PROPOSED WATERWAY USER CHARGES AND LOCKS

AND DAM 26

FRIDAY, APRIL 1, 1977

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 9:30 a.m., pursuant to notice, in room 4200, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mike Gravel (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senators Gravel, Anderson, Burdick, McClure, Domenici, and Wallop.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE GRAVEL, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA

Senator GRAVEL. The hearing will come to order.

This morning the Subcommittee on Water Resources opens 4 days of hearings on the replacement of locks and dam 26 in Alton, Ill., and proposed waterway user charges.

We have two distinct but interrelated issues here. Locks and dam 26 is an essential, integral part of our inland navigation system. It is in need of rehabilitation or replacement. No one takes issue with that fact. The question is, to what extent and to what capacity should it be repaired or rebuilt. What effect will its enlargement have upon other, competing modes of commercial transport.

Also at issue is a proposed major change in national policy. Should the Federal Government continue to subsidize the construction, operation, and maintenance of navigation facilities at no cost to their commercial users? This particular project is only one of many which will need similar rehabilitation or replacement over the foreseeable future, at a cost of several billion dollars. Should our current policy continue, or is this the appropriate time to institute a cost-sharing policy?

Last year this subcommittee held 5 days of hearings on locks and dam 26. Over 1,000 pages of testimony and exhibits constitute the hearing record. It is my hope that we will not have extensive repetition of that testimony this year. We have a commitment to report out legislation by mid-May. Extensive testimony, identical to that received last year, will not help us meet that goal.

I look forward to hearing testimony on the user charge issue. I supported the user charge section in last year's Water Resources Development Act as reported from this committee. I do recognize, however, that hearings were not formally held on the issue. While I am on record as supporting the user charge concept, I maintain an open mind on the several specific proposals before us.

The hearings will resume on April 19 and continue on April 20 concluding May 20. I am sure they will be invaluable in assisting us to determine what action should be taken on these important issues. [The bills, S. 712, S. 790, and S. 923 follow:]

95TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION

S. 712

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 10 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 1), 1977

Mr. STEVENSON (for himself, Mr. ANDERSON, Mr. DANFORTH, Mr. EAGLETON, Mr. EASTLAND, Mr. HUMPHREY, Mr. JOHNSTON, Mr. LONG, Mr. PERCY, and Mr. STENNIS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To authorize the construction of a replacement lock and dam for Locks and Dam 26, Mississippi River near Alton, Illinois and Missouri, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief 4 of Engineers, is authorized to replace Locks and Dam 26, 5 Mississippi River, Alton, Illinois and Missouri, by construct6 ing a new dam and a single, one hundred-and-ten foot by one7 thousand-two-hundred-foot lock at a location approximately 8 two miles downstream from the existing dam, substantially 9 in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of

1 Engineers in his report on such project dated July 31, 1976, 2 at an estimated cost of $391,000,000.

7

3 SEC. 2. The Secretary of the Army, acting through the 4 Chief of Engineers, is authorized and directed to replace, 5 at Federal expense as a part of project costs authorized in 6 section 1 of this Act, terrestrial wildlife habitat inundated as a result of the construction of the project on an acre-for-acre 8 basis in the respective States of Missouri and Illinois and to 9 manage such lands as are thus acquired by the Secretary for 10 wildlife mitigation purposes. The Secretary is further author11 ized to provide project-related recreation development on or 12 in the vicinity of Ellis Island, Missouri, that requires no 13 separable project lands and includes facilities such as roads, 14 parking lots, walks, picnic areas, a boat launching ramp, and 15 a beach, at an estimated cost of $4,000,000 to be cost shared 16 with the State of Missouri and administered in accordance 17 with the provisions of the Federal Water Project Recreation 18 Act (Public Law 89-72) and undertaken independently of 19 the navigation features of the project.

20 SEC. 3. The channel above Alton, Illinois, on the Mis21 sissippi River is established at nine feet, and neither the 22 Secretary of the Army nor any other Federal official is au23 thorized to study the feasibility of deepening the navigation 24 channels in the Minnesota River, Minnesota; Black River. 25 Wisconsin: Saint Croix River, Minnesota and Wisconsin;

1 and the Mississippi River north of its juncture with the Illi2 nois River, Illinois, unless specifically authorized by future 3 Act of Congress.

4 SEC. 4. (a) There is hereby created an Upper Missis5 sippi River System Council (hereinafter referred to as 6 "Council") consisting of the Secretary of Transportation, the 7 Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Army, the Sec8 retary of the Interior, and the Administrator of the Environ9 mental Protection Agency.

10 (b) The Congress hereby authorizes and directs the 11 Council to prepare a comprehensive master plan for the 12 management of the Upper Mississippi River, north of its 13 juncture with the Illinois River, Illinois, in cooperation with 14 appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies. A preliminary 15 plan shall be prepared by January 1, 1981, and shall be 16 subject to public hearings in each affected State. The Council 17 shall review all comments presented at such hearings, make

18

any appropriate revisions in the preliminary plan, and shall, 19 by January 1, 1982, submit a final master plan to Congress 20 for approval. The Council shall provide for and encourage 21 public participation in the development and revision of the 22 master plan. Approval of the final master plan shall be 23 granted only by enactment of the Congress. Changes to the 24 master plan proposed by the Council shall require enactment 25 by the Congress to become effective.