................... 100 100 

TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS ............................... 1,900 2,344 

TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS .................................................................. 23,767 28,000 

WALTER F. GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA .................................................................. 8,394 8,394 

ALASKA 

ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................... 14,013 14,013 

BETHEL HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................... 234 1,000 

CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK ..................................................................................................... 2,999 2,999 

DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................... 955 955

DOUGLAS HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................ 241 241 

HAINES HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................... 241 241 

HOMER HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................... 513 513 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK ............................................................................ 180 180 

KODIAK HARBORS, AK ......................................................................................................... .......................... 750 

NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK ....................................................................................................... 420 420 

NOME HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................. 973 973 

PETERSBURG HARBOR, AK .................................................................................................. 500 1,000 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK ..................................................................................... 1,360 1,360 

ARIZONA 

ALAMO LAKE, AZ ................................................................................................................. 3,019 3,019 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ ............................................................................ 90 90 

PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ ..................................................................................................... 1,522 1,522 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ ........................................................................ 33 33 
46 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ .................................................................................................. 607 607 

ARKANSAS 

BEAVER LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................ 10,570 10,570 

BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR ............................................................................. 8,452 9,000 

BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR .................................................................................................. 1,612 1,612 

BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR ...................................................................................................... 7,292 7,292 

DARDANELLE LOCK & DAM, AR .......................................................................................... 7,632 7,632 

DEGRAY LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................... 6,979 7,500 

DEQUEEN LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................. 1,467 1,467 

DIERKS LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................. 1,570 1,570 

GILLHAM LAKE, AR .............................................................................................................. 1,340 1,340 

GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR ................................................................................................... 10,230 10,230 

HELENA HARBOR, AR .......................................................................................................... 15 500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ............................................................................ 311 311 

MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR ......................................... 33,553 33,553 

MILLWOOD LAKE, AR ........................................................................................................... 4,802 4,802 

NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR .................................................................................. 4,874 5,250 

NIMROD LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................... 1,957 1,957 

NORFORK LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................. 6,224 6,224 

OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR ........................................................................................................ 15 1,000 

OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA ........................................................................... 7,505 10,505 

OZARK-JETA TAYLOR LOCK & DAM, AR .............................................................................. 5,485 5,485 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR ..................................................................................... 3 3 

WHITE RIVER, AR ................................................................................................................ 30 30 

YELLOW BEND PORT, AR ..................................................................................................... 3 115 

CALIFORNIA 

BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA ...................................................................................................... 2,367 2,367 

BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA ........................................................................... 2,119 2,119 

CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA ......................................................................................... 4,600 4,600 

COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA .................................................................... 3,652 6,190 

DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE & CHANNEL, CA ........................................................ 5,831 9,471 

FARMINGTON DAM, CA ........................................................................................................ 450 450 

HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA ....................................................................................... 2,163 2,163 

HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA ..................................................................................... 5,848 5,848 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA ............................................................................ 4,604 4,604 

ISABELLA LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................. 1,956 1,956 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ...................................................................... 7,035 7,035 

MARINA DEL REY, CA .......................................................................................................... 2,050 5,050 

MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ......................................................................................... 401 401 

MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA ..................................................................................................... 522 522 

MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA ................................................................................................... 1,590 1,590 

NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA ........................................................................................................ 2,476 2,476 

NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA ........................................................... 1,929 1,929 

NEWPORT BAY HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................... 1,280 1,280 

OAKLAND HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................ 7,500 7,500 

OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA .................................................................................................... 1,520 1,520 

PINE FLAT LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................ 3,378 3,378 

PINOLE SHOAL MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA ........................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA ..................................................................................... 2,132 2,132 

RICHMOND HARBOR, CA ..................................................................................................... 8,375 8,375 

SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA .................................................................... 3,585 3,585 

SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA ....................................... 1,475 1,475 

SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA ......................................................... 161 161 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY, DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA ....................................................... 1,087 1,087 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............................................... 3,090 3,090 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................. 2,776 2,776 

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA ................................................................... 3,603 6,500 

SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA ................................................................ 2,750 2,750 

SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA ............................................................................................. 4,883 4,883 
47 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................ 2,040 2,040

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA ........................................................................ 1,751 1,751 

SUCCESS LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................. 2,529 2,529 

SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA ................................................................................................. 2,980 2,980 

TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA .................................................................................... 2,133 2,133 

VENTURA HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................ 2,840 2,840 

YUBA RIVER, CA .................................................................................................................. 121 121 

COLORADO 

BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO ....................................................................................................... 647 647 

CHATFIELD LAKE, CO ........................................................................................................... 1,375 1,375 

CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO ................................................................................................... 1,057 1,057 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO ........................................................................... 572 572 

JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO ............................................................................................ 2,941 2,941 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO ........................................................................ 765 765 

TRINIDAD LAKE, CO ............................................................................................................. 1,243 1,243 

CONNECTICUT 

BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT ........................................................................................................ 537 537 

COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT .............................................................................................. 689 689 

HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................ 478 478 

HOP BROOK LAKE, CT ......................................................................................................... 1,092 1,092 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT ............................................................................ 292 292 

LONG ISLAND SOUND, DMMP, CT ....................................................................................... 2,000 2,000 

MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT ............................................................................................ 699 699 

MYSTIC RIVER, CT ............................................................................................................... 160 160 

NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CT .................................................................................................... 400 400

NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT ............................................................................................ 559 559 

NORWALK HARBOR, CT ....................................................................................................... .......................... 582 

PATCHOGUE RIVER, CT ....................................................................................................... .......................... 918 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT ..................................................................................... 1,050 1,050 

STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT ................................................................................. 467 467 

THOMASTON DAM, CT .......................................................................................................... 994 994 

WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT ................................................................................................. 849 849 

DELAWARE 

CEDAR CREEK, DE ............................................................................................................... 50 50 

HARBOR OF REFUGE, LEWES, DE ....................................................................................... .......................... 200 

INDIAN RIVER INLET AND BAY, DE ..................................................................................... 100 100 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD ............... 16,075 16,075 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO DELAWARE BAY, DE ................................ 100 100 

MISPILLION RIVER, DE ........................................................................................................ 50 50 

MURDERKILL RIVER, DE ...................................................................................................... 50 50

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE ..................................................................................... 40 40 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE .................................................................................................. 4,270 7,020 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC ........................................................................... 100 100 

POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVER, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL) .................................................. 845 845 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC .................................................................................... 30 30 

WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC ................................................................................................. 25 25 

FLORIDA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, FL ........................................................................... .......................... 2,820 

CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL ..................................................................................................... 4,715 4,715 

CENTRAL & SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL .................................................................................. 19,520 19,520 

ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL ................................................................................ 68 68 

FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................... 1,294 1,294 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL ............................................................................ 900 900 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER TO ANCLOTE RIVER, FL .................. .......................... 2,000 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL .................................................. 350 4,000 
48 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................. 5,708 5,708 

JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA ........................................ 9,449 9,449 

MIAMI HARBOR, FL .............................................................................................................. .......................... 200 

OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL .............................................................................................. 2,444 2,444 

PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL .................................................................................................. 2,510 2,510 

PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL .................................................................................................. 55 55 

PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL ..................................................................................................... 67 67 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL ..................................................................................... 1,450 1,450 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL ................................................................................... 3,500 3,500 

ST. LUCIE INLET, FL ............................................................................................................ 250 250 

TAMPA HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................. 5,200 5,200 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL ...................................................................... 400 400 

GEORGIA 

ALLATOONA LAKE, GA .......................................................................................................... 7,008 7,008 

APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL .................................. 2,603 2,603 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA ........................................................................... 265 1,500 

BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA ................................................................................................... 6,719 6,719 

BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA ..................................................................... 8,840 8,840 

CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA ............................................................................................. 8,136 8,136 

HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC .................................................................................................. 11,501 11,501 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA ........................................... 85 85 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA ............................................................................ 141 141 

J. STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC ................................................................................ 10,918 10,918 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA ..................................................................................... 122 122 

RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM & LAKE, GA & SC .................................................................... 9,387 9,387 

SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA ...................................................................................................... 18,462 18,462 

SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA ............................................................................. 230 230 

WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL ............................................................................... 8,845 8,845 

HAWAII 

BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI .............................................................................................. 245 330 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI ............................................................................. 642 961 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI ...................................................................................... 604 604 

IDAHO 

ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID ........................................................................................................ 1,521 1,521 

DWORKSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID .............................................................................. 2,965 2,965 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID ............................................................................. 288 288 

LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID ......................................................................................................... 2,689 2,689 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID ......................................................................... 499 499 

ILLINOIS 

CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN ............................................................................. 4,238 4,238 

CARLYLE LAKE, IL ................................................................................................................ 5,643 5,643 

CHICAGO HARBOR, IL .......................................................................................................... 2,064 2,064 

CHICAGO RIVER, IL ............................................................................................................. 510 510 

CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL ......................................... 7,450 7,450 

FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL ............................................................................................ 398 398 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVR PORTION) .................................................................... 32,238 32,238 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVS PORTION) .................................................................... 1,802 1,802 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL ............................................. 65 65 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ............................................................................. 1,707 1,707 

KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL ...................................................................................... 2,176 2,176

LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL ........................................................................................... 710 710 

LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL ......................................................................................................... 5,512 5,512 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR PORTION), IL ... 53,692 53,692 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS PORTION), IL .... 21,581 21,581 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL ...................................................................................... 106 106 

REND LAKE, IL ..................................................................................................................... 5,702 5,702 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL ...................................................... 689 689 
49 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL ...................................................................................................... 590 590 

INDIANA 

BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN ......................................................................................................... 1,141 1,141 

BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN ......................................................................................... 171 171 

CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................ 1,030 1,030 

CECIL M. HARDEN LAKE, IN ................................................................................................ 1,013 1,013 

INDIANA HARBOR, IN ........................................................................................................... 5,700 5,700 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN ............................................................................. 800 800 

J. EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN ............................................................................................... 1,793 1,793 

MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN ...................................................................................................... 1,147 1,147 

MONROE LAKE, IN ............................................................................................................... 1,899 1,899 

PATOKA LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................. 980 980 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN ...................................................................................... 185 185 

SALAMONIE LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................... 1,012 1,012 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN ..................................................... 125 125 

IOWA 

CORALVILLE LAKE, IA .......................................................................................................... 4,559 5,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA ............................................................................. 393 393 

MISSOURI RIVER—KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SOIUX CITY, IA ............................................. 137 137 

MISSOURI RIVER—RULO TO MOUTH, IA, NE, KS & MO ..................................................... .......................... 7,000 

MISSOURI RIVER—SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO, & NE ................................... 9,021 9,021 

RATHBUN LAKE, IA .............................................................................................................. 2,501 2,501 

RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE, RED ROCK, IA ......................................................................... 8,135 9,000 

SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA ......................................................................................................... 5,003 5,500 

KANSAS 

CLINTON LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................... 2,080 2,080 

COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS .................................................................................................. 1,649 1,649 

EL DORADO LAKE, KS .......................................................................................................... 609 609 

ELK CITY LAKE, KS .............................................................................................................. 1,040 1,040 

FALL RIVER LAKE, KS .......................................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

HILLSDALE LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................ 791 791 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS ............................................................................ 318 318 

JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS ........................................................................ 1,760 1,760 

KANOPOLIS, KS .................................................................................................................... 1,561 1,561 

MARION LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ 1,613 1,613 

MELVERN LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................. 1,981 1,981 

MILFORD LAKE, KS .............................................................................................................. 2,391 2,391 

PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS ............................................................................... 1,332 1,332 

PERRY LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................. 2,254 2,254 

POMONA LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................... 1,965 1,965 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS ........................................................................ 100 100 

TORONTO LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................. 652 652 

TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................... 2,644 2,644 

WILSON LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ 1,415 1,715 

KENTUCKY 

BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE, BARKLEY, KY & TN ................................................................... 10,025 10,025 

BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY .................................................................................................... 3,454 3,454 

BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY ..................................................................................................... 1,600 1,600 

BUCKHORN LAKE, KY .......................................................................................................... 1,655 1,655 

CARR CREEK LAKE, KY ....................................................................................................... 1,882 1,882 

CAVE RUN LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................ 965 965 

DEWEY LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................. 1,762 1,762 

ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY ................................................................................ 16 780 

FISHTRAP LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................. 1,942 1,942 

GRAYSON LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................. 1,434 1,434 

GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY ....................................................................................... 2,100 2,100 

GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 2,242 2,242 
50 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ............................................................................ 839 839 

KENTUCKY RIVER, KY .......................................................................................................... 10 10 

LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY ..................................................................................................... 1,646 1,646 

MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY .................................................................................................... 1,088 1,088 

MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY ................................................................. 113 113 

NOLIN LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................... 2,821 2,821 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH ............................................................... 31,433 31,433 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN & OH ......................................................... 5,682 5,682 

PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY ......................................................................................................... 1,361 1,361 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY ..................................................................................... 2 2 

ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 2,606 2,606 

TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 1,232 1,232 

WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY ....................................................................... 8,089 8,089 

YATESVILLE LAKE, KY .......................................................................................................... 1,154 1,154 

LOUISIANA 

ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA ...................................... 8,230 12,230 

BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA ......................................................................................... 135 135 

BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA ......................................................................................... 1,072 1,072 

BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE–JUMP WATERWAY, LA ............................................. 1,050 1,050 

BAYOU PIERRE, LA .............................................................................................................. 24 24 

BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA ...................................................................................... 37 37 

BAYOU TECHE & VERMILION RIVER, LA ............................................................................. 11 11 

BAYOU TECHE, LA ............................................................................................................... 150 150 

CADDO LAKE, LA ................................................................................................................. 222 222 

CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA ........................................................................................ 14,495 20,081 

FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA .................................................................................................... 1,625 1,625 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA .................................................................................. 19,031 19,031 

HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA .......................................................................................... 2,352 4,352

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ............................................................................ 758 758 

J.BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ................................................................................ 7,745 12,000 

LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA ......................................................................................... 17 600 

MADISON PARISH PORT, LA ................................................................................................ 5 150 

MERMENTAU RIVER, LA ....................................................................................................... 2,008 2,008 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA ...................................................................... 2,215 4,215 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA ..................................... 62,969 62,969 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA ..................................................................................... 60 60 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA ................................................................................... 1,410 1,410 

WALLACE LAKE, LA .............................................................................................................. 241 241 

WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA ...................................................................... 5 5 

WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA ................................ 30 30 

MAINE 

BASS HARBOR, TREMONT, ME ............................................................................................ 65 65 

BEALS HARBOR, ME ............................................................................................................ 100 1,250 

DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME ...................................................................................... 1,050 1,050 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME ........................................................................... 148 148 

PIG ISLAND GUT, ME ........................................................................................................... 100 100 

PORTLAND HARBOR, ME ..................................................................................................... .......................... 8,000 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME .................................................................................... 750 750 

SACO RIVER, ME ................................................................................................................. 140 140 

SCARBOROUGH RIVER, ME ................................................................................................. 160 160 

SOUTHERN MAINE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE DESIGNATION, 

ME & NH ......................................................................................................................... .......................... 200 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME .................................................... 20 20 

MARYLAND 

BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD ........................................................ 17,215 17,215 

BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL) ...................................................................... 375 375 

CRISFIELD HARBOR, MD ..................................................................................................... .......................... 160 

CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV .............................................................................. 188 188 
51 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD ........................................................................... 124 124 

JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV ............................................................................... 1,756 2,856 

LOWER THOROFARE, DEAL ISLAND, MD .............................................................................. .......................... 1,440 

NANTICOKE RIVER, MD ........................................................................................................ 160 160 

OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD ........................................... 1,400 1,400 

POCOMOKE RIVER, MD ........................................................................................................ .......................... 1,800 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD .................................................................................... 475 475 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD ....................................................................... 60 60 

WICOMICO RIVER, MD ......................................................................................................... 1,500 1,500 

MASSACHUSETTS 

BARRE FALLS DAM, MA ....................................................................................................... 700 700 

BIRCH HILL DAM, MA .......................................................................................................... 792 792 

BOSTON HARBOR, MA ......................................................................................................... 2,700 2,700 

BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA ...................................................................................................... 657 657 

CAPE COD CANAL, MA ........................................................................................................ 14,174 14,174 

CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA ..................................................... 329 329 

CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA .................................................................................................. 403 403 

DUXBURY HARBOR, MA ....................................................................................................... 100 100 

EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA ................................................................................................. 557 557

HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA ................................................................................................. 629 629 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA ........................................................................... 349 349 

KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA ........................................................................................................ 688 688 

LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA ......................................................................................................... 682 682 

NEW BEDFORD, FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA ........................... 1,250 1,250 

NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA .............................................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA .................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

TULLY LAKE, MA .................................................................................................................. 726 726 

WEST HILL DAM, MA ........................................................................................................... 842 842 

WESTVILLE LAKE, MA .......................................................................................................... 661 661 

MICHIGAN 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI ............................................................................ 125 125 

MICHIGAN NAVIGATION O&M, MI ......................................................................................... .......................... 8,000 

ALPENA HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

ARCADIA HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

BIG BAY HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

BLACK RIVER HARBOR, GOGEBIC CO-OP, MI ............................................................ .......................... ..........................

BOLLES HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

CEDAR RIVER HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ........................................... .......................... ..........................

CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI .............................................................................. 1,117 1,117 

CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................... 208 208 

CHEBOYGAN HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

CLINTON RIVER, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

DETOUR HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

DETROIT RIVER, MI .................................................................................................... 5,218 5,218 

EAGLE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... 722 722 

GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) .......................................... .......................... ..........................

GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ........................................ .......................... ..........................

HARBOR BEACH HARBOR, MI .................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

HARRISVILLE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

HOLLAND HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................... 655 655 

KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI ........................................................................................ 12 12 

KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ........................................... .......................... ..........................

LAC LA BELLE HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

LELAND HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

LES CHENEAUX ISLANDS CHANNELS, MI ................................................................... .......................... ..........................

LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................
52 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................ 1,419 1,419 

LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ............................................... .......................... ..........................

MANISTEE HARBOR AND RIVER CHANNEL, MI ........................................................... 252 252 

MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................... 230 230 

MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI & WI ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

MONROE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ 1,340 1,340 

MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................ 872 872 

ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................... 1,172 1,172 

PENTWATER HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

PORTAGE LAKE HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ......................................... .......................... ..........................

PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

ROUGE RIVER, MI ....................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

SAGINAW RIVER, MI ................................................................................................... 3,190 3,190

SAUGATUCK HARBOR, KALAMAZOO RIVER, MI ........................................................... .......................... ..........................

SEBEWAING RIVER, MI ............................................................................................... 75 75 

SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI .................................................................................................. 1,233 1,233 

ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................ 755 755 

ST. MARYS RIVER, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ................................................... 22,074 22,074 

WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI ..................................................................................... 430 430 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI ..................................................... 2,501 2,501 

MINNESOTA 

BIGSTONE LAKE AND WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD .......................................................... 251 251 

DULUTH–SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI .............................................................................. 7,237 7,237 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN ........................................................................... 463 463 

LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ................................................................. 677 677 

MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ....................................................................................................... 262 262 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), 

MN ................................................................................................................................... 48,426 48,426 

ORWELL LAKE, MN ............................................................................................................... 462 462 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN .................................................................................... 84 84 

RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN ................................................................................................. 233 233 

RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN ................................................ 4,381 4,381 

ST. PAUL HARBOR DREDGING, MN ..................................................................................... .......................... 200 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN ................................................... 446 446 

MISSISSIPPI 

BILOXI HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................ 1,400 1,400 

CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS ........................................................................................... 1 74 

EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS ................................................................................... 220 220 

GULFPORT HARBOR, MS ...................................................................................................... 3,882 10,537 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ........................................................................... 34 34 

MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS ............................................................................................. 30 175 

OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS .......................................................................................................... 1,655 2,505 

PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS ................................................................................................. 5,520 10,910 

PEARL RIVER, MS & LA ...................................................................................................... 145 145 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS .................................................................................... 77 77 

ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS ..................................................................................................... 11 1,200 

YAZOO RIVER, MS ............................................................................................................... 26 154 

MISSOURI 

CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO .......................................................................................... 13 900 

CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO ..................................................... 7,841 7,841 

CLEARWATER LAKE, MO ...................................................................................................... 3,021 3,021 

HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO ................................................................... 8,842 8,842 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ........................................................................... 1,713 1,713 

LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO .......................................................................................... 741 741 

LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO .................................................................................................... 941 941
53 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG WORKS), 

MO & IL .......................................................................................................................... 28,731 28,731 

NEW MADRID HARBOR, MILE 889, MO ............................................................................... .......................... 420 

NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO ................................................................................................. 210 240 

POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO .............................................................................................. 2,156 2,156 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO .................................................................................... 4 4 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO ....................................................................... 327 327 

SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO ......................................................................................................... 1,160 1,160 

SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MO ....................................................................................... .......................... 360 

STOCKTON LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................... 4,153 4,153 

TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR ............................................................................................. 8,293 8,293 

UNION LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................. 5 5 

MONTANA 

FT. PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT ............................................................................................. 5,411 5,411 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT ........................................................................... 120 120 

LIBBY DAM, MT ................................................................................................................... 1,846 1,846 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT ........................................................................ 270 270 

NEBRASKA 

GAVINS POINT DAM, NE & SD ............................................................................................. 7,706 7,706 

HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE ................................................................................................. 2,222 2,222 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE ............................................................................ 343 343 

PAPILLION CREEK, NE ......................................................................................................... 738 738 

SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE .................................................................................... 1,067 1,067 

NEVADA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV ............................................................................ 66 66 

MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA .......................................................................................... 1,170 1,170

PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV ......................................................................... 557 557 

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

BLACKWATER DAM, NH ....................................................................................................... 716 716 

EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH ......................................................................................... 635 635 

FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH .................................................................................................. 724 724

HOPKINTON-EVERETT LAKES, NH ........................................................................................ 1,440 1,440 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH ........................................................................... 105 105 

OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH ..................................................................................................... 730 730 

PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, NH ......................................................... .......................... 500 

PORTSMOUTH HARBOR, (SAGAMORE CREEK CHANNELS), NH ............................................ .......................... 150 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH .................................................................................... 275 275 

SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH ............................................................................................... 746 746 

NEW JERSEY 

ABSECON INLET, NJ ............................................................................................................. .......................... 200 

BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ........................................................................................................... 325 325 

COLD SPRING INLET, NJ ...................................................................................................... 350 350 

DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ ...................................................................................... 15 15 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE ............................................ 20,020 20,020 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ ............................................................................ 145 145 

MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ ....................................................................................................... .......................... 250 

NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ ...................................................................... 250 250 

NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ ...................................................... 100 100 

PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM, NJ .................................................................... 570 570 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ ..................................................................................... 1,506 1,506 

RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ ................................................................... 100 400 

RARITAN RIVER, NJ ............................................................................................................. 80 225 

SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARD, NJ .................................................................................... 100 100 

SHARK RIVER, NJ ................................................................................................................ 500 500 

SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ ........................................................................ 80 80 

SHREWSBURY RIVER MAIN CHANNEL, NJ ........................................................................... 80 80 
54 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

NEW MEXICO 

ABIQUIU DAM, NM ............................................................................................................... 2,891 2,891 

COCHITI LAKE, NM ............................................................................................................... 3,546 3,546 

CONCHAS LAKE, NM ............................................................................................................ 2,067 2,972 

GALISTEO DAM, NM ............................................................................................................. 927 927 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM ........................................................................... 740 740 

JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM ................................................................................................... 1,398 1,398 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM 

[MRGESCP] ..................................................................................................................... 2,500 2,500 

SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM ....................................................................................... 1,220 1,220 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM ....................................................................... 532 532 

TWO RIVERS DAM, NM ........................................................................................................ 601 601 

UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, CO, NM, TX ............................. 1,000 1,000 

NEW YORK 

ALMOND LAKE, NY ............................................................................................................... 490 490 

ARKPORT DAM, NY .............................................................................................................. 223 223 

BROWNS CREEK, NY ............................................................................................................ 100 100 

BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY ................................................................................................. 8,600 8,600 

EAST RIVER, NY ................................................................................................................... 2,800 2,800 

EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY ................................................................................................ 200 200 

EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY ....................................................................................................... 573 573 

EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY ................................................................................................... 150 150

FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY ............................................................................ 100 5,100 

FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY .......................................................................................... 100 100 

GREAT KILLS HARBOR, STATEN ISLAND, NY ....................................................................... 60 60 

GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY ....................................................................................................... 100 100 

HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY ............................................................................................. 100 100 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT) ............................................................................................... 3,700 3,700 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C) ............................................................................................... 1,650 1,650 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY ............................................................................ 858 858 

JAMAICA BAY, NY ................................................................................................................ 120 120 

JONES INLET, NY ................................................................................................................. 150 150 

LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY .............................................................................................. 60 60 

LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY .................................................................... 100 100 

MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY ..................................................................................................... 60 60 

MORICHES INLET, NY .......................................................................................................... 100 100 

MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY ................................................................................................... 3,661 3,661 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY .................................................................... 6,150 6,150 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY ..................................................................................................... 3,796 3,796 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............................................................... 7,200 7,200 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) ....................... 1,045 1,045 

NEW YORK GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION O&M, NY ................................................................ .......................... 1,700 

BARCELONA HARBOR, NY .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY ............................................ 1,552 1,552 

BUFFALO HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................... 1,165 1,165 

CAPE HARBOR, NY ..................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

GREAT SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

IRONDEQUOIT HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

LITTLE RIVER HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY ............................................................................... 6 6 

MORRISTOWN HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

OAK ORCHARD HARBOR, NY ...................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

OGDENSBURG HARBOR, NY ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

OLCOTT HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

OSWEGO HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................ 34 34 

PORT ONTARIO HARBOR, NY ...................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY .......................................................................................... 56 56 

VINCENT HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

WILSON HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

NEWTOWN CREEK, NY ......................................................................................................... 60 60
55 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................ 60 60 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY ..................................................................................... 1,928 1,928 

SHINNECOCK INLET, NY ...................................................................................................... 100 100 

SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY .................................................... 925 925 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY .................................................... 635 635 

WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY .................................................................................................. 100 100 

WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY ................................................................................................... 642 642 

NORTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC .......................................................................... 4,750 4,750 

B. EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC ........................................................................... 1,918 1,918 

BOGUE INLET AND CHANNEL, NC ....................................................................................... .......................... 500 

CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC ....................................................................... 2,243 2,243 

CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC ............................................................................................... .......................... 500 

FALLS LAKE, NC ................................................................................................................... 2,042 2,042 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC ........................................................................... 255 255 

LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC ........................................................................................... .......................... 500 

MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC ....................................................................................... 4,095 8,095 

MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ...................................................... 50 50 

MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC ............................................................................................ 3,800 4,100

NEW RIVER INLET, NC ......................................................................................................... 600 600 

NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ..................................................... .......................... 500

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC .................................................................................... 655 655 

ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC ................................................................................................... 50 50 

SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. 150 150

W. KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC ........................................................................ 3,591 3,591 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. 12,247 12,847 

NORTH DAKOTA 

BOWMAN HALEY, ND ........................................................................................................... 246 246 

GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND .............................................................................. 12,564 12,764 

HOMME LAKE, ND ................................................................................................................ 276 276 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND ........................................................................... 303 303 

LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND ........................................................................ 1,424 1,424 

MISSOURI RIVER BETWEEN FORT PECK DAM, MT, AND GAVIN’S POINT DAM, SD & NE 

(SEC. 33), (MANDAN DIKE RESTORATION, ND) ............................................................... .......................... 560 

PIPESTEM LAKE, ND ............................................................................................................ 550 550 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND ........................................................................ 253 253 

SOURIS RIVER, ND .............................................................................................................. 509 509 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND .................................................... 35 35 

OHIO 

ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,435 1,435 

ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................... 1,995 1,995 

BERLIN LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................ 2,347 2,347 

CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH ................................................................................................... 1,559 1,559 

CLARENCE J. BROWN DAM, OH ........................................................................................... 1,190 1,190

CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................... 10,680 14,480 

CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH ..................................................................................................... 940 940

DEER CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,323 1,323 

DELAWARE LAKE, OH ........................................................................................................... 1,362 1,362 

DILLON LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................ 1,260 1,260 

FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,572 1,572 

HURON HARBOR, OH ........................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH ........................................................................... 624 624 

LORAIN HARBOR, OH ........................................................................................................... 443 443 

MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH ................................................................... 21 21 

MICHAEL J. KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH ................................................................. 1,403 1,403 

MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH ...................................................................................... 1,722 1,722 

MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................................... 1,413 1,413 

MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH ........................................................................................... 8,244 8,244
56 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH ...................................................................... 296 296 

PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,297 1,297 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH .................................................................................... 295 295 

ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH .................................................................... 35 35 

SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH ..................................................................................................... 1,102 1,102 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH .................................................... 257 257 

TOLEDO HARBOR, OH .......................................................................................................... 5,049 7,849 

TOM JENKINS DAM, OH ....................................................................................................... 603 603 

WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................... 750 750 

WILLIAM H. HARSHA LAKE, OH ............................................................................................ 1,611 1,611 

OKLAHOMA 

ARCADIA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 596 596 

BIRCH LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................. 646 646 

BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 2,458 2,458 

CANTON LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................... 1,949 1,949 

COPAN LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 1,104 1,104 

EUFAULA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 7,232 7,232 

FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 6,216 6,216 

FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 1,058 1,058 

GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK ............................................................................................ 406 406 

HEYBURN LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 603 603 

HUGO LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................... 1,748 1,748 

HULAH LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 901 901 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK ............................................................................ 261 261 

KAW LAKE, OK ..................................................................................................................... 2,121 2,121 

KEYSTONE LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................ 5,006 5,006 

MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK ......................................... 5,794 5,794 

OOLOGAH LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 2,089 2,089 

OPTIMA LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................ 197 197 

PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK ................................................... 167 167 

PINE CREEK LAKE, OK ......................................................................................................... 1,032 1,032 

ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIR, OK .................................................... 7,604 7,604 

SARDIS LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 1,130 1,130 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK ........................................................................ 900 900 

SKIATOOK LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 1,465 1,465 

TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK ............................................................................................... 4,459 4,459 

WAURIKA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 2,568 2,568 

WEBBERS FALLS LOCK & DAM, OK ..................................................................................... 5,617 5,617 

WISTER LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................ 922 922 

OREGON 

APPLEGATE LAKE, OR .......................................................................................................... 1,298 1,298 

BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 573 573 

BONNEVILLE LOCK & DAM, OR & WA ................................................................................. 7,487 7,487 

CHETCO RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................. 586 586 

COLUMBIA & LWR WILLAMETTE R BLW VANCOUVER, WA AND PORTLAND, OR ................. 24,868 24,868 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA ...................................................................... 12,850 18,350 

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA & THE DALLES, OR .................................... 645 645 

COOS BAY, OR .................................................................................................................... 4,697 5,791 

COQUILLE RIVER, OR .......................................................................................................... 433 433 

COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR ................................................................................................. 1,319 1,319 

COUGAR LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 1,733 1,733 

DEPOE BAY, OR ................................................................................................................... .......................... 166 

DETROIT LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 1,127 1,127 

DORENA LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 1,055 1,055 

ELK CREEK LAKE, OR .......................................................................................................... 87 87 

FALL CREEK LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 1,149 1,149 

FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 1,800 1,800 

GREEN PETER-FOSTER LAKES, OR ...................................................................................... 2,139 2,139 

HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR ....................................................................................................... 863 863 
57 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR ........................................... 30 30 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR ........................................................................... 559 559 

JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ................................................................................. 5,217 5,217 

LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR .................................................................................................. 2,080 2,080 

LOST CREEK LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 3,897 3,897 

MCNARY LOCK & DAM, OR & WA ....................................................................................... 6,277 6,277 

PORT ORFORD, OR .............................................................................................................. .......................... 400 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR .................................................................................... 200 200 

ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR ................................................................................... 579 579 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR ........................................................................ 92 92 

SIUSLAW RIVER , OR ........................................................................................................... 708 1,083 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR .................................................... 4,100 4,100 

TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR ............................................................................................ .......................... 600 

UMPQUA RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................ 800 800 

WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR ................................................................. 92 258 

WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR ....................................................................... 85 85 

WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR ................................................................................................... 657 657

YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR ......................................................................................... 1,786 1,986 

YAQUINA RIVER (DEPOT SLOUGH), OR ................................................................................ .......................... 12 

PENNSYLVANIA 

ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA ........................................................................................................ 8,456 8,456 

ALVIN R. RUSH DAM, PA ..................................................................................................... 600 600 

AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA ........................................................................................... 230 230 

BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................... 1,425 1,425 

BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA ....................................................................................................... 2,817 2,817 

CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA ............................................................................................. 1,351 1,351 

COWANESQUE LAKE, PA ...................................................................................................... 1,772 1,772 

CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA ................................................................................................. 2,039 2,039 

CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA .................................................................................................... 687 687 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ ..................................................... 820 820 

EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA ........................................................................... 1,671 1,671 

ERIE HARBOR, PA ................................................................................................................ 1,389 1,389 

FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA ...................................................................................... 672 672 

FRANCIS E. WALTER DAM, PA ............................................................................................. 880 880 

GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA .......................................................... 250 250 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA ............................................................................ 744 744 

JOHNSTOWN, PA ................................................................................................................... 36 36 

KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHANY RESERVOIR, PA .................................................................. 1,469 1,469 

LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................ 1,460 1,460 

MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA ............................................................................................... 1,326 1,326 

MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA .................................................................................................. 15,861 15,861 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV ................................................................... 28,023 28,023 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV ............................................................ 633 633 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA ..................................................................................... 170 170 

PROMPTON LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................... 506 506 

PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA ............................................................................................................ 22 22 

RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................... 3,752 3,752 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA ........................................................................ 46 46 

SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA ....................................................................................................... 250 250 

SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA ................................................................................................ 2,496 2,496 

STILLWATER LAKE, PA ......................................................................................................... 363 363 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA .................................................... 107 107 

TIOGA HAMMOND LAKES, PA ............................................................................................... 2,384 2,384 

TIONESTA LAKE, PA ............................................................................................................. 2,200 2,200 

UNION CITY LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................... 425 425 

WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA .............................................................................................. 1,078 1,078 

YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA .............................................................................................. 480 480 

YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD .............................................................................. 2,358 2,358 

PUERTO RICO 

SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR ....................................................................................................... 3,700 3,700 
58 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RHODE ISLAND 

BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI ............................................................................. 1,250 1,250 

FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, PROVIDENCE, RI ........................................................... 500 500 

GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI ............................................................................... .......................... 250 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI ............................................................................. 24 24 

PAWCATUCK RIVER, LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY & WATCH HILL COVE, CT & RI ............. .......................... 2,500 

POINT JUDITH HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI .............................................................................. .......................... 500 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI ...................................................................................... 500 500 

PROVIDENCE HARBOR SHIPPING CHANNEL, RI ................................................................... .......................... 3,800 

WOONSOCKET, RI ................................................................................................................ 300 300 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC ........................................................................... 900 2,500 

CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC .................................................................................................. 9,925 9,925 

COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC ....................................................................... 6,140 6,140 

GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC ................................................................................................ 320 1,500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC ............................................................................ 64 64 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC ..................................................................................... 625 625 

TOWN CREEK, SC ................................................................................................................ 380 380 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD ..................................................................................... 9,768 9,768 

COLD BROOK LAKE, SD ....................................................................................................... 1,080 1,080 

COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD ....................................................................................... 285 285 

FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD .................................................................. 8,970 8,970 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD ............................................................................ 100 100 

LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN ................................................................................................. 656 656 

OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND ...................................................................................... 10,477 10,477

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD ........................................................................ 144 144 

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL LAKE, TN ....................................................................................................... 5,067 5,067 

CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN .......................................................................................... 6,358 6,358 

CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ..................................................................... 3,500 3,500 

CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ......................................................................... 6,429 6,429 

DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN ...................................................................................................... 6,219 6,219 

J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ....................................................................... 4,608 4,608 

OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN ..................................................................................... 8,237 8,237 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN ..................................................................................... 3 3 

TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ........................................................................................................ 16,540 16,540 

WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN ................................................................................................... 180 180

TEXAS 

AQUILLA LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 1,120 1,120 

ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL—AREA VIII, TX ................................ 1,439 1,439 

BARDWELL LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................ 1,879 1,879 

BELTON LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 3,682 3,682 

BENBROOK LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................... 2,578 2,578 

BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX ............................................................................................. 3,468 3,468 

BUFFALO BAYOU & TRIBUTARIES, TX ................................................................................. 3,518 3,518 

CANYON LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 3,429 3,429 

CEDAR BAYOU, TX ............................................................................................................... 1,695 1,695 

CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX ......................................................................................... 329 329 

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................. 4,608 4,608 

DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX & OK ............................................................................. 10,057 10,057 

ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX ............................................................. 43 43 

FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O’ THE PINES, TX ............................................................... 3,709 3,709 

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ....................................................................................................... 3,538 3,538 

GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................ 8,441 8,441 

GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX ...................................................................................... 1,825 1,825 

GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX ............................................................................................. 2,360 2,360 
59 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................... 3,014 3,014 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX .................................................................................. 27,792 27,792 

HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX ..................................................................................................... 1,708 1,708 

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX .............................................................................................. 23,817 29,040 

BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................ (1,811 ) ..........................

BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX ..................................................................................... (4,028 ) ..........................

GREENS BAYOU, TX .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX ............................................................................ 1,364 1,364 

JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................... 1,939 1,939 

JOE POOL LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................. 1,094 1,094 

LAKE KEMP, TX .................................................................................................................... 467 467 

LAVON LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................. 3,135 3,135 

LEWISVILLE DAM, TX ........................................................................................................... 3,542 3,542 

MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ......................................................................................... 3,024 5,000 

NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX ................................................................................................... 2,767 2,767 

NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX ................................................... 2,536 2,536 

O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX ......................................................................................... 1,373 1,373

PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX .......................................................................................................... 992 992 

PROCTOR DAM AND LAKE, TX ............................................................................................. 2,336 2,336 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX ..................................................................................... 451 451 

RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................... 1,525 1,525 

SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ......................................................................................... 14,330 15,000 

SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX .......................................................................... 6,396 6,396 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX ......................................................................... 194 194 

SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................... 3,292 3,292 

STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX ............................................................................................ 2,150 2,150 

TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX .......................................................................................... 1,436 1,436 

TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX ..................................................................... 100 1,000 

TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX .................................................................. 2,666 2,666 

WACO LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................... 3,131 3,131 

WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................... 2,175 2,175 

WHITNEY LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................... 7,221 7,221 

WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX ................................................................................. 3,804 3,804 

UTAH 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT ............................................................................ 31 31 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT ........................................................................ 653 653 

VERMONT 

BALL MOUNTAIN, VT ............................................................................................................ 896 896 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT ............................................................................ 79 79 

NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY .......................................................................... 85 85 

NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT ................................................................................................ 719 719 

NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT ............................................................................................ 838 838 

TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT ......................................................................................................... 797 797 

UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT ..................................................................................................... 683 683 

VIRGINIA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—ACC, VA ................................................................ 2,150 2,150 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—DSC, NC & VA ...................................................... 895 1,825 

CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA ................................................................................................... 500 500 

GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA .......................................................................... 2,268 2,268 

HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............. 1,225 1,225 

HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) ..................................... 50 50 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA ............................................................................ 367 367 

JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA ................................................................................................ 4,180 5,000 

JOHN H. KERR LAKE, VA & NC ........................................................................................... 11,423 11,423 

JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA ................................................................ 2,230 2,230 

LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA ........................................................................................................ 300 500 

NORFOLK HARBOR, VA ........................................................................................................ 9,766 11,000 

NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA ........................................................................... 668 668 
60 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PHILPOTT LAKE, VA & NC ................................................................................................... 6,396 6,396 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA ..................................................................................... 870 870 

RUDEE INLET, VA ................................................................................................................ 520 520 

TANGIER CHANNEL, VA ........................................................................................................ 1,135 1,135 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, VA ...................................................................... 104 104 

WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA ...................................................................... 143 600 

WASHINGTON 

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA ...................................................................................................... 772 772 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR ...................................................................... .......................... 800 

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA .......................................... .......................... 900 

EDIZ HOOK, WA ................................................................................................................... 30 30 

EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA ................................................................. 1,006 1,006 

GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA ....................................................................... 10,550 10,550 

HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA ................................................................................................ 3,276 3,276 

ICE HARBOR LOCK & DAM, WA .......................................................................................... 4,147 4,147 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA ........................................... 32 32 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA ........................................................................... 750 750 

LAKE CROCKETT (Keystone Harbor), WA ............................................................................. 550 550 

LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA .................................................................................. 8,276 13,376 

LITTLE GOOSE LOCK & DAM, WA ........................................................................................ 2,314 2,314 

LOWER GRANITE LOCK & DAM, WA .................................................................................... 5,872 5,872 

LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK & DAM, WA ............................................................................ 4,734 4,734 

MILL CREEK LAKE, WA ........................................................................................................ 3,817 3,817 

MOUNT ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA .................................................................... 265 265 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA ................................................................................................... 3,441 3,441 

NEAH BAY, WA ..................................................................................................................... 50 50 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA .................................................................................... 459 459 

PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA ..................................................................... 905 905 

QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA ....................................................................................................... 1,590 1,590 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA ........................................................................ 447 447 

SEATTLE HARBOR, WA ......................................................................................................... 951 951 

STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA ................................................................................................. 265 265

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA .................................................... 74 74 

SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA .................................................................................................. 62 600 

TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA .......................................................................................... 142 142 

THE DALLES LOCK & DAM, WA & OR ................................................................................. 8,702 8,702 

WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA ...................................................................................... 30 75 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BEECH FORK LAKE, WV ....................................................................................................... 1,377 1,377 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................... 1,700 1,700 

BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV ........................................................................................................ 3,049 3,049 

EAST LYNN LAKE, WV .......................................................................................................... 2,215 2,215 

ELKINS, WV .......................................................................................................................... 15 15 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV ........................................................................... 279 279 

KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS & DAM, WV .................................................................................. 9,791 9,791 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH ................................................................... 34,802 34,802 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH ............................................................ 3,088 3,088 

R D BAILEY LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................... 2,237 2,237 

STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ......................................................................................... 1,173 1,273 

SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV ................................................................................................... 2,376 2,636 

SUTTON LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................... 3,075 3,075 

TYGART LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................ 1,434 1,434 

WISCONSIN 

EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI ................................................................................................ 729 729

FOX RIVER, WI ..................................................................................................................... 2,402 2,402 

GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI .................................................................................................... 2,698 7,698 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI ............................................................................ 64 64 

KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI ...................................................................................................... 8 8 
61 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI .................................................................................................... 1,672 1,672 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI ..................................................................................... 239 239 

STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI ....................................... 19 19 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI ..................................................... 509 509 

TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WI ................................................................................................... .......................... 1,020 

WYOMING 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY ........................................... 10 10 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY ........................................................................... 37 37 

JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY ................................................................................................ 1,001 1,001 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY ........................................................................ 213 213 

SUBTOTAL .............................................................................................................. 2,198,519 2,381,612 

REMAINING ITEMS 

AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH .......................................................................... 690 690 

ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ..................................... 4,750 5,250 

BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS LINES: 

OPTIMIZATION TOOLS FOR NAVIGATION ..................................................................... 750 750 

PERFORMANCE BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM .......................................... 4,000 4,000 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM ...................................................... 1,650 1,650 

STEWARDSHIP SUPPORT PROGRAM ........................................................................... 392 392 

COASTAL DATA INFORMATION PROGRAM ............................................................................ 3,000 5,000 

COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM ................................................................................ 3,000 3,000 

CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION) ..................................................................... 5,500 5,500 

DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE .............................................................................. 10,000 10,000 

DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE .................................................................................. 11,000 11,000 

DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM ................................... 1,150 1,150 

DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION [DOER] .............................. 7,000 7,000 

DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM [DOTS] ...................................... 2,000 2,000 

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM .................................................................. 270 270 

FACILITY PROTECTION ......................................................................................................... 6,500 6,500 

FERC HYRDOPOWER COORDINATION ................................................................................... 3,000 3,000 

FISH & WILDLIFE OPERATING FISH HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT ...................................... 3,800 3,800 

GLOBAL CHANGE SUSTAINABILITY ....................................................................................... 10,000 10,000 

GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODEL ....................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS ........................................................................... 3,800 3,800 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS .................................................. 1,780 1,780 

INTERAGENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TASK FORCE/HURRICANEPROTECTION DECISION CHRONOLOGY LESSONS LEARNED IMPLEMENTATION ............................................ 8,000 8,000 

LONG-TERM OPTION ASSESSMENT FOR LOW USE NAVIGATION .......................................... 1,500 1,500 

MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS ........................................................ 1,800 1,800 

NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY ................................................................................ 15,000 15,000 

NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM ............................................................................ 7,000 9,500 

NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM ...................................................................................... 17,450 17,450 

NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM [NEPP] ............................................... 6,750 6,750 

NATIONAL NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES .............................................. 4,230 4,230 

NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATION ................................................... 571 571 

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT [ABS–P2, WINABS] ................................. 300 300 

PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION ................. 825 825 

PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: PROTECT, CLEAR AND STRAIGHTEN CHANNELS (SEC 3) .... 50 50 

PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS .......................................... 500 500 

PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS ............................... 4,771 4,771 

RECREATION ON STOP [R1S] NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVATION ................................. 65 65 

REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM ...................................... 2,000 5,000 

HAWAII RSM, HI .......................................................................................................... .......................... (1,000 ) 

NORTH CAROLINA RSM, NC ....................................................................................... .......................... (600 ) 

DELAWARE ESTUARY RSM, NJ .................................................................................... .......................... (200 ) 

SOUTH COASTAL RHODE ISLAND RSM, RI ................................................................. .......................... (750 ) 

CHESAPEAKE BAY, NEWPOINT COMFORT, MATHEWS COUNTY, VA ............................ .......................... (59 ) 

RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR MAJOR REHAB ......................................................... 608 608 

RESPONSES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AT CORPS PROJECTS ................................................... 5,000 5,000 
62 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

SHORELINE USE PERMIT STUDY ......................................................................................... 250 250 

WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT [WOTS] ............................................................ 653 653 

SUBTOTAL .............................................................................................................. 162,555 170,555 

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ...................................................................................................... .......................... ¥57,167 

ROUNDING ........................................................................................................................... ¥74 ..........................

TOTAL ..................................................................................................................... 2,361,000 2,495,000 

Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, Alabama and Mississippi.—The 

Committee recommendation includes additional funds above the 

budget request for additional dredging, environmental stewardship 

activities and backlog maintenance. 

Bethel Harbor, Alaska.—$1,000,000 is recommended to for plans 

and specifications and dredging of this small harbor that serves as 

a regional transportation center for 50 villages. 

Arkansas Lakes, Arkansas.—The Committee recommendation includes funds above the budget request for each of these projects: 

DeGray Lake, Lake Greeson, and Lake Ouachita, to provide adequate levels of service and for backlog maintenance items. 

Ouachita and Black Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana.—The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for maintenance dredging of this inland navigation project. 

Marina Del Rey, California.—The Committee recommends an additional $3,000,000 for dredging this project, the largest man-made 

harbor in the United States with nearly 6,000 boat slips and home 

to a U.S. Coast Guard cutter. The harbor also serves as the key 

rescue support for the Los Angeles International Airport. 

San Francisco Harbor, California.—The Committee is concerned 

that significant coastal erosion is occurring in the vicinity of the 

San Francisco Main Ship Channel, jeopardizing municipal wastewater infrastructure. The Committee expects that the Corps should 

complete its planning studies and the environmental requirements 

for a potential project to prevent further deterioration in fiscal year 

2011 and directs the Corps to take all steps necessary to proceed 

to construction no later than fiscal year 2012. 

Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut.—The Committee recommends 

$1,500,000 for the phase III maintenance dredging of the harbor. 

Harbor of Refuge, Lewes, Delaware.—The Committee recommends $200,000 to update existing preliminary design and condition survey. 

Wilmington Harbor, Delaware.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $7,020,000 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 $2,000,000 for maintenance dredging. 

Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Georgia.—$1,500,000 is recommended for dredging critical areas of this waterway as well as 

for work related to new upland disposal sites. 
63 

Wilson Lake, Kansas.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$300,000 above the budget request for the reallocation study. 

Indiana Harbor Confined Disposal Facility, Indiana.—Funds for 

this project have been included in the CG account. 

Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana.—The Committee has included additional funds for dredging needs on this project. 

J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana.—The Committee has 

included $4,255,000 above the budget request for backlog maintenance and dredging needs. 

Lower Thorofare, Maryland.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $1,440,000 for dredging needs on this channel that service 

watermen and the Maryland seafood industry. 

Michigan Great lakes Harbor Maintenance and Dredging, Michigan.—The Committee notes that there are some 80 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 $8,000,000 under this line item to provide for some of 

the dredging and maintenance 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 waterways is constantly changing, the Committee is directing the 

Corps to propose a maintenance program for fiscal year 2011 that 

would most effectively utilize both the budgeted funds along with 

the funds provided in this line item for these harbor and waterway 

projects. 

Mouth of the Yazoo River, Mississippi.—The Committee includes 

additional funds for the maintenance dredging of the entrance to 

the Vicksburg Harbor. 

Rosedale Harbor, Mississippi.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $1,200,000 for maintenance dredging of the harbor. The 

port serves many small communities and the farmers in the area. 

Caruthersville Harbor, Missouri.—The Committee recommendation includes $900,000 to dredge the harbor and turning basin. 

Portsmouth Harbor, New Hampshire.—The Committee recommendation includes $650,000 for the project. This includes 

$500,000 for dredging the Simplex Shoals and $150,000 for environmental documentation and plans and specifications for dredging 

Sagamore Creek and the other harbor back channels. 

Absecon Inlet, New Jersey.—The Committee recommends 

$200,000 for dredging of the inlet. 

Cape May Inlet to Lower Township, New Jersey.—The Committee 

has included funding for this project in the construction account. 

New York Great Lakes Harbor Maintenance and Dredging, New 

York.—The Committee notes that there are more than 20 federally 

maintained harbors and waterways along the Great Lakes in New 

York. However, the Committee also notes that only five are budgeted. With the limited funding available to the Committee, the 

Committee has recommended $1,700,000 under this line item to 

provide for some of the dredging and maintenance 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 
64 

conditions on these waterways is constantly changing, the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a maintenance program for 

fiscal year 2011 that would most effectively utilize both the budgeted funds along with the funds provided in this line item for these 

harbor and waterway projects. 

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. 

Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina.—The Committee recommendation includes $600,000 over the budget request for a sand 

management study for Bald Hill Island. 

Garrison Dam and Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota.—The Committee recommends $100,000 for mosquito control in the Williston 

area due to the shallow-water mosquito breeding areas created by 

the impoundment of Lake Sakakawea. 

Ohio Great Lakes Harbors.—The Committee has included additional funds for Cleveland, Huron and Toledo Harbors that were 

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 need of the State. The 

Committee notes that Cleveland Harbor has got to determine interim and long-term disposal alternatives to avoid closure of the 

harbor after 2014. 

Columbia River at the Mouth, Oregon and Washington.—The 

Committee recommends $5,500,000 above the budget request for 

South Jetty beach material placement. 

Providence Harbor, Rhode Island.—The Committee has recommended $3,800,000 to dredge this project. 

Houston Ship Channel, Texas.—The Committee has combined 

the line items for the Houston Ship Channel, the Bayport Channel, 

Greens Bayou and the Barbers Point Channel under this single 

line item for fiscal year 2011 to allow for more efficient utilization 

of funds on these interconnected navigation channels. The Corps is 

urged to budget these channels as a single line item in future 

budget submissions. However, for transparency, the justification 

sheet should still show the individual amounts for each of the 

channels. The Committee has also recommended additional funds 

above the budget request for additional maintenance dredging and 

other related activities. 

Texas Water Allocation Assessment, Texas.—$1,000,000 is recommended to continue these studies to determine if existing water 

can be better allocated to support more balanced water use in light 

of future needs. 

Appomattox River, Virginia.—The Committee recommends 

$500,000 to complete environmental testing and analysis and obtain environmental permits. 

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 
65 

while having these two projects be considered together when seeking bids and awarding contracts. $1,700,000 is recommended for 

dredging at these harbors. 

Lake Washington Ship Canal, Washington.—The Committee recommendation includes $5,100,000 over the budget request for additional maintenance needs at the project. 

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. 

Green Bay Harbor, Wisconsin.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $5,000,000 above the budget request for backlog maintenance and dredging needs. 

Asset Management/Facilities and Equipment Maintenance.—The 

Committee recognizes the critical importance of protecting the 

large Federal investment in the Nation’s aging inventory of water 

infrastructure and the key objectives of the Corps’ asset management program in this regard. Improving system reliability and efficiency, extending useful life, minimizing risk, and identifying critical maintenance needs (on a risk basis) will achieve cost savings 

to better meet service needs across the Nation. The Committee has 

therefore provided $500,000 to initiate an automated risk based 

asset management system including, but not limited to, condition 

assessments, geospatial mapping, data base integration/interoperability and photogrammetric visualization of the inventory. The 

Corps shall also evaluate technologies for real time dam monitoring 

for emergency events and the subsurface piping and seepage problems associated with aging dams and levees. The Corps is urged to 

budget for this automated system in future budget submissions. 

Coastal Data Information Program.—The Committee believes 

that this is a better account for this work to be funded than the 

GI account where it has been previously funded. The Committee 

recognizes the importance of accurate directional wave measurements to the success of coastal Corps projects and notes that nationwide, coastal Corps districts have called for sustained and enhanced wave information as a top data priority. The additional 

funding recommended above the budget request along with the 

budget request is directed toward the maintenance of wave observations and the expansion of the national wave monitoring network. The Corps is requested to report back to the Committee on 

its plan to address critical data gaps in this system. 

National Coastal Mapping.—A total of $9,500,000 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 $5,000,000 for this program, 

$3,000,000 above the budget request. Within the funds recommended, the Corps is directed to undertake studies for the State 

of Hawaii; the State of North Carolina; South Coastal Rhode Island; Delaware Estuary, New Jersey; and for Chesapeake Bay, 

New Point Comfort, Mathews County, Virginia. 
66 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $190,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 193,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 193,000,000 

An appropriation of $193,000,000 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. 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $134,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 130,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 130,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $130,000,000 to 

continue activities related to the 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 contaminated 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. The Committee directs the Corps of Engineers during fiscal 

year 2011 to complete the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study 

of the former Sylvania nuclear fuel site at Hicksville, New York 

and to proceed expeditiously to a Record of Decision and, if appropriate, initiate any necessary remediation in accordance with 
67 

CERCLA. The Secretary of the Army shall submit a report to the 

Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and 

the Senate detailing the progress not later than 120 days after enactment of this act. 

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... $30,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,000,000 

The Committee has recommended $30,000,000 for the Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies 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. 

GENERAL EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $185,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 185,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 185,000,000 

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 $185,000,000. 

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 

and 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 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 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 Corps is reminded that General Expense funds are appropriated solely for the executive management and oversight of the 
68 

Civil Works Program under the direction of the Director of Civil 

Works. 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 6,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 6,000,000 

The Committee has recommended $6,000,000 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. 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 Headquarters 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. 
69 

Section 102. The bill includes language prohibiting implementation of competitive sourcing or HPO. 

Section 103. The bill includes language concerning continuing 

contracts and the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. 

Section 104. The bill includes language concerning report notifications. 

Section 105. The bill includes a provision providing the Corps of 

Engineers authorization for emergency measures to exclude Asian 

carp from the Great Lakes. It should be noted that when considering this language for inclusion in this bill that the Committee did 

not consider hydrologic separation of the Great Lakes Basin from 

the Mississippi River Basin to be an emergency measure. The Committee believes that the issue of hydrologic separation should be 

fully studied by the Corps of Engineers and vetted by the appropriate congressional authorizing committees and specifically enacted into law rather than have implementation be attempted 

through this limited provision. 

Section 106. The bill includes language deauthorizing a portion 

of a project. 

Section 107. The bill includes language modifying the scope of a 

project. 

Section 108. The bill includes language concerning a project cost 

limit change. 

Section 109. The bill includes language concerning the utilization 

of the Revolving Fund for the acquisition of a building. 

Section 110. The bill includes language concerning the utilization 

of the Revolving Fund for the construction of three buildings. 

Section 111. The bill includes language concerning a project cost 

limit change. 

Section 112. The bill includes language modifying the boundaries 

of a project. 

Section 113. The bill includes language deauthorizing a portion 

of a project. 

Section 114. The bill includes language concerning operation and 

maintenance of a project. 

Section 115. The bill includes language concerning leasing of 

property. 

Section 116. The bill includes language concerning acquisition of 

property. 

Section 117. The bill includes language modifying the cost sharing for certain projects. 

Section 118. The bill includes language concerning a property 

transfer. 
(70) 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $42,004,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 43,004,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 43,004,000 

The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2011 to carry out 

the provisions of the Central Utah Project Completion Act totals 

$43,004,000. An appropriation of $38,810,000 has been provided for 

Central Utah project construction; $2,500,000 for fish, wildlife, and 

recreation, mitigation and conservation. The Committee recommendation provides $1,694,000 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. 

AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA] 

enacted on February 17, 2009, was an attempt to combat the severe economic downturn by putting our citizens back to work rebuilding our Nation’s water resource infrastructure. Through the 

Bureau of Reclamation’s Water and Related Resources Account, 

$50,000,000 was provided to stimulate job growth by addressing 

water resource infrastructure needs in the Central Utah Project 

area. All of this ARRA funding has been obligated. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

INTRODUCTION

The Bureau of Reclamation was established in 1902 with the primary mission of harnessing the western rivers that led to homesteading and the economic development in the west. Today, Reclamation has evolved into a contemporary water management 
71 

agency. In addition to the traditional missions of bringing water 

and power to the west, Reclamation has developed and continues 

to develop, programs, initiatives, and activities that will help the 

Western States, Native American tribes, and others meet new 

water needs and balance the multitude of competing uses of water 

in the West. 

While Reclamation only has projects in the 17 Western States, 

their programs impact the entire Nation. Reclamation is the largest 

wholesaler of water in the country operating 348 reservoirs with a 

total storage capacity of 245 million acre-feet. Reclamation projects 

deliver 10 trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million people 

each year, and provide 1 out of 5 Western farmers (140,000) with 

irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce 60 

percent of the Nation’s vegetables and 25 percent of its fruits and 

nuts. Reclamation manages, with partners, 289 recreation sites 

that have 90 million visits annually. 

Reclamation is also the second largest producer of hydroelectric 

power in the Western United States. Fifty-eight powerplants annually provide more than 41 billion kilowatt hours generating nearly 

$1,000,000,000 in power revenues and produce enough electricity to 

serve 3.5 million homes. Reclamation’s power revenues to the 

Treasury alone justify the investments proposed in the budget request. When water supply, recreation, environmental, and other 

ancillary benefits are considered, the return on this investment is 

greatly increased. 

As with the Corps of Engineers budget, the Committee does not 

believe that the administration properly values the economic input 

of the Bureau of Reclamation’s programs to the national economy. 

Reclamation’s budget amounted to a meager 0.21 percent of the 

$530,000,000,000 in nondefense discretionary spending in fiscal 

year 2010. Or more broadly, Reclamation’s budget amounted to 

0.03 percent of the entire $3,540,000,000,000 fiscal year 2010 Federal budget. 

The Committee urges the administration to assess the value of 

Reclamation’s programs to the national economy and derive a level 

of investment from that impact that is commensurate with the outputs of this critical infrastructure. 

OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST

The fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation is composed of $1,064,697,000 in new budget authority. The 

budget request is $23,019,000 less than the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount but is an increase of $44,014,000 from the fiscal year 

2010 request. 

The Committee is pleased that the administration has chosen to 

invest marginally more in Western water infrastructure in fiscal 

year 2011, but the needs far outweigh the amount proposed. Many 

Reclamation projects are 100 years old. A majority are more than 

50 years old. This aging infrastructure desperately needs to be recapitalized if the Nation intends to continue to reap the benefits 

that this infrastructure provides. Besides the jobs created by the 

construction and maintenance of the existing infrastructure, this 

infrastructure has greatly contributed to the population boom in 

the Western States over the last 50 years. This population boom 
72 

and the jobs and taxes to Federal, State, and local coffers that accompanied it would not have been possible without the infrastructure provided by the Bureau of Reclamation. 

Unfortunately this budget proposal is woefully inadequate in 

funding the infrastructure needs. The Committee is particularly 

disappointed to see that rural water projects are greatly underfunded in this budget. In many cases the budget proposals for 

these projects are less than the inflation rate for the project. In 

other words, at this level of investment, these projects will never 

be completed because project costs are increasing faster than the 

amount recommended by the administration. 

The largest account in Reclamation’s budget is the Water and 

Related Resources account. The administration budget proposal includes $913,582,000 for this account. This is a decrease of $37, 

576,000 from the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount, but it is an increase of $20,457,000 more than the administration’s fiscal year 

2010 budget request. 

The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund is proposed at $49,915,000 for fiscal year 2011. This is an increase of $14,557,000 

over the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount. This account is primarily 

funded from revenues collected from water and power customers. 

Levels of funding in this account are based on a 3-year rolling average of revenues collected. 

The California Bay-Delta Restoration account is proposed at $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. This is the same as the fiscal year 

2010 enacted amount. The Committee notes that this is a 

$9,000,000 increase over the administration’s fiscal year 2010 

budget request. 

The Policy and Administration account is requested at $61,200,000, the same as the fiscal year 2010 enacted amount. This 

is also the same as the fiscal year 2010 budget request. 

AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA] 

enacted on February 17, 2009, was an attempt to combat the severe economic downturn by putting our citizens back to work rebuilding our Nation’s water resource infrastructure. The Bureau of 

Reclamation was provided $950,000,000 to stimulate job growth by 

addressing water resource infrastructure needs. Reclamation has 

obligated more than 85 percent of their ARRA funding. Reclamation is on track to obligate all of this funding before it expires on 

September 30, 2010. 

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $951,158,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 913,582,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 938,600,000 

An appropriation of $938,600,000 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 
73 

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. 

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 budget for the Bureau of Reclamation consists of individual 

line items of projects. As presented by the President, the budget 

contains 211 specific line-item requests for directed spending by the 

administration. An additional 43 line-item requests for funding by 

the administration is for nationwide line items. All of these line 

items were specific requests by the administration of the Congress 

to be funded in fiscal year 2011. They did not request these funds 

programmatically, they requested them for a specific project in a 

specific location for a specific purpose. 

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. 

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. 

Two tables are provided at the back of this report for disclosure. 

The first table provides the congressionally directed spending items 

requested by Members of Congress requiring disclosure under the 

provisions of Rule 44 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. If the 

Member requested the budget request or if only the budget request 

was provided, Member names are not listed next to these items because under the provisions of Rule 44 this would not be considered 

congressionally directed spending. The second table lists the Presidentially directed spending items. While this table is not required 

under the disclosure provisions of Rule 44, the Committee believes 

that it is prudent to provide this additional disclosure information. 

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 
74 

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 Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Project ...................... .................. 10,960 .................... 10,960 

Colorado River Basin Project—Central Arizona Project .................. 9,055 361 9,055 361 

Colorado River Front Work and Levee System ................................. 2,255 .................. 2,255 ....................

Northern Arizona Investigations Program ......................................... 182 .................. 182 ....................

Phoenix Metropolitan Water Reclamation and Reuse Project .......... 200 .................. 200 ....................

Salt River Project .............................................................................. 581 219 581 219 

San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Settlement Act Project .................. 325 .................. 325 ....................

South/Central Arizona Investigations Program ................................ 608 .................. 608 ....................

Yuma Area Projects .......................................................................... 1,362 20,058 1,362 20,058 

CALIFORNIA 

All American Canal-Imperial Dam Electrification rehabilitation ..... .................. .................. 1,000 ....................

Cachuma Project .............................................................................. 787 614 787 614 

California Investigations Program .................................................... 233 .................. 233 ....................

Calleguas Municipal Water District Recycling Project ..................... 1,400 .................. 1,400 ....................

Central Valley Projects: 

American River Division, Folsom Dam Unit/Mormon Island ... 1,631 7,833 2,551 7,833 

Auburn-Folsom South Unit ...................................................... 1,400 .................. 1,400 ....................

Delta Division .......................................................................... 14,004 6,004 14,004 6,004 

East Side Division ................................................................... 1,458 2,943 1,458 2,943 

Friant Division ......................................................................... 1,733 3,342 9,733 3,342 

Miscellaneous Project Programs .............................................. 10,949 910 12,949 910 

Replacements, Additions, and Extraordinary Maintenance 

Program ............................................................................... .................. 21,656 .................... 21,656 

Sacramento River Division ...................................................... 41,642 1,722 41,642 1,722 

San Felipe Division .................................................................. 1,173 6 1,173 6 

San Joaquin Division ............................................................... 400 .................. 400 ....................

Shasta Division ........................................................................ 925 9,566 925 9,566 

Trinity River Division ............................................................... 12,331 4,330 12,331 4,330 

Water and Power Operations ................................................... 1,483 8,408 1,483 8,408 

West San Joaquin Division, San Luis Unit .............................. 8,367 7,033 8,367 7,033 

Yield Feasibility Investigation ................................................. 448 .................. 448 ....................

Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands ........................................................ 94 .................. 94 ....................

Long Beach Area Water Reclamation Project .................................. 1,000 .................. 1,000 ....................

Long Beach Desalination Project ..................................................... 1,000 .................. 1,000 ....................

Mokelumne River Regional Water Storage & Conjunctive ............... .................. .................. 500 ....................

Orland Project ................................................................................... .................. 767 .................... 767 

Rancho California Water District ..................................................... .................. .................. 250 ....................

Salton Sea Research Project ............................................................ 400 .................. 400 ....................

San Diego Area Water Reclamation Program .................................. 4,969 .................. 4,969 ....................

San Diego Four Reservoir Intertie .................................................... .................. .................. 500 ....................

San Jose Area Water Reclamation and Reuse Program .................. 242 .................. 242 ....................

Soboba .............................................................................................. 4,000 .................. 4,000 ....................

Solano Project ................................................................................... 1,498 2,337 1,498 2,337 

Southern California Investigations Program .................................... 262 .................. 762 ....................

Ventura River Project ........................................................................ 203 9 203 9 

COLORADO 

Animas-La Plata Project, Colorado River Storage Participating 

Project .......................................................................................... 12,134 328 12,134 328 

Collbran Project ................................................................................ 249 2,265 249 2,265 

Colorado-Big Thompson Project ....................................................... 221 12,557 221 12,557 

Colorado Investigations Program ..................................................... 183 .................. 183 ....................

Fruitgrowers Dam Project ................................................................. 154 165 154 165 

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project .............................................................. 103 8,721 103 8,721 

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project—Arkansas Valley Conduit .................. 3,000 .................. 3,000 ....................

Grand Valley Unit, CRBSCP, Title II ................................................. 195 1,345 195 1,345 

Leadville/Arkansas River Recovery Project ....................................... .................. 6,659 .................... 6,659 
75 

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 

Mancos Project ................................................................................. 113 163 1,500 163 

Paradox Valley Unit, CRBSCP, Title II .............................................. 93 2,850 93 2,850 

Pine River Project ............................................................................. 326 237 326 237 

San Luis Valley Project ..................................................................... 319 4,743 319 4,743 

Uncompahgre Project ........................................................................ 252 145 252 145 

HAWAII 

Hawaii Water Resources Study ......................................................... .................. .................. 300 ....................

IDAHO 

Boise Area Projects ........................................................................... 3,031 2,515 3,031 2,515 

Columbia and Snake River Salmon Recovery Project ...................... 18,000 .................. 18,000 ....................

Idaho Investigations Program .......................................................... 390 .................. 390 ....................

Lewiston Orchards Project ................................................................ 721 105 721 105 

Minidoka Area Projects ..................................................................... 2,901 2,310 2,901 2,310 

KANSAS 

Kansas Investigations Program ........................................................ 5 .................. 5 ....................

Wichita Project .................................................................................. 10 404 10 404 

Wichita Project (Equus Beds Division) ............................................. 50 .................. 50 ....................

MONTANA 

Fort Peck Reservation/Dry Prairie Rural Water System .................... 2,000 .................. 6,000 ....................

Hungry Horse Project ........................................................................ .................. 702 .................... 702 

Huntley Project .................................................................................. 31 84 31 84 

Lower Yellowstone Project ................................................................ 34 15 34 15 

Milk River Project ............................................................................. 327 2,456 1,327 2,456 

Montana Investigations Program ..................................................... 20 .................. 20 ....................

Rocky Boys/North Central MT Rural Water System .......................... 1,000 .................. 5,000 ....................

Sun River Project .............................................................................. 52 272 52 272 

NEBRASKA 

Mirage Flats Project ......................................................................... 13 131 13 131 

NEVADA 

Halfway Wash Project/Study ............................................................. 75 .................. 75 ....................

Lahontan Basin Project (Humbolt, Newlands, and Washoe 

Projects) ....................................................................................... 4,056 2,667 4,056 2,667 

Lake Mead/Las Vegas Wash Program .............................................. 700 .................. 1,850 ....................

North Las Vegas Water Reuse .......................................................... .................. .................. 3,000 ....................

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque Metro Area Reuse ........................................................ .................. .................. 500 ....................

Carlsbad Project ............................................................................... 3,032 1,748 3,032 1,748 

Eastern New Mexico Investigations Program ................................... 23 .................. 23 ....................

Eastern New Mexico Water Supply—Ute Reservoir ......................... .................. .................. 2,000 ....................

Jicarilla Apache Rural Water System ............................................... 500 .................. 500 ....................

Middle Rio Grande Project ................................................................ 14,772 10,323 15,422 10,323 

Navajo Gallup Water Supply ............................................................. 10,000 .................. 10,000 ....................

Navajo Nation Investigations Program ............................................. 114 .................. 114 ....................

Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project ........................................ .................. 485 .................... 485 

Rio Grande Project ............................................................................ 1,141 5,222 2,141 5,222 

San Juan River Basin Investigations Program ................................ 91 .................. 91 ....................

Southern New Mexico/West Texas Investigations Program .............. 91 .................. 91 ....................

Tucumcari Project ............................................................................. 25 16 25 16 

Upper Rio Grande Basin Investigations Program ............................ 35 .................. 35 ....................

NORTH DAKOTA 

P–SMBP—Garrison Diversion Unit ................................................... 30,672 5,879 44,121 5,879 
76 

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 

OKLAHOMA 

Arbuckle Project ................................................................................ 48 182 48 182 

McGee Creek Project ......................................................................... 20 660 20 660 

Mountain Park Project ...................................................................... 7 472 7 472 

Norman Feasibility Study .................................................................. .................. .................. 755 ....................

Norman Project ................................................................................. 9 467 9 467 

Oklahoma Investigations Program ................................................... 47 .................. 47 ....................

Washita Basin Project ...................................................................... 7 1,425 7 1,425 

W.C. Austin Project ........................................................................... 18 481 18 481 

OREGON 

Crooked River Project ....................................................................... 458 486 458 486 

Deschutes Ecosystem Restoration Project ........................................ .................. .................. 500 ....................

Deschutes Project ............................................................................. 434 392 934 392 

Eastern Oregon Projects ................................................................... 555 297 555 297 

Klamath Dam Removal Study .......................................................... 5,000 .................. 5,000 ....................

Klamath Project ................................................................................ 18,813 3,687 18,813 3,687 

Oregon Investigations Program ........................................................ 157 .................. 457 ....................

Rogue River Basin Project, Talent Division ..................................... 1,222 354 1,222 354 

Tualatin Project ................................................................................ 315 238 315 238 

Umatilla Project ................................................................................ 1,370 2,767 1,370 2,767 

Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management ........... .................. .................. 1,000 ....................

Water for Irrigation Streams and Economy Feasibility Study 

[WISE] ........................................................................................... .................. .................. 400 ....................

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Lewis and Clark Rural Water System .............................................. 2,000 .................. 10,000 ....................

Mid-Dakota Rural Water Project ....................................................... .................. 15 .................... 15 

Mni Wiconi Project ............................................................................ 17,280 10,200 20,280 10,200 

Perkins County Rural Water District ................................................ 1,000 .................. 1,000 ....................

Rapid Valley Project ......................................................................... .................. 84 .................... 84 

TEXAS 

Balmorhea Project ............................................................................ 41 10 41 10 

Canadian River Project ..................................................................... 54 111 54 111 

Lower Rio Grande Water Conservation Project ................................. 50 .................. 50 ....................

Nueces River Project ......................................................................... 20 543 20 543 

Round Rock Reclaimed Water Project, TX ........................................ .................. .................. 2,000 ....................

San Angelo Project ........................................................................... 35 383 35 383 

Texas Investigations Program .......................................................... 47 .................. 47 ....................

UTAH 

Hyrum Project ................................................................................... 167 157 167 157 

Moon Lake Project ............................................................................ 13 38 13 38 

Newton Project .................................................................................. 69 26 69 26 

Northern Utah Investigations Program ............................................. 102 .................. 602 ....................

Ogden River Project .......................................................................... 280 166 280 166 

Provo River Project ........................................................................... 1,076 520 1,076 520 

Scofield Project ................................................................................. 346 77 346 77 

Southern Nevada/Utah Investigations Program ............................... 26 .................. 26 ....................

Southern Utah Investigations Program ............................................ 128 .................. 128 ....................

Strawberry Valley Project .................................................................. 289 22 289 22 

Summit County Water Supply (Weber Basin) ................................... .................. .................. 500 ....................

Weber Basin Project ......................................................................... 914 756 914 756 

Weber River Project .......................................................................... 71 134 71 134 

WASHINGTON 

Columbia Basin Project .................................................................... 4,575 6,500 5,575 6,500 

Odessa Subarea Special Study ........................................................ .................. .................. 1,250 ....................
77 

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 

Washington Area Projects ................................................................. 407 52 407 52 

Washington Investigations Program ................................................. 75 .................. 75 ....................

Yakima Project .................................................................................. 1,493 6,992 1,493 6,992 

Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project ............................ 12,395 .................. 16,395 ....................

WYOMING 

Kendrick Project ................................................................................ 119 4,191 119 4,191 

North Platte Project .......................................................................... 266 1,569 266 1,569 

Shoshone Project .............................................................................. 76 1,122 76 1,122 

Subtotal ............................................................................... 311,885 230,166 381,696 230,166 

VARIOUS 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title I .................... .................. 10,536 .................... 11,536 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title II ................... 7,000 .................. 7,000 ....................

Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), Section 5 ........................... 3,955 4,947 3,955 4,947 

Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), Section 8 ........................... 3,752 .................. 3,752 ....................

Colorado River Water Quality Improvement Program ....................... 635 .................. 635 ....................

Dam Safety Program: 

Department of the Interior Dam Safety Program .................... .................. 1,900 .................... 1,900 

Initiate Safety of Dams Corrective Action ............................... .................. 74,274 .................... 74,274 

Safety Evaluation of Existing Dams ........................................ .................. 19,000 .................... 19,000 

Drought Emergency Assistance Program ......................................... 380 .................. 380 ....................

Emergency Planning and Disaster Response Program .................... .................. 1,157 .................... 1,157 

Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program ................. 23,721 .................. 23,721 ....................

Environmental and Interagency Coordination Activities .................. 1,883 .................. 1,883 ....................

Environmental Program Administration ........................................... 1,140 .................. 1,140 ....................

Examination of Existing Structures .................................................. .................. 9,037 .................... 9,037 

Federal Building Seismic Safety Program ........................................ .................. 1,140 .................... 1,140 

General Planning Activities .............................................................. 2,347 .................. 2,347 ....................

Land Resources Management Program ............................................ 10,665 .................. 10,665 ....................

Lower Colorado River Investigations Program ................................. 137 .................. 137 ....................

Lower Colorado River Operations Program ....................................... 25,300 .................. 25,300 ....................

Miscellaneous Flood Control Operations .......................................... .................. 803 .................... 803 

Native American Affairs Program ..................................................... 7,465 .................. 7,465 ....................

Negotiation and Administration of Water Marketing ....................... 1,924 .................. 1,924 ....................

Operation and Program Management .............................................. 936 1,044 936 1,044 

Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program (other Pick Sloan) ................... 3,018 37,339 3,018 37,339 

Power Program Services ................................................................... 1,269 307 1,269 307 

Public Access and Safety Program .................................................. 616 155 616 155 

Reclamation Law Administration ..................................................... 2,265 .................. 2,265 ....................

Recreation and Fish and Wildlife Program Administration ............. 2,137 .................. 2,137 ....................

Research and Development: 

Desalination and Water Purification Program ........................ 2,066 1,600 2,066 1,600 

Science and Technology Program ............................................ 11,488 .................. 12,488 ....................

Rural Water Program, Title I ............................................................ 2,677 .................. 2,677 ....................

Site Security Activities ...................................................................... .................. 30,268 .................... 30,268 

United States/Mexico Border Issues—Technical Support ................ 90 .................. 90 ....................

Upper Colorado River Operations Program ...................................... 252 .................. 252 ....................

Water Conservation Field Services Program .................................... 7,854 .................. 7,854 ....................

WaterSMART Program: 

WaterSMART Grants (Challenge Grant in 2010) ..................... 27,000 .................. 20,000 ....................

Title XVI Water Reclamation/Reuse Projects ........................... 20,189 .................. 7,689 ....................

Basin Studies .......................................................................... 6,000 .................. 4,000 ....................

Subtotal ............................................................................... 178,024 193,507 157,524 194,507 

Underfinancing ................................................................................. .................. .................. (16,800 ) (8,493 ) 

TOTAL ................................................................................... 489,909 423,673 522,420 416,180 
78 

All American Canal, California.—The Committee has recommended $1,000,000 to initiate the Imperial Dam Electrification 

Rehabilitation project. The Committee understands that a repayment contract will have to be negotiated with the Imperial Irrigation District under the provisions of Public Law 111–11, Title IX, 

Subtitle G—Aging Infrastructure before any funding can be provided for the project. 

Central Valley Project—American River Division.—$920,000 has 

been recommended above the budget request for the El Dorado Irrigation District Temperature Control Device. 

Central Valley Project—Miscellaneous Project Programs.—The 

Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 for anadramous 

fish screens. 

Central Valley Project—Friant Division.—The Committee recommendation includes $8,000,000 for the San Joaquin River Restoration. These funds should be utilized in conjunction with and in 

advance of those funds available from the San Joaquin River Restoration Fund. The Committee encourages the timely completion of 

all environmental review, feasibility, and design documents to 

allow for construction to begin in fiscal year 2011 on the FriantKern and Madera Canals Capacity Correction projects, and further 

encourages the expeditious completion of studies to inform the 

hatchery and genetics management plan and other actions necessary for reintroduction of salmon in 2012. 

Hawaii Water Resources Study, Hawaii.—The Committee recommends $300,000 to update the Hawaii Water Resources Study. 

This study is especially critical in view of the significant changes 

to plantation agriculture and the related water systems that have 

prevailed for more than 100 years in the State of Hawaii. 

Milk River Project.—$1,000,000 has been recommended for the 

St. Mary Diversion Rehabilitation Project. These funds should be 

utilized using applicable Reclamation Law and as directed in this 

act. 

Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin, Garrison Diversion Unit, North Dakota.—Within the Committee recommendation, $32,000,000 is recommended for rural water projects. Of this amount, $16,000,000 

shall be expended for the following projects: $2,000,000 for the 

Northwest Area Water Supply; $7,000,000 for the South Central 

Regional Water District; and $7,000,000 for the Southwest Pipeline. Additionally the Committee recommends $3,120,000 for the 

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Irrigation Project. 

Oregon Investigations Program, Oregon.—$300,000 above the 

budget request is recommended for developing appraisal-level designs and cost estimates for Umatilla on-reservation distribution 

systems. 

Water for Irrigation Streams and Economy Feasibility Study.— 

The Committee recommendation includes $400,000 for the Water 

for Irrigation Streams and Economy Feasibility study. 

Tualatin Valley Water Supply Feasibility Study, Oregon.—The 

Committee understands that Reclamation has sufficient funds 

available for the feasibility study and recognizes that the completion of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Scoggins Dam Corrective Action Alternative Study is integral to determining how the State, 

local and Federal partners will proceed to address dam safety and 
79 

long-term water needs of the region. Therefore, the Committee 

urges Reclamation to maintain its schedule for completion of the 

Scoggins Dam CAAS in Federal fiscal year 2011 in order to address 

these needs in a timely and efficient manner. 

Northern Utah Investigations Program, Utah.—The Committee 

has recommended an additional $500,000 for the Rural Water 

Technology Alliance. 

Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, Washington.— 

The Committee recommends an additional $4,000,000 above the 

budget request for the Diversion Reduction Agreement with the 

Sunnyside Irrigation District to address water shortages in the 

basin. 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title I.—The 

Committee recommends $1,000,000 above the budget request for 

plant replacements that would contribute to the successful pilot 

run of the Yuma Desalting Plant. 

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 recognize the 

unique conditions in Hawaii and provide full and fair consideration 

of the request for drought assistance from the State of Hawaii and 

fund if meritorious. 

Research and Development, Science and Technology Program.— 

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 above the budget request 

for Quagga and Zebra Mussel research activities. The Committee 

is concerned about the impacts to western waters of these two 

invasive species. Reclamation efforts to date have necessarily focused on addressing the problems caused by the mussels at Reclamation facilities. The Committee believes that Reclamation 

should establish a research program geared toward eradicating or 

controlling these invasive species. 

Water Conservation Field Services Program.—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. 

WaterSMART Program.—Within the amounts provided for the 

challenge grants, funds are included for the Desert Research Institute to create a systems framework to identify solutions for addressing water supply, flood control, natural resources and climate 

change challenges. The Committee also recommends that the Education Center at the Conservation Garden Park, Utah and the 

Gravel Pit Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project, Utah should be 

considered for challenge grants. Within the amounts provided for 

title XVI, Water Reclamation, and Reuse under this item, the Committee has recommended $2,500,000 for the WateReuse Foundation. These funds are available to support the Foundation’s research priorities. 
80 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $35,358,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 49,915,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 49,915,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $49,915,000 for 

the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund. 

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, 2010 ............................................................................. $40,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 40,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 40,000,000 

The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of 

$40,000,000 for the CALFED Bay-Delta Program. 

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, 2010 ............................................................................. $61,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 61,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 61,200,000 

The Committee recommendation for general administrative expenses is $61,200,000. 

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 Bureau of Reclamation Reprogramming. 
81 

Section 202. The bill includes language regarding the San Luis 

Unit and the Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

Section 203. 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 204. The bill includes language regarding Drought Emergency Assistance. 

Section 205. The bill includes language concerning a project cost 

ceiling increase. 

Section 206. The bill includes language regarding the Desert Terminal Lakes Program. 

Section 207. The bill includes language extending a water service 

contract. 

Section 208. The bill includes language concerning certain recreational use permits. 
(82) 

TITLE III 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

TRANSPARENCY

The Committee recognizes the Department’s efforts to achieve 

greater transparency in financial and programmatic performance. 

This has particularly been demonstrated in the execution of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In other more focused 

efforts, the Committee has seen that greater transparency has exposed significant financial risks and liabilities facing the Department, such as those liabilities arising from contractor managed defined benefit pension liabilities and other contractor benefits. The 

Committee expects the Department to apply the same degree of 

transparency to its base programs and mission support activities by 

the end of fiscal year 2011. 

CYBER SECURITY

Pervasive and sustained cyber attacks against the United States 

are on the rise and continue to pose a threat to Federal operations. 

DOE is particularly vulnerable because web-based systems and 

data support critical mission activities related to energy security, 

nuclear security, scientific discovery and innovation, and environmental programs. The Committee supports DOE’s efforts to implement cyber security measures to protect classified systems and networks. Moreover, the Committee is encouraged that a November 

2009 Office of Independent Oversight report found that DOE’s classified systems are adequately protected against cyber security 

threats, including the threat of compromise from external sources 

and the threat from malicious insiders. However, the Office also 

found remaining weaknesses that, if addressed, could further 

strengthen DOE’s cyber security. The major weaknesses include (1) 

a lack of clear policies and guidance to ensure the appropriate level 

of protection for information that is shared between networks that 

operate at different classification categories, (2) operational and 

system-specific risks are not being fully evaluated and documented, 

and (3) site-specific cyber security plans are not sufficiently detailed to address the full range of threats. The Committee directs 

DOE to submit a report by April 1, 2011, on how the Department 

resolved the program weaknesses identified in the November 2009 

Office of Independent Oversight report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

The Department of Energy is directed to operate in a manner 

fully consistent with the following reprogramming guidelines. A reprogramming request must be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations for consideration before any implementation of a reor-
83 

ganization proposal which includes moving previous appropriations 

between appropriation accounts. The Department is directed to inform the Committees promptly and fully when a change in program 

execution and funding is required during the fiscal year. To assist 

the Department in this effort, the following guidance is provided 

for programs and activities funded in the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The Department 

is directed to follow this guidance for all programs and activities 

unless specific reprogramming guidance is provided for a program 

or activity. 

Definition.—A reprogramming includes the reallocation of funds 

from one activity to another within an appropriation, or any significant departure from a program, project, activity, or organization 

described in the agency’s budget justification as presented to and 

approved by Congress. For construction projects, a reprogramming 

constitutes the reallocation of funds from one construction project 

identified in the justifications to another project or a significant 

change in the scope of an approved project. 

Any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority or prior 

year deobligations must be submitted to the Committees in writing 

and may not be implemented prior to approval by the Committees 

on Appropriations. 

ENERGY PROGRAMS

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $2,242,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 2,355,473,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,287,800,000 

The Committee recommendation is $2,287,800,000 for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 

Hydrogen Technology.—The Committee recommends 

$174,000,000 for hydrogen technology. Within the available funds, 

$20,000,000 is for Technology Validation, at least half of which is 

focused on vehicle and hydrogen infrastructure applications; 

$47,000,000 is for hydrogen fuels R&D, with a particular focus on 

the synergies between hydrogen and renewable energy and deriving hydrogen from renewable resources; $20,000,000 is for Market 

Transformation in early markets, particularly for stationary 

sources (not safety codes and standards); and $1,000,000 is for education. 

Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D.—The Committee recommends $220,000,000 for biomass and biorefinery systems R&D. 

Within the available funds a total of $30,000,000 is for algae 

biofuels. The Committee recognizes that improvements and innovations to feedstock production will contribute to meeting overall cost 

goals. Significant potential exists for discoveries in this area, particularly with algae strains that possess unique metabolic and enzymatic adaptations to tolerate high salinity. The Committee directs the Department to make $5,000,000 available for research 

and development activities for halophilic algae applications in partnership with a university-led consortia having expertise in this 

area and ready access to a wide variety of high-salinity algae 

strains. 
84 

Also within available funds, $15,000,000 is for the cellulosic reverse auction. The Committee is aware the Department is considering a reverse auction in fiscal year 2010 using $4,500,000 made 

available in fiscal year 2008. The Committee urges the Department 

to consider delaying such action and combining the 2008 funding 

with fiscal year 2011 funds to make the reverse auction more compelling. Further, within available funds, $4,000,000 is provided for 

coordination with the Fuels Technology subprogram under Vehicles 

Technologies to continue testing the effects of intermediate fuel 

blends (15–20 percent ethanol mixed with 80–85 percent gasoline) 

on Tier 1 vehicles and small engines. The testing will provide data 

on how these blends may affect materials, durability, performance 

and emissions of legacy engines. Work should be done in coordination with the Vehicles Technology Program. 

The Committee continues to be concerned about the Nation’s capability to meet the 2022 requirement of 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuels required under the Renewable Fuel Standard 

[RFS]. The Committee is not aware of a coordinated strategy 

among Federal agencies to achieve this requirement. The lack of a 

Federal strategy creates opportunities for duplication of efforts and 

the waste of taxpayer dollars. To address this, the Committee directs the Department to coordinate with the appropriate Federal 

agencies, with input from industry partners, to develop a strategy 

to meet the advanced biofuel requirements of the RFS. The strategy should seek to avoid duplication among the Federal agencies 

while drawing on their research strengths and capabilities. The 

Committee directs the Department to complete this strategy by 

September 30, 2011. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for a 

demonstration of a catalytic process to convert liquid ethanol into 

gaseous ethylene. The Committee notes that thermochemical conversion of biomass to fuels involves the production of synthetic natural gas [SNG], a valuable and important energy feedstock in its 

own right. The Committee encourages the Department to study the 

economic and ecological sustainability of integrating SNG production with existing forest, crop or other biomass source operations. 

The Department should place particular emphasis on instances 

where production of SNG can result in near-term job creation and 

prevention of job loss. The Department shall report back to the 

Committee no later than 8 months from enactment. 

Solar Energy.—The Committee recommends $272,000,000 for 

solar energy. From within the available funds, the Committee directs the Department to provide $50,000,000 for concentrating 

solar power demonstration projects as proposed in the budget request. The Committee is aware of recent developments in the field 

of concentrated photovoltaics where ultra-high-efficiency concentrator solar cells are being designed at less than the cost of current 

technology now used in concentrating photovoltaic applications. 

This technology has the advantages of lower land use and increased power. The Committee encourages DOE to continue its efforts to invest in promising high efficiency, low cost concentrated 

photovoltaic solar technology that will accelerate the achievement 

of grid parity. The Committee also encourages the Department of 

Energy to designate and fund, in fiscal year 2011, a center for solar 

energy innovation to be located in close proximity to high-quality 
85 

solar resources and the site chosen by the Department of Energy 

for its Solar Demonstration Zone Project. The center should support the research, development, and deployment of the essential 

components of the solar energy supply chain to promote the integration of solar technologies and products into utility, building and 

commercial systems, and to improve their reliability, affordability 

and rapid deployment across the Southwest region and the United 

States. 

Wind Energy.—The recommendation is $123,000,000 for wind energy. The Department is encouraged to undertake at least two offshore wind demonstration projects off the Atlantic Coast, with at 

least one project in transitional depths and one in deepwater. To 

the greatest extent possible, the Department shall coordinate with 

the Department of Interior (Bureau of Offshore Energy, Management, Regulation, and Enforcement) and the Atlantic Offshore 

Wind Energy Consortium in order to select projects that are likely 

to foster the deployment of commercial offshore wind generation in 

the short term. 

Geothermal Technology.—The recommendation for geothermal technology is $55,000,000, the same as the administration’s request. The Committee directs the Department to make not less 

than $5,000,000 available to continue development and deployment 

of low-temperature geothermal systems. 

Together, the funding provided through the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act [ARRA] and the fiscal year 2010 and fiscal 

year 2011 appropriations bills reflect the Committee’s intent to 

fund the full range of activities authorized by Congress in 2007 in 

subtitle B of Public Law 110–140. The Committee expects that in 

future years the Department will request funding for a broad based 

program, and not just Enhanced Geothermal System activities. The 

Committee also requests that the Department provide the Committee with a copy of its report required by section 621 of Public 

Law 110–140 evaluating the Department’s progress implementing 

the geothermal provisions of Public Law 110–140 and evaluating 

additional advanced concepts and technologies to maximize the geothermal resource potential of the United States. 

Water Power Energy R&D.—The Committee recommends 

$60,000,000 for water power. Of the funds made available, 

$15,000,000 is directed for conventional hydropower activities and 

$45,000,000 is for marine and hydrokinetic activities. Within available funds, the Committee directs the Department to provide not 

less than $6,000,000 for the construction of necessary testing infrastructure for marine and hydrokinetic systems. Further, the Committee includes $1,000,000 for research and development activities 

of tidal barrage technology. 

Vehicle Technologies.—The Committee recommends $325,000,000 

for vehicle technologies. The Committee recognizes the Department’s efforts to increase the number of hybrids and plug-in electric vehicles in its fleet and is also cognizant that significant research, development, and deployment [RD&D] challenges exist to 

the adoption of this technology on a large scale. To address these 

challenges, the Department should investigate technologies that 

will advance electrification of all classes of passenger vehicles. The 

Committee also directs the Department to make $3,000,000 avail-
86 

able to continue efforts on both stationary and in-motion inductive 

power transfer technology to a national laboratory-university consortia. The Committee includes $5,000,000 for natural gas vehicle 

research and development. 

The Committee recognizes that batteries that reach the end of 

their useful lives in electric vehicles will have remaining capacity 

for other uses and directs the program to use $2,000,000 in conjunction with the Office of Electricity to commence work on the secondary use program authorized in section 915 of the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005. 

The Committee further directs $5,000,000 for the Department to 

establish a program to collect and synthesize data on the use of 

plug-in electric drive vehicles and provide technical assistance to 

communities that want to prepare for plug-in electric drive vehicle 

deployment. 

Building Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$222,000,000 for building technologies. The Committee includes 

$5,000,000 for the solar decathlon, which the Department had proposed to fund under the RE-ENERGYSE program. The Committee 

includes $1,500,000 for research and development activities for advanced sensing and control technologies for task-intuitive lighting 

systems, and directs the Department to identify a university-led 

partnership with experience in this field. The Committee includes 

$16,000,000 for the Energy Efficient Building Systems Design Hub. 

The Committee is concerned about the memorandum of understanding [MOU] the Department signed with the Environmental 

Protection Agency [EPA] in September 2009 that reassigns new duties and responsibilities for implementing the ENERGY STAR program within the two agencies. The Committee does not understand 

why the Department used its limited resources to pursue this MOU 

without congressional input, particularly when an energy bill with 

significant statutory changes to the ENERGY STAR program has 

been favorably reported from the authorizing committee and was 

pending before the Senate. The Committee encourages the Department to consult with Congress in the future before it attempts to 

implement such sweeping changes to its programs. 

The Committee is also concerned about deficiencies in the ENERGY STAR program as noted in the October 2009 Audit Report 

from the Department’s Office of Inspector General, and the March 

5, 2010 GAO report. The Committee also questions the Department’s claim that Americans saved $17,000,000,000 last year using 

these products, since that data was reported by the same entities 

who had abused the program in the past. The Committee recognizes that the Department and EPA have issued new guidelines to 

address these deficiencies, but that insufficient time has passed to 

determine their effectiveness. The Committee believes the Department should require independent verification from accredited or 

third party laboratories for all products. The Committee directs the 

Government Accountability Office [GAO] to assess (1) whether the 

Department has taken sufficient steps to implement the recommendations of the Office of Inspector General, and (2) whether 

the new guidelines and other changes to the program adequately 

address the issues raised both by the Office of Inspector General 

and GAO. 
87 

The Committee notes that the Energy Policy Conservation Act of 

1975 authorized the Department to issue efficiency standards for a 

list of products, and to date televisions are the only item for which 

DOE has failed to issue a standard. The Committee encourages the 

Secretary to complete a rulemaking process to establish effective efficiency standards for televisions, as expeditiously as possible. 

Industrial Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$100,000,000 for industrial technologies. Within available funds, 

the Committee recommends $14,000,000 for the Industries of the 

Future (Specific), and $1,500,000 for the Department to contract 

with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct an analysis of 

cooperative mechanisms, beyond research and development support, to advance the development of a robust, domestic clean energy 

technology sector. Such mechanisms may include, but are not limited to, grants, loan guarantees, demonstration projects, tax incentives, procurement, and other forms of public-private partnerships. 

Federal Energy Management Program.—The Committee recommends $42,000,000 for the Federal Energy Management Program [FEMP]. Of the funds made available, the Committee recommends that Federal Fleets receive $5,000,000 to conduct an assessment of the most appropriate places to deploy electric vehicles 

in the Federal fleet and to begin a pilot program to deploy electric 

vehicles based on the assessment. 

The FEMP is intended to assist Federal agencies—which together spend roughly $10,000,000,000 annually on energy procurements—in achieving energy savings. The Committee is troubled 

with recent findings of the DOE Inspector General [OIG] in its 

audit report on the FEMP. The OIG found that FEMP ‘‘had not always maintained up-to-date energy efficiency specifications; could 

not demonstrate that it had adequately pursued the development 

of new energy efficiency specifications; and had not effectively managed relevant contractor efforts essential to the program.’’ The 

Committee directs the Department to deliver by March 15, 2011 an 

action plan to address the problems identified by the OIG. 

RE-ENERGYSE.—The Committee recommends no funds for REENERGYSE. 

Facilities and Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends 

$57,500,000 for facilities and infrastructure consistent with the 

budget request. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $170,000,000 

for program direction. 

Program Support.—The Committee recommends $59,700,000 for 

program support. Within the international subprogram, $2,000,000 

is to continue the United States-Israel energy cooperative agreement. 

Weatherization Assistance Program.—The Committee provides 

$200,000,000. Of that amount, $7,500,000 is for training and technical assistance and $30,000,000 is for innovations in weatherization as requested in the budget. The Committee notes that this program received $5,000,000,000 in the Recovery Act in addition to 

current year appropriations, and that prior appropriated balances 

are more than sufficient to carry the existing program into fiscal 

year 2012 without further appropriation. 
88 

Intergovernmental Activities.—The Committee provides $50,000,000 for State Energy Programs and $10,000,000 for Tribal 

Energy Activities. 

Congressionally Directed Spending Items.—The Committee includes $147,600,000 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 title Amount Requestor 

21st Century Renewable Fuels, Energy, and Materials Initiative ......................... $400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

Adams State College Solar Project ........................................................................ $400,000 Senator Mark Udall 

Advanced Closed-Cycle Turbine Generator ............................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Murray 

Advanced Energy Studies ...................................................................................... $2,750,000 Senator Dorgan 

Advanced Solid State Lithium Ion Battery Domestic Manufacturing Initiative .... $300,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

Algae Biofuels Research ........................................................................................ $2,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell 

Alternative and Unconventional Energy Research and Development ................... $10,000,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

Alternative Energy Medical Complex ..................................................................... $500,000 Senator Reid 

Bio-Energy Research Center .................................................................................. $800,000 Senator Tester 

Biofuel from Nevada’s Municipal Wastes ............................................................. $500,000 Senator Reid 

Biofuels, Biopower, and Biomaterials Initiative .................................................... $1,250,000 Senators Chambliss, Isakson 

Biomass Boiler and Steam Absorption Chiller Plant ............................................ $650,000 Senator Johnson 

Biomass Boiler at Ferrum College ......................................................................... $300,000 Senators Webb, Warner 

Bucknell University Marcellus Shale Research Initiative ...................................... $200,000 Senators Specter, Casey 

Center for Biomass Utilization .............................................................................. $1,500,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 

Center for Ocean Renewable Energy ..................................................................... $500,000 Senator Shaheen 

Center for Ozark Community Biomass Energy Development ................................. $1,500,000 Senator Bond 

Chittenden County Natural Gas Refueling Project ................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Leahy 

CHRISTUS Center for Healthy Living and Energy Efficient LEED Technology ....... $300,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter 

City of Grand Rapids City Building Solar and Wind Renewable Energy Demonstration Project.$400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

City of Lansing Bioengergy Generation Demonstration Project ............................ $400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

City of San Jose Smart LEED Streetlights, CA ...................................................... $600,000 Senator Feinstein 

City of Yreka Biomass Facility, CA ........................................................................ $500,000 Senator Feinstein 

Clean Energy Infrastructure Educational Initiative ............................................... $200,000 Senator Sherrod Brown

Co-Gen Electrostatic Precipitator .......................................................................... $700,000 Senator Gillibrand 

Collaboration on Renewable Energy Job Creation Strategies ............................... $300,000 Senator Reid 

Delaware Energy Efficiency .................................................................................... $55,000 Senators Carper, Kaufman 

Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks and Biomass Conversion Technology for Renewable Energy Production.$6,000,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka 

Energy Conservation, Solar Energy Education and Research ............................... $300,000 Senator Landrieu 

Energy Recovery at the Water Reclamation Facility ............................................. $750,000 Senators Tester, Baucus 

Ethanol From Agriculture for Arkansas and America ........................................... $1,000,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln 

Farm Solar Share ................................................................................................... $645,000 Senators Carper, Kaufman 

Farm-Based Renewable Energy ............................................................................. $400,000 Senator Murray

Fuel Cell Durability Research ................................................................................ $400,000 Senator Dodd 

Genetic Improvement of Switchgrass for Biofuels ................................................ $500,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse 

Geothermal Conversion Project .............................................................................. $1,000,000 Senator Lugar 

Great Basin College—Direct Use Geothermal Demonstration Project .................. $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Green Building ....................................................................................................... $250,000 Senators Schumer, Gillibrand 

Green Energy Sustainable Loan Program .............................................................. $700,000 Senator Gillibrand 

Hawaii Energy Sustainability Program .................................................................. $6,000,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka 

Hawaii Renewable Energy Development Venture .................................................. $6,000,000 Senator Inouye 

High Performance Computing Infrastructure for Modeling Solar Energy ............. $700,000 Senator Hagan 

High Speed Wind Turbine Noise Model with Suppression .................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Home Energy Efficiency Research and Development Initiative ............................. $500,000 Senator Specter, Casey 

Hoonah IPEC Hydroelectric Project ........................................................................ $1,500,000 Senator Murkowski 

Industrial Technologies Program Language .......................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Institute for Environmental Studies ...................................................................... $450,000 Senator Rockefeller 

Iowa Central Community College Renewable Fuels Laboratory ............................ $500,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 
89 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS— 

Continued 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Kaukauna Utilities Hydroelectric Generator Replacement ..................................... $1,000,000 Senator Kohl 

Large-Scale Wind Training .................................................................................... $400,000 Senators Schumer, Gillibrand 

Las Vegas Residential Energy Efficiency Program ................................................ $500,000 Senator Reid 

Livingston Campus Geothermal Energy System .................................................... $750,000 Senators Lautenberg, 

Menendez 

Long Island Sustainable Schools Network ............................................................ $450,000 Senator Schumer 

Maine Tidal Power Initiative .................................................................................. $1,000,000 Senators Collins, Snowe 

Martin County Microfiber Fuel Cell Technology Development ............................... $500,000 Senators Burr, Hagan 

Mega-Turbine Research for Enhanced Wind Power .............................................. $750,000 Senator Ben Nelson 

Mendocino County for the Strategic Woody-Biomass Initiative ............................ $450,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer 

MidSouth/Southeast BioEnergy Consortium ........................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln 

Montana Algal BioDiesel Initiative ........................................................................ $750,000 Senators Tester, Baucus 

Nanostructured Materials for Improved Photovoltaics .......................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

National Center for Deepwater Offshore Wind ...................................................... $10,000,000 Senators Collins, Snowe 

National Open-Ocean Energy Laboratory ............................................................... $1,200,000 Senator Bill Nelson 

National Wind Energy Center, University of Houston, Houston, TX ...................... $3,000,000 Senator Hutchison 

National Wind Resource Center at Pantex ............................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Cornyn 

Natural Resource Research Center (NRCC) ........................................................... $750,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln 

Nevada Inter-Tribal Energy Consortium ................................................................ $150,000 Senator Reid 

Nevada Renewable Energy Consortium ................................................................. $3,000,000 Senator Reid 

Nevada Renewable Energy Innovation and Deployment Cluster—Technology 

Commercialization and Site Development.

$3,000,000 Senator Reid 

North Country Community Wood Energy Systems ................................................. $200,000 Senator Shaheen 

Nushagak Area Hydropower Project ....................................................................... $500,000 Senator Murkowski 

Ocean-Based Energy Generation ........................................................................... $600,000 Senator Murray

Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing Center (OAEMC) ....................................... $500,000 Senator Sherrod Brown 

Ohio Low Cost Carbon Fiber Initiative .................................................................. $1,500,000 Senators Voinovich, Sherrod 

Brown 

OIT Geothermal Power Generation Plant ............................................................... $400,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley 

Old Dominion University, Construction and Operation of a Demonstration Scale 

Algal Research Center.

$750,000 Senators Webb, Warner 

Optimized Concentrated Solar Power Trough Development Project ...................... $750,000 Senator Specter 

Photovoltaic System at Closed, Capped Landfill .................................................. $650,000 Senator Schumer 

Producing Renewable, Value-Added Products from Waste Feedstocks ................ $1,000,000 Senator Landrieu 

Rapid Battery Charging Device for Electric Vehicles ............................................ $500,000 Senator Reid 

Red Wing Regional Biosolids Processing Facility ................................................. $700,000 Senator Klobuchar 

Reedsport Wave Power Project (Phase I) .............................................................. $400,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley 

Renerwable Energy Technical Training Center ...................................................... $500,000 Senator Schumer 

Renewable Energy Demonstration ......................................................................... $750,000 Senator Durbin 

Renewable Energy Demonstration Projects at Old FLC ......................................... $300,000 Senator Mark Udall 

Renewable Energy Feasibility Study and Resources Assessment for Lincoln 

County, NV.

$500,000 Senator Reid 

Renewable Energy Initiative .................................................................................. $500,000 Senator Durbin 

Renewable Energy Solar Farm ............................................................................... $650,000 Senators Lautenberg, 

Menendez 

Reno Hydrogen Fuel ............................................................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Research and Develop Geothermal Energy ............................................................ $700,000 Senator Begich 

Research, Development and Demonstration of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Drive 

Kits.

$1,000,000 Senator Kohl 

Rowan University Algae-Based Renewable Fuel Initiative .................................... $750,000 Senators Lautenberg, 

Menendez 

Salem City Solar Energy Project ............................................................................ $300,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

San Francisco Bay Area Biosolids to Energy Project, CA ..................................... $500,000 Senator Feinstein 

San Francisco Electric Vehicle Initiative ............................................................... $300,000 Senator Boxer 

Shenandoah Valley as a National Demonstration Project Achieving 25 Percent 

Renewable Energy by the Year 2025.

$350,000 Senator Warner 

Sitka Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project .................................................. $1,000,000 Senators Murkowski, Begich 

Solar Cell Connectivity Research and Development ............................................. $1,000,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse 

Solar Electric System ............................................................................................. $200,000 Senator Gillibrand 

Solar Energy Infrastructure Enhancement ............................................................. $500,000 Senator Reid 

Solar Energy Research and Laboratory ................................................................. $500,000 Senator Lugar 

Solar Power Module Development .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Leahy 
90 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS— 

Continued 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Solar Testing and Training .................................................................................... $400,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman 

South Jordan NGV Fleet Implementation Program ................................................ $300,000 Senator Bennett 

South Utah Electric District Crab Creek Small Hydropower Facility ..................... $1,000,000 Senator Bennett 

Southern Regional Center for Lightweight Innovative Designs ............................ $3,500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Southwest Washington Tidal Energy Project ......................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell 

Springfield Fast-Fill CNG Facility .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Bond 

Strategic Biomass Initiative .................................................................................. $500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Sun Grant Initiative, South Dakota State University Regional Biomass Feedstock Research and Development.$2,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune 

Sustainable Biofuel Production—Consolidated Bioprocessing Strategy for Biomass Conversion.$400,000 Senator Kerry 

Sustainable Campus Initiative of Sierra Nevada College at Lake Tahoe ............ $400,000 Senator Reid 

Sustainable Energy Homeowner Outreach Program .............................................. $200,000 Senator Sanders 

Sustainable Energy in Schools .............................................................................. $500,000 Senator Sanders 

Sustainable Energy Institute ................................................................................. $500,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 

Sustainable Energy Research Center .................................................................... $9,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Tri-County Biomass Energy Pilot Project ............................................................... $800,000 Senators Tester, Baucus 

Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility Environmental and Energy Enhancement.$1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Uintah Natural Gas Fueling Station ...................................................................... $300,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

University of Louisville Research and Energy Independence Program ................. $2,000,000 Senator McConnell 

UNLV—Intermountain West Sustainable Development Project ............................. $500,000 Senator Reid 

UNR—Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy ................................................ $250,000 Senator Reid 

University of Rhode Island—Offshore Wind Energy Research Initiative .............. $750,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse 

Utah Center for Energy Innovation and Commercialization .................................. $3,400,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

Vermont Biofuels and Carbon Harvest Initiative .................................................. $750,000 Senator Leahy 

Vermont Biomass Energy Resource Center ........................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Leahy 

Vernonia Sustainable Schools ............................................................................... $300,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley 

White Earth Tribal BioMass Bio Fuel Project ........................................................ $700,000 Senators Klobuchar,

Franken 

Wind Energy Infrastructure .................................................................................... $550,000 Senator Dorgan 

Wind Energy Materials Development ..................................................................... $1,500,000 Senator Dorgan

Wind Energy Technology Training Program ........................................................... $500,000 Senator Murray 

Wind Energy Training and Infrastructure .............................................................. $750,000 Senator Dorgan 

Wind Power Exploration ......................................................................................... $100,000 Senators Tester, Baucus 

Wind Resource Monitoring and Training Program ................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Wireless Turbine Blade Sensor System Research ................................................. $750,000 Senator Schumer 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $171,982,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 185,930,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 190,180,000 

The Committee provides $190,180,000 for Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability. The Committee recommends continued development and use of the Electricity Infrastructure Operations 

Centers for researching, developing and deploying technologies to 

better manage and control the electrical grid. 

Congressionally Directed Spending Items.—The Committee includes $4,250,000 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. 
91 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY PROJECTS 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Dubuque Smarter Energy Project ........................................................................... $500,000 Senator Harkin 

Energy Development and Reliability ...................................................................... $300,000 Senator Dorgan

Navajo Nation Electrification Program .................................................................. $900,000 Senators Bingaman, Tom 

Udall 

Smart Grid Simulation Technology ........................................................................ $800,000 Senator Dorgan

Technology Development ........................................................................................ $750,000 Senator Dorgan 

UNR—Energy Storage for Intermittent Renewable Energy Sources ..................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $786,637,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 824,052,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 783,170,000 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommendation for nuclear energy research, de- velopment, and facilities totals $783,170,000. 

Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies.—The Committee recommends $62,000,000 for Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies. 

The Committee recommends no funding for the new Transformative Nuclear Concepts R&D program for which the Committee finds no compelling argument. This line appears to be redundant to work scope already undertaken in Advanced Reactor 

Concepts and potentially in the Small Modular Reactors and Modified Open Cycle lines. Further, the Committee recommends 

$16,000,000 for the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling & Simulation. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee provides $5,000,000 to restore funding to current year levels and sustain the 

ongoing collaboration between the Office of Nuclear Energy, 

NNSA’s Office of Nuclear Nonproliferation, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support the training of engineers and scientists in nuclear engineering, as well as nonproliferation, nuclear 

forensics, and nuclear safeguards missions. This funding is to be 

used consistent with the authorization provided in section 313 of 

Public Law 111–8. This funding is not intended to supplant university research funding provided within the nuclear energy research 

and development activities. Studies by the American Physical Society, American Association for the Advancement of Science and the 

American Nuclear Society recommended Federal investment in university research and training in nuclear engineering and forensics. 

RE-ENERGYSE.—The Committee recommends no funding for 

this line. Alternately, the Committee continues to support the ongoing Integrated University Program. 

Reactor Concepts R&D.—The Committee recommends 

$188,500,000 for Reactor Concepts Research and Development. 

The Committee recommends $85,000,000 for the Next Generation 

Nuclear Plant program. This program has already spent over 

$500,000,000 with none of the funds requiring a match by industry. 

Furthermore, of the two entities selected by the Department to proceed with conceptual design, one has failed to reach agreement 

with the Department on the issue of cost-sharing and the other is 

proceeding with minimal cost-share. The issue of cost-sharing is 
92 

plaguing this program and will do so into the future without a realistic approach by industry. Additionally, the one conceptual design 

team progressing today is not expected to finish its design until 

late this year or early the following year. The design will then be 

reviewed by advisory entities and the Department and is subject to 

a formal determination by the Secretary as to whether to proceed 

further. Hence, any funding provided in fiscal year 2011 may be for 

a program that is no longer supported by a demonstration element. 

The Committee fully supports the other budget request lines under Reactors Concepts R&D and provides $50,000,000 for the 

small modular reactor [SMR] program. The Committee understands the arguments that SMRs, if successful, may have unique 

attributes in meeting base-load power supply needs of the future. 

However, the Committee notes that light-water SMRs are unlikely 

to lessen the nuclear waste issues facing the country. Regarding 

the Light Water Reactor Sustainability program, the Committee 

expects a high cost share from industry. 

Fuel Cycle Research and Development.—The Committee recommends $191,000,000 for Fuel Cycle Research and Development. 

The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Advanced Fuels 

program, including $7,000,000 for the Department to issue a competitive solicitation requesting industry teams (fuel suppliers, utilities and advanced ceramic developers) for cost shared proposals to 

develop and test advanced LWR fuel with ceramic cladding, with 

the capability of very high burn up and with the objective of 

achieving readiness for Lead Test Rod operation in commercial reactors within 5 years. This should be awarded on a 50-50 costshare basis. The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the Modified Open Cycle program. The Committee notes the Department’s 

request is putting significant funding into three different approaches to the fuel cycle—once through, closed, and modified open. 

It is not clear to the Committee how long the Department envisions 

exploring these three pathways and this raises questions about outyear costs. Significant waste reductions in a closed fuel cycle will 

be costly. It is less clear what potential exists with a modified open 

cycle. The Committee urges the Department to develop research 

plans that include decision dates in order to avoid costly and longterm research and development in these areas. 

International Nuclear Energy Cooperation.—The Committee recommends the budget request level of $3,000,000 for International 

Nuclear Energy Cooperation. 

RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

Space and Defense Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends 

$57,000,000 for Space and Defense Infrastructure. Of the funds 

provided, $15,160,000 is for Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The 

Committee urges the Department to request sufficient funds for 

nuclear infrastructure in future budgets in order that nuclear materials and engineering facilities are maintained compliant with 

DOE orders and directives. 

Research Reactor Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends 

the budget request for this activity at $4,818,000. 

Pu-238 Production Restart Project.—The Committee provides no 

funding for Pu-238 production capabilities. The Committee under-
93 

stands that the United States no longer has the capability to 

produce plutonium-238, which is a critical source of power for 

NASA space missions, and that a shortage of this radioisotope may 

affect future NASA missions. However, Pu-238 is not needed for 

any DOE or NNSA missions, including national security applications. As NASA will be the only user of Pu-238, the Committee believes NASA should pay for the entire service through a similar 

work for others arrangement that DOE has with the Department 

of Homeland Security and other government agencies. 

IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $173,000,000 for Idaho Facilities 

Management. 

PROGRAM DIRECTION

The Committee recommends $91,452,000 for Program Direction, 

consistent with the budget request. 

Congressionally Directed Spending Items.—The Committee includes $7,400,000 for the following list of projects. The Committee 

reminds recipients that statutory cost sharing requirements may 

apply to these projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED NUCLEAR ENERGY PROJECTS 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Nuclear Engineering Research Center ................................................................... $500,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

Nuclear Fabrication Consortium ............................................................................ $2,000,000 Senator Voinovich, Sherrod 

Brown 

Nuclear Power Operator Simulator ........................................................................ $400,000 Senator Kerry 

Ohio State Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Facility Research and Education Expansion.$2,000,000 Senator Voinovich 

Oversight of Yucca Mountain Shut Down and Reclamation ................................. $2,500,000 Senator Reid 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $672,383,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 586,583,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 725,950,000 

The Committee recommendation for Fossil Energy Research and 

Development is $725,950,000. The Committee urges the Department to develop a plan and request funding in the next budget request for a Clean Coal Power Initiative Round IV to build on previous efforts. The Committee also supports the Department’s efforts 

to develop a new budget structure that reflects the future direction 

of the coal research programs in Advanced Power Systems, Carbon 

Capture, Geologic Storage, and Cross-Cutting Research. 

Fuels and Power Systems.—The Committee recommends 

$452,000,000 for fuels and power systems which is $48,150,000 

above the request. From within existing funds, the Committee recommends $10,000,000, in addition to sums allocated for university 

research, to initiate the NETL-Regional University Alliance for Energy Innovation and encourages the Department’s future support 

for this initiative. The recommendation includes $68,000,000 for innovations for existing plants. Within available funds, the Committee also supports $5,000,000 to continue the mercury research 
94 

program. The Committee recommends $64,000,000 for the Advanced Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle activities and 

$32,000,000 for the Advanced Turbines program. The Committee 

recommends $170,000,000 for Carbon Sequestration activities, including support for integrated emission reduction initiatives. Of 

these funds, $20,000,000 is provided for the creation of a center focused on innovative concepts for the beneficial use of carbon dioxide for non-geologic activities. The Committee has also provided an 

additional $4,000,000 for the Focus Area for Carbon Sequestration 

Science. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for Fuels, including for coal/biomass activities. The Committee supports additional 

research and development projects that would produce substantially higher quality fuels which would include greater carbon 

lifecycle requirements than conventional fuels and technologies. 

Such fuels would be derived from coal/biomass feed stocks and seek 

to meet fuel specifications for military and civilian use without additional petroleum components. The Committee recommends 

$50,000,000 for Fuel Cell research. The Committee recommends 

$48,000,000 for Advanced Research, including $20,000,000 for computational energy sciences and system dynamics. 

Natural Gas Technologies.—The Committee recommendation includes $22,000,000. Of this amount, $15,000,000 is provided for 

methane hydrates activities. The Committee has restored the hydrates technology program to this account and does not support 

funding a gas hydrates research program within the Office of 

Science. The Committee recommends $3,000,000 to continue research being conducted that targets small, independent producers 

in the areas of exploration production, and safety, including completion and well control technology, and to continue to develop solutions to minimize the environmental impacts of natural gas development, including advancement of water resources treatment technologies. The Committee further recommends support for one or 

more demonstration-scale projects to treat water resources associated with domestic natural gas development. The Committee understands that, with the projected increases in demand for natural 

gas, the amount of produced water affected will pose an even greater challenge unless cost-effective methods are developed to treat 

the water, including treatment for beneficial reuse. The Committee 

encourages the Office of Fossil Energy to consult with other offices, 

including the Office of Environmental Management, and conduct 

the project, or projects, jointly with industry to integrate existing, 

validated, low-cost technology. The Committee recommends continued support for unconventional natural gas production from basins 

that contain tight gas sands, shale gas, and coal bed methane resources. 

Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies.—The Committee recommends $26,000,000 to continue the implementation of the comprehensive research, development, and demonstration [RD&D] 

strategy the Committee directed the Department to develop in Public Law 111–85. The Committee recommends that the Department 

concentrate its RD&D activities on developing the significant unconventional energy resource within the United States, including 

the Western Energy Corridor. The Department should look to demonstrate technology applications for these resources on state and 
95 

Federal lands, as appropriate, including oil shale and tar sands. 

The Committee urges the Department to partner with research 

universities, national laboratories, and industry. Within available 

funds, the Committee recommends $1,200,000 to continue the Risk 

Based Data Management System. Within available funds, the Committee also recommends continuation of the stripper well program 

and ongoing research being conducted that targets small, independent producers in the areas of enhanced oil recovery, exploration and production, safety, and environmental solutions. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $170,300,000 

for Program Direction, of which $138,700,000 is for the National 

Energy Technology Laboratory. 

Other Programs.—The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for 

Plant and Capital Equipment. The Committee recommends 

$10,000,000 for Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration. The 

Committee recommends $700,000 for the special recruitment programs. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 to restore funding 

for Cooperative research and development. The Committee urges 

the Department to continue NETL’s efforts within the Project Management Center [PMC]. The Committee continues to encourage the 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to carry on this 

collaboration and funding of the PMC with the NETL. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee recommends 

$19,950,000 for the following congressionally directed projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED FOSSIL ENERGY PROJECTS 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Clean Energy Technology ....................................................................................... $2,000,000 Senator Dorgan 

CO2 Sequestration Projects ................................................................................... $700,000 Senators Mark Udall, Bennet 

Fossil Fuel Research and Development ................................................................. $3,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 

Gulf of Mexico Hydrates Research Consortium ..................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Hydrogen Fuel Dispensing Station ......................................................................... $750,000 Senator Rockefeller 

Long Term Environmental and Economic Impacts of the Development of a Coal 

Liquefaction Sector in China.

$750,000 Senator Rockefeller 

National Center for Hydrogen Technology ............................................................. $3,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 

Sunbury Generation/Calera Carbon Capture Project ............................................. $750,000 Senator Specter 

University of Kentucky Coal-Derived Low Energy Materials for Sustainable Construction Project.$1,000,000 Senator McConnell 

Utah Center for Ultra-Clean Coal Utilization and Heavy Oil Research ................ $7,000,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $23,627,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 23,614,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 23,614,000 

The Committee recommends $23,614,000 for fiscal year 2011, the 

same as the budget request for the operation of the naval petroleum and oil shale reserves. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $243,823,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 138,861,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 209,861,000 
96 

The Committee recommends $209,861,000 for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Committee does not support the budget proposal to cancel $71,000,000 of prior appropriated funds for the proposed expansion site in Richton, Mississippi. The Committee notes 

that although the Department was directed by statute in Public 

Law 111–8 to submit a report to Congress regarding the effects of 

expanding the Reserve on the domestic petroleum market within 

45 days of enactment of the conference report, the Department has 

failed to submit this report. The Committee included these reporting requirements to inform decision making for both the Department and Congress, and is troubled that the Department has chosen to ignore this requirement for more than a year. The Committee expects the Department to be more responsive to congressional direction in future budget requests. 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $11,300,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 11,300,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 11,300,000 

The Committee recommends $11,300,000, the same as the budget 

request. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $110,595,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 128,833,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 119,000,000 

The Committee recommends $119,000,000 for the Energy Information Administration. The Committee strongly encourages the 

Energy Information Administration to continue its work on the Energy and Financial Markets Initiative. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $244,673,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 225,163,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 244,163,000 

The Committee’s recommendation for Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup is $244,163,000. 

Reprogramming Control Levels.—In fiscal year 2011, the Environmental Management program may transfer funding between operating expense funded projects within the controls listed below 

using guidance contained in the Department’s budget execution 

manual (DOE M 135.1–1A, chapter IV). All capital construction 

line item projects remain separate controls from the operating 

projects. The Committees on Appropriations in the House and Senate must be formally notified in advance of all reprogrammings, except internal reprogrammings, and the Department is to take no financial action in anticipation of congressional response. The Committee recommends the following reprogramming control points for 

fiscal year 2011: 

—Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning; 

—Gaseous Diffusion Plants; 

—Small Sites; and 
97 

—West Valley Demonstration Project. 

Internal Reprogramming Authority.—Headquarters Environmental Management may transfer up to $2,000,000, one time, between accounts listed above 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. 

The reprogramming authority—either formal or internal—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 and Senate must be notified within 30 days after the use of 

the internal reprogramming authority. 

Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning.—The Committee recommends $3,659,000, the same as the 

request. 

Gaseous Diffusion Plants.—The Committee recommends 

$99,464,000, the same as the request. 

Small Sites.—The Committee recommends $82,966,000. A total 

of $50,000,000 is provided to Moab. 

West Valley Demonstration Project.—The Committee recommends 

$58,074,000. 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $573,850,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 530,498,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 550,000,000 

The Committee’s recommendation is $550,000,000 to sustain 

clean-up activities at uranium enrichment facilities. Of the funds 

provided, $85,000,000 is recommended for the Paducah Gaseous 

Diffusion Plant, $200,000,000 is recommended for the East Tennessee Technology Park, and $265,000,000 is recommended for the 

Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. With these funds and any additional funds generated though the barter of uranium in the Department’s inventory, the Department is encouraged to maintain 

its current accelerated cleanup schedule at the Portsmouth site. Accelerated cleanup of the site is consistent with the Department’s 

mission for responsible resolution to the environmental legacy of 

nuclear weapons production, and is anticipated to reduce life cycle 

costs and more quickly resolve associated risks. The funding for 

Portsmouth is substantially less than the budget request due to the 

administration’s reliance on a legislative proposal to reinstate a 

$200,000,000 fee on uranium fuel to pay for the Portsmouth increase. This is the second year the Committee has rejected this proposal. The Committee is aware of the fact that more than 

$5,000,000,000 in available funding remains in the UED&D fund. 

The administration is urged to propose real increased budget authority for these activities rather than legislative proposals that 

have not been proposed to the authorizing committees of jurisdiction. 
98 

SCIENCE

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $4,903,710,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 5,121,437,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,012,000,000 

The Committee recommends $5,012,000,000 for the Office of 

Science. The Committee understands that changing the Nation’s 

decades-long dependence on imported oil and unfettered emission 

of carbon dioxide requires fundamental changes in the ways we 

produce, store, and use energy. To meet these strategic challenges, 

the United States will have to develop new technologies that require scientific breakthroughs that come only with fundamental 

understanding of new materials and chemical processes. The Committee believes the funding increase in fiscal year 2011 will support 

initiatives to advance scientific understanding for new energy technologies. 

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

The Committee recommends $820,085,000 for High Energy Physics. The Committee is encouraged that the Large Hadron Collider 

[LHC] started operations again in March 2010 and it reached energy levels of 3.5 trillion electron volts, which is three times higher 

than any other machine in the world has been able to achieve. 

However, the Committee is concerned about the LHC’s planned 

shutdown at the end of 2011 to address design problems and the 

impact the shutdown may have on the U.S. High Energy Physics 

Program. For example, a decision to operate the Tevatron at the 

Fermi National Accelerator beyond fiscal year 2011 might reduce 

funding available for other high-priority projects. The Committee 

urges the Office of Science to keep the Committee informed about 

the status of operations at LHC and how the planned shutdown 

will impact the U.S. program. The Committee also recognizes the 

recommendation made in the 2008 report of the Particle Physics 

Project Prioritization Panel to develop a world-leading program of 

neutrino science to understand the role neutrinos play in the evolution of the universe. The United States has unique capabilities 

and infrastructure at Fermilab to advance this area of science. The 

Committee supports design work for two new potential construction 

projects—the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment and the Muon to 

Electron Conversion Experiment. However, the Committee directs 

the Office of Science to submit a report not later than 180 days 

after enactment of this act that lays out (1) the expected benefits 

of intensity frontier science, (2) a strategy for maintaining the U.S. 

lead, and (3) the funding needs over the next 10 years, including 

construction activities, of implementing the proposed strategy. The 

Committee also is concerned about the status of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory [DUSEL] funded by 

the National Science Foundation [NSF]. The neutrino program relies on the construction of DUSEL and any delays in the DUSEL 

program would impact advances in this area of science. The Committee urges the Office of Science to coordinate its neutrino program research efforts with NSF to avoid unnecessary delays. The 

Committee is very encouraged by DOE and NASA’s collaborative 

effort and success on the Joint Dark Energy Mission Interim 
99 

Science Working Group and expects the Department to continue to 

fully support this process and to work closely with NASA in the 

planning and execution of this mission. 

NUCLEAR PHYSICS

The Committee recommends $554,000,000 for Nuclear Physics. A 

recent National Academy of Sciences report, Advancing Nuclear 

Medicine through Innovation, recommended increasing the Federal 

commitment to nuclear medicine research. Nuclear medicine could 

substantially accelerate, simplify, and reduce the cost of delivering 

and improving healthcare. However, the Committee is concerned 

that the Department is not using funds to directly support nuclear 

medicine research with human application. To this end, within the 

funds provided, $15,400,000 is for nuclear medicine research with 

human application. All of the added funds must be awarded competitively in one or more solicitations that include all sources—universities, the private sector, and Government laboratories—on an 

equal basis. Funding for nuclear medicine application research was 

previously within the Biological and Environmental Research program. 

BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

The Committee recommends $614,500,000 for Biological and Environmental Research. Of these funds, $11,000,000 is provided for 

artificial retina research. An artificial retina has the potential to 

restore vision to millions of people suffering from eye diseases. In 

November 2009, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

team developing artificial retinas received a Research and Development 100 Award, known as the ‘‘Oscars of Invention.’’ The Committee encourages the Department to continue this research and 

meet its goal of producing a prosthesis with more than 1,000 electrodes, which would allow facial recognition, as quickly as possible. 

The funding request of $15,400,000 for nuclear medicine research 

efforts has been moved to Nuclear Physics to better address mission requirements. 

BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

The Committee recommends $1,739,115,000 for Basic Energy 

Sciences. Of these funds, $151,600,000 is provided for construction 

activities as requested in the budget. The remaining $1,587,515,000 

is for research. Within available funds, up to $100,000,000 shall be 

used to support the 46 Energy Frontier Research Centers. The 

Committee does not support the creation of new Energy Frontier 

Research Centers at this time. The Department must first demonstrate the benefits and results of this new research and development approach designed to address fundamental scientific energy 

challenges before the program is expanded further. A significant increase in funding for the core research program in materials and 

chemical sciences should be sufficient to advance scientific and engineering knowledge in areas of study where the Department feels 

there are gaps in addressing energy challenges. 

Within the research funds provided, $16,000,000 shall be available for the Fuels from Sunlight energy innovation hub and 
100 

$22,000,000 for a new Batteries and Energy Storage energy innovation hub. 

The Committee recommends no funding for a research program 

in gas hydrates. A gas hydrates research program should continue 

in the Office of Fossil Energy, not the Office of Science. A recently 

issued, congressionally mandated report by the National Research 

Council [NRC] concluded that the Office of Fossil Energy’s methane 

hydrate program had been ‘‘consistent and effective’’ in leading a 

broad-based science and technology development program to investigate naturally occurring gas hydrates. In addition, the NRC found 

the methane hydrate program had made advances in identification, 

drilling, and production of methane from hydrate for use as a possible energy source. The Office of Science is not the appropriate office to continue this work. The Committee also provides no funding 

for modeling of engine design at this time. Within the research 

funds provided, $35,000,000 is for the Experimental Program to 

Stimulate Competitive Research [EPSCoR]. The EPSCoR program 

is currently funding energy research that will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 

ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

The Committee recommends $418,000,000 for Advanced Scientific Computing Research. 

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

The Committee recommends $384,000,000 for Fusion Energy 

Sciences. The Committee is concerned by cost increases and schedule delays related to the ITER project. In the last year, the projected start date for ITER has slipped another 10 months to November 2019, or 3 years later than first projected. These schedule 

changes put U.S. cost estimates at risk as costs escalate for the 

total project. The Committee encourages the Office of Science to 

keep the Committee informed about significant decisions and developments related to the ITER project. 

The Committee is encouraged that the Office of Science tasked 

the National Academy of Sciences with reviewing options to advance inertial fusion energy. The Committee understands that an 

independent National Academy of Sciences committee will (1) assess the prospects of generating power using inertial confinement 

fusion, (2) identify scientific and engineering challenges, the costs 

for manufacturing targets, and research and development objectives to develop an inertial fusion energy demonstration plant, and 

(3) advise DOE on a roadmap for developing a demonstration plant. 

The Committee believes that this is a practical way of identifying 

the steps that are needed to develop an inertial fusion energy program and plans to work with DOE to assess the budget needs for 

this alternative approach to fusion energy. Within available funds, 

the Committee provides $4,000,000 to advance inertial fusion energy, which may include experiments using solid state or krypton 

fluoride lasers, ion beams, or pulsed power, and to help laboratories 

and universities participate in the National Academy of Sciences 

review. 

The Committee is encouraged by DOE’s progress in advancing fusion energy sciences. However, the Committee is concerned by the 
101 

Fusion Advisory Committee finding that the United States risks 

losing leadership and competitiveness in material science. To successfully harness fusion energy, scientists and engineers must design and build reactor components that can withstand extreme radiation environments and temperature. Since these extreme environments and material needs are common to both magnetic and inertial fusion energy, the Committee encourages DOE to reassess its 

materials science program and establish a program that would explore science, engineering, and materials issues for both magnetic 

and inertial fusion energy and build U.S. expertise. 

SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee recommends $126,000,000 to support infrastructure activities. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee recommends $86,500,000 for Safeguards and Security activities. 

SCIENCE PROGRAM DIRECTION

The Committee recommends $208,000,000 for the Office of 

Science Program Direction. Of these funds, $8,963,000 shall be 

used for the Office of Scientific and Technical Information. No 

funds shall be used to hire new site office personnel, except for 

field staff at the Integrated Support Centers in Chicago and Oak 

Ridge. 

SCIENCE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommends $21,000,000 for Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists program. Of these funds, up to 

$5,000,000 shall be available for the graduate fellowship program. 

The Committee encourages the Office of Science to monitor the impact of this program and demonstrate whether students continue 

to pursue careers in scientific and technical fields. The Committee 

also provides $5,800,000 for educator programs that provides professional development for middle school, high school, community 

college, and undergraduate educators. Furthermore, $2,500,000 

shall be available for program administration and evaluation to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of science workforce development activities. 

Congressionally Directed Spending Items.—The Committee includes $40,800,000 for the following list of projects that provide for 

research, development, and demonstration of science technologies 

or programs. The Committee reminds recipients that statutory cost 

sharing requirements may apply to these projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SCIENCE PROJECTS 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Advanced Computer Simulation Initiative ............................................................. $1,000,000 Senator Reid 

Alaska Climate Center ........................................................................................... $500,000 Senators Murkowski, Begich 

Antibodies Research .............................................................................................. $4,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 

Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems ...................................................................... $2,000,000 Senator Rockefeller 

Center for Nanoscale Energy ................................................................................. $7,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 
102 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SCIENCE PROJECTS—Continued 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Characteristics and Cleanup of the U.S. Nuclear Legacy .................................... $3,500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Climate Model Evaluation Program ....................................................................... $2,000,000 Senators Shelby, Sessions 

Computing Capability ............................................................................................ $2,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad 

Development of Nontechnology-enhanced Solar Cells with Low Cost and High 

Conversion Efficiency.

$500,000 Senator Reid 

Energy Research .................................................................................................... $250,000 Senator Cochran 

Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Laboratory: Monitoring/Assessment of 

the Radioactive Pollutants in the South-West Mississippi.

$750,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Functional Nanoparticles for Improved Ultra Capacitor Devices .......................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Idaho National Laboratory Center for Advanced Energy Studies .......................... $1,000,000 Senators Crapo, Risch 

KU Cancer Research Equipment ............................................................................ $4,000,000 Senators Brownback, Roberts 

Lincoln Memorial University/ORNL Partnership on Geothermal Energy ................ $2,000,000 Senator Alexander 

Material Science Smart Coatings .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Ben Nelson 

Metal-enhanced Fluorescence Research and Development .................................. $750,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin 

Missouri University Research Reactor Reflector Shield ........................................ $1,000,000 Senator Bond 

Nanotechnology Initiative ....................................................................................... $600,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman 

Nevada Water Resources Data, Modeling, and Vizualization (DMV) Center ......... $750,000 Senator Reid 

Oregon Sustainability Center ................................................................................. $300,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley 

RNAi Research ....................................................................................................... $300,000 Senator Kerry 

Solid State Preparation and Characterization Lab ............................................... $500,000 Senator Reid 

Southern Illinois University Research .................................................................... $750,000 Senator Durbin 

Technology Transfer & Commercialization of Technologies at DOE ..................... $500,000 Senators Bingaman, Tom 

Udall 

TU Algae to Green Fuels Energy Project ................................................................ $750,000 Senator Inhofe 

University of California, San Diego Seismic Research ......................................... $1,500,000 Senator Feinstein 

University of South Dakota Project on Renewable Energy and the Economy ....... $350,000 Senator Johnson 

URI Regional Earth System Center ........................................................................ $750,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse 

ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY—ENERGY [ARPA–E]

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... $299,966,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 200,000,000 

The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy [ARPA–E]. ARPA–E is responsible 

for funding high-risk research and development projects to meet 

long-term energy challenges. The primary goal is to invest in energy projects that can overcome technological barriers and eventually reduce energy imports, improve energy efficiency, and reduce 

energy-related emissions, including greenhouse gases. ARPA–E will 

also help the United States maintain a technological lead in developing and deploying advanced energy technologies. The Committee 

supports ARPA–E’s efforts to fund creative ‘‘out-of-the-box’’ transformational energy research that industry by itself cannot or will 

not support due to its high risk, but where success would provide 

significant benefits for the United States. The Committee encourages ARPA–E to work closely with the Office of Science, including 

scientists and engineers working at Energy Frontier Research Centers and Hubs, to identify promising projects that are potential 

game changers for energy systems. 
103 

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $43,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 558,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 438,000,000 

OFFSETTING RECEIPTS

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ¥$43,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ¥58,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥58,000,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... $500,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 380,000,000 

The Committee recommends new loan authority of $10,000,000,000 for nuclear power facilities, and $7,000,000,000 for 

coal and petroleum coke-based power generation and industrial 

gasification projects that incorporate carbon capture and sequestration [CCS], pipelines and transportation of CO2. Eligible CCS 

projects may include stand-alone pipeline projects that transport 

carbon dioxide to storage sites for the purpose of storage and any 

such project shall be considered by the Secretary to have satisfied 

the requirements of section 1703(a) of Public Law 109–58. The Secretary may also direct a portion of such authority for projects focused on the beneficial use of carbon dioxide. 

The Committee also recommends $380,000,000 for subsidy costs of renewable energy projects. The Committee derives $140,000,000 

of this amount from the rescission of $14,000,000,000 in unsubsidized loan authority for renewable projects provided in fiscal year 

2009. This leaves over $3,800,000,000 in renewable unsubsidized 

loan authority remaining. The Committee notes that since fiscal 

year 2008, when renewable unsubsidized loan authority was first 

granted, only two conditional commitments collectively valued at 

$317,000,000 have been made. There are only two additional 

projects in the near term pipeline valued collectively at 

$300,000,000. Hence, in over 2 years the program is prepared to 

use only $617,000,000 of the $18,500,000,000 in renewable unsubsidized loan authority. Nearly all original applicants for the 1703 

unsubsidized renewable program have moved their applications to 

the subsidized 1705 program appropriated through the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. These factors demonstrate 

that renewable projects will advance much more quickly through a 

1703 credit subsidy program than through an unsubsidized program. The failure to convert the majority of the $18,500,000,000 in 

renewable loan authority to credit subsidy will result in that authority being untapped for over a decade. 

The Committee remains concerned with the Department’s implementation of the Loan Guarantee Program. While some program 

improvements have been made in the last year, DOE’s program im-
104 

plementation has been ad hoc. A recent Government Accountability 

Office [GAO] review of the Loan Guarantee Program found that the 

Department treats applicants inconsistently, and lacks mechanisms 

to identify and address applicants’ concerns. The program lacks 

transparency and has been slow to come to closure on applications. 

Since the program’s inception, only one loan guarantee has been 

closed, along with conditional commitments for just eight projects. 

With more than $80,000,000,000 in available loan guarantee authority, less than $14,000,000,000 has been committed. The Committee expects the Department to address the problems raised by 

GAO expeditiously, and report within 90 days of its progress. 

The Committee is also concerned that the Loan Guarantee Program does not support a diverse set of clean fuel technology and 

more importantly, the Committee is concerned about the impact 

that operation is having on the commercialization of those technologies. The Department of Energy is directed to encourage the 

production of advanced biofuels by comparing the risk profiles 

against similar risk profiles. 

The Committee is concerned that the Loan Guarantee Program, 

expanded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to help 

finance renewable energy projects that commence construction by 

September 30, 2011, will be unable to finance certain solar projects 

on private land due to environmental permitting timelines established by the Department. While the Committee is aware that the 

Department of the Interior has ‘‘fast tracked’’ the permitting of a 

subset of proposed solar energy projects on Federal land, the Committee is concerned that DOE has not established goals to complete 

environmental impact statements for projects on private land seeking loan guarantees by the September 2011 deadline. The Department has advised solar developers that if NEPA requires an EIS 

on a solar development proposal, DOE will likely not complete the 

EIS by the September 2011 deadline. The Committee instructs the 

Department to identify a set of proposed solar development projects 

on private lands with the goal of completing all necessary environmental reviews by September 2011. The Committee also strongly 

recommends that the Department initiate the environmental review process earlier in the loan guarantee selection process, in 

order to assure that environmental impacts of renewable energy 

projects are considered during loan guarantee selection. 

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $20,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 9,998,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,998,000 

The Committee recommends the $9,998,000 as requested. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

(GROSS)

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $288,684,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 288,872,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 288,872,000 
105 

(MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ¥$119,740,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ¥119,740,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥119,740,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $168,944,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 169,132,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 169,132,000 

The Committee recommends $288,872,000 for Departmental Administration, which provides a net appropriation of $169,132,000 in 

fiscal year 2011. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $51,927,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 42,850,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 42,850,000 

The Committee recommends $42,850,000, the same as the request. In fiscal year 2011, the budget request moves funding for financial statement audits from the Office of the Inspector General 

to the Working Capital Fund. This accounts for the reduction in 

the Office of Inspector General funding from fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2011. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $6,384,431,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 7,008,835,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 7,018,835,000 

The Committee recommends $7,018,835,000 for National Nuclear 

Security Administration [NNSA] Weapons Activities, an increase of 

$10,000,000 above the budget request. This level of funding will 

allow NNSA to modernize aging infrastructure and maintain the 

scientific, technological, and engineering capabilities needed to assess the safety, security, and reliability of nuclear weapons. 

DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

The Committee recommends $1,874,279,000 for directed stockpile 

work, a decrease of $24,100,000 below the request. Within these 

funds, at least $197,700,000 shall be for directed stockpile work activities at Pantex. This increase in funding will help restore activities at Pantex related to weapons dismantlement and disposition 

and stockpile services support for scheduled weapons assembly, disassembly, and dismantlement. 

Life Extension Program.—The Committee recommends 

$249,463,000 for the Life Extension Program, the same as the 

budget request. 

Stockpile Systems.—The Committee recommends $649,366,000, 

the same as the request. Of these funds, at least $165,000,000 shall 

be used for surveillance activities. Over the last several years, the 
106 

laboratory directors of Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, and 

Sandia National Laboratories, who are responsible for assessing 

the safety, security, and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile 

every year, have expressed concern that funding shortfalls in the 

surveillance program may begin to jeopardize the annual assessment process. Furthermore, in September 2009, the JASON study 

group found NNSA’s surveillance program was becoming inadequate and the continued success of stockpile stewardship required 

a revised surveillance program. A robust surveillance program is 

required to maintain confidence in the performance of nuclear 

weapons in the absence of underground nuclear testing. Thus, the 

Committee is encouraged by NNSA’s decision to increase funding 

for surveillance activities and make changes to the surveillance 

program to better address aging issues. When NNSA completes its 

Phase 6.2/6.2A study for the B61 life extension program, the Committee directs NNSA to submit to the Committee both a classified 

and unclassified report 90 days after the completion of the study 

with (1) a description of the safety and security features NNSA 

would add to a refurbished B61 and (2) a cost and benefit analysis 

of installing the proposed features in the warhead. The cost and 

benefit analysis should include (1) the costs of science, technology, 

and engineering to install new safety and security features, (2) the 

costs of assessing the impact the new features may have on the 

performance of the nuclear explosive package at the national laboratories, (3) the extent to which the proposed safety and security 

features address specific safety and security concerns, and (4) why 

current safety and security features would not be sufficient. 

When NNSA completes its Phase 6.2/6.2A study, the Committee 

also directs NNSA to submit to the Committee a revised B61 LEP 

Alternative Analysis study on whether the benefits of a combined 

nuclear and nonnuclear refurbishment option for the B61 outweighs the costs or whether it would be more cost effective to delay 

the nuclear scope. The Committee understands that the preliminary analysis shows that NNSA would save approximately 

$2,000,000,000 by combining the nuclear and nonnuclear scope. A 

combined nuclear and nonnuclear scope would also reduce NNSA 

and Air Force security risks and costs by a factor of 2 because they 

would not have to handle the weapon and transport it overseas 

twice. In addition, a combined nuclear and nonnuclear scope would 

allow NNSA to consolidate the different variants of the B61 bomb 

into one variant that has the least special nuclear material, add 

modern safety features, and extend the life of the weapon for both 

strategic and tactical missions for 30 years. However, the costs portrayed in this study are a rough order of magnitude and detailed 

program costs will not be available until NNSA completes the B61 

study. The Committee will need the most accurate information possible on these cost savings before it can make an informed decision 

about moving forward with the life extension program. 

Weapons Dismantlement.—The Committee recommends 

$64,425,000, an increase of $6,400,000 above the budget request. 

Within these funds, $27,500,000 shall be used to help restore activities at Pantex for weapons dismantlement activities. The Committee encourages NNSA to keep the Committee informed about 
107 

changes to dismantlement rates as a result of the new START treaty. 

Stockpile Services.—The Committee recommends $911,025,000, a 

decrease of $30,500,000 below the budget request. Within these 

funds, at least $74,000,000 shall be used to support surveillance activities. Also, within these funds, no more than $160,000,000 shall 

be used for plutonium sustainment. The Committee understands 

that NNSA will complete building W88 war reserve pits in fiscal 

year 2011 and continue to exercise its pit manufacturing capability. 

Furthermore, within these funds, $84,100,000 shall be used for 

scheduled weapons assembly, disassembly, and dismantlement 

work at Pantex. 

CAMPAIGNS

The campaigns support scientific research, experimental activities and advanced computation, which make up the core of the 

science-based stockpile stewardship program. This program has enabled the U.S. Government to ensure the safety, reliability, and security of our nuclear weapons stockpile without underground nuclear testing for the past 16 years. The Committee recommends 

$1,693,630,000 for NNSA Campaigns, which is $22,900,000 below 

the request. 

Science Campaign.—The Committee recommends $354,300,000, a 

decrease of $10,924,000 below the budget request. Within these 

funds, $56,050,000 shall be used for advanced certification to advance scientific understanding of safety and security systems for 

nuclear weapons and to improve the annual weapons certification 

process. The Committee continues to strongly support the weapons 

physics activities at Sandia’s Z facility that are critical to sustaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear stockpile. The Committee provides $53,296,000 to Sandia’s Z facility. An additional 

$10,000,000 in funding will help the Z facility conduct plutonium 

experiments in environments of extreme conditions found in nuclear weapons explosions. 

Engineering Campaign.—The Committee recommends 

$149,900,000, an increase of $7,980,000 above the budget request. 

Within these funds, the Committee provides $21,510,000 for weapons systems engineering assessment technology activities. Nuclear 

weapons may have to operate in a nuclear environment and electronic and other nonnuclear weapons components, which are critical to the proper functioning of a nuclear weapon, must survive 

thermal, blast and shock effects as well as exposure to neutron and 

gamma radiation. The Committee is providing funding to support 

testing and experimental capabilities that create or simulate radiation environments similar to those found in a nuclear explosion. 

The funding will also maintain the highly technical set of specialized skills needed to develop the tests and simulations, interpret 

the results, and design radiation hardened components for life extension programs, such as the upcoming W78. 

Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High-yield Campaign.—The Committee recommends $481,548,000 as requested. 

Within these funds, at least $62,477,000 and $48,000,000 shall be 

used for inertial confinement fusion activities at the University of 
108 

Rochester’s Omega facility and Sandia National Laboratory’s Z facility, respectively. 

The Committee is concerned that NNSA has been slow to solicit 

help and ideas from outside experts with knowledge in inertial confinement fusion to make the first ignition experiments a success. 

The Committee questions Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s decision, as the laboratory with lead responsibility for managing ignition experiments, to wait 4 years—and only months before the first ignition experiment is expected to take place—to implement the JASON study group’s 2005 recommendation to form a 

standing external review committee of experts that could provide 

expert advice on the scientific and technical challenges. Even with 

the creation of this external review committee, a Government Accountability Office [GAO] study found that the committee currently 

in place falls short of meeting the intent of the JASON study group 

recommendation. For example, GAO found that the committee may 

not be able to give fully objective, candid advice because the committee will take direction from, and report to, Livermore’s Director, 

rather than to NNSA. The Committee strongly supports the creation of an independent advisory board that can evaluate experiments planned at the National Ignition Facility, identify potential 

weaknesses with the experimental plan, and recommend, if necessary, alternative approaches to address scientific and technical 

challenges. The Committee also strongly supports the advisory 

committee’s role in setting a strategic direction for inertial confinement fusion and high-energy density physics research and determining how best to use current facilities to advance this scientific 

field. 

Advanced Simulation and Computing.—The Committee recommends $615,748,000 for the Advanced Simulation and Computing [ASC] Campaign as requested. The Committee supports 

NNSA’s efforts to establish a dual validation approach in the annual assessment process. Independent peer review by Los Alamos 

and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, with assistance 

from Sandia National Laboratory, will increase confidence in the 

annual assessment of the current stockpile and weapons that are 

refurbished under life extension programs. 

Readiness Campaign.—The Committee recommends $92,134,000 

for the Readiness Campaign, $19,958,000 less than the budget request. Within these funds, no more than $30,199,000 shall be used 

for tritium production efforts. The Committee is concerned about 

the technical challenges NNSA is facing with tritium production at 

the Watts Bar reactor and the slow progress in increasing production capacity. 

READINESS IN TECHNICAL BASE AND FACILITIES

The Committee recommends $1,919,970,000, an increase of 

$71,000,000 above the request. While the committee supports the 

increase in funding for science, technology, and engineering to better assess the safety, security, and reliability of the nation’s nuclear stockpile, the committee is concerned that the budget request 

does not contain sufficient funds for two major production plants— 

Y–12 in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Pantex in Amarillo, Texas. 

These production plants are responsible for, among other things, 
109 

dismantlement of retired nuclear weapons, surveillance to detect 

aging issues, and disassembly and assembly of life-extended W76 

warheads. The increase in funding will fill significant gaps at these 

facilities that would avoid layoffs and disruption to dismantlement 

and life extension schedules. 

The Committee has also restored funding for the Los Alamos 

Neutron Science Center [LANSCE] Refurbishment project. This facility is the cornerstone of scientific research at Los Alamos serving 

between 500–600 users per year. LANSCE is currently being used 

to support stockpile stewardship experiments, produce medical isotopes to treat cancer and calibrate medical imaging equipment, and 

conduct Office of Science research to study matter and materials 

that may be used in new energy technologies. Specifically, NNSA’s 

stockpile stewardship plans through 2020 show LANSCE being 

used by the three nuclear weapons laboratories to address issues 

of immediate concern to the stockpile and only LANSCE will be 

able to provide needed data in a timely and cost-effective manner. 

Congressional funding over the last 2 years has helped Los Alamos 

purchase spare parts for a critical component that is reaching the 

end of its life and will allow LANSCE to return to full operation. 

Fiscal year 2011 funds will allow Los Alamos to purchase parts for 

one of its main power sources that are expected to fail within the 

next 3 years and develop and purchase new computers, instruments, controls, and diagnostics systems that have components 

that are no longer commercially available because they were manufactured in the 1960s. 

The Committee is concerned about NNSA’s use of funds for the 

Kansas City Responsive Infrastructure Manufacturing and 

Sourcing [KCRIMS] project. The purpose of the project is to build 

a new, smaller, and more modern facility at the Kansas City Plant 

to manufacture nonnuclear components for nuclear warheads and 

bombs. The costs of this project range from $500,000,000 to 

$673,000,000 with an estimated life-cycle cost of $4,700,000,000. 

Rather than financing this construction project using a budget line 

item in the President’s annual request for appropriations, NNSA 

has decided to acquire the facility using the General Services Administration [GSA] leasing authority, which allows GSA to lease 

space from a private developer on behalf of NNSA. NNSA chose the 

GSA leasing option as the best financing approach because it would 

lead to the lowest overall total cost over a 20-year period, eliminate 

the need for large up-front capital outlays, and it would meet 

NNSA’s commitment to Congress to operate the facility by 2012. 

However, ground breaking for the new building has been delayed 

until at least August 2011 and the Committee is concerned that 

some level of funding may be being used to supplement construction costs. The Committee directs NNSA to identify funds for the 

KCRIMS project as a separate line item under the Readiness in 

Technical Base and Facilities [RTBF] account with an explanation 

of how the funds will be used to support the project. 

The Committee recommends $1,479,954,000, an increase of 

$30,000,000 above the request, for the RTBF Operations and Maintenance account. This funding supports the operations and maintenance of the NNSA laboratories and production facilities, equipment purchases, and personnel. Of these funds: 
110 

Operations of Facilities.—The Committee recommends 

$1,277,991,000, an increase of $20,000,000 above the budget request. Within these funds, at least $230,927,000 and $131,254,000 

shall be used for operations of facilities support for Y–12 and 

Pantex, respectively. This funding increase will help Y–12 and 

Pantex sustain facilities and other critical infrastructure needed for 

life extension programs, dismantlement work, and other national 

security needs. 

Program Readiness.—The Committee recommends the requested 

amount of $69,309,000. 

Material Recycle and Recovery.—The Committee recommends 

$80,429,000, an increase of $10,000,000. Within these funds, 

$50,905,000 shall be for material recycle and recovery activities at 

Y–12. This increase in funding will help restore activities at Y–12 

related to the recovery and reuse of enriched uranium and lithium 

from dismantled nuclear weapons for stockpile stewardship, naval 

reactors, and nuclear nonproliferation missions. 

Containers.—The Committee recommends the requested amount 

of $27,992,000. 

Storage.—The Committee recommends the requested amount of 

$24,233,000. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $440,016,000. 

Project 11–D–801, TA–55 Reinvestment Project, Los Alamos, New 

Mexico.—The Committee provides $20,000,000 as requested to 

begin the second phase of this effort to mitigate safety risks to 

workers identified by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. 

Project 09–D–007, LANSCE Refurbishment Project, Los Alamos, 

New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $30,000,000 to refurbish the LANSCE facility. These funds shall be made available for 

capital equipment acquisition, installation, and associated design 

funds. 

Project 09–D–404, Test Capabilities Revitalization Phase II, 

Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.—The 

committee recommends $11,000,000 to build mechanical shock facilities and rocket sled tracks that will be needed for the B61 life 

extension program. 

Project 08–D–802, High Explosive Pressing Facility, Pantex Plant, 

Amarillo, Texas.—The Committee recommends $30,000,000 as requested. 

Project 07–D–140, Project Engineering and Design [PED], Various 

Locations.—The Committee recommends $5,000,000 as requested 

to continue design work on the Transuranic Waste Facility Project 

at Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

Project 06–D–140, PED, Various Locations.—The Committee recommends $4,000,000 as requested. The project account supports 

ongoing design efforts for the Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment 

Facility. 

Project 06–D–141, PED, Uranium Processing Facility, Y–12, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee.—The Committee recommends $115,016,000, as 

requested. 

Project 04–D–125 Chemistry and Metallurgy Facility Replacement 

Project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $225,000,000 as requested. 
111 

SECURE TRANSPORTATION ASSET

The Committee recommendation for the Secure Transportation 

Asset program is $248,045,000, the same as the budget request. 

NUCLEAR COUNTERTERRORISM INCIDENT RESPONSE

The Committee recommends full funding of the nuclear counterterrorism incident response program. The Committee provides 

$233,134,000 as requested. The Committee supports NNSA’s efforts 

in developing equipment, procedures, and human expertise to identify and render safe improvised nuclear devices. 

FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE RECAPITALIZATION

The Committee provides $94,000,000 for Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization activities, consistent with the budget request. This program was developed to reduce the backlog in deferred maintenance of aging infrastructure facilities throughout the 

complex. 

SITE STEWARDSHIP

The Committee recommends $100,478,000, a decrease of 

$5,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee supports 

NNSA’s efforts to consolidate and dispose of NNSA special nuclear 

material that is no longer required for the nuclear weapons mission. Within available funds, up to $4,000,000 may be used for energy-saving projects. The Committee directs NNSA to submit with 

the fiscal year 2012 budget request the list of projects under the 

energy modernization and investment program. The list of projects 

should include the total cost of each project, the expected cost savings and other benefits of each project and when those cost savings 

will be realized, and the extent to which they contribute to NNSA’s 

energy conservation goals. 

Operations and Maintenance.—The Committee recommends 

$85,478,000. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends the requested level 

of $15,000,000. 

Project 11–D–601 Sanitary Effluent Reclamation Facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends full funding of $15,000,000 for this project. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee recommendation for the Safeguards and Security 

Program is $835,299,000. 

Defense Nuclear Security Operations and Maintenance.—The 

Committee recommends the requested level of $667,954,000. The 

Committee support NNSA’s efforts to reduce costs related to securing national laboratories and production sites while still maintaining effective physical security measures at each site. The Committee encourages NNSA to continue eliminating unnecessary costs 

while still protecting facilities’ assets and resources against theft, 

sabotage, and other criminal acts. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $43,000,000, a decrease of $9,000,000. 
112 

Project 08–D–701 Nuclear Materials Safeguards and Security Upgrades Project Phase II, Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee 

recommends $43,000,000 for this project, a decrease of $9,000,000 

from the budget request. NNSA will not be able to complete design 

activities and begin construction work until design plans for the 

Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement—Nuclear Facility [CMR–NF] project is more developed. The size of CMR–NF will 

determine the amount of security fencing needed. 

Cybersecurity.—The Committee recommends the full request of 

$124,345,000. 

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING CAPABILITY

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 as requested for 

Science, Technology, and Engineering Capability activities. The 

Committee supports NNSA’s efforts to leverage its science, engineering, and technological expertise to work with the Defense 

Threat Reduction Agency to improve the nation’s counterterrorism 

capabilities. The Committee encourages NNSA to continue working 

with DTRA to improve nuclear forensics capabilities and develop 

the tools needed to probe materials and objects and identify hidden 

or concealed nuclear threats. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $2,136,709,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 2,687,167,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,612,167,000 

The Committee recommends $2,612,167,000 for Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation. The Committee supports NNSA’s goal of securing 

all vulnerable nuclear material within 4 years. Securing nuclear 

materials at the sites and facilities where they are located is the 

best defense against nuclear terrorism. Since April 2009, when 

President Obama announced the 4-year goal, NNSA, with the assistance of other Government agencies, has made significant 

progress. For example, in the last year, four countries have eliminated all weapons-usable nuclear material on their soil—bringing 

the total to 17 countries in the last 10 years. Despite this progress, 

NNSA lacks a clear set of metrics to assess and report on the 

progress of the 4-year nuclear security effort. The Committee directs NNSA to provide a report to the Committee by April 1, 2011, 

with (1) the measures and indicators it will use to assess the 

progress in meeting the 4-year goal, (2) the progress it has made 

toward meeting the goals 2 years into the effort, and (3) additional 

measures it must take and funding requirements for the last 2 

years. Such measures should include the fraction of the total number of sites in the world with nuclear weapons or weapons-usable 

materials where all of those stocks have been eliminated and the 

fraction that have demonstrated that their security systems are 

performing effectively and could protect against a broad range of 

outsider and insider threats. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND VERIFICATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommends $362,068,000, an increase of 

$10,500,000 above the budget request, to support expanded invest-
113 

ment in developing advanced nuclear detection technologies. Within the available funds, the Committee provides $10,000,000 for 

NNSA laboratories to use their expertise and advanced computational, modeling, and simulation capabilities to meet the United 

States’ space situational awareness requirements. The Committee 

expects NNSA to include this initiative in the regular budget request. Also, within available funds, at least $500,000 should be 

used for the Global Seismographic Network [GSN] Equipment Renewal project. The GSN, among other things, has 46 sites—the single largest contribution—that monitor compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and could detect foreign nuclear tests. However, GSN equipment, such as sensors, is more 

than 15 years old, obsolete, and increasingly difficult to effectively 

maintain. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

The Committee recommends $155,930,000 as requested. 

INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR MATERIALS PROTECTION AND COOPERATION

The Committee recommends $590,118,000 as requested. The 

Committee is encouraged by NNSA’s efforts in completing security 

upgrades at 210 out of 229 buildings that store weapons usable nuclear material and warheads in Russia. NNSA is also on track to 

complete security upgrades at the remaining 19 buildings by the 

end of fiscal year 2012. In addition to completing security upgrades, NNSA is working on gradually decreasing U.S. funding and 

relying more heavily on Russian resources for upgrades and maintenance. The August 2009 Joint Transition Plan between the 

United States and Russia laid out the necessary steps at each site 

to maintain robust material, protection, control, and accounting 

[MPC&A] systems in place. However, the Committee remains concerned about sustaining security upgrades after the program expires at the end of fiscal year 2012. The Committee wants assurances that the U.S. investment of $2,700,000,000 since fiscal year 

1996 will not be squandered. The Committee directs NNSA to submit a report to the Committee not later than 90 days of enactment 

on (1) whether Russia has taken steps to implement the Joint 

Transition Plan, (2) the remaining challenges in sustaining security 

upgrades and how NNSA plans to address those challenges, and (3) 

U.S. resources, whether direct or indirect, needed after fiscal year 

2012 to support U.S.-funded MPC&A activities. 

FISSILE MATERIALS DISPOSITION

The Committee recommends $935,213,000, a reduction of 

$95,500,000, to support the plutonium disposition program and 

construction projects. 

U.S. Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition.—The Committee provides for the full request of $304,925,000, including $278,940,000 

as requested for the U.S. plutonium disposition and $25,985,000 as 

requested for the U.S. uranium disposition program. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $582,788,000 to support construction, a reduction of $30,000,000. The Committee supports construction of three critical facilities at Savannah River in 
114 

South Carolina—the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility [MFFF], the 

Waste Solidification Building, and the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility [PDCF]—that will dispose of at least 34 metric tons 

of plutonium by fabricating it into mixed oxide fuel for domestic 

nuclear reactors. However, a March 2010 GAO report found that 

NNSA (1) may not be able to supply MFFF with sufficient quantities of plutonium oxide feedstock to meet its planned production 

schedule of MOX fuel and (2) there may not be demand from domestic utilities that own nuclear reactors to buy MOX fuel. NNSA 

plans to complete construction of MFFF at least 6 years before 

PDCF is completed even though PDCF will provide the majority of 

the plutonium feedstock to MFFF. In addition, NNSA only has a 

limited quantity of feedstock on hand to supply the MFFF prior to 

the start of pit disassembly operations at PDCF. However, NNSA 

has not established a clear strategy on how it will supply feedstock 

to MFFF to meet its goals. Furthermore, while NNSA has one potential customer for most of its MOX fuel, it has not done sufficient 

outreach to find MOX fuel customers. Without this outreach, NNSA 

will not be able to sell MOX fuel and return more than 

$1,000,000,000 to the U.S. Treasury. The Committee directs the 

NNSA to submit a plan not later than 90 days of enactment to 

mitigate the likely shortfall in plutonium oxide feedstock for the 

MFFF prior to the start of pit disassembly operations. This plan 

should include, at a minimum, the following five items: (1) the actions needed to ensure that the Advanced Recovery and Integrated 

Extraction System project at Los Alamos will meet its existing production goals, and the cost and schedule associated with any needed expansion of the project; (2) an assessment of how much additional plutonium material, including fuel-grade plutonium, is available within the DOE complex for use as feedstock for the MFFF; 

(3) an assessment of the effect on the design and safety of the 

MFFF from the use of fuel-grade plutonium as feedstock; (4) an assessment of potential changes to the MOX fuel production schedule 

and the effect of these changes on the cost and schedule for operating the MFFF; and (5) an assessment of the cost and schedule 

associated with obtaining a limited but sufficient pit disassembly 

process to produce feedstock for the MFFF. The Committee also directs NNSA to submit a report not later than 90 days after enactment of this act on what actions it has taken to inform utilities 

about the MOX fuel program and related incentives and how it 

plans to increase the number of customers for MOX fuel. 

Project 99–D–143, Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, Savannah River, South Carolina.—The Committee recommends 

$475,788,000 as requested. 

Project 99–D–141–02, Waste Solidification Building, Savannah 

River, South Carolina.—The Committee recommends full funding 

of $57,000,000 for this project. 

Project 99–D–141–01, Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility, 

Savannah River, South Carolina.—The Committee recommends 

$50,000,000, a reduction of $30,000,000, for construction of this facility. The Committee supports NNSA’s efforts to design and develop gloveboxes and other critical equipment and technologies to 

handle plutonium and establish a pit disassembly and conversion 

capability. However, no funding should be used for construction ac-
115 

tivities until (1) NNSA completes its assessment of the impact on 

cost and schedule of combining NNSA’s Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility project with the Office of Environmental Management’s Plutonium Preparation Project at Savannah River, (2) determines whether the projects should be combined and the pit disassembly and conversion capability will be located at the K-area 

Facility rather than a new, stand-alone facility, and (3) completes 

its conceptual design report with a new cost and schedule range 

consistent with DOE guidance. 

Russian Surplus Materials Disposition.—The Committee recommends $47,500,000, a reduction of $65,500,000. No funding shall 

be used to support research and development of the Gas TurbineModular Helium Reactor in Russia. The Committee understands 

that on April 13, 2010, the United States and Russia signed the 

Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement. The agreement represents an important step in advancing nuclear disarmament. Under the agreement, the United States and Russia will 

each dispose of 34 metric tons of weapon-grade plutonium—enough 

material for approximately 17,000 nuclear weapons—by using it as 

fuel in civil power reactors to produce electricity. The Committee 

also understands that the United States committed $400,000,000, 

subject to future appropriations, to help Russia dispose of the excess plutonium and that NNSA requested the first $100,000,000 in 

the fiscal year 2011 budget. The Committee cannot provide the full 

$100,000,000 requested because of tight budget constraints, spending on other nonproliferation priorities, and the fact that NNSA 

does not plan to spend any of the $100,000,000 requested in fiscal 

year 2011. According to NNSA planning documents, NNSA will 

spend the $100,000,000 over 3 years beginning in fiscal year 2012. 

In addition, NNSA has $17,000,000 in uncosted funds appropriated 

in fiscal year 2010 at its disposal to implement the agreement in 

fiscal year 2011. However, as a confidence-building measure and in 

support of the agreement, the Committee will provide $47,500,000. 

The Committee directs NNSA to submit to the Committee a report on how the United States will spend the $400,000,000 and the 

milestones that Russia must meet before the United States releases any of these funds. 

GLOBAL THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE

The Committee recommends $568,838,000, an increase of 

$10,000,000. The Global Threat Reduction Initiative’s Domestic 

Material Protection program works to install security upgrades at 

buildings containing high-priority nuclear and radiological materials located at civilian sites in the United States. The Committee 

is concerned by the decrease in funding and level of effort for these 

activities. As a result, of the total funds requested for the Global 

Threat Reduction Initiative, at least $35,147,000 should be used for 

the Domestic Material Protection program to secure vulnerable nuclear materials in the United States. If by the end of the second 

quarter of fiscal year 2011 NNSA has not entered into an agreement with South Africa to remove South African highly enriched 

uranium, the Committee directs NNSA to use $27,000,000 of the 

$108,000,000 appropriated for gap nuclear material remove activities for domestic material protection activities. 
116 

NAVAL REACTORS

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $945,133,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 1,070,486,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,040,486,000 

The Committee provides $1,040,486,000 for Naval Reactors. In 

fiscal year 2010, NNSA began work on three significant projects: 

design of a reactor plant for new Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines, refueling of a land-based reactor prototype, and construction of a new spent fuel facility. Based on current projections, funding for these three projects will grow from $200,000,000 in fiscal 

year 2011 to more than $600,000,000 in fiscal year 2015. The Committee is concerned that the cost for these projects and management requirements will peak at the same time. The Committee 

urges the program to keep Congress informed on the progress of 

each project. 

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $420,754,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 448,267,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 438,267,000 

The Committee recommends $438,267,000 for the Office of the 

Administrator, a decrease of $10,000,000 below the budget request. 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $5,642,331,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 5,588,039,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,262,838,000 

The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 

Cleanup is $5,262,838,000. Within the total provided, the Department is directed to fund the Hazardous Waste Worker Training 

Program at $10,000,000. The Committee is supportive of the Office 

of Environmental Management’s efforts to improve the management of its portfolio of projects by creating operational activities 

and capital cleanup projects funded under the existing PBS structure. The capital cleanup projects are aimed at environmental remediation efforts like soil and groundwater cleanup, including monitoring well installation and construction of treatment systems, as 

well as decontamination and decommissioning of excess facilities. 

The Environmental Management program plans to apply the rigor 

of the Department’s Project Management Order, DOE 413.3A, to 

these relatively small cleanup projects. The Committee directs Environmental Management to include a summary of these capital 

cleanup projects, including scope, cost and schedule, as supplementary information to accompany the submission of the fiscal 

year 2012 request. Environmental Management should budget for 

these capital cleanup projects as operating expense funded projects 

within the PBSs, apply the principles of DOE 413 for all these 

projects, and apply all pertinent, generally accepted government accounting principles and DOE Orders for capitalization of these 

projects upon completion. 
117 

Reprogramming Control Levels.—In fiscal year 2011, the Environmental Management program may transfer funding between operating expense funded projects within the controls listed below 

using guidance contained in the Department’s budget execution 

manual (DOE M 135.1–1A, chapter IV). All capital construction 

line item projects remain separate controls from the operating 

projects. The Committees on Appropriations in the House and Senate must be formally notified in advance of all reprogrammings, except internal reprogrammings, and the Department is to take no financial action in anticipation of Congressional response. The Committee recommends the following reprogramming control points for 

fiscal year 2011: 

—Closure sites; 

—Hanford Site; 

—Idaho National Laboratory; 

—NNSA Sites; 

—Oak Ridge Reservation; 

—Office of River Protection; 

—Savannah River Site; 

—Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; 

—Program Direction; 

—Program Support; 

—Technology Development and Deployment; 

—Safeguards and Security; 

—All Capital Construction Line Items, regardless of site. 

Internal Reprogramming Authority.—The new reprogramming 

control points above obviates, in most cases, the need for internal 

reprogramming authority. However, at the few sites to which the 

internal reprogramming statute still applies, Environmental Management site managers may transfer up to $5,000,000, one time, 

between accounts listed above 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 $5,000,000 in 

total during the fiscal year. 

The reprogramming authority—either formal or internal—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 and Senate must be notified within 30 days after the use of 

the internal reprogramming authority. 

Closure Sites.—The Committee recommends $6,375,000, the 

same as the request, for closure sites. 

Hanford Site.—The Committee recommends $1,018,929,000 for 

Richland Operations. The Department is directed to carry out 

maintenance and public safety efforts at the B Reactor. Funding for 

the Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response 

[HAMMER] facilities are provided for within available funds. 

Idaho National Laboratory.—The Committee recommends 

$407,100,000 for Idaho National Laboratory. 

NNSA Sites.—The Committee recommends $279,373,000 for 

NNSA sites. 

Oak Ridge Reservation.—The Committee recommends 

$232,700,000 for Oak Ridge Reservation, including $152,278,000 

for ORNL and Y12 D&D activities under the Integrated Facilities 
118 

Disposition Program. The amount provided for cleanup activities at 

ORNL shall include the 2000 Area slabs and soils remediation and 

the Isotope Area decommissioning and demolition. 

Office of River Protection.—The Committee recommends 

$1,158,178,000 for the Office of River Protection. 

Savannah River Site.—The Committee recommends 

$1,217,799,000 for the Savannah River site. The Committee provides $910,533,000 for Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste at the Savannah River Site, an increase of $104,300,000 over the request, 

funded by offsets from Nuclear Materials and Spent Nuclear Fuel 

Activities at Savannah River. These funds should be combined with 

other fiscal year 2010 and 2011 savings to accelerate tank retrievals at the site through the deployment of innovative technologies, 

such as small column ion exchange, advanced solvent extractants 

and steam reforming. Successful demonstration of these technologies has the potential to save tens of millions of dollars in life 

cycle costs at Savannah River and will expand the range of treatment options for similar wastes at other sites. 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.—The Committee recommends 

$230,245,000 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $355,000,000 

for program direction. The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2010 

the administration requested $355,000,000 for program direction 

and then oddly reduced the fiscal year 2011 request to 

$323,825,000. The Environmental Management program has suffered due to management issues with construction projects and 

completing projects on time and within budget. While not the only 

answer to this problem, sufficient workforce is certainly required to 

address management issues. The Committee was pleased with the 

fiscal year 2010 request level even if it could not match it. The dramatic reduction of the fiscal year 2011 request is disconcerting and 

inexplicable. The Committee recognizes the need to improve project 

management in the Environmental Management organization, and 

supports efforts to make such improvements. The Committee supports the efforts of the Assistant Secretary to create a more effective Environmental Management project management team with 

the assistance of the Army Corps of Engineers. 

Program Support.—The Committee recommends $34,000,000 for 

program support. 

Safeguards and Security.—The Committee recommends 

$249,754,000 for safeguards and security. 

Technology Development and Deployment.—The Committee recommends $39,685,000 for technology development and deployment. 

Additional funds above the budget request are provided to continue 

successful efforts with industry to transfer and demonstrate international technologies and approaches to the cleanup program. The 

Committee also encourages the Department to work with industry 

on initiatives which better support the transition of ideas and technology into practice. 

Federal Contribution to Uranium Enrichment Decontamination 

and Decommissioning Fund.—The Committee recommends 

$33,700,000, the remaining balance for the Federal contribution for 

the UED&D Fund. 
119 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $847,468,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 878,209,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 866,317,000 

The Committee recommendation is $866,317,000, a decrease of 

$11,892,000 below the budget request. The Committee does not 

provide the funding requested under the general provisions to increase the Department’s acquisition workforce capacity and capabilities. 

Health, Safety and Security.—The Committee recommends 

$462,211,000. 

Office of Legacy Management.—The Committee recommends 

$188,626,000. 

Nuclear Energy.—The Committee recommends $88,200,000 for 

Idaho infrastructure for sitewide safeguards and security. 

Defense-related Administrative Support.—The Committee provides $118,836,000. 

Office of Hearings and Appeals.—The Committee provides 

$6,444,000. 

Congressionally Directed Spending Items.—The Committee includes $2,000,000 for the following list of projects of Other Defense 

Activities. The Committee reminds recipients that statutory costsharing requirements may apply to these projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES PROJECTS 

Project title Amount Requestor 

Burlington Atomic Energy Commission Plant and Ames Laboratory Former 

Workers Medical Surveillance Programs.

$1,000,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 

Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN ......... $1,000,000 Senator McConnell 

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 

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 2011. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $7,638,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

For the Southeastern Power Administration, the Committee recommends no funding, the same as the budget request. 
120 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $44,944,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 12,699,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 12,699,000 

For the Southwestern Power Administration, the Committee recommends $12,699,000, the same as the budget request. 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, 

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $256,711,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 105,558,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 105,558,000 

For the Western Area Power Administration, the Committee recommends $105,558,000, the same as the budget request. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $2,568,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 220,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 220,000 

For the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund, 

the Committee recommends $220,000 the same as the request. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $298,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 315,600,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 315,600,000 

REVENUES APPLIED

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ¥$298,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ¥315,600,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥315,600,000 
121 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy RDD&D: 

Hydrogen Technology ................................................................................................................................................... 174,000 .......................... 174,000 .......................... ∂174,000 Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies ........................................................................................................................... .......................... 137,000 .......................... .......................... ¥137,000 Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D ...................................................................................................................... 220,000 220,000 220,000 .......................... ..........................Solar energy ................................................................................................................................................................. 225,000 302,398 272,000 ∂47,000 ¥30,398 Wind energy ................................................................................................................................................................. 80,000 122,500 123,000 ∂43,000 ∂500 Geothermal technology ................................................................................................................................................ 44,000 55,000 55,000 ∂11,000 ..........................Water Power ................................................................................................................................................................. 50,000 40,488 60,000 ∂10,000 ∂19,512 Vehicle technologies .................................................................................................................................................... 311,365 325,302 325,000 ∂13,635 ¥302 Building technologies .................................................................................................................................................. 200,000 230,698 222,000 ∂22,000 ¥8,698 Industrial technologies ................................................................................................................................................ 96,000 100,000 100,000 ∂4,000 ..........................Federal energy management program ........................................................................................................................ 32,000 42,272 42,000 ∂10,000 ¥272 RE-ENERGYSE (Regaining our energy science and engineering edge) ...................................................................... .......................... 50,000 .......................... .......................... ¥50,000 Facilities and infrastructure: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL] ................................................................................................. 19,000 18,000 18,000 ¥1,000 ..........................Construction: 

10–EE–01 South table mountain ingress/egress and traffic capacity upgrades, National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO ............................................................................................................. 44,000 .......................... .......................... ¥44,000 ..........................

08–EE–01 Energy systems integration facility, National Renewal Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO ........ .......................... 39,500 39,500 ∂39,500 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 44,000 39,500 39,500 ¥4,500 ..........................Subtotal, Facilities and infrastructure ................................................................................................. 63,000 57,500 57,500 ¥5,500 ..........................

Program direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 140,000 200,008 170,000 ∂30,000 ¥30,008 Program support .......................................................................................................................................................... 45,000 87,307 59,700 ∂14,700 ¥27,607 

Subtotal, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy RDD&D .................................................................................. 1,680,365 1,970,473 1,880,200 ∂199,835 ¥90,273 
122 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Weatherization and intragovernmental: 

Weatherization: 

Weatherization assistance .................................................................................................................................. 210,000 262,500 162,500 ¥47,500 ¥100,000 Training and technical assistance .................................................................................................................... .......................... 7,500 7,500 ∂7,500 ..........................Innovations in weatherization ............................................................................................................................ .......................... 30,000 30,000 ∂30,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Weatherization ................................................................................................................................ 210,000 300,000 200,000 ¥10,000 ¥100,000 

Other: 

State energy program grants ............................................................................................................................. 50,000 75,000 50,000 .......................... ¥25,000 Tribal energy activities ....................................................................................................................................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Other ............................................................................................................................................... 60,000 85,000 60,000 .......................... ¥25,000 Subtotal, Weatherization and intragovernmental .......................................................................................... 270,000 385,000 260,000 ¥10,000 ¥125,000 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 292,135 .......................... 147,600 ¥144,535 ∂147,600 

TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY ......................................................................................... 2,242,500 2,355,473 2,287,800 ∂45,300 ¥67,673 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY 

Research and development: 

Clean energy transmission and reliability .................................................................................................................. 38,450 35,000 35,000 ¥3,450 ..........................Smart grid research and development ....................................................................................................................... 32,450 39,293 39,293 ∂6,843 ..........................Energy storage ............................................................................................................................................................. 14,000 40,000 40,000 ∂26,000 ..........................Cyber security for energy delivery systems ................................................................................................................. 40,000 30,000 30,000 ¥10,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Research and development ..................................................................................................................... 124,900 144,293 144,293 ∂19,393 ..........................

Permitting, siting, and analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 6,400 6,400 6,400 .......................... ..........................Infrastructure security and energy restoration .................................................................................................................... 6,187 6,188 6,188 ∂1 ..........................Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 21,420 29,049 29,049 ∂7,629 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 13,075 .......................... 4,250 ¥8,825 ∂4,250 
123 

TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY ..................................................................................... 171,982 185,930 190,180 ∂18,198 ∂4,250 

NUCLEAR ENERGY 

Research and development: 

Nuclear energy enabling technologies ........................................................................................................................ .......................... 99,300 62,000 ∂62,000 ¥37,300 Integrated university program ..................................................................................................................................... 5,000 .......................... 5,000 .......................... ∂5,000 RE-ENERGYSE .............................................................................................................................................................. .......................... 5,000 .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 Reactor concepts RD&D .............................................................................................................................................. .......................... 195,000 188,500 ∂188,500 ¥6,500 Generation IV nuclear energy systems ........................................................................................................................ 220,137 .......................... .......................... ¥220,137 ..........................Nuclear power 2010 .................................................................................................................................................... 105,000 .......................... .......................... ¥105,000 ..........................Fuel cycle research and development ......................................................................................................................... 136,000 201,000 191,000 ∂55,000 ¥10,000 International nuclear energy cooperation ................................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 3,000 ∂3,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Research and development ..................................................................................................................... 466,137 503,300 449,500 ¥16,637 ¥53,800 

Infrastructure: 

Radiological facilities management: 

Space and defense infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 42,000 47,000 57,000 ∂15,000 ∂10,000 Research reactor infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 10,000 4,818 4,818 ¥5,182 ..........................Oak Ridge nuclear infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... 10,000 .......................... .......................... ¥10,000 ..........................Los Alamos nuclear infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 10,000 .......................... .......................... ¥10,000 ..........................PU–238 production restart project .................................................................................................................... .......................... 15,000 .......................... .......................... ¥15,000 

Subtotal, Radiological facilities management .............................................................................................. 72,000 66,818 61,818 ¥10,182 ¥5,000 

INL facilities management: 

INL Operations and infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 173,000 162,482 173,000 .......................... ∂10,518 

Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 73,000 91,452 91,452 ∂18,452 ..........................

Subtotal, Nuclear Energy ........................................................................................................................................ 784,137 824,052 775,770 ¥8,367 ¥48,282 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 2,500 .......................... 7,400 ∂4,900 ∂7,400 

TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 786,637 824,052 783,170 ¥3,467 ¥40,882 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

Fuels and Power Systems: 

Innovations for existing plants ................................................................................................................................... 52,000 65,000 68,000 ∂16,000 ∂3,000 Advanced integrated gasification combined cycle ..................................................................................................... 63,000 55,000 64,000 ∂1,000 ∂9,000 Advanced turbines ....................................................................................................................................................... 32,000 31,000 32,000 .......................... ∂1,000 
124 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Carbon sequestration .................................................................................................................................................. 154,000 143,000 170,000 ∂16,000 ∂27,000 Fuels ............................................................................................................................................................................ 25,000 12,000 20,000 ¥5,000 ∂8,000 Fuel cells ..................................................................................................................................................................... 50,000 50,000 50,000 .......................... ..........................Advanced research ...................................................................................................................................................... 28,000 47,850 48,000 ∂20,000 ∂150 

Subtotal, Fuels and power systems ....................................................................................................................... 404,000 403,850 452,000 ∂48,000 ∂48,150 

Natural Gas Technologies .................................................................................................................................................... 17,833 .......................... 22,000 ∂4,167 ∂22,000 Unconventional fossil energy technologies from Petroleum—Oil Technologies .................................................................. 20,000 .......................... 26,000 ∂6,000 ∂26,000 Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 158,000 152,033 170,300 ∂12,300 ∂18,267 Plant and Capital Equipment .............................................................................................................................................. 20,000 20,000 20,000 .......................... ..........................Fossil energy environmental restoration .............................................................................................................................. 10,000 10,000 10,000 .......................... ..........................Special recruitment programs .............................................................................................................................................. 700 700 700 .......................... ..........................Cooperative research and development ............................................................................................................................... 5,000 .......................... 5,000 .......................... ∂5,000 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 36,850 .......................... 19,950 ¥16,900 ∂19,950 

TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................ 672,383 586,583 725,950 ∂53,567 ∂139,367 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES ................................................................................................................... 23,627 23,614 23,614 ¥13 ..........................

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVES 

Storage facilities development ............................................................................................................................................. 224,732 188,906 188,906 ¥35,826 ..........................Management for SPR operations ......................................................................................................................................... 19,091 20,955 20,955 ∂1,864 ..........................Use of prior-year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥71,000 .......................... .......................... ∂71,000 

TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVES ............................................................................................................ 243,823 138,861 209,861 ¥33,962 ∂71,000 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE ........................................................................................................................... 11,300 11,300 11,300 .......................... ..........................ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................................................. 110,595 128,833 119,000 ∂8,405 ¥9,833 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA) .................................................................................................................................... 7,652 3,659 3,659 ¥3,993 ..........................Gaseous Diffusion Plants ..................................................................................................................................................... 100,885 99,464 99,464 ¥1,421 ..........................
125 

Small Sites: 

Brookhaven National Lab ............................................................................................................................................ 15,000 13,861 13,861 ¥1,139 ..........................SNF stabilization and disposition—2012 Idaho National Lab .................................................................................. 5,000 4,900 4,900 ¥100 ..........................Consolidated Business Center: 

California Site support ....................................................................................................................................... 262 .......................... .......................... ¥262 ..........................Soil and water remediation: 

Stanford Linear Accelerator Center ........................................................................................................... 4,600 3,526 3,526 ¥1,074 ..........................

Nuclear facility D&D: 

Energy Technology Engineering Center ..................................................................................................... 13,000 10,679 10,679 ¥2,321 ..........................

Soil and water remediation—Moab ................................................................................................................... 39,000 31,000 50,000 ∂11,000 ∂19,000 Completed sites administration and support .................................................................................................... 1,200 .......................... .......................... ¥1,200 ..........................

Subtotal, Consolidated Business Center ....................................................................................................... 58,062 45,205 64,205 ∂6,143 ∂19,000 Subtotal, Small Sites ..................................................................................................................................... 78,062 63,966 82,966 ∂4,904 ∂19,000 

West Valley Demonstration Project ...................................................................................................................................... 58,074 58,074 58,074 .......................... ..........................

TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ................................................................................................. 244,673 225,163 244,163 ¥510 ∂19,000 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND 

Decontamination and decommissioning .............................................................................................................................. 573,850 730,498 550,000 ¥23,850 ¥180,498 Offsetting collections ........................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥200,000 .......................... .......................... ∂200,000 

TOTAL, URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND/URANIUM INVENTORY 

CLEANUP ............................................................................................................................................................. 573,850 530,498 550,000 ¥23,850 ∂19,502 

SCIENCE 

Advanced scientific computing research ............................................................................................................................. 394,000 426,000 418,000 ∂24,000 ¥8,000 Basic energy sciences: 

Research ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,482,260 1,683,400 1,587,515 ∂105,255 ¥95,885 Construction: 

07–SC–06 Project Engineering and Design [PED] National Synchrotron Light Source II [NSLS–II] ................ 139,000 151,600 151,600 ∂12,600 ..........................05–R–320 LINAC Coherent Light Source [LCLS] ............................................................................................... 15,240 .......................... .......................... ¥15,240 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ................................................................................................................................... 154,240 151,600 151,600 ¥2,640 ..........................Total, Basic energy sciences ......................................................................................................................... 1,636,500 1,835,000 1,739,115 ∂102,615 ¥95,885 
126 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Biological and environmental research: 

Biological systems science ......................................................................................................................................... 318,476 321,947 317,547 ¥929 ¥4,400 Climate and environmental sciences .......................................................................................................................... 285,706 304,953 296,953 ∂11,247 ¥8,000 

Total, Biological and environmental research ........................................................................................................ 604,182 626,900 614,500 ∂10,318 ¥12,400 

Fusion energy sciences program .......................................................................................................................................... 426,000 380,000 384,000 ¥42,000 ∂4,000 High-energy physics: 

Proton accelerator-based physics ............................................................................................................................... 434,471 439,262 .......................... ¥434,471 ¥439,262 Electron accelerator-based physics ............................................................................................................................ 26,420 24,707 .......................... ¥26,420 ¥24,707 Non-accelerator physics .............................................................................................................................................. 99,321 88,539 .......................... ¥99,321 ¥88,539 Theoretical physics ...................................................................................................................................................... 67,240 69,524 .......................... ¥67,240 ¥69,524 Advanced technology R&D .......................................................................................................................................... 183,031 189,968 .......................... ¥183,031 ¥189,968 Research ...................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 803,085 ∂803,085 ∂803,085 Construction: 

11–SC–40 Project Engineering and Design [PED] long baseline neutrino experiment, FNAL .......................... .......................... 12,000 12,000 ∂12,000 ..........................11–SC–41 Project Engineering and Design [PED] muon to electron conversion experiment, FNAL ................ .......................... 5,000 5,000 ∂5,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ................................................................................................................................... .......................... 17,000 17,000 ∂17,000 ..........................Total, High-energy physics ............................................................................................................................ 810,483 829,000 820,085 ∂9,602 ¥8,915 

Operations and maintenance ...................................................................................................................................... 515,000 526,000 518,000 ∂3,000 ¥8,000 Construction: 

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 ....... 20,000 36,000 36,000 ∂16,000 ..........................

Total, Nuclear physics ............................................................................................................................... 535,000 562,000 554,000 ∂19,000 ¥8,000 

Workforce development for teachers and scientists ............................................................................................................ 20,678 35,600 21,000 ∂322 ¥14,600 
127 

Science laboratories infrastructure: 

Laboratories facilities support: 

Infrastructure support: 

Payment in lieu of taxes ........................................................................................................................... 1,385 1,385 1,385 .......................... ..........................Oak Ridge landlord ................................................................................................................................... 5,214 5,260 5,260 ∂46 ..........................

Subtotal, Infrastructure support ........................................................................................................... 6,599 6,645 6,645 ∂46 ..........................

Construction: 

11–SC–70 Utilities upgrade, FNAL ........................................................................................................... .......................... 7,524 7,524 ∂7,524 ..........................11–SC–71 Utility infrastructure modernization at TJNAF ......................................................................... .......................... 7,828 7,828 ∂7,828 ..........................10–SC–70 Research support building and infrastructure modernization, SLAC ..................................... 6,900 33,100 33,100 ∂26,200 ..........................10–SC–71 Energy sciences building, ANL ................................................................................................ 8,000 15,000 15,000 ∂7,000 ..........................10–SC–72 Renovate science laboratory, Phase II, BNL ........................................................................... 5,000 15,000 15,000 ∂10,000 ..........................09–SC–72 Seismic life-safety, modernization and replacement of general purpose buildings Phase 

2, PED/Construction, LBNL ................................................................................................................... 34,027 20,103 20,103 ¥13,924 ..........................

09–SC–73, Interdisciplinary science building Phase 1, PED, BNL .......................................................... 39,387 .......................... .......................... ¥39,387 ..........................09–SC–74, Technology and engineering development facilities PED, TJNAF .......................................... 27,687 20,800 20,800 ¥6,887 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 121,001 119,355 119,355 ¥1,646 ..........................Total, Science laboratories infrastructure ............................................................................................ 127,600 126,000 126,000 ¥1,600 ..........................

Safeguards and security ...................................................................................................................................................... 83,000 86,500 86,500 ∂3,500 ..........................Science program direction: 

Headquarters ............................................................................................................................................................... 75,261 87,236 85,000 ∂9,739 ¥2,236 Office of Science and Technical Information ............................................................................................................. 8,916 8,963 8,963 ∂47 ..........................Field offices ................................................................................................................................................................. 105,200 118,238 114,037 ∂8,837 ¥4,201 

Total, Science program direction ............................................................................................................................ 189,377 214,437 208,000 ∂18,623 ¥6,437 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 76,890 .......................... 40,800 ¥36,090 ∂40,800 

TOTAL, SCIENCE ...................................................................................................................................................... 4,903,710 5,121,437 5,012,000 ∂108,290 ¥109,437 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL 

Repository program .............................................................................................................................................................. 28,400 .......................... .......................... ¥28,400 ..........................Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 70,000 .......................... .......................... ¥70,000 ..........................

TOTAL, NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL ........................................................................................................................ 98,400 .......................... .......................... ¥98,400 ..........................
128 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY—ENERGY 

Advanced research projects agency—Energy ARPA–E projects .......................................................................................... .......................... 273,400 173,434 ∂173,434 ¥99,966 Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. .......................... 26,566 26,566 ∂26,566 ..........................

Total, ENERGY TRANSFORMATION ACCELERATION FUND ........................................................................................ .......................... 299,966 200,000 ∂200,000 ¥99,966 

TITLE 17—INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM 

Administrative operations .................................................................................................................................................... 43,000 58,000 58,000 ∂15,000 ..........................Offsetting collection ............................................................................................................................................................. ¥43,000 ¥58,000 ¥58,000 ¥15,000 ..........................Cost of loan guarantees ...................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 500,000 380,000 ∂380,000 ¥120,000 Additional loan volume ........................................................................................................................................................ .......................... 360,000 170,000 ∂170,000 ¥190,000 Additional subsidy cost ........................................................................................................................................................ .......................... 300,000 .......................... .......................... ¥300,000 Loan volume (rescission) ..................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥140,000 ¥140,000 ¥140,000 

TOTAL, TITLE 17—INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM ................................................................... .......................... 1,160,000 410,000 ∂410,000 ¥750,000 

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM 

Administrative expenses ....................................................................................................................................................... 20,000 9,998 9,998 ¥10,002 ..........................

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION 

Administrative operations: 

Salaries and expenses: 

Office of the Secretary: 

Program direction ...................................................................................................................................... 5,864 5,864 5,864 .......................... ..........................Management reform .................................................................................................................................. .......................... 2,000 .......................... .......................... ¥2,000 

Total, Office of the Secretary ............................................................................................................... 5,864 7,864 5,864 .......................... ¥2,000 

Chief Financial Officer ....................................................................................................................................... 62,981 62,731 62,731 ¥250 ..........................Management ....................................................................................................................................................... 78,456 74,783 74,783 ¥3,673 ..........................
129 

Human capital management ............................................................................................................................. 29,537 27,560 27,560 ¥1,977 ..........................Chief Information Officer ................................................................................................................................... 38,146 36,238 36,238 ¥1,908 ..........................Congressional and intergovernmental affairs: 

Program direction ...................................................................................................................................... 4,826 4,826 4,826 .......................... ..........................Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs ........................................................................................... .......................... 1,500 5,500 ∂5,500 ∂4,000 

Total, Congressional and intergovernmental affairs ............................................................................ 4,826 6,326 10,326 ∂5,500 ∂4,000 

Economic impact and diversity .......................................................................................................................... 3,896 4,033 4,033 ∂137 ..........................General Counsel ................................................................................................................................................. 32,478 36,654 34,654 ∂2,176 ¥2,000 Policy and international affairs ......................................................................................................................... 19,296 19,296 19,296 .......................... ..........................Public affairs ...................................................................................................................................................... 4,500 4,500 4,500 .......................... ..........................Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs .................................................................................................... 5,500 .......................... .......................... ¥5,500 ..........................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................... 285,480 279,985 279,985 ¥5,495 ..........................

Program support: 

Minority economic impact .................................................................................................................................. 2,775 2,304 2,304 ¥471 ..........................Policy analysis and system studies ................................................................................................................... 1,159 1,159 1,159 .......................... ..........................Environmental policy studies ............................................................................................................................. 528 528 528 .......................... ..........................Climate change technology program (program support) .................................................................................. 9,270 9,270 9,270 .......................... ..........................Cybersecurity and secure communications ........................................................................................................ 33,365 35,872 35,872 ∂2,507 ..........................Corporate management information program ................................................................................................... 9,403 8,933 8,933 ¥470 ..........................Energy information technology services ............................................................................................................. 22,149 21,120 21,120 ¥1,029 ..........................

Subtotal, Program support ............................................................................................................................ 78,649 79,186 79,186 ∂537 ..........................Total, Administrative operations .................................................................................................................... 364,129 359,171 359,171 ¥4,958 ..........................

Cost of work for others ............................................................................................................................................... 47,537 48,537 48,537 ∂1,000 ..........................

Subtotal, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................................... 411,666 407,708 407,708 ¥3,958 ..........................

Funding from other defense activities ................................................................................................................................. ¥122,982 ¥118,836 ¥118,836 ∂4,146 ..........................

Total, Departmental administration (gross) ........................................................................................................... 288,684 288,872 288,872 ∂188 ..........................

Miscellaneous revenues ........................................................................................................................................................ ¥119,740 ¥119,740 ¥119,740 .......................... ..........................

TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net) ...................................................................................................... 168,944 169,132 169,132 ∂188 ..........................

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................... 51,927 42,850 42,850 ¥9,077 ..........................
130 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES: 

Directed stockpile work: 

Life extension program: 

W76 Life extension program ..................................................................................................................... 223,196 249,463 249,463 ∂26,267 ..........................

Stockpile systems: 

B61 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 91,956 317,136 317,136 ∂225,180 ..........................W76 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 65,497 64,521 64,521 ¥976 ..........................W78 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 50,741 85,898 85,898 ∂35,157 ..........................W80 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 19,064 34,193 34,193 ∂15,129 ..........................B83 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 35,682 39,349 39,349 ∂3,667 ..........................W87 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 51,817 62,603 62,603 ∂10,786 ..........................W88 Stockpile systems .............................................................................................................................. 43,043 45,666 45,666 ∂2,623 ..........................

Total, Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................... 357,800 649,366 649,366 ∂291,566 ..........................

Weapons dismantlement and disposition: 

Operations and maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 96,100 58,025 64,425 ¥31,675 ∂6,400 

Stockpile services: 

Production support ............................................................................................................................................. 301,484 309,761 309,761 ∂8,277 ..........................Research and development support .................................................................................................................. 37,071 38,582 38,582 ∂1,511 ..........................Research and development certification and safety ......................................................................................... 165,076 209,053 209,053 ∂43,977 ..........................Management, technology, and production ......................................................................................................... 183,223 193,811 193,811 ∂10,588 ..........................Plutonium sustainment ...................................................................................................................................... 141,909 190,318 159,818 ∂17,909 ¥30,500 

Subtotal, Stockpile services ........................................................................................................................... 828,763 941,525 911,025 ∂82,262 ¥30,500 Total, Directed stockpile work ....................................................................................................................... 1,505,859 1,898,379 1,874,279 ∂368,420 ¥24,100 
131 

Campaigns: 

Science campaign: 

Advanced certification ............................................................................................................................... 19,400 76,972 56,050 ∂36,650 ¥20,922 Primary assessment technologies ............................................................................................................. 83,181 85,723 85,723 ∂2,542 ..........................Dynamic materials properties ................................................................................................................... 86,617 96,984 106,984 ∂20,367 ∂10,000 Advanced radiography ............................................................................................................................... 28,535 23,594 23,594 ¥4,941 ..........................Secondary assessment technologies ......................................................................................................... 77,913 81,949 81,949 ∂4,036 ..........................

Subtotal, Science campaign ................................................................................................................. 295,646 365,222 354,300 ∂58,654 ¥10,922 

Engineering campaign: 

Enhanced surety ........................................................................................................................................ 42,000 42,429 42,429 ∂429 ..........................Weapons system engineering assessment technology ............................................................................. 18,000 13,530 21,510 ∂3,510 ∂7,980 Nuclear survivability .................................................................................................................................. 21,000 19,786 19,786 ¥1,214 ..........................Enhanced surveillance .............................................................................................................................. 69,000 66,175 66,175 ¥2,825 ..........................

Subtotal, Engineering campaign .......................................................................................................... 150,000 141,920 149,900 ¥100 ∂7,980 

Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high-yield campaign: 

Ignition ...................................................................................................................................................... 106,734 109,506 109,506 ∂2,772 ..........................NIF diagnostics, cryogenics, and experimental support ........................................................................... 72,252 102,649 102,649 ∂30,397 ..........................Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion ................................................................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 .......................... ..........................Joint program in high-energy density laboratory plasmas ....................................................................... 4,000 4,000 4,000 .......................... ..........................Facility operations and target production ................................................................................................ 269,929 260,393 260,393 ¥9,536 ..........................

Subtotal, Inertial confinement fusion ................................................................................................... 457,915 481,548 481,548 ∂23,633 ..........................

Advanced simulation and computing ................................................................................................................ 567,625 615,748 615,748 ∂48,123 ..........................Readiness campaign: 

Stockpile readiness ................................................................................................................................... 5,746 18,941 18,941 ∂13,195 ..........................High-explosives and weapon operations ................................................................................................... 4,608 3,000 3,000 ¥1,608 ..........................Nonnuclear readiness ................................................................................................................................ 12,701 21,864 21,864 ∂9,163 ..........................Tritium readiness ...................................................................................................................................... 68,246 50,187 30,229 ¥38,017 ¥19,958 Advanced design and production technologies ........................................................................................ 8,699 18,100 18,100 ∂9,401 ..........................

Subtotal, Readiness campaign ............................................................................................................. 100,000 112,092 92,134 ¥7,866 ¥19,958 Total, Campaigns .................................................................................................................................. 1,571,186 1,716,530 1,693,630 ∂122,444 ¥22,900 

Readiness in technical base and facilities [RTBF]: 

Operations of facilities: 

Operations of facilities .............................................................................................................................. .......................... 1,257,991 .......................... .......................... ¥1,257,991 
132 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Kansas City Plant ...................................................................................................................................... 156,056 .......................... 186,102 ∂30,046 ∂186,102 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory .................................................................................................. 86,670 .......................... 80,106 ¥6,564 ∂80,106 Los Alamos National Laboratory ............................................................................................................... 311,776 .......................... 318,464 ∂6,688 ∂318,464 Nevada Test Site ....................................................................................................................................... 79,583 .......................... 80,077 ∂494 ∂80,077 Pantex ........................................................................................................................................................ 131,602 .......................... 131,254 ¥348 ∂131,254 Sandia National Laboratory ....................................................................................................................... 104,133 .......................... 117,369 ∂13,236 ∂117,369 Savannah River Site .................................................................................................................................. 128,580 .......................... 92,722 ¥35,858 ∂92,722 Y–12 Productions Plant ............................................................................................................................ 229,774 .......................... 230,927 ∂1,153 ∂230,927 Institutional Site Support .......................................................................................................................... 120,129 .......................... 40,970 ¥79,159 ∂40,970 

Subtotal, Operations of facilities ......................................................................................................... 1,348,303 1,257,991 1,277,991 ¥70,312 ∂20,000 

Program readiness ............................................................................................................................................. 73,021 69,309 69,309 ¥3,712 ..........................Material recycle and recovery ............................................................................................................................ 69,542 70,429 80,429 ∂10,887 ∂10,000 Containers .......................................................................................................................................................... 23,392 27,992 27,992 ∂4,600 ..........................Storage ............................................................................................................................................................... 24,708 24,233 24,233 ¥475 ..........................

Subtotal, RTBF ............................................................................................................................................... 1,538,966 1,449,954 1,479,954 ¥59,012 ∂30,000 

Construction: 

11–D–801 TA–55 Reinvestment project, LANL ......................................................................................... .......................... 20,000 20,000 ∂20,000 ..........................10–D–501 Nuclear facilities risk reduction Y–12 National security complex, Oakridge, TN .................. 12,500 .......................... .......................... ¥12,500 ..........................09–D–007, LANSCE Reinvestment Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM ...................................... 20,000 .......................... 30,000 ∂10,000 ∂30,000 09–D–404, Test capabilities revitalization II, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM ............ 3,200 .......................... 11,000 ∂7,800 ∂11,000 08–D–801 High-pressure fire loop [HPFL] Pantex Plant, Amarillo, TX .................................................... 31,910 .......................... .......................... ¥31,910 ..........................08–D–802 High-explosive pressing facility Pantex Plant, Amarillo, TX .................................................. .......................... 30,000 30,000 ∂30,000 ..........................07–D–140 Project Engineering and Design [PED], various locations ..................................................... .......................... 5,000 5,000 ∂5,000 ..........................06–D–140 Project Engineering and Design [PED], various locations ..................................................... 12,000 4,000 4,000 ¥8,000 ..........................06–D–141 Project Engineering and Design [PED], Y–12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, TN ... 94,000 115,016 115,016 ∂21,016 ..........................06–D–402 NTS replace fire stations 1 & 2 Nevada Test Site, NV .......................................................... 1,473 .......................... .......................... ¥1,473 ..........................04–D–125 Chemistry and metallurgy facility replacement project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 

Los Alamos, NM .................................................................................................................................... 97,000 225,000 225,000 ∂128,000 ..........................

04–D–128 TA–18 mission relocation project, Los Alamos Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM ........................ 1,500 .......................... .......................... ¥1,500 ..........................
133 

99–D–141 Pit disassembly and conversion facility, SRS ........................................................................ 30,321 .......................... .......................... ¥30,321 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 303,904 399,016 440,016 ∂136,112 ∂41,000 Total, RTBF ............................................................................................................................................ 1,842,870 1,848,970 1,919,970 ∂77,100 ∂71,000 

Secure transportation asset: 

Operations and equipment ........................................................................................................................ 138,772 149,018 149,018 ∂10,246 ..........................Program direction ...................................................................................................................................... 96,143 99,027 99,027 ∂2,884 ..........................

Subtotal, Secure transportation asset .................................................................................................. 234,915 248,045 248,045 ∂13,130 ..........................

Nuclear counterterrorism incident response ............................................................................................................... 221,936 233,134 233,134 ∂11,198 ..........................Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization program ............................................................................................... 83,959 94,000 94,000 ∂10,041 ..........................

Construction: 

07–D–253 TA 1 Heating Systems Modernization [HSM] Sandia National Laboratory ............................. 9,963 .......................... .......................... ¥9,963 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 9,963 .......................... .......................... ¥9,963 ..........................Total, Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization program .............................................................. 93,922 94,000 94,000 ∂78 ..........................

Site stewardship: 

Site stewardship ................................................................................................................................................. 61,288 90,478 85,478 ∂24,190 ¥5,000 Construction: 

11–D–601 Sanitary effluent reclamation facility LANL ............................................................................ .......................... 15,000 15,000 ∂15,000 ..........................

Total, Site stewardship ......................................................................................................................... 61,288 105,478 100,478 ∂39,190 ¥5,000 

Safeguards and security: 

Defense nuclear security .................................................................................................................................... 720,044 667,954 667,954 ¥52,090 ..........................

Construction: 

10–D–701 Security improvements project Y–12 Plant, Oak Ridge, TN .......................................... 49,000 .......................... .......................... ¥49,000 ..........................08–D–701 Nuclear materials S&S upgrade project Los Alamos National Laboratory ................... .......................... 52,000 43,000 ∂43,000 ¥9,000 

Subtotal, Construction ................................................................................................................. 49,000 52,000 43,000 ¥6,000 ¥9,000 Subtotal, Defense nuclear security .............................................................................................. 769,044 719,954 710,954 ¥58,090 ¥9,000 

Cybersecurity ...................................................................................................................................................... 122,511 124,345 124,345 ∂1,834 ..........................

Total, Safeguards and security ..................................................................................................................... 891,555 844,299 835,299 ¥56,256 ¥9,000 
134 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Science, technology, and engineering capability ........................................................................................................ .......................... 20,000 20,000 ∂20,000 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ............................................................................................................................... 3,000 .......................... .......................... ¥3,000 ..........................Use of prior-year balances .......................................................................................................................................... ¥42,100 .......................... .......................... ∂42,100 ..........................

TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................................................. 6,384,431 7,008,835 7,018,835 ∂634,404 ∂10,000 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION 

Nonproliferation and verification, R&D ................................................................................................................................ 317,300 351,568 362,068 ∂44,768 ∂10,500 Nonproliferation and international security ......................................................................................................................... 187,202 155,930 155,930 ¥31,272 ..........................International nuclear materials protection and cooperation ............................................................................................... 572,050 590,118 590,118 ∂18,068 ..........................Elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program ........................................................................................... 24,507 .......................... .......................... ¥24,507 ..........................Fissile materials disposition: 

U.S. plutonium disposition .......................................................................................................................................... 90,896 278,940 278,940 ∂188,044 ..........................U.S. uranium disposition ............................................................................................................................................. 34,691 25,985 25,985 ¥8,706 ..........................Supporting activities ................................................................................................................................................... 1,075 .......................... .......................... ¥1,075 ..........................Construction: 

MOX fuel fabrication facilities: 

99–D–143 Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility, Savannah River, SC ..................................................... 504,238 475,788 475,788 ¥28,450 ..........................99–D–141–01 Pit disassembly and conversion facility, Savannah River, SC ........................................ .......................... 80,000 50,000 ∂50,000 ¥30,000 99–D–141–02 Waste solidification building, Savannah River, SC ......................................................... 70,000 57,000 57,000 ¥13,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 574,238 612,788 582,788 ∂8,550 ¥30,000 Subtotal, U.S. surplus fissile materials disposal ................................................................................ 700,900 917,713 887,713 ∂186,813 ¥30,000 

Russian surplus materials disposition .............................................................................................................. 1,000 113,000 47,500 ∂46,500 ¥65,500 

Total, Fissile materials disposition ............................................................................................................... 701,900 1,030,713 935,213 ∂233,313 ¥95,500 

Global threat reduction initiative ......................................................................................................................................... 333,500 558,838 568,838 ∂235,338 ∂10,000 
135 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 250 .......................... .......................... ¥250 ..........................

TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ..................................................................................................... 2,136,709 2,687,167 2,612,167 ∂475,458 ¥75,000 

NAVAL REACTORS 

Naval reactors development ................................................................................................................................................. 877,533 997,886 967,886 ∂90,353 ¥30,000 Construction: 

10–D–093, Security upgrades, KAPL .......................................................................................................................... 1,500 400 400 ¥1,100 ..........................10–D–904, NRF infrastructure upgrades, Idaho ........................................................................................................ 700 500 500 ¥200 ..........................09–D–190, PED, Infrastructure upgrades, KAPL ........................................................................................................ 1,000 .......................... .......................... ¥1,000 ..........................09–D–902, NRF Office Building #2, ECC upgrade, Idaho ......................................................................................... 6,400 4,000 4,000 ¥2,400 ..........................08–D–190 Project engineering and design, Expended Core Facility M–290 recovering discharge station, Naval 

Reactor Facility, ID ................................................................................................................................................. 9,500 25,000 25,000 ∂15,500 ..........................

07–D–190 Materials research technology complex [MRTC] ....................................................................................... 11,700 2,700 2,700 ¥9,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ............................................................................................................................................ 30,800 32,600 32,600 ∂1,800 ..........................Total, Naval reactors development ......................................................................................................................... 908,333 1,030,486 1,000,486 ∂92,153 ¥30,000 

Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 36,800 40,000 40,000 ∂3,200 ..........................

TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS ........................................................................................................................................ 945,133 1,070,486 1,040,486 ∂95,353 ¥30,000 

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR 

Office of the Administrator .................................................................................................................................................. 418,074 448,267 438,267 ∂20,193 ¥10,000 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 13,000 .......................... .......................... ¥13,000 ..........................Use of prior-year balances ................................................................................................................................................... ¥10,320 .......................... .......................... ∂10,320 ..........................

TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR ................................................................................................................. 420,754 448,267 438,267 ∂17,513 ¥10,000 TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ....................................................................................... 9,887,027 11,214,755 11,109,755 ∂1,222,728 ¥105,000 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

Closure Sites: 

Closure sites administration ....................................................................................................................................... 8,225 6,375 6,375 ¥1,850 ..........................Miamisburg .................................................................................................................................................................. 33,243 .......................... .......................... ¥33,243 ..........................
136 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Total, Closure sites ................................................................................................................................................. 41,468 6,375 6,375 ¥35,093 ..........................

Hanford Site: 

Nuclear facility D&D, river corridor closure project .................................................................................................... 327,955 .......................... .......................... ¥327,955 ..........................Nuclear material stabilization & disposition PFP ....................................................................................................... 118,087 .......................... .......................... ¥118,087 ..........................SNF stabilization and disposition ............................................................................................................................... 95,325 .......................... .......................... ¥95,325 ..........................

Subtotal, 2012 accelerated completions ................................................................................................................ 541,367 .......................... .......................... ¥541,367 ..........................

Nuclear facility D&D—remainder of Hanford ............................................................................................................. 70,250 .......................... .......................... ¥70,250 ..........................Richland community and regulatory support ............................................................................................................. 21,940 .......................... .......................... ¥21,940 ..........................Soil & water remediation—groundwater/vadose zone ............................................................................................... 223,766 .......................... .......................... ¥223,766 ..........................Solid waste stabilization & disposition—200 area ................................................................................................... 132,757 .......................... .......................... ¥132,757 ..........................

Subtotal, 2035 accelerated completions ................................................................................................................ 448,713 .......................... .......................... ¥448,713 ..........................

Central plateau remediation: 

Nuclear material stabilization and disposition PFP .......................................................................................... .......................... 64,969 79,969 ∂79,969 ∂15,000 SNF stabilization and disposition ...................................................................................................................... .......................... 94,016 .......................... .......................... ¥94,016 Solid waste stabilization and disposition 2035 ................................................................................................ .......................... 135,026 135,026 ∂135,026 ..........................Soil and water remediation—groundwater vadose zone 2035 ......................................................................... .......................... 129,629 204,629 ∂204,629 ∂75,000 Nuclear Facility, D&D—remainder of Hanford 2035 ......................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 99,641 ∂99,641 ∂99,641 

Subtotal, Central plateau remediation .......................................................................................................... .......................... 423,640 519,265 ∂519,265 ∂95,625 

River corridor and other clean-up operations: 

Nuclear facility D&D—remainder of Hanford 2035 ................................................................................. .......................... 139,641 .......................... .......................... ¥139,641 Nuclear facility D&D river corridor closure project ................................................................................... .......................... 386,028 380,228 ∂380,228 ¥5,800 Richland community and regulatory support ........................................................................................... .......................... 19,620 25,420 ∂25,420 ∂5,800 SNF Stabilization and disposition ............................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... 94,016 ∂94,016 ∂94,016 

Subtotal, River corridor and other clean-up operations ...................................................................... .......................... 545,289 499,664 ∂499,664 ¥45,625 Total, Hanford Site ................................................................................................................................ 990,080 968,929 1,018,929 ∂28,849 ∂50,000 
137 

Idaho National Laboratory: 

SNF stabilization and disposition—2012 ................................................................................................................... 34,268 43,337 23,337 ¥10,931 ¥20,000 Solid waste stabilization and disposition ................................................................................................................... 143,500 172,631 165,631 ∂22,131 ¥7,000 Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition ..................................................................................... 91,850 111,773 97,773 ∂5,923 ¥14,000 06–D–401, Sodium bearing waste treatment project, ID .......................................................................................... 93,700 6,500 12,500 ¥81,200 ∂6,000 11–D–402, PE&D Calcine Disposition Project, Idaho ................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... 15,000 ∂15,000 ∂15,000 Soil and water remediation—2012 ............................................................................................................................ 91,500 68,959 88,959 ¥2,541 ∂20,000 Nuclear facility D&D .................................................................................................................................................... 5,450 .......................... .......................... ¥5,450 ..........................Idaho community and regulatory support ................................................................................................................... 3,900 3,900 3,900 .......................... ..........................

Total, Idaho National Laboratory ............................................................................................................................ 464,168 407,100 407,100 ¥57,068 ..........................

NNSA: 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory .................................................................................................................... 910 635 635 ¥275 ..........................NNSA Service Center/SPRU .......................................................................................................................................... 17,938 15,547 15,547 ¥2,391 ..........................Nevada ......................................................................................................................................................................... 65,674 66,000 66,000 ∂326 ..........................California site support ................................................................................................................................................ 238 238 238 .......................... ..........................Sandia National Laboratories ...................................................................................................................................... 2,864 .......................... .......................... ¥2,864 ..........................Los Alamos National Laboratory ................................................................................................................................. 196,500 196,953 196,953 ∂453 ..........................

Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites ................................................................................................................. 284,124 279,373 279,373 ¥4,751 ..........................

Oak Ridge Reservation: 

Building 3019 .............................................................................................................................................................. 38,900 50,001 50,001 ∂11,101 ..........................Nuclear facility D&D ORNL .......................................................................................................................................... 44,400 58,101 88,503 ∂44,103 ∂30,402 Nuclear facility D&D Y–12 .......................................................................................................................................... 53,500 63,775 63,775 ∂10,275 ..........................Nuclear facility D&D, E. Tenn. Technology Park ......................................................................................................... 100 87 87 ¥13 ..........................OR reservation community & regulatory support ....................................................................................................... 6,253 6,409 6,409 ∂156 ..........................Solid waste stabilization and disposition—2012 ...................................................................................................... 35,615 23,925 23,925 ¥11,690 ..........................

Total, Oak Ridge Reservation ................................................................................................................................. 178,768 202,298 232,700 ∂53,932 ∂30,402 

Office of River Protection: 

Waste treatment and immobilization plant: 

01–D–16 A–D ..................................................................................................................................................... 365,000 370,178 370,178 ∂5,178 ..........................01–D–16E Pretreatment facility ........................................................................................................................ 325,000 370,000 370,000 ∂45,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Waste treatment and immobilization plant ................................................................................... 690,000 740,178 740,178 ∂50,178 ..........................

Tank Farm activities: 

Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition ........................................................................................ 408,000 418,000 418,000 ∂10,000 ..........................
138 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Subtotal, Tank Farm activities ...................................................................................................................... 408,000 418,000 418,000 ∂10,000 ..........................Total, Office of River Protection .................................................................................................................... 1,098,000 1,158,178 1,158,178 ∂60,178 ..........................

Savannah River site: 

Nuclear material stabilization and disposition: 

Nuclear material stabilization and disposition ................................................................................................. 385,310 .......................... .......................... ¥385,310 ..........................Construction: 

08–D–414 Project engineering and design plutonium preparation facility, VL ...................................... 6,315 .......................... .......................... ¥6,315 ..........................

Subtotal, 2012 accelerated completions .............................................................................................. 391,625 .......................... .......................... ¥391,625 ..........................

SR community and regulatory support ....................................................................................................................... 18,300 .......................... .......................... ¥18,300 ..........................Spent nuclear fuel stabilization and disposition ....................................................................................................... 38,768 .......................... .......................... ¥38,768 ..........................

Subtotal, 2035 accelerated completions ................................................................................................................ 57,068 .......................... .......................... ¥57,068 ..........................

Clean-up and waste disposition: 

Savannah River community and regulatory support ......................................................................................... .......................... 18,330 18,330 ∂18,330 ..........................

Site risk management operations: 

NM stabilization and disposition ....................................................................................................................... .......................... 370,042 275,542 ∂275,542 ¥94,500 SNF stabilization and disposition ...................................................................................................................... .......................... 23,194 13,394 ∂13,394 ¥9,800 Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization: 

Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition ................................................................... .......................... 549,282 653,582 ∂653,582 ∂104,300 Construction: 

05–D–405 Salt waste processing facility, Savannah River ............................................................ .......................... 256,951 256,951 ∂256,951 ..........................

Total, Radioactive liquid tank waste .......................................................................................... .......................... 806,233 910,533 ∂910,533 ∂104,300 Total, Site risk management operations ..................................................................................... .......................... 1,199,469 1,199,469 ∂1,199,469 ..........................

Tank Farm activities: 

Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition ........................................................................................ 527,138 .......................... .......................... ¥527,138 ..........................
139 

05–D–405, Salt waste processing facility ........................................................................................................ 234,118 .......................... .......................... ¥234,118 ..........................

Subtotal, Tank farm activities ....................................................................................................................... 761,256 .......................... .......................... ¥761,256 ..........................Total, Savannah River site ............................................................................................................................ 1,209,949 1,217,799 1,217,799 ∂7,850 ..........................

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: 

Operate WIPP ............................................................................................................................................................... 154,902 134,999 134,999 ¥19,903 ..........................Central Characterization Project ................................................................................................................................. 13,730 25,797 30,797 ∂17,067 ∂5,000 Transportation ............................................................................................................................................................. 33,851 30,678 35,678 ∂1,827 ∂5,000 Community and regulatory support ............................................................................................................................ 27,854 28,771 28,771 ∂917 ..........................

Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant ........................................................................................................................... 230,337 220,245 230,245 ¥92 ∂10,000 

Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 345,000 323,825 355,000 ∂10,000 ∂31,175 Program support ................................................................................................................................................................... 34,000 25,143 34,000 .......................... ∂8,857 Safeguards and Security: 

Oak Ridge Reservation ................................................................................................................................................ 32,400 17,300 17,300 ¥15,100 ..........................Paducah ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8,190 8,496 8,496 ∂306 ..........................Portsmouth .................................................................................................................................................................. 17,509 15,979 15,979 ¥1,530 ..........................Richland/Hanford Site ................................................................................................................................................. 82,771 69,234 69,234 ¥13,537 ..........................Savannah River Site .................................................................................................................................................... 132,064 132,064 132,064 .......................... ..........................Waste Isolation Pilot Project ....................................................................................................................................... 4,644 4,755 4,755 ∂111 ..........................West Valley .................................................................................................................................................................. 1,859 1,926 1,926 ∂67 ..........................

Total, Safeguards and Security .............................................................................................................................. 279,437 249,754 249,754 ¥29,683 ..........................

Technology development ....................................................................................................................................................... 20,000 32,320 39,685 ∂19,685 ∂7,365 Uranium enrichment D&D fund contribution ....................................................................................................................... 463,000 496,700 33,700 ¥429,300 ¥463,000 

SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ................................................................................................... 5,638,331 5,588,039 5,262,838 ¥375,493 ¥325,201 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 4,000 .......................... .......................... ¥4,000 ..........................

TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP .......................................................................................................... 5,642,331 5,588,039 5,262,838 ¥379,493 ¥325,201 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

Health, safety, and security: 

Health, safety and security ......................................................................................................................................... 337,757 356,471 354,471 ∂16,714 ¥2,000 Program direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 104,125 107,740 107,740 ∂3,615 ..........................
140 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Total, Health, safety and security .......................................................................................................................... 441,882 464,211 462,211 ∂20,329 ¥2,000 

Office of Legacy Management: 

Legacy management ................................................................................................................................................... 177,618 176,122 176,122 ¥1,496 ..........................Program direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 12,184 12,504 12,504 ∂320 ..........................

Total, Office of Legacy Management ...................................................................................................................... 189,802 188,626 188,626 ¥1,176 ..........................

Defense-related activities: 

Infrastructure: 

Idaho sitewide safeguards and security ............................................................................................................ 83,358 88,200 88,200 ∂4,842 ..........................

Defense-related administrative support .............................................................................................................................. 122,982 118,836 118,836 ¥4,146 ..........................Office of hearings and appeals ........................................................................................................................................... 6,444 6,444 6,444 .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Other Defense Activities .......................................................................................................................... 844,468 866,317 864,317 ∂19,849 ¥2,000 

Acquisitions workforce improvement .................................................................................................................................... .......................... 11,892 .......................... .......................... ¥11,892 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 3,000 .......................... 2,000 ¥1,000 ∂2,000 

TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................... 847,468 878,209 866,317 ∂18,849 ¥11,892 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL .................................................................................................................................. 98,400 .......................... .......................... ¥98,400 ..........................

TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................ 16,475,226 17,681,003 17,238,910 ∂763,684 ¥442,093 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS 

SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 85,228 88,615 88,615 ∂3,387 ..........................Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 7,638 8,034 8,034 ∂396 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 92,866 96,649 96,649 ∂3,783 ..........................
141 

Less alternative financing [PPW] ................................................................................................................................ ¥14,422 ¥14,458 ¥14,458 ¥36 ..........................Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥78,444 ¥82,191 ¥82,191 ¥3,747 ..........................Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts ..................................................................................................... 7,638 .......................... .......................... ¥7,638 ..........................

TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 7,638 .......................... .......................... ¥7,638 ..........................

SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................ 13,775 13,676 13,676 ¥99 ..........................Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 48,000 49,000 49,000 ∂1,000 ..........................Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 27,153 28,381 28,381 ∂1,228 ..........................Construction ....................................................................................................................................................... 6,016 8,073 8,073 ∂2,057 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 94,944 99,130 99,130 ∂4,186 ..........................

Less alternative financing .......................................................................................................................................... ¥12,000 ¥13,818 ¥13,818 ¥1,818 ..........................Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥69,868 ¥72,613 ¥72,613 ¥2,745 ..........................Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts ..................................................................................................... 31,868 .......................... .......................... ¥31,868 ..........................

TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 44,944 12,699 12,699 ¥32,245 ..........................

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Construction and rehabilitation ......................................................................................................................... 104,971 109,887 109,887 ∂4,916 ..........................Operation and maintenance ............................................................................................................................... 57,159 57,793 57,793 ∂634 ..........................Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 548,847 543,622 543,622 ¥5,225 ..........................Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 180,756 193,961 193,961 ∂13,205 ..........................Utah mitigation and conservation ..................................................................................................................... 7,584 7,627 7,627 ∂43 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 899,317 912,890 912,890 ∂13,573 ..........................

Less alternative financing .......................................................................................................................................... ¥288,920 ¥271,895 ¥271,895 ∂17,025 ..........................Offsetting collections (Public Law 108–477, Public Law 109–103) ......................................................................... ¥349,807 ¥350,919 ¥350,919 ¥1,112 ..........................Offsetting collections (Public Law 98–381) ............................................................................................................... ¥3,879 ¥4,212 ¥4,212 ¥333 ..........................Offsetting collections (for program direction) ............................................................................................................ ¥110,492 ¥149,036 ¥149,036 ¥38,544 ..........................Offsetting collections (for O&M) ................................................................................................................................. ¥37,038 ¥31,270 ¥31,270 ∂5,768 ..........................Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts ..................................................................................................... 147,530 .......................... .......................... ¥147,530 ..........................

TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 256,711 105,558 105,558 ¥151,153 ..........................

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND: 

Operation and maintenance ........................................................................................................................................ 2,568 3,715 3,715 ∂1,147 ..........................
142 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Enacted Budget estimate 

Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥2,348 ¥3,495 ¥3,495 ¥1,147 ..........................Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts ..................................................................................................... 2,348 .......................... .......................... ¥2,348 ..........................

TOTAL, FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND ................................................................... 2,568 220 220 ¥2,348 ..........................TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS ....................................................................................................... 311,861 118,477 118,477 ¥193,384 ..........................

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ...................................................................................................................... 298,000 315,600 315,600 ∂17,600 ..........................FERC revenues ............................................................................................................................................................. ¥298,000 ¥315,600 ¥315,600 ¥17,600 ..........................

GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ............................................................................................................... 27,111,438 29,613,170 28,346,405 ∂1,234,967 ¥1,266,765 
143 

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 on reprogramming authority. 

Section 302. Language is included that prohibits the use of funds 

in this act to initiate a request for proposal or expression of interest or other similar arrangements 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 to address issues under section 3161 of Public Law 102–484. 

Section 304. Language is included which permits the transfer 

and merger of unexpended balances of prior appropriations with 

appropriation accounts established in this bill. 

Section 305. Language is included specifically authorizing intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year 2011 Intelligence Authorization Act. 

Section 306. The Committee has included a provision related to 

pensions. 

Section 307. Language is included related to the minor construction threshold. 

Section 308. The Committee has included a provision related to 

notification of funding awards. 

Section 309. Language is included related to the barter of uranium. 

Section 310. Language is included related to notification of loan 

guarantee awards. 
(144) 

TITLE IV 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $76,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 76,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 76,000,000 

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 

2011, the Committee recommends $76,000,000 for the ARC. 

The Committee recognizes the Commission’s efforts to cooperate 

with appropriate Federal, regional, State, and local entities to help 

diversify and strengthen the Appalachian regional economy. The 

Committee encourages the Commission to explore environmental 

remediation projects related to brownfield sites and abandoned 

mine lands. The Committee encourages the Commission to examine 

the Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative, and other initiatives that will foster economic development related to forest products, ecosystem services, and tourism, by restoring healthy forests 

on a landscape scale. The Committee encourages the Commission 

to coordinate with the Appalachian Coal Country Watershed Team 

within the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 

Department of the Interior, and the State and Private Forestry programs of the U.S. Forest Service. 

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. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $26,086,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 28,640,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 26,086,000 
145 

For fiscal year 2011, the Committee recommends $26,086,000, for 

the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $13,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 13,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,000,000 

For the Delta Regional Authority, the Committee recommends 

$13,000,000. 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. 

DENALI COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $11,965,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 11,965,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 11,965,000 

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 2011, the Committee recommends 

$11,965,000. 

NORTHERN BORDER REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $1,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 1,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Northern Border 

Regional Commission. 

SOUTHEAST CRESCENT REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $250,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 250,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Southeast Crescent Regional Commission. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $1,056,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 1,043,483,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,053,483,000 

REVENUES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ¥$902,402,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ¥906,220,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥915,220,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $153,598,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 137,263,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 138,263,000 
146 

The Committee recommendation for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for fiscal year 2011 is $1,053,483,000, an increase of 

$10,000,000 above the budget request. This amount is offset by estimated revenues of $915,220,000 resulting in a net appropriation 

of $138,263,000. The additional $10,000,000 of funding supplements the $5,000,000 included in the budget request for Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission participation in an Integrated University 

Program as directed by section 313 of Public Law 111–8. The total 

of $15,000,000 for this program is subject to fee recovery consistent 

with that authorized by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 

1990, as amended. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 of this 

amount to be used to support university education 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. 

Fee Recovery.—The Committee recommendation assumes that 

the NRC will recover 90 percent of its budget authority from user 

fees and annual charges, as authorized in the Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended, less the appropriation derived from the Nuclear Waste Fund, the amount necessary to implement section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375), and 

the amount necessary for generic homeland security activities of 

the Commission. Of the $1,053,483,000 gross appropriation for fiscal year 2012, $10,000,000 is drawn from the Nuclear Waste Fund, 

$524,000 is drawn from the General Fund of the Treasury to execute NRC’s responsibilities to provide oversight of certain Department of Energy activities under section 3116 of Ronald W. Reagan 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public 

Law 108–375), and $26,048,000 is drawn from the General Fund 

of the Treasury to execute NRC’s homeland security responsibilities. Ninety percent of the balance of $1,016,911,000 (i.e., 

$915,220,000) is funded by fees collected from NRC licensees, and 

the remaining 10 percent (i.e., $101,691,000) is funded from the 

General Fund of the Treasury. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $10,860,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 10,102,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 10,860,000 

REVENUES

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $9,774,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 9,092,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,774,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $1,086,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 1,010,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,086,000 

The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $1,086,000, 

an increase of $76,000 over the budget request. The Committee di-
147 

rects that the current no year funding authority of the Office of Inspector General be retained. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. $3,891,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 2,490,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,891,000 

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board was established to 

evaluate the scientific and technical validity of the Department of 

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 2011, the Committee recommends $3,891,000. 

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COORDINATOR FOR ALASKA NATURAL GAS

TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

Appropriation, 2009 ............................................................................... $4,466,000 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... 4,285,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,285,000 

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 $4,285,000, the same as the budget request. 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

OFFSET FROM TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FUND

Appropriations, 2010 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2011 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 
(148) 

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. 
(149) 

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 2011: 

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 22, 2010, 

theCommittee ordered reported en bloc an original bill (S. 3636) 

making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 2011, and for other purposes; an original bill (S. 

3635) making appropriations for energy and water development 

and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, 

and for other purposes; and an original bill making appropriations 
150 

for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban 

Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes; with each subject to 

amendment and subject to the Committee spending guidance, and 

authorized the chairman of the committee or the chairman of the 

subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate-reported bill as a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the House companion measure, by a recorded vote of 17–12, a quorum being 

present. The vote was as follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Inouye Mr. Cochran 

Mr. Leahy Mr. Bond 

Mr. Harkin Mr. McConnell 

Ms. Mikulski Mr. Shelby 

Mr. Kohl Mr. Gregg 

Mrs. Murray Mr. Bennett 

Mr. Dorgan Mrs. Hutchison 

Mrs. Feinstein Mr. Brownback 

Mr. Durbin Mr. Alexander 

Mr. Johnson Ms. Collins 

Ms. Landrieu Mr. Voinovich 

Mr. Reed Ms. Murkowski 

Mr. Lautenberg 

Mr. Nelson 

Mr. Pryor 

Mr. Tester 

Mr. Specter 

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. 
151 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1996, PUBLIC 

LAW 104–303 

TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED 

PROVISIONS 

SEC. 333. PASSAIC RIVER, NEW JERSEY. 

Section 1148 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 

(100 Stat. 4254) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 1148. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN. 

‘‘(a) ACQUISITION OF LANDS.—The Secretary may acquire from 

willing sellers lands on which residential structures are located and 

that are subject to frequent and recurring flood damage, as identified in the supplemental floodway report of the Corps of Engineers, 

Passaic River Buyout Study, September 1995, at an estimated total 

cost of $194,000,000. 

‘‘ø(b) RETENTION OF LANDS FOR FLOOD PROTECTION.—Lands 

acquired by the Secretary under this section shall be retained by 

the Secretary for future use in conjunction with flood protection 

and flood management in the Passaic River Basin.¿ 

(b) Lands individually acquired by the Secretary under this section for flood protection and flood management in the Passaic River 

Basin are to held by the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor as 

tenants in common with, thereafter, any interest held by the Secretary in such lands to be transferred by Quitclaim Deed to the 

Non-Federal sponsor for consideration as is necessary to render the 

project cost sharing percentages to be in compliance with section 

903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 

2213) and such other law as may be applicable. 

‘‘(c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the cost of carrying out this section shall be 25 percent plus any amount that 

might result from application of subsection (d). 

‘‘(d) APPLICABILITY OF BENEFIT-COST RATIO WAIVER AUTHORITY.—In evaluating and implementing the project under this section, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in the financing of the project in accordance with section 

903(c), to the extent that the Secretary’s evaluation indicates that 

applying such section is necessary to implement the project.’’. 

(e) FUNDS FOR LAND ACQUISITION.—Funds for acquiring such 

lands as are necessary in carrying out the requirements of this section and requirements as further recommended by the Secretary 

shall include funds as provided in subsection (c) and (d) of this section herein and also funds as previously appropriated with any and 

all such funds to be held by the Secretary for use in acquiring the 

requisite lands in proportion to the project cost sharing percentages. 
152 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2000, PUBLIC 

LAW 106–541 

TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

SEC. 529. LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.— * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(b) PARTICIPATION IN PROJECT.— * * * 

(1) IN GENERAL.— * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated ø$20,000,000¿ $30,000,00 to carry out 

this section. 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

ACT, 2004, PUBLIC LAW 108–137 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

GENERAL PROVISIONS

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

SEC. 117. Section 595 of the Water Resources Development Act 

of 1999 (113 Stat. 383; 117 Stat. 142) is amended— 

(1) by striking the section heading and inserting the following: 

‘‘SEC. 595. IDAHO, MONTANA, RURAL NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, AND 

RURAL UTAH.’’; 

(2) in subsection (a)— 

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (3) as 

subparagraphs (A) through (C), respectively; 

(B) by striking (a) and all that follows through 

‘‘means—’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

‘‘(1) RURAL NEVADA.—The term ‘rural Nevada’ means’’; and 

(C) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(2) RURAL UTAH.—The term ‘rural Utah’ means— 

‘‘(A) the counties of Box Elder, Cache, Rich, Tooele, 

Morgan, Summit, Dagett, Wasatch, Duchesne, Uintah, 

Juab, Sanpete, Carbon, Millard, Sevier, Emery, Grand, 

Beaver, Piute, Wayne, Iron, Garfield, San Juan, and Kane, 

Utahø; and¿; 

‘‘(B) the portions of Washington County, Utah, that 

are located outside the city of St. George, Utahø.¿; and’’; 
153 

(C) the portions of Utah County and Weber Counties 

that are located outside of a political subdivision, the population of which is greater than 10,000 residents. 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007, 

PUBLIC LAW 110–114 

TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED 

PROVISIONS 

SEC. 3001. BLACK WARRIOR-TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALABAMA. 

Section 111 of title I of division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (118 Stat. 2944) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 111. BLACK WARRIOR-TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALABAMA. 

‘‘(a) * * * 

‘‘(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) may grant to the City of Tuscaloosa a long term lease 

or license agreement for any portion of the Parcel not required 

for construction of the new administrative facility under subsection (a) (2)(c)until such time as the City of Tuscaloosa is prepared to take fee simple title per the provisions of subsection(b)(2). 

‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 

to be appropriated to carry out this section $32,000,000.’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 3113. WESTERN SARPY AND CLEAR CREEK, NEBRASKA. 

The project for ecosystem restoration and flood damage reduction, Western Sarpy and Clear Creek, Nebraska, authorized by section 101(b)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 

(114 Stat. 2578), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 

the project at a total cost of ø$21,664,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $14,082,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 

$7,582,000.¿ $38,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $25,220,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $13,580,000. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 3182. LAND 

CONVEYANCES. 

(a)* * * 

* * * * * * * 

(j) DENISON, TEXAS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of 

enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall offer to convey at 

fair market value to the city of Denison, Texas, all right, title, 

and interest of the United States in and to the approximately 

900 acres of land located in Grayson County, Texas, which is 

currently subject to an application for lease for public park and 

recreational purposes made by the city of Denison, dated August 17, 2005. 
154 

(2) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—The exact 

acreage and description of the real property referred to in 

paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey paid for by the 

city of Denison, Texas, that is satisfactory to the Secretary. 

(3) CONVEYANCE.—Not later than 90 days after the date of 

acceptance by the city of Denison, Texas, of an offer under 

paragraph (1), the Secretary shall convey the land surveyed 

under paragraph (2) by quitclaim deed to the city of Denison, 

Texas. 

(k) ST. CHARLES COUNTY, MISSOURI.— (1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection, the following definitions apply: 

(A) FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘Federal land’ means the 

1 parcel of Corps of Engineers land totaling approximately 

84 acres, located U.S. Survey No. 1838, Township 48 

North, Range 6 East. 

(B) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘non-Federal land’ 

means the approximately 70 acres of land, subject to any 

existing easements situated in Jersey County, Illinois, adjacent to existing Corps fee title land. 

(2) LAND EXCHANGE.—Subject to paragraph (3), on conveyance by Ameren U.E. to the United States of all right, title, and 

interest in and to the non-Federal land, the Secretary shall convey to Ameren U.E., all right, title, and interest of the United 

States in and to the Federal land. 

(3) CONDITIONS.— (A) DEEDS.— (i) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of the 

non-Federal land to the Secretary shall be by a warranty deed acceptable to the Secretary. 

(ii) FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of the Federal 

land to Ameren U.E., shall be— 

(I) by quitclaim deed; and 

(II) subject to any reservations, terms, and 

conditions that the Secretary determines to be necessary to allow the United States to operate and 

maintain the Mississippi River 9-Foot Navigation 

Project. 

(iii) LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS.—The Secretary shall 

provide a legal description of the Federal land, and 

Ameren U.E., shall provide a legal description of the 

non-Federal land, for inclusion in the deeds referred to 

in clauses (i) and (ii). 

(B) REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may require the removal of, or Ameren U.E., may voluntarily remove, any 

improvements to the non-Federal land before the completion of the exchange or as a condition of the exchange. 

‘‘(ii) NO LIABILITY.—If Ameren U.E., removes any 

improvements to the non-Federal land under clause 

(i)— 

(I) Ameren U.E., shall have no claim against 

the United States relating to the removal; and 
155 

(II) the United States shall not incur or be liable for any cost associated with the removal or relocation of the improvements. 

(C) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—The Secretary shall require Ameren U.E. to pay reasonable administrative costs 

associated with the exchange. 

(D) CASH EQUALIZATION PAYMENT.—If the appraised 

fair market value, as determined by the Secretary, of the 

Federal land exceeds the appraised fair market value, as 

determined by the Secretary, of the non-Federal land, 

Ameren U.E. shall make a cash equalization payment to 

the United States. 

(E) DEADLINE.—The land exchange under subparagraph (B) shall be completed not later than 2 years after 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

ø(k)¿ (l) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.— (1) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—The exact 

acreage and the legal description of any real property to be 

conveyed under this section shall be determined by a survey 

that is satisfactory to the Secretary. 

(2) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING PROVISIONS.— Section 2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to 

any conveyance under this section. 

(3) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The Secretary 

may require that any conveyance under this section be subject 

to such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary considers appropriate and necessary to protect the interests of the 

United States. 

(4) COSTS OF CONVEYANCE.—An entity to which a conveyance is made under this section shall be responsible for all reasonable and necessary costs, including real estate transaction 

and environmental documentation costs, associated with the 

conveyance. 

(5) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a conveyance is made 

under this section shall hold the United States harmless from 

any liability with respect to activities carried out, on or after 

the date of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed. The 

United States shall remain responsible for any liability with 

respect to activities carried out, before such date, on the real 

property conveyed. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS 

SEC. 5067. IDAHO, MONTANA, RURAL NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, RURAL 

UTAH, AND WYOMING. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 

to be appropriated to carry out this section for the period beginning 

with fiscal year 2001 ø$150,000,000 for rural Nevada¿ 

$200,000,000 for rural Nevada, $75,000,000 for Montana, 
156 

$25,000,000 for New Mexico, $55,000,000 for Idaho, $100,000,000 

for rural Utah, and $30,000,000 for Wyoming. Such sums shall remain available until expended.’’. 

* * * * * * * 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008, PUBLIC 

LAW 110–161 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

SEC. 208. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of 

amounts made available under section 2507 of the Farm Security 

and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 U.S.C. 2211 note; Public Law 

107–171), the Secretary of the Interior— 

(1) acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, shall 

use— 

(A) subject to subsection (b), $3,000,000 for activities 

necessary to convey to the State of Nevada the land known 

as the ‘‘Carson Lake and Pasture’’, as authorized by section 206(e) of the Truckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water 

Rights Settlement Act (Public Law 101–618: 104 Stat. 

3311); 

* * * * * * * 

(C) in consultation with the Corps of Engineers, as applicable, $5,000,000 to study and prepare plans for the development and construction of a pipeline to convey water 

from Dixie Valley to Churchill County, Nevada; and 

ø(D) $10,000,000 for— 

ø(i) design and construction of the Derby Dam fish 

screen to allow passage of fish, including the cui-ui 

and Lahontan cutthroat trout; and 

ø(ii) any improvements to Derby Dam necessary to 

make the fish screen operable; 

ø(E) $6,000,000 for the acquisition of not more than 4 

small hydroelectric power plants from the Sierra Pacific 

Power Company to improve water allocation and fish passage in the Truckee River; and¿ 

ø(F)¿ (D) $6,000,000 for Lower Truckee River restoration projects identified by the cities of Reno and Sparks, 

Nevada, and Washoe County, Nevada; 

* * * * * * * 

(3) shall allocate $1,000,000 to the Summit Lake Paiute 

Tribe to plan and complete ørestoration efforts at the Summit 

Lake in Northern Washoe County¿ restoration and environmental protection efforts at the Summit Lake in Humboldt 

County, Nevada, for the benefit of the Tribe because of their 

status as Indians; 
157 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED 

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS, 2010, PUBLIC LAW 111–85 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

SEC. 208. (a) Of the amounts made available under section 

2507 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 

U.S.C. 2211 note; Public Law 107–171), the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, shall— 

(1) provide, subject to subsection (b), ø$66,200,000¿ 

$81,200,000 to establish the Walker Basin Restoration Program for the primary purpose of restoring and maintaining 

Walker Lake, a natural desert terminal lake in the State of 

Nevada, consistent with protection of the ecological health of 

the Walker River and the riparian and watershed resources of 

the West, East, and Main Walker Rivers, and including associated activities that enhance recovery of the federally threatened 

Lahontan cutthroat trout; and 

* * * * * * * 

(b)(1) The amount made available under subsection (a)(1) shall 

be— 

(A) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(I) to administer and manage a 3-year or longer 

water leasing demonstration program in the Walker 

Lake inflows; and 

* * * * * * * 

(vi) $200,000 to support alternative crops and alternative agricultural cooperatives programs in Lyon and 

Mineral Counties, Nevada, that promote water conservation in the Walker River Basin. 

(vii) $15,000,000 to be used as described in subparagraph (A), as determined by the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation. 
158 

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 

guidance 1

Amount 

of bill 

Committee 

guidance 1

Amount 

of bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee spending 

guidance to its subcommittees for 2011: Subcommittee on 

Energy and Water Development: 

Mandatory ............................................................................ .................... .................... .................... ....................

Discretionary ........................................................................ 34,968 34,968 NA 2 45,782 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2011 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 3 20,301 

2012 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 9,675 

2013 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 3,238 

2014 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 630 

2015 and future years ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 874 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2011 ......................................................................................... NA 93 NA 19 

1 There is no section 302(a) allocation to the Committee on Appropriations for fiscal year 2011. 

2 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

3 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 Web site 

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 

the Committee recommendation nor this report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV. 
159 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ABILENE, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN—ELM CREEK) .............................................. $200,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ALISO CREEK, CA ................................................................................................... $250,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. AMITE RIVER—ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ..................................................... $250,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY LEVEE, MD & 

DC.

$250,000 Mikulski, Cardin 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ARKANSAS RIVER CORRIDOR, OK .......................................................................... $1,650,000 Inhofe Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ARROYO SECO WATERSHED, CA ............................................................................ $150,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN WATER RESOURCES, MD ........................................... $50,000 Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. BLOOMSBURG, PA .................................................................................................. $500,000 Specter, Casey Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. BOSSIER PARISH, LA .............................................................................................. $250,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA .......................................................... $1,800,000 Kerry Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ............................................................................ $200,000 Bond, Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER BASIN, GREELEY, CO ................................................... $150,000 M. Udall Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA ................................................................................. $250,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................ $500,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CEDAR RIVER, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA ......................................................................... $3,000,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CENTRAL VALLEY INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA ......................... $500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CENTRALIA, CHEHALIS RIVER, LEWIS COUNTY, WA ............................................... $500,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHATFIELD REALLOCATION STUDY, CO .................................................................. $267,000 Bennet, M. Udall Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA .................................................................................. $500,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD & VA ............................................ $150,000 Mikulski Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHESAPEAKE BAY MARSHLANDS, MD .................................................................... $50,000 Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, PA, MD, 

& VA.

$250,000 Mikulski, Cardin 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHOWAN RIVER, VA & NC ...................................................................................... $124,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA ............................................................................. $200,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CLINTON RIVER RIPARIAN CORRIDOR, MI .............................................................. $100,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CT, MA, NH, & VT ................... $350,000 Leahy, Dodd, Lieberman, Kerry Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. COYOTE DAM, CA ................................................................................................... $250,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CROSS LAKE, LA ..................................................................................................... $50,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX .......................................... $1,600,000 Hutchison, Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA, DE & NJ ...................... $200,000 Kaufman, Specter Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DISMAL SWAMP & DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA ...................................................... $22,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DUTCHESS COUNTY WATERSHEDS, NY .................................................................. $100,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ECORSE CREEK, MI ................................................................................................ $200,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ELLIOT BAY SEAWALL, WA ...................................................................................... $500,000 Murray, Cantwell 
160 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ESPANOLA VALLEY, RIO GRANDE AND TRIBUTARIES, NM ...................................... $250,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. FARGO-MOORHEAD UPSTREAM STUDY, ND & MN (RRN BASIN AUTHORITY) ........ $200,000 Dorgan, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. FLAGLER COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................. $287,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. FORGE RIVER WATERSHED, NY .............................................................................. $400,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. FOUR MILE RUN, VA ............................................................................................... $53,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA ............................................................. $200,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, KS, MO & AR .......................... $190,000 Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS & SEDIMENT REMEDIATION, MI, IL, IN, 

MN, NY, OH, PA, & WI.

$500,000 Voinovich, Levin, Stabenow, Sherrod 

Brown 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. HILO HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, HI ......................................................................... $300,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. HOMER HARBOR NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, AK ............................................... $300,000 Murkowski Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. HUMBOLDT, IA ........................................................................................................ $175,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL ............................................................... $350,000 Durbin, Burris Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES—MISSISSIPPI RIVER AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH, WI. $350,000 Voinovich, Durbin, Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. JAMES RIVER, ND ................................................................................................... $150,000 Dorgan, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LANSING GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI ...................................... $150,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA [LACDA] WATER CONSERVATION AND 

SUPPLY, WHITTIER NARROWS DAM, CA.

$200,000 Feinstein 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA ............................................ $200,000 Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY, CA ................. $100,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA .................................................................................. $250,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & 

TN.

$150,000 Pryor, Lincoln, Wicker 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOWER SADDLE RIVER, NJ ..................................................................................... $200,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MANHATTAN, KS ..................................................................................................... $300,000 Brownback, Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MATILIJA DAM, CA .................................................................................................. $100,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR ............................................................................. $250,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ............................................................................ $250,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MIDDLE CREEK, CA ................................................................................................ $400,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MIDDLE POTOMAC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD, VA, PA, WV, & DC ..................... $68,000 Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MILE POINT, FL ....................................................................................................... $475,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L–455 & R–460–471, MO & KS ........... $150,000 Bond, Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS, & MO ................................................. $5,000,000 Dorgan, Harkin, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, HEREFORD INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ .... $250,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM NOURISHMENT, NJ ............... $200,000 Lautenberg, Menendez 
161 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA ............................................................................ $150,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL, NC ................................................. $300,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, ASHAROKEN, NY ............................................... $100,000 Schumer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY, OH, PA, IL, IN, VA, AL, TN, 

NY, MD, NC, MS, & GA.

$3,000,000 Voinovich, Bunning, Rockefeller 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PAJARO RIVER, CA ................................................................................................. $300,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ & NY ................................................................... $125,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ .............................................................................. $160,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS .............................................................................. $200,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PECKMAN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ ................................................................. $620,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, AR ...................................................................................... $250,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PORT OF IBERIA, LA ............................................................................................... $1,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER TURNING BASIN, NH ................. $150,000 Shaheen Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE AND SANITARY DISTRICT AND FISH LAKE DRAINAGE 

AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL.

$850,000 Durbin, Burris 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PUYALLUP RIVER, WA ............................................................................................. $450,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ ...................................................................................... $250,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ ......................................... $207,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ .......................................... $100,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NJ ..................................... $125,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, DE ......................................... $100,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, ND, MN, SD & MANITOBA, CANADA ............... $1,463,000 Dorgan, Klobuchar, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA ................................................................................. $200,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RIVER DES PERES, MO .......................................................................................... $45,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ............................................................................ $400,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL [GRR], CA (SYSTEM EVALUATION) ............ $600,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAC-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA ................................ $282,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA (OCEANSIDE) ............................................... $200,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK, CA ............................................................................. $300,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, FRAZIER CREEK, CA ................................................. $150,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, CA .............................. $500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WEST STANISLAUS COUNTY, ORESTIMBA CREEK, 

CA.

$223,000 Feinstein 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WHITE RIVER AND DRY CREEK, CA .......................... $150,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED, CA ................................................................... $250,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SARASOTA, LIDO KEY BEACH, FL ........................................................................... $250,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SEARSPORT HARBOR, ME ...................................................................................... $300,000 Collins Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SHEYENNE RIVER, ND ............................................................................................ $150,000 Dorgan, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SKAGIT RIVER, WA .................................................................................................. $1,137,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA ............................................................................... $300,000 Cantwell 
162 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ ............................................................. $200,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA ............................................................... $500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTH SHORE OF STATEN ISLAND, NY .................................................................. $250,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK ........................................ $325,000 Inhofe Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTHWEST COASTAL LOUISIANA HURRICANE PROTECTION, LA ........................... $1,000,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX ................................................ $200,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ST. CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA .............................................. $350,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ST. HELENA—NAPA RIVER, CA .............................................................................. $150,000 Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ ........................................................ $250,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SUN VALLEY WATERSHED, CA ................................................................................ $200,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND LOW FLOW 

MANAGEMENT, NY, PA, & MD.

$250,000 Mikulski 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. TEN MILE RIVER, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NY AND LITCHFIELD COUNTY, CT ............. $100,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. TIJUANA RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, CA ............................................. $50,000 Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. TOPEKA, KS ............................................................................................................. $400,000 Brownback, Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV ........................................................................................ $4,500,000 Reid, Ensign Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. UPPER MISS RIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IL, IA, MO, MN, & WI ....................... $750,000 Harkin, Durbin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER—ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO, & WI ........... $4,000,000 Durbin, Harkin, Burris, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION SYSTEM STUDY, PA ....................................................... $451,000 Specter, Casey Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS .................................................................................... $90,000 Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. VALDEZ NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, AK .............................................................. $500,000 Murkowski, Begich Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WALLA WALLA WATERSHED, OR & WA ................................................................... $500,000 Murray, Wyden, Merkley, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WALTON COUNTY, FL .............................................................................................. $250,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK .................................................................................... $325,000 Inhofe Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WEST MAUI WATERSHED, MAUI, HI ........................................................................ $100,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WEST SHORE—LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA ............................................................ $350,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WESTCHESTER COUNTY STREAMS, BYRAM RIVER FLOOD REDUCTION, CT & 

NY.

$100,000 Dodd, Lieberman, Schumer 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI ............................................................ $2,000,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, PA .................................. $4,000 Casey Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WESTMINSTER, EAST GARDEN GROVE, CA ............................................................. $279,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO ................................................. $250,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR ...................................................... $200,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT .................................................................... $300,000 Tester, Baucus Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. General Investigation Items not listed under states ............................................ ........................Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION: 
163 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PACIFIC ISLANDS LAND OCEAN TYPHOON EXPERIMENT ............................... $1,000,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SURGE AND WAVE ISLAND MOORING STUDIES ............................................. $1,000,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES: Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DELAWARE DAM SAFETY, DE ................................................................ $250,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. NUUANU (OAHU), HI ............................................................................. $200,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WAIOHULI GULCH (MAUI), HI ................................................................ $200,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WAIMEA (KAUAI), HI ............................................................................. $200,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ANAHOLA (KAUAI), HI ........................................................................... $200,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES, HI ................................................. $300,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DES MOINES RIVER REGULATED FREQUENCY CURVE AND 

SAYLORVILLE AND RED ROCK RESERVOIRS POOL ELEVATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES, IA.

$80,000 Grassley 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. IOWA LIDAR, IA ..................................................................................... $100,000 Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. URBAN LEVEE EVALUATIONS, MUSCATINE, IA ...................................... $60,000 Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. WICHITA AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN, KS ...................................... $300,000 Brownback, Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHITIMACHA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA, LA [GIS] ........................................ $400,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CITY OF ALEXANDRIA, LA [GIS] ............................................................ $400,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA [GIS] ................................................ $200,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LIVINGSTON PARISH, LA [GIS] .............................................................. $500,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. AU TRAIN, MI ........................................................................................ $75,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PAPILLION CREEK WATERSHED, NE ..................................................... $430,000 Ben Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. OTERO COUNTY, NM ............................................................................. $100,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SOUTHEASTERN, PA .............................................................................. $250,000 Specter, Casey Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. ABINGDON, VA ...................................................................................... $55,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES: Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS: Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LAKE TAHOE ......................................................................................... $900,000 Reid, Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES: Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. AUGUSTA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, AR .......................................... $50,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DELAWARE DAM SAFETY, DE ................................................................ $250,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SUSUPE/CHALAN KANOA DRAINAGE PLAN [CNMI] ............................... $160,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PALA LAGOON (AMERICAN SAMOA) ...................................................... $200,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT, HI .......... $250,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. HE’EIA WATERSHED, HI ........................................................................ $100,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. PALMYRA ATOLL ................................................................................... $100,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. STATE OF HAWAII GENERAL FLOOD CONTROL PLAN UPDATE .............. $190,000 Inouye, Akaka Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. GREENWAYS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DES MOINES, IA ....................... $100,000 Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. LOWER NISHNABOTNA RIVER BASIN, IA ............................................... $100,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. MIDDLE AMANA, IA ............................................................................... $74,000 Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SHUNGANUNGA CREEK, KS .................................................................. $100,000 Roberts 
164 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. CHOCTAW COUNTY RESERVOIR, MS .................................................... $50,000 Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. GENESEE RIVER SEDIMENT STUDY, NY ............................................... $250,000 Schumer Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. OKLAHOMA COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN, OK ................................... $500,000 Inhofe Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. DRIFT CREEK RESERVOIR PROJECT, OR .............................................. $20,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ........................................................................... $1,600,000 Johnson, Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................. $5,000,000 Cochran Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION, MD & VA ............................................. $1,000,000 Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. General Investigations ................................. URBAN FLOOD DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, DRI, NV ................................... $2,000,000 Reid Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM ...................................................................... $2,770,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ALAMOGORDO, NM ................................................................................................. $4,200,000 Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK .............................................................................. $2,000,000 Murkowski Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NE ............................................................................ $315,000 Ben Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ASCENSION PARISH ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, LA ................................ $160,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ATLANTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, GA ................................................. $1,000,000 Chambliss, Isakson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND, JONES INLET TO EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, 

LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY.

$300,000 Schumer 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD ..................................................................... $3,100,000 Mikulski, Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN WATER RESOURCES, GWYNNS FALLS, MD ................ $200,000 Cardin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR INLET, NJ ............................................ $7,600,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BETHEL RIVER BANK STABILIZATION, AK ............................................................... $3,000,000 Murkowski, Begich Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD ...................................................................... $3,000,000 Johnson, Thune Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO .................................................................. $550,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BRECKENRIDGE, MN ............................................................................................... $407,000 Klobuchar Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, ABSECON ISLAND, NJ ........... $400,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, BRIGANTINE ISLAND, NJ ....... $80,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC ...................................................................... $350,000 Burr, Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, DMMP, LA .............................................................. $1,000,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM, CA ............................................................... $5,000,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX .......................... $4,815,000 Hutchison, Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CENTRAL NEW MEXICO, NM ................................................................................... $1,000,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, MD, VA, & 

PA.

$1,000,000 Mikulski, Cardin, Webb, Warner 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CHESTERFIELD, MO ................................................................................................ $500,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL ........................... $5,900,000 Voinovich, Durbin, Levin, Stabenow, 

Sherrod Brown 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... COMITE RIVER, LA .................................................................................................. $8,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter 
165 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA ................................................................................... $500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... CUMBERLAND COUNTY WATER SUPPLY, TN .......................................................... $210,000 Alexander Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX ............................... $20,500,000 Hutchison, Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, BROADKILL BEACH, DE ............................................ $250,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DE & NJ, OAKWOOD BEACH ..................................... $250,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE ...................................................................... $390,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, BETHANY BEACH TO 

SOUTH BETHANY, DE.

$4,700,000 Carper, Kaufman 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, FENWICK ISLAND, 

DE.

$150,000 Carper, Kaufman 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, REHOBOTH BEACH 

AND DEWEY BEACH, DE.

$150,000 Carper, Kaufman 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DELAWARE RIVER MAINSTEM AND CHANNEL DEEPENING, DE, NJ, & PA .............. $7,000,000 Specter, Casey Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA ..................................... $3,200,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DES PLAINES RIVER, IL .......................................................................................... $3,500,000 Durbin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... DESOTO COUNTY, MS ............................................................................................. $12,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH [FC], LA ................................................................... $3,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, LA .................. $500,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... EAST ROCKAWAY INLET TO ROCKAWAY INLET AND JAMAICA BAY, NY .................. $1,000,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... EAST ST. LOUIS, IL ................................................................................................. $1,000,000 Durbin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FARGO, ND—MOORHEAD, MN ............................................................................... $20,000,000 Dorgan Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FARMINGTON RECHARGE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, CA ................................... $500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY ......................................................... $3,500,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, FL ............................................. $2,800,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FORT PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT .................................................................... $1,000,000 Tester, Baucus Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... FORT WAYNE, ST. MARY’S, AND MAUMEE RIVERS, IN (GREENWOOD AVENUE TOE 

DRAIN).

$165,000 Lugar 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... GRAFTON, ND ......................................................................................................... $3,000,000 Dorgan, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NJ ......................................... $2,000,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI ................................. $2,000,000 Voinovich, Levin, Stabenow, Sherrod 

Brown 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV ............................................................................. $1,500,000 Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... GUADALUPE RIVER, CA .......................................................................................... $200,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ .......................................................................... $300,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HAINES HARBOR, AK .............................................................................................. $500,000 Murkowski Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HAMILTON DAM, FLINT RIVER, FLINT, MI ............................................................... $1,000,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HARBOR/SOUTH BAY WATER RECYCLING PROJECT, LOS ANGELES, CA ................ $2,000,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HAWAII WATER MANAGEMENT, HI .......................................................................... $2,000,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... HOLES CREEK, WEST CARROLLTON, OH ................................................................ $1,000,000 Voinovich Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ISLAND CREEK, LOGAN, WV ................................................................................... $5,000,000 Rockefeller 
166 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA .................................................................. $5,500,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX .................................... $500,000 Hutchison, Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... JOSEPH G. MINISH PASSAIC RIVER WATERFRONT, NJ ........................................... $3,000,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... KAHUKU, HI ............................................................................................................ $4,590,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... KENAI RIVER BLUFF EROSION, AK ......................................................................... $2,500,000 Murkowski Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LACKAWANNA RIVER, SCRANTON, PA ..................................................................... $500,000 Specter, Casey Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATIVE, VT ....................................................... $500,000 Leahy, Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA, & KY .......... $2,750,000 Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, ID ........................................................................ $150,000 Crapo, Risch Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LOS ANGELES RIVER DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS, CA .......................................... $1,000,000 Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV ........................................................................... $1,500,000 Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MANATEE HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................... $100,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY PARK LEVEE, MO .............................................. $2,000,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELEN, NM .............. $500,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MID-VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA .................................................. $1,500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MS ........................................... $18,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT, MO ........................ $1,200,000 Harkin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (UNIT L–385), IA, NE, KS, MO .......................... $1,500,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND ...................................................................... $500,000 Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, SD ...................................................................... $300,000 Johnson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA ............................................................ $1,000,000 Murray Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MUDDY RIVER, MA ................................................................................................. $2,000,000 Kerry Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... MURRIETA CREEK, CA ............................................................................................ $3,500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... NAPA RIVER, CA ..................................................................................................... $2,100,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY .......................................................................... $1,000,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA ........................................... $1,000,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ND ...................................... $14,300,000 Dorgan Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL ..................................................... $300,000 Durbin Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OAKLAND COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MI .................................. $500,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, OH: Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... EUCLID, OH ................................................................................................... $1,100,000 Voinovich Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PORTSMOUTH CSO MITIGATION, OH .............................................................. $500,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... TOLEDO WATERWAYS INITIATIVE PHASE 2, OH ............................................. $1,000,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OHIO RIVERFRONT, CINCINNATI, OH ...................................................................... $3,000,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ONONDAGA LAKE, NY ............................................................................................. $1,000,000 Schumer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OUACHITA RIVER LEVEES, LA ................................................................................. $1,000,000 Landrieu 
167 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OZARK-JETA TAYLOR POWERHOUSE, AR ................................................................ $12,900,000 Pryor Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL (DELRAY BEACH REIMBURSEMENT) ............................ $680,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NJ .................................................. $500,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PINELLAS COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................ $2,500,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PLACER COUNTY, CA .............................................................................................. $1,000,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, WA .................................. $3,000,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RARITAN & SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ ........................................... $1,500,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX & OK ................................................. $2,800,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM, AR, LA, & TX .................................................. $2,500,000 Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR, LA, OK, & TX ........................... $2,000,000 Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ROSEAU, MN (RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN) ................................................. $2,500,000 Klobuchar, Franken Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RURAL IDAHO, ID ................................................................................................... $2,000,000 Crapo, Risch Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RURAL MONTANA, MT ............................................................................................. $5,000,000 Tester, Baucus Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RURAL NEVADA, NV ................................................................................................ $20,000,000 Reid, Ensign Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RURAL UTAH, UT .................................................................................................... $25,000,000 Bennett Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA ......................... $700,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CA ............................................................... $500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA ....................................................................................... $2,500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SAN RAMON VALLEY RECYCLED WATER, CA ......................................................... $459,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SANDBRIDGE, VA .................................................................................................... $300,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ .................................................................. $2,000,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SAULT STE. MARIE (REPLACEMENT LOCK), MI ...................................................... $1,000,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA ..................................................................... $600,000 Chambliss, Isakson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SHOALWATER BAY, WA ........................................................................................... $3,000,000 Murray Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SOUTHWEST VALLEY, FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, ALBUQUERQUE, NM .............. $5,809,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR MANAGEMENT PLAN, MI ........................... $300,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO ....................................................................... $100,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SUCCESS DAM AND RESERVOIR, CA (DAM SAFETY) ............................................. $500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO .............................................. $5,330,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA & NV .................................................................. $4,000,000 Reid, Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... TAMPA HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................ $200,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ ......................................................... $2,000,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... TUSCALOOSA, AL .................................................................................................... $8,240,000 Shelby Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA .............................................................................. $2,500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... VIRGINIA BEACH, VA (HURRICANE PROTECTION) ................................................... $2,000,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... WEST ONSLOW BEACH AND NEW RIVER INLET, TOPSAIL BEACH, NC ................... $722,000 Burr, Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... WESTERN SARPY COUNTY AND CLEAR CREEK, NE ............................................... $2,470,000 Ben Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ..................................................................................... $300,000 Burr Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC ..................................................................................... $300,000 Burr, Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... WYOMING VALLEY, PA (LEVEE RAISING) ................................................................ $1,500,000 Specter, Casey 
168 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA .......................................................................................... $3,500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... YUKON, OK [EI] ...................................................................................................... $500,000 Inhofe Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... Construction, General Items not listed under states ............................................ ........................Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL: Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... BLACK LAKE, OGDENSBURG, NY ................................................................... $150,000 Schumer Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT .................................................................................... $500,000 Leahy Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC LAW 106–457): Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... COLORADO LAGOON, CA ................................................................................ $1,000,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION: Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... OIL PIERS ...................................................................................................... $2,500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Construction, General ................................... RESTORATION OF ABANDONED MINES ................................................................... $500,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & TN ............ $900,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... DONALDSONVILLE TO THE GULF, LA ...................................................................... $400,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... MORGANZA TO THE GULF, LA ................................................................................ $2,600,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... QUIVER RIVER, MS ................................................................................................. $100,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR .................................................................................... $300,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—GI .................................................... SPRING BAYOU, LA ................................................................................................. $81,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ........................................................................................ $8,700,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... BAYOU METO BASIN, AR ........................................................................................ $4,000,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR .................................................................................. $16,000,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & TN .................................. $6,888,000 Cochran, Landrieu, Bond, Pryor, 

Lincoln, Vitter, Wicker 

Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO ............................................................................... $4,000,000 Bond, Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... ST. JOHNS BAYOU & NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MO .............................................. $200,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS .......................................................... $2,200,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS .............................................................................. $25,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, MISSISSIPPI DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT, MS ............................ $23,200,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, REFORMULATION, MS ..................................................................... $1,600,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS ........................................................ $13,300,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—CG ................................................... YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU, MS ............................... $575,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ BONNET CARRE, LA ................................................................................................ $1,200,000 Landrieu Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS ...................................................................................... $982,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR ............................................................... $402,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & TN .................................. $4,261,000 Cochran, Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln, 

Vitter, Wicker 

Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ ST. FRANCIS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, AR & MO ................................................. $3,707,000 Bond, Pryor, Lincoln 
169 

Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS ....................................................................................... $718,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS .................................................................... $2,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS .......................................................... $1,500,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS ............................................................................... $2,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS ....................................................................... $2,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS ........................................................................... $2,000,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS ........................................................................... $50,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, WILL M. WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS .......................................... $23,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS ....................................................... $150,000 Cochran Corps of Engineers ............. MR&T—O&M ................................................ YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS ............................................................................. $100,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ABSECON INLET, NJ ................................................................................................ $200,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL .................................................................................... $3,000,000 Sessions Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA ......................... $4,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—DSC, NC & VA ......................................... $930,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, FL .............................................................. $2,820,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA .............................................................. $1,235,000 Chambliss, Isakson Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC .............................................................. $1,600,000 Graham Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI ................................................................................. $85,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BEALS HARBOR, ME ............................................................................................... $1,150,000 Collins Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BETHEL HARBOR, AK .............................................................................................. $766,000 Murkowski Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR ................................................................ $548,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BOGUE INLET AND CHANNEL, NC .......................................................................... $500,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA ........................................................................... $5,586,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC .................................................................................. $500,000 Burr Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO ............................................................................. $887,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CRISFIELD HARBOR, MD ........................................................................................ $160,000 Mikulski Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS .............................................................................. $73,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH ....................................................................................... $3,800,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR ......................................................... $800,000 Murray Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA ......................................................... $5,500,000 Murray, Crapo, Risch, Wyden, 

Merkley, Cantwell 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA ............................. $900,000 Murray Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CONCHAS LAKE, NM ............................................................................................... $905,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COOS BAY, OR ....................................................................................................... $1,094,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CORALVILLE LAKE, IA ............................................................................................. $441,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA ....................................................... $2,538,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DEGRAY LAKE, AR .................................................................................................. $521,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DEPOE BAY, OR ...................................................................................................... $166,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE & CHANNEL, CA ........................................... $3,640,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY ................................................................... $764,000 Bunning 
170 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY ............................................................... $5,000,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND ................................................................. $200,000 Dorgan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC ................................................................................... $1,180,000 Graham Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI .................................................................. $250,000 Reed, Whitehouse Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI ....................................................................................... $5,000,000 Kohl Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GULFPORT HARBOR, MS ......................................................................................... $6,655,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HARBOR OF REFUGE, LEWES, DE .......................................................................... $200,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HELENA HARBOR, AR ............................................................................................. $485,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA ............................................................................. $2,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................. $5,223,000 Hutchison, Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX ............................................................... ........................Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX ........................................................................ ........................Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GREENS BAYOU ............................................................................................. ........................Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HURON HARBOR, OH .............................................................................................. $500,000 Voinovich Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI ................................................................ $319,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER TO ANCLOTE RIVER, FL ..... $2,000,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL ..................................... $3,650,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA .................................................................. $4,255,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA ................................................................................... $820,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV .................................................................. $1,100,000 Mikulski, Cardin, Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... KODIAK HARBORS, AK ............................................................................................ $750,000 Begich Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA ............................................................................ $583,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA ..................................................................... $5,100,000 Murray Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC .............................................................................. $500,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LOWER THOROFARE, DEAL ISLAND, MD ................................................................. $1,440,000 Mikulski Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA ........................................................................................... $200,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MADISON PARISH PORT, LA ................................................................................... $145,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ .......................................................................................... $250,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC .......................................................................... $4,000,000 Burr, Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MARINA DEL REY, CA ............................................................................................. $3,000,000 Feinstein Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................ $1,976,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MIAMI HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................. $200,000 Bill Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MICHIGAN NAVIGATION O&M, MI ............................................................................ $8,000,000 Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ALPENA HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ARCADIA HARBOR, MI ................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BIG BAY HARBOR, MI .................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow 
171 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BLACK RIVER HARBOR, GOGEBIC CO-UP, MI ............................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BOLLES HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CEDAR RIVER HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) .............................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CHANNELS IN LAKE ST. CLAIR, MI ................................................................ ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI ............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CHEBOYGAN HARBOR, MI ............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CLINTON RIVER, MI ....................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DETOUR HARBOR, MI .................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DETROIT RIVER, MI ....................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... EAGLE HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI ............................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI .......................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ............................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ........................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HARBOR BEACH HARBOR, MI ....................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HARRISVILLE HARBOR, MI ............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HOLLAND HARBOR, MI .................................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI ........................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) .............................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LAC LA BELLE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LELAND HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LES CHENEAUX ISLANDS CHANNELS, MI ...................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI .............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) .................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MANISTEE HARBOR AND RIVER CHANNEL, MI .............................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI .............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI & WI .................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MONROE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PENTWATER HARBOR, MI .............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI .......................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORTAGE LAKE HARBOR, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ............................ ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ROUGE RIVER, MI .......................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SAGINAW RIVER, MI ...................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SAUGATUCK HARBOR, KALAMAZOO RIVER, MI .............................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SEBEWAING RIVER, MI .................................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow 
172 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MI .......................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI ..................................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MI ............................................................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ST. MARYS RIVER, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ...................................... ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI .............................................................................. ........................ Levin, Stabenow Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA ......................................................... $2,000,000 Landrieu, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MISSOURI RIVER—RULO TO MOUTH, IA, NE, KS, & MO ....................................... $7,000,000 Harkin, Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MISSOURI RIVER BETWEEN FORT PECK DAM, MT, AND GAVIN’S POINT DAM, SD 

& NE (SEC. 33), (MANDAN DIKE RESTORATION, ND).

$560,000 Dorgan 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC ............................................................................... $300,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS ................................................................................ $145,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR ..................................................................... $376,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NEW MADRID HARBOR, MILE 889, MO .................................................................. $420,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO .................................................................................... $30,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ........................................ $500,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NEW YORK GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION O&M, NY ................................................... $1,700,000 Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BARCELONA HARBOR, NY ............................................................................. ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY ............................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... BUFFALO HARBOR, NY .................................................................................. ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CAPE HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................ ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... GREAT SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY .................................................................. ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... IRONDEQUOIT HARBOR, NY ........................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LITTLE RIVER HARBOR, NY ........................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY .................................................................. ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... MORRISTOWN HARBOR, NY ........................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OAK ORCHARD HARBOR, NY ......................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OGDENSBURG HARBOR, NY .......................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OLCOTT HARBOR, NY .................................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OSWEGO HARBOR, NY ................................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORT ONTARIO HARBOR, NY ......................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY ............................................................................. ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... VINCENT HARBOR, NY ................................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILSON HARBOR, NY .................................................................................... ........................ Schumer, Gillibrand Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA ................................................................................. $3,000,000 Kerry Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NORFOLK HARBOR, VA ........................................................................................... $1,234,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NORWALK HARBOR, CT .......................................................................................... $582,000 Dodd, Lieberman 
173 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS ............................................................................................. $850,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR ........................................................................................... $985,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA .............................................................. $3,000,000 Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln, Vitter Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS .................................................................................... $5,390,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PATCHOGUE RIVER, CT .......................................................................................... $918,000 Lieberman Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PAWCATUCK RIVER, LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY & WATCH HILL COVE, CT & 

RI.

$2,500,000 Reed, Whitehouse 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PETERSBURG HARBOR, AK ..................................................................................... $500,000 Murkowski, Begich Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PINOLE SHOAL MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA .............................................................. $2,500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... POCOMOKE RIVER, MD ........................................................................................... $1,800,000 Mikulski Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... POINT JUDITH HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI ................................................................. $500,000 Reed, Whitehouse Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORT ORFORD, OR ................................................................................................. $400,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORTLAND HARBOR, ME ........................................................................................ $8,000,000 Collins Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, NH ............................................ $500,000 Gregg, Shaheen Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PORTSMOUTH HARBOR, (SAGAMORE CREEK CHANNELS), NH ............................... $150,000 Shaheen Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... PROVIDENCE HARBOR SHIPPING CHANNEL, RI ...................................................... $3,800,000 Reed, Whitehouse Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ ...................................................... $300,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... RARITAN RIVER, NJ ................................................................................................ $145,000 Lautenberg, Menendez Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE, RED ROCK, IA ............................................................ $865,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS ........................................................................................ $1,189,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ............................................................................ $670,000 Hutchison Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA ...................................................... $2,897,000 Feinstein, Boxer Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA ........................................................................................... $497,000 Harkin, Grassley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SIUSLAW RIVER, OR ............................................................................................... $375,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MO .......................................................................... $360,000 Bond Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SOUTHERN MAINE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE DESIGNATION, 

ME & NH.

$200,000 Collins 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... ST. PAUL HARBOR DREDGING, MN ........................................................................ $200,000 Franken Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ............................................................................ $100,000 Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV ...................................................................................... $260,000 Rockefeller Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA ..................................................................................... $538,000 Murray, Cantwell Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS .................. $444,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TENNESSEE–TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS .................................................... $4,233,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX ........................................................ $900,000 Cornyn Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR ............................................................................... $600,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TOLEDO HARBOR, OH ............................................................................................. $2,800,000 Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WI ...................................................................................... $1,020,000 Kohl Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA ......................................................... $457,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR .................................................... $166,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA ......................................................................... $45,000 Murray 
174 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE ..................................................................................... $2,750,000 Carper, Kaufman Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ..................................................................................... $600,000 Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... WILSON LAKE, KS ................................................................................................... $300,000 Roberts Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR ............................................................................ $200,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... YAQUINA RIVER (DEPOT SLOUGH), OR ................................................................... $12,000 Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... YAZOO RIVER, MS .................................................................................................. $128,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... YELLOW BEND PORT, AR ........................................................................................ $112,000 Pryor, Lincoln Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... Operation and Maintenance items not listed under states .................................. --- Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COASTAL DATA INFORMATION PROGRAM ............................................................... $2,000,000 Shaheen, Hagan, Wyden, Merkley Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM: Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... COASTAL ZONE MAPPING AND IMAGING LIDAR, MS ..................................... $2,500,000 Cochran, Wicker Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM: Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... HAWAII RSM, HI ............................................................................................. $1,000,000 Inouye Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... NORTH CAROLINA RSM, NC .......................................................................... $600,000 Burr, Hagan Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... DELAWARE ESTUARY RSM, NJ ....................................................................... $200,000 Kaufman, Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Specter 

Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... SOUTH COASTAL RHODE ISLAND RSM, RI .................................................... $750,000 Reed Corps of Engineers ............. Operation and Maintenance ......................... CHESAPEAKE BAY, NEWPOINT COMFORT, MATHEWS COUNTY, VA ............... $59,000 Webb, Warner Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 108 ................................................................................................... ........................ Reid Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 109 ................................................................................................... ........................ Cochran, Shaheen Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 110 ................................................................................................... ........................ Cochran Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 111 ................................................................................................... ........................ Ben Nelson Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 114 ................................................................................................... ........................ Dorgan, Conrad Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 115 ................................................................................................... ........................ Shelby Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 116 ................................................................................................... ........................ Lautenberg Corps of Engineers ............. General Provision ......................................... Section 117 ................................................................................................... ........................ Lautenberg Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Albuquerque Metro Area Reuse ............................................................................. $500,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... All American Canal-Imperial Dam Electrification rehabilitation .......................... $1,000,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Central Valley Projects: Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... American River Division, Folsom Dam Unit/Mormon Island ........................ $920,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Miscellaneous Project Programs ................................................................... $2,000,000 Feinstein, Boxer Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Friant Division ............................................................................................... $8,000,000 Feinstein, Boxer Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Columbia Basin Project ......................................................................................... $1,000,000 Murray, Cantwell Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Deschutes Ecosystem Restoration Project ............................................................. $500,000 Wyden, Merkley Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Deschutes Project .................................................................................................. $500,000 Wyden, Merkley Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Eastern New Mexico Water Supply—Ute Reservoir ............................................... $2,000,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall 
175 

Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Fort Peck Reservation/Dry Prairie Rural Water System ......................................... $4,000,000 Tester, Baucus Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Hawaii Water Resources Study, HI ........................................................................ $300,000 Inouye Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Lake Mead/Las Vegas Wash Program ................................................................... $1,150,000 Reid, Ensign Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Lewis and Clark Rural Water System .................................................................... $8,000,000 Johnson, Harkin, Grassley, Klobuchar, Franken, Thune Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Mancos Project ....................................................................................................... $1,387,000 Bennet, M. Udall Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Middle Rio Grande Project ..................................................................................... $650,000 Bingaman Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Milk River Project ................................................................................................... $1,000,000 Tester, Baucus Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Mni Wiconi Project ................................................................................................. $3,000,000 Johnson, Thune Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Mokelumne River Regional Water Storage & Conjunctive .................................... $500,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Norman Feasibility Study ....................................................................................... $755,000 Inhofe Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... North Las Vegas Water Reuse ............................................................................... $3,000,000 Reid Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Northern Utah Investigations Program .................................................................. $500,000 Bennett Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Odessa Subarea Special Study .............................................................................. $1,250,000 Murray, Cantwell Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Oregon Investigations Program ............................................................................. $300,000 Wyden, Merkley Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... P–SMBP—Garrison Diversion Unit ........................................................................ $13,449,000 Dorgan, Conrad Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Rancho California Water District ........................................................................... $250,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Rio Grande Project ................................................................................................. $1,000,000 Bingaman, Tom Udall Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Rocky Boys/North Central MT Rural Water System ............................................... $4,000,000 Tester, Baucus Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Round Rock Reclaimed Water Project, TX ............................................................. $2,000,000 Cornyn Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... San Diego Four Reservoir Intertie .......................................................................... $500,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Southern California Investigations Program ......................................................... $500,000 Feinstein, Boxer Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Summit County Water Supply, UT (Weber Basin) ................................................. $500,000 Bennett, Hatch Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Wallowa Lake Dam Rehab, OR .............................................................................. $1,000,000 Wyden, Merkley Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Water for Irrigation Streams and Economy Feasibility Study (WISE) ................... $400,000 Wyden, Merkley Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project ................................................. $4,000,000 Murray Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Items not listed under states ................................................................................ ........................Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title I ......................................... $1,000,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Research and Development: Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Science and Technology Program ................................................................. $1,000,000 Feinstein Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... WaterSMART Program ................................................................................... ........................Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Title XVI Water Reclamation/Reuse Projects ................................................ $2,500,000 Reid Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Section 205 ................................................................................................... ........................ Reid Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Section 206 ................................................................................................... ........................ Reid Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Section 207 ................................................................................................... ........................ Tester Bureau of Reclamation ...... Water and Related Resources ...................... Section 208 ................................................................................................... ........................ Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... 21st Century Renewable Fuels, Energy, and Materials Initiative ......................... $400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Adams State College Solar Project ........................................................................ $400,000 Senator Mark Udall Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Advanced Closed-Cycle Turbine Generator ............................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Murray Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Advanced Energy Studies ...................................................................................... $2,750,000 Senator Dorgan 
176 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Advanced Solid State Lithium Ion Battery Domestic Manufacturing Initiative .... $300,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Algae Biofuels Research ........................................................................................ $2,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Alternative and Unconventional Energy Research and Development ................... $10,000,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Alternative Energy Medical Complex ..................................................................... $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Bio-Energy Research Center .................................................................................. $800,000 Senator Tester Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Biofuel from Nevada’s Municipal Wastes ............................................................. $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Biofuels, Biopower, and Biomaterials Initiative .................................................... $1,250,000 Senators Chambliss, Isakson Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Biomass Boiler and Steam Absorption Chiller Plant ............................................ $650,000 Senator Johnson Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Biomass Boiler at Ferrum College ......................................................................... $300,000 Senators Webb, Warner Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Bucknell University Marcellus Shale Research Initiative ...................................... $200,000 Senators Specter, Casey Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Center for Biomass Utilization .............................................................................. $1,500,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Center for Ocean Renewable Energy ..................................................................... $500,000 Senator Shaheen Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Center for Ozark Community Biomass Energy Development ................................. $1,500,000 Senator Bond Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Chittenden County Natural Gas Refueling Project ................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Leahy Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... CHRISTUS Center for Healthy Living and Energy Efficient LEED Technology ....... $300,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... City of Grand Rapids City Building Solar and Wind Renewable Energy Demonstration Project. $400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... City of Lansing Bioenergy Generation Demonstration Project .............................. $400,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... City of San Jose Smart LEED Streetlights, CA ...................................................... $600,000 Senator Feinstein Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... City of Yreka Biomass Facility, CA ........................................................................ $500,000 Senator Feinstein Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Clean Energy Infrastructure Educational Initiative ............................................... $200,000 Senator Sherrod Brown Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Co-Gen Electrostatic Precipitator .......................................................................... $700,000 Senator Gillibrand Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Collaboration on Renewable Energy Job Creation Strategies ............................... $300,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Delaware Energy Efficiency .................................................................................... $55,000 Senators Carper, Kaufman Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks and Biomass Conversion Technology for Renewable Energy Production. $6,000,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Energy Conservation, Solar Energy Education and Research ............................... $300,000 Senator Landrieu Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Energy Recovery at the Water Reclamation Facility ............................................. $750,000 Senators Tester, Baucus Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Ethanol From Agriculture for Arkansas and America ........................................... $1,000,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Farm Solar Share ................................................................................................... $645,000 Senators Carper, Kaufman Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Farm-Based Renewable Energy ............................................................................. $400,000 Senator Murray Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Fuel Cell Durability Research ................................................................................ $400,000 Senator Dodd Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Genetic Improvement of Switchgrass for Biofuels ................................................ $500,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Geothermal Conversion Project .............................................................................. $1,000,000 Senator Lugar Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Great Basin College—Direct Use Geothermal Demonstration Project .................. $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Green Building, NY ................................................................................................ $250,000 Senators Schumer, Gillibrand 
177 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Green Energy Sustainable Loan Program .............................................................. $700,000 Senator Gillibrand Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Hawaii Energy Sustainability Program .................................................................. $6,000,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Hawaii Renewable Energy Development Venture .................................................. $6,000,000 Senator Inouye Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... High Performance Computing Infrastructure for Modeling Solar Energy ............. $700,000 Senator Hagan Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... High Speed Wind Turbine Noise Model with Suppression .................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Home Energy Efficiency Research and Development Initiative ............................. $500,000 Senators Specter, Casey Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Hoonah IPEC Hydroelectric Project ........................................................................ $1,500,000 Senator Murkowski Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Industrial Technologies Program Language .......................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Institute for Environmental Studies ...................................................................... $450,000 Senator Rockefeller Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Iowa Central Community College Renewable Fuels Laboratory ............................ $500,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Kaukauna Utilities Hydroelectric Generator Replacement ..................................... $1,000,000 Senator Kohl Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Large-Scale Wind Training .................................................................................... $400,000 Senators Schumer, Gillibrand Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Las Vegas Residential Energy Efficiency Program ................................................ $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Livingston Campus Geothermal Energy System .................................................... $750,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Long Island Sustainable Schools Network ............................................................ $450,000 Senator Schumer Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Maine Tidal Power Initiative .................................................................................. $1,000,000 Senators Collins, Snowe Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Martin County Microfiber Fuel Cell Technology Development ............................... $500,000 Senators Burr, Hagan Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Mega-Turbine Research for Enhanced Wind Power .............................................. $750,000 Senator Ben Nelson Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Mendocino County for the Strategic Woody-Biomass Initiative ............................ $450,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... MidSouth/Southeast BioEnergy Consortium ........................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Montana Algal BioDiesel Initiative ........................................................................ $750,000 Senators Tester, Baucus Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Nanostructured Materials for Improved Photovoltaics .......................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... National Center for Deepwater Offshore Wind ...................................................... $10,000,000 Senators Collins, Snowe Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... National Open-Ocean Energy Laboratory ............................................................... $1,200,000 Senator Bill Nelson Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... National Wind Energy Center, University of Houston, Houston, TX ...................... $3,000,000 Senator Hutchison Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... National Wind Resource Center at Pantex ............................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Cornyn Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Natural Resource Research Center [NRCC] ........................................................... $750,000 Senators Pryor, Lincoln Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Nevada Inter-Tribal Energy Consortium ................................................................ $150,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Nevada Renewable Energy Consortium ................................................................. $3,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Nevada Renewable Energy Innovation and Deployment Cluster—Technology 

Commercialization and Site Development.

$3,000,000 Senator Reid 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... North Country Community Wood Energy Systems ................................................. $200,000 Senator Shaheen Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Nushagak Area Hydropower Project ....................................................................... $500,000 Senator Murkowski Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Ocean-Based Energy Generation ........................................................................... $600,000 Senator Murray Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing Center [OAEMC] ....................................... $500,000 Senator Sherrod Brown Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Ohio Low Cost Carbon Fiber Initiative .................................................................. $1,500,000 Senators Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... OIT Geothermal Power Generation Plant ............................................................... $400,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Old Dominion University, Construction and Operation of a Demonstration Scale 

Algal Research Center.

$750,000 Senators Webb, Warner 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Optimized Concentrated Solar Power Trough Development Project ...................... $750,000 Senator Specter 
178 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Photovoltaic System at Closed, Capped Landfill .................................................. $650,000 Senator Schumer Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Producing Renewable, Value-Added Products from Waste Feedstocks ................ $1,000,000 Senator Landrieu Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Rapid Battery Charging Device for Electric Vehicles ............................................ $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Red Wing Regional Biosolids Processing Facility ................................................. $700,000 Senator Klobuchar Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Reedsport Wave Power Project (Phase I) .............................................................. $400,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Technical Training Center ....................................................... $500,000 Senator Schumer Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Demonstration ......................................................................... $750,000 Senator Durbin Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Demonstration Projects at Old FLC ......................................... $300,000 Senator Mark Udall Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Feasibility Study and Resources Assessment for Lincoln 

County, NV.

$500,000 Senator Reid 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Initiative .................................................................................. $500,000 Senator Durbin Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Renewable Energy Solar Farm ............................................................................... $650,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Reno Hydrogen Fuel ............................................................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Research and Develop Geothermal Energy ............................................................ $700,000 Senator Begich Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Research, Development and Demonstration of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Drive 

Kits.

$1,000,000 Senator Kohl 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Rowan University Algae-Based Renewable Fuel Initiative .................................... $750,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Salem City Solar Energy Project ............................................................................ $300,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... San Francisco Bay Area Biosolids to Energy Project, CA ..................................... $500,000 Senator Feinstein Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... San Francisco Electric Vehicle Initiative ............................................................... $300,000 Senator Boxer Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Shenandoah Valley as a National Demonstration Project Achieving 25 Percent 

Renewable Energy by the Year 2025.

$350,000 Senator Warner 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sitka Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project .................................................. $1,000,000 Senators Murkowski, Begich Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Cell Connectivity Research and Development ............................................. $1,000,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Electric System ............................................................................................. $200,000 Senator Gillibrand Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Energy Infrastructure Enhancement ............................................................. $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Energy Research and Laboratory ................................................................. $500,000 Senator Lugar Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Power Module Development .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Leahy Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Solar Testing and Training .................................................................................... $400,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... South Jordan NGV Fleet Implementation Program ................................................ $300,000 Senator Bennett Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... South Utah Electric District Crab Creek Small Hydropower Facility ..................... $1,000,000 Senator Bennett Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Southern Regional Center for Lightweight Innovative Designs ............................ $3,500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Southwest Washington Tidal Energy Project ......................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Springfield Fast-Fill CNG Facility .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Bond Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Strategic Biomass Initiative .................................................................................. $500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 
179 

Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sun Grant Initiative, South Dakota State University Regional Biomass Feedstock Research and Development. $2,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Biofuel Production—Consolidated Bioprocessing Strategy for Biomass Conversion. $400,000 Senator Kerry Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Campus Initiative of Sierra Nevada College at Lake Tahoe ............ $400,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Energy Homeowner Outreach Program .............................................. $200,000 Senator Sanders Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Energy in Schools .............................................................................. $500,000 Senator Sanders Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Energy Institute ................................................................................. $500,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Sustainable Energy Research Center .................................................................... $9,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Tri-County Biomass Energy Pilot Project ............................................................... $800,000 Senators Tester, Baucus Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility Environmental and Energy Enhancement. $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Uintah Natural Gas Fueling Station ...................................................................... $300,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... University of Louisville Research and Energy Independence Program ................. $2,000,000 Senator McConnell Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... UNLV—Intermountain West Sustainable Development Project ............................. $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... UNR—Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy ................................................ $250,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... University of Rhode Island–Offshore Wind Energy Research Initiative ................ $750,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Utah Center for Energy Innovation and Commercialization .................................. $3,400,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Vermont Biofuels and Carbon Harvest Initiative .................................................. $750,000 Senator Leahy Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Vermont Biomass Energy Resource Center ........................................................... $1,000,000 Senator Leahy Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Vernonia Sustainable Schools ............................................................................... $300,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... White Earth Tribal BioMass Bio Fuel Project ........................................................ $700,000 Senators Klobuchar, Franken Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Energy Infrastructure .................................................................................... $550,000 Senator Dorgan Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Energy Materials Development ..................................................................... $1,500,000 Senator Dorgan Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Energy Technology Training Program ........................................................... $500,000 Senator Murray Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Energy Training and Infrastructure .............................................................. $750,000 Senator Dorgan Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Power Exploration ......................................................................................... $100,000 Senators Tester, Baucus Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wind Resource Monitoring and Training Program ................................................ $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy .... Wireless Turbine Blade Sensor System Research ................................................. $750,000 Senator Schumer Department of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. Dubuque Smarter Energy Project ........................................................................... $500,000 Senator Harkin Department of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. Energy Development and Reliability ...................................................................... $300,000 Senator DorganDepartment of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. Navajo Nation Electrification Program .................................................................. $900,000 Senators Bingaman, Tom Udall Department of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. Smart Grid Simulation Technology ........................................................................ $800,000 Senator DorganDepartment of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. Technology Development ........................................................................................ $750,000 Senator Dorgan 
180 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Department of Energy ........ Elecricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. UNR—Energy Storage for Intermittent Renewable Energy Sources ..................... $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Nuclear Energy ............................................. Nuclear Engineering Research Center ................................................................... $500,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Nuclear Energy ............................................. Nuclear Fabrication Consortium ............................................................................ $2,000,000 Senator Voinovich, Sherrod Brown Department of Energy ........ Nuclear Energy ............................................. Nuclear Power Operator Simulator ........................................................................ $400,000 Senator Kerry Department of Energy ........ Nuclear Energy ............................................. Ohio State Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Facility Research and Education Expansion. $2,000,000 Senator Voinovich Department of Energy ........ Nuclear Energy ............................................. Oversight of Yucca Mountain Shut Down and Reclamation ................................. $2,500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Clean Energy Technology ....................................................................................... $2,000,000 Senator Dorgan Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ CO2 Sequestration Projects ................................................................................... $700,000 Senators Mark Udall, Bennet Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Fossil Fuel Research and Development ................................................................. $3,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Gulf of Mexico Hydrates Research Consortium ..................................................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Hydrogen Fuel Dispensing Station ......................................................................... $750,000 Senator Rockefeller Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Long Term Environmental and Economic Impacts of the Development of a Coal 

Liquefaction Sector in China.

$750,000 Senator Rockefeller 

Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ National Center for Hydrogen Technology ............................................................. $3,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Sunbury Generation/Calera Carbon Capture Project ............................................. $750,000 Senator Specter Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ University of Kentucky Coal-Derived Low Energy Materials for Sustainable Construction Project. $1,000,000 Senator McConnell Department of Energy ........ Fossil Energy ................................................ Utah Center for Ultra-Clean Coal Utilization and Heavy Oil Research ................ $7,000,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Advanced Computer Simulation Initiative ............................................................. $1,000,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Alaska Climate Center ........................................................................................... $500,000 Senators Murkowski, Begich Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Antibodies Research .............................................................................................. $4,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems ...................................................................... $2,000,000 Senator Rockefeller Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Center for Nanoscale Energy ................................................................................. $7,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Characteristics and Cleanup of the U.S. Nuclear Legacy .................................... $3,500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Climate Model Evaluation Program ....................................................................... $2,000,000 Senators Shelby, Sessions Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Computing Capability ............................................................................................ $2,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Conrad Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Development of Nontechnology-enhanced Solar Cells with Low Cost and High 

Conversion Efficiency.

$500,000 Senator Reid 

Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Energy Research .................................................................................................... $250,000 Senator Cochran Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Laboratory: Monitoring/Assessment of 

the Radioactive Pollutants in the South-West Mississippi.

$750,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Functional Nanoparticles for Improved Ultra Capacitor Devices .......................... $1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Idaho National Laboratory Center for Advanced Energy Studies .......................... $1,000,000 Senators Crapo, Risch Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... KU Cancer Research Equipment ............................................................................ $4,000,000 Senators Brownback, Roberts 
181 

Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Lincoln Memorial University/ORNL Partnership on Geothermal Energy ................ $2,000,000 Senator Alexander Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Material Science Smart Coatings .......................................................................... $500,000 Senator Ben Nelson Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Metal-enhanced Fluorescence Research and Development .................................. $750,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Missouri University Research Reactor Reflector Shield ........................................ $1,000,000 Senator Bond Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Nanotechnology Initiative ....................................................................................... $600,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Nevada Water Resources Data, Modeling, and Visualization [DMV] Center ........ $750,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Oregon Sustainability Center ................................................................................. $300,000 Senators Wyden, Merkley Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... RNAi Research ....................................................................................................... $300,000 Senator Kerry Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Solid State Preparation and Characterization Lab ............................................... $500,000 Senator Reid Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Southern Illinois University Research .................................................................... $750,000 Senator Durbin Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... Technology Transfer & Commercialization of Technologies at DOE ..................... $500,000 Senators Bingaman, Tom Udall Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... TU Algae to Green Fuels Energy Project ................................................................ $750,000 Senator Inhofe Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... University of California, San Diego Seismic Research ......................................... $1,500,000 Senator Feinstein Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... University of South Dakota Project on Renewable Energy and the Economy ....... $350,000 Senator Johnson Department of Energy ........ Office of Science .......................................... URI Regional Earth System Center ........................................................................ $750,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse Department of Energy ........ Other Defense Activities ............................... Burlington Atomic Energy Commission Plant and Ames Laboratory Former 

Workers Medical Surveillance Programs.

$1,000,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 

Department of Energy ........ Other Defense Activities ............................... Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN ......... $1,000,000 Senator McConnell 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI ......................................................................................................... $408,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, MD & DC (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) .............................. $183,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... AUGUSTA, GA ............................................................................................................................. $578,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA .......................................................................................................... $2,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL, TX ........................................................... $726,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... CALCASIEU LOCK, LA ................................................................................................................. $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA ................................................................ $900,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... COYOTE AND BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA ..................................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... CURRITUCK SOUND, NC ............................................................................................................. $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, NJ ......................................................................... $290,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II) ............................................................................................ $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD ............................................................. $169,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... EDISTO ISLAND, SC .................................................................................................................... $114,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... FARGO-MOORHEAD METRO STUDY, ND & MN (RRN BASIN AUTHORITY) .................................. $15,150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENTS, TX .................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA & WI ........................ $400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX .................................................................. $600,000 The President 
182 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ............................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ ......................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ ....................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... INDIANA HARBOR, IN ................................................................................................................. $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH, NY ............................................................. $170,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... JOHN H. KERR DAM & RESERVOIR, VA & NC (SEC 216) ......................................................... $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS ........................................................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY .................................................................................................... $172,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LAKE WORTH INLET, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL ........................................................................ $340,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ....................................................... $16,595,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX ........................................................................................ $425,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ............................................. $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA ....................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA ............................................................................................... $210,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK ......................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA .................................................................. $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN ................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, MN & SD ................................................................... $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION, MO & KS ............................................................................... $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... MT ST HELENS ........................................................................................................................... $225,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC ........................................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ...................................................................................... $250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, GA ........................................................ $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... PILGRIM LAKE, TRURO & PROVINCETOWN, MA ......................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, WA ............................................ $400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO AND TX (SECTION 729) .............................................................. $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX ...................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, WISSAHICKON WATERSHED, PA ...................................................... $214,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA .......................................................................................... $307,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC ............................................................................ $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... SUTTER COUNTY, CA ................................................................................................................. $339,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... TYBEE ISLAND, GA ..................................................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA ................................................................................................. $177,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BASIN, VA ................................................................................ $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OR ............................................................... $220,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR ................................................................. $153,000 The President 
183 

Corps of Engineers .......................... General Investigations .................... YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................... $450,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... AKUTAN HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................................. $7,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ALTON TO GALE ORGANIZED LEVEE DISTRICT, IL & MO (DEF CORR) ...................................... $150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON FEATURES), CA ....................................................... $4,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA ........................................ $78,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE & BRIDGE), CA ...................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD .......................................................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NY ...................................... $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AT DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, 

VA.

$1,590,000 The President 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO ................................................................................ $4,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... BLUESTONE LAKE, WV (DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE) ................................................................... $15,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX .................................................................................................... $3,740,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... BREVARD COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................................... $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CANTON LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY) .............................................................................................. $24,334,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ .............................................................................. $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CENTER HILL DAM, TN (SEEPAGE CONTROL) ............................................................................ $77,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (DEF CORR) ................................................. $5,385,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA ..................................................................... $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CHESTERFIELD, MO .................................................................................................................... $3,939,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL .............................................. $11,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CHIEF JOSEPH DAM GAS ABATEMENT, WA ................................................................................ $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... CLEARWATER LAKE, MO (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .......................................................................... $40,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID .................................................................... $116,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR & WA .................................................. $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DADE COUNTY, FL ...................................................................................................................... $11,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES BEACH, DE ................................... $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DES PLAINES RIVER, IL ............................................................................................................. $10,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DOVER DAM MUSKINGUM RIVER, OH ........................................................................................ $36,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DUVAL COUNTY, FL .................................................................................................................... $7,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA ................................................................................ $5,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... EAST ST. LOUIS, IL .................................................................................................................... $2,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... EMSWORTH LOCKS & DAM, OHIO RIVER, PA (STATIC INSTABILITY CORRECTION) ................... $11,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY ............................................................................. $4,600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... FORT PIERCE BEACH, FL ........................................................................................................... $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND (REPLACEMENT) ....................................................... $11,088,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET AND PECK BEACH, NJ ................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA .................................................................. $11,750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .................................................................... $104,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA ...................................................................................................... $500,000 The President 
184 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... INDIANA HARBOR, CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY, IN ............................................................... $8,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ..................................................................................... $7,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ....................................................................................................... $6,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (REPLACEMENT) ............................................ $6,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS ........................................................................................................... $700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY ................................................................. $2,868,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (HURRICANE PROTECTION) ................................................. $5,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA & KY .............................. $22,250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN ....................................................................................................... $10,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOCK AND DAM 27, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (MAJOR REHAB) .................................................... $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3 AND 4 MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ....................................................... $2,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY .......................................................................................................... $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ....................................................... $19,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ ................................................................ $8,920,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ............................................. $4,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMPENSATION, WA, OR & ID ............................... $1,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MANATEE COUNTY, FL ............................................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY (MAJOR REHAB) .................................................................... $5,400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MARTIN COUNTY, FL .................................................................................................................. $8,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL ............................................................................... $40,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO & IL ...... $4,345,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MISSOURI RIVER FISH MITIGATION, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD .......................................... $74,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA ................................................................................ $1,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA (FISH PASSAGE) ............................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... MUDDY RIVER, MA ..................................................................................................................... $2,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... NAPA RIVER, SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CA .......................................................................... $12,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... NASSAU COUNTY, FL .................................................................................................................. $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ ..................................................................... $57,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... NORFOLK HARBOR, CRANEY ISLAND, VA ................................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA .............................................................................. $4,330,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY ................................................................... $136,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... POPLAR ISLAND, MD .................................................................................................................. $1,530,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR ..................................................................................... $39,539,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... PRESQUE ISLE PENINSULA, PA (PERMANENT) ........................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ ............................................................ $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... RICHARD B. RUSSEL DAM & LAKE, GA & SC ........................................................................... $1,000,000 The President 
185 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM ..................................... $1,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR ............................................................................................................ $12,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA ......................................................... $1,075,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA ......................................................................... $12,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA ............................................................. $10,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA ............................................................................................. $25,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA ......................................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ................................................. $155,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA ............................................................................ $4,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FL .............................................................................................................. $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO .......................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... SUCCESS DAM AND RESERVOIR, CA (DAM SAFETY) ................................................................. $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... TAMPA HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................................... $1,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KANSAS CITY, KS & MO ....................................................................... $8,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI .............................................. $19,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... WEST BANK AND VICINITY, NEW ORLEANS, LA ......................................................................... $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... WEST SACRAMENTO, CA ............................................................................................................ $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ......................................................................................................... $2,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .......................................... $134,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Construction, General ...................... WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL ............................................................................................................. $1,098,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–GI ......................................... COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ........................................................ $246,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–GI ......................................... COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ................................ $1,400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–GI ......................................... MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT STUDY, TN .......................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–CG ........................................ ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ........................................................................... $2,631,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–CG ........................................ ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ........................................................................................................... $15,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–CG ........................................ CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .......................................................... $47,209,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–CG ........................................ MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ...................................................... $36,038,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ........................................................................... $1,878,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ........................................................................................................... $12,398,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA .............................................................................. $42,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA ................................................................................. $47,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .......................................................... $66,008,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR .................................................................................. $190,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL .................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY .................................................................................. $20,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ................................................................................... $586,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ................................................................................. $185,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS .................................................................................. $109,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN .................................................................................. $70,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR ............................................................................ $223,000 The President 
186 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR ............................................................................. $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA .......................................................................... $377,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN .................................................................................. $1,433,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION—CAERNARVON, LA ....................................................................... $921,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... OLD RIVER, LA ........................................................................................................................... $9,255,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA ............................................................ $2,374,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA ............................................................................ $3,286,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO ............................................................................................................. $4,966,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR .................................................................................................. $1,276,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS ............................................................................................... $790,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... MR&T–O&M ..................................... YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS ................................................................................................. $1,469,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ABIQUIU DAM, NM ..................................................................................................................... $2,891,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALABAMA—COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL .......................................................... $253,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL ....................................................................................................... $18,745,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALAMO LAKE, AZ ........................................................................................................................ $3,019,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID .............................................................................................................. $1,521,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALLATOONA LAKE, GA ................................................................................................................ $7,008,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA ............................................................................................................... $8,456,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALMOND LAKE, NY ..................................................................................................................... $490,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................................................. $1,435,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ALVIN R. RUSH DAM, PA ........................................................................................................... $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK .......................................................................................................... $14,013,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL ........................................ $2,603,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ APPLEGATE LAKE, OR ................................................................................................................ $1,298,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ AQUILLA LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................................... $1,120,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ARCADIA LAKE, OK ..................................................................................................................... $596,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ARKANSAS—RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL—AREA VIII, TX ................................... $1,439,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ARKPORT DAM, NY ..................................................................................................................... $223,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH .......................................................................................................... $1,995,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA ............................................ $12,230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—ACC, VA ...................................................................... $2,150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—DSC, NC & VA ............................................................ $1,825,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA ................................................................................. $1,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC ................................................................................. $4,750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC ................................................................................. $2,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA .................................................................................................. $230,000 The President 
187 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ B. EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC ................................................................................. $1,918,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BALL MOUNTAIN, VT .................................................................................................................. $896,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD .............................................................. $17,215,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............................................................................. $375,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA ................................................................................................ $135,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI .................................................................................................... $330,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARDWELL LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................. $1,879,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE, BARKLEY, KY & TN .......................................................................... $10,025,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ................................................................................................................. $325,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARRE FALLS DAM, MA ............................................................................................................. $700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY ........................................................................................................... $3,454,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BASS HARBOR, TREMONT, ME ................................................................................................... $65,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA ............................................................................................... $1,072,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE-JUMP WATERWAY, LA .................................................... $1,050,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU PIERRE, LA .................................................................................................................... $24,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA ............................................................................................. $37,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU TECHE & VERMILION RIVER, LA .................................................................................... $11,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYOU TECHE, LA ...................................................................................................................... $150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BEALS HARBOR, ME .................................................................................................................. $1,250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO .............................................................................................................. $647,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BEAVER LAKE, AR ...................................................................................................................... $10,570,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BEECH FORK LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................. $1,377,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BELTON LAKE, TX ....................................................................................................................... $3,682,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................ $1,425,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BENBROOK LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................. $2,578,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BERLIN LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................................... $2,347,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BETHEL HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................................. $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD ........................................................................................... $9,768,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY ............................................................................................................ $1,600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BIGSTONE LAKE AND WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD ................................................................. $251,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BILOXI HARBOR, MS .................................................................................................................. $1,400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BIRCH HILL DAM, MA ................................................................................................................ $792,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BIRCH LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................ $646,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................. $2,367,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY ........................................................... $1,552,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT .............................................................................................................. $537,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL ......................................................................... $20,751,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLACKWATER DAM, NH .............................................................................................................. $716,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR .................................................................................... $9,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI ................................................................................... $1,250,000 The President 
188 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA .............................................................................................................. $2,817,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR ........................................................................................................ $1,612,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... $573,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BLUESTONE LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................... $1,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BONNEVILLE LOCK & DAM, OR & WA ....................................................................................... $7,487,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BOSTON HARBOR, MA ................................................................................................................ $2,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BOWMAN HALEY, ND .................................................................................................................. $246,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX .................................................................................................... $3,468,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. $2,458,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................ $1,141,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BROWNS CREEK, NY .................................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA .......................................................................................................... $6,719,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA ................................................................................. $2,119,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUCKHORN LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................. $1,655,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUFFALO BAYOU & TRIBUTARIES, TX ........................................................................................ $3,518,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUFFALO HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................... $1,165,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA ............................................................................................................ $657,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA ........................................................................... $8,840,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................. $7,292,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN ................................................................................................ $171,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV .............................................................................................................. $3,049,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY ........................................................................................................ $8,600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CADDO LAKE, LA ........................................................................................................................ $222,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH .......................................................................................................... $1,559,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN .............................................................................................................. $1,030,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA .............................................................................................. $20,081,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN .................................................................................... $4,238,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................... $4,715,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CANTON LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................................... $1,949,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CANYON LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................................... $3,429,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CAPE COD CANAL, MA ............................................................................................................... $14,174,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC ............................................................................. $2,243,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CARLYLE LAKE, IL ...................................................................................................................... $5,643,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CARR CREEK LAKE, KY .............................................................................................................. $1,882,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA ................................................................................................... $8,136,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO ................................................................................................. $900,000 The President 
189 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CAVE RUN LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................. $965,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CECIL M. HARDEN LAKE, IN ...................................................................................................... $1,013,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CEDAR BAYOU, TX ..................................................................................................................... $1,695,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CEDAR CREEK, DE ..................................................................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CENTER HILL LAKE, TN .............................................................................................................. $5,067,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CENTRAL & SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL ......................................................................................... $19,520,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................... $4,600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX ............................................................................................... $329,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHANNELS IN LAKE ST. CLAIR, MI ............................................................................................ $1,117,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA ........................................................... $329,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC ........................................................................................................ $9,925,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................... $208,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHATFIELD LAKE, CO ................................................................................................................. $1,375,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN ................................................................................................ $6,358,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK ........................................................................................................... $2,999,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO ......................................................................................................... $1,057,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHETCO RIVER, OR .................................................................................................................... $586,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHICAGO HARBOR, IL ................................................................................................................ $2,064,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHICAGO RIVER, IL .................................................................................................................... $510,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL ............................................... $7,450,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ........................................................................... $3,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA ............................................................................................................ $772,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA ......................................................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS ................................................................................................. $74,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO ............................................................ $7,841,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH .................................................................................................. $1,190,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLEARWATER LAKE, MO ............................................................................................................. $3,021,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH .......................................................................................................... $14,480,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CLINTON LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................................... $2,080,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COCHITI LAKE, NM ..................................................................................................................... $3,546,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLD BROOK LAKE, SD ............................................................................................................. $1,080,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLD SPRING INLET, NJ ............................................................................................................ $350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT .................................................................................................... $689,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLUMBIA & LWR WILLAMETTE R BLW VANCOUVER, WA AND PORTLAND, OR ....................... $24,868,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA ............................................................................ $18,350,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA & THE DALLES, OR .......................................... $645,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA ......................................................................................................... $403,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CONCHAS LAKE, NM .................................................................................................................. $2,972,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA ................................................................................................... $1,351,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH ............................................................................................................ $940,000 The President 
190 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC .............................................................................. $6,140,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COOS BAY, OR ........................................................................................................................... $5,791,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COPAN LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................ $1,104,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COQUILLE RIVER, OR ................................................................................................................. $433,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CORALVILLE LAKE, IA ................................................................................................................. $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ................................................................................ $6,429,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX ........................................................................................ $4,608,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ $1,319,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD ............................................................................................. $285,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COUGAR LAKE, OR ..................................................................................................................... $1,733,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................ $1,649,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COWANESQUE LAKE, PA ............................................................................................................. $1,772,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA ........................................................................... $6,190,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA ....................................................................................................... $2,039,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV ..................................................................................... $188,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................... $687,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN ............................................................................................................ $6,219,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DARDANELLE LOCK & DAM, AR ................................................................................................. $7,632,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DEER CREEK LAKE, OH .............................................................................................................. $1,323,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DEGRAY LAKE, AR ...................................................................................................................... $7,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DELAWARE LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................. $1,362,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ ............................................................................................ $15,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE ................................................... $20,020,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ ............................................................ $820,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX & OK ................................................................................... $10,057,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DEQUEEN LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................... $1,467,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DETROIT LAKE, OR ..................................................................................................................... $1,127,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DETROIT RIVER, MI .................................................................................................................... $5,218,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DEWEY LAKE, KY ........................................................................................................................ $1,762,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DIERKS LAKE, AR ....................................................................................................................... $1,570,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK .......................................................................................................... $955,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DILLON LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................................... $1,260,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME ............................................................................................. $1,050,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DORENA LAKE, OR ..................................................................................................................... $1,055,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DOUGLAS HARBOR, AK .............................................................................................................. $241,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE & CHANNEL, CA ............................................................... $9,471,000 The President 
191 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI ..................................................................................... $7,237,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DUXBURY HARBOR, MA ............................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ DWORKSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID ..................................................................................... $2,965,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA .................................................................................. $1,671,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA ........................................................................................................ $557,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS .......................................................................................... $220,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST LYNN LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................ $2,215,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST RIVER, NY ......................................................................................................................... $2,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY ....................................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY .............................................................................................................. $573,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY ......................................................................................................... $150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI ...................................................................................................... $729,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EDIZ HOOK, WA .......................................................................................................................... $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH ............................................................................................... $635,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EL DORADO LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ $609,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ELK CITY LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................... $1,040,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ELK CREEK LAKE, OR ................................................................................................................ $87,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ELKINS, WV ................................................................................................................................ $15,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY ...................................................................................... $780,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ERIE HARBOR, PA ...................................................................................................................... $1,389,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL ...................................................................................... $68,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX .................................................................... $43,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EUFAULA LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................... $7,232,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA ....................................................................... $1,006,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH ............................................................................................................. $1,572,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FALL CREEK LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... $1,149,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FALL RIVER LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ $1,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FALLS LAKE, NC ......................................................................................................................... $2,042,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL ................................................................................................... $398,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FARMINGTON DAM, CA ............................................................................................................... $450,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... $1,800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL .......................................................................................................... $1,294,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O’ THE PINES, TX ..................................................................... $3,709,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY ................................................................................... $5,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FISHTRAP LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................... $1,942,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY ................................................................................................ $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. $6,216,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD ........................................................................ $8,970,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. $1,058,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA ............................................................................................ $672,000 The President 
192 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, PROVIDENCE, RI .................................................................. $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FOX RIVER, WI ........................................................................................................................... $2,402,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA .................................................................................................... $880,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH ......................................................................................................... $724,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ............................................................................................................. $3,538,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA ........................................................................................................... $1,625,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ FT. PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT ................................................................................................... $5,411,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GALISTEO DAM, NM ................................................................................................................... $927,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................... $8,441,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND .................................................................................... $12,764,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA ................................................................................ $2,268,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GAVINS POINT DAM, NE & SD ................................................................................................... $7,706,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA ................................................................ $250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC ....................................................................................................... $1,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GILLHAM LAKE, AR ..................................................................................................................... $1,340,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX ............................................................................................. $1,825,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI ...................................................................................................... $722,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX ................................................................................................... $2,360,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................. $3,014,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA .............................................................................. $10,550,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GRAYSON LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................... $1,434,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREAT KILLS HARBOR, STATEN ISLAND, NY .............................................................................. $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK ................................................................................................... $406,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY .............................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY .............................................................................................. $2,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI ........................................................................................................... $7,698,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREEN PETER—FOSTER LAKES, OR ......................................................................................... $2,139,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................. $2,242,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR .......................................................................................................... $10,230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL ........................................................................................ $5,230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA ........................................................................................ $19,031,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX ........................................................................................ $27,792,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ GULFPORT HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................ $10,537,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HAINES HARBOR, AK .................................................................................................................. $241,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL) .................... $1,225,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) ........................................... $50,000 The President 
193 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT ....................................................................................................... $478,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE ........................................................................................................ $2,222,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HARRY S. TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO ......................................................................... $8,842,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC ........................................................................................................ $11,501,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HELENA HARBOR, AR ................................................................................................................. $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HEYBURN LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................... $603,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA ............................................................................................. $2,163,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................. $863,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HILLSDALE LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................. $791,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA ....................................................................................................... $629,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOLLAND HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................... $655,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOMER HARBOR, AK .................................................................................................................. $513,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOMME LAKE, ND ...................................................................................................................... $276,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOP BROOK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................................ $1,092,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOPKINTON-EVERETT LAKES, NH ............................................................................................... $1,440,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................ $1,708,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA ................................................................................................. $4,352,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................................... $23,817,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................. ¥$1,811,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................................ ¥$4,028,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA ...................................................................................................... $3,276,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY ................................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT) ...................................................................................................... $3,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C) ..................................................................................................... $1,650,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HUGO LAKE, OK ......................................................................................................................... $1,748,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HULAH LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................ $901,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA ............................................................................................ $5,848,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ICE HARBOR LOCK & DAM, WA ................................................................................................. $4,147,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVR PORTION) .......................................................................... $32,238,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVS PORTION) .......................................................................... $1,802,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INDIAN RIVER INLET AND BAY, DE ............................................................................................ $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INDIANA HARBOR, IN ................................................................................................................. $5,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA ................................................. $85,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL ................................................... $65,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR ................................................. $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA ................................................. $32,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY ................................................. $10,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORK, AL ..................................................................................... $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK .................................................................................. $180,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR .................................................................................. $311,000 The President 
194 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ .................................................................................. $90,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA .................................................................................. $4,604,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO .................................................................................. $572,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT .................................................................................. $292,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC .................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL ................................................................................... $900,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA .................................................................................. $141,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI ................................................................................... $961,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA ................................................................................... $393,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID ................................................................................... $288,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL .................................................................................... $1,707,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN ................................................................................... $800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS .................................................................................. $318,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY .................................................................................. $839,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ................................................................................... $758,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA .................................................................................. $349,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD ................................................................................. $124,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME .................................................................................. $148,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI ................................................................................... $125,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN ................................................................................. $463,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ................................................................................. $1,713,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS .................................................................................. $34,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT .................................................................................. $120,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC .................................................................................. $255,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND .................................................................................. $303,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE .................................................................................. $343,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH .................................................................................. $105,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ ................................................................................... $145,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM ................................................................................. $740,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV .................................................................................. $66,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY .................................................................................. $858,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH .................................................................................. $624,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK .................................................................................. $261,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR .................................................................................. $559,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA .................................................................................. $744,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI ................................................................................... $24,000 The President 
195 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC .................................................................................. $64,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD .................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX ................................................................................... $1,364,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT .................................................................................. $31,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA .................................................................................. $367,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT ................................................................................... $79,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA .................................................................................. $750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI ................................................................................... $64,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV .................................................................................. $279,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY .................................................................................. $37,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD ..................... $16,075,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL ......................................................... $4,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO DELAWARE BAY, DE ...................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ISABELLA LAKE, CA .................................................................................................................... $1,956,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ..................................................................................... $12,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ J. EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN ...................................................................................................... $1,793,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ............................................................................. $4,608,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ J. STORM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC ...................................................................................... $10,918,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY ...................................................................................................... $1,001,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ....................................................................................................... $5,708,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JAMAICA BAY, NY ....................................................................................................................... $120,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA ....................................................................................................... $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM .......................................................................................................... $1,398,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV ...................................................................................... $2,856,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................. $1,939,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA .............................................. $9,449,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOE POOL LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................... $1,094,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ....................................................................................... $5,217,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHN H. KERR LAKE, VA & NC .................................................................................................. $11,423,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO .................................................................................................. $2,941,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS .............................................................................. $1,760,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA ....................................................................... $2,230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JOHNSTOWN, PA ......................................................................................................................... $36,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ JONES INLET, NY ........................................................................................................................ $150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS & DAM, WV ......................................................................................... $9,791,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KANOPOLIS, KS .......................................................................................................................... $1,561,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL ............................................................................................. $2,176,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KAW LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................................ $2,121,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KENTUCKY RIVER, KY ................................................................................................................ $10,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI ............................................................................................................ $8,000 The President 
196 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI ....................................................................................................... $12,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KEYSTONE LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................. $5,006,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHANY RESERVOIR, PA ......................................................................... $1,469,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA ............................................................................................................... $688,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ....................................................................... $677,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND ............................................................................... $1,424,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE CROCKETT (Keystone Harbor), WA .................................................................................... $550,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE KEMP, TX .......................................................................................................................... $467,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL .................................................................................................. $710,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY .................................................................................................... $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA ................................................................................................ $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL ............................................................................................................... $5,512,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN ........................................................................................................ $656,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA ......................................................................................... $13,376,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................ $1,646,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LAVON LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................................... $3,135,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LEWISVILLE DAM, TX .................................................................................................................. $3,542,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LIBBY DAM, MT .......................................................................................................................... $1,846,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO ................................................................................................. $741,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LITTLE GOOSE LOCK & DAM, WA ............................................................................................... $2,314,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................... $6,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA ............................................................................................................... $682,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO .......................................................................................................... $941,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY ........................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LONG ISLAND SOUND, DMMP, CT .............................................................................................. $2,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR ......................................................................................................... $2,080,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LORAIN HARBOR, OH ................................................................................................................. $443,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ............................................................................ $7,035,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOST CREEK LAKE, OR .............................................................................................................. $3,897,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOWER GRANITE LOCK & DAM, WA ........................................................................................... $5,872,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK & DAM, WA .................................................................................. $4,734,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA .............................................................................................................. $1,460,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID ................................................................................................................ $2,689,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................... $1,419,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA ............................................................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MADISON PARISH PORT, LA ....................................................................................................... $150,000 The President 
197 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA ...................................................................................................... $1,326,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MANISTEE HARBOR AND RIVER CHANNEL, MI .......................................................................... $252,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT .................................................................................................. $699,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC ............................................................................................. $8,095,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MARINA DEL REY, CA ................................................................................................................ $5,050,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MARION LAKE, KS ...................................................................................................................... $1,613,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................... $230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY ........................................................................................................... $1,088,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA ................................................................................................. $1,170,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ............................................................. $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH .......................................................................... $21,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................................ $5,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................................... $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR ................................................ $33,553,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK ................................................ $5,794,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MCNARY LOCK & DAM, OR & WA ............................................................................................. $6,277,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MELVERN LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................... $1,981,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ................................................................................................ $401,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MERMENTAU RIVER, LA ............................................................................................................. $2,008,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH ......................................................................... $1,403,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM (MRGESCP) .... $2,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY ....................................................................... $113,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MILFORD LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................................... $2,391,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MILL CREEK LAKE, WA ............................................................................................................... $3,817,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MILLWOOD LAKE, AR .................................................................................................................. $4,802,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI ........................................................................................................... $1,672,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MINNESOTA RIVER, MN .............................................................................................................. $262,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISPILLION RIVER, DE ............................................................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN ............................................................................................................. $1,147,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH ............................................................................................. $1,722,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), MN ........ $48,426,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR PORTION), IL .......... $53,692,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS PORTION), IL .......... $21,581,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO & IL ...... $28,731,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA ............................................................................. $4,215,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA ........................................... $62,969,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSOURI RIVER—KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SOIUX CITY, IA .................................................... $137,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MISSOURI RIVER—SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO, & NE ......................................... $9,021,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOBILE HARBOR, AL ................................................................................................................. $23,560,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA ............................................................................................................ $522,000 The President 
198 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ......................................................................................................... $15,861,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MONROE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................ $1,340,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MONROE LAKE, IN ...................................................................................................................... $1,899,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. $4,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MORICHES INLET, NY ................................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA ......................................................................................................... $1,590,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH ...................................................................................................... $1,413,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY .......................................................................................................... $3,661,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS ................................................................................................... $175,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA ................................................................................ $265,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA ......................................................................................................... $3,441,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MURDERKILL RIVER, DE ............................................................................................................ $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................ $872,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH .................................................................................................. $8,244,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ MYSTIC RIVER, CT ..................................................................................................................... $160,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NANTICOKE RIVER, MD .............................................................................................................. $160,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR ......................................................................................... $5,250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY ................................................................................ $85,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................... $2,767,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEAH BAY, WA ........................................................................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW BEDFORD, FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA .................................. $1,250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CT .......................................................................................................... $400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................... $2,476,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ ............................................................................. $250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO ....................................................................................................... $420,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA .................................................................. $1,929,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW RIVER INLET, NC ............................................................................................................... $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY ........................................................................... $6,150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW YORK HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................ $3,796,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL) ..................................................................... $7,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) ............................. $1,045,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ ............................................................ $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEWPORT BAY HARBOR, CA ...................................................................................................... $1,280,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NEWTOWN CREEK, NY ................................................................................................................ $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NIMROD LAKE, AR ...................................................................................................................... $1,957,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................. $420,000 The President 
199 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NOLIN LAKE, KY ......................................................................................................................... $2,821,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NOME HARBOR, AK .................................................................................................................... $973,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORFOLK HARBOR, VA ............................................................................................................... $11,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORFORK LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................... $6,224,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH ............................................................................ $296,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA ................................................................................. $668,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT ...................................................................................................... $719,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX ......................................................... $2,536,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT .................................................................................................. $838,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................... $559,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ O.C. FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX ............................................................................................... $1,373,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND ............................................................................................ $10,477,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OAKLAND HARBOR, CA .............................................................................................................. $7,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD .................................................. $1,400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................... $1,520,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH ...................................................................... $31,433,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV .......................................................................... $28,023,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH .......................................................................... $34,802,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN & OH ............................................................... $5,682,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV ................................................................... $633,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH ................................................................... $3,088,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS ................................................................................................................ $2,505,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL .................................................................................................... $2,444,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN ............................................................................................ $8,237,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................... $1,172,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OOLOGAH LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................... $2,089,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OPTIMA LAKE, OK ....................................................................................................................... $197,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ORWELL LAKE, MN ..................................................................................................................... $462,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR .............................................................................................................. $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OSWEGO HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................... $34,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH ............................................................................................................ $730,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA .................................................................................. $10,505,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ OZARK-JETA TAYLOR LOCK & DAM, AR ..................................................................................... $5,485,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................................................. $1,297,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ ............................................................................................................ $1,522,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................... $1,361,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL ......................................................................................................... $2,510,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................ $55,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PAPILLION CREEK, NE ................................................................................................................ $738,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS ........................................................................................................ $10,910,000 The President 
200 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM, NJ .......................................................................... $570,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................. $992,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PATOKA LAKE, IN ....................................................................................................................... $980,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PEARL RIVER, MS & LA ............................................................................................................. $145,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS ...................................................................................... $1,332,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................... $67,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK .......................................................... $167,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PERRY LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................ $2,254,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PETERSBURG HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................ $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PHILPOTT LAKE, VA & NC .......................................................................................................... $6,396,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PIG ISLAND GUT, ME ................................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV ................................................................................ $557,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PINE CREEK LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................... $1,032,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PINE FLAT LAKE, CA .................................................................................................................. $3,378,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PIPESTEM LAKE, ND ................................................................................................................... $550,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO .................................................................................................... $2,156,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ POMONA LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................................... $1,965,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY ...................................................................................................... $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVER, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL) ........................................................ $845,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROCTOR DAM AND LAKE, TX ................................................................................................... $2,336,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK ........................................................................................... $1,360,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL ............................................................................................ $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR ........................................................................................... $3,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA ........................................................................................... $2,132,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT ........................................................................................... $1,050,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC ........................................................................................... $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE ........................................................................................... $40,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL ............................................................................................ $1,450,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA ........................................................................................... $122,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI ............................................................................................ $604,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL ............................................................................................. $106,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN ............................................................................................ $185,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY ........................................................................................... $2,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA ............................................................................................ $60,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA ........................................................................................... $1,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD .......................................................................................... $475,000 The President 
201 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME ........................................................................................... $750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI ............................................................................................ $430,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN .......................................................................................... $84,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO .......................................................................................... $4,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS ........................................................................................... $77,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC ........................................................................................... $655,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH ........................................................................................... $275,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ ............................................................................................ $1,506,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY ........................................................................................... $1,928,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH ........................................................................................... $295,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR ........................................................................................... $200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA ........................................................................................... $170,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI ............................................................................................ $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC ........................................................................................... $625,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN ........................................................................................... $3,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX ............................................................................................ $451,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA ........................................................................................... $870,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA ........................................................................................... $459,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI ............................................................................................ $239,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PROMPTON LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................. $506,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA ........................................................................... $905,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA .................................................................................................................. $22,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA ............................................................................................................. $1,590,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ R. D. BAILEY LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................. $2,237,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ ......................................................................... $400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RARITAN RIVER, NJ .................................................................................................................... $225,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RATHBUN LAKE, IA ..................................................................................................................... $2,501,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................ $1,525,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................. $3,752,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN ........................................................................................................ $233,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE, RED ROCK, IA ............................................................................... $9,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL .......................................................................................... $3,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA .......................................................................................... $1,410,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ REND LAKE, IL ........................................................................................................................... $5,702,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN ...................................................... $4,381,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RICHARD B. RUSSEL DAM & LAKE, GA & SC ........................................................................... $9,387,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RICHMOND HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................................ $8,375,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIR, OK ........................................................... $7,604,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY .......................................................................................................... $56,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR .......................................................................................... $579,000 The President 
202 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC ......................................................................................................... $50,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................ $1,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH .......................................................................... $35,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................ $2,606,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ RUDEE INLET, VA ....................................................................................................................... $520,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ............................................................................................... $15,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SACO RIVER, ME ........................................................................................................................ $140,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA .......................................................................... $3,585,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA ............................................. $1,475,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA ............................................................... $161,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAGINAW RIVER, MI ................................................................................................................... $3,190,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SALAMONIE LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................. $1,012,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE .......................................................................................... $1,067,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX ................................................................................. $6,396,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN FRANCISCO BAY, DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA ............................................................. $1,087,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL) ...................................................... $3,090,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA ................................................................................................... $2,776,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA ......................................................................... $6,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR ............................................................................................................. $3,700,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA ...................................................................... $2,750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH ............................................................................................................ $1,102,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARD, NJ .......................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA .................................................................................................... $4,883,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA .................................................................................................. $2,040,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM ............................................................................................. $1,220,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SARDIS LAKE, OK ....................................................................................................................... $1,130,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA ............................................................................................................ $18,462,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA ................................................................................... $230,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA ............................................................................................................... $5,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCARBOROUGH RIVER, ME ........................................................................................................ $160,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ ............................................................................... $33,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA ............................................................................... $1,751,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO .............................................................................. $765,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID ................................................................................ $499,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS ............................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD .............................................................................. $60,000 The President 
203 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO .............................................................................. $327,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT .............................................................................. $270,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND .............................................................................. $253,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM .............................................................................. $532,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK ............................................................................... $900,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR .............................................................................. $92,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA ............................................................................... $46,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD ............................................................................... $144,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX ............................................................................... $194,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT ............................................................................... $653,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA .............................................................................. $447,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY .............................................................................. $213,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA .............................................................................................................. $250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SEATTLE HARBOR, WA ............................................................................................................... $951,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SEBEWAING RIVER, MI ............................................................................................................... $75,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SHARK RIVER, NJ ....................................................................................................................... $500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA ...................................................................................................... $2,496,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SHINNECOCK INLET, NY ............................................................................................................. $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ .............................................................................. $80,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SHREWSBURY RIVER MAIN CHANNEL, NJ .................................................................................. $80,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC ........................................................................................................ $150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SIUSLAW RIVER, OR ................................................................................................................... $1,083,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SKIATOOK LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................... $1,465,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO ............................................................................................................... $1,160,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................... $3,292,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SOURIS RIVER, ND ..................................................................................................................... $509,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY ........................................................... $925,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI .................................................................................................................. $1,233,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................... $755,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ST. LUCIE INLET, FL ................................................................................................................... $250,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ ST. MARYS RIVER, MI (NAVIGATION STRUCTURES) ................................................................... $22,074,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT ....................................................................................... $467,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA ....................................................................................................... $265,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX .................................................................................................. $2,150,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STILLWATER LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................ $363,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STOCKTON LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................. $4,153,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ................................................................................................ $1,273,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI ............................................. $19,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SUCCESS LAKE, CA .................................................................................................................... $2,529,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA ........................................................................................................ $2,980,000 The President 
204 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................... $2,636,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH ..................................................................................................... $746,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL ............................................................ $689,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN ........................................................... $125,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME .......................................................... $20,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI ........................................................... $2,501,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN .......................................................... $446,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND .......................................................... $35,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY ........................................................... $635,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH .......................................................... $257,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR .......................................................... $4,100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA ........................................................... $107,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA .......................................................... $74,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI ........................................................... $509,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SUTTON LAKE, WV ...................................................................................................................... $3,075,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA ......................................................................................................... $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR .................................................................................................... $8,293,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA ................................................................................................. $142,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TAMPA HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................................... $5,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TANGIER CHANNEL, VA .............................................................................................................. $1,135,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................ $1,232,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... $4,459,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ............................................................................................................... $16,540,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS ..................................... $2,344,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS ......................................................................... $28,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA .......................................................................................... $2,133,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................................. $1,436,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX ........................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ THE DALLES LOCK & DAM, WA & OR ........................................................................................ $8,702,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ THOMASTON DAM, CT ................................................................................................................ $994,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TIOGA HAMMOND LAKES, PA ..................................................................................................... $2,384,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TIONESTA LAKE, PA .................................................................................................................... $2,200,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TOLEDO HARBOR, OH ................................................................................................................ $7,849,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TOM JENKINS DAM, OH .............................................................................................................. $603,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TORONTO LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................... $652,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TOWN BLUFF DAM, B. A. STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX ....................................................................... $2,666,000 The President 
205 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TOWN CREEK, SC ....................................................................................................................... $380,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT ............................................................................................................... $797,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TRINIDAD LAKE, CO ................................................................................................................... $1,243,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TULLY LAKE, MA ........................................................................................................................ $726,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................... $2,644,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TWO RIVERS DAM, NM ............................................................................................................... $601,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ TYGART LAKE, WV ...................................................................................................................... $1,434,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ UMPQUA RIVER, OR ................................................................................................................... $800,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ UNION CITY LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................ $425,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ UNION LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................................ $5,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT ........................................................................................................... $683,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, CO, NM, TX .................................... $1,000,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ VENTURA HARBOR, CA .............................................................................................................. $2,840,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ W. KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC .............................................................................. $3,591,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WACO LAKE, TX .......................................................................................................................... $3,131,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WALLACE LAKE, LA .................................................................................................................... $241,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................... $2,175,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WALTER F. GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA ......................................................................... $8,394,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC ........................................................................................................ $25,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL ............................................................................. $400,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, VA ............................................................................ $104,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA ............................................................................ $5,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA ...................................... $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA ............................................................................ $600,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL ............................................................................................................. $590,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WAURIKA LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................... $2,568,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WEBBERS FALLS LOCK & DAM, OK ........................................................................................... $5,617,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH ...................................................................................... $750,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WEST HILL DAM, MA .................................................................................................................. $842,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL ..................................................................................... $8,845,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT ....................................................................................................... $849,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY ......................................................................................................... $100,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WESTVILLE LAKE, MA ................................................................................................................. $661,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WHITE RIVER, AR ....................................................................................................................... $30,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ ........................................................................................................ $607,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WHITNEY LAKE, TX ..................................................................................................................... $7,221,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY .......................................................................................................... $642,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WICOMICO RIVER, MD ............................................................................................................... $1,500,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR ........................................................................ $258,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR .............................................................................. $85,000 The President 
206 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA ............................................................................................ $75,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILLIAM H. HARSHA LAKE, OH .................................................................................................. $1,611,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR .......................................................................................................... $657,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE ......................................................................................................... $7,020,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ......................................................................................................... $12,846,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WILSON LAKE, KS ....................................................................................................................... $1,715,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WISTER LAKE, OK ....................................................................................................................... $922,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY ............................................................................. $8,089,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN .......................................................................................................... $180,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA .................................................................................................... $1,078,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WOONSOCKET, RI ....................................................................................................................... $300,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX ........................................................................................ $3,804,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR ............................................................................................... $1,986,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YATESVILLE LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................ $1,154,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YAZOO RIVER, MS ...................................................................................................................... $154,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YELLOW BEND PORT, AR ........................................................................................................... $115,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA .................................................................................................... $480,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD .................................................................................... $2,358,000 The President Corps of Engineers .......................... Operation and Maintenance ............ YUBA RIVER, CA ........................................................................................................................ $121,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Ak Chin Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Project, AZ ........................................................ $10,960,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Animas-La Plata Project, Colorado River Storage Participating Project, CO ........................... $12,462,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Arbuckle Project, OK .................................................................................................................. $230,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Balmorhea Project, TX ............................................................................................................... $51,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Boise Area Projects, ID .............................................................................................................. $5,546,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Cachuma Project, CA ................................................................................................................ $1,401,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... California Investigations Program, CA ...................................................................................... $233,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Calleguas Municipal Water District Recycling Project, CA ....................................................... $1,400,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Canadian River Project, TX ....................................................................................................... $165,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Carlsbad Project, NM ................................................................................................................ $4,780,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Central Valley Projects, CA: Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... American River Division, Folsom Dam Unit/Mormon Island, CA ..................................... $10,384,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Auburn-Folsom South Unit, CA ........................................................................................ $1,400,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Delta Division, CA ............................................................................................................ $20,008,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... East Side Division, CA ..................................................................................................... $4,401,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Friant Division, CA ........................................................................................................... $13,075,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Miscellaneous Project Programs, CA ................................................................................ $13,859,000 The President 
207 

Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Replacements, Additions, and Extraordinary Maint. Program, CA .................................. $21,656,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Sacramento River Division, CA ........................................................................................ $43,364,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Felipe Division, CA .................................................................................................... $1,179,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Joaquin Division, CA ................................................................................................. $400,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Shasta Division, CA .......................................................................................................... $10,491,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Trinity River Division, CA ................................................................................................. $16,661,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Water and Power Operations, CA ..................................................................................... $9,891,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... West San Joaquin Division, San Luis Unit, CA ................................................................ $15,400,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Yield Feasibility Investigation, CA ................................................................................... $448,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Collbran Project, CO .................................................................................................................. $2,514,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado Investigations Program, CO ....................................................................................... $183,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Basin Project—Central Arizona Project, AZ .................................................... $9,416,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Front Work and Levee System, AZ .................................................................... $2,255,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado-Big Thompson Project, CO ......................................................................................... $12,778,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Columbia and Snake River Salmon Recovery Project, ID ......................................................... $18,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Columbia Basin Project, WA ..................................................................................................... $12,075,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Crooked River Project, OR ......................................................................................................... $944,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Deschutes Project, OR ............................................................................................................... $1,326,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Eastern New Mexico Investigations Program, NM .................................................................... $23,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Eastern Oregon Projects, OR ..................................................................................................... $852,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Fort Peck Reservation/Dry Prairie Rural Water System, MT ..................................................... $6,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Fruitgrowers Dam Project, CO ................................................................................................... $319,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Fryingpan-Arkansas Project—Arkansas Valley Conduit, CO .................................................... $3,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, CO ................................................................................................ $8,824,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Grand Valley Unit, CRBSCP, Title II, CO ................................................................................... $1,540,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Halfway Wash Project/Study, NV ............................................................................................... $75,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Hungry Horse Project, MT .......................................................................................................... $702,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Huntley Project, MT ................................................................................................................... $115,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Hyrum Project, UT ...................................................................................................................... $324,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Idaho Investigations Program, ID ............................................................................................. $390,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Jicarilla Apache Rural Water System, NM ................................................................................ $500,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Kansas Investigations Program, KS .......................................................................................... $5,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Kendrick Project, WY ................................................................................................................. $4,310,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Klamath Dam Removal Study, OR ............................................................................................ $5,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Klamath Project, OR .................................................................................................................. $22,500,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lahontan Basin Project, NV ...................................................................................................... $6,723,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lake Mead/Las Vegas Wash Program, NV ................................................................................ $1,850,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands, CA .......................................................................................... $94,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Leadville/Arkansas River Recovery Project, CO ........................................................................ $6,659,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lewis and Clark Rural Water System, SD, IA, MN ................................................................... $10,000,000 The President 
208 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lewiston Orchards Project, ID ................................................................................................... $826,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Long Beach Area Water Reclamation Project, CA .................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Long Beach Desalination Project, CA ....................................................................................... $1,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lower Colorado River Investigations Program, CO ................................................................... $137,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lower Rio Grande Water Conservation Project, TX ................................................................... $50,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lower Yellowstone Project, MT .................................................................................................. $49,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Mancos Project, CO ................................................................................................................... $1,663,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... McGee Creek Project, OK ........................................................................................................... $680,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Mid-Dakota Rural Water Project, SD ......................................................................................... $15,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Middle Rio Grande Project, NM ................................................................................................. $25,745,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Milk River Project, MT ............................................................................................................... $3,783,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Minidoka Area Projects, ID ........................................................................................................ $5,211,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Mirage Flats Project, NE ........................................................................................................... $144,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Mni Wiconi Project, SD .............................................................................................................. $30,480,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Montana Investigations Program, MT ....................................................................................... $20,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Moon Lake Project, UT ............................................................................................................... $51,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Mountain Park Project, OK ........................................................................................................ $479,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Navajo Gallup Water Supply, NM .............................................................................................. $10,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Navajo Nation Investigations Program, NM .............................................................................. $114,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Newton Project, UT .................................................................................................................... $95,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Norman Project, OK ................................................................................................................... $476,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... North Platte Project, WY ............................................................................................................ $1,835,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Northern Arizona Investigations Program, AZ ........................................................................... $182,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Northern Utah Investigations Program, UT ............................................................................... $602,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Nueces River Project, TX ........................................................................................................... $563,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Ogden River Project, UT ............................................................................................................ $446,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Oklahoma Investigations Program, OK ..................................................................................... $47,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Oregon Investigations Program,OR ........................................................................................... $457,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Orland Project, CA ..................................................................................................................... $767,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Paradox Valley Unit, CRBSCP, Title II, CO ................................................................................ $2,943,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project, NM ......................................................................... $485,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Perkins County Rural Water District, SD .................................................................................. $1,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Phoenix Metropolitan Water Reclamation and Reuse Project, AZ ............................................ $200,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Pine River Project, CO ............................................................................................................... $563,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Provo River Project, UT .............................................................................................................. $1,596,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... P–SMBP—Garrison Diversion Unit, ND .................................................................................... $50,000,000 The President 
209 

Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Rapid Valley Project, SD ........................................................................................................... $84,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Rio Grande Project, NM ............................................................................................................. $7,363,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Rocky Boys/North Central MT Rural Water System, MT ........................................................... $5,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Rogue River Basin Project, Talent Division, OR ....................................................................... $1,576,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Salt River Project, AZ ................................................................................................................ $800,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Salton Sea Research Project, CA .............................................................................................. $400,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Angelo Project, TX .............................................................................................................. $418,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Settlement Act Project, AZ .................................................... $325,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Diego Area Water Reclamation Program, CA .................................................................... $4,969,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Jose Area Water Reclamation and Reuse Program, CA .................................................... $242,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Juan River Basin Investigations Program, NM .................................................................. $91,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... San Luis Valley Project, CO ...................................................................................................... $5,062,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Scofield Project, UT ................................................................................................................... $423,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Shoshone Project, WY ................................................................................................................ $1,198,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Soboba, CA ................................................................................................................................ $4,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Solano Project, CA ..................................................................................................................... $3,835,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... South/Central Arizona Investigations Program, AZ ................................................................... $608,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Southern California Investigations Program, CA ...................................................................... $762,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Southern Nevada/Utah Investigations Program, UT ................................................................. $26,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Southern New Mexico/West Texas Investigations Program, NM, TX ......................................... $91,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Southern Utah Investigations Program, UT .............................................................................. $128,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Strawberry Valley Project, UT .................................................................................................... $311,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Sun River Project, MT ................................................................................................................ $324,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Texas Investigations Program, TX ............................................................................................. $47,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Tualatin Project, OR .................................................................................................................. $553,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Tucumcari Project, NM .............................................................................................................. $41,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Umatilla Project, OR .................................................................................................................. $4,137,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Uncompahgre Project, CO ......................................................................................................... $397,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Upper Rio Grande Basin Investigations Program, NM ............................................................. $35,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Ventura River Project, CA .......................................................................................................... $212,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... W.C. Austin Project, OK ............................................................................................................. $499,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Washington Area Projects, WA .................................................................................................. $459,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Washington Investigations Program, WA .................................................................................. $75,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Washita Basin Project, OK ........................................................................................................ $1,432,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Weber Basin Project, UT ............................................................................................................ $1,670,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Weber River Project, UT ............................................................................................................. $205,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Wichita Project (Equus Beds Division), KS ............................................................................... $50,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Wichita Project, KS .................................................................................................................... $414,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Yakima Project, WA ................................................................................................................... $8,485,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, WA .............................................................. $16,395,000 The President 
210 

PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Agency Account Project title Funding Member 

Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Yuma Area Projects, AZ ............................................................................................................ $21,420,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Items not listed under states ................................................................................................... ........................ The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title I ............................................................. $11,536,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project—Title II ........................................................... $7,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), Section 5 ................................................................... $8,902,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), Section 8 ................................................................... $3,752,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Colorado River Water Quality Improvement Program ............................................................... $635,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Dam Safety Program: Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Department of the Interior Dam Safety Program ............................................................ $1,900,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Initiate Safety of Dams Corrective Action ....................................................................... $74,274,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Safety Evaluation of Existing Dams ................................................................................ $19,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Drought Emergency Assistance Program .................................................................................. $380,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Emergency Planning and Disaster Response Program ............................................................. $1,157,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program .......................................................... $23,721,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Environmental and Interagency Coordination Activities ........................................................... $1,883,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Environmental Program Administration .................................................................................... $1,140,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Examination of Existing Structures ........................................................................................... $9,037,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Federal Building Seismic Safety Program ................................................................................ $1,140,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... General Planning Activities ....................................................................................................... $2,347,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Land Resources Management Program .................................................................................... $10,665,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Lower Colorado River Operations Program ............................................................................... $25,300,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Miscellaneous Flood Control Operations ................................................................................... $803,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Native American Affairs Program ............................................................................................. $7,465,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Negotiation and Administration of Water Marketing ................................................................ $1,924,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Operation and Program Management ....................................................................................... $1,980,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program (other Pick Sloan) ........................................................... $40,357,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Power Program Services ............................................................................................................ $1,576,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Public Access and Safety Program ........................................................................................... $771,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Reclamation Law Administration .............................................................................................. $2,265,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Recreation and Fish and Wildlife Program Administration ...................................................... $2,137,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Research and Development: Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Desalination and Water Purification Program ................................................................. $3,666,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Science and Technology Program .................................................................................... $12,488,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Rural Water Program, Title I ..................................................................................................... $2,677,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Site Security Activities .............................................................................................................. $30,268,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... United States/Mexico Border Issues—Technical Support ........................................................ $90,000 The President 
211 

Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Upper Colorado River Operations Program ............................................................................... $252,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Water Conservation Field Services Program ............................................................................. $7,854,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... WaterSMART Program: Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... WaterSMART Grants (Challenge Grant in 2010) .............................................................. $20,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Title XVI Water Reclamation/Reuse Projects .................................................................... $7,689,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... Water and Related Resources ......... Basin Studies ................................................................................................................... $4,000,000 The President Bureau of Reclamation ................... CALFED ............................................ California Bay-Delta Restoration .............................................................................................. $40,000,000 The President Department of the Interior .............. CUPCA ............................................. Central Utah Project Completion Act ........................................................................................ $43,004,000 The President 
212 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2010 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2010 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

Corps of Engineers—Civil 

Investigations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 160,000 104,000 166,000 ∂6,000 ∂62,000 Construction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2,031,000 1,690,000 1,780,000 ¥251,000 ∂90,000 Mississippi River and tributaries ......................................................................................................................................... 340,000 240,000 335,000 ¥5,000 ∂95,000 

Recission ..................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥23,000 .......................... .......................... ∂23,000 Recission of emergency funding ................................................................................................................................. .......................... ¥35,000 .......................... .......................... ∂35,000 

Subtotal, Mississippi River and tributaries ........................................................................................................... 340,000 182,000 335,000 ¥5,000 ∂153,000 

Operations and maintenance ............................................................................................................................................... 2,400,000 2,361,000 2,495,000 ∂95,000 ∂134,000 Regulatory program .............................................................................................................................................................. 190,000 193,000 193,000 ∂3,000 ..........................FUSRAP ................................................................................................................................................................................. 134,000 130,000 130,000 ¥4,000 ..........................Flood control and coastal emergencies ............................................................................................................................... .......................... 30,000 30,000 ∂30,000 ..........................Expenses ............................................................................................................................................................................... 185,000 185,000 185,000 .......................... ..........................Office of Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) ..................................................................................................... 5,000 6,000 6,000 ∂1,000 ..........................

Total, title I, Department of Defense—Civil .......................................................................................................... 5,445,000 4,881,000 5,320,000 ¥125,000 ∂439,000 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (5,445,000 ) (4,939,000 ) (5,320,000 ) (¥125,000 ) (∂381,000 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... .......................... (¥23,000 ) .......................... .......................... (∂23,000 ) Recission of emergency funding ................................................................................................................... .......................... (¥35,000 ) .......................... .......................... (∂35,000 ) 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Central Utah Project Completion Account 

Central Utah project construction ........................................................................................................................................ 38,800 38,810 38,810 ∂10 ..........................Fish, wildlife, and recreation mitigation and conservation ................................................................................................ 1,500 2,500 2,500 ∂1,000 ..........................
213 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 40,300 41,310 41,310 ∂1,010 ..........................

Program oversight and administration ................................................................................................................................ 1,704 1,694 1,694 ¥10 ..........................

Total, Central Utah project completion account .................................................................................................... 42,004 43,004 43,004 ∂1,000 ..........................

Bureau of Reclamation 

Water and related resources ................................................................................................................................................ 951,158 913,582 938,600 ¥12,558 ∂25,018 

Subtotal, Water and related resources .............................................................................................................. 951,158 913,582 938,600 ¥12,558 ∂25,018 

Central Valley project restoration fund ................................................................................................................................ 35,358 49,915 49,915 ∂14,557 ..........................California Bay-Delta restoration .......................................................................................................................................... 40,000 40,000 40,000 .......................... ..........................Policy and administration .................................................................................................................................................... 61,200 61,200 61,200 .......................... ..........................

Total, Bureau of Reclamation ................................................................................................................................. 1,087,716 1,064,697 1,089,715 ∂1,999 ∂25,018 Total, title II, Department of the Interior ............................................................................................................... 1,129,720 1,107,701 1,132,719 ∂2,999 ∂25,018 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Energy Programs 

Energy efficiency and renewable energy .............................................................................................................................. 2,242,500 2,355,473 2,287,800 ∂45,300 ¥67,673 Electricity delivery and energy reliability ............................................................................................................................. 171,982 185,930 190,180 ∂18,198 ∂4,250 Nuclear energy ...................................................................................................................................................................... 786,637 824,052 783,170 ¥3,467 ¥40,882 Fossil energy research and development ............................................................................................................................. 672,383 586,583 725,950 ∂53,567 ∂139,367 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ............................................................................................................................ 23,627 23,614 23,614 ¥13 ..........................Strategic petroleum reserve ................................................................................................................................................. 243,823 138,861 209,861 ¥33,962 ∂71,000 Northeast home heating oil reserve ..................................................................................................................................... 11,300 11,300 11,300 .......................... ..........................Energy Information Administration ...................................................................................................................................... 110,595 128,833 119,000 ∂8,405 ¥9,833 Non-defense environmental clean up .................................................................................................................................. 244,673 225,163 244,163 ¥510 ∂19,000 Uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning fund ................................................................................... 573,850 730,498 550,000 ¥23,850 ¥180,498 

Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. .......................... ¥200,000 .......................... .......................... ∂200,000 

Subtotal, UEDDF ...................................................................................................................................................... 573,850 530,498 550,000 ¥23,850 ∂19,502 

Science ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4,903,710 5,121,437 5,012,000 ∂108,290 ¥109,437 Nuclear Waste Disposal ....................................................................................................................................................... 98,400 .......................... .......................... ¥98,400 ..........................Advanced research projects agency—Energy ARPA–E ........................................................................................................ .......................... 299,966 200,000 ∂200,000 ¥99,966 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program ................................................................................................................. 43,000 58,000 58,000 ∂15,000 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥43,000 ¥58,000 ¥58,000 ¥15,000 ..........................Proposed change in subsidy cost ............................................................................................................................... .......................... 500,000 380,000 ∂380,000 ¥120,000 
214 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2010 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2010 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Additional loan volume ............................................................................................................................................... .......................... 360,000 170,000 ∂170,000 ¥190,000 Additional subsidy cost ............................................................................................................................................... .......................... 300,000 .......................... .......................... ¥300,000 Loan volume (rescission) ............................................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... ¥140,000 ¥140,000 ¥140,000 

Subtotal, Innovative Technology Guarantee Pgm ................................................................................................... .......................... 1,160,000 410,000 ∂410,000 ¥750,000 

Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing loans program ............................................................................................ 20,000 9,998 9,998 ¥10,002 ..........................Departmental administration ............................................................................................................................................... 288,684 288,872 288,872 ∂188 ..........................

Miscellaneous revenues ............................................................................................................................................... ¥119,740 ¥119,740 ¥119,740 .......................... ..........................

Net appropriation .................................................................................................................................................... 168,944 169,132 169,132 ∂188 ..........................

Office of the Inspector General ............................................................................................................................................ 51,927 42,850 42,850 ¥9,077 ..........................

Atomic Energy Defense Activities 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons activities ...................................................................................................................................................... 6,384,431 7,008,835 7,018,835 ∂634,404 ∂10,000 Defense nuclear nonproliferation ................................................................................................................................ 2,136,709 2,687,167 2,612,167 ∂475,458 ¥75,000 Naval reactors ............................................................................................................................................................. 945,133 1,070,486 1,040,486 ∂95,353 ¥30,000 Office of the Administrator ......................................................................................................................................... 420,754 448,267 438,267 ∂17,513 ¥10,000 

Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Administration ............................................................................................... 9,887,027 11,214,755 11,109,755 ∂1,222,728 ¥105,000 

Defense environmental cleanup ........................................................................................................................................... 5,642,331 5,588,039 5,262,838 ¥379,493 ¥325,201 Other defense activities ....................................................................................................................................................... 847,468 866,317 866,317 ∂18,849 ..........................

Acquisition workforce capacity and capabilities ........................................................................................................ .......................... 11,892 .......................... .......................... ¥11,892 

Subtotal, Other defense activities .......................................................................................................................... 847,468 878,209 866,317 ∂18,849 ¥11,892 

Defense nuclear waste disposal .......................................................................................................................................... 98,400 .......................... .......................... ¥98,400 ..........................
215 

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities ................................................................................................................. 16,475,226 17,681,003 17,238,910 ∂763,684 ¥442,093 

Power Marketing Administrations 

Operation and maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration ...................................................................................... 78,444 8,034 8,034 ¥70,410 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥70,806 ¥8,034 ¥8,034 ∂62,772 ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Southeastern Power Administration .............................................................................................. 7,638 .......................... .......................... ¥7,638 ..........................

Operation and maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration ..................................................................................... 82,944 46,312 46,312 ¥36,632 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥38,000 ¥33,613 ¥33,613 ∂4,387 ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Southwestern Power Administration ............................................................................................. 44,944 12,699 12,699 ¥32,245 ..........................

Construction, rehabilitation, operation and maintenance, Western Area Power Administration ........................................ 610,397 285,864 285,864 ¥324,533 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥349,807 ¥180,306 ¥180,306 ∂169,501 ..........................Offsetting collection Colorado River Dam Fund ......................................................................................................... ¥3,879 .......................... .......................... ∂3,879 ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Western Area Power Administration .............................................................................................. 256,711 105,558 105,558 ¥151,153 ..........................

Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund ...................................................................................................... 2,568 3,715 3,715 ∂1,147 ..........................

Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. .......................... ¥3,495 ¥3,495 ¥3,495 ..........................

Subtotal, Falcon and Amistad O&M fund .............................................................................................................. 2,568 220 220 ¥2,348 ..........................Total, Power Marketing Administrations ................................................................................................................. 311,861 118,477 118,477 ¥193,384 ..........................

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 298,000 315,600 315,600 ∂17,600 ..........................Revenues applied ................................................................................................................................................................. ¥298,000 ¥315,600 ¥315,600 ¥17,600 ..........................

Total, title III, Department of Energy ..................................................................................................................... 27,111,438 29,613,170 28,346,405 ∂1,234,967 ¥1,266,765 

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Appalachian Regional Commission ...................................................................................................................................... 76,000 76,000 76,000 .......................... ..........................Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board .............................................................................................................................. 26,086 28,640 26,086 .......................... ¥2,554 Delta Regional Authority ...................................................................................................................................................... 13,000 13,000 13,000 .......................... ..........................Denali Commission ............................................................................................................................................................... 11,965 11,965 11,965 .......................... ..........................Northern Border Regional Commission ................................................................................................................................ 1,500 1,500 .......................... ¥1,500 ¥1,500 Southeast Crescent Regional Commission .......................................................................................................................... 250 250 .......................... ¥250 ¥250 Nuclear Regulatory Commission: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 1,056,000 1,043,483 1,053,483 ¥2,517 ∂10,000 
216 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2010 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2010 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Revenues ..................................................................................................................................................................... ¥902,402 ¥906,220 ¥915,220 ¥12,818 ¥9,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 153,598 137,263 138,263 ¥15,335 ∂1,000 

Office of Inspector General ......................................................................................................................................... 10,860 10,102 10,860 .......................... ∂758 Revenues ..................................................................................................................................................................... ¥9,774 ¥9,092 ¥9,774 .......................... ¥682 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 1,086 1,010 1,086 .......................... ∂76 Total, Nuclear Regulatory Commission ................................................................................................................... 154,684 138,273 139,349 ¥15,335 ∂1,076 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board ............................................................................................................................... 3,891 2,490 3,891 .......................... ∂1,401 Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects ........................................................... 4,466 4,285 4,285 ¥181 ..........................

Total, title IV, Independent agencies ..................................................................................................................... 291,842 276,403 274,576 ¥17,266 ¥1,827 Grand total .............................................................................................................................................................. 33,978,000 35,878,274 35,073,700 ∂1,095,700 ¥804,574 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (33,978,000 ) (35,936,274 ) (35,213,700 ) (∂1,235,700 ) (¥722,574 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... .......................... (¥23,000 ) (¥140,000 ) (¥140,000 ) (¥117,000 ) Rescission of emergency funding .................................................................................................................. .......................... (¥35,000 ) .......................... .......................... (∂35,000 ) 

Æ