ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana, Chairman 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

TAUNJA BERQUAM, JOSEPH LEVIN, JAMES WINDLE, 

TYLER KRUZICH, and CASEY PEARCE, Staff Assistants 

PART 5 

U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
PART 5—ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana, Chairman 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

TAUNJA BERQUAM, JOSEPH LEVIN, JAMES WINDLE, 

TYLER KRUZICH, and CASEY PEARCE, Staff Assistants 

PART 5 

U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

61–742 WASHINGTON : 2010 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin, Chairman 

NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington 

ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana 

NITA M. LOWEY, New York 

JOSE ́ E. SERRANO, New York 

ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut 

JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California 

SAM FARR, California 

JESSE L. JACKSON, JR., Illinois 

CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK, Michigan 

ALLEN BOYD, Florida 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey 

SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

BARBARA LEE, California 

ADAM SCHIFF, California 

MICHAEL HONDA, California 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

C.A. ‘‘DUTCH’’ RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

CIRO RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

JERRY LEWIS, California 

C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky 

FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia 

JACK KINGSTON, Georgia 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

TODD TIAHRT, Kansas 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

TOM LATHAM, Iowa 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri 

KAY GRANGER, Texas 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas 

MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois 

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

JO BONNER, Alabama 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

BEVERLY PHETO, Clerk and Staff Director 

(II)


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 

2011 

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2010. 

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

WITNESSES 

JO-ELLEN DARCY, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR CIVIL 

WORKS 

LIEUTENANT GENERAL ROBERT VAN ANTWERP, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

MAJOR GENERAL WILLIAM GRISOLI, DEPUTY COMMANDING GENERAL, CIVIL & EMERGENCY OPERATIONS, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

GARY A. LOEW, CHIEF, CIVIL WORKS PROGRAMS INTEGRATION DIVISION, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

Mr. PASTOR. Good afternoon. We have before us today the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Jo-Ellen Darcy. This is 

Ms. Darcy’s first appearance before the subcommittee and we welcome you. But you have already provided us with much assistance 

and we look forward to continuing to work with you. And today we 

have the Chief of the Engineers, who is a Lieutenant General. You 

have been with us now, what, at least a couple years. 

General VAN ANTWERP. It is my third year. 

Mr. PASTOR. Third year. And good to see you Major General William Grisoli. And Gary Loew. Where is Gary? Oh, there’s Gary. 

Good to see you, Gary. They are here today to present the administration’s budget request for the Corps of Engineers. I would also 

like to introduce Marie Vanderpool. Where is Marie? There is 

Marie. Marie has joined us this year from the Corps’ district office 

in Fort Worth. That ought to make you happy, Chet. 

Mr. EDWARDS. Absolutely. 

Mr. PASTOR. And we are very happy to have her. As you know, 

every year we have someone as a liaison, and they do great work 

for us every year as we prepare the budget. So we want to thank 

you and we look forward to working with you, because we look to 

her for guidance and recommendations. 

The fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Corps program totals $4.9 billion, a reduction of $506 million from the fiscal year 2010 

enacted level. As with most budgets for the Corps of Engineers, 

past budgets, this budget continues to disappoint us. I understand 

that the administration has made difficult choices in a constrained 

fiscal environment, but providing adequate and efficient navigation 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
2 

channels and flood control to the Nation are vital to our economy 

and also are a factor in maintaining and adding jobs. 

Ms. Darcy, I will be interested today in hearing your defense of 

the choices made in the Corps’ fiscal year 2011 budget request, fiscal year 2010 execution and the overall Corps management. Ms. 

Darcy, I would ask your assistance in ensuring that the hearing 

record, the questions for the record and any supporting information 

requested by the subcommittee be delivered in final form to the 

subcommittee no later than 4 weeks from the time you receive 

them, and that is so that we can make informed decisions. Members who have additional questions for the record will have until 

close of business tomorrow to provide them to the subcommittee office. 

With these opening comments, I would like to yield to the committee’s ranking member for any opening comments that he may 

have. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure 

to be serving with you again and all members of the committee and 

the great staff that makes us look good. We appreciate it. I would 

like to add my welcome to Secretary Darcy as she attends her first 

hearing before the subcommittee. You know the Hill pretty well 

and I think you know that traditionally and historically members 

of this committee love the Army Corps and obviously will learn to 

hold you in affection as well. And to General Van Antwerp and 

your colleagues, thank you very much for being here. 

I would also like to take this opportunity, I am sure I do it on 

behalf of the whole committee, to thank the men and women of the 

Corps for their hard work both here and overseas. They serve, you 

serve, in some of the most difficult and dangerous places in the 

world and I don’t think you get enough recognition. Recently in 

Haiti, providing relief and doing all sorts of things to rebuild the 

harbor and providing some pretty basic necessities, and your continued work in Afghanistan; a lot of work has been going on recently in Iraq. I think a figure is close to 10,000 civilians in the 

Army Corps, correct me if I am wrong, have spent some time in 

Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 7 or 8 years, and we are highly 

appreciative of that service and that sacrifice. And that is done voluntarily. While we have a volunteer military, not all those who 

work for the Corps do have to volunteer, but 10,000 I think have 

and we certainly congratulate them. 

I just wanted to take a moment before we begin to pay tribute 

to one of your own, Colonel John O’Dowd, who passed away on January 21st, a son of New Jersey. Colonel O’Dowd was the New York 

District Commander from 2001 to 2004 and had a long and distinguished career serving our country at home and abroad, and he did 

it at a time in the New York-New Jersey region in the aftermath 

of September 11, 2001. I for one will never forget the work of the 

Corps and a lot of other great people and his leadership in that regard. We were sorry to hear about his sudden death, and please 

know that our thoughts and prayers go with his family and to the 

Corps family as well. He will be surely missed. 

Mr. Chairman, my constituents are united in one thing: We have 

to stop spending so much of their money here in Washington. With 

ballooning deficits and continued unemployment, they want to keep 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
3 

more of their money at home. But when Congress does spend their 

money, they assume that it will be spent wisely and that whatever 

is spent can be considered to be a sound long-term investment, and 

I think that is what the Corps is all about. And that applies whether it is regular appropriations or stimulus. 

When I look over the administration’s request for our subcommittee’s consideration, major cuts are proposed for water programs. 

Your budget request is cut, as the chairman said, over $500 million 

from last year, your work to keep our waterways open and our defenses against flooding strong is critically important. Past investments and projects have shown their value many fold. 

Strangely, among your major program lines only aquatic restoration has increased. Navigation funding, however, is cut by nearly 

8 percent, flood protection by almost 17 percent. Is the condition 

of our navigation system strong enough to justify this? Are our cities and homes so safe from future flooding that we can actually 

take away funding in order to fund other environmental projects? 

I am sure we will explore some of these issues this afternoon. 

A month ago a lock gate failed at Greenup. I know Greenup is 

in Kentucky, but that failure closed down the Ohio River, correct 

me if I am wrong, that navigation system for 3 or 4 days. And that 

type of situation could happen across the system, unless we provide 

significant new funding for our navigation system, one estimate is 

that 80 percent of our locks will be obsolete in another 10 years. 

I don’t think that cutting navigation funds by nearly 8 percent 

makes much sense. 

Madam Secretary, General, the Office of Management and Budget obviously controls your lives and to some extent ours. OMB 

should be helping you solve some of these problems. While I support smarter and smaller budgets overall, I have serious concerns 

about some of the priorities expressed in the documents before us. 

I hope we can have a constructive discussion today about the real 

analytical work that went into these documents. 

I thank you, Mr. Pastor, for the time and happy to yield back. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you very much, Rodney. We will take 5 minutes for questions, and we will keep time more or less within the 

5. And so before we ask questions we will have the opening statement from Ms. Darcy. And as you know we have a written statement, so we will submit that for the record, and you may continue. 

Ms. DARCY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to present 

the President’s budget for the Civil Works Program of the Army 

Corps of Engineers for fiscal year 2011. With me today are Lieutenant General Robert Van Antwerp, Chief of Engineers for the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Major General Bill Grisoli, who is the 

Deputy Commander for Civil and Emergency Operations, and Gary 

Loew, who is the Chief of the Civil Works Program’s Integration 

Division. I will summarize my written statement and ask that my 

full statement be included in the record. 

The fiscal year 2011 President’s budget for the Civil Works Pro- gram is $4,939,000,000. The budget supports four principal objectives: Funding construction of the highest performing water resources infrastructure investments that will provide the best return 

from a national perspective; supporting the Nation’s navigation 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
4 

network by funding capital development achievable within current 

revenues; advancing aquatic ecosystem restoration efforts and continuing to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act; 

and emphasizing critical maintenance and operational reliability of 

the existing civil works infrastructure. 

The budget focuses funding primarily on three main Civil Works 

Program areas: commercial navigation, flood and coastal storm 

damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration. The budget 

also supports hydropower, recreation, environmental stewardship, 

and water supply services at existing resources projects owned or 

operated by the Corps. 

Finally, the budget provides for protection of the Nation’s regulated waters and wetlands, cleanup of sites contaminated as a result of the Nation’s early efforts to develop atomic weapons, and 

emergency preparedness and training. 

In keeping with President Obama’s commitment to limit the 

overall level of nonsecurity discretionary spending, the level of 

funding and the 2011 civil works budget is a reduction from both 

the 2010 budget and the 2010 appropriations. However, the 2011 

funding level reflects a practical, effective, and a sound use of the 

Nation’s financial resources. 

The Army continues to apply objective performance guidelines to 

many competing civil works construction projects in order to establish priorities among them and to guide the allocation of funds to 

high performing ongoing projects and high performing new construction starts. These guidelines emphasize investments that provide the best return from a national perspective and achieving economic, environmental, and public safety objectives. 

The budget includes two construction new starts and several new 

initiatives. One of the construction new starts is the Louisiana 

Coastal Area Program, which will provide funding for the construction of projects coming out of the study by the same name, after 

they have favorably completed the Administration review. The 

other construction new start is a nonstructural flood damage reduction program in Onion Creek, Texas. 

Within the Operation and Maintenance Program there is funding 

for a new global change sustainability program to assess the impacts of climate change on Civil Works projects. Understanding 

those impacts will enable the Corps to identify operational and 

other modifications to anticipate and to respond to climate change. 

Last year, the Administration proposed legislation for a new user 

fee to increase revenue in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund, and 

that proposal remains available for consideration by Congress in 

support of the 2011 budget. The Army continues to work in partnership with the inland waterway stakeholders to identify priorities and an effective funding stream for inland waterway construction and rehabilitation for the next 20 years, which could be made 

possible by enactment of a new funding mechanism. 

The budget provides $180 million for the South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Program, which includes funding for 

continued construction of five significant restoration projects: Picayune Strand, Site One Impoundment, Indian River Lagoon South, 

Kissimmee River, and the C–111 project. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
5 

The budget also supports work on other major ecosystem initiatives, in part through Federal interagency working groups headed 

by the Council on Environmental Quality. The budget includes a 

total of $52 million for one such effort, which is the California Bay 

Delta restoration. 

Within the ongoing Cultural Resources Program, $3 million is included to continue the Veterans Curation Project, which was initially funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act and recently received the Annual Chairman’s Award from the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Veterans Curation 

Project supports small curation laboratories in Augusta, Georgia; 

St. Louis, Missouri; and here in Washington, D.C., three cities with 

high populations of recently returning and wounded veterans. The 

veterans are hired into temporary positions and receive on-the-job 

training in curation of some of the backlog of archeological and historic properties that have come into the Corps’ possession over the 

years. This is an innovative approach to supporting returning and 

disabled veterans of all branches of military service with jobs in 

training and a variety of technical skills with broad applicability 

while benefiting the Civil Works Program. I spoke at the opening 

of the lab in Augusta and I was moved by the stories of how this 

program has given hope to our recovering veterans. 

In conclusion, this is a frugal budget that reflects the priorities 

of a nation that is both at war and successfully navigating its way 

out of economic upheaval. While this budget does not fund all of 

the good things that the Corps of Engineers is capable of doing, it 

will support very important investments that will yield long-term 

returns for the Nation’s citizens. 

Mr. Chairman, I am proud to support the 2011 budget of the 

Army Civil Works Program. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Ms. Darcy follows:] 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
6 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 14 here 61742A.001
7 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 15 here 61742A.002
8 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 16 here 61742A.003
9 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 17 here 61742A.004
10 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here 61742A.005
11 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 19 here 61742A.006
12 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you, Ms. Darcy. General. 

General VAN ANTWERP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is a real honor to be before you today. If you wouldn’t mind, I would like to make some 

introductions of this row that is right behind me because we 

brought all of our division commanders today. If you are wondering 

who is running the Corps we have got 36,000 great commanders 

out there, so we are in good hands even though all these folks are 

here. Some of this is their education. I will start over here on your 

left, my right. 

This is Duke DeLuca. He is with the North Atlantic Division out 

of New York City. Next to him is Rock Donahue. Rock is out of the 

South Pacific Division in San Francisco. This is General Mike 

Walsh. He is out of the Mississippi Valley Division in Vicksburg, 

Mississippi. Next to him is John McMahon from the Northwest Division out in Portland, Oregon. And then of course Steve Stockton, 

who needs no introduction by anybody. 

I will start over here with Tony. Well, all the way over. Gene 

Ban is representing the Pacific Ocean Division. His commander is 

in Japan today, hosting a meeting. So Gene, nice to have you with 

us. This is Tony Funkhouser. He is the Commander of the Southwest Division out of Dallas. Next is Todd Semonite, Commander of 

the South Atlantic Division out of Atlanta, Georgia. And General 

John Peabody, Lakes and Rivers Division. He is our Asian carp expert. It is great to be with you here today. 

This budget is a performance-based budget. It makes the best 

use of available funds through a focus on projects and activities 

that provide the highest returns, both economic and environmental, 

and it makes the best investment we can and it really addresses 

significant risk where human safety comes in. 

The budget funds 99 construction projects, including four in the 

Mississippi River and Tributaries Account. There are 10 dam safety assurance and seepage control and static instability correction 

projects. You might ask if were there more that could be done. 

These 10 all have the studies and the designs done. That is as 

many dam safety projects as we had at this point to be ready to 

move forward. There are 20 projects that address significant risk 

to human safety, and then 69 other projects. 

This budget supports restoration of nationally and regionally significant aquatic systems with emphasis on the Florida Everglades, 

Louisiana coastal area, and Hamilton Air Field in California, which 

is in the San Francisco Bay region. Also the budget supports the 

Columbia River and Missouri River fish projects to support the continued operation of the Corps of Engineers’ multi-purpose projects. 

As soon as the Corps constructs a project our attention has to 

turn to operation and maintenance. Generally with periodic maintenance, we can operate our facilities for many years. I might just 

give you one point of reference. Our 241 locks in the Corps of Engineers have an average age of 58.3 years old. So that is part of the 

challenge. Most of those had a design life of around 50 years, but 

they can go a long time if we properly maintain them. This budget 

supports our continued stewardship in this area. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
13 

The Operation and Maintenance Program for fiscal year 2011 in- cludes $2.36 billion and an additional $153 million in the Mississippi River and Tributaries Account. 

We support the President’s commitment to continued sound development and management of the Nation’s water and related land 

resources. The way in which we manage our water resources can 

improve the quality of life for citizens. We found that even in Haiti 

one of the most important things early on is to get water back to 

the people and properly do that. 

The Corps of Engineers personnel from across the Nation continue to respond to calls for help both domestically and internationally. As was mentioned, we have had almost 10,000 civilians deployed since we started Iraq and Afghanistan, and I will add another piece, Katrina. In those three areas, 10,000 people deployed. 

We currently have almost 800 people deployed into Afghanistan. 

I especially want to recognize those many, I call them expeditionary, they are both civilians and soldiers, that really provide 

this engineering expertise all over the world. Today we are in 34 

countries around the world. The unsung efforts of these patriotic 

men and women contribute greatly toward this Nation’s goals and 

restoring the economy, security, and quality of life for everyone. 

In closing, the Corps of Engineers is committed to staying at the 

leading edge of service to the Nation. We are committed to change 

that ensures an open, transparent and performance-based Civil 

Works Program. 

Sir, thank you for the opportunity comment and I look forward 

to your questions. 

[The statement of General Van Antwerp follows:] 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
14 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 24 here 61742A.007
15 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 25 here 61742A.008
16 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 26 here 61742A.009
17 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 27 here 61742A.010
18 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 28 here 61742A.011
19 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you, General, for your testimony. And I, as 

well as all my colleagues here, we also want to thank the patriots, 

the men and women who serve the Corps of Engineers, for the fine 

work they do regardless of where they are at, those in Iraq or Afghanistan, Katrina and other parts of our great country. 

Madam Secretary, one of the concerns I have is if the budget request, if enacted as requested, I asked the staff what would be the 

preliminary result. And they have told me that it would be either 

a suspension or a termination of more than 350 studies or projects 

that are ongoing currently with the Corps. And that caused me to 

think of what would be the resulting jobs that would be eliminated, 

terminated, and what it would do to just the economic impact it 

would have in those communities where these projects would have 

to be delayed or terminated. And I ask that question and have that 

concern. Because as you know probably if there is one mantra that 

unites Republicans and Democrats, it’s job creation and the unemployment rate that we face. And so I would ask you how would you 

ask us to defend this budget request, if enacted, when we know 

that that would be one of the major consequences of this budget. 

Ms. DARCY. Mr. Pastor, I think that as we described the budget, 

it is a frugal budget. It is never as much as anyone wants, but we 

are going to do the best that we can to work within it to retain as 

many jobs as possible. We can get back to you with the numbers, 

as to what the actual job impact would be. We have not done that 

analysis about what the impact would be of those 300 odd studies 

or projects that you said would not be funded. I don’t know that 

answer. But I do know that we are going to do all that we can to 

make sure that these dollars are spent wisely and efficiently and 

in the best way that we can to retain the jobs that we have and 

to make those dollars go as far as we can with job creation. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, one thing I learned from law school was that 

reasonable people will differ. And I don’t know if I am going to ask 

you to take the time and energy to determine the total job loss, but 

it is a concern that at least I have, and I imagine, as I heard from 

Rodney, it is a concern I guess a lot of the members have. And so 

we feel that under the circumstances, we understand and we are 

all going to do our best; but in developing priorities it is all in the 

eye of the beholder in terms of what is best for these times. Obviously your people have looked at it and determined what you think. 

But collectively I think we have a responsibility here as a subcommittee to look at what your priorities are. And maybe if we 

think that there are other ways that we can maintain the job force 

that we have or if there is other ways to spend the money, obviously I think that is at the discretion of this group. But we will 

work with you, and hopefully together we will meet the goals of the 

administration and also the concerns that the members have of the 

subcommittee. But we look forward to working with you. I just 

wanted you to highlight some of the concerns we have, because obviously these are difficult times. But by both of us working together 

with a group of members here we can probably develop a bill that 

will be helpful to America, at the same time create jobs or maintain jobs, employment and assist the economic welfare of our country. 

Rodney. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
20 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. It is awfully quiet in here, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for the opportunity. Madam Secretary and General Van 

Antwerp, both of you, if you care to respond. The Corps received 

I think $4.6 billion under the Recovery Act, a/k/a stimulus. As of 

January 22nd the Corps had only obligated, I think, 62 percent of 

that amount. I realize that the Corps didn’t receive its final allocations from OMB until nearly May, but I think we had all hoped for 

of all the agencies, the Army Corps, the military model, the ‘‘can 

do’’ group, the shovel ready team, could have perhaps maybe executed some of these projects in a more expeditious way. 

Can you give members of the committee some insight into the 

schedule for obligating, where we’re going relative to expenditures? 

Maybe tell us how much money has actually been spent, how much 

has been obligated and where we are going here. We are counting 

on you. We support you. 

Ms. DARCY. As you said, the Corps received $4.6 billion under the stimulus program. To date we have obligated $3 billion of that 

$4.6 billion. We are on track. Our goal is to obligate 80 percent by 

the end of March. We are on target to meet that goal. We have 830 

projects. We have already completed 71 of those projects with our 

ARRA funding. 

As I say, we are on track. We have until September to obligate 

all of it. We will obligate 80 percent by the end of March. We have 

completed projects. We have over 3,000 contracts under contract 

right now. Through our contracting authority, 74 percent of our 

contracts have gone to small businesses. 20 percent of those have 

gone to disadvantaged businesses. Another 15 percent have gone to 

minority-owned businesses. One thing at the Corps, we have a lot 

of small projects. We don’t have a contract out there that is more 

than $50 million. Most of them are much smaller than that. We 

have been able to generate a great number of contracts and individual work packages throughout the Corps, throughout all of our 

mission areas, whether it be flood control or navigation for example. Across all of the mission areas of the Corps we have been able 

to fund projects with the stimulus money. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Your response is pretty comprehensive. I 

want to compliment you. I don’t mean in any way to be solicitous. 

It is a good solid response. First of all, let me commend you, I am 

sure all committee members do, for what you are doing to make 

sure that when those who are veterans come back, that they have 

jobs. When people come into my office with their hat in their hand, 

I say what are you doing to hire veterans before you ask me to do 

something on your behalf. Let me commend you on the veterans 

project, and I think we ought to promote whatever we can do for 

those that have served us. 

The numbers, the employment numbers, as you are aware, on 

the Recovery Act and stimulus are somewhat elusive. And I don’t 

mean this in any political way, but I think it is important for people to sort of have some reassurance that there are actually some 

private sector jobs being produced out there. You gave me a great 

response. If there is some way to put maybe a little more meat on 

the bones, I think it probably would be beneficial. 

Ms. DARCY. In the most recent quarter of reporting, sir, our program generated 6,047 jobs. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
21 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. You didn’t know I was going to ask that 

question. 

Ms. DARCY. Out of full disclosure, yesterday I was in front of 

Congressman Oberstar’s committee on the implementation of 

ARRA. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Good. I think anybody who comes before 

Appropriations, any committee these days, would like to have some 

reassurance that we get as many private sector jobs out there as 

possible, and you touch a lot of that. 

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Chet. 

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, it 

is good to see you for the second time today. I saw her previously 

wearing her hat overseeing Arlington Cemetery’s operations and 

maintenance. Thank you for your work on that. Thank you all for 

your work in Civilian Works Projects with the Corps. 

Let me quickly touch on something that doesn’t get discussed a 

lot publicly here, because it is not in one of the top four priorities 

of the Corps. Is it correct that more Americans visit Army Corps 

parks and recreation facilities in a given year than the entire National Park System, is that correct? 

Ms. DARCY. It is close to correct. We had 360 million visitors last 

year, is that correct? 

General VAN ANTWERP. Visitor days. 

Ms. DARCY. Sorry, 360. 

Mr. EDWARDS. I have heard that is more than the National Park 

System, but we can check that out. 360 million days. And I know 

these are tough budget times. And I don’t know how you do the 

cost-benefit analysis of parks, but I would just want to be one person to emphasize at a time when our economy is struggling, people 

have lost jobs, can’t afford to get on a plane and fly to Cancun for 

their family vacation I hope we don’t completely lose sight of the 

importance of our parks for day-to-day families. They are the national parks for most, the vast majority of American citizens. 

In regard to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, is 100 percent 

of the dollars collected last year, this year, next year in the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund, are those put back into maintenance and 

operations of our harbors and, if not, what percent is it? 

Ms. DARCY. No, 100 percent is not put back in. In this budget I believe $783 million is going to be used from the receipts collected 

last year. 

Mr. EDWARDS. What were the receipts? What percent is that? 

Ms. DARCY. $1.5 billion is what was collected. 

Mr. EDWARDS. So half, half the money is not being used. Why is 

that? Let me put it this way. Isn’t it correct that there are a number of our ports in the United States that are not being dredged 

at their authorized levels and therefore we are creating economic 

inefficiencies, making it less competitive for our country to compete 

with foreign countries and driving up prices for consumers? Aren’t 

there a number of ports that aren’t at authorized levels? 

General VAN ANTWERP. We have about 926 ports and harbors; 

299 of those are deep water. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. If you can put your microphone a little closer. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
22 

General VAN ANTWERP. Of all those ports and harbors about 35 

percent are dredged at any one time to the prescribed width and 

depth, as was in the Chief’s report or the report that authorized 

the project. 

Mr. EDWARDS. So 35 percent are at the authorized dredge level. 

General VAN ANTWERP. Right. 

Mr. EDWARDS. So that means 65 percent are not. 

General VAN ANTWERP. Right. 

Mr. EDWARDS. And is the 50 percent figure, percentage use of the 

revenues from the Harbor Trust Fund, is that traditional, is that 

what it usually has been or is that a trend going up or down? 

General VAN ANTWERP. I think it is fairly standard for every 

year. It is about 50 percent of what we take in. The trust fund now 

has over $4 billion in it. 

Mr. EDWARDS. And who makes the decision? Is this an OMB decision to say we are only going to use 50 percent of the funds that 

are collected? These are funds collected by the companies and entities using the ports, is that correct? 

General VAN ANTWERP. Correct. It is a tax. 

Mr. EDWARDS. So we are just basically giving them $0.50 back 

for every dollar they are paying in a fee or tax, is that correct? 

Ms. DARCY. For the port maintenance? 

Mr. EDWARDS. Is that an OMB decision? 

Ms. DARCY. It is an Administration decision. 

Mr. EDWARDS. I think I know what the answer is, but I don’t 

want to get anybody in trouble. Well, you know, Mr. Chairman, I 

hope that maybe at some point we could take a look at what are 

the economic costs to businesses in the United States for not having our ports dredged at the authorized levels, and that ought to 

be looked at. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. PASTOR. I would agree with you because one of the things 

I have learned coming from the Southwest, my expectation is the 

big one is going to come out in California and I will have a port 

of Yuma. But in the meantime learning more about the ports that 

we have in Houston and Brownsville and L.A. If you go in the East 

Coast, it is just that we just need to do more. And it is a problem 

that we need to solve collectively. And then you look at the waterways, inland waterways, and that is another that we need to look 

at. So I agree with you that maybe for sometime in the future we 

need to come back and say what are the possibilities and the probabilities that we can address these issues. 

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. And we have Governor. 

Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Darcy, I read extensively your history and I assume 

that one of the main reasons that President Obama appointed you 

is because of your environmental expertise and focus on doing 

things cleaner and more efficient. And I hope you will be a warrior 

for our navigation systems in the Inland Waterway System because 

of how much cleaner they are than the other modes of transportation in our country. And it means you have got to be willing to 

box OMB from time to time on behalf of this entire system, which 

is clean but it is in real trouble. And ironically you are now 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
23 

partnered with some of the toughest guys in America who like big 

rocks and things. But it is a good partnership, and I hope you will 

do some good work while you are there. 

For 14 years right here at this committee I have pled with everyone to try to keep the Tennessee River open to navigation and commerce because the Chickamauga Lock, which is now 70 years old, 

is one of the top priorities from the users, from the Corps, the entire system now with a 6 to 1 cost-benefit ratio, twice as high as 

Olmsted, twice as high as Kentucky Lock, and we are going to be 

stalled out. We have a zero in this budget request, zero, despite the 

fact that we are on the funding profile a third of the way through 

construction, we have a coffer dam complete now in the middle of 

the Tennessee River waiting to be dried out and tested this spring. 

It is like 10 football fields in the middle of the Tennessee River 

going to be dry all the way to the bottom of the river ready to pour 

footings, yet we don’t have the go ahead to move forward. We have 

$58 million worth of stimulus money that has bought the gates and 

the steel ready to install them, and they are going to move that to 

Muscle Shoals to store it until we can start the project. 

I understand the technicalities because of the insolvency of the 

trust fund. But we now have an agreement from the users that 

they will put up more money to make the trust fund more solvent. 

There is a proposal before the Water Resources Development Subcommittee so that the WRDA bill could potentially fix this problem 

statutorily so we would have a road map to go forward with, with 

new revenues into the trust fund, reclassify Olmsted, which has 

been like Pac-Man gobbling up all the money in the trust fund, way 

over budget, way past due, but it needs to be moved into a different 

category. In your budget request, $68 million out of $82 million 

from the trust fund in your budget request all goes to Olmsted. Everybody else has crumbs on the table, and we are going to be 

stopped, stopped. And this is a high priority project. It is called the 

Chickamauga Lock. 

I have said it over and over and over again. Now I have got a 

partner down there named Lincoln Davis on this subcommittee, 

and when I am gone at the end of this year he is going to continue 

to stay until we finish the project. But we started it. It is a high 

priority project. I need your help. We need everyone’s help on this, 

and we need a WRDA bill that allows us to go forward with this 

agreement that has been put forth by the users to make the trust 

fund more solvent, reclassify some of the projects and make these 

projects or allow these projects to go forward. 

How ironic that we have stimulus money buying the equipment 

and you can’t pour footings in the middle of the river. As a matter 

of fact after they test the coffer dam they are going to fill it back 

up with water and wait for the Congress, the executive branch, 

OMB, the leadership of our country. Wait. And it will be the largest lock closure in the history of our country, the highest cargo passage to close. I hope we are not all responsible for that outcome. 

So tell me how we are going to get this fixed with your support. 

Ms. DARCY. Congressman, I am aware of the Inland Waterway 

Users Board’s work on coming up with a solution to the dwindling 

revenues coming into the Inland Waterway Trust Fund, and I look 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
24 

forward to receiving that. I am told that soon it will be presented 

up to my office. 

The Administration is committed to finding a mechanism for us 

to move forward on getting that trust fund up and running to meet 

the needs of the Inland Waterway Trust Fund and the inland waterway navigation. 

Mr. WAMP. For the good of our colleagues here because we have 

seen many people come and go through the years, many of us, we 

need the administration to support a Water Resources Development Act, to push for it like they are pushing for health care, whatever the other priorities are. We see no prioritization of that. And 

the Congress needs to hear that from the administration that we 

do want to fix these problems in the Inland Waterway System. You 

have to have a WRDA bill to do it statutorily, otherwise we are operating without the authorization and it stops. And this committee 

has to follow that authorization. I would cry out to the administration to take a leadership position on this issue, which we are not 

seeing. 

Ms. DARCY. Well, I am hearing you, sir. 

Mr. WAMP. Thank you. He has been there, the chairman here, 

the former chairman has been there. Anyway, you should see it. It 

is crumbling. It is crumbling. We may have to close the lock. As 

a matter of fact the Corps of Engineers basically already notified 

the Tennessee Valley Authority that there will be a point at which 

they have to actually close the lock, and that is because we are at 

this point. It is a critical thing for the entire Inland Waterway System. 

General, do you want to comment before my 5 minutes is up or 

it is up? 

Mr. PASTOR. No, go ahead. 

General VAN ANTWERP. I would say, yes, we have to schedule 

maintenance and do it regardless, because it is going to take time 

to build it obviously. But you are exactly right what you have said. 

You were right that there is $82 million that is coming out of the 

trust fund. About $153 million is the total when we put the two 

parts together. We think that we could use twice that because of 

the infrastructure we think. So if the Inland Waterway User Board 

comes up with a solution that would get us to the $350 million 

mark, that would be very appropriate. 

Mr. WAMP. Well, the solution is on the table. We need OMB to 

say yes, we need the administration to take a lead, and we need 

a call to the Congress to get a Waterway Resources Development 

Act so we can make this statutory. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you. Steve. 

Mr. ISRAEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am going to 

ask the subcommittee’s indulgence because I have to raise a very 

local issue in my district, and the reason I have to raise it here is 

because I have been trying to facilitate a problem with the Army 

Corps on Long Island for 18 months, and it has been frustrating 

because I am caught in between the defiance of a local power company and the seeming powerlessness of the Army Corps to enforce 

its own permits. If I don’t raise it here in the presence of the senior 

leadership of the Army Corps, I would be doing a disservice to my 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
25 

district. And secondly, if it is happening in my district it is probably happening elsewhere. 

So permit me to lay out the facts for you. I don’t expect you to 

have a specific response here, but I do expect you to come back to 

me within a very short period of time and let me know how we are 

going to solve this. 

I represent a community called Asharoken on the north shore of 

Long Island. There is a major power plant there. That power plant 

has been displacing sand from the beaches of Asharoken. The Army 

Corps directed the owner of that power plant, National Grid, to 

place 15,000 cubic yards of sand a year to replenish the beach and 

25,000 cubic yards of sand immediately. National Grid has defied 

the Army Corps of Engineers for the past 18 months. The Army 

Corps issued a permit. National Grid has stalled. They have played 

games. The Army—I have to tell you, you have a guy there who 

is just extraordinary, a guy named Gene Brickman. I have the 

highest regard for him. He is a good man. He is doing the best he 

can. But you have a local company that is defying a Member of 

Congress, defying the Army Corps of Engineers. And the question 

I have, when you issue a permit directing someone to place sand 

on a beach and that company defies your directives, how do you implement the conditions of your permit? 

You want $30 million for flood control and coastal emergencies. 

Why should I support additional funding for flood control and 

coastal emergencies when in my district the Army Corps seems absolutely impotent to enforce the terms of its own permits. That is 

the macro question. That is a policy question. The specific question 

is how long will it take you, General, to come back to me and say 

I have reviewed it and here is the course of action, either we are 

going to litigate, or here are the other courses of action available 

to the Army Corps to enforce the conditions of its own permit? 

General VAN ANTWERP. I will commit to you, Congressman, to 

come back in 30 days. I am looking at Duke DeLuca over here. 

Mr. ISRAEL. Who is also a good man. 

General VAN ANTWERP. Right. The New York District Commander. I don’t know if he is here in the room. But we will come 

back to you in 30 days. There are enforcement options, things to 

do. But I think the first thing we are going to see is what does the 

permit say, what are they doing or not doing, and then we will 

come back to you within 30 days. 

Mr. ISRAEL. 30 days is acceptable, thank you. And we have the 

permit right here, and my assistant will give it to you, Mr. DeLuca. 

And if we can work within that time frame, that will be helpful. 

Thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome. And as 

you probably know, I am sure, we have a very good working relationship with the Corps in Montana and thank you so much. My 

question of course you probably know all about, and that is St. 

Mary’s Water Project, because I am not sure that you didn’t suggest it to Senator Baucus in the first place. 

Ms. DARCY. I worked for Senator Baucus. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
26 

Mr. REHBERG. I know you did. And while I appreciate Senator 

Baucus being able to get the St. Mary’s Water Project into the 

WRDA bill, it also created a new problem, and that is it never gets 

done. It probably would have been more appropriately placed in the 

Bureau of Rec, but we couldn’t get it accomplished there and so it 

is a new start. 

So I would like to start by suggesting or asking of the $2 billion in the stimulus package under construction or under the $4.6 billion were there any new starts funded, constructed, or reconstructed? 

Ms. DARCY. No, sir. 

Mr. REHBERG. No. I heard in your opening statement that there 

are new starts in the President’s budget, correct? 

Ms. DARCY. Correct. 

Mr. REHBERG. Do you have a list of the criteria that allowed the 

opportunity for certain new starts to be put at the top of the list 

and others that are authorized not to make that new start list. 

Ms. DARCY. I don’t have a list in my hand, but I can provide you 

with that list for the criteria that we used to select the two new 

starts. 

Mr. REHBERG. So I would be able to see where St. Mary’s, which 

was authorized in the 2007 WRDA bill, where it stands as far as 

priority within the Corps of Engineers within the President’s budget, so that we can have some indication if we are ever going to 

make the list, or if we are ever going to make it to the top of the 

list. 

Ms. DARCY. It is my understanding that the project purpose is 

irrigation and water supply, and that is not something that we 

usually budget for. 

Mr. REHBERG. Not necessarily. Frankly, what is going to happen, 

and if your background and love and passion is the environment, 

if it fails, which we all anticipate it is going to fail. It will be an 

international scandal, just not a national environmental scandal 

because it occurs both on an Indian reservation, it is the tributary 

to a lot of communities within Montana, but it also flows into Canada and so it will be an environmental problem more than—perhaps the construction deals with irrigation, but it is also drinking 

water, and so it is a little more complicated than just the irrigation 

acreage. 

Real quickly. Do I still have some time, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. PASTOR. Sure. 

Mr. REHBERG. Inspection of completed works, I don’t understand 

the concept or the appropriations within your budget. You wouldn’t 

think that Montana has a huge levee problem, although we find 

ourselves in the same dilemma that some of the other States do on 

the recertification of levees and the whole mapping with FEMA. I 

have got a situation around the Great Falls area. We are having 

some difficulty getting a recertification. And we have been told it 

is a liability issue. 

Could you tell me the Corps’ perspective and how do we—I am 

sure it is a bigger problem than just Montana—how do you intend 

to deal with this, because we can’t just ignore the recertification of 

the levees because all of a sudden we are going to find ourselves 

dumping the cost on cities, homeowners, flood insurance, and you 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
27 

know the issue. I find myself in Montana dealing with levees, and 

I frankly think that is more Rodney’s problem in Louisiana than 

mine, but it is now my problem. 

General GRISOLI. Mr. Rehberg, you asked a great question and 

a very challenging and complex one. And if I may, I would like to 

take a few moments and frame a little bit of the challenges that 

you just mentioned because it is of interest to all of us, and then 

try to address some of those particular issues. 

First of all, when you take a look at our Nation’s levees, you 

have the levees that the Corps built and maintained, and what I 

am going to mention is really four categories. The second would be 

the levees that the Corps has built and they are maintained by our 

sponsors. You have some levees in a category that have been admitted to a Public Law 84–99 program. That group right there is 

about 4,000 miles of levee. Then you have about 100 miles of levees, when we start looking at the national levee program, that we 

would like to be able to at least put into a database and know what 

they are. 

But let’s go back to those first three categories. Those first three 

categories, what the Corps is trying to do with the dollars they receive from ARRA, and in this particular budget, is to survey those 

and inspect those and get them online in a database. 

Mr. REHBERG. Is that the operation and maintenance budget or 

some other budget? 

General GRISOLI. That would be an operations and maintenance 

budget for that piece there. For those levees there, we can use Inspection of Completed Works, if we budget approximately $25 million, as we talked about today. The challenge of O&M funds and 

where those funds go are a unique challenge. We have a certification program. A certification program is all about flood insurance. Flood insurance is something that needs to be worked out 

with FEMA. Let’s go through those categories again. If it is a Corps 

built, Corps maintained levee, the Corps would prepare the paperwork and submit it to FEMA, they would accredit that particular 

levee. If they are levees that are in the Corps built, sponsor maintained [category], the sponsor would then be required to request 

certification, and the certification would then either get accredited 

or not by FEMA. The last category is pretty much the same way. 

When the Corps takes a look at all this we are ensuring that, 

first of all, we get the information properly into the database, and 

that database is available to all of the constituents. We will make 

that available if they need to get their levees accredited. But the 

Corps’ main function is not one of accrediting and working towards 

flood insurance; therefore when we take a look at this overall, it 

is not a high priority as far as accreditation. And we have pushed 

to ensure that we have the data available, but we do not have the 

program funds available to be able to accredit all the levees—does 

that help? 

Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to point that problem 

out because it is coming to a head and somebody is going to have 

to deal with it because it is not going to go away. It is a huge problem, not so much for me. It is a thousand houses and that is important to me, but to some other areas it is going to be an incredible 

expense. Especially if FEMA gets done with their mapping or 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
28 

doesn’t get done with their mapping; and they just ignore the fact 

that the levee is there. It is as if the levee does not exist. And then 

there is no way other than flood insurance to protect the individual 

landowner. So we are headed for a wreck here if we don’t do something. 

Mr. PASTOR. I appreciate the questions. We have been informed 

that possibly anywhere between 3:00 and 3:15 we may have a series of votes. And I don’t know how many votes it will be. And we 

have three members who have not had at least questions in the 

first round. We will try to at least allow those three members to 

have their 5 minutes, give or take a little bit. And then we will see 

where we are at and then we will make a decision from there. 

So I think, Marion Berry. 

Mr. BERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, and 

General Van Antwerp, General Grisoli, Gary, welcome. I think we 

all appreciate very much what the Corps of Engineers does and the 

contribution that you make around the world to make somebody’s 

life better and easier to endure. And I have always considered myself, as I have told you, Madam Secretary, I am sure, the biggest 

fan of the Corps of Engineers. I live in a place where we receive 

a minimum of 50 inches of rainfall a year, and this year we went 

over 80 inches, and every square inch of my district is considered 

a wetlands by somebody. 

But what I want to address today is the same problem that my 

colleague from Montana just brought up. The way this certification 

is taking place defies hydrology. It is not a logical process. These 

levees, they are Federal levees maintained by Federal money under 

the supervision of the Corps of Engineers, and there has never to 

my knowledge been a failure of one of them anytime. And yet they 

are being decertified and creating a situation where homeowners 

are suddenly being required to add $1,200 to $1,500, depending on 

the value of their home, to the cost of owning that home immediately, and it is hitting people in the face like a bat. 

Has there been any public input as these regulations have been 

developed? I am not aware if there has. If there has, I think we 

need to do it again. If there has not, I think we need to have some 

hearings and some forums about this. Because I think we are creating something here that is going to have an economic consequence that cannot be carried. And I just plead with you to let’s 

go back and take a new look at the way this is being done. And 

they are declaring people have to buy flood insurance that the 1927 

flood didn’t even bother. And that does not make sense to me. 

So if you all can do that, I would really appreciate it. And I 

would ask you to work with us. 

We have here with us today from the St. Francis Levee District, 

their Chief Engineer, Rob Rash, and he knows more about that 

stuff than anybody I have ever known. And he will bore you to 

death talking about it, but he is an expert that needs to be heard. 

Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Alexander. 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, 

and gentlemen, I too would like to thank you for the way you have 

worked with our office. General Walsh and his Vicksburg bunch 

have been great to work with. They have been very responsive any 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
29 

time we have called upon them. And I want to continue the dialogue that Congressman Rehberg and Congressman Berry have 

talked about. 

This is something that is going to affect everybody here. And 

General, when you said that accreditation wasn’t a top priority, I 

can assure you that it is my top priority and I am going to see if 

we can get as many colleagues as possible to take that same 

stance. Because this is not just a problem for Louisiana or Montana 

or Arkansas, this is a national problem. 881 counties or parishes 

in Louisiana we are told are protected by the levee system. 35 percent of the land mass, but almost 60 percent of the population. And 

if we advance in the direction that I see us going, and the Corps 

of Engineers and FEMA do get to the point of not certifying those 

levees at some point in the future; we are talking just a few 

months away, and FEMA redraws those maps as if those levees 

don’t exist; then we are going to have some homeowners—and we 

are told about 60 percent of homeowners out there—with mortgages today, those mortgages are backed in some way by the Federal Government, they are going to be exposed to insurance premiums that will be left just up to the imagination. Insurance 

agents and FEMA can tell us what those insurance premiums are 

today, but if they are presented a flood map with no levees on 

them, then one can only imagine what those premiums are going 

to be. This is going to be a massive tax increase for those living 

out there behind those levees. 

Now, what makes it even more confusing to me is that I have 

1,100 miles of navigable river in the district that I represent, 350 

miles of the Mississippi River. And I talked to the Corps and they 

say, well, we are responsible for the levee on this side of the river, 

but we are not on that side. If you go a little bit down the river 

we are responsible for it on both sides. Well, we have a bank cavein down there; but we are not authorized to fix that. We are authorized to fix the next one, but we don’t have any money to do it 

with. 

Help us understand what we need to do to help you all. I feel 

like you all want to solve the problem. But this is the problem that 

is going to be bigger than anything that has jumped up on those 

that we represent out there. There are some people along the Gulf 

Coast today that are already paying $5,000 a year for flood insurance, and it is unbelievable what they might be subjected to. 

Now I appreciate the work that you are doing in advancing the 

cause of recovering the Gulf Coast, but we don’t care whether the 

Gulf Coast is there or not if we can’t live in Louisiana. If we have 

to move somewhere else what difference does it make? 

It is a serious, serious problem that is not going to go away, and 

it is only going to get worse. We are having public meetings in my 

district. I am encouraging other members to start the same thing 

and let the public know what is about to come down. 

Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Davis. 

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I have two or three questions, but a brief comment before I ask those questions. 

A century ago our Nation started an ambitious program in infrastructure. Anywhere you go today, you turn on the faucet, a lot of 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
30 

it comes from Corps of Engineers or TEA, basically Corps of Engineers lakes that were built. 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, early 70s they 

were started. We had an ambitious program for energy called nuclear energy as well as hydro energy, an ambitious program to 

build an interstate system, space. 

In the last 30 years we have done nothing except go in debt. Borrow more money, spend more money, borrow more money, spend 

money with no plans whatsoever. We have increased our national 

debt by a thousand percent since 1980 and haven’t done a single 

thing in infrastructure. And what we are talking about today is our 

fear as Members of Congress that that infrastructure we built, 30, 

40, 50, 60 years ago, the dams near where I live are deteriorating 

and are about to collapse. It seems the last 30 or 40 years we had 

no interest in building infrastructure or even repairing infrastructure. 

So my question to you is this: What is the Corps of Engineers 

doing in these major developments that gave us an unbelievable 

edge in economic opportunity? Interstate systems, for instance, 

gave us just-in-time manufacturing other countries in the world 

couldn’t compete with us on. 

What would you recommend or have a vision of how we obtain 

the funding that we need to replace, repair, and build an infrastructure that again puts us in position where we can compete with 

the rest of the world, including the Chinas and the larger populated countries? 

I know we are talking about the trust fund. As we do that, I 

want you to be aware that after you pass the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio, you’ve got pretty well free sailing all the way 

down to the ocean. So you are not going to be paying a tonnage 

there. If you look at tonnage as the way to build a trust fund, then 

you are shutting down and putting the costs so high for the burden 

of this in the small inland waterways that are tributaries to the 

Mississippi River that may prohibit what we need today, a good, 

clean, reliable source of transportation. 

So my hope is as you engage, and the two questions are: which 

do you feel compelled to support, a tonnage or a fuel tax? 

The second one is what would you do, how quickly do you think, 

and how much do you think it would take us to actually rebuild 

the infrastructure that we must rebuild to keep this country going? 

Ms. DARCY. As Congressman Wamp has already discussed, the 

Inland Waterway Users Board has developed as an alternative 

mechanism to make this trust fund whole. The administration’s 

perspective, as I said earlier, is that we want to work with the 

stakeholders to come up with a viable mechanism that can be included and passed by the Congress. 

So we need to have not only your support but the support of the 

stakeholders in order to come up with a position to make that 

mechanism workable. As to how much we are going to need in the 

future, just in the waterways alone I think it is in the billions of 

dollars, and I think anything that we do in looking forward has to 

be, whether it is in the WRDA bill or other legislative, we have to 

come up with some innovative ways to recapitalize. 

Mr. DAVIS. A very quick question, if there should come a time 

that the Corps could not continue to maintain Chic Lock which imVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:56 Nov 19, 2010 Jkt 061742 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A742P2.XXX A742P2

hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
31 

pacts both the Fourth and the Third Congressional Districts, if that 

is not possible for you to continue to maintain and keep that open, 

what happens then? Do you think that you can actually maintain 

that adequately and keep it open until the construction dollars flow 

until we can build the necessary improvements at the lock to keep 

the 300 some odd miles upstream open? 

General VAN ANTWERP. We can, but you will find more unscheduled outages and more scheduled outages because of what it takes 

to maintain. That is what we find as we look at this aging system. 

We track this very closely. What are the unscheduled outages? If 

it is a scheduled outage, industry will work with us. It is those unscheduled ones that are really tough because they shut down unexpectedly. And we had a couple of lock gates this year where we had 

those issues. 

So I would say the answer is yes, we will continue to maintain 

it, but we also expect that it will be out of service more frequently 

than it is today, and that continues to go up over time until we can 

build new locks. 

Mr. WAMP. Will the gentleman yield? Just as in the Nashville 

District, your colonel was here, they would say, yes, you can, but 

with a very steep increase in O&M. A very steep increase in O&M, 

and I am not talking about $2 million a year; I am talking about 

8, 10, 12 million a year to keep it open. We are approaching that 

rapidly now. You have got these post tension rods like bullet holes 

shot all the way down through this gate over and over again. Literally dozens, 60 and 70 of them. This thing is just patched together to keep it open. So it gets really expensive from here on. 

I just want to put that point in. 

General VAN ANTWERP. I think our decision process of whether 

to build new or do a total renovation gets to that question and the 

recommendation has been made to build new at Chic Lock. 

Mr. DAVIS. You will find those on this committee who will continue to have an interest in that to be sure, that part of the Tennessee River especially, flows northward in Tennessee and will continue the traffic that will be bringing commerce and industry from 

the eastern part of the United States and that area that will actually be put on a barge and be shipped out across. 

I yield back. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Fattah. 

Mr. FATTAH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me thank you, 

Madam Secretary, for the work that you are doing. And let me 

thank you for all of the projects, in and around Philadelphia. I 

know that there has been a lot of talk of exciting and productive 

work that the Corps has done and continues to do, and I want to 

thank you. You are a local team there, but I do have a couple of 

questions. 

In your total personnel, you mentioned the number who are in 

Afghanistan, some 800-and-something. How are they carried from 

a budgetary standpoint? Are they carried in the cost of the Corps 

or are they carried over in the Defense budget? 

General VAN ANTWERP. When you get down to a district level, 

which is where most of these people are located in Afghanistan; for 

instance, we have two districts, one in the south and one in the 

north. Those 800 people are paid from project funds. That is how 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
32 

it works in a District. In a Division and the Corps Headquarters, 

we are paid by general funds. When you appropriate for a project 

or if it is another country, like Afghanistan, the funds allocated to 

that project pay for those workers while they are over there. 

Mr. FATTAH. Give me the total number of your complement, civilian and military, and your total number outside of the country in 

Afghanistan and Iraq and Haiti. 

General VAN ANTWERP. In general terms we have about 600 that 

wear the uniform—this is in the entire Corps of Engineers—about 

36,000 that wear a suit or a life jacket or a hard hat. 

Mr. FATTAH. Let me ask you a question about the civilian population. In terms of the critical skill shortages going forward, you 

know we have a lot of people who are going to be retiring and so 

on, are you preparing—I was looking through your budget document—for the next, you know, I don’t know what percentage of 

your key personnel are going to be leaving and retiring as part of 

the baby boom generation. But do you have a game plan in terms 

of person power and skill needs going forward? 

General VAN ANTWERP. We absolutely do. I will just give you the 

fiscal year 2009 figures and can tell you the 2010 will be higher. 

In fiscal year 2009, we hired 8,213 people from outside the Corps. 

We had 4,600 people leave the Corps, including retirees. We expect 

it to be higher in fiscal year 2010 because some of the people 

are—— 

Mr. FATTAH. I would be very interested if the Corps could share 

with the chairman and then I am sure the staff will make sure I 

get it, information about your manpower game plan or your person 

power game plan going forward. 

General VAN ANTWERP. We definitely have a game plan to get at 

it. 

Mr. FATTAH. Now we are all in agreement in this room. We love 

the Corps and think you are doing important work. I need to get 

some things on the record, Madam Secretary. There has been a lot 

of debate outside this room about the role of government. Is there 

anything about what the Corps is doing in the levees, the dams, 

all of this work on America’s infrastructure that you perceive to be 

not properly the role of the government or in any way socialistic 

or anything of this notion? 

Ms. DARCY. No, sir. 

Mr. FATTAH. When we heard this comment from my great colleague from Louisiana about flood insurance, we have a lot of debate now about insurance. As I would understand it, there is no 

privately available flood insurance in the country for the most part; 

is that correct? This is a government subsidized—a public option 

flood insurance; right? Is it private insurance? 

General VAN ANTWERP. It is private insurance. Like if the levee 

is not certified—— 

Mr. FATTAH. We now finance through the agriculture flood insurance dollars, right? What is that for? 

General VAN ANTWERP. You go through your homeowner insurance company and your mortgage company, probably you may take 

it out with them. But largely it is private insurance. 

Mr. FATTAH. Why are we subsidizing it in the agriculture budget? Maybe I could yield to my colleague. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
33 

Mr. ALEXANDER. If the gentleman would yield, let me tell you 

what I see down the road. If these levees are decertified and FEMA 

draws a map saying the levee is being nonexistent, then they are 

going to presented to the person that lives in a mortgaged home 

that is backed by the taxpayers in some form—60 percent, about— 

they are going to say okay, you are going to pay this amount in 

insurance premiums for flood insurance if you continue living 

there. And you can buy the insurance from us or you can buy it 

from X, Y, Z company over here that has a deal with us. You can 

buy it from them, but we are going to tell them what to charge you. 

Now at the end of the year, if they have made money they are 

going to give it to us and we are going to pay them for the operation. If they lose money, we will reimburse you. Now, I have sold 

a lot of things but I can’t sell that to the public. I have never called 

it socialism, but what I see about to happen is ugly. 

Mr. FATTAH. I just want to make sure that we are all clear what 

the Corps is doing. And the other thing I understand from your testimony, that we have to find a way to finance this. That means 

that we can’t do it for free, that somebody has to pay. And so 

whether we deal with the trust fund issue or the user fee proposal 

that the administration has put forward, right, as I just heard you 

answer my colleague, we are talking about billions of dollars. When 

I am trying to make sure that as we go forward the commitment 

on the spend-down of these dollars—what you are dealing with you 

went through some impressive numbers on small businesses and 

all of these projects. When you are working through these contractors are there prescriptions in the contract that require these contractors when they are buying supplies and self contract themselves to also use small business, veteran-owned businesses, disadvantaged businesses to buy those supplies from other domestically owned companies? 

General VAN ANTWERP. When we award a contract—— 

Mr. FATTAH. When you give me a contract for $10 billion. 

General VAN ANTWERP. If you are a large business, we will require you to have a certain percentage of small business subcontractors. So that is one way that small business is in there. And 

we follow the Buy American Act. We have restrictions on where 

you can buy the supplies, and a lot of those supplies are bought 

with small business vendors. 

We have a target of 32 percent in the Corps of Engineers for 

small business. Last year we awarded 36 percent to small business. 

In the Recovery Act it has been a much greater amount. It is 46 

percent of the dollars and about 70 percent of the projects. 

Mr. FATTAH. You said there are some 6,000 people that have 

been employed through the Recovery Act dollars? Because I heard 

someone in the upper chamber—he was new—saying that not one 

job had been created through the Recovery Act. But you got at 

least 6,000. 

Ms. DARCY. Just in the last quarter. 

General VAN ANTWERP. The contractors have to report that by 

the way. They have to report jobs created. 

Ms. DARCY. That is where we get our figures. 

Mr. FATTAH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
34 

Mr. PASTOR. That is why we don’t want them to lose those jobs 

that we created. That is why we have to work on this budget. Before I recognize Calvert, you had 30 seconds. 

Mr. WAMP. Actually, just 10 seconds. I wanted you to hear, Secretary Darcy and General Van Antwerp, one of the victims that 

died under the rubble of Hotel Montana in Haiti was a constituent 

from my district named Diane Cade. Their family and all the families would like to honor Colonel Norberto Cintron who oversaw that 

recovery work under the Hotel Montana through the Corps of Engineers. And I just got to tell you he did such remarkable work. 

When he would get engaged, the families were confident that our 

country was doing what they could. And without him, they were 

confused and terrified and it was bad enough. But I just want to 

give him credit at this public meeting today for an outstanding job 

in Haiti. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Calvert. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize I was late. 

We have an Interior hearing going on the same time. I apologize. 

Madam Secretary, General, thank you for coming. Good to see 

you again. My question is regarding some meetings I had last week 

with some local officials back in California. And more than one occasion, as a matter of fact on a number of occasions, the issue of 

404 permits came up on just simple maintenance jobs. For instance, and I know, General, you are very much aware of this 

project, the San Luis Rey Flood Control Project has been in the 

permit process for 7 years just for mowing, just for maintenance of 

that flood control project. And thank goodness, we didn’t have a 

major flood event during that period. As you know, that would 

have created significant problems. 

Are these delays—I believe these delays are unnecessary. It certainly increases the risk to public safety and economic damage. 

And I know this is going on not just in southern California, but 

throughout the United States. 

So my question both to the Secretary and to the Corps, does the 

administration have a position on potential congressional efforts to 

exempt just routine maintenance from the 404 permitting process 

where we can just maintain these projects without these costly and 

potentially disastrous delays? 

Ms. DARCY. Congressman, I am not familiar with that project. I 

am not sure if the Chief wants to address it directly, but we currently do not have that. It is something that we might need to consider. 

General VAN ANTWERP. I am not familiar with the permit on San 

Luis Rey, but we will definitely check into it. Sometimes the permit 

has to do a lot more with environmental considerations, endangered species for example. What seems like routine maintenance 

and maybe even was routine maintenance in the past, now has 

some environmental consequences. That is where it really gets difficult. 

Mr. CALVERT. As you know, these delays go on and on and on, 

and some people think it reverts back to wetlands and the rest, and 

then you never do the routine maintenance and then you have a 

potential problem on your hand. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
35 

And another question, I know that under the stimulus bill you were appropriated about $4.6 billion, 2 billion for construction and 

2.7 billion for operation and maintenance. As I understand, many 

of these projects are coming in 20, 30 percent under estimates because of the bid process out there in the marketplace. 

Is that a trend all around the country? All of these bids coming 

in about that, 20, 30 percent under? 

General VAN ANTWERP. This has been an exceptional year. I 

wouldn’t say all across the country, but we have gotten very good 

bids on our projects and a lot of our projects have been 20, 30 percent under the usual amount. 

Mr. CALVERT. With that money that you have left over, obviously 

there is going to be substantial dollars left over apparently for reallocation or to pay down the debt or whatever, what it is your intent to do with those additional funds? 

Ms. DARCY. Congressman, we are trying to develop what we are 

calling our backup list to address just that, for either projects that 

have come in under bid or if there are projects that we thought 

were going to be able to go forward but for one reason or the other 

are not going forward. We want to be able to have a list so that 

we will be able to expend and obligate those funds before September. 

Mr. CALVERT. How will you disclose and notify the public of those 

reallocations? Do you need to go to the chairman and the ranking 

member to ask for a sign-off on those reallocations? 

Ms. DARCY. Not under the stimulus bill, sir. 

Mr. CALVERT. This is all done by the Corps? 

Ms. DARCY. It is posted on our Web site, sir. 

Mr. PASTOR. OMB. 

Mr. CALVERT. That is what I am afraid of, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. DARCY. It is posted on our Web site and also on the Recovery.gov Web site for whatever gets reallocated to different projects. 

Mr. CALVERT. So we will find out about it when we see it on the 

Web site? 

Ms. DARCY. We have been notifying Members when we have reallocations. 

Mr. CALVERT. Do you have to run this through OMB first? 

Ms. DARCY. This is an Administration program. 

Mr. CALVERT. The answer is yes? You have to run it by OMB 

first? 

Ms. DARCY. We have to comply with the Administration’s guidance. 

Mr. PASTOR. There is a high probability. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. You are welcome. We have the votes that have been 

called and we have 10 minutes. I want to take a few minutes and 

ask you about the Asian carp, so give me the 3-minute version. 

Talk about the money that you have and what you are doing with 

the locks and the lawsuits. 

But what I would like to have is a formal response back so that 

we can share with members who have an interest in the Asian 

carp, and then I will yield to my ranking member. 

Ms. DARCY. I will take that one, Congressman. The Corps of Engineers has been involved in trying to keep the Asian carp out of 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
36 

the Great Lakes for a number of years now. We started back earlier this decade, in 2000 actually, by constructing a fish barrier, 

which was originally designed to keep the gobi out of the lakes. 

Since then the carp have been migrating north in the Mississippi 

and coming close to a lot of the tributaries. 

We have constructed fish barriers in the Chicago Sanitary and 

Ship Canal. We have two barriers up and operating and we are 

about to construct a third fish barrier. These are all congressionally 

mandated fish barriers. In addition to that, we are working with 

scientists in ways to determine whether there are fish above the 

barrier. To date we have found no Asian carp above our barriers; 

however, what we have found is what is called eDNA evidence, 

which is evidence that says there is possibility that there are carp 

there. So in addition to what we have done already with our fish 

barriers, we have worked with the Council on Environmental Quality, the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Illinois DNR, and 

the City of Chicago to come up with a framework for all the Federal family as well as the locals to come up with a strategy to keep 

the carp out of the lakes. 

In addition, we have authorization to complete an efficacy study 

which is ongoing. The first interim report of that efficacy study 

found that the Corps needed to be able to prevent Asian carp coming into the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal in a flood event from 

the Des Plaines River. You may not be familiar with the hydrology 

out there, but the Des Plaines River is almost parallel to the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and in a flood event the Des Plaines 

River could flood into the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and the 

carp could get in. 

We will be awarding a contract I think within the month to build 

a sort of Jersey barrier between the two and also a mesh fence so 

that in a flood event if carp are there they will not be able to get 

in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal because that is the pathway to the lakes. 

In addition, we are also looking at other ways that we can help 

to prevent the carp. We are working really closely, and I need to 

point this out, with the other Federal family because in December 

one of our barriers had to come down for maintenance and in order 

for us to do that we had to work with the Illinois DNR and the 

Fish and Wildlife Service to apply rotenone into a 6-mile stretch of 

the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal in order to kill whatever fish 

might be there while we took the barrier out for repair. 

That was a very successful event. Again, there were no carp 

found above the barrier. We don’t want to assume that they are not 

above the barrier. We are also looking through this efficacy study 

at some other alternatives. The Chicago Lock on the Chicago River 

as well as the O’Brien Lock, are locks that we operate for navigation and for flood control, we are looking at modifying the operations of those locks so that if we close them to navigation for a 

certain period of time it will reduce the numbers of openings that 

could help to keep the fish out of the lake, which is our ultimate 

goal. 

So we are looking at those modified lock operations as well and 

when we do that we may be looking at some other kinds of barriers 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
37 

there, what are called bubble barriers and acoustic barriers, which 

keep the fish scared and they don’t go anywhere. 

Mr. PASTOR. Is it Alice Cooper? 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Better than New Jersey barriers. Let’s 

eliminate that from your vocabulary. We have enough of those on 

the damn highway. Let’s not put those there. 

Ms. DARCY. Those are some of our ongoing efforts. The Fish and 

Wildlife Service in partnership with the Illinois DNR are in the rivers now. What they are doing is going out to places where we have 

seen a positive indication of eDNA evidence and doing electro-fishing and netting in those areas to see if these find any carp. As I 

say, to date we have not found any carp. This is on the Web site 

too, we have what is called the Asian Carp Control Strategy that 

we released about a week and a half ago. We have got long-term 

plans, as well as short-term plans. 

Mr. PASTOR. There are many members who have a great interest 

in it. And if there are any additional comments, if you would submit it to us we would appreciate it. And I want to give some time 

to Mr. Frelinghuysen. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, a lot of questions will be put on the record. I certainly would like, and I think 

committee members, to understand how you are going to spend 

that money for global change type stability. I don’t need to hear 

about it now. 

I continue to have concerns about your budgeting for the Federal 

dredgers, McFarland and Weaver. If you are looking for cost economics there are pretty extravagant costs to keep those things operating. 

I have a lot of questions that relate to the Harbor Maintenance 

Fund. Perhaps the largest question here and perhaps this is not 

necessarily venting, an excellent article in The New York Times 

the other day about China builds, India Frets: Developing ports, 

Influence in South Asia. Where we are as a Nation on the East 

Coast and West Coast and on other coasts of the U.S., where we 

are in terms of our ability to keep our ports open for business and 

competitive. We are going to be opening up a widened Panama 

Canal. And I think that our competition is stiff out there, and I 

hope in the overall scheme of things, we keep an eye on that ball, 

because the Chinese are underwriting across the world and sucking 

up just about every asset and mineral known to man. And I just 

want to make sure that we are not left out of the overall equation 

when it comes to access to our Nation’s ports. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you very much. Madam Secretary, thank you 

very much. 

Ms. DARCY. Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. We look forward to working with you and welcome 

aboard. There are many problems but there are great opportunities. And so as the future takes us into doing a bill, we look for 

your guidance and your comments. And General, thank you for 

your service. And again we want to thank all the men and women 

who serve at the Corps of Engineers for their service, and we look 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
38 

forward to working with you on the field and also on this budget. 

And so this will conclude the hearing. 

Thank you very much. 

Ms. DARCY. Thank you. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
39 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 77 here 61742A.012
40 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 78 here 61742A.013
41 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 79 here 61742A.014
42 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 80 here 61742A.015
43 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 81 here 61742A.016
44 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 82 here 61742A.017
45 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 83 here 61742A.018
46 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 84 here 61742A.019
47 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 85 here 61742A.020
48 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 86 here 61742A.021
49 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 87 here 61742A.022
50 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 88 here 61742A.023
51 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 89 here 61742A.024
52 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 90 here 61742A.025
53 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 91 here 61742A.026
54 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 92 here 61742A.027
55 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 93 here 61742A.028
56 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 94 here 61742A.029
57 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 95 here 61742A.030
58 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 96 here 61742A.031
59 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 97 here 61742A.032
60 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 98 here 61742A.033
61 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 99 here 61742A.034
62 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 100 here 61742A.035
63 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 101 here 61742A.036
64 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 102 here 61742A.037
65 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 103 here 61742A.038
66 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 61742A.039
67 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 61742A.040
68 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 61742A.041
69 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 107 here 61742A.042
70 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 108 here 61742A.043
71 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 109 here 61742A.044
72 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 110 here 61742A.045
73 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 111 here 61742A.046
74 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 112 here 61742A.047
75 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 61742A.048
76 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 114 here 61742A.049
77 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 115 here 61742A.050
78 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 116 here 61742A.051
79 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 117 here 61742A.052
80 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 118 here 61742A.053
81 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 119 here 61742A.054
82 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 120 here 61742A.055
83 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 121 here 61742A.056
84 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 122 here 61742A.057
85 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 123 here 61742A.058
86 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 124 here 61742A.059
87 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 125 here 61742A.060
88 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 126 here 61742A.061
89 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 127 here 61742A.062
90 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 128 here 61742A.063
91 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 129 here 61742A.064
92 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 130 here 61742A.065
93 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 131 here 61742A.066
94 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 132 here 61742A.067
95 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 133 here 61742A.068
96 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 134 here 61742A.069
97 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 135 here 61742A.070
98 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 136 here 61742A.071
99 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 137 here 61742A.072
100 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 138 here 61742A.073
101 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 139 here 61742A.074
102 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 140 here 61742A.075
103 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 141 here 61742A.076
104 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 142 here 61742A.077
105 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 143 here 61742A.078
106 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 144 here 61742A.079
107 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 145 here 61742A.080
108 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 146 here 61742A.081
109 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 147 here 61742A.082
110 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 148 here 61742A.083
111 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 149 here 61742A.084
112 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 150 here 61742A.085
113 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 151 here 61742A.086
114 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 152 here 61742A.087
115 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 153 here 61742A.088
116 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 154 here 61742A.089
117 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 155 here 61742A.090
118 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 156 here 61742A.091
119 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 157 here 61742A.092
120 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 158 here 61742A.093
121 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 159 here 61742A.094
122 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 160 here 61742A.095
123 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 161 here 61742A.096
124 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 162 here 61742A.097
125 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 163 here 61742A.098
126 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 164 here 61742A.099
127 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 165 here 61742A.100
128 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 166 here 61742A.101
129 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 167 here 61742A.102
130 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 168 here 61742A.103
131 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 169 here 61742A.104
132 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 170 here 61742A.105
133 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 171 here 61742A.106
134 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 172 here 61742A.107
135 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 173 here 61742A.108
136 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 174 here 61742A.109
137 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 175 here 61742A.110
138 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 176 here 61742A.111
139 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 177 here 61742A.112
140 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 178 here 61742A.113
141 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 179 here 61742A.114
142 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 180 here 61742A.115
143 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 181 here 61742A.116
144 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 182 here 61742A.117
145 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 183 here 61742A.118
146 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 184 here 61742A.119
147 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 185 here 61742A.120
148 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 186 here 61742A.121
149 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 187 here 61742A.122
150 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 188 here 61742A.123
151 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 189 here 61742A.124
152 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 190 here 61742A.125
153 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 191 here 61742A.126
154 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 192 here 61742A.127
155 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 193 here 61742A.128
156 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 194 here 61742A.129
157 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 195 here 61742A.130
158 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 196 here 61742A.131
159 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 197 here 61742A.132
160 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 198 here 61742A.133
161 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 199 here 61742A.134
162 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 200 here 61742A.135
163 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 201 here 61742A.136
164 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 202 here 61742A.137
165 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 203 here 61742A.138
166 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 204 here 61742A.139
167 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 205 here 61742A.140
168 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 206 here 61742A.141
169 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 207 here 61742A.142
170 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 208 here 61742A.143
171 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 209 here 61742A.144
172 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 210 here 61742A.145
173 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 211 here 61742A.146
174 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 212 here 61742A.147
175 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 213 here 61742A.148
176 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 214 here 61742A.149
177 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 215 here 61742A.150
178 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 216 here 61742A.151
179 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 217 here 61742A.152
180 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 218 here 61742A.153
181 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 219 here 61742A.154
182 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 220 here 61742A.155
183 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 221 here 61742A.156
184 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 222 here 61742A.157
185 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 223 here 61742A.158
186 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 224 here 61742A.159
187 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 225 here 61742A.160
188 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 226 here 61742A.161
189 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 227 here 61742A.162
190 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 228 here 61742A.163
191 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 229 here 61742A.164
192 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 230 here 61742A.165
193 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 231 here 61742A.166
194 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 232 here 61742A.167
195 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 233 here 61742A.168
196 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 234 here 61742A.169
197 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 235 here 61742A.170
198 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 236 here 61742A.171
199 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 237 here 61742A.172
200 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 238 here 61742A.173
201 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 239 here 61742A.174
202 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 240 here 61742A.175
203 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 241 here 61742A.176
204 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 242 here 61742A.177
205 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 243 here 61742A.178
206 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 244 here 61742A.179
207 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 245 here 61742A.180
208 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 246 here 61742A.181
209 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 247 here 61742A.182
210 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 248 here 61742A.183
211 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 249 here 61742A.184
212 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 250 here 61742A.185
213 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 251 here 61742A.186
214 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 252 here 61742A.187
215 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 253 here 61742A.188
216 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 254 here 61742A.189
217 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 255 here 61742A.190
218 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 256 here 61742A.191
219 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 257 here 61742A.192
220 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 258 here 61742A.193
221 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 259 here 61742A.194
222 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 260 here 61742A.195
223 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 261 here 61742A.196
224 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 262 here 61742A.197
225 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 263 here 61742A.198
226 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 264 here 61742A.199
227 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 265 here 61742A.200
228 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 266 here 61742A.201
229 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 267 here 61742A.202
230 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 268 here 61742A.203
231 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 269 here 61742A.204
232 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 270 here 61742A.205
233 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 271 here 61742A.206
234 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 272 here 61742A.207
235 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 273 here 61742A.208
236 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 274 here 61742A.209
237 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 275 here 61742A.210
238 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 276 here 61742A.211
239 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 277 here 61742A.212
240 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 278 here 61742A.213
241 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 279 here 61742A.214
242 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 280 here 61742A.215
243 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 281 here 61742A.216
244 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 282 here 61742A.217
245 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 283 here 61742A.218
246 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 284 here 61742A.219
247 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 285 here 61742A.220
248 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 286 here 61742A.221
249 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 287 here 61742A.222
250 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 288 here 61742A.223
251 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 289 here 61742A.224
252 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 290 here 61742A.225
253 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 291 here 61742A.226
254 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 292 here 61742A.227
255 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 293 here 61742A.228
256 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 294 here 61742A.229
257 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 295 here 61742A.230
258 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 296 here 61742A.231
259 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 297 here 61742A.232
260 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 298 here 61742A.233
261 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 299 here 61742A.234
262 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 300 here 61742A.235
263 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 301 here 61742A.236
264 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 302 here 61742A.237
265 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 303 here 61742A.238
266 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 304 here 61742A.239
267 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 305 here 61742A.240
268 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 306 here 61742A.241
269 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 307 here 61742A.242
270 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 308 here 61742A.243
271 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 309 here 61742A.244
272 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 310 here 61742A.245
273 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 311 here 61742A.246
274 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 312 here 61742A.247
275 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 313 here 61742A.248
276 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 314 here 61742A.249
277 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 315 here 61742A.250
278 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 316 here 61742A.251
279 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 317 here 61742A.252
280 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 318 here 61742A.253
281 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 319 here 61742A.254
282 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 320 here 61742A.255
283 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 321 here 61742A.256
284 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 322 here 61742A.257
285 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 323 here 61742A.258
286 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 324 here 61742A.259
287 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 325 here 61742A.260
288 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 326 here 61742A.261
289 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 327 here 61742A.262
290 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 328 here 61742A.263
291 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 329 here 61742A.264
292 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 330 here 61742A.265
293 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 331 here 61742A.266
294 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 332 here 61742A.267
295 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 333 here 61742A.268
296 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 334 here 61742A.269
297 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 335 here 61742A.270
298 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 336 here 61742A.271
299 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 337 here 61742A.272
300 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 338 here 61742A.273
301 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 339 here 61742A.274
302 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 340 here 61742A.275
303 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 341 here 61742A.276
304 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 342 here 61742A.277
305 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 343 here 61742A.278
306 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 344 here 61742A.279
307 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 345 here 61742A.280
308 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 346 here 61742A.281
309 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 347 here 61742A.282
310 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 348 here 61742A.283
311 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 349 here 61742A.284
312 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 350 here 61742A.285
313 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 351 here 61742A.286
314 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 352 here 61742A.287
315 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 353 here 61742A.288
316 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 354 here 61742A.289
317 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 355 here 61742A.290
318 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 356 here 61742A.291
319 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 357 here 61742A.292
320 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 358 here 61742A.293
321 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 359 here 61742A.294
322 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 360 here 61742A.295
323 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 361 here 61742A.296
324 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 362 here 61742A.297
325 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 363 here 61742A.298
326 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 364 here 61742A.299
327 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 365 here 61742A.300
328 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 366 here 61742A.301
329 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 367 here 61742A.302
330 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 368 here 61742A.303
331 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 369 here 61742A.304
332 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 370 here 61742A.305
333 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 371 here 61742A.306
334 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 372 here 61742A.307
335 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 373 here 61742A.308
336 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 374 here 61742A.309
337 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 375 here 61742A.310
338 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 376 here 61742A.311
339 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 377 here 61742A.312
340 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 378 here 61742A.313
341 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 379 here 61742A.314
342 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 380 here 61742A.315
343 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 381 here 61742A.316
344 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 382 here 61742A.317
345 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 383 here 61742A.318
346 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 384 here 61742A.319
347 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 385 here 61742A.320
348 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 386 here 61742A.321
349 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 387 here 61742A.322
350 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 388 here 61742A.323
351 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 389 here 61742A.324
352 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 390 here 61742A.325
353 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 391 here 61742A.326
354 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 392 here 61742A.327
355 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 393 here 61742A.328
356 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 394 here 61742A.329
357 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 395 here 61742A.330
358 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 396 here 61742A.331
359 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 397 here 61742A.332
360 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 398 here 61742A.333
361 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 399 here 61742A.334
362 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 400 here 61742A.335
363 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 401 here 61742A.336
364 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 402 here 61742A.337
365 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 403 here 61742A.338
366 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 404 here 61742A.339
367 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 405 here 61742A.340
368 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 406 here 61742A.341
369 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 407 here 61742A.342
370 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 408 here 61742A.343
371 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 409 here 61742A.344
372 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 410 here 61742A.345
373 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 411 here 61742A.346
374 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 412 here 61742A.347
375 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 413 here 61742A.348
376 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 414 here 61742A.349
377 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 415 here 61742A.350
378 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 416 here 61742A.351
379 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 417 here 61742A.352
380 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 418 here 61742A.353
381 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 419 here 61742A.354
382 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 420 here 61742A.355
383 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 421 here 61742A.356
384 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 422 here 61742A.357
385 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 423 here 61742A.358
386 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 424 here 61742A.359
387 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 425 here 61742A.360
388 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 426 here 61742A.361
389 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 427 here 61742A.362
390 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 428 here 61742A.363
391 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 429 here 61742A.364
392 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 430 here 61742A.365
393 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 431 here 61742A.366
394 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 432 here 61742A.367
395 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 433 here 61742A.368
396 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 434 here 61742A.369
397 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 435 here 61742A.370
398 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 436 here 61742A.371
399 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 437 here 61742A.372
400 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 438 here 61742A.373
401 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 439 here 61742A.374
402 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 440 here 61742A.375
403 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 441 here 61742A.376
404 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 442 here 61742A.377
405 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 443 here 61742A.378
406 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 444 here 61742A.379
407 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 445 here 61742A.380
408 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 446 here 61742A.381
409 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 447 here 61742A.382
410 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 448 here 61742A.383
411 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 449 here 61742A.384
412 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 450 here 61742A.385
413 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 451 here 61742A.386
414 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 452 here 61742A.387
415 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 453 here 61742A.388
416 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 454 here 61742A.389
417 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 455 here 61742A.390
418 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 456 here 61742A.391
419 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 457 here 61742A.392
420 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 458 here 61742A.393
421 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 459 here 61742A.394
422 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 460 here 61742A.395
423 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 461 here 61742A.396
424 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 462 here 61742A.397
425 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 463 here 61742A.398
426 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 464 here 61742A.399
(427) 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 2010. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FY 2011 BUDGET 

WITNESSES 

MICHAEL L. CONNOR, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

ANNE CASTLE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR WATER AND SCIENCE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

REED MURRAY, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACT OFFICE 

Mr. PASTOR [presiding]. Hearing will come to order. Good afternoon. Today the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development 

meets to hear testimony on the fiscal year 2011 budget request for 

the Department of Interior’s water agencies in the western states, 

including the Bureau of Reclamation and the Central Utah Project 

Completion Act Office. 

The Bureau of Reclamation is responsible for providing agricultural, municipal and industrial water supply in the West. Economies, ecosystems, and communities all rely on the availability of 

clean water. At a time when demand is increasing and many regions have been hit by extended drought the Bureau is being asked 

more and more to provide solutions to the West’s water needs while 

being good stewards of our natural resources and I hope to hear 

how the fiscal year 2011 budget request reflects this expanded responsibility. 

Every day we hear examples where state, local, and federal agencies, as well as tribal governments, have to spread limited water 

resources across competing demands, including use for water supply, power generation, ecosystem restoration, and our river and 

delta systems. These challenges have been particularly difficult in 

California, where water is pulled between an agricultural sector 

with high unemployment in some areas, municipal and industrial 

water supply for growing populations, and an overstressed delta 

ecosystem. 

I look forward to hearing the Reclamation’s strategy to help all 

interests when water demand is increasing and supplies continue 

to be scarce. 

I also note the Bureau of Reclamation’s roots in building and 

maintaining dams and other water structures that protect Americans. Much of this infrastructure was built nearly a century ago; 

in fact, over half of the Bureau’s dams are now more than 60 years 

old. It is critical that Reclamation maintain its aging infrastructure 

and I hope today to explore how the budget request provides funding levels that meet the Bureau’s responsibility to keep Americans 

safe while maintaining America’s dams in proper working order. 

The Bureau of Reclamation plays a vital role in delivering water 

to tribes and rural communities that could not otherwise access 

clean water. The Bureau’s rural water budget request is signifiVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:56 Nov 19, 2010 Jkt 061742 PO 00000 Frm 00427 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A742P2.XXX A742P2

hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
428 

cantly below the fiscal year 2010 level and today I look to our witnesses to shed light on how the administration’s proposal will address their water supply commitments to tribes and meet the needs 

of rural communities. 

We have before us the assistant secretary for water and science, 

Anne Castle, to present the Department of Interior’s water strategy 

and how the strategy is reflected in the budget request; Bureau of 

Reclamation Commissioner Michael Connor, who will address the 

Bureau of Reclamation fiscal year 2011 budget request, including 

the budget’s activities related to water supply, water recycling and 

reuse, ecosystem restoration, rural water delivery, dam safety, and 

other programs; finally, Program Director Reed Murray, to give testimony on the administration request for the Central Utah Project 

Completion Act. 

Welcome, to all of you. I ask each of you to ensure that the hearing record—questions for the record, any supporting information 

requested by the subcommittee are delivered in final form to the 

subcommittee no later than 4 weeks from the time your receive 

them. Members with additional questions for the record will have 

until close of business tomorrow to provide them to the subcommittee. 

And with these opening comments, I would like to yield to the 

ranking member for any opening comments that he would like to 

make. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good afternoon, Secretary Castle, Commissioner Connor, Director Murray. Welcome to the committee. 

The administration’s budget request for the Bureau of Reclama- tion and related accounts is just over $1.1 billion, $22 million below 

the fiscal year 2010 level. I have made it clear in all of our hearings this year how concerned my constituents are about the growing deficit. Your programs were actually cut from the fiscal year 

2010 level, but I don’t want to lose sight, however, of the funding 

and extraordinary flexibility which Congress provided you in the 

Stimulus Act. We would like to hear how that $1 billion has been 

spent. 

I do have some concerns about the priorities expressed in the 

budget request. The heart of the Bureau is water and power—is 

water and power management for the region, yet this part of the 

budget is cut by nearly one-quarter. At the same time, land and 

fish and wildlife conservation and development are increased by 

over 28 percent. Now, I have been a longtime supporter of our— 

of environmental conservation programs, but with that said, I hope 

you will be able to explain why, with rising tension and economic 

devastation in the West caused by decreasing access to water—I 

think the chairman has focused on that in his remarks, too—now 

is the time to cut funding for these very important programs that 

should be helping us find solutions. 

The Bureau’s reputation for water resources management is 

strong, which is only fitting given how important your work is to 

the population, economic development, and environmental quality 

of our western states. But the future will require more. You will 

need visionary and creative leadership to manage competing 

stresses on the scarce water resources of the region. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
429 

I look forward—and I should say we look forward—to hearing 

more of your plans for providing this leadership in addition to the 

technical expertise, which has long been your bureau’s strength. 

Thank you for your appearance before the committee and we welcome you here this afternoon. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Frelinghuysen, 

members of the subcommittee. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to be here today to represent the secretary—— 

Mr. PASTOR [continuing]. Move that mike up to—— 

Ms. CASTLE. You bet. 

Thanks for the opportunity to represent the secretary of interior 

and to support the president’s 2011 budget request for the Bureau 

of Reclamation and the Central Utah Project Completion Act Office. You recognized Commissioner Connor and Director Murray. 

With us here at the table is Bob Wolf, Reclamation’s director of 

program and budget as well, answering detail questions. 

Interior’s people and programs and our lands affect virtually 

every American. We protect natural resources and special places, 

like national parks and wildlife refuges; we protect waterways and 

cultural heritage; we manage energy development and provide 

earth science for the entire country; and we have trust responsibility for Native American communities. We really are the department of all America. 

The 2011 budget request for the department focuses on six priorities: first, implementing a new energy frontier; second, climate 

change adaptation; third, tackling our water challenges; fourth, 

protecting America’s great outdoors; fifth, engaging our youth in 

natural resources; and finally, empowering tribal nations. 

I am going to mention just a couple of those areas that I think 

this subcommittee would be particularly interested in, and the first 

is our new sustainable water strategy, called WaterSMART. The 

WaterSMART program was launched at the end of February. 

SMART stands for ‘‘sustain and manage America’s resources for tomorrow.’’ 

We need this program and we need to focus on water sustainability because we have an imbalance in our water supply and demand equation. Just as Mr. Frelinghuysen mentioned, we have additional pressures on our water supplies and we need a national 

commitment to balance—rebalance—that imbalance. 

It is caused by a variety of factors. We have population growth, 

climate change, we have new water needs for domestic energy development, we have declining aquifer levels, and we are now much 

more cognizant of the need for water to support healthy ecosystems. 

The WaterSMART program is designed to help bring that imbalanced equation back into balance. We are going to, through this 

program, coordinate the department’s different water conservation 

and sustainability efforts. We are going to focus on the water-energy nexus, recognizing that different types of energy development 

spells different water demands and those demands need to be 

taken into account when we are making decisions about energy development, and also recognizing that saving water also conserves 

energy. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
430 

The program will have an Internet-based clearinghouse for best 

practices and incentives and the most cost-effective water-saving 

technologies. We will coordinate with our department’s climate 

change program, and finally, we are developing our own water footprint reduction program so that we will walk the walk in the Department of the Interior and help achieve the president’s goal of reducing water consumption overall at federal agencies. The 2011 budget includes $72.9 million for the various components of the Water SMART program. That is an increase of over 

$36 million over the 2010 enacted budget. $62 million of that total 

is for the Bureau of Reclamation’s programs, including its basin 

studies and various cost-share grants for water efficiency and recycling and reuse projects. Another $10.9 million is for the U.S. Geological Survey’s WaterSMART availability and use assessment, 

what we have called in the past ‘‘water census,’’ and that part of 

the program implements provisions of the Secure Water Act, Public 

Law 111–11. 

In the category of new energy development, I want to just mention a new memorandum of understanding on hydroelectric power 

development. It was signed just last month by Secretary Salazar, 

and Energy Secretary Chu, and Assistant Secretary Darcy, of the 

Department of the Army. And that MOU represents a new approach to the development of hydroelectric power—one that seeks 

to take advantage of all the opportunities that we have to develop 

hydropower on existing federal facilities in a sustainable way. 

We can add to our country’s renewable energy portfolio with lowimpact hydro projects that won’t have the damaging environmental 

effects that we have seen in the past from some hydro developments. We are working right now to identify the best places on existing federal facilities that we can add hydroelectric power capability, and we will start working with our local communities to 

make that happen. 

The overall budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation is $1.02 billion. Commissioner Connor can talk about the details of 

that budget request, but I just want to emphasize that the budget 

is intended to support reliable and sustainable water supplies that 

are delivered in an economically and environmentally sound manner. 

The 2011 budget request for the Central Utah Project Completion Act is $43 million; that is $1 million more than in 2010. And 

that funding provides for the continued design and construction of 

the Utah Lake System, which is the last component of the Central 

Utah Project. 

This 2011 budget represents our best effort to work within the 

tough economic times that we are all facing, to do our part to reduce the spending deficit but to still carry out the core mission and 

priorities of the Department of the Interior. So thank you very 

much for this opportunity to be here today, and I will be happy to 

answer any questions. [See Page 617] 

Mr. CONNOR. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Frelinghuysen, 

and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to discuss the Bureau of Reclamation’s fiscal year 2011 budget. 

With me today is Bob Wolf, our director of program and budget at 

the Bureau of Reclamation. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
431 

The fiscal year 2011 discretionary request for Reclamation, as stated by Secretary Castle, is $1.02 billion. Overall, the budget reflects the set of wide-ranging activities and initiatives that support 

Reclamation’s mission. 

According to a recent departmental economic analysis, Reclamation’s mission of supplying water, generating power, and providing 

recreation opportunities to millions of Americans supports over 

260,000 jobs on an annual basis and $39.5 billion in economic activity. 

At its core, however, the goal of Reclamation’s budget is simply 

to promote certainty and sustainability in the use of limited water 

resources, whether it be for agricultural, municipal, industrial, environmental, or power generation purposes. Certainty and sustainability requires Reclamation to take action on many fronts, and our 

budget proposal was developed with that principle in mind. 

Through these efforts we believe we can continue to provide the 

economic benefits I just described. 

Secretary Castle identified six priorities that are a focal point of 

Interior’s fiscal year 2011 budget. Very briefly I want to speak to 

Reclamation’s involvement in each of those areas. 

First two are tackling the nation’s water challenges and new energy frontier. Addressing water challenges and energy needs starts 

with operating, maintaining, and improving the condition of our existing facilities. Accordingly, the 2011 budget requests a total of $424 million for 

facility operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation activities. This 

amount represents almost half—46 percent—of the water and related resources account. The remaining balance of that account is 

used for water, energy, land, and fish and wildlife resource management activities, which amount to $490 million in total. Included 

within this latter amount, and critical to tackling the nation’s 

water challenges, is the WaterSMART program that was just described by the assistant secretary. I would simply like to add two 

points to that earlier discussion. 

First, WaterSMART is an important program that can and has 

expanded water supplies in the West. The WaterSMART grant program has become immensely popular and we expect significantly 

more requests than there is available funding. In 2009 Reclamation 

made available $40 million of its Recovery Act funds for the grant 

program and received approximately $350 million in proposals. 

Water-users in the West are generating creative solutions to water 

resources challenges and are willing to put significant resources on 

the table to match limited federal funds. 

WaterSMART also includes a specific focus on the energy-water 

nexus, as was mentioned. In addition to promoting energy efficiency through conservation, Reclamation will be working with our 

partners to facilitate new renewable energy generation development in association with Reclamation facilities and operations. 

In the area of climate change, Reclamation will do its part to assist the department in implementing an integrated strategy to better understand and respond to climate change impacts on water 

and associated resources. As identified in the budget documents, 

the department will be establishing climate science centers, landscape conservation cooperatives, and a Climate Effects Network. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
432 

Reclamation’s 2011 budget includes an increase of $3 million for 

Reclamation’s basin study program to implement West-wide risk 

assessments and to establish two LCCs. Reclamation’s science and 

technology program will also devote $4 million in support of the 

science agenda being carried out by the climate science centers. 

This funding represents a critical investment that will help our 

stakeholders better understand and plan for our future impacted 

by increasing temperatures. 

Treasured landscapes: Protecting the nation’s treasured landscapes is another departmental priority, and it is imperative that 

the Reclamation do its share. Simply put, maintaining our ability 

to deliver water and generate power requires protecting and restoring the aquatic and riparian environments affected by our operations. 

Beyond that, restoring the health of our rivers will help avoid future conflicts and provide more flexibility in addressing the challenges presented by droughts, increasing populations, increasing 

energy demands, environmentally depleted aquifers, and a changing climate. Included within the restoring rivers programs are our 

endangered species recovery programs, which is an increasing portion of Reclamation’s budget. 

The final priority I want to discuss is Reclamation’s support for 

tribal nations. The 2011 budget continues this support through our 

ongoing efforts to implement Indian water right settlements. 

Included in the request is funding for the Animas-La Plata 

Project and Shiprock Pipeline, which are features of the Colorado 

Ute Settlement. The request also includes funding for the NavajoGallup Water Supply Project, the key element of the Navajo Nation 

Water Rights Settlement in the San Juan River Basin in New Mexico. There is also $4 million included to complete the federal funding necessary to implement the Soboba Water Rights Settlement in 

California. 

Outside settlements, Reclamation is addressing tribal needs through its rural water program. $62 million is requested for continuing the construction of authorized rural water projects, several 

of which benefit tribal nations in the Great Plains and the upper 

Colorado River regions. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by simply expressing my 

sincere appreciation for the continued support that this subcommittee has provided the Bureau of Reclamation, and I will answer questions at the appropriate time. [See Page 622] 

Mr. MURRAY. Chairman, I will not be giving an oral statement 

at this time, but will rely on my written testimony. [See Page 629] 

Mr. PASTOR. I will start with the California Bay-Delta water 

issues, since it is on everybody’s mind. California, as well as the 

Bureau of Reclamation, have been struggling to supply water to the 

state’s farmers, municipal and industrial water users, while protecting the already stressed natural habitat. 

Last month the National Academies released a study of the impact of water diversions from Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers 

in California on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. These diversions, which supply water to agricultural, municipal, and industrial 

customers, have impacted ecosystem restoration and the protection 

of endangered species and highlight the challenge in California of 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
433 

providing water for growing populations and economic needs while 

preventing harm to the region’s natural treasures. 

I would like to hear your thoughts on the study’s results that are 

relevant to the Bureau’s operations and direction in California. You 

recently took several actions to try to help San Joaquin Valley 

farmers and other water users. What actions has the Reclamation 

taken to ease water supply shortfalls in the region? How does the 

National Academy study relate to the Reclamation actions in that 

area? And how are you planning to move forward in a way that 

will further improve the situation? 

I guess either Madam Secretary or—and Commissioner—both of 

you answer. 

Ms. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, why don’t I give an overview of the 

departmental response—— 

Mr. PASTOR. Okay. 

Ms. CASTLE [continuing]. On California water issues, and then 

Commissioner Connor can talk more specifically about Reclamation’s involvement. 

One thing that I think is the overriding message from the Department of the Interior is that we have an all-hands-on-deck approach to trying to be productive and helpful and solve problems 

in the California Bay-Delta. The secretary himself is deeply involved. I was in a meeting this morning with him. 

He has personally taken a very significant interest in all of the 

details of what is going on in California. He announced yesterday 

a $20.7 million Recovery Act funding for the intertie—the connection between the Delta-Mendota Canal and the California Aqueduct that will help create more efficiency and more capacity in the 

use of the California system. 

He will be announcing, by the end of this week, the new allocations of water in California based on the March 1 forecast. He announced the allocations that were based on the February forecast 

last month. We have speeded up that process to try to provide more 

certainty to California farmers and also allow them to know earlier 

what they should be able to count on. 

Reclamation’s budget for 2011 in the request—in the President’s 

request—is $172 million for the Central Valley Project, and that is 

just Reclamation. I was looking at the cross-cut budget for 

CALFED activities throughout the administration, and it is $265 

million. The bulk of that is from Department of Interior agencies, 

but it also includes very significant contributions from the Corps of 

Engineers and the Department of Agriculture. So we really do have 

a concerted effort to try to better the situation in California. 

With respect to the National Academy of Science study, we were 

very pleased that that study found that the decisions and the conclusions that had been reached by the Fish and Wildlife Service 

and the NOAA Fisheries Service were scientifically justified. But 

that study gave us, also, some opportunities to make things better 

and made some suggestions that are currently being considered 

and acted upon within both the Department of Commerce and the 

Department of the Interior. We are actively and aggressively working to follow up on the NAS study suggestions and hope to come 

out with a plan in the very near future. 

Mr. PASTOR. Commissioner. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
434 

Mr. CONNOR. I would simply add that I would certainly agree 

with the notion that California water is on everybody’s minds. It 

certainly is on my mind on a daily basis and has been a focus of 

our efforts. I would simply add a couple of things to what Secretary 

Castle has already mentioned. 

I think the notion of—with respect to how we are following up 

on the recommendations and the analysis done by the National 

Academy of Science is to recognize the area of improvement that 

the Academy noted, which is a fundamentally integrated approach 

to science that needs to take—be taken into account by both the 

Bureau of Reclamation as an action agency as well as the Fish and 

Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries, as the agencies reviewing the 

activity under the Endangered Species Act. It is something that we 

are going to aggressively follow up on. I think there is area for improvement in science, and that was demonstrated this year with 

the operations that have occurred so far in 2010. 

During the latter part of last year, recognizing, with respect to 

the delta smelt and its relationship to turbidity in the Bay-Delta— 

recognizing that is one very strong indicator of the location of the 

smelt. We, in association with our analysis of a project known as 

2-Gates, we installed a large number of turbidity monitors in the 

Delta. The result of that information was incorporated into the activities this year in reviewing, on a week-to-week basis, how much 

we could pump from the Bay-Delta. 

Based on that information, the fisheries agencies, a group known 

as the Smelt Working Group, takes a look at all the indicators and 

determines whether or not there is a high likelihood of taking some 

of the endangered smelt. That data was very helpful in helping us 

to understand the location of smelt and was incorporated and was 

a factor of why there is a range within the smelt’s biological opinion that you can pump. That information helped us maintain a 

higher range of pumping throughout this spring season, up until 

April 1 when other aspects of the biological opinion took place. 

So from that standpoint, more precipitation, better management 

of our operations have helped to improve the water supply situation. As mentioned earlier, we will be making yet another announcement revising our allocations before the end of the week— 

Central Valley Project. And that is the type of activity that we are 

going to be looking at—science, integrated science, coordinated operations as the intertie will allow us to do. That is part of the 

whole suite of things that we will be doing over the next year to 

short-term, mid-term, and long-term address the California water 

issues. 

Mr. PASTOR. The only thing you have to worry about is precipitation now. 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. 

Mr. PASTOR. Because that has been a major factor there, and I 

guess it continues to be. I don’t know how this winter was up there 

in terms of precipitation. 

Mr. CONNOR. It has actually—after the turn of the year, from 

January on, it has been fairly good. It has been on the average 

level, which is terrific. 

The only problem and the ongoing, lingering effects of the 

drought was, we were—the fall, through last December, was very 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
435 

dry. Our reservoirs were low, and although we have gotten a lot 

of great precipitation this year we are kind of in a deficit situation. 

But now our reservoirs are refilling. I think at least three of the 

five are basically at average year-to-date at this point in time, including Shasta, which is a very good sign. And from that standpoint we are in a better situation than we were last year, but still 

we have the lingering effects of the drought plus the ongoing restrictions, which have limited water supply. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, thank God for El Nino last year. 

Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Before yielding my time to Mr. Rehberg, let 

me thank the chairman for raising this issue. I don’t think anything on the floor last year raised, should we say, the heat level 

in this debate on diversion—water diversion. For those of us from 

the East, we really got a full taste, should we say, or a full measure of how controversial these issues are. 

So I could just say on my own behalf, and I am sure other members of the committee, we will be watching very carefully as to 

what the hell is going on out there, and obviously we want to be 

respectful of the views and knowledge of members of Congress from 

California that represent the whole state and that area, but boy, 

I think we learned firsthand, you know, up close and personal how 

some of these decisions can affect the way of life of many people 

up there. We are obviously respectful of the environment and fish 

species, but it was a lesson for some of us as to how things can sort 

of dissipate unless we address it. Hopefully this National Academy 

study will put us in the right direction. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield my time to Mr. 

Rehberg. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Frelinghuysen. Okay. 

Real quickly—obviously I don’t want to be as aggressive in my 

questioning. I think 4 or 5 years ago I got after Commissioner 

Keyes and he quit the next day, so—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. REHBERG. I am going to be a little careful. Montana produces or provides $50 million a year to the Reclama- tion Fund, and the president has seen fit to allow us back $3 million towards our two major projects that are both anticipated to 

cost between $200 million to $250 million apiece. At $2 million to 

$3 million per year you can’t even last that long as commissioner, 

nor could any of us. 

I don’t get it. Why? What is the idea behind having an authorized project, signed by the president after the House and Senate 

both passes it, and then to appropriate a grand total of $3 million 

for two projects from a state that is adequately providing at least 

$50 million to your budget? Where is the money going? 

Mr. CONNOR. Other projects. 

Mr. REHBERG. No. You didn’t get any of it. 

Mr. CONNOR. I know. As mentioned in the—— 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. Chairman’s remarks, there are a wide 

array of competing priorities with respect to—— 

Mr. REHBERG. With our money. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
436 

Mr. CONNOR. With the money that flows into the Reclamation 

Fund—— 

Mr. REHBERG. From Montana. 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. From—Montana being one of many 

states that provides money to the Reclamation Fund. 

Mr. REHBERG. We call them donor states. We are donating $50 

million of energy production—mostly mineral leasing dollars—for a 

return of $3 million to two projects that will cost $400 million. 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. 

Mr. REHBERG. Okay. Are you financing or appropriating dollars 

in this budget for any unauthorized projects or new starts? 

Mr. CONNOR. With respect to rural water projects, no. They are 

all authorized projects. There are no new starts in our budget this 

year. 

Mr. REHBERG. Okay. 

Mr. CONNOR. And I would simply note that we did allocate $200 

million of Recovery Act funding for the rural water projects, including $60 million to those two projects in Montana. 

Mr. REHBERG. But I noticed, like the Garrison Diversion or with 

the Lewis and Clark Project, you didn’t stop, you kept going forward. And part of the problem is you are not staying ahead of inflation, and the projects like Garrison and Lewis and Clark are eating up the budget because they are not staying within budget, and 

it is this catch-22. You are never going to get ahead of the game 

if we don’t realistically appropriate dollars to these projects. 

Mr. CONNOR. The numbers don’t lie, and I agree with you, sir, 

that currently inflation is eating up more in the way of resources 

than we are applying year-to-year, without a doubt. We prioritize 

our rural water project funding towards O&M; that has got to be 

the first priority, according to the authorizations that we are working under. So we have got $62 million in the budget this year. Approximately $15 million, $16 million of that is being taken up by 

O&M. So the reality is, as we complete it—and that is the second 

priority, trying to complete projects—we are incurring more in the 

way of O&M obligations. So in the balance of—— 

Mr. REHBERG. But it sounds— 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. Competing interests—— 

Mr. REHBERG [continuing]. We don’t see where any projects are 

ever completed because of inflation. None of the projects are ever 

completed. 

Mr. CONNOR. We certainly, in 2006 we completed the Mid-Dakota 

Rural Water Project. We anticipate being able to complete the Perkins County Project in South Dakota in the near future and we 

have several projects that are—— 

Mr. REHBERG. But based upon the $3 million that our two 

projects, North Central and Dry Prairie, got, when do you project 

them being completed? 

Mr. CONNOR. I will have to get back to you, but those projects 

are not near completion at this point in time. We do have projections as to when they might be completed. Those projections are 

based on phase-out completion of the projects that are ongoing 

right now and then we can move. 

Mr. REHBERG. One last question, Mr. Chairman, then. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
437 

Could we realistically assume the appropriations within your request is the priority that—your internal priority ranking? So Garrison is number one, Lewis and Clark is number two, on down the 

list? Is that a fair assumption? 

Mr. CONNOR. We do have—and I am happy to provide to the subcommittee the priorities that we use for ranking, and they are 

based on O&M first, then it is the ability to—— 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes. I am more interested in the construction priorities as opposed to the O&M priorities. 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. And then based on the ability and the 

likelihood of being able to complete projects. 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes. If we could, I would like to also have you 

send that to my office. 

Mr. CONNOR. Absolutely. 

Mr. REHBERG. Great. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, to all of you here. 

Mr. Connor, I want to thank you for all your help with the Arkansas Valley Conduit and Hatua Reservoir and Jackson Gulch Rehabilitation. I think that is where Mr. Rehberg’s money probably 

is going. [Laughter.] 

But thank you, sir, for being such a great donor state. 

I am just curious why the conduit request for the ARRA funding 

has been declined. I know that one of the criteria is shovel-ready 

projects, but I have noticed on your Web site that—and don’t misunderstand me, I am not critical of these projects—but there are 

several projects that have been put on that have funding for costshare studies for planning and preliminary engineering, such as 

the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan and the Climate Agreement and 

principal and the San Carlos Irrigation Project—and again, I am 

not criticizing the work of these project, but we had requested some 

ARRA funding so that we could actually begin the legal process 

and the planning process for the Arkansas Valley Conduit and we 

were declined. Could you tell us the difference, why these projects 

got—or maybe my brother doesn’t like me. I don’t know. [Laughter.] 

Mr. CONNOR. That one I will not touch, but I will note that with 

respect to the Recovery Act Funding, we have made our initial set 

of allocations back last April 2009. We have been working through 

those projects that were identified at that point in time and we are 

seeing, based on bids, et cetera, we are having some funds being 

made available which we are now reallocating to different projects. 

With respect to the Arkansas Valley Conduit, my understanding is, based on the $5 million write-in that you were successful in securing in 2010, which we are making very good use of towards the 

planning and environmental activity that you mentioned, plus the 

$3 million that we have included in the fiscal year 2011 budget for 

the Arkansas Valley Conduit, that we are addressing the full measure of capabilities and needs that we have right now for the planning activities. So I think our perspective right now is that, based 

on 2010 and the 2011 request that we are doing—maximizing the 

use of resources towards the planning and the environmental compliance activities right now for Arkansas Valley Conduit. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
438 

Mr. SALAZAR. It is my understanding that they could utilize the $11 million to complete the legal process by next October. But also, 

can you provide us with the status of initiating the legal process 

for the conduit? 

Mr. CONNOR. I can provide that to you for the record. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Okay. Because it was my understanding that it 

was supposed to take place earlier this month and it hasn’t. 

Mr. CONNOR. Okay. I will follow up on that, Congressman. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Okay. That is all the questions I have for you now. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Obviously I am from 

California, so I get to take a crack at this Bay-Delta problem also. 

I am certainly happy that we are moving, finally, toward this 

intertie project, and I am also, along with the ranking member, curious to find out what this National Academy study will find. But 

from a pragmatic point of view, and living in the state and being 

the past chairman of the authorizing committee, being familiar 

with this problem and the authors of the underlying legislation on 

the Bay-Delta, I am certainly very concerned about the immediacy 

of this issue. 

Now, I know you are going to come out with a new allocation 

number here pretty soon and there is a lot of people that are risking—are waiting for that number. Their very livelihood is at question here. And I am certainly hopeful—what is the snowpack right 

now in this year, I mean, relative to the overall season so far? 

Mr. CONNOR. That is one number I didn’t check before I came in 

today, but I think in most of our basins where we are, with respect 

to reservoir levels—Shasta, Folsom—we are—and Friant—we are 

at basically 100 percent average, year-to-date. So the snowpack—— 

Mr. CALVERT. I have heard that it is about approximately 120 

percent. Would you say that is approximately correct? 

Mr. CONNOR. It has been up to 120 percent, then we hit a dry 

spell in March, and then we have hit a wet spot in the last couple 

weeks so it is probably back up. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, I would hope that we can get these allocations back up to where they need to be in order to get production 

up. As you know, there are a number of farms with permanent 

crops that literally—if a proper allocation isn’t put on the table 

quickly they are gone. They have stressed that crop so much they 

can’t go another year. So I am hopeful that that occurs. 

If anyone suggests that the water crisis in California is over, unfortunately it is not—we could have 120 percent snowpack, and unless you increase the allocation and allow these people to pump 

then, in fact, nothing is going to be accomplished. As a matter of 

fact, I don’t know if you keep a statistic on how much water that 

would be otherwise delivered to water-users that have been allowed 

to flow out to the Pacific Ocean due to federal imposed restrictions. 

If you could, I would like for the record to find out how many 

acre-feet of water were lost last year due to pumping restrictions. 

You probably don’t know that off the top of your head, but I would 

like to know that number. Do you think you can find that and submit that for the record? 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes, we can, and I will follow up more specifically. 

But for last year’s number—2009—the figures that we have been 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
439 

public with, and it is coordinated between our analysis—ours being 

the Bureau of Reclamation—and the State Department of Water 

Resources, is that on average there has been, over the last decade, 

5.7 million acre-feet pumped from the California Bay-Delta—combined pumping between the state project and the Central Valley 

Project. In 2009 the number was 3.6 million acre-feet, so the difference was 2.1 million acre-feet. 

Mr. CALVERT. Does that 2.1 million acre-feet have any positive 

impact on the delta smelt? 

Mr. CONNOR. Well, all I can tell you—— 

Mr. CALVERT. Doesn’t, in fact, the delta smelt population continue to decline? 

Mr. CONNOR. I wouldn’t make a judgment as to their overall 

health, but as you have been informed, the trawling figures that 

estimate the populations were lower this past year. I would just 

note that of that 2.1 million acre-foot reduction—— 

Mr. CALVERT. I would hope in this study that is being completed 

that they would recognize that the smelt population continues to 

crash in spite of the delta restrictions—pumping restrictions—that 

are in place, and that certainly, anecdotally, it would be to most 

people’s reaction that there are other reasons, as Mr. Costa and 

others have pointed out, why the smelt population continues to go 

down. And certainly the interface between an urban population in 

San Francisco and other factors have a negative impact on that 

population. And I would hope that that study would point that out. 

I participated in a meeting with David Hayes some time ago 

about the 2-Gates Project, and I know you have gone through a 

number of studies, and studies of whether—why the 2-Gates 

Project won’t work. I have never really heard precisely why it won’t 

work. Can you tell us, for the record, why you believe the 2-Gates 

project will not work and you will not move forward on that 

project? 

Mr. CONNOR. Well, we have not made a conclusion that the 2- 

Gates Project won’t work. What we made a conclusion on at the 

end of last year was that we were not going to be able to complete 

the studies necessary to initiate construction in 2010. 

That was based on, I would say, three factors, one factor being 

the substantial increase in cost from the preliminary estimates of 

$25 million to estimates that range from $60 million to $70 million, 

leaving the question of who was going to fund the entirety of the 

project. Two, an independent science panel—the CALFED independent science panel, made up not just of federal biologists, state 

biologists, and other academics, had concluded that there was not 

the—at this point in time there had not been the scientific 

underpinnings have been prove that 2-Gates would work. And then 

three, there was significant local opposition to the project necessitating a more thorough environmental review than an E.A. 

I would say that in—we are ongoing with the analysis and the 

studies necessary to look at the 2-Gates Project, and they have 

been very fruitful, not that the 2-Gates Project wouldn’t work but 

the location of the gates initially and where they were being 

specked out were probably not the optimum place to put it, and 

there are—— 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
440 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, I would also point out, if there isn’t some urgency to this, in fact, there won’t be anything left to protect, I 

mean, as far as the farmers—I am not talking about the smelt, 

whether it protects them or not, but we need to get on this right 

away. We have talked about this for well over a year now. And, you 

know, you only have a short window in order to build that, so we 

need to determine whether it is a feasible project or not. 

From my trips up there and talking to people, they believe that 

it is, and I think regarding these numbers that we have been bantering around, the contractors themselves told me that they 

thought it was about $30 million. I don’t know where others came 

up with the $60 million number, unless it was for environmental 

mitigation that was related to the 2-Gates Project. Was that part 

of the problem? 

Mr. CONNOR. I don’t know the entirety of the problem, but the 

significant—the most significant aspect of the increase was due to 

trying to move the project forward so quickly—— 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, I guess my biggest concern is that if we can’t 

move forward on these short-term projects how are we going to get 

around to the long-term solution of the Bay-Delta, including the diversion around the delta, if ever? I mean, we can’t seem to resolve 

these short-term issues, and I am just very concerned about the future of the Central Valley and what is going to happen. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. PASTOR. You know, the drought has been a factor for a number of years. That 2.1 million acre-feet, what percentage was due 

to the drought? Do you have any idea? 

Mr. CONNOR. Of that 2.1 million acre-foot shortfall last year, 75 

percent was attributed to hydrology, or the drought, 25 percent was 

due to the regulatory restrictions. 

Mr. PASTOR. How much was—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Seventy-five percent, or 1.6 million acre-feet, was 

due to the drought conditions in California, and 500,000 acre-feet, 

or 25 percent, was due to the regulatory restrictions. 

Mr. BERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Been dealing with water all my life. I am from Arkansas and my 

family is in the rice business, and it is a big deal to us. 

Last year we got 80 inches of rainfall. That is a 10-year supply 

for California or places out there. 

When I first went to work at the White House—Clinton White 

House—in 1993 they explained to me that in the West whiskey is 

for drinking and water is for fighting, and I am sure you have 

heard that before. I then went to the Central Valley—I believe we 

were in Vasai, I am not sure—it was a big packing shed out there 

and it was about 110 degrees, and Secretary Babbitt had been 

there the week before and declared that he would like for the hallmark of this administration to be that he destroyed Friant Dam. 

That didn’t go very well either. 

Bill Thomas—and I didn’t even know who Bill Thomas was; I did 

after that forever more—but I was there as a special assistant to 

the president for agriculture and was trying to explain that they 

really weren’t going to blow up Friant Dam, but Bill Thomas didn’t 

let me off the hook and he took the hide off of me like you wouldn’t 

believe in front of 3,000 people that enjoyed every minute of it. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
441 

Having said that, when—I was just kind of sitting back thinking, 

‘‘I got 80 inches of rainfall last year and we got water all over the 

place and I am not really worried about it, and this is an issue for 

those west of me,’’ and then we brang up a project that I didn’t 

even know existed called ‘‘Arkansas Valley Conduit.’’ I don’t know 

how far that is from me but I don’t want them taking water out 

of the Arkansas River if they don’t have to, and that makes me a 

little nervous, even though I don’t know anything about it—— 

Mr. SALAZAR. Will the gentleman yield? 

The Arkansas River is in Colorado. It is a small—— 

Mr. BERRY. I know, but it comes by me. [Laughter.] 

And I want it to keep coming by me. We have recommended that 

those states west of us drink as much beer as possible, especially 

in dry conditions. [Laughter.] 

All that having been said, I am very interested in the answer to 

the question that Mr. Calvert from California raised. And I actually, when I was in the White House, dealt with some of those 

issues myself, as part of my job. And I know they are complex and 

they are difficult, and you have got extremes on both sides and all 

those things, but is it possible to tell whether all these measures 

that have been done and tried and continued to be speculated 

about, whether it is changing anything or not? 

Mr. CONNOR. Well, I think it is, and I think some of these measures demonstrate progress very soon after they are completed; 

some of them are a little bit more intangible. In response to Congressman Calvert’s, I guess, admonition that we really latch on to 

some of these projects that can make a difference short term, I 

think the intertie project that we just announced funding for yesterday is one of those projects, and I know you mentioned that as 

progress being made, and I appreciate that. 

That is one that we know, based on that increased flexibility of 

that intertie between the state system and federal system, I think 

there is a general consensus that we are going to yield another 

40,000 acre-feet of water to the project once we complete that. That 

is an 18-month completion. It is going to be in operation at the end 

of 2011, which is great for us because that is when we—that is one 

time that we can start pumping a lot of water. So that is indicative 

of something that will have a very good effect immediately. 

I would also note, as Congressman Calvert is well aware of, the 

Title 16 program that has been strongly supported. This is water 

reuse in Southern California, and its genesis in 1992 was to reuse 

water to get some of the Southern California municipalities to rely 

more on local supplies as opposed to the imported supplies from the 

delta. That, up until this point in time through the various implementation of the numerous projects we have in Southern California, we estimate they have saved or they have recycled and had 

as an additional supply something to the tune of about 250,000 

acre-feet. 

I don’t think Southern California would have ever survived the 

restrictions from the Colorado River or the Bay-Delta currently if 

they hadn’t implemented those projects and had increased local 

supplies. So I think that is another example of where progress has 

been made, it has been meaningful, and it has helped weather the 

storm. Certainly, though, we have a lot more to do. We are in a 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
442 

new paradigm, given the state of the ecosystem in the Bay-Delta, 

and we need to be rapidly responding to that and developing—Secretary Castle mentioned—an all-hands-on-deck approach—infrastructure, operations, science—so that we can meet the challenges 

that we face now. 

Ms. CASTLE. Mr. Berry, if I may add to that answer, on the 

science component, one of the things that we are doing is looking 

very hard at connecting jeopardy to the fish species with actions on 

the ground. We are looking at how the smelt in particular are associated with turbid conditions. And that was one of the premises of 

the 2-Gates Project, that we are looking to see if there are less expensive, less, sort of, major structural alternatives that we can use 

to try to make a more direct connection between the pumping restrictions and jeopardy to the smelt—getting the smelt killed in the 

ponds. 

So the U.S. Geological Survey is working on that together with 

the Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries. So we are also 

looking forward to the phase two of the National Academy of 

Science studies that will look at the other stressors that you mentioned, Mr. Calvert, the water pollution into the Bay-Delta, that is 

also having an effect on fish. 

And I think finally, we need to recognize that the state of California is also looking very hard at what it needs to do with its state 

water project that is also part of the mix here, and the California 

voters will be faced with that decision in November. So, you know, 

I think that it is one of those situations where no one agency can 

solve the problem. It is a big problem. It has developed over 100 

years. We have got an ecosystem in collapse and we all need to 

work together in order to try to make it better. 

Mr. PASTOR. In the report it finds that biological opinions are scientifically justified, but it also asserts implementation of actions 

identified by the opinions need to be accompanied by careful monitoring, adopted management, and additional analysis. So what you 

explained just a few minutes ago, I am assuming that that is part 

of that whole plan as required by the report. 

Ms. CASTLE. Yes, sir. We are looking and working with NOAA 

Fisheries to integrate the actions of the two agencies that are 

charged with endangered species protections—Fish and Wildlife 

Service and NOAA Fisheries. That was one of the significant findings in the NAS report, that those two biological opinions should 

be better integrated. So we are looking at both short-term and 

long-term measures to work the bi-ops collectively and also looking 

forward to the announcement of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan, 

which is expected later this year in November, and that will give 

us the opportunity to work together with NOAA Fisheries to come 

up with an integrated biological opinion that will address the longterm plan that California has proposed. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As you might guess, I was going to ask something about the 

Minidoka Spillway, and so I will. We have discussed this in the 

past, as you know, the irrigation district went out and passed 

bonds that would enable them to fund their portion of the spillway 

project. Bureau didn’t put any funding in for this year so there is 

no match for them. That is why they are concerned that they are 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
443 

going to go out and sell these bonds, they are not going to have the 

money to start this. 

Construction costs are going to be higher next year. Is there anything we are going to be able to do to help them start this year? 

If not, is it going to be part of the Bureau of Reclamation’s priorities next year? 

Mr. CONNOR. Well, we are going to have a hard time getting 

started this year. As you know, we will finish the MPA compliance 

activity by the end of this fiscal year, so if there was funding available we would be able to initiate construction in fiscal year 2011. 

It is not, as you mentioned, in our budget request. And so absent 

some federal funds being available or the water-users who, I do understand now, have approved their bonding issue, put in additional 

money it looks like we are headed towards a year’s delay in those 

project costs, and we do have to seriously look at that situation. 

That is, as we have discussed, an item now that we have got the 

local funding that we know is going to be made available. We do 

have to look at that as a very high priority need where there is a 

mechanism with the locals to get that done, so it is going to be 

right up there in our considerations next year. 

And I am happy to continue the dialogue that we have had ongoing. I think it has been fairly productive. And we will continue to 

negotiate a repayment contract under the new authority that was 

provided in the Omnibus Public Lands bill on the chance that there 

is funding made available. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Appreciate that. 

Over half of Reclamation’s dams and dikes were built in the first 

half of the 20th century. Reclamation has a continued responsibility to ensure the safety of these facilities. The budget request 

maintains that dam safety is one of Reclamation’s highest priorities 

but the budget request is $95.2 million below the 2010 funding 

level. 

How is this funding level consistent with the administration’s 

recognition that dam safety is one of the highest priorities? And 

have there been any dams that have failed over the last 5, 10, 20 

years? And what is the likelihood of that? 

What are we doing about dam safety? It is a concern of mine, 

having lived below the one dam that probably failed—last major 

one—of Reclamation’s since Teton Dam. 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. I think dam safety—I don’t have the exact 

years—has become a much more of a priority for Reclamation. We 

are slightly below—$2 million below the 2010 enacted level, but the 

reason we adjusted that number towards the end of the budget 

process because we were able to put more Recovery Act money in 

towards dam safety funding, specifically to Folsom. So we took 

some of the planned activities for 2011 in Folsom Dam and are accomplishing that this year using some additional Recovery Act 

funds. 

Mr. SIMPSON. So we put Recovery Act funds into dam safety? 

Mr. CONNOR. Oh, we put a significant amount of—we always had 

some level of Recovery Act funds into dam safety specifically 

for—— 

Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. Into projects? 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
444 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes, Folsom Dam, the project that has been ongoing for several years there. We had an opportunity to complete another phase so we put in a little bit more money into that particular effort. So it has been a priority; we have ramped it up over 

the last, I think, 5 years—I am not sure what the figures are, but 

we got it up to about a $95 million, $100 million program and that 

is where we are trying to keep it right now—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. Given that it is a priority. 

Notwithstanding that, I think a—not a major failure, as you indicated that Teton was but we did have an incident this year with 

Red Willow Dam in Nebraska that has caused us to draw down 

that facility to a safe operating level, which is going to impact irrigation in Nebraska this year, and we are doing it all-hands-on-deck 

to get a corrective action plan in place with hopefully initiating 

some action, and we will be looking at our budget to take care of 

that corrective action need in 2012 and beyond. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, dam safety is not only an issue with BOR but 

also with the Army Corps. It is one of the primary concerns I have 

with the Army Corps. Did you start any projects with ARRA funding that will need additional funding in the future to continue or 

will they be able to be completed with the ARRA funding? 

Mr. CONNOR. You are talking dam safety—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. I am talking—projects, because—well, there was 

direction, as I understand it, that projects that were started with 

ARRA funding were supposed to be completed with ARRA funding 

and not impact the ongoing budget that you currently have. So did 

we start any projects which got partially funded and now we are 

going to have to find funding for in the budget for ongoing years? 

Mr. CONNOR. Let me answer that question for the record. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. 

Mr. CONNOR. I think that would be a more complete and 

thoughtful response. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. I appreciate that. 

One last question: The quagga mussel research—we provided 

funding for an R&D program to determine ways to deal with this 

invasive species. We are very concerned about this in the West and 

its impact on our waters. How much of that funding is included in 

the Reclamation’s budget to address the control of the quagga mussels and what is the estimated cost that Reclamation has to deal 

with quagga mussels in Reclamation projects? 

I mean, it is going to be a huge issue. Obviously it is in the Great 

Lakes area, and, you know, we would just as soon leave it there. 

Mr. CONNOR. Right. And we are taking a, once again, kind of 

across-the-board approach to quagga mussels. We allocated $4.5 

million of Recovery Act money to investigations and trying to do 

the surveys and monitoring, working very closely with the states— 

and Idaho is certainly one of those states—to really identify where 

we have some of these issues. 

Other than that, we have got $1.5 million in our science and 

technology program evaluating ways to deal with the mussels once 

they are there and how to avoid them attaching to some of our facilities and ramping up our maintenance costs. Then we have 

money spread out across our regions for additional educating the 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
445 

public on not spreading—potentially spreading—quagga mussels, 

other protection activities. All told, I think we have got in our upcoming request something along the lines of $4 million that we are 

going to be applying towards quagga mussel activity—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, let’s—— 

Mr. CONNOR [continuing]. On top of the $4.5 million—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Let’s get control of them and reduce them, and not 

to the level where they become endangered, because then we have 

got a problem. So find a way to contain them, because they do add 

significantly to the cost—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Absolutely. 

Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. Of operations and can significantly 

damage the infrastructure of all our projects. So I appreciate it. 

Thank you for all you do. I appreciate you being here. 

Mr. REHBERG. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Sure. 

Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Chairman, could I ask also, then, when you 

get back for the record the answer to Mr. Simpson’s question, using 

stimulus dollars for any of those projects that were started, either 

not authorized or new starts? That would complete the question 

that I asked about this current budget—is any money in this current budget being appropriated or requested for either non-authorized—it is not unauthorized, I don’t think is the right word—but 

unauthorized or new starts and you said no. So the question then 

would be, were there any non-authorized or new starts using stimulus dollars? 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. We will combine those questions and make it 

a comprehensive answer. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SIMPSON. While you are at it—and I am sure that the chairman will agree—we would like to know where you have spent all 

the stimulus money, how much has been obligated, you know—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. REHBERG. Did I mention $50 million coming out of my state, getting $3 paltry million back? Did I mention that? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Didn’t get any stimulus money at all? 

Mr. REHBERG. We did get stimulus money. 

Mr. SIMPSON. You did. 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I thought it was $50 million. 

Mr. REHBERG. What did I say? $30 million? 

Mr. SIMPSON. $60 million. It went up $10 million. 

Mr. REHBERG. It was $50 million. It was $50 million that went 

to Reclamation funds; it was $3 million back. 

Mr. SIMPSON. $60 million in Recovery Act—— 

Mr. REHBERG. Recovery Act, yes. 

Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. Projects in Montana. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Can I reclaim my time from you, Mr. Simpson? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We would like to know how much money 

has been spent, how much has been obligated, anything related, 

and certainly in terms of jobs. I think that is—that was sort of why 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
446 

we put all that money out there. All of that money being borrowed 

was to actually promote some, hopefully, private sector jobs. Want 

to comment, or—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes, I—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. If that is all right, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. PASTOR. It is. 

Mr. CONNOR. Just very briefly—we will provide a full accounting as you request, but as of this date, $615 million have been obligated of the $950 million that we have received, and about $134 

million has actually already been expended. 

Ms. CASTLE. Can I also add that the Central Utah Project Completion Act Office is the poster child for Recovery Act money spending. They have obligated 99.6 percent of the $50 million that went 

to CUPCA and have expended about 60 percent—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. There are no poster children in Idaho? 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. SIMPSON. I better yield back my time, Mr. Chairman—— 

Mr. PASTOR. I think you had better, yes. And I felt sorry about Montana, you know, about the measly $3 

million, and now I have got—well, I better start complaining about 

some of the Arizona projects while I am at it. 

Mr. REHBERG. If that money is free why don’t you give us the 

rest of it, the unobligated dollars? What is going to happen to the 

unobligated dollars? That is one of the questions that we always 

need to ask next. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, I know we have to ask it, and I will—why 

don’t you respond for the record as you are going over these—— 

Mr. REHBERG. Because again, I talk about inflation and we are 

not getting ahead of the game and it keeps costing more, and why 

not take the unobligated and finish—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Well, the unobligated funds that we have, we have 

a schedule and we can provide that, too, of where we expect those 

to be expended—obligated over the next few months. For example, 

the Red Bluff Diversion, the pumping plant that we are doing in 

California, our largest Recovery Act project—it is $110 million that 

we obligated towards that. We have already, in a series of contracts, obligated approximately half of that money, so it has been 

a series of buying equipment, getting initial designs activities 

going. Now our next contract is going to be the balance of the $100 

million, I think by the end of May, which will be something along 

the lines of about a $70 million or $80 million contract to actually 

initiate construction activities. 

So that is kind of indicative of the phased-in approach on that 

particular project. A large fish-screening, Contra Costa, that we 

have is similar. And in fact, we have had three series of obligations. The last one will be the balance of construction and we will 

move forward. And that is—— 

Mr. PASTOR. Why don’t I make a request that you have all of 

that back to the committee on the record and that way we have it 

and everybody can see what it is and where it is at. 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. To know on that, if I could, Mr. Chairman, is, are we obligating ourselves and this committee to future 

spending because of these projects that should have been completed 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
447 

with ARRA funds—as I understand it the requirement was that 

the project be completed with those funds. 

Mr. PASTOR. Are you asking in maintenance and operation? 

Mr. REHBERG. Not in maintenance and operation, but finishing 

construction. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And if any of those unobligated funds and those 

projects don’t get started that you have got on that list of things, 

there is a Minidoka Spillway waiting. 

Mr. PASTOR. Let me ask a question. I will go to Rodney and he 

can—he is yielding time anyway, so I will let him do that. 

I am going to go back to the mussel question. In the last year 

or so there has been great concern on Lake Powell, and conversations with the two senators—Senator Kyl and Senator McCain— 

and members of the delegation, there is a concern about the contamination of Lake Powell with the mussel. 

I don’t know what species it is, but are you aware of it? Because 

I have been told that the Bureau of Reclamation has had some concern over it. 

Ms. CASTLE. Oh, I think we are all very concerned that we keep 

the quagga mussel problem from spreading. It is in Lake Mead 

and—— 

Mr. PASTOR. In Lake Mead, okay. 

Ms. CASTLE. Yes. But there is great concern that it not spread 

to Lake Powell, so they have got an aggressive inspection—boat inspection—program to just try to make sure that boats that have 

been in areas that are infested don’t bring the mussels with them 

to Lake Powell. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, one concern was that we did not have enough 

resources to do adequate policing of the boats coming in and that 

that would—that was where the gap was that the monies were not 

there. And we were talking about what would be different methods 

of providing enough resources so that Lake Powell would not get 

contaminated. 

Ms. CASTLE. I am not familiar with—— 

Mr. PASTOR. Okay. Maybe you can respond on the record. 

Ms. CASTLE. Yes. We can respond on the record. 

Mr. PASTOR. Okay. 

Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Commissioner Connor, tell me about the— 

is there $10 million for a Bureau-wide urban canal project? 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. That is part of the money that we allocated 

towards the aging infrastructure part of our Recovery Act program. 

Approximately $135 million went for various rehabilitation projects 

but we did have $10 million to get our arms around this issue that 

is becoming more readily apparent—the problem of urban canals 

and the possibility of failure of those canals and the impact on the 

communities—adjacent communities, the example being, and what 

has driven the issue, has been the failure of the Truckee Canal, 

through Fernley, Nevada, which resulted in a significant property 

loss in that area. And so based on that and knowing that that—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So these are urban canals basically in the 

western—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Yes. That is correct. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
448 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. In Reclamation’s canals in the 17 western 

states Idaho has a number of these areas. I would be happy to 

yield to the gentleman, Mr. Rehberg. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen. 

And Mr. Simpson made a very important point. He said he didn’t 

necessarily need the operation and maintenance but you had said 

before that operation and maintenance is your number one priority 

and then the project construction. So it does matter that if there 

are projects that were completed using stimulus dollars and there 

is operation and maintenance on top of it, that keeps my projects 

in Montana from being completed sooner because you are going to 

go to operation and maintenance as a result. 

And so the question then once again becomes, were there projects 

that were not authorized or new starts using stimulus dollars? And 

I know you are going to need to get back, but that becomes very 

important if construction is after operation and maintenance in 

your list of priorities. So I would like to maybe amend Mr. Simpson’s request and say, yes, please provide for the committee operations and maintenance as well for the new projects, completed or 

not, under stimulus—— 

Mr. CONNOR. Any operation and maintenance obligations that we 

are then incurring as a result of finishing construction phases? 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes. 

Mr. CONNOR. Okay. 

Mr. REHBERG. Using stimulus dollars. 

Mr. CONNOR. Using stimulus dollars. 

Mr. REHBERG. And once again, whether it was unauthorized or 

new starts. 

Mr. CONNOR. And just two points that I would make, just—and 

I recognize we will be doing this—I don’t—either I am not understanding, but I don’t believe we would be providing any money for 

any unauthorized activities. They are authorized activities. That 

was a fundamental premise of Recovery Act. 

And two, I think—and this is where I want to be careful—new 

starts versus—I know that we did start new authorized projects in 

the Title 16 area. The obligation we have in the Recovery Act was 

to be a—ensure that we complete phases, you know, so that you 

were not—that we didn’t allocate money to a part of a project that 

would then carry over and we would have to naturally fund that 

the next year, that we could complete a phase, such as the rural 

water projects, a water treatment facility—but we will clarify that 

when we get back. 

Mr. CALVERT. In your budget—this fiscal 2011 budget—you request funding for specific Title 16 projects, which is normal. However, you requested funding for a discretionary program where you 

would award funds for Title 16 projects on a competitive basis. Do 

you think it sends a confusing message to Title 16 project sponsors 

that can receive funds either through direct appropriations or 

through a competitive discretionary grant program? 

Mr. CONNOR. This year is a year of transition, so hopefully any 

confusion will be resolved as we go on task. We have issued now— 

as you know, we worked on the criteria for assessing feasibility of 

projects. Now we have moved into developing criteria for 

prioritizing our funding requests. That is in the mix this year. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
449 

We just issued the draft criteria approximately 1 month ago; we 

are taking public comment and input into that. And based on that 

transition where previously we had only low dollars for Title 16, 

approximately in the neighborhood of $7 million to $9 million, they 

were being used to fund completion of just a few of the originally 

authorized projects. 

Now we are ramping up the resources available to Title 16. I think last year Title 16 received $13.5 million in 2010 enacted, and 

we have increased that in our budget request to $29 million. So we 

are increasing the resources, and while we have got this criteria 

development we decided to allocate this to a pot of money that we 

would then apply that criteria. 

We are still determining how to move forward. Next year we may 

use that criteria and just fund projects or, depending on—— 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, obviously you need to clear that up, because 

there is some confusion out there. 

In your budget you mention unauthorized Title 16 projects that 

received nigh construction funding under a new discretionary program. Do you envision the limits being both on a per-project basis 

as well as an overall basis for unauthorized project funding? 

Mr. CONNOR. They will all be authorized projects and they will 

all have to fit within the ceiling that is being made available. And 

we will go through the process similar to the process that we used 

in allocating the $135 million for Recovery Act. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well if, in fact, you go back and you find, based 

on Mr. Rehberg’s question, that unauthorized projects were funded 

using stimulus dollars, would a project be eligible for non-construction funding? 

Mr. CONNOR. No. The only projects that are going to be eligible 

for that money are authorized projects—congressionally authorized 

projects. That is the list of—I think that is one of the first level 

of criteria in the criteria that we just released for comment. So it 

is authorized projects. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MURRAY. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. 

Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. That concludes the hearing. 

Thank you very much, Madam Secretary, Commissioner. And 

don’t forget, send us the answers to the questions. Thank you. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
450 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 521 here 61742A.400
451 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 522 here 61742A.401
452 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 523 here 61742A.402
453 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 524 here 61742A.403
454 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 525 here 61742A.404
455 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 526 here 61742A.405
456 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 527 here 61742A.406
457 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 528 here 61742A.407
458 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 529 here 61742A.408
459 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 530 here 61742A.409
460 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 531 here 61742A.410
461 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 532 here 61742A.411
462 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 533 here 61742A.412
463 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 534 here 61742A.413
464 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 535 here 61742A.414
465 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 536 here 61742A.415
466 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 537 here 61742A.416
467 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 538 here 61742A.417
468 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 539 here 61742A.418
469 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 540 here 61742A.419
470 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 541 here 61742A.420
471 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 542 here 61742A.421
472 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 543 here 61742A.422
473 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 544 here 61742A.423
474 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 545 here 61742A.424
475 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 546 here 61742A.425
476 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 547 here 61742A.426
477 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 548 here 61742A.427
478 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 549 here 61742A.428
479 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 550 here 61742A.429
480 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 551 here 61742A.430
481 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 552 here 61742A.431
482 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 553 here 61742A.432
483 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 554 here 61742A.433
484 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 555 here 61742A.434
485 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 556 here 61742A.435
486 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 557 here 61742A.436
487 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 558 here 61742A.437
488 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 559 here 61742A.438
489 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 560 here 61742A.439
490 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 561 here 61742A.440
491 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 562 here 61742A.441
492 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 563 here 61742A.442
493 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 564 here 61742A.443
494 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 565 here 61742A.444
495 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 566 here 61742A.445
496 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 567 here 61742A.446
497 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 568 here 61742A.447
498 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 569 here 61742A.448
499 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 570 here 61742A.449
500 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 571 here 61742A.450
501 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 572 here 61742A.451
502 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 573 here 61742A.452
503 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 574 here 61742A.453
504 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 575 here 61742A.454
505 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 576 here 61742A.455
506 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 577 here 61742A.456
507 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 578 here 61742A.457
508 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 579 here 61742A.458
509 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 580 here 61742A.459
510 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 581 here 61742A.460
511 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 582 here 61742A.461
512 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 583 here 61742A.462
513 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 584 here 61742A.463
514 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 585 here 61742A.464
515 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 586 here 61742A.465
516 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 587 here 61742A.466
517 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 588 here 61742A.467
518 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 589 here 61742A.468
519 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 590 here 61742A.469
520 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 591 here 61742A.470
521 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 592 here 61742A.471
522 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 593 here 61742A.472
523 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 594 here 61742A.473
524 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 595 here 61742A.474
525 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 596 here 61742A.475
526 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 597 here 61742A.476
527 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 598 here 61742A.477
528 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 599 here 61742A.478
529 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 600 here 61742A.479
530 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 601 here 61742A.480
531 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 602 here 61742A.481
532 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 603 here 61742A.482
533 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 604 here 61742A.483
534 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 605 here 61742A.484
535 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 606 here 61742A.485
536 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 607 here 61742A.486
537 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 608 here 61742A.487
538 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 609 here 61742A.488
539 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 610 here 61742A.489
540 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 611 here 61742A.490
541 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 612 here 61742A.491
542 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 613 here 61742A.492
543 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 614 here 61742A.493
544 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 615 here 61742A.494
545 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 616 here 61742A.495
546 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 617 here 61742A.496
547 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 618 here 61742A.497
548 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 619 here 61742A.498
549 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 620 here 61742A.499
550 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 621 here 61742A.500
551 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 622 here 61742A.501
552 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 623 here 61742A.502
553 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 624 here 61742A.503
554 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 625 here 61742A.504
555 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 626 here 61742A.505
556 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 627 here 61742A.506
557 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 628 here 61742A.507
558 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 629 here 61742A.508
559 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 630 here 61742A.509
560 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 631 here 61742A.510
561 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 632 here 61742A.511
562 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 633 here 61742A.512
563 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 634 here 61742A.513
564 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 635 here 61742A.514
565 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 636 here 61742A.515
566 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 637 here 61742A.516
567 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 638 here 61742A.517
568 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 639 here 61742A.518
569 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 640 here 61742A.519
570 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 641 here 61742A.520
571 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 642 here 61742A.521
572 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 643 here 61742A.522
573 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 644 here 61742A.523
574 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 645 here 61742A.524
575 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 646 here 61742A.525
576 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 647 here 61742A.526
577 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 648 here 61742A.527
578 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 649 here 61742A.528
579 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 650 here 61742A.529
580 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 651 here 61742A.530
581 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 652 here 61742A.531
582 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 653 here 61742A.532
583 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 654 here 61742A.533
584 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 655 here 61742A.534
585 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 656 here 61742A.535
586 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 657 here 61742A.536
587 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 658 here 61742A.537
588 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 659 here 61742A.538
589 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 660 here 61742A.539
590 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 661 here 61742A.540
591 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 662 here 61742A.541
592 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 663 here 61742A.542
593 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 664 here 61742A.543
594 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 665 here 61742A.544
595 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 666 here 61742A.545
596 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 667 here 61742A.546
597 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 668 here 61742A.547
598 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 669 here 61742A.548
599 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 670 here 61742A.549
600 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 671 here 61742A.550
601 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 672 here 61742A.551
602 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 673 here 61742A.552
603 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 674 here 61742A.553
604 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 675 here 61742A.554
605 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 676 here 61742A.555
606 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 677 here 61742A.556
607 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 678 here 61742A.557
608 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 679 here 61742A.558
609 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 680 here 61742A.559
610 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 681 here 61742A.560
611 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 682 here 61742A.561
612 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 683 here 61742A.562
613 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 684 here 61742A.563
614 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 685 here 61742A.564
615 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 686 here 61742A.565
616 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 687/700 here 61742A.566
617 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1 here 61742A.567
618 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 2 here 61742A.568
619 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 3 here 61742A.569
620 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 4 here 61742A.570
621 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 5 here 61742A.571
622 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 6 here 61742A.572
623 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 7 here 61742A.573
624 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 8 here 61742A.574
625 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 9 here 61742A.575
626 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 10 here 61742A.576
627 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 61742A.577
628 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 12 here 61742A.578
629 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 13 here 61742A.579
630 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 14 here 61742A.580
(i) 

W I T N E S S E S 

Page 

Castle, Anne ............................................................................................................. 427 

Connor, M. L ............................................................................................................ 427 

Darcy, Jo-Ellen ......................................................................................................... 1 

Grisoli, Major General WIlliam .............................................................................. 1 

Loew, G. A ................................................................................................................ 1 

Murray, Reed ........................................................................................................... 427 

Van Antwerp, Lieutenant General Robert ............................................................ 1 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING