Alexander Leads Hearing on FY17 Army Corps & Bureau of Reclamation Budget Request

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, today led a hearing to review the fiscal year 2017 budget request for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation.

The following is Alexander's opening statement, as prepared for delivery:

The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development will please come to order.
Today’s hearing will review the president’s fiscal year 2017 budget request for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, which is part of the Department of the Interior.  
This is the Subcommittee’s second budget hearing this year, and we will have two more budget hearings in the coming weeks.  
I want to thank our witnesses for being here today, and also Senator Feinstein.  
Our witnesses today include:
Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works;
Ms. Darcy has been serving as the Assistant Secretary since 2009, and she has told me this may be her last budget hearing before this subcommittee.  I thank Ms. Darcy for her many years of public service, including her time working on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.  
Lieutenant General Thomas P. Bostick, Chief of Engineers for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
General Bostick has been serving as Chief of Engineers since 2012, and this will be his last budget hearing before this subcommittee.  I thank General Bostick for his many years of service to our nation.
Estevan López, Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation; and
Tom Iseman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science at the Department of the Interior
We’re here today to review the president’s fiscal year 2017 budget request for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation.   
Today I will focus my questions on three main areas:

1.    Making investments in our nation’s water infrastructure a priority;
2.    Properly funding our inland waterways system; and
3.    Deepening and widening our coastal harbors.

Making Investments in Our Nation’s Water Infrastructure a Priority
In my opinion, we should spend more, not less, on our nation’s water infrastructure.
Last year, Congress made record investments in our water infrastructure by providing nearly $6 billion to the Corps of Engineers – the largest amount of funding for the Corps of Engineers in a regular appropriations bill.  
Instead of building on that investment, however, the president’s budget request this year proposes to cut funding for the Corps of Engineers to $4.620 billion, which is a $1.4 billion or 23 percent cut below FY16.  
This is an enormous step backwards.  In fact, if we simply approved the president’s request, the Corps of Engineers would receive less than what Congress appropriated in FY2006, setting us back more than a decade.
If we look at the condition of the locks and dams that the Corps operates across the country, for example, we should be able to see exactly why these investments are needed.
The National Academies of Science in 2011 said the Corps has 138 locks in operation that are over 50 years old, and that the average age of our locks is 58 years.
Using locks is the only way for inland waterway shippers to move things like grain, steel, fertilizer and coal up and down rivers, and having to unexpectedly shut them down for extended periods of time could be catastrophic for agriculture and other commodities that rely on them to get their goods to market.
Yet, as these facilities age, major upgrades, maintenance, and sometimes replacement is required, so I think it’s fair to ask, why would the president cut funding for the Corps of Engineers at a time when more investment is needed?
President Obama should make funding for our nation’s waterways a priority, but this year’s budget request certainly doesn’t reflect that, and I am going to ask our witnesses why that is the case.

Properly funding our Inland Waterways System
The president’s budget request proposes significant cuts to our 12,000 mile inland waterways system.
Critical projects, such as replacing Chickamauga Lock in my home state of Tennessee, have been piling up for years due to a lack of funding, and many of us in Congress have recognized that we needed to take steps to increase funding for the Corps of Engineers to address this backlog.   
First, Congress passed a law that reduced the amount of money that comes from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund to replace Olmsted Lock, a project in Illinois and Kentucky that was soaking up almost all of the money that is available for inland waterway projects.  
Second, Congress worked with the commercial waterways industry to establish a priority list for projects that needed to be funded, on which Chickamauga ranks near the top, in fourth place.
And third, two years ago, working together in a bipartisan way, we increased the user fee increase that commercial barge owners asked to pay in order to provide more money to replace locks and dams across the country, including Chickamauga Lock.  These user fees are deposited into the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
These steps increased the amount of funding that was available for inland waterways projects from about $85 million in FY2014 to now $106 million this year.  
These funds are matched with funds from the general treasury, which would allow the Corps of Engineers to make significant progress to address the backlog of work on our inland waterways.
Yet the president’s budget request only proposes to spend $34 million from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, leaving about 75% of the available funds unspent.  
The budget request also only proposes to fund a single project, Olmsted Lock, and eliminates funding for the other three projects that received funding last year − Lower Monongahela, Kentucky Locks, and Chickamauga Lock.
Replacing Chickamauga Lock is important to all of Tennessee and if Chickamauga Lock closes, it will throw 150,000 more trucks onto I-75, yet the administration continues to not include it in the budget.
I’ve worked with Secretary Darcy and General Bostick over the past few years and I deeply appreciate that we found a way for construction to restart on Chickamauga Lock, which has now been funded for two consecutive years.  
But this budget proposal is a huge step backwards in this area. I will be asking our witnesses today why the administration has not proposed to spend all of the funds that have been collected, especially since commercial barge owners asked Congress to increase user fees they pay to improve our inland waterway infrastructure.
Deepening and Widening our Coastal Harbors
The budget request this year also fails to make critical investments in our nation’s harbors.  
To maintain our economic competitiveness, our harbors need to be able to accept the larger ships that are expected to come through the Panama Canal.  
Significant work and funding is necessary to deepen and widen our coastal harbors to accommodate these bigger ships, yet the administration’s budget proposes major cuts for this program as well.  
To ensure that these critical investments were made to our harbors, Congress enacted spending targets for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund in the 2014 Water Resources Reform and Development Act.  
The target for FY17 is about $1.180 billion, yet the administration only proposes to spend $986 million, a shortfall of $194 million.  
So I will ask the witnesses how they   plan to make these important upgrades to our harbors without requesting sufficient resources to do it.
I’d also like to recognize our witnesses from the Department of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation.
The Bureau of Reclamation delivers water to one of every five farmers in the West, irrigating more than 10 million acres of some of the most productive agriculture land in the country.
Although Reclamation doesn’t manage water resources in Tennessee, I know of its deep importance to Senator Feinstein and other Senators on this subcommittee, and we look forward to hearing your testimony.
With that, I’ll turn to Senator Feinstein for her opening statement.