extent. >> at 10:30 p.m., from the american historical associations annual meeting, a discussion on free speech on college campuses. >> intellectual diversity, i think, is healthier than many people suspect. that doesn't mean there isn't an ush issue where certain groups' views think there is less active attention from the faculty and administration. i think they have less public attention and we need to meet those students where they are and to help them have a place in the public conversation where they feel more included. >> on sunday on real america, 198 will 1987 film "reel america." >> when you do cocaine, you lie

to yourself about being in control. >> cocaine is not hip, it's hype. anyone who tells you it's okay is a liar. >> watch american history tv every weekend on c-span 3. >> state and local water resource officials testify about the status of u.s. water infrastructure and the benefits of passing a new bill which would designate specific repair or improvement projects. the senate environment and public works committee held this hearing earlier this month.

good morning. i call this hearing to order. today we highlight the importance of passing a new resource water development act, or wrda. wrda authorizes funding for the civil works program. in order to write good legislation we must consider the effectiveness, the status of their implementation as well as our country's future water infrastructure needs. they have jurisdiction over much of the water's infrastructure including locks and dams and inland waterways and ports. prior congresses have traditionally passed on a biannual basis going back to 1986. unlike other contentious issues, historically republican and democratic members have been able to work together and pass word of legislation.

to put it another way, this is legislation that moves. it does so because regardless of party affiliation we understand these kinds of investments are far too important to our economy and security to fall victim to partisan politics. they represent a diverse group of communities with different needs. our committee has members that represent baltimore, maryland and anchorage, alaska. wyoming, wilmington, delaware. and millions of other americans expect us to do our job to grow economies and to keep them safe. when it comes to rural areas in particular, many depend oncor projects for their existence. congress must act to make it easy for the core to prevent flooding and modernize levies. those that cause the big horn river to flood small rural communities such as grable, wyoming.

ice jams are a major public safety concern for towns that can't afford the out of control costs that come with severe flooding. and rural still face long-term supply and storage. federal facilities out west continue to lose existing space as a result of sediment build up. this is a big problem for western state economies with significant ranching farming communities and enlarging energy industries. i believe the corps and the bore bur /* bureau of reclamation need to work together.ureau of reclamation n work together. it's my hope this committee will work forward to find solutions in a bipartisan way to meet our country's infrastructure needs. our nation's ports, waterways

are just as vite thool country's economic well being. goods, commodities go through these ports for export. in wyoming, the key component of making glass gets shipped out of the port of portland, oregon. we all have a vested interest in these ports. so i urge my colleagues to work with me in a bipartisan way to find these solutions in 2018. with that i'll turn to the ranking member of the committee for his comments. senator, carper. >> we welcome all of our witnesses. you're good to take time to share your thoughts with us and it's a really important issue and an issue we might actually be able to work on together and get something done. in past years working with senator barbara boxer have been good at showing us how this is done. so hopefully we won't screw up a good thing and with your help, that will be the case. i want to say this is extremely important authorization given we do it about every two years.

in december. as we all know coastal issues are extremely important to delaware but as the chairman said in what i thought was a very good statement. you don't have to be on a coast, massachusetts or delaware to have a strong interest in this issue. it affects us all every day. but delaware's economic reliance on the core's work is not unique. over 99% of the u.s. oversees trade volume and coastal channels that the core maintains. additionally the inland waterways and locks form a -- think of it as a water highway. connecting waterways and ports and providing direct access and provide critical infrastructure for the u.s. military and work to reduce it risk to human safety and property damage from flooding. flooding alone currently cost the united states billions of dollars annually.

2017 hurricane system illustrated, the nation needs to be a resilient one ready for the next storm or flood or drought event because they are coming. in fact just this week we're told by noaa, in 2017 total cost exceeded $300 billion. if that seems like a lot of money, it is. a new annual record in the u.s. so clearly not a matter of if for the next extreme weather event is coming, a matter of when. the flood risk management activities account for more than 70% of the association. but the core has or shares jurisdiction over many other critical civil works programs as well. including hydropower, recreation, emergency management and water supply.

unfortunately in the mid 1980s, funding for rehabilitation began to steadily decline. with this trend the core's actions have shifted to operations, maintenance, rehabilitation of infrastructure and a back log has continued to grow ever since. as a result much of the core's infrastructure is exceeding its life span. we have a couple graphics here. one christine is holding up for us. it's provided by our friends from the american association port authorities. a busy chart but a good one nonetheless. and everyone should have at your desk a copy of this. but about $66 billion in investment and port related infrastructure is needed over the next decade to ensure job growth. to ensure that u.s. job creation

economic growth continues over next ten years. i have another graphic also provided by the american association of port authorities and as this shows investment in our freight network of ships, trucks and trains is essential to the safe and efficient movement of goods. both into and out of the united states. and this serves as the backbone of our economy. not just ships, barges, trains, trucks, it's all the above and more. the american association of civil engineers report card tells us a story with waterways receiving a grade of d. deplorable. representing an overall cumulative investment back log of nearly $140 billion and an authorized but unconstructed portfolio of another $60 billion. the core faces a sizeable math problem as they try to service

that. match that up with the annual budget around $4.6 billion. the math just doesn't work, does it? clearly we have a lot of important work to do. we need to work in a bipartisan fashion. in a smart, cost effective efficient way leveraging green and gray infrastructure solutions. again, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this important hearing. we all look forward to hearing from our witnesses. i have something i want to submit for the record. is that right? i want to submit for the record these letters of acclaim for the newest member of our committee. no, actually, this information deals with our hearing material. but i just want to say to chris, welcome aboard.

[ inaudible ] senator harris came up to me yesterday and said i'm moving off your committee and i said i know we're sorry to hear that. and she said i'm keenly interested in the issues and want to be part of your extended family. i thought we could work that out. but for attorney general and somebody you want to be on the judiciary committee if you can get there and she'll still be part of our team. thanks very much. >> i'd like to welcome senator rand holland to the committee with you and senator carpen and since my mom grew up in maryland working at a summer job, i could tell you with two of you from maryland and this history that now we can make sure that the chesapeake bay is fully protected. >> chairman, i will say no more. thank you. >> welcome to the committee. we're now going to hear from our witnesses.

we're going to start with an introduction in a second but we have mr. scott robertsson, and the associate legislature of the association of counties. the chairman elect of the association of port authorities. the national policies specialist and mr. steven cochran who is the associate vice president for coastal protection, restore the mississippi delta coalition and i believe senator cassy is going to be here in a few moments to help introduce senator cochran. >> i appreciate that and also for having the presence of scott robinson here. he's spent a lot of time in this business and we have become good friends. one thing, building a little bit on what he just said. it's not just the coastal states

we're interested in. we are, in oklahoma, america's most inland warm water port. now the problem is nobody knows it. and i remember when i was in the state senate many -- in fact in the '70s we conceived something we thought we're going to tell the whole world we're in oklahoma. and so the world war ii submarine veterans came in. they said if you can procure a submarine we can figure out a way to get it from texas to oklahoma. we're talking about a submarine. u.s.s. bat fish. the length of a football field a huge thing. and all my adversaries were saying we're going to sink inhoff with the submarine. and there it is in your port 300-foot submarine that shows the world we are in fact an inland port. so anyway, scott, it's nice to have you here. you have a tremendous background. you've been at the point of

muskogy for 28 years now with more than 1,000 acres of land in the jurisdiction the port is poised to continue its growth and provide several transportation options. scott's been active in the waterway communities, serving on a variety of related boards and commissions including the national waterways conference, the marine transportation system, national advisory council. arkansas, oklahoma port operators association. so it's great to have you here. you'll bring a lot of knowledge to this meeting and i appreciate it. >> thank you very much for that introduction. good to see you. i could spend my five minutes talking about you but i won't do that. >> we'll extend -- don't feel limited to five minutes if you're going to talk -- but i want to remind all witnesses your full testimony will be made part of the official hearing record and except for mr. robinson i would ask you to keep your statements to five minutes. so that we may have time for

questions. mr. robinson? >> members of the committee, it is han honor and privilege to testify before you today about the america's infrastructure needs in 2018. thank you for this opportunity to contribute my thoughts. i am, as senator inhoff said port of muskogee, i've been there since 1990. it's one of two public ports in oklahoma and one of five in oklahoma and arkansas. i commend the committee for the work it has accomplished through 2014 and 2016. i hope to illustrate further in my testimony, the absence of regularly enacted wrda legislation between 2001 and 2013 caused serious harm along the mcclellan/arkansas river navigation system which in the interest of time i will refer to

as mcarnes. it is a 445 multipurpose waterway that runs through arkansas and oklahoma completed in 1970 at a cost of $1.2 billion. it was the largest federal investment ever made in a civil works project. connecting the two states, oklahoma and arkansas with domestic rivers, ports and terminals along the inland waterways of the united states and ports all over the world, via the port of new orleans and gulf of mexico. in 2015 there was a regional impact study conducted and published documenting the impacts, $8.5 million in sales. 55,000 jobs, 289 million in taxes to the national economy. you'll find a copy of that in attachment 8 of my testimony. in attachment d you will find a letter signed by the president of the oklahoma/arkansas port operators association endorsing its priorities for the mcarns.

you will find the briefing we made to the congress and to stake holders and congressional staffers in attachment b and c. i would like to take a few minutes to talk about infrastructure for the mcarns and give a glimpse of the water structure needs. of the nation. number one, priority was modification of an existing structure near the confluence of the mcarns and the mississippi river, the arkansas river and the white river trying to come together. every time it floods, the corps has to spend money to fix the problem. a solution is imperative. the permanent solution will soon some out of a corps study. and costs shares by the state of arkansas. once the study is completed, the

melinda structure will face new start and cost share hurdles. until then it's at risk of failure. number two, back log of critical maintenance. there's a back log of deferred maintenance. 143 million of which is deemed critical by the corps of engineers. they define critical as having a 50% chance of failure within five years. in march of 2017 there were 42 such critical maintenance items. more alarming than that, the critical back log is growing rapidly. in his testimony in 2016, tulsa director expressed concern that the critical back log had reached $70 million. so that's twice as much today. the problem on the mcarns is no different than across the nation. we are fixing critically important infrastructure as close to failure as possible and in some cases after it fails and an on emergency basis. this is not an acceptable asset

management strategy, this is a prescription for failure. before 2014 and 2016 the congress in section 136 of the energy and water development appropriations act of 2004 authorized the deepening of the mcarns from 9 to 12 feet. in the 0 2005 water developme 2t and appropriations act, 7 million was appropriated for the channel deepening. 5.5 million was used for design activities which reduced the project cost by a like amount. in 2009 the court expressed a $40 million capability but it never ended up in the president budget. suffice to say being lost in the switch is not good. the committee can rescue the 12-foot channel and restart the dilemma by including clarification language as

and word 2018 adds follows -- congress finds that initial funding was provided and construction started on a 12-foot navigation of the mcclellan arkansas water navigation system as directed in section 136 of the energy and water development appropriations act, thereby meeting the new start requirements. according to the institute of water resources from 2010 to 2012, the army core off engineers provided a nationally economic net benefit of $87 billion in stimulated 27 billion in returns to the u.s. treasury. 16-1 return in terms of economic benefits and 5-1 for the treasury. waterways investment is a wise investment. if there's going to be a comprehensive infrastructure plan then my plea is that it not just be for roads and bridges but for waterways too.

not just for deep coastal ports and harbors but for inland waterways too. for efficient competitive movement of freight. to the extent waterway projects freight. and to the point they do private, then the water infrastructure act program created in wrda 2014 may be the tool necessary to track such investment. in projects for which the in land water way trust revenues are not sufficient to share. thank you for the opportunity to testify. we'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. i realize i have gone over my time. if you want me to tell any of my sto stories, i'll. >> thank you. i would like to introduce senator cassidy your guests here

today. >> the person steve cochran sitting behind me i gather he's on the next panel but thank you mr. chairman for allowing me to introduce. and other members thank you for letting me introduce stephen cochran. worked for many years in pursuit of a long term solution that will restore and protect louisiana incredibly fragile coastal system. he's worked with former louisiana buddy rommer, mississippi delta, and environmental fund to speak to the integrated strategy that utilizes innovative approaches to restore wet lands and support coastal ecosystem. now, coast stall louisiana is losing land as we speak. as we speak, there is something on the google map that looks green that if you had an updated google map would not look green but open water. so that the crisis we have.

it poses a serious threat to ourm communities and nation's economy. it has required our state to bipartisan comprehensive plan referred to as louisiana master plan for sustainable coast. $50 billion over 50 years plan to restore louisiana's coast based on sound scientific and modeling principles required to be updated every five years. now, while louisiana is prepared to implement projects in the master plan, the problem is the environmental review and permitting process challenges the threat to stop these projects from going forward. currently, the average time frame for the government to approve a federal project is close to five years. now, remember i said we are losing coastline like this minute. we get five years to permit something, and by that time there has been dramatic change. this time frame is unacceptable

given the magnitude of the threat to louisiana's coastline. revising the permitting approach for the corp. and for other agencies, particularly with multiple federal agencies is involved, is critical to find ways to expedite consideration of long-term ecosystem projects that restore wet lands and protect communities rather than maintain the current short term reg torety focus that again only seems to impede these important projects from moving forward. the mid base sed sed entarry south of louisiana to improve federal agencies. the diversion will take it from the mississippi and threatened wet lands on the western side of the river to build and sustain existing wet lands. now, the existing regulatory hurdles multiple federal agencies will likely lead to

multi year permitting delays for this and other projects resulting in the loss of louisiana coast. i look forward to working with this economy to restore the mississippi delta and update the permitting process so that we are better able to sustain coast coastal environments across the nation. and i thank you for that. >> thank you, senator cassidy, i know you have pressing matters. i appreciate you coming here today to introduce mr. cochran. now i'd like to call on mist julie ufner. welcome. >> good morning, chairman, ranking member, and members of the committee. i'm honored to testify before you today on water infrastructure needs and challenges. my name is julie eufner of

national counts. i've been asked to share with you our western county experiences. how we use wrda to work with the army corp. to keep our communities safe. consider this, counties own 45% of the nation's road miles and close to 40% of nation's bridges, along with harbors, ports, levees, dams. these play vital roles to keep our economies safe. this especially plays out in the west where water issues can be more complex. the federal government owns vast tracks of land within counties which raise property taxes yet we are still responsibility for emergency services on these lands while also protecting our residents on nonfederal lands. the federal government owns 97%

of the land in the city, borough of juno, alaska, which leaves the borough of 33,000 with only 3% of usable land. they are highly dependent on tourism, mining, and fishing to drive their $2.6 billion economy. and a large part of their success comes from wrda funding that helps them maintain those navigation channels leading to their port. in park county, wyoming, a community of 30,000, in the last year has had mountain flooding and ice jams. this has resulted in flooding which has destroyed county bridges and roads, many of which lead to the gateways of the national parks. tt county is now working with the army koerp and fema to replace these structures. but wrda could do more. counties have aging infrastructure in their communities. some of which that are close to 100 years old. and we have a limited pot of

funds to pay for this. one example, tuolumne of 64,000 is depended on old wooden flume for water which was built in 1850s. this flume is located in a heavily overgrown national forest, which is vulnerable to wildfires. if it were destroyed, the community would be without water for months. it would take over a year to rebuild. devastating the local committee. additionally, some federal regulations slow down construction and significantly increase costs for public safety projects. orange county, it california, maintains several hundred miles of flood control channels that are intended to protect homes, businesses, and roads from flooding. bull for maintenance activity in these channels, such as cleaning out debris, the county is required to obtain section 404

permits from the army corps of engineers. it cook the county approximately three years to obtain the permit which mandated them to clear 13 acres of vegetation and required 20 acres of mitigation at a cost of over $3.5 million for a permit that is only for five years. this is not an isolated example. additionally t our counties note there are challenges within the existing army corp. structure, which includes cumbersome and complex requirements, the length of time that it takes to complete water studies, limited funding, and competing agency requirements. congress has a unique opportunity to address this issue. and we are encouraged by the senate's stated commitment to complete a wrda bill this year. we look forward to working with you to address challenges within the section 404 permitting

program for safety infrastructure. also like to address funding needs because without wrda and the army corp., our counties would not have been able to accomplish the multitude of projects that we have been able to carry out in the past several decades. finally, we encourage congress to provide a framework of meaningful consultation between the army corps of engineers and state and local government partners on pending rules and policies that directly impact those entities. we believe that this will solve many of the conflicts that now exist between the army corp. and its inter governmental partners. simply put, wrda is a project that works. and together we can work to make the partnership stronger. on behalf of us, thank you for the opportunity to testify. and i would be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much. we appreciate you being here today. i'd like to turn to mr. william fried man chairman elect of the association of port authorities. thanks so much for joining us

today. >> thank you. good morning, chairman, and members of the committee. i want to thank you you for the opportunity to provide remarks for the environment and public works for on infrastructure challenges. i'm chief executive officer of the port authority which we usually shorten to the port of cleveland. it's northeast ohio merit sector which is economic part of the county. 13 million tons annually through cleveland, $3.5 billion in our community and supports 20,000 jobs in our community as well. i'm also speaking on behalf of the american association of port authorities, aapa as the chairman elect of legislative policy committee that sets policy for our members. my remarks will provide examples of water infrastructure needs by

public ports and to improve the corps of engineers navigation program. we appreciate that congress understands the importance of sea port role in the economy. constructing and maintaining the nation's 21st century is essential to the future. private@ports are committed to this chal elenge. it is imperative that related infrastructure be a part of any broad infrastructure investment legislation the committee develops. apa has identified $66 billion in potential water side and land side investments over the decade that ensure the benefits from anticipated $155 billion in capital infrastructure investments. the revenues over the ten year period, use of the $9 billion

harbor surplus to restore federal navigation panels, and $6.2 billion for the federal share of cost shared authorized in wrda 2014 and 2016. and projects that currently being studied that will get authorized in the coming years. apa believes a significant federal investment would grow the u.s. committee, enhance america's competitiveness, and generate additional tax revenues. i provided two info graphics which senator carper had had pointed out at the outset of the hearing. those are both available to you. they look like this. the first provides details on the $66 billion needs and the second info graphic highlights the types of port related projects that can benefit from infrastructure investment legislation. turning to wrda, it is vitally important that this legislation be passed on two year cycle as it enables both major and

smaller policy changes and improvements to be made in navigation projects to be authorized. i look forward to the next wrda legislation to continue making these improvements in the legislation. and would point out apa three key priority issues for wrda as follows. first, wrda 2014 was land marked legislation establishing a path to full use of the harbor mabt tans tax revenues for intended purpose. which is navigation channel maintenance. win 2016 adjusted the annual approach so progress is made toward full use each year. we are grateful currently being met by congress. however, we maintain the ultimate solution is for full revenues to be provided directly to the corps of engineers. we appreciate the bills proposed to address this issue. my fellow members and i are working on approach that

accomplishes full revenue use that includes an industry supported spending formula. number two, authorize and proceed to construct navigation project improvements recommended in chief of engineers reports. this includes a project authorization change report for the sue locks on the great lakes. and number three, past wrda streamlining of corps of engineers study process for channel improvements and that has worked well. we think additional streamlining can be made in upcoming wrda. apa a will have a list to the committee soon. i commend the committee by nexus between the two. i urge you to develop and pass infrastructure investment in wrda legislation at the earliest possible time. i'll be happy to address any questions you have for me. thank you very much. >> thank you very much for your testimony. we'll look forward to the questions. i would first like to turn to

nicole carter for the congressional research services. thanks for joining us. >> chairman and members of the committee, my name is nicole carter. i'm a specialist at the congressional research service in natural resources policy. thank you for inviting us here to testify. the committee requested focus on the legislative process for water resources development act. a wrda. and related issues in 2018. i'll start with wrda primer then discuss executive branch reports relevant to wrda deliberations and end with broader context and infrastructure deliberations in 2018. congress is often involved at the project level when it comes to the u.s. army corps of engineers. congress authorizes them to do specific projects to reduce flood damage and restore aquatic ecosystems. they have new studies in statute. in omni bus authorization bill, a wrda bill prior to providing federal funding.

most authorities previous wrda do not require reauthorization. a small number of time limited authorities and authorizations of appropriations end in 2018 and 2019. authorization, however, does not guarantee federal appropriations for a project. although congress does not appropriate funds in a wrda, they may affect the use of appropriations. for example, wrda provisions have provided targets for navigation trust funds and have established the nonfederal, federal split of project costs. the timing of this has varied. sense wrda 1986 congress has aimed to have long delays between the planning and execution of projects. biannual enactment of wrda was 1986 to early 2,000s, since thnen actment has been less

regular. how to do a bill without specific activities. commonly referred to as earmarks. in response, the 113th congress new reporting processes i'll discuss later. the 113th congress enacted water resources reform and development act of 2014. expanded nonfederal opportunities to lead core studies and projects and authorize 34 new construction projects. the 114th congress enacted the next wrda in 2016. authorized 30 new core projects as well as dozens of studies. wrda 2016 was title of a broader authorization bill that covered a range of water infrastructure issues including programs and activities of the bureau of reclamation and epa. all 64 new core construction projects authorized in wrda 2014 and 2016 had a completed report by the agency's chief of

engineers. since wrda 2016, five reports that recommend congressional authorization of new projects have been completed. two projects in texas, two in florida and one in new york. additional 12 to 18 reports may be completed by the end of 2018. congress also uses wrdas to authorize significant changes in previously authorized projects. the core has completed a report recommending an increase in the authorization of appropriations for the savannah harbor expansion project. wrda 2014 created a new process for the secretary of army to annually collect and report on publicly submitted proposals. report in 2017, 13 proposal for new feasibility and modification to existing projects. deadline for the next annual to congress is february 2018.

many topics may shape clib rations on water resource infrastructure such as the two navigation trust funds and safety and operation of core dams and levees, three broad topics of relevance to deliberation to 2018 are infrastructure initiative. how may a broad infrastructure initiative relate to authorized core projects and reinvestment in aging federally owned infrastructure. two, nonfederal expectations and partnerships. what will the federal government expect of sponsors incoming years? and what can nonfederal entities expect from the federal government in terms of financing of projects. three, floods, resent disasters including the 2017 hurricanes have raised numerous questions. like how effective and efficient are coure end processes for identifying priority investments to reduce nation's flood risk. thank you. this concludes my statement. >> well, thank you very much, ms. carter, we appreciate your testimony.

i would like to now welcome stephen cochran for coastal protection. thanks for joining us today. >> i also want to thank senator cassidy for coming here this morning. i don't know if you noticed it but he has a bad cold so i particularly appreciate him being willing to come out today. i wanted to thank senator kennedy from our state as well. . for the record i'm steve cochran. and director of collusion called restore the mississippi delta. coalition of three national organizations. and two louisiana based organizations. for over ten years, our coalition has worked together on land scape across the louisiana coast. in addition to my own written

statement which is submitted for the record, coalition members, national wildlife has submitted as well. this morning i'd like to tell you the challenges in my home state louisiana where to be blunt senator cassidy said we have a cotal crisis. as congress begins to look at wrda, i want to focus on possible solutions. from what we believe are lessons from the front. louisiana coast since the 1930s has lost about 1900 square miles. as senator carper knows that loss is the roughly the state of delaware. without action, we are pro jebted to lose up to another 4,000 square miles within the next 50 years. these losses have dramatic implications for millions of people and their communities along the coast for nationally significant energy and refining infrastructure, for kblglobal p

activities, and recreational fisheries. crisis along louisiana coast is unique, challenges are reflected across the country. as the committee knows 2017, senator carper set the record for weather related damages across the country majority were from hurricanes and floods. as you would imagine, we spent a lot of time in the delta thinking about solutions. so from that perspective, here are some general concepts we would recommend, as you consider wrda. first, coastlines are complex system in each area requires its own carefully considered measures to adopt to changing conditions. second, no engineered or natural structure is 100% effective against all storms. but structural solutions can be rendered far more effective in concert with restored natural features and processes. and, third, in many cases our nation's wet lands and flood planes are themselves critical infrastructure. need to be restored so in

addition to ecological benefits they could be used specifically to reduce the impacts and costs of floods and storms. now, in louisiana, the state and partners have used these concepts in constructing their own approach. louisiana master plan for sustainable coast is a document which guides cutting edge and driven by priorities, recognizes finite funding, and enjoys quite remarkable bipartisan support. this plan is iterative, which means it's updated every five years, to incorporate the latest science and reflect progress. each update must be approved by the state legislation and three iterations over 15 years have all been approved unanimously. this plan is also formed by engagement process giving communities a voice in their own future. we strongly recommend that other states facing significant flooding challenges examine the master plans approach as useful

guide. as for details, gray projects like rock shore lines or levees are complimented with barrier reeves. these combination of these measures are organized to create a multiple lines of defense. as you can see, my colleague holding here you can see array of various approaches that can be married together to provide the multiple lines of defense. that's true along rivers and coast lines. and it's this kind of thag we would strongly recommend to the committee in thinking about the kinds of incentives it builds into the system going forward. this next chart is simply a specific version done specific to louisiana where you can actually see how it works in our setting. these charts are in the written testimony. and you can look at them in more detail that way.

now, the natural aspects of these are really beneficial because they have so many cobenefits. so oyster reeves which help reduce wave problems also grow oysters. the storm surges can be stopped by wet lands. the maritime swamp can reduce wind speeds and commercial species. so these things together that we think make the most sense particularly as we have limited assets and finite resources going forward. one final element i want to tell you about, senator cassidy mentioned, is the unique and innovative approach. originally authorized to make this point in wrda 2007 under a different name. take up to 75,000 cubic feet from the mississippi river in

the river cycle. in doing so it will use the power of nature to build and sustain tens of thousands of wet land acres, including those reated through separate projects. these wet lands will in turn provide buffering for the levees inside of which our communities and the industry that we depend upon, so you get the mixed of national infrastructure protecting onion communities and coast. that combination that we think makes the most sense. now, it's a wonderful approach for us. but i have to adhere these kind of projects are not without challenges. in this case l the cause of the projects essential nature for our work, we the state has decided to fund it entirely on its own through resources that came through the deep water horizon penalties. those of course are subject to federal agency permitting, as they should be. and i want to underscore the

importance from our perspective of environmental review and frankly even our opposition to some of the streamlining we have seen. however, the federal permitting time line of nearly five years for this urgent already long studied project is unseepable given the urgency that we face. and in this case some delays stem from several factors, including the challenges some agencies confront in accounting for what happens if no action is taken at all. now, given the urgency of this crisis and the challenges associated with it, it may be that target legislative solution is required, which done carefully without damage to the underlining statute we support. here and elsewhere we are encouraging permitting agencies to work cooperatively to find ways to consolidate the permitting time lines. in summary, louisiana is deploying multiple lines of defense and pursuing innovation to address a coast in crisis. but to be successful, it needs

reliable, effective federal partner that can provide timely and appropriate resources and stay focused on solution. as the committee moves forward with this authorization, we encourage you to think about that formula for the rest of the country as well. >> thank you for your testimony. we are now going to move on as series of questions from members. so i'll start with you miss ufner if i can. many stakeholders who have worked with the corps of engineers have commented and complained about the process it follows from get from identifying water resources problem to implementing a solution that can be long costly delays. for example, in the midwest many water supply challenges that haven't yet been solved such as removing sediment from reservoirs to providing more water supply and water needs, such as flood management and drinking management. so as a result the water supply is becoming scarce and more

expensive. can you please share any thoughts you have as to how to improve it so water resources projects are operated more efficiently? >> thank you, senator. we actually have a number of suggestions. but in the interests of time i'm going to limit it to two. first, improve the inter governmental dl governmental collaboration between the core. processes and permits they have often prohibit or slow down projects from moving forward. and, secondly, congress may want to consider requiring the core to do regulatory ee fifficiency core processes and have core submit to congress results of this with potential alternatives how they are going to address it. thank you. >> and as you said, you were going to share two. if you have additional you would

be happy to do in writing. >> we'd be happy to do so. >> thank you. and as well as mr. robert son and fried man, over a year over a trillion dollars worth of goods moves through water ways and to every basic corner of the united states and around the world. can you talk a little bit more about the importance of ports in land water ways and how their management impacts your ability to transport goods allowing us to keep jobs at home and help us to more effectively compete globally? >> senator bra, speaking on beh of m carnes and muskogee, there are 8,000 jobs, more than $5 billion invested, annual payroll toss the counties and cities are $320 million annually. in muskogee which is a community

of 39,000 people, most of the manufacturers in that community, and muskogee is a manufacturing town, depend on the water way, so they depend on the reliability of the water way. they depend upon the transportation cost savings for delivering and receiving goods on the waterway. it's critically important to the economy of rural america. we are not investing in the system like we should be. therefore, we are encountering delays. and not a good situation in rural america. >> mr. friedman, would you like to add? >> yes, thank you for the question. so i'll address that from the perspective of the great lakes in the st. lawrence sea way which is unique water system where we are all interconnected and we trade within one another within the system domestically and also of course the international water way st. lawrence sea way where we

connect to all parts of the globe. so partnership we have under wrda to keep our harbors fully dredged is critical lifeline for big cities like cleveland, detroit, chicago, as well as for steel makers which takes place in cleveland based on iron orr which comes down from minnesota. and many cargos both exports from american manufacturers and in ports like specialty steel that we rely on in the appliance manufacturing sector and other manufacturing sectors. so i think in total the number for the entire system is something like on the order of 227,000 jobs both on the u.s. and canadian side of the sea way and great lakes. so making sure that we continue to get wrda right, streamline the process, authorize new

projects, and get to full use and full spending of the harbor tax is critical priority for us. thank you. >> thank you. senator carper. >> thanks mr. chairman. let me start off with nick hol carter. excellent testimony. very helpful. a question for you, if i could. given our current operating environment with recently passed tax reform, state of our crumbling infrastructure with a grade of d, and talking about the kind of situation we face here with our ports and rivers and so forth, it's just as bad with respect to roads, highways and bridges. complete with limited numbers of chief reports and large backlog of core projects, what are the big issues that we should tackle on the next water resources development act? >> thank you for the question. in wrda 2014, congress

established new ways for nonfederal entities to be involved in projects. and this has resulted upon additional projects being led by nonfederal entities. and trying to understand how well are those projects and processes working for those nonfederal entities as well as delivering projects would be part of the process to understand how to incorporate a core projects into a larger investment package. basically right now that process consists of the nonfederal entities often providing the funds up front. and essentiallying signing agreement that upon the availability of appropriations, they may receive some reimbursements. gao recently did a study that identified about $4 billion in projects like this in the country. and that about $400 million has been reimbursed. but we don't know the total amount. how well those are working will

shape how well future entities in the future want to make the investments and what they can expect in the way of federal government partnering in the investments if they do choose to lead rather than wait for the corp. >> thank you very much. i want to turn next to mr. friedman. does the river still catch on fire? >> nos. we are coming up on the 50th anniversary and i'm happy to report the environmental health of the river has been restored significantly. so we are proud of what we've been able to achieve since that dark day. >> i was student at ohio state university around that time. and we used to talk about fish fries up on the river. so wrong kind. question for you, if i could, by 2020, total volume of cargo ship biwater is expected to double just 17 years ago in 2001.

ships continue to get bigger see more congestion at the docks. how do we ensure that ports are able to effectively distribute and receive goods as ships continue to grow incise is a policy of finding, is poly issue, is it funding issue, is it both? and if it is a funding issue, what can we do, how do we go about more with less? >> certainly policy and funding issue both. you heard me say earlier, apaa is asking for $66 billion over the next ten years to address many of those issues that you just spoke to deepening water side projects such as deepening to keep up with the shipping that are of course enormous today as well as some land side projects to ensure that we have the inter modal connection so

once it comes off at the port, it can get to the port efficiently from in land point. so we absolutely need the federal partnership. i would also point out that there is already what i would call a robust public private partnership in place because our port authorities work very closely with private sector terminal operators and ship owners who invest heavily in partnership with our ports and federal government. so federal dollars will leverage individual private investment and go towards the infrastructure projects which there is no direct pay back on. so we look forward through this next round of wrda and infrastructure discussion you'll be having this year to ensuring that we can put a plan in place to fund those important needs at our ports. >> all right. and in my opening statement i mentioned that the core faces a

rather, indeed, real sizable math problem as they try to service roughly $200 billion requirement. and more with annual bug edget t hovers around $4.6 billion. think about that. we know it costs a lot of money. we know how economically important it is in our country. we are just not spending the money and investing the money. and we can do streamlining from now until the cows come home. and we have done a lot of smart streamlining and we are prepared to do more. there is good opportunities to figure out how to leverage federal and state resources to bring in private sector resources. doing that right flnow with extension of port of wilmington. but at the end of the day what

we need is the federal government to do its part. and that's not something that requires a response from any of you. i think that's the 800 pound gorilla in the room. thank you. >> senator inhofe. >> i think senator carper brought out something that was significant and very unique, and that is that in this area where we are trying to bring in private sector funding, we actually had to pass a bill in a provision into law to allow that to take place. i can't think of anyplace else in government where you have to ask permission to let the private sector pay for something. so that was something that was good. miss robinson, i again appreciate your being here so that we can make it very visible to people that we have problems on this inland water way. i can remember back when i first came to congress, i would go up through some of the eastern states and see the problems they had with their old ports, thinking, well we are pretty

fortunate in oklahoma we don't have those problems. now we do have the problems. enough years has gone by we've out lived the lives of some of our ports. and so we have to address that. we had a subcommittee meeting that i chaired not long ago on the transportation and infrastructure. and someone suggested that in the cost share of the inland water way trust fund should be changed in some way. one suggestion was from to 15% from the trust fund and 85% from the general fund. are you familiar with that suggestion? >> yes, senator inhofe i am. and i think there probably needs to be an adjustment. the problem, as senator carper acknowledged, is not doing more with less. we have been trying to do that forever. it's not working. we do to do more with more and efficiently in a business like manner. >> and those of us who have been

down there and observed some of the problems in the relatively ports ports that carry our goods and services. our nations system directly touches 38 states brought out. it's not just the coast. three of our ports go through senator boozman state. and two more ports are in oklahoma. now, in the fast act for the first time, and i've been through all seven of them since 1987, that we were able to have a freight provision. and that freight provision left a lot of the authority up to the states as to how to expend that and so forth. and so i would ask the question, would allowing the states to use fast act freight funds on our waterways, if they chose to do it, would that be available to address the issues and the needs of our inland states? >> i think so. i think we need more tools.

that would be one of them. the question would be of course states that are focused on roads and bridges, how much effort or expenditure they would allow from those funds for water ways. and the other question is, what would they use those funds for. would they use it to cost share new projects? if that were the case i think there is a real need to cost share. there is not enough money in the water ways trust fund to do that perhaps the states will have to pick up a little bit of the load there. so, yes, i think that. >> it's not going to happen unless somebody does something. >> that's right. >> you have to get address sin e come in with the state. and then what percentage might be appropriate for that? because i look at sources. and i run out of ideas. so anyway that's something i think we can do. and it's something that doesn't effect us in the state

government but the federal government. >> water infrastructure financing act that the congress authorized in 2014 is another tool that could be used. it's a leverage because the federal government is getting the money back. it's a loan. so i think that's another one of the tools at our disposal. tiger program. >> okay. and there is a variety. we can get together and decide what we want to do on state level. they are facing a lot of issues when it comes to water resources. and i know other states not just the state of oklahoma have these problems. in the city of oklahoma the community is growing and in need of additional water storage. now, we had water storage, and as a result from one lake in that city. tan and as a result increased the rates to the customers by over 100%. but when we tried to open up

another one, and i'm not sure you are familiar with this particular issue, but we went to the corps of engineers, and they increased, they had rate increase of 3,000%, which obviously our cities that particular city of bart elseville was not able to do anything. when i asked the gao to investigate how the corp. comes up with their prices, they reported back that they couldn't, because the agencies record keeping was so bad and varied they could not actually st study how the agencies arrived at their numbers. does that shock you? >> i always feel like that's a trick question, senator. >> no, it's not a trick question. it's a serious question. and we need the time to talk about it because we have new people coming in and we've had a hearing already with the civil division with the corps of engineers. and they recognized changes have to be made. but not if we all sit around and keep quiet and don't talk about it. >> i think you hit a strong

point on the head. there is a lot of information that is not available out there. and it's something that we need to figure out and work together to do it. >> yeah. well my time has expired but that's something we need to address. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator white house. >> thank you, gentlemen. i appreciate the panel here and particularly mr. friedman. rhode island has two ports that we are invested and proud of. we are home of shipping agencies which is one of the world's best shipping agencies. so we are keenly interested in ports. and i'm interested in your take on what sea level rise infrastructure impacts our ports are looking at? >> i think our ports are keenly interested and concerned about sea level rise and what they can do in partnership with local, state, and federal government to

enhance resiliencies. we heard mr. cochran speaking, too, earlier. i think we would look toward this wrda bill to increase our ability to work in innovative ways with the army corps of engineers, you usually find a lot of the new and interesting ideas tend to bubble up from those on the ground in local ports and communities and we need the ability to sit down with our army corp. districts and work together on those solutions. we are engaged in those discussions with the buffalo district of the corp., which oversees cleveland. believe it or not, we've had some coastal resiliency issues in cleveland. super storm sandy did a tremendous amount of damages to our break water and other structures in our port. so we are looking at ways we can use material to fortify our port. >> is it fair to say that the

concern of america's ports about sea level rise goes beyond the actual sea shore itself, that you can raise peers and sea walls and so forth. but if the sea is in filtrating through for instance water systems, and flooding access roads necessary to get goods in and out of the ports, those are matters that are of equal concern to the actual shoreline itself. is that correct? >> no question, senator, i think our ports are literally on the front lines on this issue and very concerned about upland impact of sea level rise as well as being inundated on the docs. no question our ports are focused on that and working hard to figure out how do we mitigate going forward. >> miss ufner, you are here on behalf of all counties but cotal counties could you tell us what you are hearing about the infrastructure hazards and risks and problems and challenges that

they are seeing related to sea level rise and storm surges and so forth? >> well, it's even broader than sea level rise and storm surges. we are definitely getting the flooding in the cotastal counties, and the hurricanes that came through the last fall, increasingly focusing how to address those issues. because the weather events have been getting more severe, and the population growth within those communities makes it even more essential that the communities can address these issues at the local level. >> so my view on this is that this is a problem that cotastal communities face, that very often those counties and

municipalities don't have a lot of resources to do the planning. i see your head nodding for the record, yes, good. it's also my view that a lot of the fema mapping has proven itself to be wildly inaccurate. and so you have counties that are counting on the federal government for planning as to what sea level rise and flood risk looks like and being given bad information which puts it again back on the community to try to reach its own better planning process. but without the resources, it's really hard to ask a local community to take on a task like that. is that a fair description of the problem as you see it as well? >> it is. counties derive a large part of their income from property taxes and states set the limit of how we can raise property taxes. so it sets an ugly cycle of how do we fund for something, how do

we strengthen our local communities. and that's why the federal state partnership is so valuable to us. >> yeah. well, let me just, i've got a few seconds left. let me make one point to my colleagues. i think as we are beginning to address these wrda issues, one of the areas in which we can become more efficient and helpful to the army corp. would be to try to find a good honorable and transparent way for congress and this committee to be able to assert its own priorities in the process. it concerns me that we shuffle projects in one side of the wrda bill and we shovel money in the other side of the wrda bill. and how the army corps of engineers connects that money to those projects is a giant black hole. and i think we need to fix that. i no he we ha i know we have been through a problem problem of earmarks that

criticism. our response was to get rid of this entirely. i think that was an overreactionment and we could and should in this community try to frame out an honorable transparent proper way for these priorities to be met under our supervision rather than just throw it off to the army corp. br br bureaucracy. i hope that wasn't unwelcome. >> it wasn't. thank you for your time. mr. wicker. >> mr. friedman let's talk about the harbor maintenance trust. and i notice in your testimony you advocate full use of hmt revenues over ten year period. what we've been doing as has been pointed out is we've been taking in more hmt revenue and sort of setting it aside and making deficit look better by not spending it for intended purpose. if we take your recommendation

and restore over a ten-year period the full use of these revenues, will that get us where we need to be in terms of meeting our funding needs? >> thank you, senator wicker. it gets us part of the way there but not all the way there. so if you look at the numbers that they submitted in the info graphic, we are calling for full spend every year of the revenues that are brought into the trust fund, and spending the roughly $9 billion surplus that has been built up, as you just mentioned. and then on top of that we would need additional monies through infrastructure bill to reach the $66 billion which we identify as the full need. so we would certainly be fully maintaining our harbors at that point if we fully spend the harbor maintenance trust fund catching up with the backlog if

we use the surplus. and then for some additional water site improvements such as deepening, which was mentioned earlier, some of our largest harbors for the larger ships, some of the big container ports, tan then some critical land side multi modal connections using infrastructure dollars we think that gets us to where we need to be as a nation. >> okay. so it's your hope that the president's infrastructure plan which should be outlined to us and to the public within a couple of weeks or perhaps at least within a month, that that $1 trillion infrastructure plan will be the third step in getting us where we need to be to meet our needs? >> we hope so, senator, yes. >> okay. and i hope so too. now, thank you for this chart. and senator carper, or these graphics, senator carper showed a bigger copy of this. but illustrative examples of

port investment needs. and i notice you have three rail projects, one being the mississippi rail relocation project marine terminal project at mississippi. only city in the united states that rhymes with hallelujah. you might tuck that away as a fact you learned today. also tunnel and port arthur rail project. how are we doing in rail access to ports? and why aren't we where we need to be? what have been some of the challenges in getting that rail to the ports? >> okayme. well, i think we made good progress in the last 20 or 30 years or so improving rail access to ports. inter modality or the whole

concept of putting container onto a train is not that old a concept. and so many of our ports had to be retrofitted with the kind of rail connections that would be functional for them. the grand daddy of all those would be the alameda corridor project in southern california which consolidated all the rail lines in a cut so as to eliminate grade crossings. and we have seen those sorts of projects on somewhat smaller scale at many of our ports. and i think that's been a good relationship between the ra railroad agencies. but we need more. it's particularly important for exports. we tend to think of containers coming into our ports. but where i am in cleveland we think about exports and we need the strong rail connections from the hin tear land to move heavy products that we make here in

the u.s. so that's why in that $66 billion we have included those critical rail connections in some cases tunnel clearances, in some cases it's rail bridges, in some cases it's grade crossings, it's more track in order to manage those trains. >> thanks. quickly, mr. cochran, this loss of land in louisiana, it's something i'm familiar with as next door neighbor. truth of the matter is, i'm not advocating doing away with flood control. but it's actually flood control over the centuries and decades that has caused the absence of sediment and the loss of land. is that correct? >> one of the significant factors, yes, sir. >> and just the point i would make is no one would advocate the solution to the problem is to go back to the wild days that we used to have that caused the sediment. i appreciate you and your testimony about thinking of

different ways, innovative ways to address something that we can't change back to the way it used to be. and i appreciate that. also let me just say, i understand that we are all for streamlining permitting. you have some doubts about some of the suggestions at the other end of the table. we are going to have to come together across the aisle on ways we can streamline the permitting process. so i'm glad to see a consensus among all five of our witnesses, i believe, that we need to address that. and i hope we can work on nuances that can be a happy solution and a win-win for all parties. >> i would offer, and i appreciate that, i think that the key there is what you identified, which is sitting down together, sitting down together.

one of the things we've been lucky enough and maybe threatened enough in louisiana to do is to recognize that hurricanes and other things aren't completely nonpartisan. and we need to be too as we figure this out. so looking at how to make the system work better. how to make underlying protections do what they are intended to do but do so in the most efficient way. that's a great conversation to have. >> thank you, senator. senator gillibrand. >> thank you. i'm very grateful for holding this hearing. it's important work that our committee does to draft the new water resources development act this year. my state of new york has a wide range of diverse water infrastructure needs and ch challenges. we are a coastal state affected by sea level rise. also great lake state challenged by asian carp that have the potential to destroy our fisheries if they are not stopped from gaining a foothold. we have the largest and busiest

port on the east coast essential to international commerce. and we have a number of small ports and harbors across our state important to the local economies and need to be properly maintained. we cannot address all of these challenges without a strong investment in the army corp., but funding is only part of it. we need to ensure that we are investing our federal dollars so that we are more resilient in the face of these challenges. i was very disappointed that the trump administration chose to rescind the flood risk management standard implemented by the obama administration which required federally funded project on climate change and sea level rise and build above the base floor elevation levels. if we are spending, as we are in the northeast, billions of dollars to build es the infrastructure to protect our communities, it defies logic that we would leave taxpayers exposed to the types of catastrophic losses we saw after super storm sandy and more

recently hurricanes harvey, irma, and maria, by not building future flood risks. so to miss ufner, what are the consequences to counties and local governments and tax pay fers we fail to assess risks both current and future when planning to build in flood plains? >> thank you, senator for your question. ultimately counties are responsible for public health and safety of our communities. probably if you look at what's happening santa barbara county, california within the last day of the flooding that's due from the wildfires, there's only a limited things that you can do after a wildfire to address a risk. it demonstrates that when floods happen, people die.

home disappears. memories are gone. this is something that local governments want to prevent and they want to be there to help with their residents. >> are we going fluff to ensure that we're adequately protecting ourselves and our assets from future storms and floods and what could we be doing better? >> it's a combination approach. there's a responsibility on the local governments. a lot of the local governments have the limited income and technical assistance to follow through with these projects. that's where they look to the army corps of engineers to bring the technical, data, model. sglo wh what else could we be doing? >> we just keep ongoing in the direction we're doing.

we can help the communities that are out there really being aggressive. in are trend setters and they're the ones we learn from on what may work in other communities. >> thank you. to mr. cochran, what needs to change to allow to mitigate along our coastlines? >> this multiple lines of defense system chart that we used early to illustratie the integration of hardened infrastructure and natural infrastructure is based on a chart that the core put together following this its post-sandy efforts as it did a comprehensive study in the northeast. i take that as a positive sign that too often what we do is learn about these things after

the fact. is this a post-sandy study. not a pre-sandy study. one of the things we need to encourage is take the learnings that have occur and really make sure they penetrate across the core, across the various divisions not just in one place so all the areas both coastal and inland can get the ben amphetami -- benefit of this thinking and approach. you can do the comparisons that let you select the things that work best. that's the way we have done it but integrate these things so they become not only protective but sustainable in the process. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> a number of my coastal colleagues have mentioned the detriment to hurricanes and so forth. i would offer them the

opportunity to come inland a bit. iowa owa has about a though sass of coastal set backs. we do have flooding issues in iowa that occur on a much more regular basis than those 100 year floods or 500 year floods. i tend to agree with the senator and there is a black hole and we need greater transparency there. part of that black hole is the benefit to coast ratio. you encourage congress to direct the corps to modernize the benefit to cost ratio analysis

because you believe the estimated costs are inaccurate. our rural ones have an opportunity to get their project funded. it was mentioned for prioritization but not received any funding due to the low bcr that results from iowa's relatively low property values. i know that is true in other areas as well and maybe mr. c r cochran in louisiana too. do you have any thoughts on how it could be modified so projects like this in cedar rapids have a

better chance of receiving funding? >> one of recommendations we have is really a focus on making sure that you can, in fact, take account for the range of benefits that can come from projects when you're doing protection. a lot of that has to do often with the benefits of wetlands. the benefits of set backs, things like that that you're used to and marine situation that really don't get accounted for any benefits when you get into the cost benefit. there's some land there but they don't look at benefits socialed with this kind of benefits. a true accounting for the benefits for natural infrastructure really needs to be done. it will end up benefitting these discussions along the ways you're talking about. it gives a true picture. a part of the challenge is

there's a real lack of transparency. it's difficult to understand where the numbers came from and how they got there. we think that's a fundamental piece of this. real accounting of benefits request make a difference. >> going back to that black hole that senator white house was referencing. thank you. i think that's important and i hope that we are taking a look at the bcr as we move forward. of course, miss carter the army corps component of the program that was established in 2014 has yet to get off the ground. what are some of the challenges the corps is facing in implementing this program and at this current pace how long will it take for the corps to watch

up to where epa is. >> thank you for the question. the program has not been funded. part of what's been going on is that there's the corps has no real history with a loan guarantee program so developing the guidelines and understanding how will those projects be scored in terms of the risk to the government have been some of the primary challenges. as basically as those issues get worked through with either congressional or administration involved in those discussions of how do you score the risk as those progress then funding could be provided and the corps could start providing loan for guarantees that could assist with projects like flood levees where communities could potentially proceed on their own to perform those projects.

those are the main ones is the ability to understand the scoring of it. >> then would it be helpful since epa already has an established process, would it be helpful then if the core could determine those projects and then fund those through epa? >> i've not looked at that as aen option but i believe there's some legislation out there to that effect. we have an expert. any questions for the record that you would like to provide we're happy to answer. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i don't have a question for you miss carter. we appreciate all of your knowledge and here in general. you do a great job. probably aren't thanked enough as we try and get things together so give yourself a big pat on the back. >> it keeps us going so thank you.

>> we do appreciate you. >> to capitalize on america's changing economy it's clear that necessary infrastructure improvements must be made to inland waterways and ports. arkansas and oklahoma been working for years to deepen p the arkansas river navigation system so barges and boats can carry larger loads. i think about 40% greater load. it's very, very significant. also the national significance of the 12-foot channel versus what we have now and we're going to work really hard in 2018 to try to amphetamine that accomplished. can you explain why the 12-foot channel would be a benefit? not just for arkansas and oklahoma but for the country as a whole. >> let me give you an example. you know scott mcgeorge

operating a rock quarry there in pine bluff. they weren't able to compete when new orleans needed rock desperately. we started the channel but we didn't complete it. we didn't go forward with it. >> along that line, i have great concern in as recently as 2016, there was concern that critical backlog was of that nature. that number has now ballooned to $143 million in less than three years. if we continue to kick the can down the road and do not address the critical backlog, talk about

that. also, 58% of locks and dams surpass their 50-year life expectancy. talk about if we could do some more things. the positive effect. >> the locks and dams are 47 years old. i realize the locks and dams on the rest of the system in the nation are older than that. one of the reasons that the backlog of critical maintenance is growing at such an alarming rate is because we're nearing the end of the 50 year life that most projects like that have for an engineering stand point. we're discovering new things every time we de-water a lot and we do that quite often in other words to make sure we're keeping up with the maintenance that needs to be done.

the funds aren't available to do the maintenance. it's not a good way to do business. these projects were justified on expectations that the benefits would exceeds the cost. they have done that. there's significant earnings to the government, to the federal government that go into the treasury. it's not a matter of not enough benefits and revenues. it's a matter of using those revenues for other purposes. >> a top rpriority for the chairman and ranking member is passing the bill. we went through a period from where we had a gap.

2014-2016 we've gotten back on track. can you talk about what it means to have certainty with having the bill? >> it's critically important for the port industry, the maritime industry. adjustments need to made as projects are designed and then being built. the army core has beps has been for many years adding costs. a gape of 7 years is very harmful. it gives a chance to address the

issue of transparency. make sure we're funding the best projects for the nation. apa is strongly in favor of getting back to the regular order on werda. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, sir. i think we all realize that take holder and project sponsor collaboration with the army of engineers is essential to solving our water resource challenges which are many. this collaboration helps to limit the cost of missed opportunities. most better planning provides better transparency.

>> you're talking integrated planning from the concept of environmental protection agency but using it also with within the army corps of engineerengin? >> yes. >> it's a big issue with us with water issues in the corps or the army core to address clean water act issues in a holistic way. that includes potentially -- i don't want to say wundsbundling projects but it's a way to look at the most important things. we're still meeting our clean water act goals in the corps or

epa. >> i want to go back to something i said earlier. i'm going to ask you to join me in an airplane up to 30,000 feet. i want you to react to what i said earlier. i spent some time in puerto rico and virgin islands and houston and saw the devastation we're going to pay for for a long time. nation needs to be a resilient one ready for the next storm. noaa estimated the total cost

exceeded $300 billion which the new annual record for the u.s., it's not matter of if but when. accounted for more than 70% of the agency civil works appropriations. they include hydropower, re recreati recreation, emergency management and water supply. with this trend the corps's actions have shifted to operation, maintenance and rehabilitation and a backlog of maintenance continue to grow.

if you're sitting on this side, as members of this committee, what would you with doing about it? i'll start with you stove. >> i think the situation you describe is incredibly debilitating to the people who work at the corps of engineers. they are, many of them quite skilled. quite talented, quite able and yet they, the vision of what it could be and what they need to be is completely overwhelmed by a backlog of things that they're not getting done. it's essential to find a way to overcome the backlog not by doing all the projects. that's not going to work. creating a new vision that does. we talk a lot in louisiana about getting ahead of the next storm, the same way you talked about it in your opening statement.

that's critical. oids you're always playing catch up. that's what the core is doing now. we should -- i don't actually mean this but we should either give them a real job to do or we should just get rid of them so the way it is right right now, everybody has learned how to do more with less. that's just business as usual. if you do that long enough, you give up a on what you need to do. >> one of the topics that may be of concern in the future is dam and levee safety issues.

>> well, i'm going to ask you to react to what i said earlier and just repeat it, please. >> absolutely. they want to see the continued movement toward full use and spend of the harbor maintenance trust fund that would make tremendous difference for us and we're grateful for the progress that congress has made and you made in that direction. the numbers are remarkable from where we were five or six years ago. then we would again submit that our waterways, our water infrastructure needs to be viewed very high priority in any

upcoming infrastructure, legislation that's passed out of congress and then just speaking for myself, if i were on your side and in your shoes, i can sort of think back to when the army core, the days when the army core was building some of the greatst pest public work projects known to man. other waterways and water works. i think we need to get back to that spirit of we can do this. we have to fund it but we can do it. i think sort of share the view that without enough funding there's not much the corps can do. they are fighting in this backlog but i think we have to start thinking bigger on a bigger scale to address these problems and make that a national priority. >> i think, senator. actual, two thoughts on that,

well several thoughts. there's such a backlog within the core and the need within the communities are so huge. there's no funding. they don't meet the cost benefit analys analysis. the technical assistance the corps offers is so valuable. there's a lot of challenges within the core within the processes, complex requirements that make it very difficult even if counties do want to partner with them. they may go to other federal agencies first because it may take ten years through the core as opposed to seven years somewhere else. >> the civil works program in the country for many, many years has delivered significant benefits to the country and revenues to the treasury.

>> good hearing. we appreciate very much what you've added to it. >> couple quick questions. the comment about the time, the complexity and all of those things. 1870 to 1914. it did spend a 44-year plan.

>> several programs passed in the water infrastructure, are important to reduce flooding, ice jam prevention. you mentioned mitigation and mitigation pry lilot program. how important is preventing flooding? >> to reiterate what we mentioned before, it is immeasurable. communities are responsible. counties are responsible for health and public safety. we take many measures to ensure that our public is protected on the scenes of any emergencies. flooding disasters and when they result in deaths and or damage to our economies, ultimately impacts the national economy. it's huge that we're able to address this long term and figure out the steps that we need to get there in the end

together. >> i've continued to advocate maintaining snow pack monitors, these are gauges used to monitor snow depth, to help inform agencies like the corps like the flooding. is there more that can be better done to prevent flooding and drought? >> there's more that can be done. there needs to be more available data and that's reliably updated. we hear this a lot about the data used for nfip or also flood elevation data. >> thank you.

some members may ask -- senator. >> thank you. i have a question but i'm not going to ask it now. i want to flag it the regards to flood risk management. one of the things that's important to a lot of us on the east coast from maine down to florida is the issue of cost benefit ratio with respect to the systems to protect a lot of our coastal towns and communities. we'll send that to do you and ask do you take a good look at that. thank you. all of you have done a great job. >> members may be submitting written questions. i ask that you follow up quickly for the record. the hearing will remain open for two weeks opinion i want to thank you for being here for your time and testimony. the hearing is adjourned. thank you.

the federal government faces a possible shutdown on friday at midnight. lawmakers will decide on a short term package to keep the government working into the middle of next month. the senate might take up the bill thursday. follow the debate with l