Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 104
111th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                     111-45

======================================================================



 
         ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2010

                                _______
                                

                  July 9, 2009.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Dorgan, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 1436]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1436) 
making appropriations for energy and water development and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, 
and for other purposes, favorably thereon and recommends that 
the bill do pass.
    The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 0000) making appropriations for energy and water 
development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, reports the same to 
the Senate with an amendment, and an amendment to the title, 
and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.



Amount in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2010

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $34,271,000,000
Amount of 2009 appropriations...........................  92,533,165,000
Amount of 2010 budget estimate..........................  34,914,709,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2009 appropriations................................. -58,262,165,000
    2010 budget estimate................................    -643,709,000


                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Purpose..........................................................     4
Summary of Estimates and Recommendations.........................     4
Title I:
    Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army:
        Corps of Engineers--Civil:
            General Investigations...............................    16
            Construction, General................................    32
            Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries.....    50
            Operation and Maintenance, General...................    52
            Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies................    73
            Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program......    74
            General Expenses.....................................    74
            General Provisions--Corps of Engineers--Civil........    76
Title II:
    Department of the Interior:
        Central Utah Project Completion Account..................    78
        Bureau of Reclamation:
            Water and Related Resources..........................    78
            Central Valley Project Restoration Fund..............    86
            California Bay-Delta Restoration.....................    86
            Policy and Administration............................    86
        General Provisions--Department of the Interior...........    87
Title III:
    Department of Energy:
        Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy...................    89
            Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability..........    96
            Nuclear Energy.......................................    97
            Fossil Energy Research and Development...............   100
            Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves...............   102
            Strategic Petroleum Reserve..........................   102
            Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve...................   102
            Energy Information Administration....................   103
        Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup........................   103
        Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 
          Fund...................................................   104
        Science..................................................   104
            High Energy Physics..................................   105
            Nuclear Physics......................................   105
            Biological and Environmental Research................   105
            Basic Energy Sciences................................   105
        Nuclear Waste Disposal...................................   108
        Departmental Administration..............................   109
        Office of Inspector General..............................   109
        Atomic Energy Defense Activities:
            National Nuclear Security Administration:
                Weapons Activities...............................   110
                Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.................   115
                Naval Reactors...................................   117
                Office of the Administrator......................   118
        Environmental and Other Defense Activities:
            Defense Environmental Cleanup........................   118
            Other Defense Activities.............................   121
            Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal.......................   121
            Power Marketing Administrations:
                Operation and Maintenance, Southeastern Power 
                  Administration.................................   122
                Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power 
                  Administration.................................   122
                Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and 
                  Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration.   122
            Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Salaries and 
              Expenses...........................................   123
        General Provisions--Department of Energy.................   154
Title IV:
    Independent Agencies:
        Appalachian Regional Commission..........................   155
        Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board..................   155
        Delta Regional Authority.................................   156
        Denali Commission........................................   156
        Nuclear Regulatory Commission............................   156
            Office of Inspector General..........................   157
        Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.....................   157
        Tennessee Valley Authority Office of the Inspector 
          General................................................   157
        General Provision--Independent Agencies..................   158
Title V: General Provisions......................................   159
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   160
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the 
  Senate.........................................................   160
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   161
Budgetary Impact Statement.......................................   166
Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items............   166
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................   230

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for 
the fiscal year 2010 beginning October 1, 2009, and ending 
September 30, 2010, for energy and water development, and for 
other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources 
development programs and related activities of the Department 
of the Army, Civil Functions--U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 
Civil Works Program in title I; for the Department of the 
Interior's Bureau of Reclamation in title II; for the 
Department of Energy's energy research activities, including 
environmental restoration and waste management, and atomic 
energy defense activities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration in title III; and for related independent 
agencies and commissions, including the Appalachian Regional 
Commission, Delta Regional Authority, Denali Commission, and 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in title IV.

                SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    The fiscal year 2010 budget estimates for the bill total 
$34,914,709,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The 
recommendation of the Committee totals $34,271,000,000. This is 
$643,709,000 below the budget estimates and $58,262,165,000 
below the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year.

                         Subcommittee Hearings

    The Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water held 
three sessions in connection with the fiscal year 2010 
appropriation bill. Witnesses included officials and 
representatives of the Federal agencies under the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction.
    The recommendations for fiscal year 2010 therefore, have 
been developed after careful consideration of available data.

                         Votes in the Committee

    By a vote of 30 to 0 the Committee on July 9, 2009, 
recommended that the bill, as amended, be reported to the 
Senate.

                                TITLE I

                      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Corps of Engineers is made up of approximately 35,000 
civilian and 650 military members that perform both military 
and civil works functions. The military and civilian engineers, 
scientists and other specialists work hand in hand as leaders 
in engineering and environmental matters. The diverse workforce 
of biologists, engineers, geologists, hydrologists, natural 
resource managers, and other professionals meets the demands of 
changing times and requirements as a vital part of America's 
Army.
    The Corps' mission is to provide quality, responsive 
engineering services to the Nation including:
  --Planning, designing, building and operating water resources 
        and other civil works projects. (Navigation, Flood 
        Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, 
        et cetera);
  --Designing and managing the construction of military 
        facilities for the Army and Air Force. (Military 
        Construction); and
  --Providing design and construction management support for 
        other Defense and Federal agencies. (Interagency and 
        International Services).
    The Energy and Water bill only funds the Civil Works 
missions of the Corps of Engineers. Approximately 23,000 
civilians and about 190 military officers are responsible for 
this nationwide mission.
    From our hundreds of rivers, lakes, and wetlands to our 
thousands of miles of coastal shoreline, we are fortunate in 
America to enjoy an abundance of water resources. As a Nation, 
we value these resources for their natural beauty; for the many 
ways they help meet human needs; and for the fact that they 
provide habitat for thousands of species of plants, fish and 
wildlife.
    The Congress has given the Corps of Engineers the 
responsibility of helping to care for these important aquatic 
resources.
    Through its Civil Works program the Corps carries out a 
wide array of projects that provide:
  --Coastal storm damage reduction;
  --Disaster preparedness and response;
  --Environmental protection and restoration;
  --Flood damage reduction;
  --Hydropower;
  --Navigable waters;
  --Recreational opportunities;
  --Regulatory oversight and
  --Water supply.
    One of the biggest challenges the Corps and other 
Government agencies face is finding the right balance among the 
often conflicting concerns our society has related to our water 
resources. Society wants these resources to help fuel economic 
growth (navigation, hydropower). Society wants them to provide 
social benefits (recreation). And finally society wants to be 
sure that they are available for future generations 
(environmental protection and restoration).
    The Corps is charged with seeking to achieve the best 
possible balance among these competing demands through an 
integrated approach to water resources management that focuses 
on regional solutions, involving an array of stakeholders (that 
is other Government agencies, environmental groups, businesses, 
and private organizations). In recent years, the Corps has 
implemented this approach largely by concentrating on 
watersheds.

      OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET REQUEST

    The fiscal year 2010 budget request for the Corps of 
Engineers is composed of $5,125,000,000 in new budget 
authority. This is an increase of $384,000,000 from the fiscal 
year 2009 request. The budget request is $277,000,000 less than 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted amount--the narrowest gap in 
recent memory. This is the first budget for the Corps of 
Engineers by this administration and the Committee sees 
definite improvements over the previous administrations 
proposals. However, much more needs to be done to truly change 
the paradigm under which Corps budgets seems to be produced 
within the executive branch.
    The Committee believes that the administration should 
seriously evaluate the Nation's infrastructure needs and budget 
accordingly. At a time when this existing infrastructure, the 
foundation of our economic security and quality of life, is 
depreciating much faster than it is being recapitalized, when 
our increasing population is placing much greater stress on the 
Nation's vital water resources, when shifts in population 
centers mean new and different problems and when a growing 
environmental awareness requires new solutions to persistent 
problems, this underfunding is unacceptable and threatens our 
continued well-being. Infrastructure budgets have got to be 
increased. If not, the Nation will continue to face unscheduled 
outages, damaged incomplete infrastructure and other emergency 
situations that must be dealt with through ever increasing 
emergency appropriations.
    This budget proposal again ignores studies and projects 
that are ongoing and funded in the Energy and Water section of 
the fiscal year 2009 omnibus that was agreed to by the Congress 
and signed into law by the President in favor of a select group 
of studies and projects that comport to budgetary criteria 
devised by the administration without any input from the public 
or the Congress. The Committee accepts that it is the 
prerogative of the administration to develop whatever criteria 
that it sees fit to utilize in order to decide which projects 
it will and will not fund. What this Committee does not accept 
is that the administration developed criteria is somehow 
superior to and should supplant the investment decisions of 
Congress.
    The Committee agrees with some of the administration's 
criteria. The Committee believes it is important to fund the 
capability level for dam safety projects. Likewise the 
Committee believes that it is a Federal obligation to fund 
mitigation and environmental compliance activities. Funding 
obligations under continuing contracts and projects that factor 
in the consideration of human safety are certainly laudable 
criteria for determining which projects to fund.
    However, the Committee differs with the administration 
concerning benefit to cost ratios being utilized to establish 
priority for funding. The Principles and Guidelines utilized by 
the Corps require the Chief of Engineers to develop the 
National Economic Development [NED] plan for a project. The NED 
plan, among other things, is distinguished by the fact that it 
provides the greatest excess benefits over the project costs. 
This is not the same thing as the highest benefit to cost [B/C] 
ratio. It is often the case that the NED plan and the plan with 
the highest B/C ratio are not the same plan.
    The Flood Control Act of 1936 established that project 
benefits should exceed projects costs. This has been the Corps' 
longstanding water resource policy and attempts to change this 
legislative requirement have been unsuccessful. However, the 
administration has arbitrarily decided that benefits simply 
exceeding the costs is not a sufficient measure of a project's 
worth. They have decided that they will only budget for 
projects that have benefit to cost ratios significantly greater 
than one to one. Unfortunately the B/C ratio has arbitrarily 
changed from year to year in order to accommodate the 
administrations desired level of investment.
    The criteria for deciding which studies to budget for 
appears to be even murkier than the criteria for determining 
which construction projects to fund. What is obvious is the 
result. Fewer studies are funded every year than are enacted in 
the previous appropriation act. These studies provide the 
information needed to make vital investments in our water 
resources infrastructure. However, they are de-emphasized in 
the budget request. One study, albeit an important one, 
consumes nearly 50 percent of the resources dedicated to 
studies across the country.
    As this Committee has noted in the past, planning in the 
Corps is a specialized skill set and once that ability is lost, 
it is difficult to re-establish. Most of the criticisms of the 
Corps' project development process in recent years have 
centered on the planning process. The administration is 
providing funding for some improvements to the planning program 
such as funding the Planning Associates Program and Planning 
Centers of Expertise. However, planning studies have to be 
undertaken to utilize these improvements. The Committee 
believes that the Corps should have a robust planning program 
to not only address new water resource needs but to evaluate 
changes throughout the project development process. Continued 
budgets like this will lead to a complete loss of this vital 
Corps of Engineers' competency. The administration should 
seriously revise their priorities for this account in the 
fiscal year 2011 budget.
    The Committee is pleased that the shifting of items from 
the Construction, General [CG] account to the Operation and 
Maintenance [O&M;] account has not been all but abandoned by 
this administration. There is still roughly $47,067,000 of 
traditionally funded construction items contained in the fiscal 
year 2010 O&M; account. The Committee believes this was just an 
oversight in preparation of the budget. These items are 
identified in a table in the section of this report dealing 
with the CG account. The budget request is shown in the O&M; 
account and the funded amounts are included in the CG account.
    With these items shifted to their proper accounts, the CG 
account total for the budget request would be $1,765,067,000 
and the O&M; budget request would be $2,456,933,000. This means 
that the administration's CG request is down $376,610,000 from 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted amount and the O&M; account shows a 
true increase of $255,033,000 from the fiscal year 2009 
enacted. This increase to the O&M; account is long overdue as 
this account has remained relatively stagnant this decade while 
personnel and material costs continue to increase. The 
Committee is pleased that the administration did not present 
the O&M; budget in the ill-conceived regional budget groupings 
proposed for the last several years.
    The regulatory budget is $190,000,000 for fiscal year 2010. 
This is up about $7,000,000 from the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
amount. This increase is largely due to the increased workload 
from trying to implement regulatory requirements in light of 
the unclear Rapanos and SWANCC Supreme Court cases.
    The Committee is disappointed that funding for the Formerly 
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program [FUSRAP] was cut by 
$6,000,000 from the fiscal year 2009 enacted amount of 
$140,000,000. This program was transferred to the Corps from 
the Department of Energy, because the Committee was concerned 
with management and cost issues of the program within the 
Energy Department. This is a program that is being well managed 
by the Corps and should have stable, adequate budget resources 
to continue these radiological clean-up activities.
    The Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies account is 
proposed at $41,000,000 for fiscal year 2010. These funds are 
proposed for Corps readiness and preparedness activities of the 
Corps of Engineers.
    The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil 
Works) is proposed as a separate account for $6,000,000. The 
Committee continues to believe that the Assistant Secretary's 
office should be funded in the Defense appropriations bill. 
However, until such time as that can be reintegrated into that 
bill, the Committee agrees that the office should be funded as 
a separate account. The Assistant Secretary's duties encompass 
much more than the civil works functions of the Corps of 
Engineers and the budget needs of the office should be 
addressed separately.
    The General Expenses [GE] account is proposed at 
$184,000,000 for fiscal year 2010. While this is a little less 
than the inflation adjusted amount, the Committee is pleased to 
see the recognition that the oversight functions of the 
headquarters of the Corps should be strengthened. The Committee 
notes that the Corps operates one of the most efficient 
headquarters staffs in the National Capital region. Only about 
3.5 percent of their staffing is at their headquarters level as 
opposed to 10 percent or more for comparable agencies in the 
National Capital region.

           THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009

    The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA] 
was an attempt to combat the recession by putting our citizens 
back to work rebuilding our Nation's water resource 
infrastructure. The Committee was amazed that the Corps was not 
included in the administration's original proposal. The Corps 
would have seemed to have been one of the first agencies that 
one would go to create jobs. However, after negotiations with 
the Congress, the administration agreed that funding for the 
Corps would be a component of the ARRA. The Corps was provided 
$4,600,000,000 to stimulate job growth by addressing needed 
water resource infrastructure needs.
    The Recovery Act gave the administration complete 
discretion as to which projects would be funded and how much 
funding each project would receive. The Congress provided 
general guidance expressing Congressional intent as to how the 
funds should be utilized. The President signed the ARRA on 
February 17, 2009, and by all accounts the Corps had internally 
developed a list of projects within about 30 days that met the 
Congress' intent of creating jobs across the country while 
completing usable increments of projects or providing deferred 
maintenance to projects. One of the primary criteria that the 
Corps' utilized in their project list was the ability to get 
the work underway quickly. After all, the goal was to quickly 
create jobs. However, on the eve of releasing this list, the 
administration decided to reevaluate the criteria that the 
Corps had internally used to develop its' project list. This 
review took another 30 days and by all accounts resulted in a 
drastically different list than what the Corps originally 
proposed--particularly in the CG account. In the Committee's 
opinion, this additional administration review did not result 
in an improved list. In fact the Committee believes that it 
delayed execution of these funds and included projects that 
were not ``shovel ready'' but may have had other attributes the 
administration found compelling.
    The Committee found many of the funding choices made by the 
administration questionable. Again the internal criteria for 
making these decisions was developed without public input. 
Criteria was provided when the ultimate project lists were 
released, but some of the logic behind the decisions was 
tortured and hard to follow based on a straight reading of the 
administration's criteria. The Committee was particularly 
disappointed that shore protection projects were deemed 
ineligible to receive funding from the ARRA. The Committee see 
these projects as being ``shovel ready'' and providing the same 
NED benefits to the Nation that any flood damage reduction 
project does. The Committee believes they should have been 
funded and encourages the administration to use unexpended ARRA 
funds for this legitimate Federal purpose.
    While the President was celebrating the initiation of the 
1,000th transportation project funded by the ARRA, the Corps 
project list was still under administrative review. The first 
report on expenditures from the Corps was indicative of this 
extended review by showing virtually none of the funds expended 
more than 75 days after enactment of the ARRA. We are now more 
than 4 months after enactment of the ARRA and are still seeing 
little progress on getting projects started. This should be 
unacceptable to the administration. It certainly is to this 
Committee.

                      PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING

    While not calling this a performance-based budget, many of 
the same criteria seem to be at play in the decisionmaking 
process. The Committee hopes that the administration will try 
to work with Congress to try to find a better budget model as 
they begin the development process for the fiscal year 2011 
budget. It is imperative that the Congress and the executive 
branch find common ground on investment decisions for water 
resource development if we are to effectively confront the 
numerous water resource issues that face the Nation.
    The Committee believes that Corps budgets should be 
developed from the bottom up, district to division to 
headquarters to ASA to OMB. District commanders should be 
responsible for developing and managing a program within their 
geographic area. Division commanders should be responsible for 
integrating the district office programs into a single 
division-wide program. The headquarters office should integrate 
the division programs into a single national program. The 
Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army should assure 
that the program complies with administration policy and 
budgetary guidance and OMB develops the budgetary guidance and 
provides funding levels. Decisions for budgeting should be made 
within the framework of administration policy by those who know 
the projects and programs best, not Washington level 
bureaucrats. Unfortunately, if the ARRA is any guide, this will 
not be the case.

                         BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

    As often happens with a change of administrations, the 
administration's fiscal year 2010 budget request was delayed 
beyond the traditional first Monday in February release. This 
is to be expected. The President released his budget outline in 
March 2009, with the formal budget documents released on May 7, 
2009. Inexplicably, the detailed budget justifications for the 
Corps of Engineers were not received until 5 weeks after the 
budget was released. The justifications that were provided only 
covered the GI, and CG accounts plus the remaining items in 
O&M.; That means the administration provided no detailed 
justification for $2,400,000,000 of the Corps budget. This is 
unacceptable. This has now happened twice in the past 4 years. 
It is inconceivable to this Committee that DOE with a budget 5 
times the size of the Corps can get printed and bound editions 
of their budget justification delivered on the day the budget 
is released and the Corps cannot even get their justifications 
on the Internet for 5 weeks after the budget is released. The 
administration should note that this situation will not be 
tolerated for the fiscal year 2011 budget. If every other 
executive branch agency can produce detailed budget 
justifications when the budget is released, the Corps should be 
able to also.
    The Committee appreciates the traditional layout of the 
justifications that were finally delivered. It was especially 
good to see that both the Flood Plain Management Services and 
Planning Assistance to States GI line items provided a detailed 
breakdown of the funding requests for these programs for the 
first time ever. Unfortunately, this level of detail was not 
included for the Continuing Authorities Program or the Dam 
Safety/Seepage Stability Correction Program. The justifications 
for these items showed a total dollar value and listed 
projects, but neither program justification gives the Committee 
an idea of how the program totals were arrived at. There is no 
way to know whether the administration proposal underfunds or 
overfunds these programs.
    The Committee believes that budget justifications serve to 
justify the administration's request. The budget justifications 
should be improved by providing more relevant budget and 
project information. For fiscal year 2011 the Corps is directed 
to provide, at a minimum, detailed project information for each 
O&M; project justifying the needs for each project.

                       INLAND WATERWAY TRUST FUND

    More than 3 years ago, this Committee was made aware of a 
pending shortfall in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. It took 
the previous administration 2 years from when they first 
notified the Committee of the issue to actually submit a 
proposal to Congress to address this shortfall. Unfortunately 
this proposed lockage fee was developed as a part of the fiscal 
year 2009 budget deliberations and, as such, the administration 
did not coordinate it with industry. When the proposal was 
announced it was loudly criticized by the navigation industry 
(who had no input into the proposal) and was largely considered 
dead on arrival. Unfortunately, the administration's budget 
request assumed revenues from this lockage fee would be 
available to fund a portion of their fiscal year 2009 budget 
request. This put the Committee in the awkward position of 
trying to make the budget work with insufficient funds.
    When the fiscal year 2010 budget was presented to Congress, 
the budget repeated the proposal to phase out the existing fuel 
tax that funds the IWTF and phase in a lockage fee. 
Fortunately, the budget was not predicated on this proposal 
being enacted. The administration proposal only expends 
existing revenues available in the IWTF and deposits assumed 
revenues from the lockage fee into the IWTF to be used in 
subsequent years. This is a much more prudent way to budget 
with these limited funds.
    The Committee has supported and continues to support 
sharing the cost of construction and major rehabilitations 
between the IWTF and the General Treasury in the CG account. 
The Committee believes that this arrangement makes the users 
active partners in the overall inland waterway system and 
provides for a better more efficient system. As the Congress 
already pays 100 percent of the O&M; costs of the inland 
waterway system, the Committee would not support a change in 
cost sharing for the IWTF. Even if it did support a cost share 
change, this would only prolong the inevitable bankrupting of 
the IWTF.
    The current fuel tax generates about $90,000,000 annually. 
Currently awarded continuing contracts for IWTF projects will 
require approximately $60,000,000 of this amount for the next 3 
years. The Committee believes that the only way to solve the 
problem is to generate additional revenues in the fund. The 
current fuel tax is spread relatively equitably across all 
commercial users of the inland waterway system. However, the 
fuel tax has remained at $0.20 per gallon of diesel fuel since 
1996. Inflation and increased efficiency in tow boats has 
eroded the value of the fuel tax. One potential solution is to 
index the fuel tax to inflation. Another solution would be to 
keep the current fuel tax in place but to add a lock user fee 
to the revenue stream. This way, all users would pay something 
and those that use the locks would pay more. Other potential 
solutions that could be considered include a bulk commodity tax 
collected from the river terminals, a nationwide marine fuel 
tax, or even a national sales tax. A wholesale change from a 
fuel tax to a user fee as proposed by the administration 
appears to be unacceptable to Congress or the inland waterway 
industry. However, the Committee only proffers these as 
discussion topics. As waterways are the most efficient mode of 
transport any solution to the funding shortfall should not 
provide disincentives for using the inland waterways.
    Legislative text is again included this year to prohibit 
the Corps from entering into any new continuing contracts for 
any inland waterway project until the revenue stream for the 
IWTF is enhanced. The administration should submit the fiscal 
year 2011 budget based on expected revenues in the IWTF not 
based on projections based on legislation that may or may not 
happen. No change in law has been made nor will this Committee 
propose any to alleviate the funding problem in this fund. A 
solution to this problem must be developed with the users of 
the system, the Corps and the appropriate authorizing 
committees of the Congress.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    The budget for the Corps of Engineers consists of 
individual line items of projects. As presented by the 
President, the budget contains 969 specific line item requests 
for directed spending by the administration. Additional funding 
is requested by the administration for nationwide line items. 
All of these line items were specific requests by the 
administration of the Congress to be funded in fiscal year 
2010. They did not request these funds programmatically, they 
requested them for a specific project in a specific location 
for a specific purpose.
    The Committee has returned to its tradition of including 
funding for the Corps of Engineers by account in legislative 
text and provided the details for each account within the 
report that accompanies the legislation. This provides the 
agency some flexibility in how funds are expended and allows 
the Corps to effectively manage their program while honoring 
the intent of Congress. The primary intent of Congress has 
always been that once the Congress funded a study, it intended 
for the study phase to be completed to determine if Federal 
investment is warranted. By the same token, once the Congress 
committed to initiation of construction of a project, it 
intended for the project to be completed and the national 
economy to accrue the project benefits.

                 CONTINUING CONTRACTS AND REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee expects the Chief of Engineers to execute the 
Civil Works program generally in accordance with congressional 
direction. This includes moving individual projects forward in 
accordance with the funds annually appropriated. However, the 
Committee realizes that many factors outside the Corps' control 
may dictate the progress of any given project or study.
    The Committee is retaining the reprogramming guidance for 
fiscal year 2010 that was enacted for fiscal year 2009. The 
guidance is as follows:
    General Investigations.--For a base funding level less than 
$100,000, the reprogramming limit is $25,000. For a base level 
over $100,000, 25 percent up to a limit of $150,000 per study 
or activity. Amounts over this limit will require approval of 
the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, except that the 
Committee does not object to reprogramming up to $25,000 to any 
continuing study or activity that did not receive an 
appropriation in the current year.
    Construction, General.--For a base less than $2,000,000, 
the reprogramming limit is $300,000. For a base level over 
$2,000,000, 15 percent up to a limit of $3,000,000 per project 
or activity. The Committee will allow reprogramming up to 
$3,000,000 for settled contractor claims, accelerated earnings 
or real estate deficiency judgments. Amounts over this limit 
require approval of the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees. Reprogramming within each section of the Continuing 
Authorities is unlimited however, the percentages between 
studies and implementation must be maintained as directed in 
this report. Further, no reprogramming is allowed between 
sections nor into or out of the overall CG account. The 
Committee does not object to reprogramming of up to $300,000 to 
any continuing project or program that did not receive an 
appropriation in the current year.
    Operations and Maintenance.--Unlimited reprogramming 
authority is granted in order for the Corps to be able to 
respond to emergency situations. The Chief of Engineers must 
notify the House and Senate Appropriations Committees of these 
emergency actions as soon thereafter as practicable. For all 
other situations, for a base less than $1,000,000, the 
reprogramming limit is $150,000. For a base over $1,000,000, 15 
percent up to a limit of $5,000,000 per project or activity. 
Amounts over this limit require approval of the House and 
Senate Appropriations Committees. The Committee does not object 
reprogramming up to $150,000 to any continuing project or 
program that did not receive an appropriation in the current 
year.
    Mississippi River and Tributaries.--The Corps should follow 
the same reprogramming guidelines for the GI, CG, and O&M; 
portions of the Mississippi River and Tributaries account as 
listed above.
    Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program.--The Corps 
may reprogram up to 15 percent of the base of the receiving 
project.
    Continuing Authorities Program.--The reprogramming guidance 
does not apply to the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP]. The 
Corps has unlimited reprogramming within each section of the 
CAP but shall not reprogram funding from the CG account to any 
section of CAP or between CAP sections.

                  5-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET PLANNING

    While the Committee appreciates the Corps' attempts to 
provide a meaningful 5-year budget plan, it recognizes the 
inherent difficulties between the legislative and executive 
branches in preparing a useful plan. The executive branch is 
unwilling to project a 5-year horizon for projects for which 
they do not budget leaving a sizeable percentage of the Corps 
annual appropriations with a year-to-year event horizon for 
planning purposes. The fact that a sizeable portion of the 
annual appropriations are dedicated to congressional priorities 
is not a new phenomenon. Many major public works projects over 
the last two centuries have been funded on an annual basis 
without a clear budget strategy. The Committee would welcome 
the ideas and the opportunity to work with the executive branch 
to determine a mutually agreeable way to develop an integrated 
5-year comprehensive budget that displays true funding needs 
for congressional as well as administration priorities. 
Anything less will only give a partial view of the investments 
needed in water resources infrastructure.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes a total of 
$5,405,000,000. This is $280,000,000 over the administration's 
budget request and $2,635,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted amount. Funding is displayed in the following table. 
The first column represents the President's budget as 
requested, the second column is displayed with the President's 
request in the accounts where the projects have been 
traditionally located, the third column is the Senate 
Recommendation and the final column is the Senate 
recommendation versus the President's request in the 
traditional account structure. Funding by account is as 
follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Fiscal year 2010
                                             President's    Fiscal year 2010       Senate          Request vs.
                                               budget            request       recommendation    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Investigations..................          $100,000          $100,000          $170,000          $+70,000
Construction, General...................         1,718,000         1,765,067         1,924,000          +158,933
Mississippi River and Tributaries.......           248,000           248,000           340,000           +92,000
Operation and Maintenance...............         2,504,000         2,456,933         2,450,000            -6,933
Regulatory..............................           190,000           190,000           190,000  ................
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies...            41,000            41,000  ................           -41,000
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action            134,000           134,000           140,000            +6,000
 Program................................
Office of the Assistant Secretary of the             6,000             6,000             5,000            -1,000
 Army (Civil Works).....................
General Expenses........................           184,000           184,000           186,000            +2,000
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.............................         5,125,000         5,125,000         5,405,000          +280,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               NEW STARTS

    Out of the more than 2,100 requests this Committee received 
for Corps projects and studies for fiscal year 2010, 93 were 
for new study requests; 163 were for new construction projects. 
Of this 163, 92 were for new water and sewer projects for the 
Corps. That is an astounding total of 12 percent of the 
Committee requests for new studies and projects. This is 
demonstrative of the tremendous need for water resource 
solutions across the Nation. Neither the administration nor the 
Congress is able to find the budget resources to address these 
critical needs.
    The administration's budget request proposed seven new 
construction starts and three new study starts in fiscal year 
2010. These new construction starts account for $92,700,000 or 
5.4 percent of the CG budget request for fiscal year 2010 and 
would require in excess of $800,000,000 in future 
appropriations to fund the obligations that would be incurred 
by starting these new projects. Starting these projects would 
only increase the pressure on the administration next year to 
establish budgetary criteria that would exclude more projects 
from funding consideration in order to fund these new 
priorities.
    While the Committee is recommending a boost to the 
construction budget that is $158,900,000 above the budget 
request, this recommendation is $80,500,000 less than what was 
proposed in the Senate bill in fiscal year 2009. Further, the 
Committee's CG recommendation is $217,700,000 below the fiscal 
year 2009 enacted CG amount. The Committee believes that 
recommending new starts in this budget environment would be 
imprudent. These new starts would get over the ``new start'' 
hurdle, only to face a budget that cannot accommodate all of 
these needs. One has to ask, is it more prudent to start a 
project, or to adequately fund those that have been started?
    The Committee has decided that there just are not 
sufficient resources to start any new studies or projects in 
the fiscal year 2010 bill--either the administration's new 
starts or those proposed by Congress. The Committee continues 
to believe that new starts are a vital part of the Corps' 
program, there just are not sufficient funding resources to 
start new obligations at this time. If additional resources 
become available in conference, the Committee might re-evaluate 
this decision.

                         DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

    The Committee received more than 2,000 requests for 
projects, programs, studies, or activities for the Corps of 
Engineers for fiscal year 2010. These requests included the 
budget request as well as requests by Members. The Committee 
obviously was unable to accommodate all of these requests.
    In the interest of providing full disclosure of funding 
provided in the energy and water bill, all disclosures are made 
in the report accompanying the bill.
    All of the projects funded in this report have gone through 
the same rigorous public review and approval process as those 
proposed for funding by the President. The difference in these 
projects, of course, is that the congressionally directed 
projects are not subject to the artificial budgetary 
prioritization criteria that the administration utilizes to 
decide what not to fund.
    There are two disclosure tables this year. One table 
discloses the recommended amounts that are in excess of those 
proposed in the budget request and the Members names that made 
these requests. If the Member requested the budget request or 
if only the budget request was provided, Member names are not 
listed next to these items because under the provisions of Rule 
44 this would not be considered congressionally directed 
spending. The second table discloses only those earmarks 
requested by the President and the amount recommended or the 
budget request whichever is appropriate.
    The purposes for the funding provided in the various 
accounts is described in the paragraphs associated with each 
account. The location of the programs, projects, or studies are 
denoted in the account tables.

                         GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$168,100,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     170,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $25,000,000.

    This appropriation funds studies to determine the need, 
engineering feasibility, economic justification, and the 
environmental and social suitability of solutions to water and 
related land resource problems; and for preconstruction 
engineering and design work, data collection, and interagency 
coordination and research activities.
    The planning program is the entry point for Federal 
involvement in solutions to the Nation's water resource 
problems and needs. Unfortunately, the General Investigations 
[GI] account amount proposed in the budget is only marginally 
better that what has been proposed in previous budgets. 
Nationwide studies and programs consume almost half of the 
administration's GI request. This budget is saying that the 
Nation should concentrate scarce resources on completing 
studies but not carrying forward ongoing studies. However, the 
budget request was able to carve out $700,000 for three new 
starts. While this Committee supports new study starts 
believing them a vital part of the planning program, the 
Committee does not support new starts when so many on-going 
studies are unfunded in the budget request.
    The Committee has provided for a robust and balanced 
planning program for fiscal year 2010. However, no new starts 
are included in this recommendation. To provide additional 
transparency in the budget process, the Committee has 
segregated the budget into three columns in the following 
table.
    The first column represents the reconnaissance phase of the 
planning process. These studies determine if there is a Federal 
interest in a water resource problem or need and if there is a 
cost sharing sponsor willing to move forward with the study. 
The next column represents the feasibility phase of the study. 
These detailed cost-shared studies determine the selected 
alternative to be recommended to the Congress for construction. 
The third column represents the preconstruction engineering and 
design phase. These detailed cost-shared designs are prepared 
while the project recommended to Congress is awaiting 
authorization for construction.
    The Committee hopes that by segregating the table in this 
manner that more attention will be focused on the various study 
phases, and a more balanced planning program will be developed 
by the administration. As the last two columns are generally 
cost shared, they demonstrate the commitment by cost-sharing 
sponsors to be a part of the Federal planning process. By the 
same token, it also shows the level of commitment of the 
Federal Government to these cost-sharing sponsors. The 
Committee directs that the fiscal year 2011 planning budget be 
presented to the Committee in this fashion.
    The budget request and the recommended Committee allowance 
are shown on the following table:

                                   CORPS OF ENGINEERS--GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Budget estimate            Committee recommendation
                  Project title                  ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Investigations   Planning      RECON       FEAS         PED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                     ALASKA
 
HOMER HARBOR MODIFICATION, AK...................  ..............  ..........  ..........        340   ..........
KOTZEBUE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, AK..................  ..............  ..........  ..........        210   ..........
MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK...................          100     ..........  ..........        100   ..........
VALDEZ HARBOR EXPANSION, AK.....................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        385
WHITTIER HARBOR, AK.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        340   ..........
YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK..............................          450     ..........  ..........        450   ..........
 
                     ARIZONA
 
PIMA COUNTY, AZ.................................          275     ..........  ..........        275   ..........
VA SHLY-AY AKIMEL SALT RIVER RESTORATION, AZ....  ..............        658   ..........  ..........        658
 
                    ARKANSAS
 
LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE STUDY, AR......  ..............  ..........  ..........        250   ..........
MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        425
SOUTHWEST ARKANSAS, AR..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        210   ..........
WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO........  ..............  ..........  ..........        250   ..........
WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR........  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
 
                   CALIFORNIA
 
CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA.....          900     ..........  ..........        900   ..........
CENTRAL VALLEY INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT STUDY  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
COYOTE & BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA...................  ..............        950   ..........  ..........        950
COYOTE DAM, CA..................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
GRAYSON AND MURDERER'S WALNUT CREEK BASIN, CA...  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
HAMILTON CITY, CA...............................  ..............        400   ..........  ..........        400
HUMBOLT BAY LONG-TERM SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, CA...  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA.....  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
LOS ANGELES RIVER WATERCOURSE, HEADWORKS,  CA...  ..............  ..........  ..........        230   ..........
LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND      ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 VICINITY,......................................
LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        250
MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED,  CA.....................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
MIDDLE CREEK, CA................................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        250
PAJARO RIVER, CA................................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        425
REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        210   ..........
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAMP, CA.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        221   ..........
SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, GRR, CA (SYSTEMS  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
 EVALU).........................................
SAC-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA....          468     ..........  ..........        468   ..........
SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAMP, CA.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA..................  ..............  ..........  ..........        340   ..........
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK, CA......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN [SJRB], FRAZIER CREEK/    ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 STRATHMO.......................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WEST STANISLAUS,         ..............  ..........  ..........        370   ..........
 ORESTIMBA CR...................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, LOWER SAN JOAQUIN        ..............  ..........  ..........        640   ..........
 RIVER, CA......................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), WHITE RIVER/DRY   ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 CREEK,.........................................
SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED, CA.................  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA..................          278     ..........  ..........        278   ..........
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA...............  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
ST. HELENA-NAPA RIVER, CA.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
SUN VALLEY WATERSHED, CA........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
SUTTER COUNTY, CA...............................          339     ..........  ..........        339   ..........
UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA......................          386     ..........  ..........        386   ..........
WESTMINSTER (EAST GARDEN GROVE) WATERSHED,  CA..  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
WEST SACRAMENTO, CA.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        950   ..........
 
                    COLORADO
 
CACHE LA POUDRE, CO.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........         50   ..........
SOUTH BOULDER CREEK, CO.........................  ..............  ..........         82   ..........  ..........
 
                   CONNECTICUT
 
CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CT, MA,  ..............  ..........  ..........        380   ..........
 NH &...........................................
 
                    DELAWARE
 
RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED,  DE..  ..............  ..........  ..........        264          36
 
                     FLORIDA
 
FLAGER COUNTY, FL...............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        496   ..........
INDIAN RIVER LAGOON NORTH, FL...................          150     ..........  ..........        150   ..........
LAKE WORTH INLET, FL............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
LIDO KEY, SARASOTA, FL (SARASOTA, LIDO KEY, FL).  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        340
MIAMI HARBOR, FL................................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        510
MILE POINT, FL (JACKSONVILLE)...................  ..............  ..........  ..........        185   ..........
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL......................          510     ..........  ..........        510   ..........
WALTON COUNTY, FL...............................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        229
 
                     GEORGIA
 
AUGUSTA, GA.....................................  ..............        278   ..........  ..........        278
OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, GA...          100     ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA...................  ..............      1,000   ..........  ..........  ..........
SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, GA PH II....  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        210
TYBEE ISLAND, GA................................          206     ..........  ..........        206   ..........
 
                      GUAM
 
HAGATNA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL.....................          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 
                     HAWAII
 
ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI.........................          175     ..........  ..........        408   ..........
KALAELOA BARBERS POINT HARBOR MODIFICATION,  HI.  ..............  ..........  ..........        300   ..........
MAALAEA HARBOR, MAUI, HI........................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        202
WAIAKEA-PALAI STREAMS, HI.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        300
WALILUPE STREAM, OAHU, HI.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        175   ..........
WEST MAUI FEASIBILITY STUDY, HI.................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
 
                    ILLINOIS
 
DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II)................          500     ..........  ..........        500   ..........
ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL............          400     ..........  ..........        400   ..........
INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES, MISSISSIPPI            300     ..........  ..........        300   ..........
 RIVER A........................................
PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, IL...............  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........         50
PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE, IL........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        209         255
S. FORK, SOUTH BRANCH, CHICAGO RIVER, (BUBBLY     ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
 CREEK),........................................
UPPER MISS-ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO &   ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........      9,000
 WI.............................................
UPPER MISS RIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IL, IA, MO,  ..............  ..........  ..........        640   ..........
 MN &...........................................
 
                     INDIANA
 
INDIANA HARBOR, IN..............................  ..............        300   ..........  ..........        300
 
                      IOWA
 
CEDAR RIVER TIME CHECK AREA, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA...  ..............  ..........  ..........        750   ..........
HUMBOLT, IA.....................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 
                     KANSAS
 
MANHATTAN, KS...................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
TOPEKA, KS......................................  ..............        100   ..........  ..........        250
UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        170
 
                    KENTUCKY
 
GREEN RIVER WATERSHED, KY.......................          200     ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
 
                    LOUISIANA
 
BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA...........................  ..............      1,239   ..........  ..........      1,239
BOSSIER PARISH, LA..............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        150   ..........
CALCASIEU LOCK, LA..............................        1,000     ..........  ..........      1,000   ..........
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA....................  ..............  ..........  ..........        675   ..........
CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        153   ..........
CROSS LAKE, LA..................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA       25,000     ..........  ..........     23,000   ..........
LOUISIANA COASTAL PROTECTION & RESTORATION              3,000     ..........  ..........      3,000   ..........
 [LACPR], LA....................................
PLAQUEMINES PARISH, LA..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        107
PORT OF IBERIA, LA..............................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........      1,000
ST. CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA......  ..............  ..........  ..........        391   ..........
SOUTHWEST COASTAL LOUISIANA HURRICANE             ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
 PROTECTION, LA.................................
WEST SHORE, LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA..............  ..............  ..........  ..........        425   ..........
 
                    MARYLAND
 
ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES COMPREHENSIVE     ..............  ..........  ..........        321   ..........
 PLAN, MD.......................................
BALTIMORE METRO WATER RESOURCES--PATAPSCO URBAN   ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
 RIVER..........................................
CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND COASTAL        ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
 MANAGEMENT,....................................
CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT     ..............  ..........        143          57   ..........
 MANAGEME.......................................
EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD....  ..............        250   ..........  ..........        483
MIDDLE POTOMAC COMP PLAN, MD, VA, PA, WV, DC....  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
MIDDLE POTOMAC WATERSHED, GREAT SENECA CREEK AND  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
 MUDDY..........................................
SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN LOW FLOW MANAGEMENT AND   ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 ENVIRO.........................................
 
                  MASSACHUSETTS
 
BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA.............  ..............        500   ..........  ..........        500
PILGRIM LAKE, TRURO & PROVINCETOWN, MA..........          100     ..........  ..........        100   ..........
 
                    MICHIGAN
 
GREAT LAKES NAV SYST STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY,           400     ..........  ..........        400   ..........
 OH, PA.........................................
GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS [RAP], MI.....  ..............  ..........  ..........        850   ..........
LANSING, GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI.  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
 
                    MINNESOTA
 
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED, MN...................  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, MN & SD........          350     ..........  ..........        350   ..........
WILD RICE RIVER, RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN,            271     ..........  ..........        271   ..........
 MN.............................................
 
                   MISSISSIPPI
 
PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 
                    MISSOURI
 
BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO......................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        242
KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS...........................          224     ..........  ..........        224   ..........
MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION, MO & KS.............          600     ..........  ..........        600   ..........
MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L455 & R460--  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        340
 471, MO........................................
RIVER DES PERES, MO.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        100
ST. LOUIS, MO (WATERSHED).......................          400     ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
 
                     MONTANA
 
YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT..................          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 
                  NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA........          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 
                   NEW JERSEY
 
DELAWARE RIVER COMPREHENSIVE, NJ................          290     ..........  ..........        290   ..........
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS,          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 NJ.............................................
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
LOWER SADDLE RIVER, BERGEN COUNTY, NJ...........  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        255
NEW JERSEY SHORE PROECTION, HEREFORD TO CAPE MAY  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 INLET..........................................
NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM        ..............  ..........  ..........        110   ..........
 NOURISHMENT....................................
PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ.....................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        215
PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ.....................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        215
PECKMAN RIVER BASIN, NJ.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        300   ..........
RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS,  NJ..  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ....  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........         25
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION-BEACH, NJ.  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        110
SHREWSBURY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ............          511     ..........  ..........        511   ..........
SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ............  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        215
STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ..........  ..............  ..........  ..........        110   ..........
 
                   NEW MEXICO
 
ESPANOLA VALLEY, NM.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        150   ..........
RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO & TX...................  ..............  ..........  ..........        120   ..........
SANTA FE, NM....................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        228   ..........
 
                    NEW YORK
 
BRONX RIVER BASIN, NY...........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
BUFFALO RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, NY........          100     ..........  ..........        100   ..........
HASHAMOMUCK COVE, SOUTHOLD, NY..................          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ................  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH NY.....          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        441   ..........
MONTAUK POINT, NY...............................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        255
NIAGARA RIVER WATERSHED, NY.....................  ..............  ..........        104   ..........  ..........
ONONDAGA LAKE, NY...............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, FLOODPLAIN        ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
 RECONNECTION...................................
UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, LIVINGSTON        ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
 MANOR, NY......................................
 
                     NEVADA
 
TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV.............................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........     10,000
 
                 NORTH CAROLINA
 
BOGUE BANKS, NC.................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        135   ..........
CURRITUCK SOUND, NC.............................          150     ..........  ..........        150   ..........
NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC...........................  ..............        200   ..........  ..........        200
NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL PORT, NC...........  ..............  ..........        104         170   ..........
SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC...........  ..............  ..........  ..........         17         170
 
                  NORTH DAKOTA
 
MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS, MO......  ..............  ..........  ..........      5,500   ..........
RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD AND              150     ..........  ..........      3,050   ..........
 MANITOBA,......................................
 
                      OHIO
 
HOCKING RIVER BASIN, MONDAY CREEK, OH...........  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        437
MAHONING RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH.......  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        640
WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI...........  ..............  ..........  ..........        340   ..........
 
                    OKLAHOMA
 
GRAND [NEOSHO] RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, MO, KS  ..............  ..........  ..........        162   ..........
OOLOGAH LAKE WATERSHED, KS AND OK...............  ..............  ..........  ..........        135   ..........
SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK.....  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
 
                     OREGON
 
AMAZON CREEK, OR................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        320   ..........
WALLA WALLA RIVER WATERSHED, OR & WA............          203     ..........  ..........        203   ..........
WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OR.....  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR.....  ..............        240   ..........  ..........        240
 
                  PENNSYLVANIA
 
BLOOMSBURG, PA..................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
DELAWARE RIVER BASIN, PINE KNOT, PA.............  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA,  ..............  ..........         81          85   ..........
 DE &...........................................
SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, WISSAHICKON, PA.........  ..............  ..........  ..........        214   ..........
UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION STUDY, PA.................  ..............  ..........  ..........      1,700   ..........
 
                 SOUTH CAROLINA
 
EDISTO ISLAND, SC...............................          167     ..........  ..........        167   ..........
REEDY RIVER, SC.................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
 
                  SOUTH DAKOTA
 
JAMES RIVER, SD & ND............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        200   ..........
WATERTOWN AND VICINITY, SD......................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        448
 
                    TENNESSEE
 
MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN.......           50     ..........  ..........         50   ..........
 
                      TEXAS
 
ABILENE, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN--ELM CREEK).....  ..............  ..........  ..........        190   ..........
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL,  TX..          526     ..........  ..........        526   ..........
DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX..  ..............  ..........  ..........      2,125   ..........
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX.............................          675     ..........  ..........        675   ..........
GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENTS,           200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
 TX.............................................
GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX......          423     ..........  ..........        423   ..........
LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX..................          425     ..........  ..........        425   ..........
NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX................          250     ..........  ..........        250   ..........
RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX............................          304     ..........  ..........        304   ..........
SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX................          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX.......  ..............  ..........  ..........        143   ..........
 
                     VERMONT
 
MONTPELIER, VT..................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        239   ..........
 
                    VIRGINIA
 
CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        130   ..........
CHOWAN RIVER BASIN, VA..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        215   ..........
DISMAL SWAMP AND DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA.........  ..............  ..........  ..........         78   ..........
FOUR MILE RUN, VA...............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        100   ..........
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA...............  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (SECTION          300     ..........  ..........        300   ..........
 216)...........................................
LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VA.......................          112     ..........  ..........        112   ..........
NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA.....................  ..............  ..........  ..........         90   ..........
UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA (PHASE II).........  ..............  ..........  ..........        170   ..........
VICINITY OF WILLOUGHBY SPIT, VA.................  ..............  ..........  ..........        243   ..........
 
                   WASHINGTON
 
CENTRALIA, WA...................................  ..............  ..........  ..........      1,000   ..........
CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA........................  ..............  ..........  ..........      1,000   ..........
ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, WA.........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        255   ..........
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA &          300     ..........  ..........        300   ..........
 OR.............................................
PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT                      400     ..........  ..........        400   ..........
 RESTORATION, WA................................
PUYALLUP RIVER, WA..............................          250     ..........  ..........        250   ..........
SKAGIT RIVER, WA................................  ..............  ..........  ..........        550   ..........
SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA.......................  ..............  ..........  ..........        300   ..........
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA...  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........        130
 
                  WEST VIRGINIA
 
CHERRY RIVER BASIN, WV..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........        600   ..........
OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY,     ..............  ..........  ..........      2,000   ..........
 OH, PA.........................................
UPPER GUYANDOTTE, WV............................  ..............  ..........  ..........        300   ..........
WELLS LOCK AND DAM, LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER, WV      ..............  ..........  ..........         40   ..........
 (LITTLE K).....................................
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL FOR PROJECTS.....................       44,468         6,115         514      85,028      32,439
 
                NATIONAL PROGRAMS
 
COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES........  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
ACCESS TO WATER DATA (TECH ASSIST)..............          750     ..........  ..........        750   ..........
COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS......          100     ..........  ..........        100   ..........
OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS.....................        4,330     ..........  ..........      4,730   ..........
LAKE TAHOE......................................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (500)  ..........
PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES:                          7,000     ..........  ..........      8,051   ..........
    ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, AZ...         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CA.....................         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    CITY OF PALMDALE, CA........................          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CA......................         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    SAN BERNADINO COUNTY, CA....................         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    SAN MANUEL BAND OF INDIANS, CA..............          (66)    ..........  ..........        (66)  ..........
    SOBOBA BAND OF INDIANS, CA..................          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    WEST CANAL/WILLOW BROOK FLOOD MANAGEMENT STU          (20)    ..........  ..........        (20)  ..........
    DELAWARE ESTUARY SALINITY MONITORING STUDY,.  ..............  ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    SOUTH BETHANY TIDAL PUMP SYSTEM STUDY, DE...         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    EFFINGHAM COUNTY STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN          (60)    ..........  ..........        (60)  ..........
    NORTHWEST GA WATERSHEAD, GA.................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    HAWAII DOT GIS, HI..........................  ..............  ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    HAWAII WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, HI.......  ..............  ..........  ..........       (270)  ..........
    RAINFALL ATLAS OF HAWAII, STATE OF HAWAII     ..............  ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
     AN.........................................
    WAIMANALO WASTEWATER EFFLUENT REUSE PLAN, ST  ..............  ..........  ..........        (67)  ..........
    STATE OF HAWAII GENERAL FLOOD CONTROL PLAN U  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,000)  ..........
    BOYER RIVER, MISSOURI VALLEY, IA............  ..............  ..........  ..........        (36)  ..........
    NISHNABOTNA WATERSHED, IA...................         (341)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    WILLOW CREEK, IA............................          (45)    ..........  ..........        (45)  ..........
    BIG WOOD RIVER--BELVUE......................  ..............  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
    IDAHO, ID...................................          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    WEISER R. FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS, ID...........          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    LAKE COUNTY WETLANDS RESTORATION, IL........  ..............  ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    KS RIVER WATER RESOURCES, KS................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    PAS TRIBAL SUPPORT, KS......................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    BARDSTOWN, KY...............................          (88)    ..........  ..........        (88)  ..........
    LOUISVILLE PARKS, KY........................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    CHITIMACHA WATERSHED PLANNING, LA...........         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    NEW ORLEANS RIVER PARK, LA..................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    PORT OF LAKE CHARLES MASTER PLAN, LA........         (125)    ..........  ..........       (125)  ..........
    RIVER PARISHES PEDESTRIAN PLAN, LA..........         (125)    ..........  ..........       (125)  ..........
    ST. JOHNS PARISH MONUMENTATION, LA..........         (125)    ..........  ..........       (125)  ..........
    TUNICA RECREATION TRAIL, TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE         (125)    ..........  ..........       (125)  ..........
    PENN'S HILL DRAINAGE STUDY, QUINCY, MA......          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    TOWN LINE BROOK DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT, MALDEN,          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MD.......................          (20)    ..........  ..........        (20)  ..........
    MACOMB COUNTY DRAIN MAPPING & DATABASE, MI..         (200)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    STREAM CHARACTERISTICS STUDY FOR SAGANING RI          (80)    ..........  ..........        (80)  ..........
    CHOCTAW COUNTY RESERVOIR, MS................  ..............  ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    CAPE GIRARDEAU GROUNDWATER STUDY, MO........          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    CITY OF MARQUAND FLOOD STUDY, MO............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    PAS MO MDNR NORTHWEST MISSOURI, MO..........          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    PERUQUE CREEK WATER QUALITY, MO.............          (30)    ..........  ..........        (30)  ..........
    ST. CHARLES RIVERFRONT MICRO-MODEL, MO......          (90)    ..........  ..........        (90)  ..........
    HENRY R. DAM, BURKE, CO., NC................          (48)    ..........  ..........        (48)  ..........
    GOOCHS MILLL, GRNADVILLE, CO., NC...........          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    FONTENELLE/BELLEVUE, NE.....................          (40)    ..........  ..........        (40)  ..........
    SPICKET RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH...........          (55)    ..........  ..........        (55)  ..........
    GRANTS DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT PLAN, NM.........          (56)    ..........  ..........        (56)  ..........
    TARRYTOWN, NY...............................          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    TOWN OF CLARENCE, NY........................          (80)    ..........  ..........        (80)  ..........
    WAPPINGERS FALLS, NY........................          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    HARPERSFIELD DAM, GRAND RIVER, OH...........          (88)    ..........  ..........        (88)  ..........
    STATE OF OHIO GIS, OH.......................          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    OKLAHOMA COMP WATER PLAN, OK................  ..............  ..........  ..........       (500)  ..........
    PAS BOONE NUTE SLOUGH, OR...................          (27)    ..........  ..........        (27)  ..........
    PAS CITY OF MEDFORD FLOODPLAIN, OR..........          (60)    ..........  ..........        (60)  ..........
    PAS NEHALEM RIVER ODOT FLOOD MAPPING,  OR...         (200)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    PAS PORTLAND BALANCED CUT AND FILL STUDY, OR          (35)    ..........  ..........        (35)  ..........
    PAS TOUTLE RIVER RADIO TRACKING, OR.........          (30)    ..........  ..........        (30)  ..........
    ALLEGHENY CO AQUATIC ASSESSMENT STUDY, PA...          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    NORTHERN ALLEGHENY CO STORMWATER MANGT STUDY          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD INUNDATION MAPPING, PA...         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SW PA SPILL RESPONSE STUDY, PA..............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    USS YORKTOWN, SC............................          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    KINGSPORT RIVERFRONT, TN....................          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    TN DEPT OF ENV AND CONSERV PILOT STUDY--WTR.         (200)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    CHARLOTTESVILLE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT, VA          (40)    ..........  ..........        (40)  ..........
    JAMES CITY SURRY NON-STRUCTURAL, VA.........          (35)    ..........  ..........        (35)  ..........
    STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR COASTAL COMM  ..............  ..........  ..........       (220)  ..........
    VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,  VA..         (114)    ..........  ..........       (114)  ..........
    WILLIAMSBURG STORMWATER MANAGEMENT,  VA.....          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    CLOVER ISLAND--PORT OF KENEWICK, WA.........          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    ELWHA RIVER, WA.............................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    HALF MOON LAKE ALUM DOSING STUDY, WI........          (30)    ..........  ..........        (30)  ..........
    INTERNAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING ASSESSMENT STUDY          (31)    ..........  ..........        (31)  ..........
    ONEIDA NATION FLOODPLAIN DELINEATION, WI....         (250)    ..........  ..........       (250)  ..........
    CITY OF RAVENWOOD, WV.......................          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    PUTNAM COUNTY DRAINAGE, WV..................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
 
       COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA
 
AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT TRI-CADD..          350     ..........  ..........        350   ..........
COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION...................        1,400     ..........  ..........      6,000   ..........
    COASTAL DATA INFORMATION PROGRAM............  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,000)  ..........
    PACIFIC ISLAND LAND OCEAN TYPHOON EXPERIMENT  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,000)  ..........
    SURGE AND WAVE ISLAND MODELING STUDIES, HI..  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,250)  ..........
    ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES..................           75     ..........  ..........         75   ..........
FLOOD DAMAGE DATA...............................          220     ..........  ..........        220   ..........
FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES.................        8,000     ..........  ..........     13,200   ..........
    MOBILE DISTRICT HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    SPECIAL STUDY--CROWDABOUT CREEK, AL.........          (81)    ..........  ..........        (81)  ..........
    SS--SFHE MONTGOMERY AL, LITTLE SANDY CREEK,.          (40)    ..........  ..........        (40)  ..........
    SS--BEAVER/CLEAR CREEKS, CAMP VERDE, AZ.....         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--COCHISE COUNTY, AZ......................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--GILA RIVER/DUNCAN, AZ...................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--HOPI TRIBE FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, AZ.......         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--TOHONO O'ODHAM GU VO WASH, AZ...........          (95)    ..........  ..........        (95)  ..........
    SS--TOHONO O'ODHAM NATIONWIDE FLOOD-  PLAIN.         (250)    ..........  ..........       (250)  ..........
    HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CA TSUNAMI PAS, CA.........         (500)    ..........  ..........       (500)  ..........
    RAYMOND BASIN CONJUNCTIVE USE DROUGHT STUDY.         (125)    ..........  ..........       (125)  ..........
    SAN MATEO COUNTY, CA LEVEE SURVEY, CA.......          (30)    ..........  ..........        (30)  ..........
    SS--ANAVERDE CREEK FLOODPLAIN DELINEATION,..         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--SOBOBA BAND OF INDIANS FLOOD MAPPING,...         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    CARBON COUNTY, CO...........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    DURANGO, LAPLATA COUNTY, CO.................          (60)    ..........  ..........        (60)  ..........
    GREEN RIVER CITY, CO........................          (80)    ..........  ..........        (80)  ..........
    LA PLATA COUNTY, CO.........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    MESA COUNTY, CO.............................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    FLOOD/HURRICANE EVACUATION, DC..............         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    WHITE CLAY CREEK, NEW CASTLE, DE............  ..............  ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    SAVANNAH DISTRICT HURRICANE EVAC STUDIES, G.          (40)    ..........  ..........        (40)  ..........
    SS--GA CLARKSVILLE STREAM SURVEY, GA........          (20)    ..........  ..........        (20)  ..........
    ANAHOLA FLOOD HAZARD STUDY, KAUAI, HI.......         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    HAWAII TECHNICAL SERVICES, HI...............  ..............  ..........  ..........        (40)  ..........
    HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES, HAWAII........
                                                  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,000)  ..........
    KALUANUI STREAM FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATION,.         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    NUUANU RESERVOIR FLOOD STUDY, HI............         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    WAIMEA RIVER ZONE A FLOOD DETERMINATION, KA.         (185)    ..........  ..........       (185)  ..........
    WAIOHULI GULCH FLOOD HAZARD STUDY, KULA, MA.         (200)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    IOWA MULTI-STATE DAM SAFETY ANALYSES, IA....  ..............  ..........  ..........        (37)  ..........
    LITTLE SIOUX WATERSHED, IA..................  ..............  ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    MON-MAQ DAM REMOVAL STUDY & LOCAL FLOODPLAIN  ..............  ..........  ..........       (120)  ..........
    SS--EVALUATION OF FLOODING SCENARIOS, IA....         (120)    ..........  ..........       (120)  ..........
    SS--REGULATED FREQUENCY CURVES..............         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    SS BOULDER CREEK DONNELLY, ID...............          (35)    ..........  ..........        (35)  ..........
    SS WARM SPRINGS CREEK VIC OF CHALLIS, ID....          (38)    ..........  ..........        (38)  ..........
    SS WARM SPRINGS CREEK VIC OF KETCHUM,  ID...          (45)    ..........  ..........        (45)  ..........
    SS--IL LEVEES EVALUATION SUPPORT, IL........         (250)    ..........  ..........       (250)  ..........
    WILL COUNTY SURVEY, IL......................         (400)    ..........  ..........       (400)  ..........
    NODAWAY COUNTY BRIDGE STUDY, KS.............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    CHITIMACHA TRIBE OF LA, [GIS]...............  ..............  ..........  ..........       (250)  ..........
    CITY OF ALEXANDRIA, LA [GIS]................  ..............  ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA [GIS]...........  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,200)  ..........
    HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDY, SE LOUISIANA UP.         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    LIVINGSTON PARISH, LA [GIS].................  ..............  ..........  ..........       (350)  ..........
    SS--CITY OF GRETNA GIS, LA..................         (200)    ..........  ..........       (200)  ..........
    SS--EAST BATON ROUGE GIS, LA................         (450)    ..........  ..........       (450)  ..........
    SS--LIVINGSTON PARISH GIS, LA...............         (650)    ..........  ..........       (650)  ..........
    CLAY PIT BROOK FLOODING STUDY, MA...........          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    HOOSIC RIVER FLOOD MITIGATION STUDY, CHESHI.          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    SAW MILL BROOK FLOOD STUDY, NEWTON, MA......          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    SPEAR BROOK FLOOD CONTROL STUDY, WILBRAHAM,.          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES, MD............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    AUTRAIN RIVER SCOUR STUDY, MI...............          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT TRAINING, MO..........          (30)    ..........  ..........        (30)  ..........
    SS--LINCOLN COUNTY, MO......................         (150)    ..........  ..........       (150)  ..........
    JORDAN, MT..................................          (80)    ..........  ..........        (80)  ..........
    NASHUA FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT, MT............          (55)    ..........  ..........        (55)  ..........
    NORTH CAROLINA HES RESTUDY, NC..............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    BEAVER & BLACK BROOKS FLOODING STUDY, LOND..          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    FLOODPLAIN MAPS FOR MANALAPAN AND MATCHAPON.  ..............  ..........  ..........       (500)  ..........
    SS--MANALAPAN BROOK, NJ.....................         (110)    ..........  ..........       (110)  ..........
    ELBOW CREEK, NY.............................          (60)    ..........  ..........        (60)  ..........
    FORECAST STUDIES, NY........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDIES, NY............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    ONONDAGA CREEK, SYRACUSE, NY................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SPECIAL STUDY--FINGER LAKES, NY.............         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    NEW JERSEY--PORT AUTHORITY STUDY UPDATE, N..         (180)    ..........  ..........       (180)  ..........
    SPECIAL STUDY--CRAWFORD COUNTY, OH..........         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS CITY OF JOHN DAY, OR.....................         (160)    ..........  ..........       (160)  ..........
    SS CROOKED RIVER FIS (CITY OF PRINEVILLE),..         (140)    ..........  ..........       (140)  ..........
    SS JUNIPER CANYON FIS (CITY OF PRINEVILLE),.         (137)    ..........  ..........       (137)  ..........
    SS WAHKIAKUM CO FIS #1 (GRAY'S RIVER), OR...         (155)    ..........  ..........       (155)  ..........
    SS WAHKIAKUM CO FIS #2 (ELOCHOMAN RIVER), OR         (130)    ..........  ..........       (130)  ..........
    SS WAHKIAKUM CO FIS #3 (WILSON CREEK),  OR..         (128)    ..........  ..........       (128)  ..........
    SS WAHKIAKUM CO FIS #4 (SKAMOKAWA CREEK), OR         (128)    ..........  ..........       (128)  ..........
    PHILADELPHIA HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDY, P..          (10)    ..........  ..........        (10)  ..........
    SOUTHEASTERN, PA............................         (250)    ..........  ..........       (250)  ..........
    PUERTO RICO HES BEHAVIOR STUDY, PR..........         (112)    ..........  ..........       (112)  ..........
    SOUTH CAROLINA HES RESTUDY, SC..............          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    SS--CITY OF GALLATIN, TN....................          (85)    ..........  ..........        (85)  ..........
    UNINCORPARATED WEBER CO., UT................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    CITY OF GALAX, VA...........................         (100)    ..........  ..........       (100)  ..........
    SS--TOWN OF ABINGDON, VA....................          (56)    ..........  ..........        (56)  ..........
    DAM BREAK STUDIES, VT.......................          (31)    ..........  ..........        (31)  ..........
    EAST LONG POND DAM, VT......................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    LAKE HARDWICK DAM, VT.......................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    MACKVILLE POND DAM, VT......................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    NICHOLS POND DAM, VT........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    RUGG BROOKS, ST. ALBANS CITY, VT............          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    SS--STEVENS BROOKS, TOWN OF ST. ALBANS, VT..          (75)    ..........  ..........        (75)  ..........
    SS--VERMONT, VT.............................          (25)    ..........  ..........        (25)  ..........
    WARREN LAKE DAM, VT.........................          (50)    ..........  ..........        (50)  ..........
    SS LIND COULEE, VICINITY OF LIND, WA........          (35)    ..........  ..........        (35)  ..........
    SS MCCOY CREEK, VICINITY OF OAKESDALE,  WA..          (67)    ..........  ..........        (67)  ..........
    BEAR RIVER STUDY--UINTA CO., WY.............         (140)    ..........  ..........       (140)  ..........
HYDROLOGIC STUDIES..............................          250     ..........  ..........        250   ..........
INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES.....................          200     ..........  ..........        200   ..........
PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE)          225     ..........  ..........        225   ..........
REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM            150     ..........  ..........        150   ..........
 SUPPORT........................................
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS....           50     ..........  ..........         50   ..........
STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY)..........          600     ..........  ..........        600   ..........
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS..........................          350     ..........  ..........        350   ..........
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT........................       16,892     ..........  ..........     25,392   ..........
    SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION, MD............  ..............  ..........  ..........     (1,000)  ..........
    URBAN FLOOD DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, DRI, NV..  ..............  ..........  ..........     (2,500)  ..........
 
                   OTHER--MISC
 
FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT...........................        2,000     ..........  ..........      2,000   ..........
INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW.........................        1,000     ..........  ..........      1,000   ..........
NATIONAL SHORELINE..............................          375     ..........  ..........        750   ..........
PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM........................        2,100     ..........  ..........      2,100   ..........
TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM......................        1,000     ..........  ..........      1,000   ..........
WATER RESOURCES PRIORITIES STUDY................        2,000     ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL PROGRAMS...............       49,417     ..........  ..........     69,223   ..........
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL.....................................       93,885         6,115         514     154,251      32,439
SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE............................  ..............  ..........  ..........    -17,224   ..........
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      GRAND TOTAL...............................      100,000     ..........  ..........    170,000   ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Homer Harbor Modification, Alaska.--The Committee 
recommends $340,000 to continue feasibility studies. A new 
harbor basin would not only reduce existing overcapacity and 
congestion, but would also enable Port and Harbor of Homer to 
accommodate the growth in the use of Homer by the commercial 
fleet.
    Valdez Harbor Expansion, Alaska.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $385,000 for preconstruction 
engineering and design studies. Rafting during the commercial 
fishing season has been reported up to eight boats deep on a 
regular basis. The problem is highly seasonal, requiring a 
large need for transient space primarily during the summer 
months.
    Central Valley Integrated Flood Management Study, 
California.--The Committee recommends $425,000 for this 
feasibility study. The State of California has requested that 
the Corps update the original Sacramento-San Joaquin Basin 
Comprehensive Study. These studies will be muted to prepare a 
comprehensive system approach to flood management for the 
Central Valley.
    Riverside County SAMP and San Diego County SAMP, 
California.--The Committee recommendation includes funding to 
complete these Special Area Management Plans. The SAMPs will 
result in a streamlined section 404 process, which will 
generate general and individual permits.
    West Sacramento, California.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $950,000 to continue the general re-evaluation of the 
levee system.
    Red Clay Creek, Christina River Watershed, Delaware.--The 
Committee recommends $264,000 for the final screening of 
alternatives, selection of recommended plan of improvement, 
preparation of draft EA, and completion of draft feasibility 
report, $36,000 is recommended to initiate preconstruction 
engineering and design.
    Miami Harbor Channel, Florida.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $510,000 to continue studies of the 
harbor deepening.
    Walton County, Florida.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $229,000 to initiate preconstruction engineering and 
design activities. This project is a test bed for the Institute 
of Water Resources Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction model.
    Ocmulgee River Basin Watershed Management, Georgia.--The 
Committee has recommended no funding for this administration 
new study start.
    Savannah Harbor Expansion, Georgia.--The Committee 
recommendation has included funds for this project under the 
Construction General Heading. The Construction Phase was 
initiated in the fiscal year 2009 Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations Act.
    Prairie Dupont Levee, Illinois.--The Committee recommends 
$209,000 for the feasibility study to assess the potential for 
reconstruction of deteriorated features such as gates and 
culverts. The recommendation also includes $255,000 for the 
deficiency correction preconstruction engineering and design 
studies to investigate solutions such as rehabilitation/
replacement of existing relief wells and the construction of 
additional relief wells.
    Upper Mississippi River--Illinois Waterway Navigation 
System, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin.--
The Committee recommendation includes $9,000,000 for 
continuation of preconstruction engineering and design studies. 
The Committee recognizes the need to modernize this more than 
60-year-old navigation system and has provided continued 
funding for both structural design and environmental 
restoration work.
    Green River Watershed, Kentucky.--The Committee has 
recommended no funding for this new study star proposed by the 
administration.
    Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration, Louisiana.--
The Committee recommends $23,000,000 for these important 
studies. The Committee notes that the Science activities are 
included within the overall line item rather than being 
budgeted separately.
    The reduction made to these studies should not be viewed as 
any diminution of support for these efforts, rather it is an 
attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers nationwide 
program among the various missions of the Corps.
    Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Project 
[LACPR], Louisiana.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$3,000,000 to refine and integrate LACPR findings and outputs 
regarding alternative trade-offs, and coastal landscape 
contributions to risk management, with ongoing Hurricane Storm 
Damage Reduction projects and Coastal Protection and 
Restoration projects and to delineate comprehensive plans for 
higher levels of storm surge risk reduction.
    Chesapeake Bay, Susquehanna Reservoir Sediment Management, 
Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia.--It has been estimated 
that 280 million tons of sediment originating from the 
Susquehanna River watershed are trapped behind the four 
hydroelectric dams located on the Lower Susquehanna River 
between Havre de Grace, Maryland, and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 
Three of the four dams Holtwood, Safe Harbor, and York Haven 
have reached steady state. It is estimated that the Conowingo 
Dam will cease to have trapping capacity in 15 to 20 years. 
Once this last reservoir reaches steady state, the sediment 
input to the bay may increase dramatically. The Committee 
recommendation includes $143,000 to complete the reconnaissance 
study to examine the impact of the Lower Susquehanna River Dams 
on sediment transport into the Bay and $57,000 to initiate 
feasibility studies.
    St. Louis Watershed, Missouri.--The Committee has 
recommended no funding for this new study star proposed by the 
administration.
    Upper Delaware River Watershed, Livingston Manor, New 
York.--The Committee recommendation includes $170,000 to 
continue flood control studies along the Delaware River.
    Red River of the North Basin, Minnesota, North Dakota, 
South Dakota and Manitoba.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $3,050,000 to continue various flood damage reduction 
studies in North Dakota and Minnesota. In the Fargo, North 
Dakota/Moorhead, Minnesota area alone the Red River has 
exceeded flood stage in 51 of the past 107 years and every year 
from 1993 through 2009. Studies are ongoing under this 
authority in the Fargo-Moorhead Metro area, Pembina, North 
Dakota, the Fargo upstream area and additional studies of the 
Sheyenne River will be undertaken to evaluate solutions to the 
2009 spring flood.
    James River, South Dakota and North Dakota.--The Committee 
has recommended $200,000 to evaluate solutions to flooding 
conditions in the James River Basin due to the spring 2009 
flood.
    Gathright Dam and Lake Moomaw, Virginia.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $255,000 to initiate feasibility 
studies to address several problems articulated by the Virginia 
Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Game 
and Inland Fisheries including benthic impairments, low 
dissolved oxygen concentrations, elevated nutrient levels, and 
cold and warm water fisheries in the James River below the 
lake.
    Vicinity of Willoughby Spit, Norfolk, Virginia.--The 
Committee recommends $243,000 to complete the General 
Reevaluation Study.
    Centralia, Chehalis River, Lewis County, Washington.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to continue 
preconstruction engineering and design efforts to reduce the 
risk of flooding to the Interstate 5 corridor. Significant 
flooding in 2007 and 2009 resulted in heavy damages to urban 
and rural areas of the Chehalis Basin and closed I-5 for a 
total of 6 days.
    Chehalis River Basin, Washington.--The Committee recommends 
$1,000,000 for plan formulation for a Feasibility decision 
document, conduct a Feasibility Scoping meeting and initiate 
the alternatives analysis for ecosystem and flood risk 
management studies. It is the Committee's understanding that 
Grays Harbor has recently indicated they would like to pursue 
increasing the scope of the study to include flood risk 
management.
    Planning Assistance to States.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $8,051,000 for this nationwide cost-
shared program. The Committee recognizes that there are 
hundreds of these studies on-going at any given time. The 
Committee has provided a listing in the table of projects that 
should be given priority if cost-sharing funds are available 
from the local sponsors. However, the Corps should view these 
amounts as guides and reprogram funds as appropriate to move 
these studies forward as rapidly as possible.
    Coastal Field Data Collection.--The Committee has 
recommended $6,000,000 for this nationwide program. In addition 
to budgeted funds of $1,400,000, $4,600,000 has been 
recommended to continue the Coastal Data Information Program; 
Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies, Hawaii; and the Pacific 
Island Land Ocean Typhoon Experiment Program. The Wave Data 
Study should also be continued within this overall funding 
amount. The Committee has included a portion of the climate 
change funding from the O&M; account to this line item to ensure 
that this data collection effort continues. As a majority of 
our population lives within 50 miles of the coast it is prudent 
to invest in these data collection activities to be able to 
evaluate how sea level rise will affect all of our coastal 
areas. Recent studies have shown, for instance, that sea level 
rise will affect the Atlantic Coast unequally with the 
Chesapeake Bay area being impacted more than the northern and 
southern portions of the Atlantic Coast. However, the Atlantic 
and Gulf Coasts of 2100 will likely look much different than 
they do today.
    The Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States 
Report (www.globalchange.gov/usimpacts) released by the White 
House in May 2009 shows the impacts to our coastal environments 
if even a moderate sea level rise of 2-4 feet occurs over the 
next 100 years. Planning needs to be accelerated to determine 
how sea level rise will be accommodated. This may involve an 
orderly retreat from some of the lowest areas of the coast over 
a period of years. Coastal protection projects will continue to 
be vital to protecting our population, but the policy question 
that must be answered is should all of our coastal areas be 
protected and at what cost.
    Flood Plain Management Services Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $13,200,000. The Committee has provided 
a listing in the table of projects that should be given 
priority if cost sharing funds are available from the local 
sponsors. However, the Corps should view these amounts as 
guides and reprogram funds as appropriate to move these studies 
forward as rapidly as possible.
    Research and Development.--The Committee has recommended 
$25,392,000 for the Corps nationwide research and development 
programs. The Committee believes that this is an important area 
of the Corps' program that should be supported and has 
recommended $5,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
believes that some of this additional funding should be applied 
to climate change research to be conducted in concert with the 
Coastal Data Information Program. The Committee has also 
recommended $1,000,000 to continue submerged aquatic vegetation 
research in the Chesapeake Bay and $2,500,000 to continue the 
Urban Flood Demonstration Program in cooperation with the 
Desert Research Institute.
    National Shoreline Study.--The Committee recommends an 
additional $375,000 for the national Planning Center of 
Expertise for Coastal Storm Damage Reduction for continuing to 
develop a process for managing shore protection projects as 
part of a systems approach to coastal protection for the 
purpose of achieving improved project performance, increased 
cost effectiveness, and enhanced benefits.
    Water Resources Priorities Study.--No funds are provided 
for this new study start proposed by the administration.

                         CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $2,141,677,000
Budget estimate, 2009\1\................................   1,718,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,924,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $4,835,000,000.

    This appropriation includes funds for construction, major 
rehabilitation and related activities for water resources 
development projects having navigation, flood and storm damage 
reduction, water supply, hydroelectric, environmental 
restoration, and other attendant benefits to the Nation. The 
construction and major rehabilitation for designated projects 
for inland and costal waterways will derive one-half of the 
funding from the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. Funds to be 
derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund will be applied 
to cover the Federal share of the Dredged Material Disposal 
Facilities Program.
    The Administration's budget request proposes funding for 
most of the construction items in the CG account. However, 
there were a few oversights that the Committee found within the 
O&M; account and have chosen to fund those items under CG. The 
budget request for these items is displayed in the O&M; account 
as requested by the Administration. These items are listed 
below.
    When accounting for these items in the traditional 
accounts, the President's CG budget request is actually 
$1,765,067,000 rather than $1,718,000,000 as shown above. The 
projects moved from the O&M; request include:

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Project Name                            Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assategue, MD.........................................             1,000
Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape May Point, NJ............               400
Cape May Inlet to Lower Township, NJ..................               200
Delaware Bay Coastline, Roosevelt Inlet to Lewes                     350
 Beach, DE............................................
Section 111 Program...................................             9,043
Poplar Island, MD.....................................             8,200
Dredged Material Disposal Facilities..................             5,199
Indiana Harbor (Confined Disposal Facility), IN.......            13,500
Section 204/145.......................................             9,175
                                                       -----------------
      TOTAL, Projects Migrating from Construction to              47,067
       O&M............................................;
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The projects that are included in the line item above for 
the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities are listed in the CG 
table.
    Due to constrained funding, the Committee reduced the 
requested amounts for some administration projects. This should 
not be perceived as a lack of support for any of these 
projects, rather it is an attempt by the Committee to balance 
out the program across the Nation and fund most of the projects 
or studies that were funded in fiscal year 2009 but were not 
addressed by the administration proposal.
    Even with a $280,000,000 increase to the Corps' accounts, 
the Committee is unable to address all of the needs. The CG 
account is down by $80,500,000 from the fiscal year 2009 Senate 
proposal. By the Committee's estimate, less than 60 percent of 
the needed funding is available for this account. Construction 
schedules will slip due to this constrained funding. This will 
result in deferred benefits to the national economy. The 
Committee does not believe that there is any way to prioritize 
the projects to alleviate this problem without serious 
unintended consequences. Adequate resources have been denied 
for too long. Only providing adequate resources for these 
national investments will resolve this situation.
    The Committee deleted the new construction starts requested 
by the Administration as sufficient funding does not exist in 
the current budget nor is there reasonable assurance that 
sufficient funds will be available in the future to accommodate 
these new items as well as ongoing work.
    The appropriation provides funds for the Continuing 
Authorities Program (projects which do not require specific 
authorizing legislation), which includes projects for flood 
control (section 205), emergency streambank and shoreline 
protection (section 14), beach erosion control (section 103), 
mitigation of shore damages (section 111), navigation projects 
(section 107), snagging and clearing (section 208), aquatic 
ecosystem restoration (section 206), beneficial uses of dredged 
material (section 204), and project modifications for 
improvement of the environment (section 1135).
    The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 
shown on the following table:

                CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
             Project title              Budget estimate   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                ALABAMA
 
TUSCALOOSA, AL........................  ...............          10,000
 
                ALASKA
 
ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK............  ...............           2,000
ST. PAUL HARBOR, AK...................           3,000            3,000
UNALASKA, AK..........................  ...............           2,000
 
               ARKANSAS
 
RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM, LA, AR &   ...............           2,000
 TX...................................
RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION,    ...............           2,000
 AR & TX..............................
 
              CALIFORNIA
 
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON                 6,700            6,700
 FEATURES), CA........................
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM            66,700           66,700
 MODIFICATIONS), C....................
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM               600              600
 RAISE), CA...........................
CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM, CA....  ...............           5,000
CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA................  ...............             500
FARMINGTON RECHARGE, CA...............  ...............           1,000
GUADALUPE RIVER, CA...................  ...............             304
HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS                      14,250           14,250
 RESTORATION, CA......................
KAWEAH RIVER, CA......................             640              640
LOS ANGELES HARBOR MAIN CHANNEL                    885              885
 DEEPENING, CA........................
MID VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION,   ...............           2,000
 CA...................................
MURRIETA CREEK, CA....................  ...............           2,000
NAPA RIVER, CA........................           5,000            1,000
NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CA.           6,750   ...............
OAKLAND HARBOR (50-FOOT PROJECT), CA..           1,000            1,000
PLACER COUNTY, CA.....................  ...............           2,000
SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA.          10,000           10,000
SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION                15,000           15,000
 PROJECT, CA..........................
SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA          ...............             500
 IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA..............
SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA................  ...............           2,500
SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA..........          52,193           52,193
SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA...           2,500            2,500
SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER (DAM SAFETY),           10,000           10,000
 CA...................................
TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA...........  ...............           3,000
UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA.............  ...............           2,000
WEST SACRAMENTO, CA...................           2,955   ...............
YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA..................  ...............           2,000
 
               DELAWARE
 
DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT       ...............             350
 INLET TO LEWES BEACH.................
DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE.........  ...............             390
DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HELOPEN TO     ...............           1,750
 FENWICK ISLAND, BE...................
DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HENLOPEN TO    ...............           2,000
 FENWICK ISLAND, R....................
 
         DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 
WASHINGTON, DC & VICINITY.............           6,790   ...............
 
                FLORIDA
 
BREVARD COUNTY, FL (MID AND SOUTH       ...............             500
 REACHES).............................
CEDAR HAMMOCK, WARES CREEK, FL........           5,565            5,565
HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE               130,000          130,000
 CONTROL).............................
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL...............  ...............             950
LEE COUNTY, FL........................  ...............           1,400
MARTIN COUNTY, FL.....................             350              350
PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FL...............  ...............             500
PINELLAS COUNTY, FL...................           6,000            6,000
SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM             214,357          163,402
 RESTORATION, FL......................
    CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL..        (163,771)        (117,004)
    EVERGLADES AND S. FLORIDA                   (1,725)          (1,725)
     ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,...........
    KISSIMMEE RIVER, FL...............         (44,673)         (44,673)
    MODIFIED WATER DELIVERIES, FL.....          (4,188)  ...............
TAMPA HARBOR, FL......................  ...............             500
 
                GEORGIA
 
ATLANTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE,   ...............           1,000
 GA...................................
RICHARD B. RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA &            1,615            1,615
 SC...................................
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA...................  ...............           1,000
 
                HAWAII
 
IAO STREAMS, HI.......................  ...............             250
HAWAII WATER MANAGEMENT, HI...........  ...............           2,000
KAHUKU, HI............................  ...............           4,360
 
                 IDAHO
 
RURAL IDAHO...........................  ...............           2,000
 
               ILLINOIS
 
ALTON TO GALE LEVEE DISTRICT, IL & MO              300              300
 (DEF CORR)...........................
CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI                6,500            6,500
 RIVER, IL (DEF CORR).................
CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL,                 5,000            5,000
 DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL................
CHICAGO SHORELINE, IL.................  ...............           3,500
DES PLAINES RIVER, IL.................           3,300            6,800
EAST ST LOUIS, IL.....................           2,000            2,000
EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, IL.......  ...............             540
MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL....          25,000           25,000
NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT,    ...............             300
 IL...................................
OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL          109,790          105,000
 & KY.................................
UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION,            20,000           18,000
 IL, IA, MN, MO &.....................
WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL..................           1,170            1,170
 
                INDIANA
 
INDIANA HARBOR CONFINED DISPOSAL        ...............          13,500
 FACILITY, IN\1\......................
LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN..............          20,000           20,000
MT. ZION MILL POND DAM, FULTON COUNTY,  ...............             575
 IN...................................
 
                 IOWA
 
DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, IA.....  ...............           2,700
DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND       ...............           4,300
 GREENBELT, IA........................
MISSOURI RIVER FISH MITIGATION, IA,             70,000           60,000
 KS, MO, MT, NE.......................
 
                KANSAS
 
TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS & MO...........           2,500            3,500
 
               KENTUCKY
 
KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE                 1,000            1,000
 RIVER, KY............................
MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY, IL (MAJOR            1,000            1,000
 REHAB)\1\............................
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY            123,000          123,000
 (SEEPAGE CONTROL)....................
 
               LOUISIANA
 
ASCENSION PARISH, LA [EI].............  ...............           1,000
COMITE RIVER, LA......................  ...............           8,000
EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA [FC]......  ...............           3,000
EAST BATON ROUGE, LA [EI].............  ...............             500
J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA......           7,000            7,000
LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA [CG]......           1,200            5,800
LIVINGSTON PARISH, LA [EI]............  ...............             500
 
               MARYLAND
 
ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD.................  ...............           1,000
ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD........  ...............           4,500
CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL            ...............           1,000
 RESTORATION AND PROTECTION...........
CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD &    ...............           2,000
 VA...................................
POPLAR ISLAND, MD.....................  ...............           8,550
 
             MASSACHUSETTS
 
MUDDY RIVER, MA.......................           4,000            5,000
 
               MICHIGAN
 
GENESEE COUNTY, MI....................  ...............             600
GEORGE W. KUHN DRAIN PROJECT, MI......  ...............             300
GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM       ...............           2,000
 RESTORATION, MI......................
NEGAUNEE, MI..........................  ...............           1,000
SAULT STE MARIE REPLACEMENT LOCK, MI..  ...............           1,000
 
               MINNESOTA
 
BRECKENRIDGE, MN......................  ...............           5,000
ROSEAU, MN............................  ...............           2,500
 
              MISSISSIPPI
 
DESOTO COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER       ...............           8,000
 SYSTEM, MS...........................
MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL               ...............          10,000
 INFRASTRUCTURE, MS...................
 
               MISSOURI
 
BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO.....  ...............             750
BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO...           5,600            5,600
CHESTERFIELD, MO......................           3,331            3,331
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO (SEEPAGE CONTROL).          40,000           40,000
KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS.................             700   ...............
MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY CITY        ...............           1,525
 LEVEE, MO............................
MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS             580              580
 (REG WORKS), MO......................
MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPI RIVERS   ...............           1,000
 ENHANCEMENT, MO......................
MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (L-385),    ...............           2,500
 MO, IA, NE, KS.......................
ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO........             566              566
SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS      ...............           4,000
 CITY, MO.............................
 
                MONTANA
 
FORT PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT........  ...............           1,869
RURAL MONTANA, MT.....................  ...............           5,000
 
               NEBRASKA
 
ANTELOPE CREEK, NE....................           5,697            5,697
 
                NEVADA
 
RURAL NEVADA [EI], NV.................  ...............          15,000
 
              NEW JERSEY
 
BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR     ...............           5,000
 INLET, NJ............................
BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR    ...............           2,000
 INLET (ABSECON IS....................
BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR    ...............              80
 INLET, BRIGANTINE....................
CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ..  ...............             200
DELAWARE RIVER MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING,  ...............          10,000
 NJ, PA, DE...........................
GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET & PECK BEACH,             6,500            6,500
 NJ...................................
GREAT EGG HARBOR TO TOWNSENDS INLET,    ...............           3,500
 NJ...................................
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ............  ...............             500
JOSEPH G. MINISH WATERFRONT, NJ.......  ...............           3,000
LOWER CAP MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT,  ...............             400
 NJ...................................
PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MGMT, NJ....  ...............           1,000
RAMAPO RIVER AT MAHWAH AND SUFFERN, NJ  ...............             200
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, NJ....  ...............           2,000
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT    ...............           2,000
 MONMOUTH, NJ.........................
RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-            7,000            7,000
 BASIN, NJ............................
SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ......  ...............           2,000
TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ.  ...............           2,000
 
              NEW MEXICO
 
ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM........  ...............             500
ALAMOGORDO, NM........................  ...............           4,200
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION,     ...............             800
 BERNALILLO TO BELE...................
RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO                 800              800
 BOSQUE DEL APACHE,...................
SOUTHWEST VALLEY ALBUQUERQUE, NM......  ...............           4,000
 
               NEW YORK
 
ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET            3,000            3,000
 TO NORTON POINT,.....................
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY           5,800            5,800
LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY.................             700              700
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY &            64,716           60,000
 NJ...................................
NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY...........  ...............           1,000
NEW YORK STATE CANAL, NY..............  ...............           1,000
ONONDAGA LAKE, NY.....................  ...............           1,000
ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NY..............  ...............           1,000
 
            NORTH CAROLINA
 
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC..........  ...............             900
CAROLINA BEACH AND VICINITY, NC.......           1,500            1,500
WEST ONSLOW BEACH AND NEW RIVER INLET,             400              400
 NC...................................
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC.................           1,800            1,800
 
             NORTH DAKOTA
 
GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND                 8,620            8,620
 (REPLACEMENT)........................
GRAND FORKS, ND--EAST GRAND FORKS, MN.  ...............           2,617
MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND........  ...............             300
NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL              ...............          15,000
 INFRASTRUCTURE, ND...................
 
                 OHIO
 
DOVER DAM, MUSKINGUM RIVER, OH (DAM             18,500           18,500
 SAFETY ASSURANCE)....................
HOLES CREEK, WEST CARROLLTON, OHIO....
                                        ...............           1,656
OHIO EI, OH...........................  ...............           1,000
 
               OKLAHOMA
 
CANTON LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY)..........          24,250           24,250
 
                OREGON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS               500              500
 SITES, OR & WA.......................
ELK CREEK LAKE, OR....................             500              500
WILLAMETTE TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR....          11,000           11,000
 
             PENNSYLVANIA
 
EMSWORTH L&D;, OHIO RIVER, PA (STATIC            25,000           25,000
 INSTABILITY CORRE....................
LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3 AND 4, MONONGAHELA           6,210            6,210
 RIVER, PA............................
PRESQUE ISLE, PA......................           1,000            1,000
WYOMING VALLEY (LEVEE RAISING), PA....  ...............           1,200
 
              PUERTO RICO
 
PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR.......          45,000           42,000
RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR..................           5,000            5,000
 
             SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD......  ...............           4,000
 
               TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL DAM (SEEPAGE CONTROL), TN.          56,000           56,000
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN.           1,000            1,000
 
                 TEXAS
 
BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX..............           7,300            5,300
CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER         ...............             500
 TRINITY RIVER, TX....................
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.......  ...............           2,000
DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY      ...............          22,000
 RIVER, TX............................
JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN,     ...............           1,500
 ARLINGTON, TX........................
RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX &  ...............           1,000
 OK...................................
SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX...  ...............           5,000
SIMS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX...............          25,700           18,000
TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX................           8,000            6,000
 
                 UTAH
 
RURAL UTAH, UT [EI]...................  ...............          20,000
 
                VERMONT
 
BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT.................  ...............             500
LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATE, VT.  ...............           1,000
 
               VIRGINIA
 
AIWW, BRIDGES AT DEEP CREEK, VA.......           1,500   ...............
JAMES RIVER DEEPWATER TURNING BASIN,    ...............           2,234
 VA...................................
JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC          16,915           16,915
 (REPLACEMENT)........................
NORFOLK HARBOR, CRANEY ISLAND, VA.....          28,500   ...............
NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS             ...............           1,000
 (DEEPENING), VA......................
RICHMOND CSO, VA......................  ...............             150
ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS            1,075            1,075
 AREA, VA.............................
 
              WASHINGTON
 
CHIEF JOSEPH GAS ABATEMENT, WA........           1,000            1,000
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, OR &            95,800           85,000
 WA...................................
DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA....           2,600            2,600
HOWARD HANSEN DAM, WA.................          13,000           13,000
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM                   1,650            1,650
 RESTORATION, WA, OR..................
LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE              1,500            1,500
 COMP, WA, OR, ID.....................
MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA...           1,500            1,500
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA..................             400              400
PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS         ...............             200
 RESTORATION, WA......................
SHOALWATER BAY SHORELINE, WA..........  ...............           5,000
 
             WEST VIRGINIA
 
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV....................          86,700           86,700
GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV............  ...............           1,500
ISLAND CREEK BASIN IN AND AROUND        ...............          21,750
 LOGAN, WV, VA........................
LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER          ...............           6,750
 CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, V..............
VIRGINIA..............................  ...............          (4,000)
WEST VIRGINIA.........................  ...............          (2,750)
LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV...........  ...............           1,955
                                       ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, FOR PROJECTS..........       1,610,020        1,815,414
 
NATIONAL PROGRAMS:
AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL.................           4,000            5,000
GUNTERSVILLE LAKE HYDRILLA/MILFOIL....  ...............            (150)
    FIFE LAKE AQUATIC WEED CONTROL, MI  ...............            (145)
    BLACK LAKE, OGDENSBURG, NY........  ...............            (100)
    SODUS BAY, NY.....................  ...............            (100)
    LAKE CHAUTAUQUA, JAMESTOWN, NY....  ...............             (50)
    LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT................  ...............            (500)
 
    CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM
 
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION           6,967           25,000
 206).................................
    UPPER YORK CREEK DAM REMOVAL, CA..  ...............  ...............
    GOOSE CREEK, CO...................  ...............  ...............
    TAMARISK ERADICATION ALONG THE      ...............  ...............
     COLORADO RIVER,..................
    MILL RIVER RESTORATION, STAMFORD,   ...............  ...............
     CT...............................
    CHATTAHOOCHEE FALL-LINE ECOSYSTEM   ...............  ...............
     RESTORATION......................
    JACKSON CREEK, GWINNETT CO, GA....  ...............  ...............
    LITTLE RIVER WATERSHED, HALL        ...............  ...............
     COUNTY, GA.......................
    PARADISE CREEK, ID................  ...............  ...............
    CHARITON RIVER AND RATHBUN LAKE     ...............  ...............
     WATERSHED, IA....................
    EMIQUON PRESERVE, IL..............  ...............  ...............
    ORLAND PARK, IL...................  ...............  ...............
    CHARITON RIVER/RATHBUN LAKE, IA...  ...............  ...............
    CLEAR CREEK AND IOWA RIVER,         ...............  ...............
     JOHNSON COUNTY, IA...............
    DUCK CREEK, DAVENPORT, IA.........  ...............  ...............
    STORM LAKE, IA....................  ...............  ...............
    VENTURA MARSH, IA.................  ...............  ...............
    WHITEBREAST CREEK WATERSHED, IA...  ...............  ...............
    BURAS MARINA, LA..................  ...............  ...............
    FALSE RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,  ...............  ...............
     POINT COUPE......................
    LAKE KILLARNEY, LOUISIANA STATE     ...............  ...............
     PENITENTIARY,....................
    ZEMURRAY PARK LAKE RESTORATION,     ...............  ...............
     TANGIPAHOA PAR...................
    MALDEN RIVER ECOSYSTEM, MA........  ...............  ...............
    MILFORD POND RESTORATION, MILFORD,  ...............  ...............
     MA...............................
    DEEP RUN/TIBER HUDSON, HOWARD       ...............  ...............
     COUNTY, MD.......................
    DOG ISLAND SHOALS, MD.............  ...............  ...............
    GREENBURY POINT, MD...............  ...............  ...............
    NORTH BEACH, MD...................  ...............  ...............
    NORTHWEST BRANCH, ANACOSTIA RIVER,  ...............  ...............
     MD...............................
    PAINT BRANCH FISH PASSAGE, MD.....  ...............  ...............
    PAINTER CREEK, MN.................  ...............  ...............
    MUSCONETCONG RIVER DAM REMOVALS,    ...............  ...............
     NJ...............................
    BLUE HOLE LAKE STATE PARK, NM.....  ...............  ...............
    JANES-WALLACE MEMORIAL DAM, SANTA   ...............  ...............
     ROSA, NM.........................
    KINGS PARK, NY....................  ...............  ...............
    MUD CREEK, GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY....  ...............  ...............
    SOUNDVIEW PARK, BRONX, NY.........  ...............  ...............
    SPRING CREEK, NY..................  ...............  ...............
    CONCORD STREAMS RESTORATION, NC...  ...............  ...............
    WESTERN CARY STREAM RESTORATION,    ...............  ...............
     CARY, NC.........................
    WILSON BAY RESTORATION,             ...............  ...............
     JACKSONVILLE, NC.................
    DRAYTON DAM, ND...................  ...............  ...............
    CAMP CREEK, ZUMWALT PRAIRIE         ...............  ...............
     PRESERVE, OR.....................
    EUGENE DELTA PONDS, OR............  ...............  ...............
    KELLOGG CREEK, OR.................  ...............  ...............
    OAKS BOTTOM, OR...................  ...............  ...............
    SPRINGFIELD MILLRACE, OR..........  ...............  ...............
    CODORUS CREEK WATERSHED             ...............  ...............
     RESTORATION, PA..................
    NARROW RIVER, RI..................  ...............  ...............
    WINNEAPAUG POND RESTORATION, RI...  ...............  ...............
    MOSES LAKE, TX....................  ...............  ...............
    RIO GRANDE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,   ...............  ...............
     LAREDO, TX.......................
    SPRING LAKE, SAN MARCOS, TX.......  ...............  ...............
    STEPHENVILLE WWTP, TX.............  ...............  ...............
    CARPENTER CREEK, WA...............  ...............  ...............
BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL     ...............          10,000
 (SECTION 204, 206, 933...............
    BLACKHAWK BOTTOMS, IA.............  ...............  ...............
    ATCHAFALAYA RIVER, SHELL ISLAND     ...............  ...............
     PASS, ST. MAR....................
    CALC RV, MI 5--14 KS, LA..........  ...............  ...............
    HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL BARRIER      ...............  ...............
     ISLAND RESTORAT..................
    CAPE COD CANAL, SANDWICH, MA......  ...............  ...............
    NEWBURY HARBOR, MA................  ...............  ...............
    NJIWW BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGE, NJ  ...............  ...............
    NJIWW, DREDGED HOLE 35, NJ........  ...............  ...............
    BUFFALO RIVER, NY.................  ...............  ...............
    MANTEO OLD HOUSE, NC..............  ...............  ...............
    MAUMEE BAY REGIONAL SEDIMENT        ...............  ...............
     MANAGEMENT, OH...................
    WYNN ROAD REGIONAL SEDIMENT         ...............  ...............
     MANAGEMENT, OH...................
    SOUTH PADRE ISLAND, TX............  ...............  ...............
EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE               1,477            7,000
 PROTECTION (SECTION..................
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)..          12,049           38,000
    INDIAN BAYOU, AR..................  ...............  ...............
    WYNNE, AR.........................  ...............  ...............
    COSGROVE CREEK, CALAVERAS COUNTY,   ...............  ...............
     CA...............................
    LAS GALLINAS CREEK/SANTA VENETIA    ...............  ...............
     LEVEE, CA........................
    PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT,    ...............  ...............
     DE...............................
    INDIAN/DRY CREEK CEDAR RAPIDS, IA.  ...............  ...............
    MAD CREEK, MUSCATINE, IA..........  ...............  ...............
    WINNEBAGO RIVER, MASON CITY, IA...  ...............  ...............
    CONCORDIA, KS.....................  ...............  ...............
    EUREKA CREEK, MANHATTAN, KS.......  ...............  ...............
    NEODESHA, KS......................  ...............  ...............
    SEDGWICK, KS......................  ...............  ...............
    HOPKINSVILLE DRY-DAM, KY..........  ...............  ...............
    NORTH RIVER, PEABODY, MA..........  ...............  ...............
    MCKINNEY BAYOU, TUNICA COUNTY, MS.  ...............  ...............
    BLACKSNAKE CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MO..  ...............  ...............
    LITTLE RIVER DIVERSION, DUTCHTOWN,  ...............  ...............
     MO...............................
    LIVINGSTON, MT....................  ...............  ...............
    PLATT RIVER, FREMONT, NE..........  ...............  ...............
    PLATT RIVER, SCHUYLER, NE.........  ...............  ...............
    HATCH, NM.........................  ...............  ...............
    ASSUNPINK CREEK, HAMILTON           ...............  ...............
     TOWNSHIP, MERCER CO..............
    JACKSON BROOK, NJ.................  ...............  ...............
    PENNSVILLE, NJ....................  ...............  ...............
    PORT JERVIS, NY...................  ...............  ...............
    BLANCHARD RIVER, OTTAWA, OH         ...............  ...............
     (OTTAWA, OH).....................
    DUCK CREEK, OH....................  ...............  ...............
    FINDLAY, OH.......................  ...............  ...............
    PHILADELPHIA SHIPYARD SEA WALL,     ...............  ...............
     PHILADELPHIA,....................
    RIO DESCLABRADO, PR...............  ...............  ...............
    RIO GUAMANI-GUAYA, PR.............  ...............  ...............
    EAST PROVIDENCE, RI...............  ...............  ...............
    BEAVER CREEK AND TRIBS, BRISTOL,    ...............  ...............
     TN...............................
    WV STATEWIDE FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM,  ...............  ...............
     WV...............................
NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)......           1,436            7,000
    SAVOONGA HARBOR, AK...............  ...............  ...............
    OYSTER POINT MARINA/PARK            ...............  ...............
     BREAKWATER, CA...................
    NAPOLEAN AVENUE CONTAINER TERMINAL  ...............  ...............
     ACCESS, NE.......................
    BASS HARBOR, ME...................  ...............  ...............
    BUCKS HARBOR, MACHIASPORT, ME.....  ...............  ...............
    RHODES POINT, SOMERSET CO, MD.....  ...............  ...............
    WOODS HOLE, GREAT HARBOR, WOODS     ...............  ...............
     HOLE, MA.........................
    MACKINAC ISLAND HARBOR BREAKWATER,  ...............  ...............
     MI...............................
    NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN, TRAVERSE     ...............  ...............
     CITY, MI.........................
    HAMPTON HARBOR, NH................  ...............  ...............
    DELAWARE RIVER, FAIRLESS TURNING    ...............  ...............
     BASIN, PA........................
    CHARLESTOWN BREACHWAY AND INLET,    ...............  ...............
     RI...............................
    POINT JUDITH HARBOR, EXPANSION      ...............  ...............
     STUDY, RI........................
    NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGIONAL        ...............  ...............
     HARBOR, TN.......................
    TANGIER ISLAND JETTY, VA..........  ...............  ...............
MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION    ...............           9,043
 111).................................
    MOBILE PASS, AL...................  ...............  ...............
    EAST PASS CHANNEL, PANAMA CITY, FL  ...............  ...............
    BRUN HARBOR/JEKYLL IMPROVEMENTS,    ...............  ...............
     GA...............................
    CAMP ELLIS, SACO, ME..............  ...............  ...............
    MANISTEE HARBOR AND RIVER CHANNEL,  ...............  ...............
     MI...............................
    MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY..............  ...............  ...............
    FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH...............  ...............  ...............
    VERMILLION HARBOR, OH.............  ...............  ...............
    WHITCOMB FLATS, WA................  ...............  ...............
PROJECT MODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE              5,736           25,000
 ENVIRONMENT (SECTI...................
    LOWER CACHE RESTORATION, AR.......  ...............  ...............
    MILLWOOD LAKE, GRASSY LAKE, AR....  ...............  ...............
    LOWER KINGMAN ISLAND, DC..........  ...............  ...............
    BRAIDED REACH, ID.................  ...............  ...............
    SHORTY'S ISLAND, ID...............  ...............  ...............
    RATHBUN LAKE HABITAT RESTORATION,   ...............  ...............
     IA...............................
    GREEN RIVER DAM MOD, KY...........  ...............  ...............
    BAYOU DESIARD, MONROE, LA.........  ...............  ...............
    HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL MILE 12--    ...............  ...............
     31.4 RESTORATION.................
    MORGANZA FORE-BAY RESTORATION, LA.  ...............  ...............
    BLOOMINGTON STATE PARK, MO........  ...............  ...............
    BLUE VALLEY WETLANDS, JACKSON       ...............  ...............
     COUNTY, MO.......................
    DUCK CREEK, STODDARD COUNTY, MO...  ...............  ...............
    LINCOLN PARK WEST, ECOSYSTEM        ...............  ...............
     RESTORATION STUD.................
    LAS CRUCES DAM ENVIRONMENTAL        ...............  ...............
     RESTORATION, DON.................
    AQUATIC HABITAT RESTORATION at      ...............  ...............
     PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA, NM..........
    NORTHPORT HARBOR, NY..............  ...............  ...............
    SMOKES CREEK, NY..................  ...............  ...............
    PRISON FARM SHORELINE HABITAT, ND.  ...............  ...............
    TAPPAN LAKE, OH...................  ...............  ...............
    LOWER COLUMBIA SLOUGH, OR.........  ...............  ...............
    WALLA WALLA RIVER, OR.............  ...............  ...............
    LAKE CHAMPLAIN LAMPREY BARRIERS,    ...............  ...............
     VT...............................
    BENNINGTON LAKE DIVERSION DAM, WA.  ...............  ...............
SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103)........             680            4,230
    BAY FARM ISLAND, CA [BAY FARM       ...............  ...............
     DIKE, CA]........................
    GOLETA BEACH, CA..................  ...............  ...............
    PISMO BEACH, CA...................  ...............  ...............
    PROSPECT BEACH, WEST HAVEN, CT....  ...............  ...............
    COASTAL AREAS, MARSHFIELD, MA.....  ...............  ...............
    SEASIDE PARK, OCEAN COUNTY, NJ....  ...............  ...............
    FORT SAN GERONIMO, PR.............  ...............  ...............
    LINCOLN PARK BEACH, WA............  ...............  ...............
SNAGGING AND CLEARING (SECTION 208)...             200              200
    CAMP BAYOU CANAL, MOREHOUSE         ...............  ...............
     PARISH, LA.......................
    SNAGGING AND CLEARING UPPER BAYOU   ...............  ...............
     BOEUF, LA........................
    AUGLAIZE RIVER, OH................  ...............  ...............
    BLACKWELL LAKE, BLACKWELL, OK.....  ...............  ...............
    SWCD FLOOD REDUCTION, OR..........  ...............  ...............
DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY                49,100           49,100
 CORRECTION PROGRAM...................
DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE STUDIES:
    ISABELLA DAM, CA..................
    MARTIS CREEK DAM, CA & NV.........  ...............  ...............
    CHERRY CREEK DAM, CO..............  ...............  ...............
    DWORSHAK DAM, ID..................  ...............  ...............
    JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA....  ...............  ...............
SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION STUDIES:
    BLAKELY MOUNTAIN DAM, AR..........  ...............  ...............
    HIDDEN DAM, CA....................  ...............  ...............
    SAN ANTONIO DAM, CA...............  ...............  ...............
    TERMINUS DAM, CA..................  ...............  ...............
    WHITTIER NARROWS DAM, CA..........  ...............  ...............
    TRINIDAD DAM, CO..................  ...............  ...............
    HOP BROOK DAM, CT.................  ...............  ...............
    MANSFIELD HOLLOW DAM, CT..........  ...............  ...............
    HERBERT HOOVER DIKE (REACH 2&3),    ...............  ...............
     FL...............................
    DWORSHAK DAM, ID..................  ...............  ...............
    LA GRANGE L&D;, IL.................  ...............  ...............
    LAKE SHELBYVILLE DAM, IL..........  ...............  ...............
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER, LOCK AND DAM     ...............  ...............
     24, IL&MO........................;
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER, LOCK AND DAM     ...............  ...............
     25, IL&MO........................;
    THOMAS J. O'BRIEN CONTROLLING       ...............  ...............
     WORKS L&D;, IL....................
    BROOKVILLE DAM, IN................  ...............  ...............
    J. EDWARD ROUSH DAM, IN...........  ...............  ...............
    PATOKA LAKE DAM, IN...............  ...............  ...............
    SALAMONIE LAKE DAM, IN............  ...............  ...............
    HARTFORD LEVEE AT JOHN REDMOND, KS  ...............  ...............
    GREEN RIVER LAKE DAM, KY..........  ...............  ...............
    MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY & OH...  ...............  ...............
    NOLIN LAKE DAM, KY................  ...............  ...............
    ROUGH RIVER LAKE, DAM, KY.........  ...............  ...............
    SALAMONIE LAKE DAM, KY............  ...............  ...............
    RUSSELL B. LONG L&D;, LA...........  ...............  ...............
    WESTVILLE LAKE DAM, MA............  ...............  ...............
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER LOCK AND DAM 1,   ...............  ...............
     MN...............................
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER LOCK AND DAM 2,   ...............  ...............
     MN...............................
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER LOCK AND DAM 3,   ...............  ...............
     MN...............................
    ORWELL RESERVOIR DAM, MN..........  ...............  ...............
    ARKABUTLA, MS.....................  ...............  ...............
    CAPE FEAR RIVER LOCK AND DAM 1, NC  ...............  ...............
    BEACH CITY DAM, OH................  ...............  ...............
    BOLIVAR DAM, OH...................  ...............  ...............
    DELAWARE DAM, OH..................  ...............  ...............
    MAGNOLIA LEVEE,(BOLIVAR DAM), OH..  ...............  ...............
    MOHAWK DAM, OH....................  ...............  ...............
    CUMBERLAND DIKE--TEXOMA, OK.......  ...............  ...............
    KEYSTONE LAKE DAM, OK.............  ...............  ...............
    ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM, OK...  ...............  ...............
    BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA..  ...............  ...............
    FOSTER DAM, OR....................  ...............  ...............
    WILLAMETTE FALLS LOCK, OR.........  ...............  ...............
    CHARLEROIS (MONOR), PA............  ...............  ...............
    CURWENSVILLE DAM, PA..............  ...............  ...............
    EAST BRANCH DAM, CLARION RIVER, PA  ...............  ...............
    HAMMOND DAM, PA...................  ...............  ...............
    MONTGOMERY LOCKS AND DAM, PA......  ...............  ...............
    J. PERCY PRIEST, TN...............  ...............  ...............
    ADDICKS DAM, BUFFALO BAYOU, TX....  ...............  ...............
    BARKER DAM (BUFFALO BAYOU,), TX...  ...............  ...............
    LEWISVILLE DAM, TX................  ...............  ...............
    PROCTOR DAM, TX...................  ...............  ...............
    STILLHOUSE-HOLLOW DAM, TX.........  ...............  ...............
    TOWN BLUFF DAM, TX................  ...............  ...............
    WHITNEY LEVEE, TX.................  ...............  ...............
    BALL MOUNTAIN DAM, VT.............  ...............  ...............
    HOWARD HANSEN DAM, WA.............  ...............  ...............
    MILL CREEK AND MILL CREEK           ...............  ...............
     DIVERSION DAM, WA................
    NEW CUMBERLAND L&D;, WV............  ...............  ...............
    CEDARS LOCK AND DAM, WI...........  ...............  ...............
    DEPERE GEN LAWS, WI...............  ...............  ...............
    LITTLE CHUTE, WI..................  ...............  ...............
    RAPIDE CROCHE LOCK AND DAM, WI....  ...............  ...............
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES    ...............           5,199
 PROGRAM [DMDF].......................
    JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL 1.........  ...............          (1,000)
    SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA 1.............  ...............            (900)
    CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN   ...............          (1,501)
     1................................
    CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC 1...........  ...............          (1,798)
EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION FUND...........          21,000           21,000
ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC              5,000            1,000
 LAW 106-457).........................
INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (BOARD                  60               60
 EXPENSES)............................
INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (COE EXP).             275              275
SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT   ...............           1,000
 AND DEMONSTRATION....................
                                       ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, FOR PROJECTS NOT               107,980          208,107
       LISTED UNDER STATES............
SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE..................  ...............        -100,426
                                       ---------------------------------
      TOTAL CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL.....       1,718,000        1,924,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa [ACT], Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-
Flint [ACF] Rivers, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.--The 
Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, 
is directed to provide an updated calculation of the critical 
yield of all Federal projects in the ACF river basin and an 
updated calculation of the critical yield of all Federal 
projects in the ACT river basin within 120 days of enactment of 
this Act.
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama.--The Committee recommends $10,000,000 
for the relocation project at Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
    Unalaska, Alaska.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for 
continuation of this navigation project.
    Ozark-Jeta Taylor, Arkansas.--The Committee has included no 
funding to complete the continuing contract for this project 
that was not funded in the budget request. It is the 
Committee's understanding that the administration has committed 
to fund this project through surplus ARRA funds.
    Red River Below Denison Dam, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma 
and Texas.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 to continue 
levee rehabilitation work in Arkansas and Louisiana to protect 
the 1.7 million-acre flood plain from crop damage; loss of 
livestock; damage to levees, railroads, highways, industries, 
and other river and urban developments.
    Red River Emergency Bank Protection, Arkansas and 
Louisiana.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for protection 
of critical infrastructure and land along the Red River below 
Index, Arkansas. The project plan provides for revetment, 
dikes, or cutoffs that can be accomplished in advance of 
developing the design for the entire project.
    Mid Valley Area Levee Reconstruction, California.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 reconstruction of 
this flood control project. The project includes levee 
reconstruction through installing landside berms with toe 
drains, ditch relocation, embankment modification, slurry cut-
off walls, and developing land for fish and wildlife 
mitigation.
    Napa River, California.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,000,000 rather than the $5,000,000 proposed in the 
budget. This amount was reduced in recognition of the nearly 
$100,000,000 this project received in the ARRA not due to any 
diminution of support for the project by the Committee.
    Napa River Salt Marsh, California.--The Committee has not 
recommended any funding for this new construction start 
proposed by the administration.
    Santa Ana River, California.--The Committee recommends 
$52,193,000 to continue construction of this flood control 
project.
    West Sacramento, California.--The Committee recommendation 
included funding for the General Reevaluation Report in the 
General Investigations Table.
    Delaware Bay Coastline, Roosevelt Inlet to Lewes Beach, 
Delaware.--The Committee has funded this item in this table. 
The budget request is shown in the O&M; table as proposed by the 
administration.
    Delaware Coast Protection, Delaware.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $390,000 to reimburse the State for the 
Federal share of the annual operation and maintenance of the 
sand bypass facilities.
    Washington, DC and Vicinity, District of Columbia.--The 
Committee recommendation has provided no funding for this new 
construction start proposed by the administration.
    Everglades and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration, 
Florida.--The Committee has chosen to display the various, 
separately authorized components of the project in the table in 
addition to a single line item as was proposed in the budget. 
The Committee believes that it is prudent to maintain 
visibility of the various project elements in the budget 
process. The Committee has deleted the two new start requests 
proposed by the administration for the Everglades these are 
Site one and Indian River Lagoon-South. The total for these new 
construction starts is $46,767,000 and the Central and Southern 
Florida line item has been reduced by this amount. This should 
not be interpreted as a reduction of support by this Committee 
for this project. Even without the new starts, the funding 
level for fiscal year 2010 is nearly $40,000,000 more than what 
was provided in fiscal year 2009. Since fiscal year 2000 this 
Committee has provided more than $1,300,000,000 in funding for 
Everglades restoration projects which is nearly twice the level 
of resources received by any other construction project in the 
same period.
    The Committee has provided no funding for the Modified 
Waters Delivery Plan ($4,188,000) as proposed in the budget. 
The Committee directed in the fiscal year 2009 Omnibus that 
this project should be funded through the Interior 
appropriations budget in future years. The Committee again 
directs the administration to include the Modified Waters 
Delivery Plan funding in the Interior budget in future budget 
submissions.
    Central and South Florida, Florida.--Within the funds 
recommended, the Corps shall continue work on the Upper St. 
Johns River project.
    Jacksonville Harbor, Florida.--The Committee has 
recommended $950,000 to continue work on the general 
reevaluation report concerning further channel deepening.
    Tampa Harbor, Florida.--$500,000 is provided to complete 
the preconstruction engineering and design of navigation 
improvements and channel deepening.
    Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Illinois.--The Committee 
has recommended $5,000,000 for construction on aquatic nuisance 
species Barriers I and II.
    Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River, Illinois and Kentucky.--
The Committee recommends $105,000,000 to continue construction 
of this project. None of the funds provided for the Olmsted 
Locks and Dam Project or any other construction funds are to be 
used to reimburse the Claims and Judgment Fund.
    Upper Mississippi River Restoration, Illinois, Iowa, 
Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin.--The Corps is directed to 
complete a plan to transition this project to the Navigation 
and Ecosystem Sustainability Program [NESP] for the Upper 
Mississippi River System [UMRS]. Funding for NESP is dependent 
on a solution to shortfalls in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund, 
therefore a transition to NESP is not anticipated in the 
immediate future. However, in order to facilitate the eventual 
transition, while maintaining the Corps ecosystem restoration 
capacity on the UMRS, the Corps is directed to limit planning 
or construction under this authority to projects that can be 
completed or readily transferred to NESP within 2 years of NESP 
receiving sufficient construction funding to support program 
transition.
    Indiana Harbor (Confined Disposal Facility), Indiana.--The 
Committee has recommended funding for this project in the CG 
account rather than in the O&M; account as proposed by the 
administration.
    Missouri Fish and Wildlife Recovery, Iowa, Kansas, 
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.--
The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for this project. Within 
the recommended funds, $18,000,000 is to be used for 
modifications to the Intake Dam to provide additional habitat 
for the pallid sturgeon.
    Turkey Creek, Kansas and Missouri.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $3,500,000 to continue construction of 
this project.
    Kentucky Lock and Dam, Tennessee River, Kentucky.--The 
Committee recommends $1,000,000 for continuation of the 
project. Funding deficits in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund 
prohibit the Committee from providing additional funds for the 
upstream lock excavation contract. The Committee recognizes 
that this is a critical path contract for the overall schedule. 
However, until the revenue stream for the Inland Waterway Trust 
Fund is enhanced, the Committee actions will be limited by 
available Trust Fund revenues.
    Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana.--The Committee has 
recommended $5,800,000 to continue efforts to provide 100-year 
flood protection for this project. Surveys show the levee grade 
is deficient by 12-18 inches.
    Assateague Island Restoration, Maryland.--The Committee has 
recommended funding for this project in the CG table as has 
been the Committee tradition. The budget request is shown in 
O&M; as proposed by the administration.
    Chesapeake Bay Environmental Program, Maryland, 
Pennsylvania and Virginia.--The Committee has recommended 
$1,000,000 for continuation of this project that is integral to 
the clean-up of the Chesapeake Bay.
    Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, Maryland and Virginia.--The 
Committee recommends $2,000,000 to continue oyster recovery 
efforts.
    Poplar Island, Maryland.--The Committee has recommended 
funding for this project in the CG table as has been the 
Committee tradition. The budget request is shown in O&M; as 
proposed by the administration.
    Kansas Citys, Missouri and Kansas.--The Committee has not 
recommended any funding for this new construction start 
proposed by the administration.
    Meramec River Basin, Valley City, Missouri.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,525,000 for additional flood risk 
management features to address problems that became apparent 
during the 2008 flood.
    Fort Peck Dam and Lake, Montana.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,869,000 for continuation of the 
disposition of Fort Peck cabins.
    Rural Nevada, Nevada.--The Committee recommendation 
provides $15,000,000 for this project. Within the funds 
provided the Corps should give consideration to projects at 
North Lemmon Valley; Spanish Springs Phased Sewering Project; 
Indian Springs Wastewater Collection and Treatment System 
Project; the MoapaValley Wastewater Collection System Project; 
the Searchlight Water System Improvements Project; Huffaker 
Hills Water Conservation; Lawton-Verdi; Boulder City; Lyon 
County; Gerlach; Incline Village; Esmeralda County; Cold 
Springs; Fallon; Goldfield; Churchill County; West Wendover; 
Yearington; Virgin Valley Water District; Lovelock; Truckee 
Meadows Water Authority; McGill-Ruth Consolidated Sewer and 
Water District; Carlin; Eldorado Valley; Ely and Carson City. 
Other communities that meet the program criteria should be 
considered as funding allows.
    Cape May Inlet to Lower Township, New Jersey.--The 
Committee has recommended funding for this project in the CG 
table as has been the Committee tradition. The budget request 
is shown in O&M; as proposed by the administration.
    Lower Cape May Meadows--Cape May Point, New Jersey.--The 
Committee has recommended funding for this project in the CG 
table as has been the Committee tradition. The budget request 
is shown in O&M; as proposed by the administration.
    Acequias Irrigation System, New Mexico.--The Committee 
recommends $500,000 to continue restoration of these historic 
irrigation distribution systems.
    Middle Rio Grande Restoration, New Mexico.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $24,016,000 to continue environmental 
restoration efforts along the Rio Grande River within 
Bernalillo County.
    North Dakota [EI], North Dakota.--The Committee has 
recommended $15,000,000 for this program. $7,900,000 is for the 
Traill Rural Water District; $3,000,000 is for the North 
Central Rural Water District; $950,000 is for the Barnes Rural 
Water District; $750,000 for the Williams Rural Water District; 
$600,000 for the Langdon Rural Water District; $425,000 for the 
North Prairie Rural Water District; and $375,000 for the 
Greater Ramsey Water District.
    New York and New Jersey Harbor, New York and New Jersey.--
The Committee recommends $60,000 for continued construction of 
this harbor project. The reduction made under this heading 
should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this 
project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of 
Engineers nationwide program among the various missions of the 
Corps.
    Ohio [EI], Ohio.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,000,000. These funds should be used for the Marietta WWTP 
and the Coalton Waterline.
    Presque Isle, Pennsylvania.--The Committee recommends 
$1,000,000 to continue this project.
    Big Sioux River, South Dakota.--The Committee recommends 
$4,000,000 to continue construction of this project. The 
Committee recognizes that, rightly or wrongly, there was an 
expectation by the project sponsors that this project was to be 
funded under the ARRA. When the project list was released, this 
project was not on the list due to the incredibly tortured 
criteria the administration utilized to decide which projects 
were funded. The Committee encourages the Corps to give 
consideration to funding this project if surplus ARRA funds 
become available.
    Central City, Fort Worth, Upper Trinity River Basin, 
Texas.--The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for the 
Central City, Fort Worth, Texas, project.
    Red River Basin Chloride Control, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas 
and Louisiana.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 to continue 
construction of the project.
    Sims Bayou, Houston, Texas.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $20,000,000 for this project. The reduction made to 
this project should not be viewed as any diminution of support 
for this project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of 
Engineers nationwide program among the various missions of the 
Corps.
    Rural Utah, [EI], Utah.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $20,000,000 to continue construction of eligible 
projects.
    Burlington Harbor, Vermont.--The Committee recommends 
$500,000 to continue work on removal of oil bollards in the 
harbor.
    Lake Champlain Watershed Initiative, Vermont.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 for continuation 
of this project.
    AIWW, Bridges at Deep Creek, Virginia.--The Committee has 
not recommended any funding for this new construction start 
proposed by the administration.
    Norfolk Harbor, Craney Island, Virginia.--The Committee has 
not recommended any funding for this new construction start 
proposed by the administration.
    Columbia River Fish Mitigation, Washington, Oregon, and 
Idaho.--The Committee recommendation includes $85,000,000 for 
this project. The reduction made to this project should not be 
viewed as any diminution of support for this project, rather an 
attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers nationwide 
program among the various missions of the Corps.
    Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and Cumberland 
River, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Virginia.--The Committee 
recommends $6,750,000 for the continuation of the project. 
Within the funds recommended, the Committee includes $4,000,000 
for the Buchanan County, Dickenson County, and Grundy, Virginia 
elements. Further, the recommendation includes $2,750,000 for 
Kermit, Lower Mingo County, McDowell County, Upper Mingo, and 
Wayne County, West Virginia.
    Aquatic Plant Control Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $5,000,000 for this program. Funds 
above the budget request are included for cost-shared programs 
for Guntersville Lake, Alabama; Fife Lake, Michigan; Black Rock 
Lake, Odensburg, New York; Sodus Bay, New York; Lake Champlain, 
Vermont; and Lake Chautauqua, Jamestown, New York.
    Section 204 and Section 111 of the Continuing Authorities 
Program.--The Committee has recommended funding for these 
programs in the CG table as has been the Committee tradition. 
The budget request is shown in O&M; as proposed by the 
administration.
    Dredged Material Disposal Facilities Program.--The 
Committee has recommended funding for this project in the CG 
table as has been the Committee tradition. The budget request 
is shown in O&M; as proposed by the administration.
    Estuary Restoration Program.--The Committee has included 
$1,000,000 for this program. Within this amount, consideration 
should be given to the Colorado Lagoon, California, Restoration 
project.
    Shore Line Erosion Control Development and Demonstration 
Program.--The Committee has recommended $1,000,000 to continue 
monitoring programs and other appropriate activities under this 
authority.

                     CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM

    When Congress authorized the initial Continuing Authorities 
in the 1940s and 1950s, they were envisioned to provide a small 
pool of money available to the Corps of Engineers to solve very 
small localized problems without being encumbered by the longer 
study and project authorization process. As more programs were 
added to the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP] they became 
increasingly popular with congressional Members and the public. 
More and more congressionally directed projects began to appear 
in the annual appropriations bills. At first these 
congressionally directed projects were added to the base 
program. As more and more of these congressionally directed 
projects came into the program it became difficult for these 
congressionally directed projects to be added to the base, and 
as such, the base program began to shrink. Congressionally 
directed projects now dominate all sections of the CAP Program. 
Congressionally directed projects have proliferated to such an 
extent that several of the sections are over-subscribed.
    The budget justifications for the CAP program do not 
provide much useful information as to how the administration 
developed its program for fiscal year 2010. There is a dollar 
value associated with each section and a listing of projects in 
priority order that corresponds to the amount. However, the 
Committee has no way of knowing whether the amount shown is 
adequate. The Corps is directed to provide more information to 
justify the amount shown on the justification sheets for fiscal 
year 2011.
    Starting in fiscal year 2008 the Committee no longer 
provided any congressional earmarks for the section 14, 
Emergency Bank Stabilization authority. Again this year, the 
Committee has not provided either the administration's earmark 
requests for this section or requests by Members for fiscal 
year 2010. By definition these are projects that are estimated 
to fail within 9-12 months. As an emergency situation the Chief 
of Engineers should have the responsibility for determining how 
these funds are expended in the most efficient and effective 
manner. Budget justifications for this section should display 
the anticipated projects and associated costs to be undertaken 
in the budget year as well as the anticipated resources 
necessary to address emergencies that arise in the budget year.
    Starting in fiscal year 2011, the Committee will no longer 
list individual projects in the CAP program in the table. The 
priority system that has been established will guide the 
execution of the projects.
    CAP projects and studies are listed in the CG table 
immediately preceding this section. This listing includes the 
priority projects listed in the President's budget request as 
well as those that were requested by Members. The Committee has 
not provided dollar amounts for the named projects in the 
report. This lack of specificity in project amounts is intended 
to give the Chief of Engineers flexibility within the various 
sections of the CAP program in order to address the backlog. 
The Committee has repeated the guidance below from the fiscal 
year 2009 statement of the managers that accompanied Public Law 
111-8 detailing how the Corps should prioritize work in the CAP 
program.
    The Corps shall give first priority to the projects listed 
in the tables in this report. For each CAP section, available 
funds over and above the amounts specified shall be allocated 
to the projects listed in the table for that section, including 
projects with specified amounts, in the following sequence of 
steps until the funds are exhausted:
  --capability-level funds for ongoing projects that have 
        executed cost sharing agreements for the applicable 
        phase;
  --capability-level funds for projects that are ready for 
        execution of new cost sharing agreements for the 
        applicable phase and for which Corps headquarters 
        authorizes execution of the agreements;
  --funds, as permitted by Corps policies, for other projects 
        previously funded for the applicable phase but not 
        ready for execution of new cost sharing agreements; and
  --funds as permitted by Corps policies, for projects not 
        previously funded for the applicable phase.
    Within the step at which available funds are exhausted for 
each CAP section, funds shall be allocated to the projects in 
that section that rank high according to the following factors: 
high overall performance based on outputs; high percent 
fiscally complete; high unobligated carry-in; and listing in 
any conference report or statement of managers from fiscal year 
2004 through fiscal year 2009. Section 14 funds shall be 
allocated to the projects that address the most significant 
risks and adverse consequences, irrespective of phase or 
previous funding history.
    The Corps shall continue the ongoing process for suspending 
and terminating inactive projects. Suspended projects shall not 
be reactivated or funded unless the sponsor reaffirms in 
writing its support for the project and establishes its 
willingness and capability to execute its project 
responsibilities.
    In order to provide a mix of studies, design, and 
construction within each CAP section, the Corps is directed to 
divide the funding generally 80/20 between the design and 
implementation and the feasibility phases within each 
authority. The Chief of Engineers shall provide a report to the 
Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment of 
this act detailing how funds will be distributed to the 
individual items in the various CAP sections for the fiscal 
year. The Chief shall also provide an annual report at the end 
of each fiscal year detailing the progress made on the backlog 
of projects. The report should include the completions and 
terminations as well as progress of ongoing work.
    The Corps is directed not to initiate any new continuing 
authorities projects in sections 205, 206, 208, or 1135 without 
explicit congressional direction. New projects may be initiated 
in the remaining sections after an assessment is made that such 
projects can be funded over time based on historical averages 
of the appropriation for that section and after prior approval 
by the Committees on Appropriations.

 FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS, ILLINOIS, 
       KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, AND TENNESSEE

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$383,823,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     248,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     340,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency funds of $375,000,000.

    This appropriation funds planning, construction, and 
operation and maintenance activities associated with water 
resource projects located in the lower Mississippi River Valley 
from Cape Girardeau, Missouri to the Gulf of Mexico.
    The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 
shown on the following table:

                    MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year     Fiscal year
              Project title                 2009 budget        2010
                                              request     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
             INVESTIGATIONS
 
ALEXANDRIA TO THE GULF, LA..............           1,000           1,000
DONALDSONVILLE TO THE GULF, LA..........             400             400
COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA                 84             350
 LAKE, MS...............................
MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MGMT                 100             100
 STUDY, TN & MS.........................
QUIVER RIVER, MS........................  ..............             160
SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR..................  ..............             300
SPRING BAYOU, LA........................  ..............             350
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA......             500           1,665
 
              CONSTRUCTION
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS,          47,721          47,721
 MO, TN.................................
GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR................  ..............          10,000
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY,             28,874          45,439
 LA, MS, MO & TN........................
ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO..............  ..............           3,700
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA..           2,664           3,000
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...................           5,834          15,000
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA............           2,250           2,250
YAZOO BASIN--BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS....  ..............           3,200
YAZOO BASIN--DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT,    ..............          23,200
 MS.....................................
YAZOO BASIN--MAIN STEM, MS..............  ..............              25
YAZOO BASIN--REFORMULATION UNIT, MS.....  ..............           1,500
YAZOO BASIN--UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS...  ..............          13,000
YAZOO BASIN--BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU.  ..............              75
YAZOO BASIN--YAZOO BACKWATER, MS........  ..............             629
 
        OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS,          67,350          67,350
 MO & TN................................
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR......             211             400
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR.......             425             425
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR....             223             223
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR....             150             175
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY,              8,011          11,708
 LA, MS, MO & TN........................
WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR...............           1,217           1,217
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL.......             191             191
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY.......             100             100
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA..           2,532           2,532
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...................          12,374          12,374
BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA.....              43              43
BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA......              54              54
BONNET CARRE, LA........................           2,415           3,500
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA.......           1,716           1,716
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, CAERNARVON, LA             358           1,800
OLD RIVER, LA...........................           9,739          10,200
LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA..             100             100
TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS,             2,485           2,485
 AR & LA................................
TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA...           3,660           3,660
GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS...................              24             500
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS.......              25              25
VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS....................              42             537
YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS.........           6,091           6,870
YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS....             154           2,400
YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS..............           5,915           7,640
YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS..............             807             807
YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS...........           6,331           7,381
YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS..............           1,733           2,800
YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS............           7,329           9,183
YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS............             778             825
YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX                  332             400
 CHAN, MS...............................
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS...             544             544
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS.............             731             731
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO.......             150             150
ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO..............           6,243           9,843
WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO.....................           5,416           5,416
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN.......              45              45
MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN.......           1,417           1,417
REMAINING ITEMS:
    MAPPING.............................           1,112           1,112
REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE......  ..............         -11,943
                                         -------------------------------
      TOTAL.............................         248,000         340,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS

    Quiver River, Mississippi.--The Committee has recommended 
$160,000 to continue studies to identify options for improving 
water quality while addressing other needs to create a 
situation where additional development could be accommodated 
without adversely impacting fish and wildlife habitat.
    Southeast Arkansas, Arkansas.--The Committee recommends 
$300,000 to continue feasibility studies of current flooding, 
ecosystem restoration and water supply problems and needs 
throughout the 1.2 million-acre watershed.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    Grand Prairie, Arkansas.--The Committee has recommended 
$10,000,000 for continued construction of the project.
    Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.--Additional 
funds above the budget request could be used for the following 
activities: to fully fund relief wells at Delta, Mississippi; 
Linda, Missouri; Vidalia-Moreville, Louisiana, Item 365-R; and 
continue design efforts.
    Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower Basin, Mississippi.--The 
Committee recognizes the need for control of bank erosion along 
the Big Sunflower River and has recommended $3,200,000 for the 
continued construction of the Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River 
Project. $2,00,000 is recommended to continue bank 
stabilization erosion repairs at selected sites in the 
Sunflower Basin.
    The Committee expects the water quality funds to be used 
for the monitoring and establishment of water quality reference 
indicators and the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads 
target loads on Yazoo Basin projects.
    Yazoo Basin, Delta Headwaters Project, Mississippi.--The 
Committee has recommended $23,200,000 to continue construction 
of this erosion protection projects in the Yazoo Basin.
    Yazoo Basin, Upper Yazoo Project, Mississippi.--The 
Committee has recommended $13,000,000 to continue construction 
of this flood control project.

                              MAINTENANCE

    Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee.--Funds provided 
above the budget request are recommended for resurfacing the 
mainline levee at various reaches to be determined throughout 
the Memphis District; levee slide repairs; provide gravel for 
levees; operation and maintenance of LMRMRIS [MV MISSISSIPPI 
IV]; and mitigation in the Vicksburg District.
    Mississippi Lakes.--The Committee has recommended 
additional funding to address the maintenance backlog at 
Arkabutla, Sardis, Enid, and Grenada Lakes in Mississippi.

                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................  $2,201,900,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   2,504,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,450,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $2,117,875,000.

    This appropriation funds operation, maintenance, and 
related activities at the water resources projects that the 
Corps operates and maintains. Work to be accomplished consists 
of dredging, repair, and operation of structures and other 
facilities, as authorized in the various River and Harbor, 
Flood Control, and Water Resources Development Acts. Related 
activities include aquatic plant control, monitoring of 
completed projects where appropriate, removal of sunken 
vessels, and the collection of domestic waterborne commerce 
statistics.
    The O&M; budget request appears to have been increased by 
$302,100,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted amount. However 
this is a little misleading. As was pointed out in the CG 
table, $47,067,000 in projects appears to have been 
inadvertently funded under O&M; rather than CG. Once these 
projects are shifted back to CG, the increase is still 
$255,033,000 when compared to the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
amount. This moderate increase is a step in the right direction 
after years of flat budgets. The Committee also acknowledges 
that the administration has returned to the tradition of 
displaying the O&M; budget on a project by project basis.
    With the $47,067,000 in CG items removed from the O&M; 
request, the effective O&M; request is $2,456,933,000 rather 
than the $2,504,000,000 presented in the budget request. A list 
of these migrated projects is displayed under the CG heading 
earlier in this report.
    Maintenance of our aging water infrastructure inventory 
gets more expensive every year, however, it is consistently 
underfunded. If this trend continues, the Corps will not be 
able to maintain expected levels of service at all of its 
projects. The Committee has maintained its tradition of 
supporting what the budget request terms as ``low use harbors 
and waterways''. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
these facilities and will continue to provide funding for them. 
The Committee is pleased that the Administration provided a 
modest increase to O&M; however, this increase needs to be a 
commitment for upcoming fiscal years to provide the resources 
necessary to deal with our aging infrastructure.

              CORPS OF ENGINEERS--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
             Project title              Budget estimate   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                ALABAMA
 
ALABAMA-COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER                  253              253
 STUDY, AL............................
ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL...............          16,785           16,785
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL          24,180           24,180
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL........           5,735            5,735
MOBILE HARBOR, AL.....................          23,996           23,996
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL.........             100              100
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE            2,100            2,500
 MITIGATION, AL &.....................
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS.          22,978           25,000
WALTER F. GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA           8,972            8,972
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL.              76               76
 
                ALASKA
 
ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK..................          18,659           18,659
CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK.................           2,816            2,816
DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK.................             885              885
HOMER HARBOR, AK......................             400              400
KODIAK HARBOR, AK.....................  ...............             240
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK.....             168              168
NOME HARBOR, AK.......................             820              820
PETERSBURG NORTH HARBOR, AK...........  ...............             500
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK.........             930              930
 
                ARIZONA
 
ALAMO LAKE, AZ........................           1,542            1,542
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ.....             199              199
PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ..................           1,320            1,320
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ...              31               31
WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ.................             300              300
 
               ARKANSAS
 
BEAVER LAKE, AR.......................           8,864            8,864
BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR.....           6,579            7,079
BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR................           1,914            1,914
BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR..................          14,234           14,484
DARDANELLE LOCK & DAM, AR.............           9,754            9,754
DEGRAY LAKE, AR.......................           6,503            7,003
DEQUEEN LAKE, AR......................           1,752            1,752
DIERKS LAKE, AR.......................           1,360            1,360
GILLHAM LAKE, AR......................           1,366            1,366
GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR.................           7,759            7,759
HELENA HARBOR, AR.....................              40               40
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR.....             673              673
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER                   40,016           40,016
 NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR................
MILLWOOD LAKE, AR.....................           5,122            5,122
NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR.........           4,505            5,005
NIMROD LAKE, AR.......................           2,289            2,289
NORFORK LAKE, AR......................           5,717            5,717
OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR....................             397              800
OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR AND LA..           9,605            9,605
OZARK-JETA TAYLOR LOCK & DAM, AR......           5,725            5,725
WHITE RIVER, AR.......................              40               40
YELLOW BEND PORT, AR..................               4              115
 
              CALIFORNIA
 
BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA..................           2,234            2,234
BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA.....           2,041            2,041
COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA.           3,829            3,829
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE &                  5,139            5,139
 CHANNEL, CA..........................
FARMINGTON DAM, CA....................             481              481
HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA..........           2,170            2,170
HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA...........           3,010            3,010
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA.....           6,702            6,702
ISABELLA LAKE, CA.....................           1,802            1,802
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA..           4,597            4,597
MARINA DEL REY, CA....................  ...............           3,000
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA.............             451              451
MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA..................             288              288
MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA..................           3,300            3,300
NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA....................           2,515            2,515
NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL,            1,898            1,898
 CA...................................
NEWPORT BAY HARBOR, CA................           1,780            1,780
OAKLAND HARBOR, CA....................           9,255            9,255
OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA..................           1,500            1,500
PINE FLAT LAKE, CA....................           3,201            3,201
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA.........           2,442            2,442
REDWOOD CITY HARBOR...................           6,745            6,745
RICHMOND HARBOR, CA...................           9,589            9,589
SACRAMENTO RIVER (30-FOOT PROJECT), CA           3,351            3,351
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES                 1,712            1,712
 (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA.................
SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT                     234              234
 CHANNEL, CA..........................
SAN FRANCISCO BAY, DELTA MODEL                   1,118            1,118
 STRUCTURE, CA........................
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA                 2,945            2,945
 (DRIFT REMOVAL)......................
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA..............           3,237            3,237
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON,             3,554            3,554
 CA...................................
SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT,            2,650            2,650
 CA...................................
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA.............           3,094            3,094
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA..............           1,690            1,690
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA...           1,915            1,915
SUCCESS LAKE, CA......................           1,989            1,989
SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA................           4,019            4,019
TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA.........           2,037            2,037
VENTURA HARBOR, CA....................           6,426            6,426
YUBA RIVER, CA........................             146              146
 
               COLORADO
 
BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO...................             395              395
CHATFIELD LAKE, CO....................           1,442            1,442
CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO.................           1,999            1,999
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO.....             773              773
JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO.............           2,554            2,554
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO...             612              612
TRINIDAD LAKE, CO.....................             960              960
 
              CONNECTICUT
 
BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT...................           1,436            1,436
COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT..............             615              615
HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT................             442              442
HOP BROOK LAKE, CT....................             917              917
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT.....             392              392
LONG ISLAND SOUND DMMP, CT............           2,000            2,000
MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT.............             861              861
MYSTIC RIVER, CT......................             250              250
NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT.............             610              610
NORWALK HARBOR, CT....................  ...............           1,000
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT.........           1,050            1,050
STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT........             434              434
THOMASTON DAM, CT.....................           1,136            1,136
WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT................             569              569
 
               DELAWARE
 
DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT                  350   ...............
 INLET TO LEWES BEACH.................
HARBOR OF REFUGE, LEWES, DE...........  ...............             200
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE R TO            28,390           28,390
 CHESAPEAKE BAY, D....................
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO              70               70
 DELAWARE BAY, D......................
MISPILLION RIVER, DE..................              30               30
MURDERKILL RIVER, DE..................              30               30
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE.........             105              105
WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE.................             320            2,320
 
         DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC.....             140              140
POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVER, DC (DRIFT             805              805
 REMOVAL).............................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC.........              30               30
WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC.................              25               25
 
                FLORIDA
 
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL..................           4,600            4,600
CENTRAL & SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL........          23,876           23,876
ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL.......              56               56
FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL.................           1,625            1,625
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL.....           1,200            1,200
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CALOOSAHATCHEE              780            2,000
 RIVER TO ANCLOTE.....................
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO             500              689
 MIAMI, FL............................
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL\1\............           7,035            6,035
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE                  9,732            9,732
 SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA................
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL...............           2,357            2,357
PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL.................           3,225            3,225
PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL................           2,055            2,055
PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL..................              67               67
PONCE DE LEON INLET, FL...............             600              600
PORT ST. JOE, FL, DMMP................  ...............             500
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL.........           1,300            1,300
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL.........           4,445            4,445
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL...              30               30
ST. LUCIE INLET, FL...................             350              350
TAMPA HARBOR, FL......................           5,620            5,620
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL.             380              380
 
                GEORGIA
 
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA....................           7,077            7,077
APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT            2,437            2,437
 RIVERS, GA, AL &.....................
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA....             265            1,000
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA..................           7,156            7,156
BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA.           8,924            8,924
CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA..............           8,318            8,318
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC................          11,999           11,999
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL               48               48
 PROJECTS, GA.........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA.....             108              108
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC........          10,316           10,316
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA.........             151              151
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM & LAKE, GA & SC.           9,209            9,209
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA\1\................          15,087           14,187
SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA......             274              574
WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL......           9,591            9,591
 
                HAWAII
 
BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI..............             201              201
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI.....             705              705
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI.........             570              570
 
                 IDAHO
 
ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID..................           1,545            1,545
DWORKSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID.......           2,875            2,875
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID.....             324              324
LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID...................           2,597            2,597
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID...             484              484
 
               ILLINOIS
 
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN\1\..           4,621            3,120
CARLYLE LAKE, IL......................           5,171            5,171
CHICAGO HARBOR, IL....................           3,889            3,889
CHICAGO RIVER, IL.....................             493              493
FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL.............             352              352
ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVR                  1,748            2,648
 PORTION).............................
ILLINOIS WATERWAY, IL & IN (MVS                 31,736           31,736
 PORTION).............................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL               65               65
 PROJECTS, IL.........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL.....           1,298            1,298
KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL........           2,148            2,148
LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL...........             683              683
LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL..................           5,454            5,454
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI              58,714           58,714
 RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BTWN MISSOURI RIVER           22,227           22,227
 AND MINNEAPOLIS......................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL.........             104              104
REND LAKE, IL.........................           5,386            5,386
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  685              685
 WATERS, IL...........................
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL...................             492              492
 
                INDIANA
 
BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN...................             862              862
BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN.............             165              165
CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN..................             892              892
CECIL M. HARDEN LAKE, IN..............           1,027            1,027
INDIANA HARBOR, CONFINED DISPOSAL               13,500   ...............
 FACILITY, IN\1\......................
INDIANA HARBOR, IN....................           2,330            2,330
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN.....             709              709
J. EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN..............             944              944
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN.................             974              974
MONROE LAKE, IN.......................           1,101            1,101
PATOKA LAKE, IN.......................             887              887
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN.........             185              185
SALAMONIE LAKE, IN....................             904              904
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  126              126
 WATERS, IN...........................
 
                 IOWA
 
CORALVILLE LAKE, IA...................           3,381            3,381
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA.....             483              483
MISSOURI RIVER--KENSLERS BEND, NE TO               129              129
 SIOUX CITY, IA.......................
MISSOURI RIVER--RULO TO THE MOUTH, IA,           6,059            7,000
 KS, MO & NE..........................
MISSOURI RIVER--SIOUX CITY TO RULO,              2,610            2,610
 IA, KS, MO & NE......................
RATHBUN LAKE, IA......................           3,019            3,019
RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE, RED ROCK, IA...           3,978            4,567
SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA..................           4,685            5,032
 
                KANSAS
 
CLINTON LAKE, KS......................           2,073            2,073
COUNCIL GRAVE LAKE, KS................           1,739            1,739
EL DORADO LAKE, KS....................             786              786
ELK CITY LAKE, KS.....................             718              718
FALL RIVER LAKE, KS...................           1,283            1,283
HILLSDALE LAKE, KS....................             860              860
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS.....             220              220
JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS....           3,685            3,685
KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS....................           2,288            2,288
MARION LAKE, KS.......................           1,820            1,820
MELVERN LAKE, KS......................           2,151            2,151
MILFORD LAKE, KS......................           2,057            2,057
PEARSON-SKUBITZ BILL HILL LAKE, KS....           1,472            1,472
PERRY LAKE, KS........................           2,015            2,015
POMONA LAKE, KS.......................           2,047            2,047
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS...             100              100
TORONTO LAKE, KS......................           3,522            3,522
TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS.................           2,062            2,062
WILSON LAKE, KS.......................           1,717            2,017
 
               KENTUCKY
 
BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE, BARKLEY, KY & TN          10,393           10,393
BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY.................           2,514            2,514
BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY..................           1,710            1,710
BUCKHORN LAKE, KY.....................           1,585            1,585
CARR CREEK LAKE, KY...................           1,737            1,737
CAVE RUN LAKE, KY.....................             926              926
DEWEY LAKE, KY........................           1,775            1,775
ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY......              40               40
FISHTRAP LAKE, KY.....................           2,171            2,171
GRAYSON LAKE, KY......................           1,709            1,709
GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY...........           1,880            1,880
GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY..................           2,202            2,202
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY.....             665              665
KENTUCKY RIVER, KY....................              10               10
LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY.................           1,927            1,927
MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY.................             814              814
MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY             113              113
NOLIN LAKE, KY........................           2,477            2,477
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN           40,748           40,748
 & OH.................................
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL,            5,836            5,836
 IN & OH..............................
PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY..................           1,231            1,231
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY..................           2,742            2,742
TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY.................           1,104            1,104
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY...           7,835            7,835
YATESVILLE LAKE, KY...................           1,143            1,143
 
               LOUISIANA
 
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE,             11,640           11,640
 BOEUF & BLACK, LA....................
BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA............             165              165
BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA............             954              954
BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP               1,211            1,211
 WATERWAY, LA.........................
BAYOU PIERRE, LA......................              24               24
BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA...........              49               49
BAYOU TECHE AND VERMILLION RIVER, LA..              15               15
BAYOU TECHE, LA.......................             200              200
CADDO LAKE, LA........................             224              224
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA..........          17,968           23,968
FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA..................           2,235            2,235
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA........          24,777           24,777
HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA............           2,569            2,569
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA.....           1,487            1,487
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA.......          10,598           13,598
LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA............              22              500
MADISON PARISH PORT, LA...............               7               99
MERMENTAU RIVER, LA...................           1,913            1,913
MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE,             2,838            2,838
 LA...................................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE           54,994           54,994
 GULF OF MEXICO,......................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA.........              65               65
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA.........           1,410            1,410
WALLACE LAKE, LA......................             244              244
WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA..              47               47
WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO              48               48
 BAYOU DULAC, LA......................
 
                 MAINE
 
BASS HARBOR, TREMONT, ME..............  ...............              60
BUCKS HARBOR, MACHIASPORT, ME.........  ...............             750
DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME..........           1,000            1,000
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME.....             215              215
INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES, ME.......              17               17
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME.........             750              750
 
               MARYLAND
 
ASSATEAGUE, MD........................           1,000   ...............
BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNEL (50                15,513           20,000
 FOOT), MD............................
BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL)..             360              360
CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV.......             177              177
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD.....             155              155
JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV.......           1,779            1,779
OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND         ...............           1,400
 SINEPUXENT BAY, MD...................
POPLAR ISLAND, MD.....................           8,200   ...............
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD.........             400              400
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD...             108              108
SOMERSET COUNTY CHANNELS, MD..........  ...............           1,000
WICOMICO RIVER, MD....................           1,676            1,676
 
             MASSACHUSETTS
 
BARRE FALLS DAM, MA...................             753              753
BIRCH HILL DAM, MA....................           1,203            1,203
BOSTON HARBOR, MA.....................           7,000            7,000
BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA..................             836              836
CAPE COD CANAL, MA....................          13,263           13,263
CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE               275              275
 AREA, MA.............................
CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA.................             210              210
EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA...............             950              950
HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA................             567              567
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA.....             414              414
KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA...................           1,421            1,421
LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA..................             889              889
NEW BEDFORD AND FAIRHAVEN HARBOR, MA..             500              500
NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET                 619              619
 HURRICANE BARRIER,...................
NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA................  ...............             350
PLYMOUTH HARBOR, MA...................             200              200
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA.........           1,200            1,200
TULLY LAKE, MA........................             666              666
WEST HILL DAM, MA.....................             572              572
WESTVILLE LAKE, MA....................             784              784
 
               MICHIGAN
 
CHANNELS IN LAKE ST. CLAIR, MI........           1,636            1,636
CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI.................             203              203
DETROIT RIVER, MI.....................           5,415            5,415
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI................             820              820
HOLLAND HARBOR, MI....................           2,151            2,151
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI.....             158              158
KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI.................              37               37
MICHIGAN HARBOR DREDGING, MI..........  ...............           7,000
    ALPENA HARBOR, MI.................  ...............  ...............
    ARCADIA HARBOR, MI................  ...............  ...............
    AU SABLE, MI......................  ...............  ...............
    BAY PORT HARBOR, MI...............  ...............  ...............
    BIG BAY HARBOR, MI................  ...............  ...............
    BLACK RIVER (GOGEBIC), MI.........  ...............  ...............
    BOLLES HARBOR, MI.................  ...............  ...............
    CLINTON RIVER, MI.................  ...............  ...............
    EAGLE HARBOR, MI..................  ...............  ...............
    FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MI...........  ...............  ...............
    INLAND ROUTE, MI..................  ...............  ...............
    LAC LA BELLE HARBOR, MI...........  ...............  ...............
    LELAND HARBOR, MI.................  ...............  ...............
    LES CHENEAUX ISLAND CHANNELS, MI..  ...............  ...............
    LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI............  ...............  ...............
    LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    MANISTEE HARBOR, MI...............  ...............  ...............
    MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MI.............  ...............  ...............
    MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    NEW BUFFALO HARBOR, MI............  ...............  ...............
    PENTWATER HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    POINT LOOKOUT HARBOR, MI..........  ...............  ...............
    PORT AUSTIN HARBOR, MI............  ...............  ...............
    PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI...........  ...............  ...............
    PORTAGE HARBOR, MI................  ...............  ...............
    ROUGE RIVER, MI...................  ...............  ...............
    SAUGATUCK HARBOR, MI..............  ...............  ...............
    SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MI............  ...............  ...............
    WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI.............  ...............  ...............
ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI..................           1,122            1,122
PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI...............             335              335
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI.........             410              410
SAGINAW RIVER, MI.....................           3,624            3,624
SEBEWAING RIVER, MI...................           1,200            1,200
ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI...................             533              533
ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MI.................             755              755
ST. MARYS RIVER, MI...................          23,010           23,010
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                2,612            2,612
 WATERS, MI...........................
 
               MINNESOTA
 
BIGSTONE LAKE--WHETSTONE RIVER, MN &               276              276
 SD...................................
DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI.......           5,985            5,985
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN.....             633              633
LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER,              627              627
 MN...................................
MINNESOTA RIVER, MN...................             256              256
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI              44,130           44,130
 RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS................
ORWELL LAKE, MN.......................             533              533
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN.........              82               82
RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN................             150              150
RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF                      3,398            3,398
 MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN................
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  359              359
 WATERS, MN...........................
TWO HARBORS, MN.......................             350              350
 
              MISSISSIPPI
 
BILOXI HARBOR, MS.....................           1,250            1,250
CLAIRBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS............               2               74
EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS........             187              187
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS...................           3,470            5,000
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS.....             183              183
MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS..............              40              112
OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS....................           1,703            1,703
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS.................           7,505           10,900
PEARL RIVER, MS & LA..................             193              193
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS.........              75               75
ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS...................              15              600
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS.              66               66
YAZOO RIVER, MS.......................              35              154
 
               MISSOURI
 
CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO.............              40              800
CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN               6,813            6,813
 LAKE, MO.............................
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO...................           2,933            3,018
HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO..           9,393            9,393
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO.....           1,491            1,491
LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO...........             845              845
LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO..................             949              949
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND             23,403           23,403
 MISSOURI RIVERS (R...................
NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO.................              90              400
NEW MADRID HARBOR (MILE 889), MO......              40              240
POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO...............           2,231            2,231
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO...             327              327
SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO...................           1,850            1,850
STOCKTON LAKE, MO.....................           4,370            4,370
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR..............           7,550            7,550
UNION LAKE, MO........................               6                6
 
                MONTANA
 
FT. PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT.............           6,361            6,361
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT.....             115              115
LIBBY DAM, MT.........................           1,948            1,948
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT...             145              145
 
               NEBRASKA
 
GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK                8,165            8,165
 LAKE, NE AND SD......................
HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE................           2,312            2,312
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE.....             714              714
PAPILLION CREEK, NE...................             847              847
SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE........           1,079            1,079
 
                NEVADA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV.....              63               63
MARTIS CREEK LAKE, CA & NV............           1,192            1,192
PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV....             341              341
 
             NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
BLACKWATER DAM, NH....................             610              610
COCHECO RIVER DREDGING PROJECT, NH....  ...............           2,000
EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH.............             560              560
FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH................           1,921            1,921
HOPKINTON-EVERETT LAKES, NH...........           1,148            1,148
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH.....             126              126
OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH..................             553              553
PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA                   500              500
 RIVER, NH............................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH.........             275              275
SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH...............             760              760
 
              NEW JERSEY
 
ABSECON INLET, NJ.....................  ...............             250
BARNEGAT INLET, NJ....................             225              225
CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ..             200   ...............
COLD SPRING INLET, NJ.................             250              250
DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ..........              15               15
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE             19,600           19,600
 SEA, NJ, PA & DE.....................
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO                820              820
 TRENTON, NJ..........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ.....             205              205
LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY                   400   ...............
 POINT, NJ............................
MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ...................             160              160
NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ..             250              250
NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC                 150              150
 RIVERS, NJ...........................
PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM, NJ             553              553
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ.........           1,653            1,653
RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF,              200              200
 NJ...................................
RARITAN RIVER, NJ.....................             120              500
SALEM RIVER, NJ.......................             100              100
SHARK RIVER, NJ.......................             400              400
SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ....              80               80
 
              NEW MEXICO
 
ABIQUIU DAM, NM.......................           3,305            3,305
COCHITI LAKE, NM......................           6,876            6,876
CONCHAS LAKE, NM......................           1,796            1,796
GALISTEO DAM, NM......................             591              591
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM.....             639              639
JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM..................             756              756
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES             3,150            3,150
 COLLABORATIVE PRO....................
SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM...........           1,099            1,099
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM...             477              477
TWO RIVERS DAM, NM....................             404              404
UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS                4,188            4,188
 MODEL STUDY, NM......................
 
               NEW YORK
 
ALMOND LAKE, NY.......................             524              524
ARKPORT DAM, NY.......................             298              298
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA                 1,503            1,503
 HARBOR, NY...........................
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY....................           1,325            1,325
BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY................           1,760            1,760
EAST RIVER, NY........................             300              300
EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY...............           2,950            2,950
EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY..................             588              588
EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY.................           4,090            4,090
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY..             150              150
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY............              60               60
GREAT KILLS HARBOR, S.I., NY..........              60               60
GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY...................              60               60
HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY..............              60               60
HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT)..............           1,270            1,270
HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C)..............           1,550            1,550
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY.....             898              898
JAMAICA BAY, NY.......................             220              220
JONES INLET, NY.......................             150              150
LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY...............             100              100
LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY...........               5                5
LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY.             100              100
MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY..................              60               60
MORICHES INLET, NY....................             100              100
MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY..................           2,696            2,696
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY..           4,100            4,100
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY...................           3,698            3,698
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (PREVENTION             1,045            1,045
 OF OBSTRUCTIVE DE....................
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT                  7,000            7,000
 REMOVAL).............................
NEWTOWN CREEK, NY.....................             150              150
OGDENSBURG HARBOR, NY.................  ...............              70
OSWEGO HARBOR, NY.....................  ...............             300
PORT CHESTER HARBOR, NY...............              60               60
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY.........           2,123            2,123
ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY..................               5                5
SHINNECOCK INLET, NY..................             100              100
SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL                    807              807
 PROJECTS, NY.........................
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  579              579
 WATERS, NY...........................
WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY.................             100              100
WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY................             685              685
 
            NORTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC....           4,300            4,300
B. EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC....           1,898            1,898
BEAUFORT HARBOR, NC...................  ...............             250
BOGUE INLET, NC.......................  ...............             650
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC..             988              988
CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC..............  ...............             500
FALLS LAKE, NC........................           1,859            1,859
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC.....             244              244
LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC.............  ...............             600
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC...........           3,945            3,945
MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING                   2,300            2,300
 CHANNELS, NC.........................
MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC..............           9,500            9,500
NEW RIVER INLET, NC...................             700              700
NEW TOPSAIL INLET, NC.................  ...............             600
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC.........             295              295
ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC.................              50               50
SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC................             250              250
W. KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC...           3,421            3,421
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC.................          12,155           12,155
 
             NORTH DAKOTA
 
BOWMAN HALEY, ND......................             350              350
GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND......          14,746           14,946
HOMME LAKE, ND........................             252              252
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND.....             452              452
LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND...           1,351            1,351
PIPESTEM LAKE, ND.....................             496              496
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND...             138              138
SOURIS RIVER, ND......................             286              286
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                   35               35
 WATERS, ND...........................
 
                 OHIO
 
ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH...................           1,545            1,545
ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH..................             840            1,840
BERLIN LAKE, OH.......................           2,198            2,198
CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH.................           1,500            1,500
CLARENCE J. BROWN DAM, OH.............           1,145            1,145
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH..................           7,357            8,357
CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH...................           1,191            1,191
DEER CREEK LAKE, OH...................           1,481            1,481
DELAWARE LAKE, OH.....................           1,322            1,322
DILLON LAKE, OHIO.....................           1,366            1,366
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH.....             555              555
LORAIN HARBOR, OH.....................             880              880
MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH              37               37
MICHAEL J. KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR,             1,089            1,089
 OH...................................
MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH.........           1,727            1,727
MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH...............             995              995
MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH.............           7,306            7,306
NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH..             274              274
PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH..................           1,216            1,216
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH.........             295              295
ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH              35               35
SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH...................           1,465            1,465
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  234              234
 WATERS, OH...........................
TOLEDO HARBOR, OH.....................           5,034            6,034
TOM JENKINS DAM, OH...................             894              894
WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH......             745              745
WILLIAM H. HARSHA LAKE, OH............           1,029            1,029
 
               OKLAHOMA
 
ARCADIA LAKE, OK......................             521              521
BIRCH LAKE, OK........................             902              902
BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK...................           3,202            3,202
CANTON LAKE, OK.......................           2,217            2,217
COPAN LAKE, OK........................           1,035            1,035
EUFAULA LAKE, OK......................           6,620            6,620
FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK..................          11,768           11,768
FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK..................           1,104            1,104
GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK............             347              347
HEYBURN LAKE, OK......................             748              748
HUGO LAKE, OK.........................           1,738            1,738
HULAH LAKE, OK........................           2,097            2,097
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK.....             255              255
KAW LAKE, OK..........................           2,751            2,751
KEYSTONE LAKE, OK.....................           6,947            6,947
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER                    6,173            6,173
 NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK................
OOLOGAH LAKE, OK......................           4,106            4,106
OPTIMA LAKE, OK.......................             219              219
PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE                   114              114
 CHEROKEES, OK........................
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK...................           1,276            1,276
ROBERT S. KEER LOCK AND DAM AND                  8,441            8,441
 RESERVOIR, OK........................
SARDIS LAKE, OK.......................           1,254            1,254
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK...             900              900
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK.....................           1,414            1,414
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK..............           6,625            6,625
WAURIKA LAKE, OK......................           1,431            1,431
WEBBERS FALLS LOCK & DAM, OK..........           5,903            5,903
WISTER LAKE, OK.......................             856              856
 
                OREGON
 
APPLEGATE LAKE, OR....................           1,302            1,302
BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR...................             940              940
BONNEVILLE LOCK & DAM, OR & WA........          13,911           13,911
CHETCO RIVER, OR......................             909              909
COLUMBIA & LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVER               24,495           24,495
 BELOW VANCOUVER, WA..................
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA..          12,945           12,945
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA &             689              689
 THE DALLES, OR.......................
COOS BAY, OR..........................           4,591            5,043
COQUILLE RIVER, OR....................             339              339
COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR................           1,130            1,130
COUGAR LAKE, OR.......................           1,582            1,582
DEPOE BAY, OR.........................  ...............             118
DETROIT LAKE, OR......................             949              949
DORENA LAKE, OR.......................           1,160            1,160
FALL CREEK LAKE, OR...................           1,864            1,864
FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR...................           2,362            2,362
GREEN PETER--FOSTER LAKES, OR.........           3,650            3,650
HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR..................             843              843
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL               34               34
 PROJECTS, OR.........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR.....             636              636
JOHN DAY LOCK & DAM, OR & WA..........           8,901            8,901
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR................           2,766            2,766
LOST CREEK LAKE, OR...................           3,636            3,636
MCNARY LOCK & DAM, OR & WA............           7,137            7,137
PORT ORFORD, OR.......................              38               38
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR.........             200              200
ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR.........             565              565
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR...              69               69
SIUSLAW RIVER, OR.....................             647              647
SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR..................               6                6
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY               10,400           10,400
 WATERS, OR...........................
TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR.............              48               48
UMPQUA RIVER, OR......................           1,174            1,174
WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS,               87              918
 OR...................................
WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR..              41               41
WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR.................             629              629
YAQUINA BAY & HARBOR, OR..............           1,790            1,790
 
             PENNSYLVANIA
 
ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA...................           9,039            9,039
ALVIN R. BUSH DAM, PA.................             659              659
AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA.............             215              215
BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA...................           1,201            1,201
BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA...................           2,696            2,696
CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA..............           1,253            1,253
COWANESQUE LAKE, PA...................           1,889            1,889
CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA................           1,683            1,683
CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA.................             757              757
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA....           1,524            1,524
ERIE HARBOR, PA.......................             555              555
FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA..........             674              674
FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA..............             969              969
GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND                       224              224
 RESERVOIR, PA........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA.....             880              880
JOHNSTOWN, PA.........................              34               34
KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA           1,338            1,338
LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA...................           1,346            1,346
MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA...............           1,286            1,286
MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA.................          16,758           16,758
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV          21,470           21,470
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH &             516              516
 WV...................................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA.........             120              120
PROMPTON LAKE, PA.....................             434              434
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA......................              22               22
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA.....................           3,847            3,847
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA...              59               59
SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA..................             200              200
SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA...............           6,992            6,992
STILLWATER LAKE, PA...................             452              452
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                   98               98
 WATERS, PA...........................
TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PA...............           2,456            2,456
TIONESTA LAKE, PA.....................           1,812            1,812
UNION CITY LAKE, PA...................             440              440
WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA...............           1,041            1,041
YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA..............             478              478
YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD......           2,335            2,335
 
              PUERTO RICO
 
SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR...................           1,200            1,200
 
             RHODE ISLAND
 
BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI.....  ...............           1,250
FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, RI.......             500              500
GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI (NEW             100              200
 HARBOR)..............................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI.....              48               48
PAWCATUCK RIVER, LITTLE NARRAGANSETT    ...............             200
 BAY & WATCH HILL.....................
POINT JUDITH HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI.....             300              300
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI.........             500              500
PROVIDENCE HARBOR SHIPPING CHANNEL, RI  ...............             300
WOONSOCKET, RI........................             200              200
 
            SOUTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC....             795            1,295
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC\1\..............          12,492           10,694
COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC...           4,685            4,685
GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC.................             250            1,250
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC.....              70               70
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC.........             465              465
 
             SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD.........           9,873            9,873
CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER       ...............           3,000
 BRULE SIOUX, SD......................
COLD BROOK LAKE, SD...................             436              436
COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD...........             271              271
FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE,            12,210           12,210
 SD...................................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD.....              75               75
LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN................             598              598
OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND..........          11,816           11,816
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD...              81               81
 
               TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN..................           6,143            6,143
CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN.............           6,454            6,454
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN.           3,775            3,775
CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN....           6,813            6,813
DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN..................           6,386            6,386
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN.....              50               50
J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN.           4,818            4,818
OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN..........          12,304           12,304
TENNESSEE RIVER, TN...................          16,833           16,833
WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN.................             373              373
 
                 TEXAS
 
AQUILLA LAKE, TX......................           1,564            1,564
ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE               1,558            1,558
 CONTROL-AREA VIII,...................
BARDWELL LAKE, TX.....................           2,229            2,229
BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX..............           4,968            4,968
BELTON LAKE, TX.......................           3,280            3,280
BENBROOK LAKE, TX.....................           2,575            2,575
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX..............           3,388            3,388
BUFFALO BAYOU & TRIBUTARIES, TX.......           2,958            2,958
CANYON LAKE, TX.......................           4,005            4,005
CEDAR BAYOU, TX.......................           1,790            1,790
CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX..............           2,161            2,161
CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX...........             383              383
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.......           4,523            4,523
DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX & OK.....           7,676            7,676
ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL                      43               43
 PROJECT, TX..........................
FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O' THE                 3,485            3,485
 PINES, TX............................
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX...................           3,316            3,316
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX......          13,095           13,095
GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX.........           2,264            2,264
GIWW, CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX.............           1,733            1,733
GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX..............           2,588            2,588
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX....................           2,735            2,735
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX........          26,046           26,046
HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX..................           1,605            1,605
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX..............          15,063           15,063
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX.....           1,520            1,520
JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX..................           1,718            1,718
JOE POOL LAKE, TX.....................           1,096            1,096
LAKE KEMP, TX.........................             327              327
LAVON LAKE, TX........................           3,497            3,497
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX....................           3,549            3,549
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX............           4,627            4,627
NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX................           4,168            4,168
NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE                   2,382            2,382
 GEORGETOWN, TX.......................
O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX...........           1,164            1,164
PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX....................           1,208            1,208
PROCTOR LAKE, TX......................           2,324            2,324
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX.........             223              223
RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX..................           1,324            1,324
SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX............          13,399           13,399
SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX.....           6,247            6,247
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX...             149              149
SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX...................           3,366            3,366
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX.............           2,096            2,096
TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX...........           4,000            4,000
TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX.             100            1,000
TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE,             2,505            2,505
 TX...................................
WACO LAKE, TX.........................           3,711            3,711
WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX..................           2,114            2,114
WHITNEY LAKE, TX......................           8,348            8,348
WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX........           3,517            3,517
 
                 UTAH
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT.....              84               84
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT...             594              594
 
                VERMONT
 
BALL MOUNTAIN, VT.....................             858              858
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT.....             109              109
NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY....              85               85
NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT...............             772              772
NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT............             854              854
TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT....................             814              814
UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT.................             627              627
 
               VIRGINIA
 
APPOMATTOX RIVER, VA..................  ...............             500
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--ACC,             2,620            2,620
 VA...................................
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--DSC,               991            1,311
 VA...................................
CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA................             913              913
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA.....           2,323            2,323
HAMPTON RDS, NORFOLK AND NEWPORT NEWS              882              882
 HARBOR, VA (DRIF.....................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA.....             369              369
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA...............           4,479            4,479
JOHN H. KERR LAKE, VA & NC............          11,585           11,585
JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR,             2,104            2,104
 VA...................................
LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA...................             277              277
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA....................          11,343           11,343
NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA....             630              630
PHILPOTT LAKE, VA & NC................           5,638            5,638
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA.........             850              850
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, VA.........              50               50
RUDEE INLET, VA.......................             795              795
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, VA.             104              104
WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA.             201              201
 
              WASHINGTON
 
CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA..................             790              790
COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR..              86              727
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND                   7              847
 SAND ISLAND, WA......................
EDIZ HOOK, WA.........................             730              730
EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA           1,766            1,766
FRIDAY HARBOR, WA.....................             111              111
GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA...          11,140           11,140
HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA.................           3,694            3,694
ICE HARBOR LOCK & DAM, WA.............           5,828            5,828
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL               74               74
 PROJECTS, WA.........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA.....             725              725
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA........           9,246            9,246
LITTLE GOOSE LOCK & DAM, WA...........           2,551            2,551
LOWER GRANITE LOCK & DAM, WA..........           7,651            7,651
LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK & DAM, WA.......           2,735            6,735
MILL CREEK LAKE, WA...................           3,834            3,834
MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA...             279              279
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA..................           3,056            3,056
NEAH BAY, WA..........................              67               67
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA.........             524              524
PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA..           1,011            1,011
QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA..................             266              266
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA...             537              537
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA....................             172              172
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA...............             165              165
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                   50               50
 WATERS, WA...........................
TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA............             130              130
THE DALLES LOCK & DAM, WA & OR........           8,769            8,769
WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA..........              40               40
 
             WEST VIRGINIA
 
BEECH FORK LAKE, WV...................           1,405            1,405
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV....................           1,661            1,661
BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV...................           2,246            2,246
EAST LYNN LAKE, WV....................           2,167            2,167
ELKINS, WV............................              15               15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV.....             336              336
KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS & DAM, WV.........          14,089           14,089
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH          35,276           35,276
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY &           2,996            2,996
 OH...................................
R D BAILEY LAKE, WV...................           1,927            1,927
STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV............           1,148            1,148
SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV.................           3,234            3,234
SUTTON LAKE, WV.......................           2,413            2,413
TYGART LAKE, WV.......................           1,478            1,478
 
               WISCONSIN
 
EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI..............             888              888
FOX RIVER, WI.........................           2,421            4,421
GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI..................           3,459            6,459
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI.....              91               91
KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI...................              40               40
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI.........             283              283
STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN               20               20
 SHIP CANAL, WI.......................
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY                  388              388
 WATERS, WI...........................
 
                WYOMING
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL               10               10
 PROJECTS, WV.........................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY.....              25               25
JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY...............             877              877
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY...             118              118
                                       ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED BY           2,317,027        2,366,322
       STATE..........................
 
REMAINING ITEMS:
    ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE                8,000            5,000
     OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........
    AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH.             690              690
    ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND              4,750            4,750
     EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE............
    BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M;            6,792            6,792
     BUSINESS LINES...................
    COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM....           3,000            3,000
    CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROJECTS     ...............  ...............
     NOT REQUIRING SPECIFIC...........
    BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED                   9,175   ...............
     MATERIAL (SECTION 204/145).......
    NATIONAL MITIGATION PROJECTS        ...............           9,043
     (SECTION 111)....................
    RESPONSE TO CLIMATE CHANGE AT                5,000            2,500
     CORPS PROJECTS...................
    CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/                  2,500            2,500
     CURATION)........................
    DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE....          12,000           12,000
    DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE......          12,000           12,000
    DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE           1,150            1,150
     MONITORING SYSTEM................
    DREDGING OPERATIONS AND                      7,000            7,000
     ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (DOE...
    DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL                2,000            2,000
     SUPPORT PROGRAM [DOTS]...........
    EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION                   270              270
     PROGRAM..........................
    FACILITY PROTECTION...............           7,000            7,000
    FERC HYDROPOWER COORDINATION......           3,000            3,000
    FISH AND WILDLIFEOPERATING FISH              4,700            4,700
     HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT...........
    GREAT LAKES SEDIMENT TRANSPORT               1,200            1,200
     MODEL............................
    INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS.           3,800            3,800
    INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS.....           1,780            1,780
    LONG-TERM OPTION ASSESSMENTFOR LOW           1,500            1,500
     USE NAVIGATION...................
    MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION           1,800            1,800
     PROJECTS.........................
    NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM..           7,000           12,000
    NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.......          18,000           18,000
    NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS              7,000            7,000
     PROGRAM [NEPP]...................
    NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY..          10,000           10,000
    NATIONAL (MULTI PROJECT) NATURAL             4,230            4,230
     RESOURCES MANAGEMENT.............
    NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR              571              571
     REALLOCATION.....................
    NATIONWIDE EVALUATION OF                     2,000            2,000
     HYDROPOWER REHAB.................
    PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL                  300              300
     SUPPORT [ABS-P2,WINABS]..........
PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION:
    REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS.........             500              500
    PROTECT, CLEAR AND STRAIGHTEN                   50               50
     CHANNELS (SEC 3).................
    WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS....           4,771            4,771
    HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA                    825              825
     COLLECTION.......................
    RECREATION ONE STOP [R1S] NATIONAL              65               65
     RECREATION RESERVAT..............
    REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT                 2,000            5,000
     DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM............
        HAWAII RSM, HI................  ...............            (500)
        SOUTHEAST OAHU REGIONAL         ...............            (500)
         SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, HI......
        NORTH CAROLINA RSM, NJ........  ...............            (600)
        DELAWARE ESTUARY RSM, NJ......  ...............            (200)
        SOUTH COASTAL RHODE ISLAND      ...............            (750)
         REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT.
        CHESAPEAKE BAY, NEWPOINT        ...............            (350)
         COMFORT, MATHEWS COUNTY,.....
    RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR                 608              608
     MAJOR REHAB......................
    RESERVE FOR KEY EMERGENCY                   20,000   ...............
     MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS..............
    SHORELINE USE PERMIT STUDY........             250              250
    WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT             653              653
     [WOTS]...........................
                                       ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, FOR ITEMS NOT LISTED           186,973          151,255
       UNDER STATES...................
REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE....  ...............         -67,577
                                       ---------------------------------
      TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE       2,504,000        2,450,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Kodiak Harbor, Alaska.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $240,000 to secure environmental clearances and 
prepare contract documents for St. Herman's Harbor and St. Paul 
Harbor.
    Petersberg Harbor, Alaska.--$500,000 is recommended to 
obtain environmental clearances and prepare contract plans and 
specifications.
    Arkansas Lakes, Arkansas.--The Committee recommendation 
includes an increase of $500,000 each for DeGray Lake, Lake 
Greeson and Lake Ouachita, to provide adequate levels of 
service and for backlog maintenance items.
    Osceola Harbor, Arkansas.--The Committee recommends 
$800,000 for maintenance dredging of this harbor.
    Marina Del Rey, California.--The Committee recommends 
$3,000,000 for dredging this project, the largest man-made 
harbor in the United States with nearly 6,000 boat slips and 
home to a U.S. Coast Guard Cutter.
    Norwalk Harbor, CT.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 
for the Phase III maintenance dredging of the harbor.
    Delaware Bay Coastline, Roosevelt Inlet to Lewes Beach, 
Delaware.--The Committee has included funding for this project 
in the construction account.
    Harbor of Refuge, Lewes, Delaware.--The Committee 
recommends $200,000 to update existing preliminary design and 
condition survey.
    Wilmington Harbor, Delaware.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $2,320,000 for this project. Additional funds 
recommended above the budget request are for maintenance of 
disposal areas and additional dredging.
    Intracoastal Waterway, Caloosahatchee to Anclote, 
Florida.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for maintenance 
dredging.
    Jacksonville Harbor, Florida.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $6,035,000 for routine maintenance and $1,000,000 is 
included in the CG account for Dredged Material Disposal 
Facilities [DMDF].
    Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Georgia.--$1,000,000 is 
recommended for dredging critical areas of this waterway as 
well as for work related to new upland disposal sites.
    Savannah Harbor, Georgia.--The Committee recommendation for 
Savannah Harbor includes $14,187,000 for routine maintenance 
and $900,000 is included in the CG account for Dredged material 
Disposal Facilities [DMDF].
    Chicago Harbor, Illinois.--The Committee is aware of the 
city of Chicago's interest in modifying the existing Chicago 
Lakefront Inner Breakwater consistent with the city of 
Chicago's 2016 Olympic Master Plan for Chicago Harbor. The 
Committee encourages the Chicago District of the Army Corps of 
Engineers to continue to work with the city of Chicago on the 
city's proposal.
    Illinois River Waterway, Illinois and Indiana (MVR 
Portion).--The Committee has recommended $900,000 above the 
budget request for small boat harbor dredging in western 
Illinois.
    Calumet Harbor and River, Illinois.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $3,120,000 for routine maintenance and 
$1,501,000 is included in the CG account for DMDF.
    Indiana Harbor Confined Disposal Facility, Indiana.--Funds 
for this project have been included in the CG account.
    Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana.--The Committee has 
included additional funds for dredging needs on this project.
    J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana.--The Committee has 
included additional funds above the budget request for backlog 
maintenance and dredging needs.
    Assateague, Maryland.--The Committee has included funding 
for this project in the construction account.
    Poplar Island, Maryland.--The Committee has included 
funding for this project in the construction account.
    Somerset County Channels, Maryland.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,000,000 for additional dredging 
needs at these harbors that service watermen and the Maryland 
seafood industry.
    Michigan Harbor Dredging, Michigan.--The Committee notes 
that there are some 50 Federally maintained harbors and 
waterways in Michigan. However, the Committee also notes that 
fewer than 20 are budgeted. With the limited funding available 
to the Committee, the Committee has recommended $7,000,000 
under this line item to provide for some of the dredging needs 
of the State rather than trying to fund small amounts for each 
project. The Committee has listed all of the harbors and 
waterways in the table that are eligible for this funding. 
However, recognizing that conditions on these small waterways 
is constantly changing and the Great Lakes are suffering from 
near historic low water levels, the Committee is directing the 
Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2010 that 
would most effectively utilize the scarce funds available for 
these harbor and waterway projects.
    Mouth of the Yazoo River, Mississippi.--The Committee 
includes additional funds for the maintenance dredging of the 
entrance to the Vicksburg Harbor.
    Pascagoula Harbor, Mississippi.--The Committee has 
recommended $10,900,000 for this project. Additional funds 
above the budget request are recommended to perform additional 
dredging and maintenance of the entrance and main channels.
    Rosedale Harbor, Mississippi.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $600,000 for maintenance dredging of the harbor.
    Absecon Inlet, New Jersey.--The Committee recommends 
$250,000 for dredging of the inlet.
    Cape May Inlet to Lower Township, New Jersey.--The 
Committee has included funding for this project in the 
construction account.
    Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape May Point, New Jersey.--The 
Committee has included funding for this project in the 
construction account.
    Ogdensburg Harbor, New York.--The Committee recommends 
$70,000 to provide for Sediment Sampling and Analysis in order 
to perform a tiered evaluation and characterize the channel 
material for dredging and establish appropriate disposal 
methods for the dredged material.
    Oswego Harbor, New York.--The Committee recommends $300,000 
to perform Engineering and Design for the East and West 
Arrowhead Breakwater Repair.
    Coastal Inlets, North Carolina.--The Committee has included 
additional funds for the coastal inlets on the North Carolina 
coast that were not funded in the administration's budget 
request. With the limited funding available to the Committee, 
the Committee has attempted to provide for some of the dredging 
needs of the State. However, recognizing that conditions on 
these inlets are constantly changing the Committee is directing 
the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2010 
that would most effectively utilize the scarce funds available 
for these inlets.
    Garrison Dam and Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota.--The 
Committee recommends $100,000 for mosquito control in the 
Williston area due to the shallow-water mosquito breeding areas 
created by the impoundment of Lake Sakakawea.
    Ohio Great Lakes Harbor.--The Committee has included 
additional funds for a number of the Great Lakes Harbors in 
Ohio that were underfunded in the administration's budget 
request. With the limited funding available to the Committee, 
the Committee has attempted to provide for some of the dredging 
need of the State. However, recognizing that conditions on 
these inlets are constantly changing the Committee is directing 
the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2010 
that would most effectively utilize the scarce funds available 
for these harbors.
    Willamette River at Willamette Falls, Oregon.--The 
Committee recommends $918,000 for this project. Funds above the 
budget request are for minimal seasonal lock operation for 
commercial and recreational users and to prepare a design 
report for comprehensive rehab of lock facility.
    Block Island, Harbor of Refuge, Rhode Island.--The 
Committee has recommended $1,250,000 to advertise and award a 
fully funded contract to repair the east bulkhead.
    Charleston Harbor, South Carolina.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $10,694,000 for routine maintenance and 
$1,798,000 is included in the CG account for DMDF.
    Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, South 
Dakota.--The Committee notes that title VI of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999, as amended, requires that 
funding to inventory and stabilize cultural and historic sites 
along the Missouri River in South Dakota, and to carry out the 
terrestrial wildlife habitat programs, shall be provided from 
the O&M; account. The Committee provides $3,000,000 to protect 
cultural resource sites and provide funding to the State and 
tribes for approved restoration and stewardship plans and in 
compliance with the requirements of title VI, directs the Corps 
to contract with or reimburse the State of South Dakota and 
affected tribes to carry out these duties.
    Texas Water Allocation Assessment, Texas.--$1,000 is 
recommended to continue these studies to determine if existing 
water can be better allocated to support more balanced water 
use in light of future needs.
    Appomattox River, VA.--The committee recommends $500,000 to 
complete environmental testing and analysis and obtain 
environmental permits.
    Chinook, Head of Sand Island, and Baker Bay, Washington.--
The Committee notes the proximity of Corps navigation 
facilities on the Columbia River between Chinook and the Head 
of Sand Island, Washington, and at Baker Bay, Washington, and 
encourage the Corps of Engineers to seek ways to achieve cost 
savings and efficiency, such as by utilizing appropriate 
contracting methods while having these two projects be 
considered together when seeking bids and awarding contracts. 
$1,574,000 is recommended for dredging at these harbors.
    Mud Mountain Dam, Washington.--Within the funds 
recommended, the Corps is directed to continue to satisfy 
Federal fish passage obligations for the term of the 
cooperative agreement with Puget Sound Energy.
    Fox River, Wisconsin.--Additional funds recommended above 
the budget request are to reimburse Wisconsin, in accordance 
with the agreement, for the costs of repairs and rehabilitation 
of the transferred locks and for the Corps of Engineers to 
undertake major repairs for the dams and associated 
infrastructure.
    Green Bay Harbor, Wisconsin.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $3,000,000 above the budget request for backlog 
maintenance and dredging needs.
    Continuing Authorities Projects for Section 111 and Section 
204.--These sections of the CAP are funded in the CG account 
with the other parts of the CAP.
    Response to Climate Change at Corps Projects.--A portion of 
these funds were moved to the Coastal Data Information Program 
in order to ensure that the period of record for coastal wave 
information is maintained.
    National Coastal Mapping.--$12,000,000 is recommended for 
this program. Additional funds recommended above the budget 
request are for LIDAR bathymetry for use in regional sediment 
management and for Coastal Zone Mapping and Imaging LIDAR/LASER 
to be conducted with the University of Southern Mississippi.
    Regional Sediment Management Demonstration Program.--The 
Committee has recommended $5,000,000 for this program, 
$3,000,000 above the budget request. Within the funds 
recommended, the Corps is directed to undertake studies for the 
State of Hawaii; the Southeast Coast of Oahu, Hawaii; the State 
of North Carolina; South Coastal Rhode Island; Delaware 
Estuary, New Jersey; and for Chesapeake Bay, New Point Comfort, 
Mathews County, Virginia.
    Reserve for Key Emergency Maintenance/Repairs.--The 
Committee has recommended no funding for this item. The 
Committee believes it is critical for Corps Headquarters to 
retain a maintenance reserve. Therefore, a proviso in the 
operation and maintenance section of the bill is included to 
address this need.

                 FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriations, 2009....................................           (\1\)
Budget estimate, 2010...................................          41,000
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $3,680,290,000.

    The Committee has recommended no funding for the Flood 
Control and Coastal Emergencies account. Readiness and 
preparedness activities have been funded through supplemental 
appropriations acts. This account provides funds for 
preparedness activities for natural and other disasters, 
response, and emergency flood fighting and rescue operations, 
hurricane response, and emergency shore protection work. It 
also provides for emergency supplies of clean water where the 
source has been contaminated or where adequate supplies of 
water are needed for consumption.

                           REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$183,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     190,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     190,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $25,000,000.

    An appropriation of $190,000,000 is recommended for the 
regulatory program of the Corps of Engineers.
    This appropriation provides for salaries and costs incurred 
administering regulation of activities affecting U.S. waters, 
including wetlands, in accordance with the Rivers and Harbors 
Act of 1899 33 U.S.C. section 401, the Clean Water Act of 1977 
Public Law 95-217, and the Marine Protection, Research and 
Sanctuaries Act of 1972 Public Law 92-532.
    The appropriation helps maintain program performance, 
protects important aquatic resources, and supports partnerships 
with States and local communities through watershed planning 
efforts.

            FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$140,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     134,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     140,000,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $100,000,000.

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $140,000,000 
to continue activities related to the FUSRAP in fiscal year 
2005.
    The responsibility for the cleanup of contaminated sites 
under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program was 
transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers in the fiscal year 
1998 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, Public 
Law 105-62.
    FUSRAP is not specifically defined by statute. The program 
was established in 1974 under the broad authority of the Atomic 
Energy Act and, until fiscal year 1998, funds for the cleanup 
of contaminated defense sites had been appropriated to the 
Department of Energy through existing appropriation accounts. 
In appropriating FUSRAP funds to the Corps of Engineers, the 
Committee intended to transfer only the responsibility for 
administration and execution of cleanup activities at eligible 
sites where remediation had not been completed. It did not 
intend to transfer ownership of and accountability for real 
property interests that remain with the Department of Energy.
    The Corps of Engineers has extensive experience in the 
cleanup of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive wastes through its 
work for the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies. 
The Committee always intended for the Corps' expertise be used 
in the same manner for the cleanup of contaminated sites under 
FUSRAP. The Committee expects the Corps to continue programming 
and budgeting for FUSRAP as part of the Corps of Engineers--
Civil program. The Committee directs the Corps to prioritize 
sites that are nearing completion during fiscal year 2008.
    The Corps is directed to prioritize sites that are nearing 
completion. The Committee directs the Corps of Engineers during 
fiscal year 2010 to complete the Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study of the former Sylvania nuclear fuel site at 
Hicksville, New York and to proceed expeditiously to a Record 
of Decision and, if appropriate, initiate any necessary 
remediation in accordance with CERCLA. The Secretary of the 
Army shall submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
of the House of Representatives and the Senate detailing the 
progress not later than 120 days after enactment of this act.

                            GENERAL EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $179,365,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     184,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     186,000,000

    This appropriation finances the expenses of the Office, 
Chief of Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain research 
and statistical functions of the Corps of Engineers. The 
Committee recommendation is $186,000,000.
    Executive Direction and Management.--The Office of the 
Chief of Engineers and 8 division offices supervise work in 38 
district offices.
    Humphreys Engineer Center Support Activity.--This support 
center provides administrative services (such as personnel, 
logistics, information management, and finance and accounting) 
for the Office of the Chief of Engineers and other separate 
field operating activities.
    Institute for Water Resources.--This institute performs 
studies, analyses, and develops planning techniques for the 
management and development of the Nation's water resources.
    United States Army Corps of Engineers Finance Center.--This 
center provides centralized support for all Corps finance and 
accounting.
    Office of Congressional Affairs.--The Committee has 
included statutory language for the past several years 
prohibiting any funds from being used to fund an Office of 
Congressional Affairs within the executive office of the Chief 
of Engineers. The Committee believes that an Office of 
Congressional Affairs for the Civil Works Program would hamper 
the efficient and effective coordination of issues with the 
Committee staff and Members of Congress. The Committee believes 
that the technical knowledge and managerial expertise needed 
for the Corps headquarters to effectively address Civil Works 
authorization, appropriation, and headquarters policy matters 
resides in the Civil Works organization. Therefore, the 
Committee strongly recommends that the Office of Congressional 
Affairs not be a part of the process by which information on 
Civil Works projects, programs, and activities is provided to 
Congress.
    In 1998, The Chief of Engineers issued a Command Directive 
transferring the oversight and management of the General 
Expenses account, as well as the manpower associated with this 
function, from the Civil Works Directorate to the Resource 
Management Office. The Corps is reminded that General Expense 
funds are appropriated solely for the executive management and 
oversight of the Civil Works Program under the direction of the 
Director of Civil Works.

      OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $4,500,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       6,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

    The Committee has recommended $5,000,000 for the Office of 
the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) [OASA(CW)]. 
As has been previously stated, the Committee believes that this 
office should be funded through the Defense appropriations bill 
and directs the administration to budget for this office under 
the Department of Defense, Operation and Maintenance--Army 
account in future budget submissions. It is the Committee's 
opinion that the traditional role of the ASA(CW) is to provide 
the Chief of Engineers advice about policy matters and 
generally be the political spokesperson for the 
administration's policies; however, the Chief of Engineers is 
responsible for carrying out the program. This is underscored 
by the administration's budget documents that state that the 
OASA(CW) provides policy direction and oversight for the civil 
works program and the Headquarters of the Corps provides 
executive direction and management of the civil works program.
    The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works advises 
the Secretary of the Army on a variety of matters, including 
the Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers. The 
Assistant Secretary is a member of the Army Secretariat with 
responsibilities, such as participating in Continuity of 
Government exercises that extend well beyond Civil Works. The 
Assistant Secretary also oversees the administration, operation 
and maintenance, and capital development of Arlington National 
Cemetery and the Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery. 
Congressional oversight of the Army Cemetery program lies not 
with the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, but 
rather with the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs and with the Committee on 
Veterans Affairs.
    The Army's accounting system does not track OMA funding of 
overhead or Army-wide support offices on the basis of which 
office receives support, nor would it be efficient or effective 
to do so for a 20-person office. Instead, expenses such as 
legal support, personnel services, finance and accounting 
services, the executive motor pool, travel on military 
aircraft, and other support services are centrally funded and 
managed on a department-wide basis. Transferring the funding 
for the expenses of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works to 
a separate account has greatly complicated the Army's 
accounting for such indirect and overhead expenses with no 
commensurate benefit to justify the change. The Committee does 
not agree that these costs should be funded in this bill and 
therefore has only provided funding for salaries and expenses 
as in previous years.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL

    Section 101. The bill includes language concerning 
reprogramming guidelines.
    Section 102. The bill includes language prohibiting 
implementation of competitive sourcing or HPO.
    Section 103. The bill includes language concerning report 
notifications.
    Section 104. The bill includes language concerning 
reallocations in Lake Cumberland, Kentucky.
    Section 105. The bill includes language concerning 
continuing contracts and the Inland Waterway Trust Fund.
    Section 106. The bill contains language concerning a 
project cost limit change.
    Section 107. The bill contains language concerning a 
project cost limit change.
    Section 108. The bill contains language concerning a 
project cost limit change.
    Section 109. The bill contains language concerning a 
project cost limit change.
    Section 110 The bill contains language concerning a project 
cost limit change.
    Section 111. The bill contains language concerning a 
reimbursement limit change.
    Section 112. The bill contains language regarding Alaska 
coastal erosion.
    Section 113. The bill contains language making a correction 
to a provision in WRDA 2007.
    Section 114. The bill contains language concerning a 
project cost limit change.
    Section 115. The bill contains language concerning a 
rescission of MR&T; funds.
    Section 116. The bill contains language concerning a 
rescission of CG funds.

                                TITLE II

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                Central Utah Project Completion Account

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $42,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      42,004,000
Committee recommendation................................      42,004,000

    The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2010 to carry 
out the provisions of the Central Utah Project Completion Act 
totals $42,004,000. An appropriation of $38,800,000 has been 
provided for Central Utah project construction; $1,500,000 for 
fish, wildlife, and recreation, mitigation and conservation. 
The Committee recommendation provides $1,704,000 for program 
administration and oversight.
    Legislative language is included which allows up to 
$1,500,000 of the funds provided to be used for administrative 
costs.
    The Central Utah Project Completion Act (titles II-VI of 
Public Law 102-575) provides for the completion of the central 
Utah project by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. 
The Act also authorizes the appropriation of funds for fish, 
wildlife, recreation, mitigation, and conservation; establishes 
an account in the Treasury for the deposit of these funds and 
of other contributions for mitigation and conservation 
activities; and establishes a Utah Reclamation Mitigation and 
Conservation Commission to administer funds in that account. 
The act further assigns responsibilities for carrying out the 
act to the Secretary of the Interior and prohibits delegation 
of those responsibilities to the Bureau of Reclamation.

                         Bureau of Reclamation


                      WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$920,259,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     893,125,000
Committee recommendation................................     993,125,000

\1\Excludes emergency appropriations of $1,000,000,000.

    An appropriation of $993,125,000 is recommended by the 
Committee for general investigations of the Bureau of 
Reclamation. The water and related resources account supports 
the development, management, and restoration of water and 
related natural resources in the 17 Western States. The account 
includes funds for operating and maintaining existing 
facilities to obtain the greatest overall level of benefits, to 
protect public safety, and to conduct studies on ways to 
improve the use of water and related natural resources. Work 
will be done in partnership and cooperation with non-Federal 
entities and other Federal agencies.
    The Committee has divided underfinancing between the 
Resources Management Subaccount and the Facilities Operation 
and Maintenance subaccount. The Committee directs that the 
underfinancing amount in each subaccount initially be applied 
uniformly across all projects within the subaccounts. Upon 
applying the underfinanced amounts, normal reprogramming 
procedures should be undertaken to account for schedule 
slippages, accelerations, or other unforeseen conditions.

                         DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

    The Committee received more than 140 requests for projects, 
programs, studies or activities for the Bureau of Reclamation 
for fiscal year 2010. These requests included the budget 
request as well as requests by Members. The Committee obviously 
was unable to accommodate all of these requests.
    In the interest of providing full disclosure of funding 
provided in the Energy and Water bill, all disclosures are made 
in the report accompanying the bill.
    All of the projects funded in this report have gone through 
the same rigorous public review and approval process as those 
proposed for funding by the President. The difference in these 
projects, of course, is that the congressionally directed 
projects are not subject to the artificial budgetary 
prioritization criteria that the administration utilizes to 
decide what not to fund.
    There are two disclosure tables this year. One discloses 
the recommended amounts that are in excess of those proposed in 
the budget request and the Members names that made these 
requests. If the Member requested the budget request or if only 
the budget request was provided, Member names are not listed 
next to these items because under the provisions of Rule 44 
this would not be considered congressionally directed spending. 
The second table discloses only those earmarks requested by the 
President and the amounts recommended or the budget request 
whichever is appropriated.
    The purposes for the funding provided in the various 
accounts is described in the paragraphs associated with each 
account. The location of the programs, projects or studies are 
denoted in the account tables.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee are shown on the 
following table along with the budget request.

                               BUREAU OF RECLAMATION--WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Budget estimate             Committee
                                                                -------------------------     recommendation
                         Project title                                                   -----------------------
                                                                  Resources   Facilities   Resources  Facilities
                                                                  management     OM&R;     management     OM&R;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                            ARIZONA
 
AK CHIN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT....................  ...........      10,600  ..........      10,600
ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT............................       1,400   ..........       1,400  ..........
COLORADO RIVER BASIN, CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT..................      18,103          305      18,103         305
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM.....................       2,350   ..........       2,350  ..........
NORTHERN ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM........................         350   ..........         350  ..........
PHOENIX METROPOLITAN WATER REUSE PROJECT.......................         200   ..........         200  ..........
SALT RIVER PROJECT.............................................         517          133         517         133
SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT...................         325   ..........         325  ..........
SOUTH/CENTRAL ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...................       1,000   ..........       1,000  ..........
SOUTHERN ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT...........       1,703   ..........       1,703  ..........
YUMA AREA PROJECTS.............................................       1,327       23,173       1,327      23,173
LOAN FOR WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE TRIBE, AZ.......................  ...........  ..........       3,209  ..........
 
                           CALIFORNIA
 
CACHUMA PROJECT................................................         837          837         837         837
CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..............................         500   ..........         500  ..........
CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECYCLING PLANT.............       1,400   ..........       1,400  ..........
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS:
    AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION....................................       1,681        7,895       1,681       7,895
    AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT...................................       1,663   ..........       1,663  ..........
    DELTA DIVISION.............................................      15,063        5,342      15,063       5,342
    EAST SIDE DIVISION.........................................       1,676        2,750       1,676       2,750
    FRIANT DIVISION............................................       2,054        3,702       2,554       3,702
    MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS.............................      10,838          958      10,838         958
    REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY MAINT...........  ...........      25,000  ..........      25,000
    SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION..................................      15,517        1,379      15,517       1,379
    SAN FELIPE DIVISION........................................       1,635           16       1,635          16
    SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION.......................................         356   ..........       7,356  ..........
    SHASTA DIVISION............................................         178        7,876         178       7,876
    TRINITY RIVER DIVISION.....................................       7,310        3,185       7,310       3,185
    WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS.................................         993        8,287         993       8,287
    WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT...................       3,047        5,478       3,047       5,478
    YIELD FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION............................         450   ..........         450  ..........
INLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL WATER RECYCLING PROJECT.................  ...........  ..........         100  ..........
IRVINE BASIN GROUND & SURFACE WATER............................  ...........  ..........         100  ..........
LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL WETLANDS...................................         102   ..........       2,602  ..........
LONG BEACH AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECT............       1,400   ..........       1,400  ..........
LONG BEACH DESALINATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT...............         700   ..........         700  ..........
MOKELUMNE RIVER REGIONAL WATER STORAGE & CONJUNCTIVE  U........  ...........  ..........         500  ..........
ORLAND PROJECT.................................................  ...........         703  ..........         703
SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT....................................         400   ..........         400  ..........
SAN DIEGO AREA WATER RECLAMATION PROGRAM.......................       3,500   ..........       3,500  ..........
SAN GABRIEL BASIN PROJECT......................................       1,400   ..........       1,400  ..........
SAN JOSE AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM..............         208   ..........         208  ..........
SOBABO WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT PROJECT.........................       5,000   ..........      10,000  ..........
SOLANO PROJECT.................................................       1,612        2,497       1,612       2,497
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.....................         520   ..........         520  ..........
VENTURA RIVER PROJECT..........................................         397          195         397         195
 
                            COLORADO
 
ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT........................................      53,743          445      53,743         445
COLLBRAN PROJECT...............................................         190        3,695         190       3,695
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT..................................         405       13,395         405      13,395
COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................................         300   ..........         300  ..........
FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT.......................................          99          160          99         160
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT.....................................         252        8,398         252       8,398
GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II............................         170        1,307         170       1,307
LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY..............................          30        2,935          30       2,935
LOWER COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..........................         250   ..........         250  ..........
MANCOS PROJECT.................................................          71          107          71         107
PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II..........................          64        2,282          64       2,282
PINE RIVER PROJECT.............................................         189          157         189         157
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT........................................         244        4,636         244       4,636
UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT............................................         228          140         228         140
UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM........................         250   ..........         250  ..........
 
                             IDAHO
 
BOISE AREA PROJECTS............................................       3,086        2,315       3,086       2,315
COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT FCRPS.........      18,000   ..........      18,000  ..........
IDAHO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...................................         300   ..........         300  ..........
LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS.....................................       1,234           30       1,234          30
MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS.........................................       2,736        4,432       2,736       4,432
 
                             KANSAS
 
KANSAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..................................          25   ..........          25  ..........
WICHITA PROJECT--CHENEY DIVISION...............................          10          395          10         395
WICHITA PROJECT--EQUUS BEDS DIVISION...........................          50   ..........       2,050  ..........
 
                            MONTANA
 
FORT PECK DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM.......................       4,000   ..........      14,000  ..........
HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT...........................................  ...........       1,865  ..........       1,865
HUNTLEY PROJECT................................................          31           56          31          56
LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT......................................         532           15         532          15
MILK RIVER PROJECT.............................................         314        1,486         314       1,486
MILK RIVER/ST. MARY DIVERSION REHABILITATION PROJECT...........       2,500   ..........       4,000  ..........
MONTANA INVESTIGATIONS.........................................         140   ..........         140  ..........
ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MONTANA RURAL WATER SYSTEM............       1,000   ..........      16,000  ..........
SUN RIVER PROJECT..............................................          50          328          50         328
 
                            NEBRASKA
 
MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT...........................................          16          119          16         119
 
                             NEVADA
 
CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS [NORTH LAS VEGAS, WATER REUSE].........  ...........  ..........       2,000  ..........
HALFWAY WASH PROJECT STUDY.....................................         125   ..........         125  ..........
LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT.........................................       4,745        2,531       4,745       2,531
LAKE MEAD/LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM...............................         800   ..........       2,000  ..........
 
                           NEW MEXICO
 
ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA WATER & RECLAMATION REUSE...............  ...........  ..........         500  ..........
CARLSBAD PROJECT...............................................       2,615        1,104       2,615       1,104
CHIMAYO, NM....................................................  ...........  ..........         500  ..........
EASTERN NEW MEXICO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM......................          50   ..........          50  ..........
EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY..........................  ...........  ..........         500  ..........
JICARILLA APACHE RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM................       1,000   ..........       5,000  ..........
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT......................................      14,801        8,949      14,961       8,949
NAVAJO GALLUP WATER SUPPLY.....................................  ...........  ..........       7,791  ..........
NAVAJO NATION INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...........................         200   ..........         200  ..........
PECOS RIVER BASIN WATER SALVAGE PROJECT........................  ...........         209  ..........         209
RIO GRANDE PROJECT.............................................         824        4,175         824       4,175
SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM....................         150   ..........         150  ..........
SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO/WEST TEXAS INV. PROGRAM....................         150   ..........         150  ..........
TUCUMCARI PROJECT..............................................          24           17          24          17
UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN INVESTIGATIONS..........................          75   ..........          75  ..........
 
                          NORTH DAKOTA
 
PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN--GARRISON DIVERSION..................      30,654        5,639      64,361       5,639
 
                            OKLAHOMA
 
ARBUCKLE PROJECT...............................................          48          186          48         186
MCGEE CREEK PROJECT............................................          20          644          20         644
MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT..........................................           7          518           7         518
NORMAN PROJECT.................................................          25          452          25         452
OKLAHOMA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................................         150   ..........         150  ..........
WASHITA BASIN PROJECT..........................................           7        1,048           7       1,048
W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT............................................          23          435          23         435
 
                             OREGON
 
CROOKED RIVER PROJECT..........................................         412          427         412         427
DESCHUTES PROJECT..............................................         300          182         800         182
EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS........................................         573          272         573         272
KLAMATH PROJECT................................................      20,589        4,411      20,589       4,411
KLAMATH DAM REMOVAL STUDY......................................       2,000   ..........       2,000  ..........
OREGON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..................................         300   ..........         450  ..........
ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION.....................         814          331       1,014         331
SAVAGE RAPIDS DAM REMOVAL......................................       1,160   ..........       1,160  ..........
TUALATIN PROJECT...............................................          68          271          68         271
TUALATIN VALLEY WATER SUPPLY FEASIBILITY.......................  ...........  ..........         300  ..........
UMATILLA PROJECT...............................................         958        3,352         958       3,352
 
                          SOUTH DAKOTA
 
LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM.............................       2,000   ..........      16,000  ..........
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT.................................  ...........          15  ..........          15
MNI WICONI PROJECT.............................................      17,280       10,200      27,280      10,200
PERKINS COUNTY RURAL WATER SYSTEM..............................       1,000   ..........       2,000  ..........
RAPID VALLEY PROJECT...........................................  ...........          79  ..........          79
 
                             TEXAS
 
BALMORHEA PROJECT..............................................          41           17          41          17
CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT.........................................          54          163          54         163
LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION  P........          50   ..........       2,550  ..........
NUECES RIVER PROJECT...........................................          20          721          20         721
SAN ANGELO PROJECT.............................................          35          401          35         401
TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...................................          45   ..........          45  ..........
 
                              UTAH
 
HYRUM PROJECT..................................................         152           46         152          46
MOON LAKE PROJECT..............................................           4           76           4          76
NEWTON PROJECT.................................................          59           39          59          39
NORTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...........................         200   ..........         700  ..........
OGDEN RIVER PROJECT............................................         213          177         213         177
PROVO RIVER PROJECT............................................       1,002          433       1,002         433
SCOFIELD PROJECT...............................................         107           80         107          80
SOUTHERN NEVADA/UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM....................          25   ..........          25  ..........
SOUTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...........................         225   ..........         225  ..........
STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT......................................         248           21         248          21
WEBER BASIN PROJECT............................................         747          745       1,747         745
WEBER RIVER PROJECT............................................          50          109          50         109
 
                           WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT.........................................       5,692       10,762       5,692      10,762
ODESSA SUBAREA SPECIAL STUDY...................................  ...........  ..........       3,000  ..........
WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS.......................................         193           15         193          15
WASHINGTON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..............................         150   ..........         150  ..........
YAKIMA PROJECT.................................................       2,420        6,092       2,420       6,092
YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT...................       8,500   ..........      10,000  ..........
 
                            WYOMING
 
KENDRICK PROJECT...............................................         119        3,139         119       3,139
NORTH PLATTE PROJECT...........................................         266        1,351         266       1,351
SHOSHONE PROJECT...............................................          76        1,080          76       1,080
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL FOR PROJECTS....................................     322,861      229,923     455,528     229,923
 
                       REGIONAL PROGRAMS
 
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROGRAM, TITLE I.........  ...........      11,450  ..........      11,450
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROGRAM, TITLE I.........       6,970   ..........       6,970  ..........
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, [CRSP], SECTION 5......................       3,449        4,888       3,449       4,888
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, [CRSP], SECTION 8......................       2,710   ..........       2,710  ..........
COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM...............         233   ..........         233  ..........
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM:
    DEPARTMENT DAM SAFETY PROGRAM..............................  ...........       2,029  ..........       2,029
    INITIATE SOD CORRECTIVE ACTION.............................  ...........      81,600  ..........      81,600
    SAFETY OF EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS......................  ...........      18,250  ..........      18,250
DROUGHT EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM...........................         488   ..........         488  ..........
EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM.................  ...........       1,432  ..........       1,432
ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM.............      19,012   ..........      19,012  ..........
ENVIRONMENTAL & INTERAGENCY COORDINATION ACTIVITIES............       2,187   ..........       2,187  ..........
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION...........................         947   ..........         947  ..........
EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES.............................  ...........       7,675  ..........       7,675
FEDERAL BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY PROGRAM........................  ...........       1,400  ..........       1,400
GENERAL PLANNING STUDIES.......................................       2,213   ..........       2,213  ..........
LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM..............................       8,682   ..........       8,682  ..........
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM........................      21,448   ..........      22,128  ..........
MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS.........................  ...........         777  ..........         777
NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM................................       6,197   ..........       6,197  ..........
NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING................       1,563   ..........       1,563  ..........
OPERATIONS AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..............................       1,026          625       1,026         625
PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN--OTHER PICK SLOAN....................       3,321       36,205       3,321      36,205
POWER PROGRAM SERVICES.........................................         724          307         724         307
PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM...............................         598          155         598         155
RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION.................................       2,199   ..........       2,199  ..........
RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION............       1,625   ..........       1,625  ..........
 
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:
    DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM................       2,133        1,600       2,133       1,600
    SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.............................       9,200   ..........      10,200  ..........
RURAL WATER LEGISLATION, TITLE I...............................       2,348   ..........       2,348  ..........
SITE SECURITY..................................................  ...........      28,877  ..........      28,877
TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM..................  ...........  ..........       2,500  ..........
UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES--TECHNICAL SUPPORT..........          96   ..........          96  ..........
WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM......................       6,510   ..........       6,510  ..........
WATER CONSERVATION INITIATIVE..................................      37,192   ..........      22,192  ..........
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES....................     465,932      427,193     587,779     427,193
UNDERFINANCING.................................................  ...........  ..........     -18,404      -3,193
                                                                ================================================
      TOTAL, WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES.......................     893,125   ..........     993,125  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    White Mountain Apache Tribe, Arizona.--The Committee 
recommends $3,209,000 to be provided as the subsidy for a loan 
to the White Mountain Apache Tribe for a drinking water 
project.
    Central Valley Project--Friant Division, California.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for the Semi Tropic 
Phase II groundwater banking.
    Central Valley Project--San Joaquin Division.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $7,000,000 for the San 
Joaquin River Restoration. These funds should be utilized in 
conjunction with and in advance of those funds available from 
the San Joaquin River Restoration Fund.
    Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project.--The 
Committee recognizes that the authorizing statute (Public Law 
104-266 as amended by Public Law 111-11) authorizes a cap of 
$20,000,000 in 1996 prices, which could escalate to as much as 
$26,000,000 in 2010 prices for the Orange County Regional Water 
Reclamation Project. Accordingly, this project has not yet 
reached its authorization ceiling and is eligible for 
additional funding. Other projects may be similarly situated. 
The Committee encourages Reclamation to allocate surplus funds 
that may become available from the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act to this project and any other similarly 
situated project. The Committee expects the Bureau to provide 
accurate capability statements for all Title XVI projects that 
reflect the escalator clause. Capability statements should not 
contain restrictions and limitations that are based purely on 
internal Bureau policies, but rather should reflect the true 
maximum capacity of the Bureau under the governing statutes.
    Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands, California and Nevada.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,602,000. Within the funds 
provided, $2,000,000 is recommended for the Rosewood Creek, 
Area A project in Nevada.
    Sobabo Water Rights Settlement Project, California.--The 
Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 above the budget 
request for this water rights settlement.
    Wichita Project--Equus Beds Division, Kansas.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 above the budget 
request to continue this project.
    Fort Peck-Dry Prairie Rural Water System, Montana.--The 
Committee recommendation is $14,000,000. $9,000,000 of these 
funds should be applied to the tribal portions of the water 
system. These funds should be utilized in addition to the 
normal tribal/non-tribal split of the underlying funded amount 
in the budget ($4,000,000) and provided by the Committee 
($1,000,000).
    Milk River/St. Mary's Diversion Project.--The Committee 
urges the Bureau of Reclamation to combine NEPA compliance 
activities and preparation of design, specifications, and 
contract documents for the entire St. Mary's project including 
the diversion dam, fish passage structure, drop structures, 
siphon, and canal as a single activity.
    Rocky Boys/North Central Montana Rural Water System, 
Montana.--The Committee recommendation is $16,000,000. 
$11,000,000 of these funds should be applied to the tribal 
portions of the water system. These funds should be utilized in 
addition to the normal tribal/non-tribal split of the 
underlying funded amount in the budget ($1,000,000) and 
provided by the Committee (4,000,000).
    Jicarilla Apache Reservation Rural Water System, New 
Mexico.--The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
$4,000,000 above the budget request to continue work on this 
tribal water system.
    Navajo-Gallup Water Supply, New Mexico.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $7,791,000 for continued work on this 
tribal water project.
    Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin, Garrison Diversion Unit, North 
Dakota.--Within the Committee recommendation, $52,000,000 is 
recommended for rural water projects. Of this amount, 
$26,000,000 shall be expended for the following projects: 
$8,000,000 for the Northwest Area Water Supply; $9,000,000 for 
the South Central Regional Water District; and $9,000,000 for 
the Southwest Pipeline. Additionally the Committee recommends 
$2,000,000 for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Irrigation 
Project. The Committee directs Reclamation to rexamine the 
Federal cost estimate of the annual operating costs of the 
Three Affiliated Tribes water system.
    Oregon Investigations Program, Oregon.--$150,000 above the 
budget request is recommended for developing appraisal-level 
designs and cost estimates for Umatilla on-reservation 
distribution systems.
    Rogue River Basin Project, Talent Division.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $200,000 for the Water for Irrigation 
Streams and Economy Feasibility study.
    Mni Wiconi Project, South Dakota.--The Committee 
recommendation is $33,280,000. $10,000,000 of these funds 
should be applied to the tribal portions of the water system. 
These funds should be utilized in addition to the normal 
tribal/non-tribal split of the underlying funded amount in the 
budget ($17,280,000).
    Northern Utah Investigations Program, Utah.--The Committee 
has recommended an additional $500,000 for the Rural Water 
Technology Alliance.
    Weber Basin Project, Utah.--The Committee recommends 
$1,000,000 for feasibility studies to increase the storage 
capacity of the reservoir impounded by the Arthur V. Watkins 
Dam.
    Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, Washington.--
The Committee recommends an additional $1,500,000 above the 
budget request for the Yakima River Basin Water Storage Plan to 
address water shortages in the basin.
    Drought Emergency Assistance.--The Committee has provided 
the budget request for this program. Within the funds provided, 
the Committee urges the Bureau of Reclamation to provide full 
and fair consideration for drought assistance from the State of 
Hawaii.
    Lower Colorado River Operations Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $680,000 above the budget request for 
the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Plan for 
California.
    Research and Development, Science and Technology Program.--
The Committee recommends $1,000,000 above the budget request 
for Quagga and Zebra Mussel research activities. The Committee 
is concerned about the impacts to western waters of these two 
invasive species. Reclamation efforts to date have necessarily 
focused on addressing the problems caused by the mussels at 
Reclamation facilities. The Committee believes that Reclamation 
should establish a research program geared toward eradicating 
or controlling these invasive species.
    Title XVI, Water Reclamation, and Reuse.--The Committee has 
provided $2,500,000 for the WateReuse Foundation. These funds 
are available to support the Foundation's research priorities.
    Water Conservation Field Services Program.--Within the 
amounts provided, Reclamation is urged to continue urban water 
conservation projects identified through the Metropolitan Water 
District of Southern California Innovative Conservation 
Program; industrial water efficiency surveys to assess 
opportunities to conserve water in industrial water use; and 
for weather based irrigation controller activities to pilot 
ways to speed distribution and acceptance of these landscape 
water efficiency devices.
    Water Conservation Initiative.--The Committee encourages 
Reclamation to work with Water Research Laboratory at Utah 
State University to expand water quality monitoring in the 
Cache Valley, Utah, to provide the necessary data to reduce the 
uncertainty of water quality management decisions pertaining to 
Cutler Reservoir and to reduce the cost of maintaining and 
improving water quality in the region.

                CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $56,079,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      35,358,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,358,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,358,000 
for the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
    The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized 
in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of 
Public Law 102-575. This fund was established to provide 
funding from project beneficiaries for habitat restoration, 
improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife 
restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of 
California. Revenues are derived from payments by project 
beneficiaries and from donations. Payments from project 
beneficiaries include several required by the act (Friant 
Division surcharges, higher charges on water transferred to 
non-CVP users, and tiered water prices) and, to the extent 
required in appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation 
and restoration payments.

                    CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $40,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      31,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      41,000,000

    This account funds activities that are consistent with the 
CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18 
State and Federal agencies and representatives of California's 
urban, agricultural, and environmental communities. The goals 
of the program are to improve fish and wildlife habitat, water 
supply reliability, and water quality in the San Francisco Bay-
San Joaquin River Delta, the principle hub of California's 
water distribution system.

                       POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $59,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      61,200,000
Committee recommendation................................      61,200,000

    The Committee recommendation for general administrative 
expenses is $61,200,000.
    The policy and administrative expenses program provides for 
the executive direction and management of all reclamation 
activities, as performed by the Commissioner's offices in 
Washington, DC, Denver, Colorado, and five regional offices. 
The Denver office and regional offices charge individual 
projects or activities for direct beneficial services and 
related administrative and technical costs. These charges are 
covered under other appropriations.

             General Provisions--Department of the Interior

    Section 201. The bill includes language regarding Bureau of 
Reclamation Reprogramming.
    Section 202. The bill includes language regarding the San 
Luis Unit and the Kesterson Reservoir in California.
    Section 203. The bill includes language that states 
requirements for purchase or lease of water from the Middle Rio 
Grande or Carlsbad Projects in New Mexico.
    Section 204. The bill includes language regarding Drought 
Emergency Assistance.
    Section 205. The bill includes language extending a project 
authorization.
    Section 206. The bill includes language regarding the 
administration of the Desert Terminal Lakes Program.
    Section 207. The bill includes language regarding the 
Desert Terminal Lakes Program.
    Section 208. The bill includes language expending funds 
from the Desert Terminal Lakes Program. The National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation will administer funds for water projects in 
the Walker River Basin, including a demonstration water leasing 
program to be managed by the Walker River Irrigation District.
    Section 209. The Bill includes a provision pertaining to 
the North Dakota Natural Resources Trust.
    Section 210. The bill contains a provision concerning 
CALFED.

                               TITLE III

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

          Laboratory Directed Research and Development [LDRD]

    The Committee recognizes the invaluable role the Laboratory 
Directed Research and Development [LDRD] program provides to 
the Federal Government and the Nation in general. Discretionary 
LDRD investments have been and will continue to be responsive 
to the energy needs of the Nation, as evidenced by recent R&D; 
projects in materials science, optoelectronics, computer 
science, and high-energy density physics. Cutting-edge LDRD 
research provides the science base for energy-specific 
applications such as fuel cells, hydrogen technologies, carbon 
management, nuclear energy, and solid-state lighting. In 
addition, LDRD is the national labs' most important tool for 
maintaining the vitality of the national labs in support of 
other national security missions. LDRD enables the labs to hire 
the ``best and brightest'' young scientists and engineers and 
allows them to seek innovative science and technology solutions 
for current or emerging national security issues, including 
those of energy security. LDRD investments have been effective 
in providing solutions for today's energy problems and 
demonstrate the inherent flexibility of the program to provide 
national security mission support on a very timely basis. 
Energy climate research needs can best be addressed by 
continuing a vibrant LDRD program at the national laboratories.

                           Pension Shortfalls

    The Committee includes section 311 in the General 
Provisions to give the Secretary the authority to transfer 
funds as necessary to fully fund pension obligations. Over the 
last year, the stock market performance has had a devastating 
impact on the defined benefit funds of the current and former 
laboratory and plant employees. As required by law, these 
shortfalls must be closed. All personnel costs, including 
pension obligations are charged to the program as an indirect 
cost. In fiscal year 2009, the NNSA and Environmental 
Management program were forced to redirect nearly $400,000,000 
in mission funding to meeting required pension contributions. 
At the beginning of the year, the Department estimated that 
$1,170,000,000 in pension contributions would be needed; 
however, subsequent estimates have projected shortfalls to 
increase by an additional $260,000,000, a 22 percent increase, 
which can only be recovered through program funding. In the 
fiscal year 2010 budget request, the administration has 
attempted to provide additional funding to the various programs 
impacted, but significant funding gaps remain. In order to 
minimize the impact to program funding, especially those 
programs that are facing flat or declining budget requests, the 
Committee felt it was prudent to provide the Department with 
additional authority to minimize the impact to programs and 
personnel.

                        Reprogramming Guidelines

    The Department of Energy is directed to operate in a manner 
fully consistent with the following reprogramming guidelines. A 
reprogramming request must be submitted to the Committees on 
Appropriations for consideration before any implementation of a 
reorganization proposal which includes moving previous 
appropriations between appropriation accounts. The Department 
is directed to inform the Committees promptly and fully when a 
change in program execution and funding is required during the 
fiscal year. To assist the Department in this effort, the 
following guidance is provided for programs and activities 
funded in the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act. The Department is directed to follow this 
guidance for all programs and activities unless specific 
reprogramming guidance is provided for a program or activity.
    Definition.--A reprogramming includes the reallocation of 
funds from one activity to another within an appropriation, or 
any significant departure from a program, project, activity, or 
organization described in the agency's budget justification as 
presented to and approved by Congress. For construction 
projects, a reprogramming constitutes the reallocation of funds 
from one construction project identified in the justifications 
to another project or a significant change in the scope of an 
approved project.
    Any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority or 
prior year deobligations must be submitted to the Committees in 
writing and may not be implemented prior to approval by the 
Committees on Appropriations.

                            Energy Programs

                 ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Appropriations, 2009..................................\1\$18,978,540,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   2,318,602,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,233,967,000

\1\Includes Emergency Appropriations of $250,000,000 under Public Law 
110-329 and $16,800,000,000 under Public Law 111-5.

    The Committee recommendation is $2,233,967,000 for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    In updating the renewable energy resource assessments 
required by section 201 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the 
Committee recommends that each program area assess the amount 
of each type of renewable energy that can reasonably be 
expected to be deployed by the year 2030. The reports should be 
modeled on the Department's 20 percent Wind Energy by 2030 
report issued in May 2008. The individual resource reports 
should be integrated into a single report that investigates 
multiple alternative scenarios for the potential deployment of 
renewable resources by 2030.
    Hydrogen Technology.--The Committee recommends 
$190,000,000, all above the request of $0, to continue funding 
189 contracts the Department has in place for fiscal year 2010, 
saving approximately 140 jobs at universities, 150 at Federal 
laboratories, and 235 jobs within industry. The Committee 
provides additional funds to enable fuel research and 
development, early market deployment, transformation, and 
enabling activities in transportation applications. The 
Committee also looks forward to the 2009 release of the updated 
Hydrogen Program Plan that replaces the existing Posture Plan, 
and encourages the Secretary to consider it more carefully as 
the fiscal year 2011 program budget is developed.
    Fuel Cell Technologies.--The Committee recommends $0, 
rather than $68,213,000, as requested, for Fuel Cell 
Technologies. Fuel cell technology can continue to be pursued 
under the Hydrogen Technology program in fiscal year 2010 as it 
has been in the past.
    Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D.--The; Committee 
recommends $235,000,000, the same as the request. Within the 
available funds, the Committee directs the Department to 
provide not less than $35,000,000 for a comprehensive research, 
development and deployment strategy focused on algae biofuels. 
This non-food source biofuel offers one of the best 
opportunities to develop large-scale production on non-arable 
land using non-potable water. The Committee encourages the 
Department to develop a balanced program to address technical 
challenges related to organism selection, cultivation, water 
usage, biofuel production, and land-use issues. The Department 
should particularly pursue algal biofuels that have a high 
potential to beneficially re-use industrial carbon dioxide and 
are fungible in existing infrastructure. The Committee expects 
the Department to enlist the participation and to provide 
funding to universities, laboratories and industry to support 
this effort.
    Also, within available funds, $7,500,000 is provided for 
coordination with the Fuels Technology subprogram under 
Vehicles Technologies to expand and accelerate testing of 
intermediate fuel blends (15 percent-20 percent ethanol mixed 
with 80 percent-85 percent gasoline). The testing is performed 
on vehicles, other engines, and infrastructure components to 
provide data on how these blends may affect materials, 
durability, performance and emissions, and alleviate supply/
demand imbalances. Work should be done in coordination with the 
Vehicles Technology Program.
    Solar Energy.--The Committee recommends $255,000,000. From 
within the amount provided, the Committee directs the 
Department to provide $30,000,000 to support the demonstration 
and deployment of concentrating solar technology. No funds are 
provided for the Solar Electricity Energy Innovation Hub.
    The Committee notes that flexible solar cell roofing 
shingles and panels have the potential to provide significant 
distributed, renewable electricity generation. The Committee 
encourages the Department to support research, development, and 
demonstration of novel technologies, including innovative 
textiles, which have the potential to enhance power generation 
and reduce production and installation costs of solar cells and 
panels.
    The budget request provides $30,000,000 to establish a PV 
Manufacturing Initiative. The National Academies Board on 
Science, Technology, and Economic Policy is exploring the 
future of PV manufacturing in the United States, specifically 
the economic and institutional issues for technology-related 
public-private partnerships, conducting workshops in April, 
July, and October 2009. The Committee directs the Department to 
develop the PV Manufacturing Initiative consistent with the 
recommendations of these workshops. The Committee recognizes 
the value of creating a centralized facility to assist solar PV 
companies in making the transition to commercial production, 
and encourages the Department to create such a facility, 
consistent with the recommendations of these workshops, either 
at an existing facility to avoid additional mortgage costs, or 
at a separate facility.
    Wind Energy.--The recommendation is $85,000,000. The 
committee directs this office and the Office of Electricity to 
work collaboratively to improve wind systems integration and 
forecasting modeling to facilitate increased deployment of wind 
energy nationwide.
    Geothermal Technology.--The recommendation for Geothermal 
Technology is $50,000,000, the same as the administration's 
request. The Committee directs the Department to provide not 
less than $5,000,000 to develop and deploy low temperature 
geothermal systems.
    Water Power Energy R&D.--The; Committee recommends 
$60,000,000, a total of $30,000,000 above the request. The 
Committee directs that all of the available increase be applied 
to expand marine and hydrokinetic research, development, and 
deployment. The Committee directs the Department to use the 
available funding to validate economic and technical viability 
of a variety of technologies and to provide a written report to 
Congress on the prospect of each of the technologies. In 
addition, the Department shall include its research and 
development priorities and goals for this program for the next 
5 years. The Department is directed to utilize the Department's 
only marine sciences laboratory to undertake an R&D; program to 
expand marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy programs 
consistent with section 633 of EISA 2007.
    Vehicle Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$323,302,000. The Committee encourages the Department to 
continue investigating the full portfolio of transportation 
fuel options within the Fuels Technology Program, including 
biofuels, electricity, natural gas, hydrogen, and other 
advanced fuels.
    Within available funds, $2,200,000 is provided to the 
vehicles program for the Department to contract with the 
National Academy of Sciences to conduct a comprehensive 
analysis of energy use within the light-duty vehicle 
transportation sector, and use the analysis to conduct an 
integrated study of the technology and fuel options that could 
reduce petroleum consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
    Also within available funds, $7,500,000 is provided for 
coordination with the Biomass program to expand and accelerate 
testing of intermediate fuel blends (15 percent-20 percent 
ethanol mixed with 80 percent-85 percent gasoline). The testing 
is performed on vehicles, other engines, and infrastructure 
components to provide data on how these blends may affect 
materials, durability, performance and emissions, and alleviate 
supply/demand imbalances.
    The Committee further directs the Department to study the 
variety and density of recharging infrastructure options 
necessary to support significant penetration of plug-in, 
electric drive, light-duty vehicles. The Department must report 
back to Congress on the progress of the secondary applications 
and disposal of electric drive vehicle batteries program 
required under Section K of 42 U.S.C. 17231.
    Building Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$202,698,000, a decrease of $35,000,000 to the request. No 
funds are provided for the Equipment Standards and Analysis 
Hub. The Committee has continued to invest additional resources 
in building technologies and other renewable technologies, but 
the Department has maintained the same goal of developing a 
zero-energy home in 2020. The Committee challenges the 
Department to better integrate renewable energy technology and 
focus the buildings research to achieve a zero-energy home 
sooner than the 2020 target date.
    Industrial Technologies.--The Committee provides 
$100,000,000, the same as the request.
    Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee 
recommends $32,272,000, the same as the request. The Committee 
is concerned with the lack of progress being made at the 
Department in adapting Congressional direction to reduce its 
electricity usage and support deployment of increased 
efficiency technologies. The May 2009 Inspector General report 
finds the Department has not taken many possible and practical 
actions to reduce energy consumption associated with its 
information technology resources. The Committee has 
significantly increased funding to the Department for energy 
efficiency initiatives. Yet, it does not appear that the 
Department has implemented policies and procedures to save 
millions of dollars annually, i.e., through implementing more 
energy-efficient computer power management, thin-client 
computing, and data centers which should apply more cost-
effective, power efficient storage systems. The Committee 
believes the Department should aggressively implement the IG's 
``low-hanging fruit'' recommendations as well as work with the 
Office of Science and the NNSA Advanced Computing program to 
apply innovative technology solutions. The Committee notes 
these steps should be viewed as the bare minimum necessary to 
meet congressional and presidential directives to the 
Department.
    RE-ENERGYSE.--The Committee recommends $0, a decrease of 
$115,000,000 from the request.
    Facilities and Infrastructure.--The Committee recommends 
$63,000,000, the same as the request. Of the total, $44,000,000 
is provided for the South Table Mountain Ingress/Egress and 
Traffic Capacity Upgrades project at the National Renewable 
Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado. Through the ARRA, Congress 
provided the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
with $16,800,000,000. The Committee would support the 
Department using ARRA funding for the South Mountain Table 
Ingress/Egress and Traffic Capacity Upgrades project, freeing 
up $44,000,000 for energy research in fiscal year 2010. If the 
Department is able to change the funding source for this 
project, the Committee supports the Department using the 
$44,000,000 to fund the proposed Fuels From Sunlight and Energy 
Efficient Building Systems hubs at $22,000,000 each.
    Weatherization Assistance Program.--The Committee 
recommends $200,000,000. Of that amount, $3,300,000 is for 
training and technical assistance. The Committee understands 
the Department is looking at non-traditional initiatives to 
increase the effectiveness of the weatherization program. From 
within available funds, the Committee directs the Department to 
develop two pilot projects, at $35,000,000 each. The first is 
for the purpose of demonstrating energy savings through use of 
improved insulating and sealing in homes built prior to 1980. 
The Committee also directs the Department to develop a pilot 
project that would increase the leverage of Federal funding 
through the formation of partnerships between the Department 
and traditional and/or non-traditional weatherization 
providers. The current Weatherization Assistance Program 
leverages less than $1 from non-Federal sources for every 
Federal dollar invested. The Committee hopes the Department 
could attain a $3 to $1 match.
    Intergovernmental Activities.--The Committee recommends 
$50,000,000 for State Energy Programs, $10,000,000 for Tribal 
Energy Activities, and $5,000,000 for the Renewable Energy 
Production Incentive.
    Program Direction.--The Committee recommends $152,620,000.
    Program Support.--The Committee recommends $72,000,000. The 
Committee is supportive of two new efforts called Strategic 
Priorities and Impact Analysis and Commercialization, and 
provides $15,000,000 and $25,000,000 respectively. The 
Committee understands the International Renewable Energy 
Program is being transferred to this account in fiscal year 
2010, where it is being increased to $10,000,000 from the 
$5,000,000 appropriated in fiscal year 2009. Within the funds 
provided, the Department is directed to begin conducting 
feasibility studies of the most promising strategies and 
projects identified in the recently updated Territorial Energy 
Assessment. Authorized by section 252 of the Energy Policy Act 
of 2005, the Assessment is looking at strategies and projects 
that have the greatest potential for reducing the dependence of 
U.S. territories and freely associated states on imported oil. 
Further, of the International Renewable Energy Program funding, 
$2,000,000 is available to support the U.S.-Israeli energy 
cooperation agreement.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $148,075,000 for the following list of projects that 
provide for research, development, and demonstration of energy 
efficiency or renewable energy technologies or programs. The 
Committee reminds recipients that statutory cost-sharing 
requirements may apply to these projects.
    The Committee directs $2,000,000 of the total provided to 
the Hawaii Sustainable Energy Security project be used to 
evaluate the efficacy of integrating the full range of 
renewable energy technologies into electricity grids including, 
but not limited, to hydro electricity, solar, and 
photovoltaics. Additionally, of the total provided to the 
Hawaii Renewable Energy Development Venture project, $2,000,000 
is to support pilot/commercial scale demonstrations using 
renewable, nonfossil energy resources that provide 
documentation of the efficacy of renewable energy technologies 
and measures of the carbon footprint and other environmental 
impacts associated with such projects, which could include but 
are not limited to cold seawater air conditioning, 
photovoltaics, and solar. Finally, of the total provided for 
the Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks and Biomass 
Conversion project, $2,000,000 is for support of on-farm 
demonstration of feedstock production and conversion 
technologies and the Committee recommends expansion of these 
activities to the American Pacific region through a partnership 
with the Western Insular Pacific Subcenter.

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
21st Century Renewable Fuels,         $1,250,000  Senators Levin,
 Energy, and Materials Initiative.                 Stabenow
A123Systems Large Format               1,000,000  Senators Levin,
 Nanophosphate Batteries for Solar                 Stabenow
 Energy Storage.
Algae Biofuels Research............    2,000,000  Senators Murray,
                                                   Cantwell
Algae to Ethanol Research and            750,000  Senators Lautenberg,
 Evaluation.                                       Menendez
Algal-Based Renewable Energy for         800,000  Senator Reid
 Nevada.
Alternative and Unconventional        10,000,000  Senator Bennett
 Energy Research and Development.
Alternative Energy School of the       1,200,000  Senator Reid
 Future.
Bayview Gas to Energy Project......    1,000,000  Senator Bennett
Ben Franklin Technology Partners--       500,000  Senator Casey
 Clean Technology Commercialization
 Initiative.
Biodiesel Blending.................      600,000  Senator Kohl
Biodiesel Feedstock Development        1,000,000  Senator Bond
 Initiative (MO).
Biomass Energy Resources Center....    1,000,000  Senator Leahy
Black Hills State Heating and          1,000,000  Senators Johnson,
 Cooling Plant.                                    Thune
Cellulosic Diesel Biorefinery......    1,000,000  Senators Lautenberg,
                                                   Menendez
Center for Biomass Utilization.....    7,000,000  Senators Dorgan,
                                                   Conrad
Center for Nanoscale Energy........    5,000,000  Senator Dorgan
Center for Ocean Renewable Energy..      750,000  Senator Shaheen
Central Vermont Recovered Biomass        500,000  Senator Leahy
 Facility.
Clean Power and Energy Research        1,000,000  Senator Landrieu
 Consortium.
Commercial Building Energy               500,000  Senator Durbin
 Efficiency Demonstration.
Cooling Heating and Power (Micro-      2,000,000  Senator Cochran
 CHP) and Bio-Fuel Application
 Center.
Development of an Economic and           750,000  Senator Hagan
 Efficient Biodiesel Production
 Process.
Development of Biofuels Using Ionic    1,500,000  Senator Reid
 Transfer Membranes.
Development of High Yield Tropical     6,000,000  Senator Inouye
 Feedstocks and Biomass Conversion.
DRI Renewable Energy Center [REC]..      500,000  Senator Reid
Energy Storage/Conservation and          400,000  Senators Kennedy,
 Carbon Emissions Reduction                        Kerry
 Demonstration Project.
EngenuitySC Commercialization and        500,000  Senator Graham
 Entrepreneurial Training Project.
Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe             200,000  Senator Reid
 Demonstration Energy Park.
Fluid Flow Optimization of Aerogel       300,000  Senators Kennedy,
 Blanket Process Project.                          Kerry
Fuel Cell Durability Research......    1,000,000  Senator Dodd
Gas heat pump cooperative training       250,000  Senator Reid
 program.
Genetic Improvement of Switchgrass.    1,500,000  Senator Reed
Great Basin College--Direct-Use        1,000,000  Senator Reid
 Geothermal Demonstration Project.
Great Lakes Institute for Energy       1,000,000  Senator Voinovich
 Innovation.
Great Plains Wind Power Test           2,000,000  Senator Hutchison
 Facility, Texas Tech University,
 Lubbock, TX.
Hawaii Energy Sustainability           6,000,000  Senators Inouye, Akaka
 Program.
Hawaii Renewable Energy Development    6,000,000  Senator Inouye
 Venture.
High Speed Wind Turbine Noise Model    1,000,000  Senator Cochran
 with Suppression.
Hydrogen Production and Delivery         500,000  Senators Dodd,
 Technology.                                       Lieberman
HyperCAST R&D; Funding for Vehicle        750,000  Senator Bennet
 Energy Efficiency.
Independent Energy Community           1,000,000  Senator Bennett
 Renewable Power System.
Institute for Sustainable Energy...      750,000  Senator Sessions
Iowa Central Community College           750,000  Senator Harkin
 Renewable Fuel Testing Laboratory.
Lane Community College Energy            550,000  Senators Wyden,
 Demonstration Building.                           Merkley
Lansing Plug-In Hybrid Initiative..      750,000  Senators Levin,
                                                   Stabenow
Low Cost Production of Thin-film       1,200,000  Senator Specter
 Photovoltaic [PV] Cells.
Marine Energy Technology...........    1,750,000  Senator Murray
MidSouth/Southeast BioEnergy           1,000,000  Senators Lincoln,
 Consortium.                                       Pryor
Montana Algal BioDiesel Initiative.      500,000  Senators Baucus,
                                                   Tester
Montana Bio-Energy Center of           2,250,000  Senators Baucus,
 Excellence.                                       Tester
Nanostructured Materials for           1,000,000  Senator Cochran
 Improved Photovoltaics.
Nanostructured Solar Cells for           500,000  Senators Lincoln,
 Increased Efficiency and Lower                    Pryor
 Cost.
National Center of Excellence in       1,000,000  Senator Voinovich
 Energy Storage Technology.
National Open-Ocean Energy             2,000,000  Senators Bill Nelson,
 Laboratory.                                       Martinez
National Wind Energy Center,           2,000,000  Senator Hutchison
 University of Houston, Houston, TX.
Near Zero Carbon Footprint Energy      1,000,000  Senator Specter
 Creation Through Thermal Oxidation.
Nevada Renewable Energy Integration    3,000,000  Senator Reid
 and Development Consortium.
NIREC--Nevada Institute for            1,000,000  Senator Reid
 Renewable Energy Commercialization.
Northern Nevada Renewable Energy         500,000  Senator Reid
 Training Project.
Norwich Cogeneration Initiative....      750,000  Senators Dodd,
                                                   Lieberman
Novel Photocatalytic Metal Oxides..      250,000  Senator Ben Nelson
Offshore Wind Initiative...........    5,000,000  Senators Collins,
                                                   Snowe
Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing       500,000  Senator Brown
 Center.
Oregon Solar Highway--Innovative       1,000,000  Senators Wyden,
 Use of Solar Technology.                          Merkley
Placer County Biomass Utilization      1,000,000  Senator Feinstein
 Pilot Project.
Power Cube for Wind Power and Grid       500,000  Senator Specter
 Regulation Services.
Renewable Energy Clean Air Project     1,000,000  Senator Klobuchar
 [RECAP].
Renewable Energy Demonstration.....      500,000  Senator Durbin
Renewable Energy Feasibility Study       500,000  Senator Reid
 and Resources Assessment.
Renewable Energy Initiative........      500,000  Senator Durbin
Renewable Energy Initiatives for       1,000,000  Senator Reid
 Clark County, Nevada Parks and
 Recreation.
Research on Fuel Cell Powered by         675,000  Senator Schumer
 Hydrogen Produced from Biomass to
 Provide Clean Energy for Remote
 Farms away from Electric Grids.
San Francisco Electric Vehicle           500,000  Senator Boxer
 Infrastructure Initiative.
Shenandoah Valley as a National          750,000  Senators Webb, Warner
 Demonstration Project Achieving 25
 Percent Renewable Energy by the
 Year 2025.
Smart Energy Program...............      500,000  Senators Dodd,
                                                   Lieberman
Solar Compactor Energy Efficiency        300,000  Senators Kennedy,
 Research Demonstration Project.                   Kerry
Solar Electric Power for                 500,000  Senator Reid
 Nonsectarian Educational and
 Social Services Facility.
Solar Energy Development,                800,000  Senator Collins
 University of Maine at Presque
 Isle, ME.
Solar Energy Zone Planning and         1,000,000  Senator Reid
 Infrastructure for the Nevada Test
 Site and Adjacent Lands.
Solar Panels in Municipal Owned        1,000,000  Senators Lautenberg,
 Buildings.                                        Menendez
Solar Pioneer and Solar                  500,000  Senator Gillibrand
 Entrepreneur Programs.
Southern Pine Based Biorefinery        1,000,000  Senator Chambliss
 Center.
Southern Regional Center for           4,000,000  Senator Cochran
 Lightweight Innovative Designs.
Southwest Alaska Regional              2,500,000  Senators Murkowski,
 Geothermal Energy Project.                        Begich
Strategic Biomass Initiative.......      500,000  Senator Cochran
Student Sustainability Initiatives.      300,000  Senator Sanders
Sun Grant Initiative...............    2,750,000  Senator Johnson
Sustainable Energy Research Center.   10,000,000  Senator Cochran
Switchgrass Biofuel Research:            500,000  Senator Ben Nelson
 Carbon Sequestration and Life
 Cycle Analysis.
The CUNY Energy Institute..........    1,550,000  Senators Schumer,
                                                   Gillibrand
Thin Film Photovoltaic Research &        500,000  Senator Leahy
 Development.
Unconventional and Renewable           2,500,000  Senator Bennett
 Energies Research Utilizing
 Computer Simulations.
University of Louisville Research      2,000,000  Senator McConnell
 and Energy Independence Program.
University of New Haven Solar            500,000  Senator Dodd
 Testing and Training Lab.
UNR--Biodiesel from Food Waste.....    1,000,000  Senator Reid
UNR--Great Basin Center for            1,000,000  Senator Reid
 Geothermal Energy.
UNR--Mass Exchanger Technology for     1,200,000  Senator Reid
 Geothermal and Solar Energy
 Systems.
Vermont Biofuels Initiative........      750,000  Senator Leahy
Vermont Energy Investment                450,000  Senator Sanders
 Corporation.
Wallowa County Integrated Biomass        500,000  Senators Wyden,
 Energy Center.                                    Merkley
Washoe Wind Turbine Demonstration         50,000  Senator Reid
 Project.
Wind Turbine Development...........    1,000,000  Senators Baucus,
                                                   Tester
Wind Turbine Infrastructure for        1,000,000  Senators Carper,
 Green Energy and Research on Wind                 Kaufman
 Power in Delaware.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability

Appropriations, 2009...................................\1\$4,637,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     208,008,000
Committee recommendation................................     179,483,000

\1\Includes Emergency Appropriations of $4,500,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee provides $179,483,000 for Electricity 
Delivery and Energy Reliability. No funding is provided for the 
Grid Materials, Devices and Systems Hub.
    The Committee is supportive of the increased investment in 
cyber security funding to support a coordinated research and 
development strategy that will improve the security of our 
national electricity grid and establish the appropriate 
protocols and policies for the integration on smart grid 
technology and to validate and test SCADA technologies and 
software. To ensure the effective deployment of this technology 
in the electric transmission system the Committee directs the 
Department to establish a private sector organization to 
identify vulnerabilities, and develop research and development 
and deployment strategies. It is important the users, owners 
and operators of the bulk power system are able to work with 
Federal agencies and laboratories to test and validate 
technologies and software and develop and disseminate best 
practices to ensure the thorough deployment of the state-of-
the-art technology. In addition, this organization must include 
broad representation of owners, operators, users, and 
technology providers. Due to the international threat the 
Department should include other countries that face similar 
cyber security threats to share best practices to the extent 
possible. The Committee recommends that the Department provide 
up to 50 percent of the funding for cyber security to establish 
the organization and execute the recommended research, 
development and deployment strategy.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $6,475,000 for the following list of projects that 
provide for research, development, and demonstration of 
electricity delivery and energy reliability technologies or 
programs. The Committee reminds recipients that statutory cost-
sharing requirements may apply to these projects.

  CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
                                PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Development and Reliability.     $325,000  Senator Dorgan
Navajo Nation Electrification          1,750,000  Senators Bingaman, Tom
 Program.                                          Udall
North Dakota Energy Workforce          1,900,000  Senator Dorgan
 Development.
Oswego County BOCES Wind Turbine         200,000  Senator Schumer
 Model Project.
Power Grid Reliability and Security    1,000,000  Senators Murray,
                                                   Cantwell
Technology Development.............      300,000  Senator Dorgan
UVM Smart Energy Grid Research.....      500,000  Senator Leahy
Watkins Glen, Schuyler County Gas        500,000  Senator Gillibrand
 Storage project.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Nuclear Energy

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $792,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     761,274,000
Committee recommendation................................     761,274,000

                        RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommendation for nuclear energy research 
and development totals $761,274,000.
    Integrated University Program.--The Committee provides 
$5,000,000 to restore funding to current year levels and 
sustain the ongoing collaboration between the Office of Nuclear 
Energy, NNSA's Office of Nuclear Nonproliferation and the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support the education and 
training of engineers and scientists in nuclear engineering, as 
well as nonproliferation, nuclear forensics, and nuclear 
safeguards missions. This funding is to be used consistent with 
the authorization provided in section 313 of Public Law 111-8. 
This funding is not intended to supplant university research 
funding provided within the nuclear energy research and 
development activities. Studies by the American Physical 
Society, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 
and the American Nuclear Society recommended Federal investment 
in university research and training in nuclear engineering and 
forensics as well.
    Nuclear Power 2010.--The Committee recommends $120,000,000, 
an increase of $100,000,000. This funding is to be used to 
support the engineering design work of U.S. reactor designs in 
the development of a license application to the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission. Not only will this reactor design 
facilitate deployment in the United States, but will also 
support export sales, where there is strong interest in nuclear 
power.
    Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems.--The Committee 
recommendation is $143,000,000. The Committee has shifted 
$10,000,000 to the Research Reactor Infrastructure program to 
support university-led research and fund critically important 
equipment upgrades.
    Within the available funds, $10,000,000 is provided to 
focus on existing light water reactor technology life 
extension. Consistent with the MIT Study ``Update of the MIT 
2003 Future of Nuclear Power'' the Committee directs the 
Department to evaluate the issues related to extending the life 
of the existing light water reactors to 80 years and support 
research to increase the power output of future light water 
reactors.
    The Committee is concerned the budget request for this 
program lacks focus and mission. This is demonstrated by the 
fact that this budget reverses the previous decision by the 
program to focus on two advanced reactor technologies in favor 
of supporting research on six different technologies. This is a 
step backwards and unproductive in advancing deployment of new 
reactor designs. The Committee directs the program to select 
two reactor technologies in fiscal year 2010 and focus its 
research on those designs that offer the best opportunity to 
realize commercial deployment, a high level of safety and 
efficiency and exhibit the best waste management 
characteristics.
    The Committee does believe advanced computing and 
simulation can play a critical role in developing advanced 
fuels and modeling reactor performance. As such, the Committee 
supports the establishment of the Energy Innovation Hub for 
Modeling and Simulation. Advanced computing can only be 
effective if its software codes are supported by validated 
experiments which are supported by the Fuel Cycle Research and 
Development program. The Committee also recommends this office 
support an industry cost shared demonstration program to 
develop and test high performance light water reactor fuel 
utilizing ceramic cladding.
    The Committee appreciates the fact that ongoing nuclear 
research is being performed in aging nuclear facilities at our 
national laboratories and campuses. The Committee believes 
investment in these facilities is critical if the Department is 
going to support a robust research program to develop advanced 
fuels and reactor technologies. The Committee recommends 
$20,000,000 from within the available funding to be divided 
evenly between Oak Ridge and Los Alamos National Labs for hot 
cell and nuclear testing infrastructure. The Committee has also 
made additional investment in university research reactors and 
the Idaho National Laboratory infrastructure as well.
    Fuel Cycle Research and Development.--The Committee 
recommends $145,000,000 for this program, the same as current 
year levels. The Committee cannot support the proposed 
innovation hub in extreme materials in light of the termination 
of the LANSCE Facility upgrade at Los Alamos, which offers the 
best existing opportunity to serve the extreme materials 
research mission. Like the Generation IV program, this program 
request lacks specificity, yet the mission is critical to 
addressing our current and future spent fuel needs, especially 
in light of the administration's decision to abandon Yucca 
Mountain. Consistent with the recommendations proposed in the 
MIT Update Study, the Committee directs the Department to 
support the following R&D; strategy: (1) Continue to support 
fuel separations technologies to validate and demonstrate the 
capability of technologies and processes that will produce 
separate fuel, actinides and fission byproducts and produce new 
fuel pellets for testing; (2) expand the capability to utilize 
computer simulation and modeling to support this mission; (3) 
consider alternatives to the existing waste management strategy 
to support a wider variety of waste solutions including long 
term geologic repositories and interim strategies (funding may 
be provided to support site specific research and 
characterization, in order to develop fuels that improve long-
term waste handling and storage requirements); and (4) develop 
a strategy in cooperation with industry to support material 
protection control and accounting of nuclear material.

                   RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    Space and Defense Infrastructure.--The Committee recommends 
the budget request for this activity at $47,000,000.
    Research Reactor Infrastructure.--The Committee recommends 
$15,000,000 for this activity to support facility upgrades at 
reactor facilities and equipment purchases for universities 
that support nuclear engineering programs consistent with 
historic funding levels. The budget request had buried this 
activity within the Idaho facilities management program.
    Pu-238 Production Restart Project.--The Committee 
recommends no funding for this program at this time. The 
Committee understands the importance of this mission and the 
capability provided to other Federal agencies. However, the 
Department's proposed plutonium reprocessing program is poorly 
defined and lacks an overall mission justification as well as a 
credible project cost estimate. Sustaining the plutonium 
mission is a costly but an important responsibility. The 
Committee expects the Department to work with other Federal 
agency customers to develop an equitable and appropriate cost-
sharing strategy to sustain this mission into the future.

                      IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $211,274,000. The Committee 
opposes the Department's decision to included research reactor 
funding within the Idaho Facilities Management line. The 
additional funding provided in this account and the funds 
provided for research reactors shall be applied to support 
upgrades to the Advanced Test Reactor Life Extension program 
for a total increase of 12,700,000 for the ATR. This is a one-
of-a-kind user facility supporting research and mission need 
for Federal customers, academia, and commercial users that must 
be maintained. The Committee recognizes that this account has 
received $45,000,000 in additional funding to offset shortfalls 
in pension funding caused by poor market performance. Without 
these funds, mission priorities and goals would be compromised.

                           PROGRAM DIRECTION

    The Committee recommends $73,000,000 to Program Direction, 
consistent with the budget request.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $2,000,000 for the following list of projects that 
provide for research, development, and demonstration of nuclear 
energy technologies or programs. The Committee reminds 
recipients that statutory cost-sharing requirements may apply 
to these projects.

            CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED NUCLEAR ENERGY PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Fabrication Consortium.....   $2,000,000  Senator Voinovich
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2009...................................\1\$4,276,320,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     617,565,000
Committee recommendation................................     699,200,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $3,400,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee recommendation for Fossil Energy Research and 
Development is $699,200,000. No funds are provided for the 
Clean Coal Power Initiative and FutureGen because of 
substantial increases in the American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act. The Committee urges the Department to work thoroughly but 
expeditiously to utilize these funds as well as to expand its 
efforts on innovative concepts for beneficial reuse of carbon 
dioxide activities. The Committee has also added bill language 
to permit the Department to vest title to property acquired for 
all programs under Fossil energy appropriations in the same 
manner as authorized for the Clean Coal Power Initiative.
    Fuels and Power Systems.--The Committee recommends 
$428,200,000 for fuels and power systems which is $24,300,000 
above the request. The recommendation includes $58,000,000 for 
Innovations for Existing Plants [IEP]. The IEP program is 
directed to continue carbon capture research for the existing 
fleet. Of the IEP funds, $10,000,000 is for Federal 
laboratories, in collaboration with universities, to continue 
research and development on the critical link between water and 
fossil energy extraction including unconventional fossil energy 
resources and utilization. The Committee also supports 
$5,000,000, in additional research for the mercury research 
program. The Committee provides $2,000,000 for the Department 
to work with utilities, cooperatives, and municipalities to 
perform an assessment of coal-fired power plants in the 
existing U.S. fleet that would be suitable candidates for 
consideration of CO2 capture retrofits. The 
Committee expects the Department to assess the retrofit 
capacity based on a wide range of variables, including 
available space, water supplies, sequestration potential, 
labor, and other options. The Committee expects the Department 
to provide the estimated cost and schedule for the various 
control technology options that are known at this time. The 
Committee recommends $65,000,000 for the Advanced Integrated 
Gasification Combined Cycle activities and $32,000,000 for the 
Advanced Turbines program. The Committee recommends 
$160,200,000 for Carbon Sequestration activities but does not 
support the request for the hub. The Committee has provided 
$5,000,000 to be applied to advanced computational modeling and 
visualization to be applied to the large regional sequestration 
demonstration projects research. The Committee has further 
provided $5,000,000 for the Department to explore co-
sequestration technology opportunities. The Committee 
recommends $25,000,000 for Fuels to support both fuels research 
from coal liquids and hydrogen. Within available funds for 
Fuels, the Committee recommends adequate funding to continue 
the integrated coal-biomass research activities. The Committee 
recommends $58,000,000 for Fuel Cell research. The Committee 
recommends $30,000,000 for Advanced Research, including 
$3,000,000 for computational energy sciences.
    Natural Gas Technologies.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $25,000,000. Of this amount $15,000,000 is provided to 
methane hydrates, and $5,000,000 is for research to continue to 
develop solutions to minimize the impact or develop treatment 
technologies for produced water as a by-product of natural gas 
production. Within the remaining funding, the Committee 
recommends supporting unconventional natural gas production 
from basins that contain tight gas sands, shale gas and coal 
bed methane resources.
    Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies.--The Committee 
recommends $25,000,000 to establish an unconventional fossil 
energy technologies program to replace the Oil Technologies 
program that was not funded in this budget request. The 
Committee recognizes the vast potential to increase the 
domestic production of on-shore unconventional oil, natural gas 
and coal resources but acknowledges the technological, economic 
and environmental challenges related to their production. The 
Committee recommends $20,000,000 to establish a comprehensive 
research, development and technology deployment strategy to 
focus a range of unconventional oil, gas and coal resources. In 
demonstrating technology applications, the program should look 
to deploy new or validate existing technology applications and 
should consider demonstrations located on state or Federal 
lands. The Committee encourages the Department to include 
funding for interdisciplinary university, laboratory and 
industry consortia to develop and test technology and 
productions methods. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $1,200,000 to continue the Risk Based Management 
System and the continuation of the stripper well program.
    The Committee recognizes the tremendous potential that 
computational visualization can offer in the development and 
efficient production of unconventional fossil resources in an 
environmentally responsible manner. The Committee directs the 
Office of Fossil Energy, the Office of Science and NNSA's 
Advanced Computing and Simulation [ASC] program to work in 
collaboration with universities and industry to establish a 
joint program to develop a research, development and 
demonstration strategy and make awards to enhance domestic 
production and minimize the environmental impacts utilizing 
advanced simulation and visualization capabilities. The 
Committee recommends $5,000,000 be provided to the Office of 
Fossil Energy and has also provided funds to Office of Science 
and the NNSA's ASC campaign for this joint effort.
    Program Direction.--The Committee recommends $158,000,000 
for Program Direction, of which $125,150,000 is for the 
National Energy Technology Laboratory.
    Other Programs.--The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for 
Plant and Capital Equipment. The Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration. The 
Committee recommends $700,000 for the Special recruitment 
programs. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Cooperative 
research and development. The Committee continues to support 
the Department's project management efforts and the role of the 
National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL], with the 
assistance of the Golden Field Office, in setting up a 
successful Project Management Center [PMC]. The Committee 
encourages the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
to continue collaboration and funding of the PMC with the NETL.
    Congressionally Directed Projects.--The Committee 
recommends $27,300,000 for the following congressionally 
directed projects.

             CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED FOSSIL ENERGY PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design and Test of an Advanced SOFC   $1,000,000  Senator Specter
 Generator in PA.
Fossil Fuel Research and               4,000,000  Senators Dorgan,
 Development.                                      Conrad
Gulf of Mexico Hydrates Research       1,200,000  Senator Cochran
 Consortium.
Hydrogen Fuel Dispensing Station...    1,200,000  Senator Byrd
Long Term Environmental and            1,250,000  Senator Byrd
 Economic Impacts of the
 Development of a Coal Liquefaction
 Sector in China.
Montana ICTL Demonstration.........    1,250,000  Senator Baucus
National Center for Hydrogen           3,000,000  Senators Dorgan,
 Technology.                                       Conrad
Shale Oil Upgrading Utilizing Ionic    1,500,000  Senator Bennett
 Membranes.
Shallow Carbon Sequestration Pilot     2,400,000  Senator Bond
 Demonstration (MO).
Utah Center for Ultra-Clean Coal       8,000,000  Senator Bennett
 Utilization and Heavy Oil Research.
Utah Coal and Biomass to Fuel Pilot    2,500,000  Senator Bennett
 Plant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $19,099,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      23,627,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,627,000

    The Committee recommends $23,627,000 for fiscal year 2010, 
the same as the budget request for the operation of the naval 
petroleum and oil shale reserves. The Department is directed to 
operate the field as close to maximum efficiency as possible, 
given available funds.

                      Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $205,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     229,073,000
Committee recommendation................................     259,073,000

    The Committee recommends $259,073,000 for the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve. Of these funds, the Committee directs the 
Department to use $30,000,000 for engineering activities at the 
Richton, Mississippi expansion site. While the Committee has 
provided for the operation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, 
it does not support any other expansion activities at this 
time. The Committee also provides for the purchase of a 
commercial storage cavern to replace an existing Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve cavern due to environmental risk at the Bayou 
Choctaw, Louisiana site.

                   Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $9,800,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      11,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,300,000

    The Committee recommends $11,300,000, the same as the 
budget request.

                   Energy Information Administration

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $110,595,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     133,058,000
Committee recommendation................................     110,595,000

    The Committee recommends $110,595,000 for the Energy 
Information Administration.

                   Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$744,819,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     237,517,000
Committee recommendation................................     259,829,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $483,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee's recommendation for Non-Defense 
Environmental Cleanup is $259,829,000, a total of $22,312,000 
above the request.
    Reprogramming Control Levels.--In fiscal year 2010, the 
Environmental Management program may transfer funding between 
operating expense funded projects within the controls listed 
below using guidance contained in the Department's budget 
execution manual [DOE M 135.1-1A, Chapter IV]. All capital 
construction line item projects remain separate controls from 
the operating projects. The Committees on Appropriations in the 
House and Senate must be formally notified in advance of all 
reprogrammings, except internal reprogrammings, and the 
Department is to take no financial action in anticipation of 
Congressional response. The Committee recommends the following 
reprogramming control points for fiscal year 2010:
  --Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and 
        Decommissioning;
  --Gaseous Diffusion Plants;
  --Small Sites; and
  --West Valley Demonstration Project.
    Internal Reprogramming Authority.--Headquarters 
Environmental Management may transfer up to $2,000,000, one 
time, between accounts listed above to reduce health and safety 
risks, gain cost savings, or complete projects, as long as a 
program or project is not increased or decreased by more than 
$2,000,000 in total during the fiscal year.
    The reprogramming authority--either formal or internal--may 
not be used to initiate new programs or to change funding 
levels for programs specifically denied, limited, or increased 
by Congress in the act or report. The Committee on 
Appropriations in the House and Senate must be notified within 
30 days after the use of the internal reprogramming authority.
    Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and 
Decommissioning.--The Committee recommends $7,652,000, the same 
as the request.
    Gaseous Diffusion Plants.--The Committee recommends 
$104,444,000, the same as the request.
    Small Sites.--The Committee recommends $82,233,000, an 
increase of $14,886,000 above the request. An additional 
$10,000,000 is provided to Moab, bringing the fiscal year 2010 
total to $40,671,000, and an additional $4,886,000 is provided 
to continue ongoing surveillance and operation of groundwater 
treatment systems and completion of the decontamination and 
decommissioning of two reactor facilities at Brookhaven 
National Laboratory.
    West Valley Demonstration Project.--The Committee 
recommends $65,500,000, an increase of $7,426,000 above the 
request, to maintain progress on cleanup.

      Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$925,503,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     359,377,000
Committee recommendation................................     588,322,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $390,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee's recommendation is $588,322,000, an increase 
of $228,945,000 over the request to sustain cleanup activities 
at the Paducah, Kentucky Gaseous Diffusion plant consistent 
with fiscal year 2009 level of $116,446,000 for cleanup. The 
Committee provides $225,000,000 for East Tennessee Technology 
Park and $246,876,000 for Portsmouth, both as requested. We 
note there is no request for reimbursement for Uranium/Thorium 
cleanup contracts, and therefore provide nothing in our 
recommendation.
    The Committee did not adopt the administration's proposed 
$200,000,000 tax on uranium fuel. The Committee is aware of the 
fact that over $5,000,000,000 in available funding remains in 
the UED&D; fund. If this administration is serious about this 
cleanup effort it should demonstrate it by increasing the 
funding requests, not through budgetary gimmicks.

                                SCIENCE

Appropriations, 2009...................................\1\$6,372,636,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   4,941,682,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,898,832,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $1,600,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee recommends $4,898,832,000 for the Office of 
Science. The Committee applauds the successes, which have been 
achieved when the Department of Energy has collaborated with 
the National Institutes of Health [NIH]. These successes 
include the human genome project, advances in bioinformatics, 
and breakthroughs in atomic resolution structural biology. The 
Committee strongly encourages the DOE Office of Science and the 
National Laboratories to reach out to the NIH to 
institutionalize senior level contacts with the goal of 
identifying opportunities for sustained collaboration in 
research and development. The Committee notes that long-lasting 
relationships are necessary to build the types of integrated 
collaborative programs that could bring about breakthroughs in 
biomedical imaging, systems biology, and other key areas of 
research. The Committee directs the Office of Science, in 
consultation with the NNSA, to review all radioactive materials 
held by the Department of Energy and to work with science, 
medical, industrial and agricultural groups to ascertain if 
available inventories can be used in industrial or medical 
applications and how to improve the utilization of existing 
sources and avoid further production or importation of new 
sources. Finally, the Office of Science, working with all the 
relevant offices, is directed to make recommendations for 
investment in U.S. facilities including research reactors or 
accelerators that could be upgraded to provide domestic sources 
for medical and industrial applications.

                          HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $813,000,000 for High Energy 
Physics. The Committee questions the increased investment in 
Large Hadron Collider [LHC] support when the timing of the 
restart of the LHC is in doubt. The Committee urges the Office 
of Science and the LHC managers to improve communication on the 
status of the LHC.

                            NUCLEAR PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $540,000,000 for Nuclear Physics. 
Within the funds provided, $17,500,000 is for nuclear medicine 
medical application research. The Committee emphasizes its 
commitment to nuclear medicine medical application research at 
the Department of Energy. All of the added funds must be 
awarded competitively in one or more solicitation that includes 
all sources--universities, the private sector, and Government 
laboratories. Funding for nuclear medicine application research 
was previously within the Biological and Environmental Research 
program.

                 BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $604,182,000 for Biological and 
Environmental Research. The Committee recognizes the 
international communities' reliance on the NNSA laboratories 
expertise in climate change modeling and continues to believe 
the NNSA laboratories are well equipped to develop and deploy a 
national system for science-based stewardship that combines 
advanced modeling, multi-scale monitoring, and impact analysis 
tools. These laboratories, with their experience in nuclear 
weapons nonproliferation and their unique capabilities across a 
wide range of technical resources are able to make a 
significant contribution in the development and implementation 
of a comprehensive climate research strategy. The Committee 
directs the Office of Science to continue to work closely with 
the NNSA laboratories on climate change modeling.

                         BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $1,653,500,000 for Basic Energy 
Sciences. Of these funds $154,240,000 is provided for 
construction activities as requested in the budget. The 
remaining $1,499,260,000 is for research. The Committee does 
not accept the proposed new break out of subaccounts within 
Basic Energy Sciences as proposed by the budget.
    Within the research funds provided $35,000,000 is for the 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
[EPSCoR]. The EPSCoR program is currently funding energy 
research that will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 
EPSCoR States have significant energy resources, contain or are 
near national laboratories and already undertake research in 
areas of importance to the Department and Nation. In fact, 6 of 
the top 10 energy-producing States are EPSCoR States. In order 
to keep up with the increased national focus on energy, the 
Committee recommends that the limit of one Implementation Grant 
per EPSCoR State be removed and the cap on the maximum 
allowable award be increased to $2,500,000.
    Within the funding provided, $15,000,000 is provided to 
develop a second target station at the Spallation Neutron 
Source. The Committee strongly encourages the Office of Science 
to fully fund all major items of equipment requested in the 
budget and provide full funding of facility operations within 
this account.

                 ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $399,000,000 for Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research. The Committee expects the Office 
of Science to continue to support joint research with the NNSA 
laboratories through the Institute for Advanced Architecture 
and Advanced Algorithms. Within the available funds, $5,000,000 
shall be provided to collaborate in a joint program to enhance 
the production of unconventional fossil energy using advanced 
simulation and visualization.

                         FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $416,000,000 for Fusion Energy 
Sciences.

                  SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

    The Committee recommends $133,600,000 to support 
infrastructure activities, the same as the budget request.

                        SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

    The Committee recommends $83,000,000 for Safeguards and 
Security activities, the same as the budget request. The 
program provides funding for physical security, information 
protection, and cyber security for the national laboratories 
and facilities of the Office of Science.

                       SCIENCE PROGRAM DIRECTION

    The Committee recommends $194,722,000 for the Office of 
Science Program Direction. The reduction from the budget 
request reflects the Committee's primary continued concern 
about the proposed large increase for field office personnel. 
The Committee supports the $8,916,000 for the Office of Science 
and Technical Information.

                     SCIENCE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

    These initiatives support the mission of the Department's 
Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists program. The 
Committee recommends $20,678,000, the same as the budget 
request.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $41,150,000 for the following list of projects that 
provide for research, development, and demonstration of science 
technologies or programs. The Committee reminds recipients that 
statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to these 
projects.

                CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SCIENCE PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced Manufacturing and            $1,000,000  Senator Lugar
 Engineering Equipment.
Alaska Climate Center..............    1,000,000  Senator Murkowski
Antibodies Research................    3,000,000  Senators Dorgan,
                                                   Conrad
Carbon Nanotube Technology Center      1,000,000  Senator Inhofe
 [CANTEC].
Center for Advanced Bio-Based            950,000  Senator Grassley
 Binders and Pollution Reduction
 Technologies at the University of
 Northern Iowa.
Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems..    3,000,000  Senator Byrd
Center of Excellence and Hazardous       750,000  Senators Bingaman, Tom
 Materials.                                        Udall
Clean Energy Infrastructure              500,000  Senator Brown
 Educational Initiative.
Climate Model Evaluation Program...    1,800,000  Senator Shelby
Computing Capability...............    5,000,000  Senators Dorgan,
                                                   Conrad
Development of Ultrafiltration           800,000  Senator Reid
 Membrane-Separation Technology for
 Energy-Efficient Water Treatment
 and Desalination Process.
Enhancement for the Intermountain        600,000  Senator Bennett
 Center for River Restoration and
 Rehabilitation.
Environmental Quality Monitoring         500,000  Senator Durbin
 and Analysis.
Fuel Cell Research, Brown              1,500,000  Senators Reed,
 University, RI.                                   Whitehouse
Functional MRI Research............    1,200,000  Senator Leahy
Idaho Accelerator Center Production    1,500,000  Senators Crapo, Risch
 of Medical Isotopes.
Kansas University Cancer Research      4,000,000  Senators Brownback,
 Equipment.                                        Roberts
Marine Systems Energy/Environmental      300,000  Senators Kennedy,
 Sustainability Research.                          Kerry
Martin County Microfiber Hydrogen      1,000,000  Senators Burr, Hagen
 Fuel Cell Technology Development.
Material Science Smart Coatings....      500,000  Senator Ben Nelson
Nanotechnology Initiative..........      750,000  Senators Dodd,
                                                   Lieberman
Nevada Water Resources Data,             500,000  Senator Reid
 Modeling, and Visualization Center
 [CAVE].
Performance Assessment Institute...    1,000,000  Senator Reid
Pioneer Valley Life Science              400,000  Senators Kennedy,
 Institute Translational Biomedical                Kerry
 Research.
Renovation and Development of the      1,000,000  Senators Landrieu,
 LSU Nuclear Science Building.                     Vitter
RNAI Research......................      300,000  Senators Kennedy,
                                                   Kerry
Science Center Equipment and Energy      900,000  Senator Bennett
 Efficient LEED Technology.
Smart Grid Communications Security     1,000,000  Senator Udall, Mark
 Project.
SUU Science Center Energy              1,000,000  Senator Bennett
 Efficiency Modernization and
 Enhancement Project.
Targeted Radiotherapy for Melanoma.      300,000  Senators Kennedy,
                                                   Kerry
Technology Transfer and                  750,000  Senator Bingaman
 Commercialization of Technologies
 at DOE Laboratories.
The New School Green Building......    1,000,000  Senators Schumer,
                                                   Gillibrand
USD Catalysis Group for Alternative    1,100,000  Senator Johnson
 Energy.
Yttrium-90 Microspheres Research...    1,250,000  Senator Murray
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                ENERGY TRANSFORMATION ACCELERATION FUND

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$400,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $400,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee does not recommend the $10,000,000 requested.

                         NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $145,390,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      98,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      98,400,000

    The Committee recommends $98,400,000, the same as the 
request. The Nuclear Waste Fund has a current balance of 
$22,000,000,000 and generates annual interest of just over 
$1,000,000,000 that is added to the corpus. The Committee 
believes that interest accrued, being more than five times the 
President's fiscal year 2010 budget proposal of $196,800,000, 
is more than adequate to cover planned activities proposed in 
this budget request and is not aware of any specific strategy 
to execute the statutory obligations to manage both defense and 
nondefense material consistent with the Nuclear Waste Policy 
Act. Given the Administration's decision to terminate the Yucca 
Mountain repository program while developing disposal 
alternatives, the Committee expects the Secretary of Energy to 
suspend collection of payments to the Nuclear Waste Fund.

              Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program


                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009...................................\1\$6,484,880,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   1,543,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      43,000,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $6,000,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          OFFSETTING RECEIPTS

Appropriations, 2009....................................    -$19,880,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................  -1,543,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     -43,000,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $6,465,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   1,500,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

        ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2009...................................\1\$7,520,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $7,510,000,000 under Public Law 
110-329 and $10,000,000 under Public Law 111-5.

    The Committee recommends the $20,000,000 requested.

                      Departmental Administration


                                (GROSS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $272,643,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     302,071,000
Committee recommendation................................     293,684,000

                        (MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)

Appropriations, 2009....................................   -$117,317,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    -119,740,000
Committee recommendation................................    -119,740,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $155,326,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     182,331,000
Committee recommendation................................    -173,944,000

    The Committee recommends $293,684,000 for Departmental 
Administration, which provides a net appropriation of 
$173,944,000 in fiscal year 2010. The Departmental 
Administration account supports 10 Department-wide management 
organizations including administrative, human resources, 
financial, workforce diversity, congressional liaison, and 
program management functions.
    The January 2009 Small Refineries Exemption Study issued by 
the Department of Energy was intended to determine whether 
small refineries faced a disproportionate economic hardship in 
meeting Renewable Fuel Standard [RFS] requirements beginning in 
2011. The Committee understands the study contained inadequate 
small refinery input, did not assess the economic condition of 
the small refining sector, take into account regional factors 
or accurately project RFS compliance costs. Therefore, the 
Committee does not believe the study is complete, nor is the 
Department able to make the required determination at this 
time. In view of these deficiencies and the importance of the 
study, the Department is directed to reopen and reassess the 
Small Refineries Exemption Study by June 30, 2010. The 
Department is specifically directed to seek and invite comment 
from small refineries on the RFS exemption hardship question, 
assess RFS compliance impacts on small refinery utilization 
rates and profitability, evaluate the financial health and 
ability of small refineries to meet RFS requirements, study 
small refinery impacts and regional dynamics by PADD, and 
reassess the accuracy of small refinery compliance costs 
through the purchase of renewable fuel credits. Finally, the 
Committee notes that the 2009 study does not estimate the price 
of tradable fuel credits, but the Committee is aware that from 
2008 to 2009, price has increased nearly threefold. The 
Committee expects the Department to undertake an economic 
review to estimate the actual economic impact of the RFS on 
small refineries on a regional basis.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2009....................................  \1\$66,927,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      51,445,000
Committee recommendation................................      51,927,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $15,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee recommends $51,927,000, the same as the 
request.

                    ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES


                National Nuclear Security Administration


                           WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $6,410,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   6,384,431,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,468,267,000

    The Committee recommends $6,468,267,000 for Nation Nuclear 
Security Administration Weapons Activities.

                        DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

    Life Extension Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$209,196,000 for the Life Extension Program, the same as the 
budget request.
    Stockpile Systems.--The Committee recommends $390,300,000, 
the same as the request.
    Weapons Dismantlement.--The Committee recommends 
$84,100,000, the same as the request. The funding for the Pit 
Disassembly and Conversion Facility has been moved from this 
program to the Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities 
(Construction) program.
    Stockpile Services.--The Committee recommends $844,055,000. 
The Committee recommends an increase of $30,000,000 to support 
experimental activities at the Nevada Test Site needed to 
support subcritical experiments in the Science and Advanced 
Simulation and Computing Campaigns. No funding is provided to 
support the transition of the tritium design and gas transfer 
R&D; mission as proposed in the Complex Transformation plan. An 
independent study found there was no compelling economic or 
programmatic justification for this move and the transfer fails 
to deliver any amount of budgetary savings. In fact, NNSA's 
preferred alternative would cost an additional $86,000,000 
above the no action alternative. The NNSA has a poor record of 
transferring mission responsibilities without considerable 
disruption to the mission. Until the NNSA is able to provide 
both an economic or programmatic justification, the Committee 
will not support the transfer of tritium design and gas 
transfer R&D; missions.

                               CAMPAIGNS

    The campaigns support scientific research, experimental 
activities and advanced computation, which make up the core of 
the science-based stockpile stewardship program. This program 
has enabled the U.S. Government to ensure the safety, 
reliability, and security of our nuclear weapons stockpile 
without underground nuclear testing for the past 15 years. 
However, due to declining investment in the core scientific 
capabilities, a Task Force Report by the Defense Science Board 
found the lack of funding in the Advanced Computing program 
will not allow the NNSA to meet its nuclear weapons milestones. 
At the same time, the existing stockpile continues to age 
presenting new scientific challenges as required modifications 
move each system further and further away from its test 
validated state, further taxing the scientific capacity of the 
complex to accurately predict the expected margins and 
reliability of the aging stockpile. The Committee does not 
believe this level of funding is adequate to support 
modernization of the complex including critical investment in 
infrastructure and scientific capabilities. The Committee 
recommends additional funding for both categories. The 
Committee recommends $1,589,230,000 for NNSA Campaigns, which 
is $29,500,000 above the request, but $34,120,000 below current 
year levels.
    Science Campaign.--The Committee recommends $319,690,000, 
an increase of $3,000,000 which is added to Primary Assessment 
Technologies.
    Engineering Campaign.--The Committee recommends 
$150,000,000, consistent with the budget request.
    Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield 
Campaign.--The Committee provides $453,415,000, an increase of 
$16,500,000 to restore operation to current year levels for 
Sandia's Z machine and the University of Rochester Omega 
facility. The Committee is frustrated with NNSA's inability to 
provide a balanced program to support full operations at each 
of the facilities which are each critical to understanding the 
complex high energy density science. The Committee provides 
$54,000,000 to Sandia to operate full shift operations and 
$55,000,000 to the University of Rochester to support Omega 
operations.
    The Committee understands the NNSA is preparing to 
establish an advisory board for the National Ignition Facility 
experimental program, as recommended by the JASONS, and is 
considering the establishment of a national ICF/HED advisory 
committee. The Committee strongly supports the creation of an 
independent advisory board over the national ICF science and 
HED physics research. This panel should review the program 
strategy to ensure the experimental program appropriately 
manages the facilities and make recommendations on the 
appropriate scientific and technical aspects of the 
experimental program.
    The NNSA is to be commended on completing construction of 
the NIF and the Committee encourages the NNSA to focus on the 
goal of ignition, for which this facility was built.
    The Committee is concerned by the sole-source award of 
target development, which is inconsistent with its own policy 
guidelines. The Committee recognizes that competition will 
drive innovation and savings into the program. The Committee 
expects the NNSA to ensure that all future target fabrication 
solicitations be competitively bid.
    Advanced Simulation and Computing.--The Committee 
recommends $566,125,000 for the Advanced Simulation and 
Computing [ASC] Campaign, an increase of $10,000,000. The 
Committee is frustrated with the continued inconsistency in 
funding requests between the Office of Science and the NNSA ASC 
program and believes the Department has not done enough to 
integrate the cooperation and research and development between 
the two programs.
    The Defense Science Board produced a report on Advanced 
Computing in March 2009. The report outlined five primary 
conclusions, which this Committee is in full agreement: (1) The 
advanced simulation and computing program is the ``principal 
tool'' for assuring the safety and surety of the nuclear 
deterrent without underground nuclear testing; (2) The NNSA 
advanced computing program has enabled the United States to be 
the leader in high performance computing; (3) This program has 
also advanced the science and development of advanced computing 
which has broad applications in national security, energy and 
the environmental research within the Department of Energy, but 
other agencies and commercial enterprise as well; (4) The ``ASC 
program needs significantly more resources in the future to 
achieve the goals stated in its roadmaps and planning 
documents. At currently projected levels of funding it will not 
meet its nuclear weapons milestones in a timely manner and 
perhaps not at all.''; and (5) The program requires additional 
resources if the program hopes to achieve the next level of 
high performance computing capability. The Committee expects 
the Department to provide sufficient resources to address the 
concerns raised by the Advanced Computing Task Force report and 
improve its cooperation between other offices within the 
Department of Energy to apply these advanced computational, 
visualization and simulation capabilities to solving other 
complex science and energy applications. This point was 
specifically endorsed by the Defense Science Board Report as 
well.
    The Committee also urges the Department to continue to 
support the development and collaboration with the Office of 
Science in development of advanced algorithms and architectures 
in high performance computing systems.
    The Committee has provided an additional $10,000,000 in 
this program of which $5,000,000 shall be applied to a joint 
program with the Office of Fossil Energy and the Office of 
Science to work in collaboration with universities and industry 
to improve our capacity to produce domestic unconventional oil 
and gas resources and minimize environmental impact through by 
utilizing high performance computing capabilities.
    As the demands of stockpile stewardship continue to push 
the limits of parallel computing, power consumption is becoming 
untenable. While the industry focuses on power-efficient 
processor technology, there are additional opportunities to 
increase computational performance and optimize energy savings 
through improvement in storage systems. The ASC program is 
directed to allocate $5,000,000 to explore aspects of cost-
effective, power-efficient storage systems.
    Readiness Campaign.--The Committee recommends $100,000,000 
for the Readiness Campaign, consistent with the budget request.

               READINESS IN TECHNICAL BASE AND FACILITIES

    The Committee recommends $1,848,870,000, an increase of 
$112,522,000 above the request. The funding is provided to fill 
significant gaps in infrastructure development at the NNSA 
facilities. The Committee has restored funding to support the 
design effort and to minimize job losses associated with the 
Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement facility at Los 
Alamos and the Uranium Process Facility at Y-12. The facilities 
replace aging facilities which pose a serious threat to worker 
health and safety and have been recommended to be closed by the 
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The Committee urges 
the NNSA to continue the design efforts to develop 
appropriately sized facilities to support the mission needs.
    The Committee has also restored funding for the LANSCE 
Refurbishment project initiated last year by Congress. This 
facility is the cornerstone of scientific research at Los 
Alamos serving between 500-600 users per year. This facility 
still supports a wide range of experiments in both open science 
and classified work in support of the stockpile stewardship 
mission. The investment in this facility upgrade is one of the 
most cost-effect science investments and will support new 
applications to support advanced materials research.
    The Committee has also rescinded the prior year balances of 
$42,100,000 for the High Explosive Pressing Facility that was 
cancelled in this budget upgrade.
    The Committee recommends $1,519,966,000, for the Readiness 
in Technical Base and Facilities account. This funding supports 
the operations and maintenance of the NNSA laboratories and 
production facilities, equipment purchases and personnel. Of 
these funds:
    Operations of Facilities.--The Committee recommends 
$1,329,303,000.
    Program Readiness.--The Committee recommends the requested 
amount of $73,021,000.
    Material Recycle and Recovery.--The Committee recommends 
the requested amount of $69,542,000.
    Containers.--The Committee recommends the requested amount 
of $23,392,000.
    Storage.--The Committee recommends the requested amount of 
$24,708,000.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $328,904,000, an 
increase of $125,522,000. The Committee provided this funding 
to make key investment in laboratory and plant infrastructure.
    Project 10-D-501, Nuclear Facilities Risk Reduction, Y-12, 
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee provides $12,500,000, as 
requested to support critical facility upgrades.
    Project 99-D-141, Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility 
SRS.--The Committee recommends $30,321,000, as requested for 
this facility.
    Project 09-D-007, LANSCE Refurbishment Project, Los Alamos, 
New Mexico.--The Committee recommends $30,000,000 to refurbish 
the LANSCE facility.
    Project 09-D-404, Test capabilities revitalization II, 
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.--The 
Committee recommends $13,000,000.
    Project 08-D-801, High Pressure Fire Loop, Pantex, Texas.--
The Committee recommends $31,190,000 as requested.
    Project 06-D-140, Project Engineering Design [PED], Various 
Locations.--The Committee recommends $16,200,000. The project 
account supports ongoing design efforts for the TA-55 
Reinvestment Project, Phase II at $5,200,000, and the 
Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility at $11,000,000.
    Project 06-D-141, Project Engineering Design [PED], Uranium 
Process Facility, Y-12, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee 
recommends $94,000,000 to sustain the design efforts of this 
facility and prevent layoffs of critical design staff. The 
Committee has separated the UPF project from the other PED 
projects to improve oversight of this project.
    Project 06-D-402, NTS replace Fire Stations 1&2 Nevada Test 
Site, Nevada.--The Committee recommends $1,473,000, as 
requested.
    Project 04-D-125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Facility 
Replacement Project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, New 
Mexico.--The Committee recommends $98,000,000 to keep the 
Radiological laboratory completion and equipment installation 
on schedule and to sustain design efforts of the nuclear 
facility.
    Project 04-D-128, TA-18, Criticality Experiments Facility, 
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Nevada Test Site, Nevada.--The 
Committee recommends $1,500,000, the same as the budget 
request.

                      SECURE TRANSPORTATION ASSET

    The Committee recommendation for the Secure Transportation 
Asset program is $234,915,000, the same as the budget request.

                   NUCLEAR WEAPONS INCIDENT RESPONSE

    The Committee recommends full funding of the nuclear 
weapons incident response program. The Committee provides 
$221,936,000 as requested.

             FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE RECAPITALIZATION

    The Committee provides $154,922,000 for Facilities and 
Infrastructure Recapitalization activities, consistent with the 
budget request. This program was developed to reduce the 
backlog in deferred maintenance of aging infrastructure 
facilities throughout the complex.

                            SITE STEWARDSHIP

    The Committee recommends $61,288,000 a reduction of 
$29,086,000. The Committee is supportive of the materials 
consolidation mission. The Committee has not provided funding 
for the Stewardship planning initiative as the mission 
priorities are poorly defined. The Committee has attempted to 
restore mission critical investments in both science and 
infrastructure and is unable to provide additional funding for 
the proposed Stewardship planning activities. The Committee 
urges the NNSA to work with the Federal Energy Management 
Program, including independent third party energy providers, 
the National Renewable Energy Lab, and universities to develop 
a range of solutions in meeting the Federal renewable energy 
goals. The Committee would encourage the Administration to use 
ARRA funds for this project as long at those funds will be able 
to provide 100 percent of the project and will not create any 
future funding liability for this program.

                        SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

    The Committee recommendation for the Safeguards and 
Security Program is $871,555,000, as requested.
    Defense Nuclear Security Operations and Maintenance.--The 
Committee recommends the requested level of $700,044,000.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $49,000,000, the 
same as the budget request.
    Project 10-D-701 Security Improvement Project Y-12 Plant, 
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee recommends full funding of 
$49,000,000 for this project.
    Cybersecurity.--The Committee recommends the full request 
of $122,511,000, which is $1,225,000 above the current year 
levels. The Committee is concerned about increasing attempts to 
penetrate NNSA firewalls and urges the NNSA to take this threat 
seriously.
    Use of Prior Year Balances.--The Committee recommends the 
use of $42,100,000 of prior year balances from unexpended 
balances of the cancelled High Explosive Pressing Facility at 
Pantex.

                    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $1,537,350,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   2,136,709,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,136,709,000

    The Committee recommends $2,136,709,000. The Committee has 
provided full funding for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication 
Facility to support the nonproliferation mission of destroying 
excess plutonium in United States and Russian stockpiles. The 
Committee is aware that the administration is preparing to sign 
an agreement with Russia accepting the use of fast reactors to 
burn plutonium as their preferred path for disposal. The 
Committee is aware that the administration intends to provide 
$400,000,000 in funding to support the Russian effort 
consistent with previous U.S. policy commitments. However, the 
budget request did not include the estimated $100,000,000 in 
funding needed to fulfill those commitments in this fiscal year 
and this Committee does not have the resources to cover this 
shortfall. In addition, the Committee does not include any of 
the funding requested to support the denuclearization work in 
North Korea. The Committee is supportive of this work, but 
until relations improve, the Committee has applied this funding 
to improving the U.S. capability to develop advanced nuclear 
nonproliferation and detection technologies.

       NONPROLIFERATION AND VERIFICATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $337,300,000, an increase of 
$40,000,000 to support expanded investment in developing 
advanced nuclear detection technologies. Within the available 
funds, the Committee provides $15,000,000 to support the 
Integrated University Program consistent with the section 313 
of Public Law 111-8. The program is directed to cooperate with 
the Office of Nonproliferation and International Security in 
developing education and research funding priorities for 
advanced nuclear safeguards research.
    Also, within available funds, the Committee provides 
$6,000,000 for NNSA laboratories for the purpose of applying 
their expertise and advanced computational, modeling and 
simulation capabilities to the Nation's space situational 
awareness requirements. NNSA should execute this effort in 
collaboration with the Air Force's efforts to ensure the 
freedom of U.S. space operations and counter emerging threats 
to space operations.

              NONPROLIFERATION AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

    The Committee recommends $187,202,000 a reduction of 
$20,000,000. The reduction is tied to $40,000,000 in funding 
requested for North Korea. If, in the future, North Korea 
renews its commitment to denuclearization; the Committee would 
be willing to work with the NNSA to provide additional funding 
for that mission.

       INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR MATERIALS PROTECTION AND COOPERATION

    The Committee recommends $522,300,000 as requested. The 
Committee has provided strong support to this program over the 
past decade and believes this is an important mission. However, 
the Committee wants to ensure that the U.S. investments in 
Russian materials control and security are maintained. The 
Committee expects the Russian Government to share in the 
operations and maintenance responsibilities. The Committee 
intends to closely follow this matter to ensure Russia fulfills 
its obligations and United States resources are not wasted.

           ELIMINATION OF WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION

    The Committee recommends $24,507,000 as requested by the 
Administration.

                     FISSILE MATERIALS DISPOSITION

    The Committee recommends $701,900,000 as requested to 
support the plutonium disposition program and construction 
projects.
    U.S. Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition.--The Committee 
provides for the full request of $126,662,000, including 
$90,896,000 for the U.S. plutonium disposition and $34,691,000 
as requested for the U.S. uranium disposition program.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $574,238,000 to 
support construction as requested.
    Project 99-D-143, Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, 
Savannah River, South Carolina.--The Committee recommends 
$504,238 as requested.
    Project 99-D-141-02, Waste Solidification Building, 
Savannah River South Carolina.--The Committee recommends full 
funding of $70,000,000 for this project.
    Russian Surplus Materials Disposition.--The Committee 
recommends $1,000,000, as requested. If President Obama and 
Russian President Medvedev sign a plutonium disposition 
strategy, this budget does not provide adequate resources to 
fulfill the U.S. requirements under that agreement and 
additional resources must be found.

                   GLOBAL THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE

    The Committee recommends $333,500,000. The Committee 
recommendation does not include funding requested for North 
Korea in this program. The Committee recognizes the shortfall 
in supplies of isotope Molybedenum-99 for the use in medical 
treatments and provides $20,000,000 to advance the creation of 
a domestic supply of this isotope. The Committee recommends 
that not less than $10,000,000 within available funds be made 
available to undertake a full inventory of all Department of 
Energy and NNSA nuclear material to determine if there are 
materials that have value and can be reused in other mission or 
commercial applications. These funds are to be shared with the 
relevant programs across the Department to support the 
Committee's direction. In February 2009, the Department of 
Energy Inspector General released a report that found that DOE 
could not account for 37 percent of the quantities or location 
of nuclear materials that had been loaned or leased for 
research or medical purposes. This inventory is managed by the 
Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission through 
the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards Systems. In 
addition to the lack of rigorous management of existing 
inventories, the Committee is concerned that the new nuclear 
sources are being created without consideration of how these 
will ultimately be tracked, stored and safely disposed. This 
issue was addressed during March 2009 International Atomic 
Energy Agency workshop, which urged a more comprehensive 
``cradle to grave'' management strategy of medical and 
industrial seal radioactive sources. Using the funds provided, 
the Committee expects this office to work with the Office of 
Science, the Office of Nuclear Energy, all of the relevant 
Department of Energy Laboratories, the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission and other relevant Federal agencies, academia and 
industry to identify the location, status and proposed disposal 
pathway for all known radioactive source materials and which 
Federal agency has responsibility for this material. The 
Department of Energy is directed to implement the 
recommendations made by the Inspector General [DOE/IG-0813] and 
update the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards Systems 
and report to the Committee on Appropriations on the status of 
any inconsistency in that report or unaccounted materials.

                             Naval Reactors

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $828,054,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   1,003,133,000
Committee recommendation................................     973,133,000

    The Committee provides $973,133,000 for the Naval Reactor 
program to provide the U.S. Navy with nuclear propulsion plants 
that are capable of responding to the challenges of 21st 
century security concerns. The Committee recommends 
$905,533,000 for operations and maintenance. The Committee is 
aware that additional funding has been provided to offset 
pension shortfalls in this program, but is concerned that 
additional funding may be needed. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to utilize authorities provided in section 311 to 
prevent any reduction in mission funding.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $30,000,000 as 
requested for the various construction projects proposed in the 
budget request.

                      Office of the Administrator

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $439,190,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     420,754,000
Committee recommendation................................     420,754,000

    The Committee recommends $420,754,000 of the Office of the 
Administrator.

               ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES


                     Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2009..................................\1\$10,784,250,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   5,495,831,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,763,856,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $5,127,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 
Cleanup is $5,763,856,000. Within the total provided, the 
Department is directed to fund the Hazardous Waste Worker 
Training Program [HAZWOPER] at $10,000,000.
    The Committee had hoped with the new administration that 
the Cleanup budget submittal would--for the first time in 
years--request sufficient funding to be legally compliant. 
Sadly, it appears that the administration decided to lean on 
the Recovery Act funding to meet many of its fiscal year 2010 
compliance milestones. The result is that it has deliberately 
underfunded the base program that should have requested funds 
to meet those fiscal year 2010 milestones. Next year, rather 
than parading out expensive new initiatives, the administration 
should consider meeting its basic legal, moral, and human 
commitments to clean up nuclear research and cold war sites.
    The Committee is aware of the potential for significant 
shortfalls in this budget because the program may have to cover 
defined-benefit pension contributions later this year. We have 
included a general provision that will permit the Secretary to 
take steps to address the programmatic shortfalls that could 
occur once the impact of the pension contributions becomes 
clearer at the end of the calendar year.
    Reprogramming Control Levels.--In fiscal year 2010, the 
Environmental Management program may transfer funding between 
operating expense-funded projects within the controls listed 
below using guidance contained in the Department's budget 
execution manual [DOE M 135.1-1A, Chapter IV]. All capital 
construction line item projects remain separate controls from 
the operating projects. The Committees on Appropriations in the 
House and Senate must be formally notified in advance of all 
reprogrammings, except internal reprogrammings, and the 
Department is to take no financial action in anticipation of a 
congressional response. The Committee recommends the following 
reprogramming control points for fiscal year 2010:
  --Closure sites;
  --Hanford site;
  --Idaho National Laboratory;
  --NNSA sites;
  --Oak Ridge Reservation;
  --Office of River Protection;
  --Savannah River site;
  --Waste Isolation Pilot Plant;
  --Program Direction;
  --Program Support;
  --Technology Development and Deployment;
  --Safeguards and Security; and
  --All capital construction line items, regardless of site.
    Internal Reprogramming Authority.--The new reprogramming 
control points above obviates, in most cases, the need for 
internal reprogramming authority. However, at the few sites to 
which the internal reprogramming statute still applies, 
Environmental Management site managers may transfer up to 
$5,000,000, one time, between accounts listed above to reduce 
health and safety risks, gain cost savings, or complete 
projects, as long as a program or project is not increased or 
decreased by more than $5,000,000 in total during the fiscal 
year.
    The reprogramming authority--either formal or internal--may 
not be used to initiate new programs or to change funding 
levels for programs specifically denied, limited, or increased 
by Congress in the act or report. The Committee on 
Appropriations in the House and Senate must be notified within 
30 days after the use of the internal reprogramming authority.
    Closure Sites.--The Committee recommends $41,468,000, the 
same as the request.
    Hanford Site.--The Committee recommends $1,023,080,000. An 
additional $53,000,000 is provided for characterization of 
groundwater, waste sites, and preparation of remedial 
investigations and feasibility studies for the Central Plateau, 
all aimed at completing CERCLA remedial decisions and 
continuing Central Plateau cleanup in the 2012-2013 timeframe. 
Another $27,000,000 of the increase is for continued treatment 
of Mixed Low Level Waste, disposal of Low Level Waste and 
retrieval and processing of Transuranic Waste. Finally, 
$40,000,000 is provided to support sludge treatment for the K-
Basins sludge. The Committee understands the Department's 
continued support of the B-Reactor Museum and the Hazardous 
Materials Management and Emergency Response [HAMMER] 
facilities, which are provided for within available funds.
    Idaho National Laboratory.--The Committee recommends 
$470,168,000, an increase of $64,000,000 to the request, all 
for Soil and Groundwater Remediation.
    NNSA Sites.--The Committee recommends $291,624,000, an 
increase of $15,000,000 over the request. The additional 
$15,000,000 is for Los Alamos National Laboratory to place two 
regional ground water characterization wells and complete a 
Field Investigation and subsequent Report of Materials Disposal 
Area AB to maintain regulatory compliance.
    Oak Ridge Reservation.--The Committee recommends 
$153,768,000, the same as the request.
    Office of River Protection.--The Committee recommends 
$1,098,000,000, the same as the request. The Waste Treatment 
and Immobilization Plant is funded at $690,000,000, and is 
considered a single line-item construction project. Funding may 
be moved between subprojects.
    Savannah River Site.--The Committee recommends 
$1,242,974,000, an increase of $33,025,000 above the request. 
The increase is applied to the Soil and Groundwater Remediation 
project, which was unfunded in the request.
    Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.--The Committee recommends 
$235,337,000. This recommendation includes funding for Carlsbad 
educational support, infrastructure improvements resulting from 
operations at WIPP and for construction of the WIPP digital 
records center, activities the program found meritorious enough 
to support in fiscal year 2009.
    Program Direction.--The Committee recommends $355,000,000, 
the same as the request. The Committee recognizes and supports 
the need for more Federal employees to manage the cleanup 
contracts. However, the fiscal year 2010 request includes 52 
new hires at headquarters (+17 percent), which is more than 
half the number of new hires at all the field offices combined 
(+97, +9.3 percent). Cleanup work is done in the field, where 
the cleanup contracts are executed, not at headquarters. The 
program would be well advised to constrain the number of 
Headquarters new hires.
    Program Support.--The Committee recommends $34,000,000, the 
same as the request.
    Technology Development and Deployment.--The Committee 
recommends $55,000,000, the same as the request. This program 
languished for years without support, or even recognition, of 
Environmental Management's long-term mission. The new 
administration seems to be taking a fresh look at the need for 
break-through technologies that can, as the National Research 
Council's March 2, 2009 report highlights, permit this program 
to be completed safely, cost-effectively, and expeditiously.
    The Committee supports the Technology Development and 
Deployment program's involvement this year with the Office of 
River Protection, whose budget includes $50,000,000 to advance 
solutions for the treatment of radioactive waste including pre-
treatment processes, tank structural integrity, and advanced 
retrieval technologies.
    Safeguards and Security.--The Committee recommends 
$296,437,000, a total of $17,000,000 above the request. The 
increase is primarily to avoid workforce impacts where prior 
year funding may no longer be available and to provide for 
security investigations for field personnel, reflecting a 
change in Departmental practice.
    Federal Contribution to Uranium Enrichment Decontamination 
and Decommissioning Fund.--The Committee recommends 
$463,000,000, the same as the request.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $4,000,000 for the following list of projects that 
provide for research, development, and demonstration of defense 
environmental cleanup technologies or programs. The Committee 
reminds recipients that statutory cost sharing requirements may 
apply to these projects.

     CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristics and Cleanup of the    $4,000,000  Senator Cochran
 U.S. Nuclear Legacy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Other Defense Activities

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $1,314,063,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     852,468,000
Committee recommendation................................     854,468,000

    The Committee recommendation is $854,468,000, a decrease of 
$461,595,000 from current year levels reflecting the shift for 
the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility from this program to 
the Office of Nuclear Nonproliferation. The recommended level 
is consistent with the budget request.
    Health, Safety and Security.--The Committee recommends 
$449,882,000, as requested.
    Office of Legacy Management.--The Committee recommends 
$189,802,000 as requested.
    Nuclear Energy.--The Committee recommends $83,358,000 for 
Idaho infrastructure for sitewide safeguards and security, the 
same as the request.
    Defense-related Administrative Support.--The Committee 
recommends $122,982,000, the same as the request.
    Office of Hearings and Appeals.--The Committee recommends 
$6,444,000, as requested.
    Congressionally Directed Spending Items.--The Committee 
includes $2,000,000 for the following list of projects of Other 
Defense Activities. The Committee reminds recipients that 
statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to these 
projects.

       CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Project title                Amount           Requestor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burlington Atomic Energy Commission   $1,000,000  Senator Harkin
 Plant [BAECP] and Ames Laboratory
 Former Workers Medical
 Surveillance Programs [FWP].
Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY,    $1,000,000  Senator McConnell
 Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $143,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      98,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      98,400,000

    The Committee recommends $98,400,000 for Defense Nuclear 
Waste Disposal activities, the same as the request.

                    Power Marketing Administrations


                    BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION

    The Bonneville Power Administration is the Department of 
Energy's marketing agency for electric power in the Pacific 
Northwest. Bonneville provides electricity to a 300,000 square 
mile service area in the Columbia River drainage basin. 
Bonneville markets the power from Federal hydropower projects 
in the Northwest, as well as power from non-Federal generating 
facilities in the region. Bonneville also exchanges and markets 
surplus power with Canada and California. The Committee 
recommends no new borrowing authority for BPA during fiscal 
year 2010.

      OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $7,420,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       8,638,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,638,000

    For the Southeastern Power Administration, the Committee 
recommends $8,638,000, the same as the budget request.

      OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $28,414,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      44,944,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,944,000

    For the Southwestern Power Administration, the Committee 
recommends $44,944,000, the same as the budget request.

 CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, WESTERN AREA 
                          POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2009.................................... \1\$228,346,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     256,711,000
Committee recommendation................................     256,711,000

\1\Includes emergency appropriations of $10,000,000 under Public Law 
111-5.

    For the Western Area Power Administration, the Committee 
recommends $256,711,000, the same as the budget request.
    In this and subsequent fiscal years, the Committee 
recommends adopting the proposal presented in the President's 
budget request to reclassify from mandatory to discretionary 
those power receipts associated with the repayment of Western's 
annual expenses in this appropriations account. Such receipts 
will now be credited to this account as discretionary 
offsetting collections available for the sole purpose of 
funding the annual expenses of Program Direction and Operations 
and Maintenance (but excluding Purchase Power and Wheeling) of 
this account. This change does not convert this account into a 
revolving fund, since the Committee must specify a dollar limit 
on this activity in annual appropriations acts. For fiscal year 
2010, the Committee recommends that no more than $147,530,000 
be credited to this account for this purpose.
    The Committee directs the Western Area Power Administration 
to continue to collaborate with its firm power customers to 
develop annual work plans and accept funds advanced by 
customers to the extent such customers deem funds to be 
available, pursuant to its existing authorities.
    For fiscal year 2010, the Committee supports a total 
program level for this account of $899,317,000, which includes 
$104,971,000 for Construction and Rehabilitation, $57,159,000 
for Operations and Maintenance, $548,847,000 for Purchase Power 
and Wheeling, and $180,756,000 for Program Direction. The 
Committee recommends $7,584,000 for the Utah Reclamation 
Mitigation and Conservation.
    Offsetting collections total $501,216,000, consisting of 
$147,530,000 for Western's annual expenses, $349,807,000 for 
Purchase Power and Wheeling, and $3,879,000 from the Colorado 
River Dam Fund (as authorized in Public Law 98-381).

           FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $2,959,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,568,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,568,000

    The Falcon Dam and Amistad Dam on the Rio Grande River 
generate power through hydroelectric facilities and sell this 
power to public utilities through the Western Power 
Administration. This fund, created in the Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995, defrays the 
costs of operation, maintenance, and emergency activities and 
is administered by the Western Area Power Administration. For 
the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund, the 
Committee recommends $2,568,000 the same as the request.

                  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $273,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     298,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     298,000,000

                            REVENUES APPLIED

Appropriations, 2009....................................   -$273,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    -298,000,000
Committee recommendation................................    -298,000,000


                                                                  DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            Committee recommendation
                                                                                                          Committee               compared to--
                                                                         Enacted      Budget estimate   recommendation ---------------------------------
                                                                                                                            Enacted      Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
               ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY
 
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy RDD&D;:
    Hydrogen Technology............................................         168,960   ...............         190,000          +21,040         +190,000
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................          43,400   ...............  ...............         -43,400   ...............
    Fuel cell technologies.........................................  ...............          68,213   ...............  ...............         -68,213
    Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D............................;         217,000          235,000          235,000          +18,000   ...............
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................         786,500   ...............  ...............        -786,500   ...............
    Solar energy...................................................         175,000          320,000          255,000          +80,000          -65,000
    Wind energy....................................................          55,000           75,000           85,000          +30,000          +10,000
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................         118,000   ...............  ...............        -118,000   ...............
    Geothermal technology..........................................          44,000           50,000           50,000           +6,000   ...............
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................         400,000   ...............  ...............        -400,000   ...............
    Water Power....................................................          40,000           30,000           60,000          +20,000          +30,000
    Vehicle technologies...........................................         273,238          333,302          323,302          +50,064          -10,000
    Building technologies..........................................         140,000          237,698          202,698          +62,698          -35,000
    Industrial technologies........................................          90,000          100,000          100,000          +10,000   ...............
    Federal energy management program..............................          22,000           32,272           32,272          +10,272   ...............
    RE-ENERGYSE (Regaining our energy science and engineering edge)  ...............         115,000   ...............  ...............        -115,000
 
    Facilities and infrastructure:
        National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL]................          22,000           19,000           19,000           -3,000   ...............
 
        Construction:
            10-EE-01 South table mountain ingress/egress and         ...............          44,000           44,000          +44,000   ...............
             traffic capacity upgrades, National Renewable Energy
             Laboratory, Golden, CO................................
            08-EE-02 South-table mountain site infrastructure                13,000   ...............  ...............         -13,000   ...............
             development, National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
             Golden, CO............................................
            08-EE-01 Energy systems integration facility, National           41,000   ...............  ...............         -41,000   ...............
             Renewal Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.................
            07-EE-01 Integrated Biorefinery research facility,               13,500   ...............  ...............         -13,500   ...............
             National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO
             (emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5)............
            06-EE-01 Research support facility project, National             68,000   ...............  ...............         -68,000   ...............
             Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (emergency
             appropriation Public Law 111-5).......................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Construction.............................         135,500           44,000           44,000          -91,500   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Facilities and infrastructure..............         157,500           63,000           63,000          -94,500   ...............
 
    Advanced battery manufacturing:
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................       2,000,000   ...............  ...............      -2,000,000   ...............
    Alternative fueled vehicles pilot grant program:
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................         300,000   ...............  ...............        -300,000   ...............
    Transportation electrification:
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................         400,000   ...............  ...............        -400,000   ...............
    Energy efficient appliance rebate program:
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................         300,000   ...............  ...............        -300,000   ...............
    Information and communication efficiency:
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................          50,000   ...............  ...............         -50,000   ...............
    Program direction:                                                      127,620          238,117          152,620          +25,000          -85,497
        Emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5...................          50,000   ...............  ...............         -50,000   ...............
    Program support:                                                         18,157          120,000           72,000          +53,843          -48,000
        RDD&D......................................................;       5,976,375        2,017,602        1,820,892       -4,155,483         -196,710
 
Energy efficiency and conservation block grants--competitive                400,000   ...............  ...............        -400,000   ...............
 (emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5)........................
Energy efficiency and conservation block grants--Subtitle E, title        2,800,000   ...............  ...............      -2,800,000   ...............
 V, EISA (emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5)................
 
Weatherization and intragovernmental:
    Weatherization:
        Weatherization assistance..................................  ...............         220,000          200,000         +200,000          -20,000
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............       4,900,000   ...............  ...............      -4,900,000   ...............
        Training and technical assistance..........................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............         100,000   ...............  ...............        -100,000   ...............
        Weatherization and technical assistance....................         200,000   ...............  ...............        -200,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Weatherization.................................       5,200,000          220,000          200,000       -5,000,000          -20,000
 
    Other:
        State energy program grants................................          50,000           75,000           50,000   ...............         -25,000
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............       3,100,000   ...............  ...............      -3,100,000   ...............
        International renewable energy program.....................           5,000   ...............  ...............          -5,000   ...............
        Tribal energy activities...................................           6,000            6,000           10,000           +4,000           +4,000
        Renewable energy production incentive......................           5,000   ...............           5,000   ...............          +5,000
        Asia pacific...............................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Other..........................................       3,166,000           81,000           65,000       -3,101,000          -16,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Weatherization and intragovernmental...........       8,366,000          301,000          265,000       -8,101,000          -36,000
 
Energy efficiency and renewable energy research and development             970,600   ...............  ...............        -970,600   ...............
 [EERE R&D;] (emergency appropriation Public Law 111-5).............
Use of prior year balances.........................................         -13,238   ...............  ...............         +13,238   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................         228,803   ...............         148,075          -80,728         +148,075
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 110-329)......................         250,000   ...............  ...............        -250,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY.................      18,978,540        2,318,602        2,233,967      -16,744,573          -84,635
          Appropriations...........................................      (1,928,540)      (2,318,602)      (2,233,967)       (+305,427)        (-84,635)
          Emergency appropriations.................................     (17,050,000)  ...............  ...............    (-17,050,000)  ...............
 
            ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
 
Research and development:
    High temperature superconductivity R&D.........................;          23,796   ...............  ...............         -23,796   ...............
    Visiualization and controls....................................          24,373   ...............  ...............         -24,373   ...............
    Energy storage and power electronics...........................           6,552   ...............  ...............          -6,552   ...............
    Renewable and distributed systems integration..................          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000   ...............
    Clean energy transmission and reliability......................  ...............          42,000           42,000          +42,000   ...............
    Smart grid research and development............................  ...............          67,000           32,000          +32,000          -35,000
    Energy storage.................................................  ...............          15,000           15,000          +15,000   ...............
    Cyber security for energy delivery systems.....................  ...............          50,000           50,000          +50,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and development...........................          84,721          174,000          139,000          +54,279          -35,000
 
Operations and analysis............................................          11,451   ...............  ...............         -11,451   ...............
Permitting, siting, and analysis...................................  ...............           6,400            6,400           +6,400   ...............
Infrastructure security and energy restoration.....................  ...............           6,188            6,188           +6,188   ...............
Program direction..................................................          21,180           21,420           21,420             +240   ...............
    Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).....................          22,500   ...............  ...............         -22,500   ...............
    Congressionally directed projects..............................          19,648   ...............           6,475          -13,173           +6,475
 
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5):
        Smart grid investment program [EISA 1306]..................       3,375,700   ...............  ...............      -3,375,700   ...............
        Smart grid regional and energy storage demos...............         700,000   ...............  ...............        -700,000   ...............
        Workforce training.........................................         100,000   ...............  ...............        -100,000   ...............
        Interoperability standards and framework...................          10,288   ...............  ...............         -10,288   ...............
        Interconnection planning and analysis......................          80,000   ...............  ...............         -80,000   ...............
        Other recovery act.........................................         211,512   ...............  ...............        -211,512   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY.......       4,637,000          208,008          179,483       -4,457,517          -28,525
              Appropriations.......................................        (137,000)        (208,008)        (179,483)        (+42,483)        (-28,525)
              Emergency appropriations.............................      (4,500,000)  ...............  ...............     (-4,500,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                           NUCLEAR ENERGY
 
Research and development:
    Integrated university program..................................           5,000   ...............           5,000   ...............          +5,000
    Nuclear power 2010.............................................         177,500           20,000          120,000          -57,500         +100,000
    Generation IV nuclear energy systems...........................         180,000          191,000          143,000          -37,000          -48,000
    Nuclear hydrogen initiative....................................           7,500   ...............  ...............          -7,500   ...............
    Advanced fuel cycle initiative.................................         145,000   ...............  ...............        -145,000   ...............
    Fuel cycle research and development............................  ...............         192,000          145,000         +145,000          -47,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and development...........................         515,000          403,000          413,000         -102,000          +10,000
 
Infrastructure:
    Radiological facilities management:
        Space and defense infrastructure...........................          35,000           47,000           47,000          +12,000   ...............
        Research reactor infrastructure............................           6,146   ...............          15,000           +3,854          +10,000
        Oak Ridge nuclear infrastructure...........................          12,500   ...............  ...............         -12,500   ...............
        Los Alamos nuclear infrastructure..........................          12,500   ...............  ...............         -12,500   ...............
        PU-238 production restart project..........................  ...............          30,000   ...............          +5,000          -25,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Radiological facilities management.............          66,146           77,000           62,000           -4,146          -15,000
 
    INL infrastructure:
        INL Operations and infrastructure..........................         140,000          203,402          211,274          +71,274           +7,872
        Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.....................          78,811           83,358           83,358           +4,547   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, INL Infrastructure.............................         284,957          363,760          356,632          +71,675           -7,128
 
Program direction..................................................          73,000           77,872           73,000   ...............          -4,872
Use of prior year balances.........................................          -5,000   ...............  ...............          +5,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nuclear Energy.....................................         867,957          844,632          842,632          -25,325           -2,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Funding from other defense activities..............................         -78,811          -83,358          -83,358           -4,547   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................           2,854   ...............           2,000             -854           +2,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................         792,000          761,274          761,274          -30,726   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                       CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY
 
Deferral of unobligated balances, fiscal year 2009.................         149,000   ...............  ...............        -149,000   ...............
Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D; [CCPI]...............................        -149,000   ...............  ...............        +149,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY.................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
               FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
 
Clean coal power initiative........................................         288,174   ...............  ...............        -288,174   ...............
FutureGen..........................................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Fuels and Power Systems:
    Innovations for existing plants................................          50,000           41,000           58,000           +8,000          +17,000
    Advanced integrated gasification combined cycle................          65,236           55,000           65,000             -236          +10,000
    Advanced turbines..............................................          28,000           31,000           32,000           +4,000           +1,000
    Carbon sequestration...........................................         150,000          179,865          160,200          +10,200          -19,665
 
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5):
        Carbon capture and storage.................................       1,000,000   ...............  ...............      -1,000,000   ...............
        Geologic sequestration site characterization...............          50,000   ...............  ...............         -50,000   ...............
        Geologic sequestration training and research grant program.          20,000   ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
        Clean coal power initiative round 3........................         800,000   ...............  ...............        -800,000   ...............
        Carbon capture competitive solicitation....................       1,520,000   ...............  ...............      -1,520,000   ...............
    Fuels..........................................................          25,000           15,000           25,000   ...............         +10,000
    Fuel cells.....................................................          58,000           54,000           58,000   ...............          +4,000
    Advanced research..............................................          28,000           28,000           30,000           +2,000           +2,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fuels and power systems............................       3,794,236          403,865          428,200       -3,366,036          +24,335
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Coal...............................................       4,082,410          403,865          428,200       -3,654,210          +24,335
          Appropriations...........................................        (692,410)        (403,865)        (428,200)       (-264,210)        (+24,335)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (3,390,000)  ...............  ...............     (-3,390,000)  ...............
 
Natural Gas Technologies...........................................          20,000           25,000           25,000           +5,000   ...............
Petroleum--Oil Technologies........................................           5,000   ...............          25,000          +20,000          +25,000
Program direction..................................................         152,000          158,000          158,000           +6,000   ...............
    Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).....................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
Plant and Capital Equipment........................................          18,000           20,000           20,000           +2,000   ...............
Fossil energy environmental restoration............................           9,700           10,000           10,000             +300   ...............
Special recruitment programs.......................................             656              700              700              +44   ...............
Cooperative research and development...............................           5,000   ...............           5,000   ...............          +5,000
Congressionally directed projects..................................          43,864   ...............          27,300          -16,564          +27,300
Use of prior year balances.........................................         -70,310   ...............  ...............         +70,310   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT................       4,276,320          617,565          699,200       -3,577,120          +81,635
          Appropriations...........................................        (876,320)        (617,565)        (699,200)       (-177,120)        (+81,635)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (3,400,000)  ...............  ...............     (-3,400,000)  ...............
 
NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES.............................          19,099           23,627           23,627           +4,528   ...............
 
STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE........................................         205,000   ...............  ...............        -205,000   ...............
    Storage facilities development.................................  ...............         209,482          239,482         +239,482          +30,000
    Management for SPR operations..................................  ...............          19,591           19,591          +19,591   ...............
Use of prior year balances.........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE...........................         205,000          229,073          259,073          +54,073          +30,000
 
NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE.................................           9,800           11,300           11,300           +1,500   ...............
ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION..................................         110,595          133,058          110,595   ...............         -22,463
 
                 NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA)...............................          10,755            7,652            7,652           -3,103   ...............
Operating expenses.................................................          48,296          104,444          104,444          +56,148   ...............
02-U-101, Depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facility........          33,000   ...............  ...............         -33,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Gaseous Diffusion Plants..............................          81,296          104,444          104,444          +23,148   ...............
 
Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion, 02-U-101.................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Small Sites:
    Argonne National Lab...........................................           9,479   ...............  ...............          -9,479   ...............
        Transfer from Science......................................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
        Transfer from NNSA.........................................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................          98,500   ...............  ...............         -98,500   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Argonne National Lab...........................         127,979   ...............  ...............        -127,979   ...............
 
    Brookhaven National Lab........................................           8,433           12,614           17,500           +9,067           +4,886
        Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).................          42,355   ...............  ...............         -42,355   ...............
    Idaho National Lab.............................................          13,478            5,000            5,000           -8,478   ...............
 
    Consolidated Business Center:
        California Site support....................................             187              262              262              +75   ...............
        Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.........................           4,883            4,600            4,600             -283   ...............
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............           7,925   ...............  ...............          -7,925   ...............
        Energy Technology Engineering Center.......................          15,000           13,000           13,000           -2,000   ...............
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............          54,175   ...............  ...............         -54,175   ...............
        Los Alamos National Lab....................................           1,905   ...............  ...............          -1,905   ...............
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............          14,775   ...............  ...............         -14,775   ...............
        Moab.......................................................          40,699           30,671           40,671              -28          +10,000
            Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).............         108,350   ...............  ...............        -108,350   ...............
        Tuba City..................................................           5,000   ...............  ...............          -5,000   ...............
        Completed sites administration and support.................           1,100            1,200            1,200             +100   ...............
        Oak Ridge National Laboratory (emergency appropriation,              78,800   ...............  ...............         -78,800   ...............
         Public Law 111-5).........................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Consolidated Business Center...................         332,799           49,733           59,733         -273,066          +10,000
        Funding from Science, NNSA.................................         -20,000   ...............  ...............         +20,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Small Sites....................................         505,044           67,347           82,233         -422,811          +14,886
 
West Valley Demonstration Project..................................          65,500           58,074           65,500   ...............          +7,426
    Emergency appropriation (Public Law 111-5).....................          73,875   ...............  ...............         -73,875   ...............
AARA Non-defense program direction (emergency appropriation, Public           2,415   ...............  ...............          -2,415   ...............
 Law 111-5)........................................................
ARRA Non-defense unallocated (emergency appropriation, Public Law             1,830   ...............  ...............          -1,830   ...............
 111-5)............................................................
Use of Prior year balances.........................................            -653   ...............  ...............            +653   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................           4,757   ...............  ...............          -4,757   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.....................         744,819          237,517          259,829         -484,990          +22,312
          Appropriations...........................................        (261,819)        (237,517)        (259,829)         (-1,990)        (+22,312)
          Emergency appropriations.................................        (483,000)  ...............  ...............       (-483,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
    URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND
 
Decontamination and decommissioning................................         525,503          559,377          588,322          +62,819          +28,945
Uranium/thorium reimbursement......................................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5):
        Uranium/thorium reimbursement..............................          68,950   ...............  ...............         -68,950   ...............
        ARRA Oak Ridge.............................................         118,200   ...............  ...............        -118,200   ...............
        AARA Paducah...............................................          78,800   ...............  ...............         -78,800   ...............
        ARRA Portsmouth............................................         118,200   ...............  ...............        -118,200   ...............
        ARRA program direction.....................................           1,950   ...............  ...............          -1,950   ...............
        ARRA unallocated...........................................           3,900   ...............  ...............          -3,900   ...............
Offsetting collections.............................................  ...............        -200,000   ...............  ...............        +200,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, UED&D; FUND/URANIUM INVENTORY CLEANUP..................         925,503          359,377          588,322         -337,181         +228,945
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                              SCIENCE
 
High energy physics:
    Proton accelerator-based physics...............................         410,343          442,988          436,988          +26,645           -6,000
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................         107,990   ...............  ...............        -107,990   ...............
    Electron accelerator-based physics.............................          48,772           26,420           26,420          -22,352   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................           1,400   ...............  ...............          -1,400   ...............
    Non-accelerator physics........................................          86,482           99,321           99,321          +12,839   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................           4,445   ...............  ...............          -4,445   ...............
    Theoretical physics............................................          63,036           67,240           67,240           +4,204   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................           5,975   ...............  ...............          -5,975   ...............
    Advanced technology R&D........................................;         187,093          183,031          183,031           -4,062   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................         112,580   ...............  ...............        -112,580   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, High energy physics...............................       1,028,116          819,000          813,000         -215,116           -6,000
 
Nuclear physics....................................................         481,019          530,000          518,000          +36,981          -12,000
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          89,800   ...............  ...............         -89,800   ...............
    Construction:
        07-SC-02 Electron beam ion source Brookhaven National                 2,438   ...............  ...............          -2,438   ...............
         Laboratory, NY............................................
        06-SC-01 Project engineering and design [PED] 12 GeV                 28,623           22,000           22,000           -6,623   ...............
         continuous electron beam accelerator facility upgrade,
         Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator facility (was
         project 07-SC-001), Newport News, VA......................
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..............          65,000   ...............  ...............         -65,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Nuclear physics...............................         666,880          552,000          540,000         -126,880          -12,000
 
Biological and environmental research:
    Biological research............................................         423,613   ...............  ...............        -423,613   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................         100,793   ...............  ...............        -100,793   ...............
    Climate change research........................................         177,927   ...............  ...............        -177,927   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................          64,860   ...............  ...............         -64,860   ...............
    Biological systems science.....................................  ...............         318,476          318,476         +318,476   ...............
    Climate and environmental sciences.............................  ...............         285,706          285,706         +285,706   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Biological and environmental research.................         767,193          604,182          604,182         -163,011   ...............
 
Basic energy sciences:
    Research:
        Materials sciences and engineering research................       1,129,391          381,112        1,172,903          +43,512         +791,791
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..............         236,798   ...............  ...............        -236,798   ...............
 
        Chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy:
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..............         154,062   ...............  ...............        -154,062   ...............
            Biosciences............................................         297,113          338,357          326,357          +29,244          -12,000
        Scientific user facilities.................................  ...............         811,791   ...............  ...............        -811,791
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Research.......................................       1,817,364        1,531,260        1,499,260         -318,104          -32,000
 
    Construction:
        08-SC-01 Advanced light source [ALS] user support building,          11,500   ...............  ...............         -11,500   ...............
         LBNL, CA..................................................
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..............          14,546   ...............  ...............         -14,546   ...............
        08-SC-11 Photon ultrafast laser science and engineering               3,728   ...............  ...............          -3,728   ...............
         [PULSE] building renovation, SLAC, CA.....................
        07-SC-06 Project engineering and design [PED]:
            National Synchrotron light source II [NSLS-II].........          93,273          139,000          139,000          +45,727   ...............
                Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..........         150,000   ...............  ...............        -150,000   ...............
        05-R-320 LINAC coherent light source [LCLS]................          36,967           15,240           15,240          -21,727   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................         310,014          154,240          154,240         -155,774   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Basic energy sciences.............................       2,127,378        1,685,500        1,653,500         -473,878          -32,000
 
Advanced scientific computing research.............................         368,820          409,000          399,000          +30,180          -10,000
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................         157,110   ...............  ...............        -157,110   ...............
Fusion energy sciences program.....................................         402,550          421,000          416,000          +13,450           -5,000
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          91,023   ...............  ...............         -91,023   ...............
 
Science laboratories infrastructure:
    Laboratories facilities support:
        Infrastructure support:
            Payment in lieu of taxes...............................           1,385            1,385            1,385   ...............  ...............
            Excess facilities disposal.............................          24,844   ...............  ...............         -24,844   ...............
                Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..........          14,301   ...............  ...............         -14,301   ...............
            Oak Ridge landlord.....................................           5,079            5,214            5,214             +135   ...............
            General plant projects (emergency appropriations Public          89,572   ...............  ...............         -89,572   ...............
             Law 111-5)............................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Infrastructure support.....................         135,181            6,599            6,599         -128,582   ...............
 
        Construction:
            10-SC-70 Research support building and infrastructure    ...............           8,900            8,900           +8,900   ...............
             modernization, SLAC...................................
            10-SC-71 Energy sciences building, ANL.................  ...............          10,000           10,000          +10,000   ...............
            10-SC-72 Renovate science laboratory, Phase II, BNL....  ...............           7,000            7,000           +7,000   ...............
            09-SC-72 Seismic life-safety, modernization and                  12,495           34,027           34,027          +21,532   ...............
             replacement of general purpose buildings Phase 2, PED/
             Construction, LBNL....................................
                Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..........          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000   ...............
            09-SC-73, Interdisciplinary science building Phase 1,             8,240           39,387           39,387          +31,147   ...............
             PED, BNL..............................................
                Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..........          18,673   ...............  ...............         -18,673   ...............
            09-SC-74, Technology and engineering development                  3,700           27,687           27,687          +23,987   ...............
             facilities PED, TJNAF.................................
            08-SC-71 Modernization of laboratory facilities PED,             25,103   ...............  ...............         -25,103   ...............
             ORNL..................................................
                Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..........          60,568   ...............  ...............         -60,568   ...............
            07-SC-05 Physical science facilities, PNNL.............          52,775   ...............  ...............         -52,775   ...............
            03-SC-001 Science laboratories infrastructure:
                MEL-001 Multiprogram energy laboratory                       11,759   ...............  ...............         -11,759   ...............
                 infrastructure projects, various locations........
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Construction.............................         208,313          127,001          127,001          -81,312   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total, Science laboratories infrastructure.........         343,494          133,600          133,600         -209,894   ...............
 
Safeguards and security............................................          80,603           83,000           83,000           +2,397   ...............
 
Science program direction:
    Headquarters...................................................          75,525           86,606           80,606           +5,081           -6,000
    Office of Science and Technical Information....................           8,916            8,916            8,916   ...............  ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................           1,600   ...............  ...............          -1,600   ...............
    Field offices..................................................         102,254          118,200          105,200           +2,946          -13,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Science program direction.............................         188,295          213,722          194,722           +6,427          -19,000
 
Workforce development for teachers and scientists..................          13,583           20,678           20,678           +7,095   ...............
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          12,500   ...............  ...............         -12,500   ...............
Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy [ARPA-E].................          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................          93,687   ...............          41,150          -52,537          +41,150
 
Small business innovation research [SBIR]:
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          19,004   ...............  ...............         -19,004   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, SCIENCE............................................       6,375,236        4,941,682        4,898,832       -1,476,404          -42,850
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of prior year balances.........................................         -15,000   ...............  ...............         +15,000   ...............
Unallocated recovery act funding (Emergency appropriation, Public            12,400   ...............  ...............         -12,400   ...............
 Law 111-5)........................................................
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, SCIENCE...............................................       6,372,636        4,941,682        4,898,832       -1,473,804          -42,850
          Appropriations...........................................      (4,772,636)      (4,941,682)      (4,898,832)       (+126,196)        (-42,850)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (1,600,000)  ...............  ...............     (-1,600,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
              ENERGY TRANSFORMATION ACCELERATION FUND
 
Advanced research projects agency--Energy (Emergency appropriation,         398,000   ...............  ...............        -398,000   ...............
 Public Law 111-5).................................................
Program direction..................................................  ...............          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................           2,000   ...............  ...............          -2,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY TRANSFORMATION ACCELERATION FUND...............         400,000           10,000   ...............        -400,000          -10,000
 
                       NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL
 
Repository program.................................................          68,552           28,400           28,400          -40,152   ...............
Program direction..................................................          74,983           70,000           70,000           -4,983   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................           1,855   ...............  ...............          -1,855   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL................................         145,390           98,400           98,400          -46,990   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
         TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM
 
Administrative operations..........................................          19,880           43,000           43,000          +23,120   ...............
Offsetting collection..............................................         -19,880          -43,000          -43,000          -23,120   ...............
Advance appropriation (Public Law 110-161).........................          25,000   ...............  ...............         -25,000   ...............
Proposed change in subsidy cost....................................         440,000        1,500,000   ...............        -440,000       -1,500,000
 
Section 1705 Temporary loan guarantee program:
    Direct loan subsidy costs (Emergency appropriations, Public Law       5,965,000   ...............  ...............      -5,965,000   ...............
     111-5)........................................................
    Administrative expenses........................................  ...............          17,000           17,000          +17,000   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................          35,000   ...............  ...............         -35,000   ...............
        Administrative expenses, offsetting collections............  ...............         -17,000          -17,000          -17,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          TOTAL, TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM.       6,465,000        1,500,000   ...............      -6,465,000       -1,500,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
        ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PGM
 
Direct loan subsidy costs (Emergency appropriations Public Law 110-       7,510,000   ...............  ...............      -7,510,000   ...............
 329)..............................................................
Administrative expenses............................................  ...............          20,000           20,000          +20,000   ...............
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PGM...       7,510,000           20,000           20,000       -7,490,000   ...............
 
                    DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
 
Administrative operations:
    Salaries and expenses:
        Office of the Secretary....................................           5,700            5,864            6,864           +1,164           +1,000
        Chief Financial Officer....................................          43,257           65,981           63,981          +20,724           -2,000
        Management.................................................          67,790           88,456           78,456          +10,666          -10,000
        Human capital management...................................          31,436           29,537           29,537           -1,899   ...............
        Chief Information Officer..................................          53,738           38,146           38,146          -15,592   ...............
        Congressional and intergovernmental affairs................           4,700            7,326            5,826           +1,126           -1,500
        Economic impact and diversity..............................           3,545            3,896            3,896             +351   ...............
        General Counsel............................................          31,233           32,478           32,478           +1,245   ...............
        Policy and international affairs...........................          19,469           19,296           19,296             -173   ...............
        Public affairs.............................................           3,780            5,405            4,500             +720             -905
        Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs................           1,500   ...............           5,500           +4,000           +5,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Salaries and expenses..........................         266,148          296,385          288,480          +22,332           -7,905
 
    Program support:
        Minority economic impact...................................             855            2,775            2,775           +1,920   ...............
        Policy analysis and system studies.........................           1,000            1,159            1,159             +159   ...............
        Environmental policy studies...............................             531              528              528               -3   ...............
        Climate change technology program (prog. supp).............           2,000            9,270            9,270           +7,270   ...............
        Cybersecurity and secure communications....................          34,512           33,365           33,365           -1,147   ...............
        Corporate management information program...................          27,250            9,403            9,403          -17,847   ...............
        Energy information technology services.....................  ...............          23,631           23,149          +23,149             -482
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Program support................................          66,148           80,131           79,649          +13,501             -482
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Administrative operations.........................         332,296          376,516          368,129          +35,833           -8,387
 
    Cost of work for others........................................          48,537           48,537           48,537   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION........................         380,833          425,053          416,666          +35,833           -8,387
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding from other defense activities..............................        -108,190         -122,982         -122,982          -14,792   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental administration (gross)...................         272,643          302,071          293,684          +21,041           -8,387
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Miscellaneous revenues.............................................        -117,317         -119,740         -119,740           -2,423   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net).....................         155,326          182,331          173,944          +18,618           -8,387
                                                                    ====================================================================================
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL........................................          51,927           51,445           51,927   ...............            +482
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000   ...............
 
                  ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
              NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES:
    Life extension program:
        B61 Life extension program.................................           2,123   ...............  ...............          -2,123   ...............
        W76 Life extension program.................................         202,920          209,196          209,196           +6,276   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Life extension program............................         205,043          209,196          209,196           +4,153   ...............
 
    Stockpile systems:
        B61 Stockpile systems......................................          78,021          124,456          124,456          +46,435   ...............
        W62 Stockpile systems......................................           1,596   ...............  ...............          -1,596   ...............
        W76 Stockpile systems......................................          66,365           65,497           65,497             -868   ...............
        W78 Stockpile systems......................................          42,049           50,741           50,741           +8,692   ...............
        W80 Stockpile systems......................................          31,073           19,064           19,064          -12,009   ...............
        B83 Stockpile systems......................................          24,986           35,682           35,682          +10,696   ...............
        W87 Stockpile systems......................................          36,073           51,817           51,817          +15,744   ...............
        W88 Stockpile systems......................................          48,358           43,043           43,043           -5,315   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Stockpile systems.................................         328,521          390,300          390,300          +61,779   ...............
 
    Reliable replacement warhead...................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
    Weapons dismantlement and disposition:
        Operations and maintenance.................................         125,322           84,100           84,100          -41,222   ...............
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-32.............          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000   ...............
 
        Construction:
            99-D-141 Pit disassembly and conversion facility, SRS..          64,883   ...............  ...............         -64,883   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Weapons dismantlement and disposition.........         220,205           84,100           84,100         -136,105   ...............
 
    Stockpile services:
        Production support.........................................         293,062          301,484          301,484           +8,422   ...............
        Research and development support...........................          35,144           37,071           37,071           +1,927   ...............
        Research and development certification and safety..........         187,574          143,076          173,076          -14,498          +30,000
        Management, technology, and production.....................         195,334          200,223          183,223          -12,111          -17,000
        Pit manufacturing..........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Pit manufacturing capability...............................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Plutonium capability.......................................         155,269   ...............  ...............        -155,269   ...............
        Plutonium infrastructure sustainment.......................  ...............         149,201          149,201         +149,201   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Stockpile services.............................         866,383          831,055          844,055          -22,328          +13,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Directed stockpile work...........................       1,620,152        1,514,651        1,527,651          -92,501          +13,000
 
    Campaigns:
        Science campaign:
            Advanced certification, non-RRW........................          19,400           19,400           19,400   ...............  ...............
            Primary assessment technologies........................          80,181           80,181           83,181           +3,000           +3,000
            Dynamic plutonium experiments..........................          23,022   ...............  ...............         -23,022   ...............
            Dynamic materials properties...........................          83,231           86,617           86,617           +3,386   ...............
            Academic alliances.....................................  ...............          30,251           30,251          +30,251   ...............
            Advanced radiography...................................          28,535           22,328           22,328           -6,207   ...............
            Secondary assessment technologies......................          76,913           77,913           77,913           +1,000   ...............
            Test readiness.........................................           5,408   ...............  ...............          -5,408   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Science campaigns........................         316,690          316,690          319,690           +3,000           +3,000
 
        Engineering campaign:
            Enhanced surety, non-RRW...............................          46,112           42,000           42,000           -4,112   ...............
            Weapons system engineering assessment technology.......          16,592           18,000           18,000           +1,408   ...............
            Nuclear survivability..................................          21,100           21,000           21,000             -100   ...............
            Enhanced surveillance..................................          66,196           69,000           69,000           +2,804   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Engineering campaign.......................         150,000          150,000          150,000   ...............  ...............
 
        Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield
         campaign:
            Ignition...............................................         100,535          106,734          106,734           +6,199   ...............
            NIF diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support...          66,201           72,252           72,252           +6,051   ...............
            Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion...............           8,652            5,000            5,000           -3,652   ...............
            Joint program in high energy density laboratory plasmas           3,053            4,000            4,000             +947   ...............
            Facility operations and target production..............         203,282          248,929          265,429          +62,147          +16,500
            Inertial fusion technology.............................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
            Naval Research Laboratory..............................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
            NIF assembly and installation..........................          55,192   ...............  ...............         -55,192   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.............................................         436,915          436,915          453,415          +16,500          +16,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Inertial confinement fusion................         436,915          436,915          453,415          +16,500          +16,500
 
        Advanced simulation and computing..........................         556,125          556,125          566,125          +10,000          +10,000
 
        Readiness campaign:
            Stockpile readiness....................................          27,869            5,746            5,746          -22,123   ...............
            High explosives and weapon operations..................           8,659            4,608            4,608           -4,051   ...............
            Nonnuclear readiness...................................          30,000           12,701           12,701          -17,299   ...............
            Tritium readiness......................................          71,831           68,246           68,246           -3,585   ...............
            Advanced design and production technologies............          22,261            8,699            8,699          -13,562   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Readiness campaign.........................         160,620          100,000          100,000          -60,620   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Campaigns.....................................       1,620,350        1,559,730        1,589,230          -31,120          +29,500
 
    Readiness in technical base and facilities [RTBF]:
        Operations of facilities:
            Operations of facilities...............................  ...............       1,342,303   ...............  ...............      -1,342,303
            Kansas City Plant......................................          89,871   ...............         156,056          +66,185         +156,056
            Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.................          82,605   ...............          86,670           +4,065          +86,670
            Los Alamos National Laboratory.........................         289,169   ...............         311,776          +22,607         +311,776
            Nevada Test Site.......................................          92,203   ...............          79,583          -12,620          +79,583
            Pantex.................................................         101,230   ...............         131,602          +30,372         +131,602
            Sandia national Laboratory.............................         123,992   ...............         104,133          -19,859         +104,133
            Savannah River Site....................................          92,762   ...............         128,580          +35,818         +128,580
            Y-12 Productions Plant.................................         235,397   ...............         210,774          -24,623         +210,774
            Institutional Site Support.............................          56,102   ...............         120,129          +64,027         +120,129
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, operations of facilities...................       1,163,331        1,342,303        1,329,303         +165,972          -13,000
 
        Program readiness..........................................          71,626           73,021           73,021           +1,395   ...............
        Material recycle and recovery..............................          70,334           69,542           69,542             -792   ...............
        Containers.................................................          22,696           23,392           23,392             +696   ...............
        Storage....................................................          31,951           24,708           24,708           -7,243   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, RTBF...........................................       1,359,938        1,532,966        1,519,966         +160,028          -13,000
 
        Construction:
            10-D-501 Nuclear facilities risk reduction Y-12          ...............          12,500           12,500          +12,500   ...............
             National security complex, Oakridge, TN...............
            99-D-141 Pit disassembly and conversion facility, SRS..  ...............          30,321           30,321          +30,321   ...............
            09-D-007, LANSCE Reinvestment PED Los Alamos National            19,300   ...............          30,000          +10,700          +30,000
             Lab, Los Alamos, NM...................................
            09-D-404, Test capabilities revitalization II, Sandia             3,104   ...............          13,000           +9,896          +13,000
             National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM................
            08-D-801 High pressure fire loop [HPFL], Pantex Plant,            1,940           31,910           31,910          +29,970   ...............
             Amarillo, TX..........................................
            08-D-802 High explosive pressing facility Pantex Plant,          27,386   ...............  ...............         -27,386   ...............
             Amarillo, TX..........................................
            08-D-804 TA-55 Reinvestment project, Los Alamos                   7,663   ...............  ...............          -7,663   ...............
             National Laboratory [LANL]............................
            08-D-806 Ion beam laboratory refurbishment, SNL                   6,100   ...............  ...............          -6,100   ...............
             Albuquerque, NM.......................................
            07-D-140 Project engineering and design [PED], various            7,223   ...............  ...............          -7,223   ...............
             locations.............................................
            07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility             19,070   ...............  ...............         -19,070   ...............
             upgrade project, LANL.................................
            06-D-140 Project engineering and design [PED], various          101,521           70,678           16,200          -85,321          -54,478
             locations.............................................
            06-D-141 Project engineering and design [PED], Y-12      ...............  ...............          94,000          +94,000          +94,000
             National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, TN..............
            06-D-402 NTS replace fire stations 1 & 2 Nevada Test              9,060            1,473            1,473           -7,587   ...............
             Site, NV..............................................
            05-D-402 Beryllium capability [BEC] project, Y-12                 4,865   ...............  ...............          -4,865   ...............
             National security complex, Oak Ridge, TN..............
            04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy facility replacement           97,194           55,000           98,000             +806          +43,000
             project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos,
             NM....................................................
            04-D-128 TA-18 mission relocation project, Los Alamos            10,042            1,500            1,500           -8,542   ...............
             Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM............................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Construction...............................         314,468          203,382          328,904          +14,436         +125,522
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Readiness in technical base and facilities....       1,674,406        1,736,348        1,848,870         +174,464         +112,522
 
        Secure transportation asset:
            Operations and equipment...............................         127,701          138,772          138,772          +11,071   ...............
            Program direction......................................          86,738           96,143           96,143           +9,405   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Secure transportation asset................         214,439          234,915          234,915          +20,476   ...............
 
    Nuclear weapons incident response..............................         215,278          221,936          221,936           +6,658   ...............
 
    Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization pgm:                      79,550          144,959          144,959          +65,409   ...............
        Construction:
            08-D-601 Mercury highway, Nevada Test Site, NV.........          11,349   ...............  ...............         -11,349   ...............
            08-D-602 Portable water system upgrades Y-12 Plant, Oak          26,836   ...............  ...............         -26,836   ...............
             Ridge, TN.............................................
            07-D-253 TA 1 heating systems modernization [HSM]                15,282            9,963            9,963           -5,319   ...............
             Sandia National Laboratory............................
            06-D-601 Electrical distribution system upgrade, Pantex           3,880   ...............  ...............          -3,880   ...............
             Plant, Amarillo, TX...................................
            06-D-603 Steam plant life extension project [SLEP], Y-           10,552   ...............  ...............         -10,552   ...............
             12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge,  TN..........
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Construction.............................          67,899            9,963            9,963          -57,936   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total, Facilities and infrastructure                        147,449          154,922          154,922           +7,473   ...............
                 recapitalization program..........................
 
    Site stewardship:
        Environmental projects and operations......................  ...............          41,288           41,288          +41,288   ...............
        Nuclear materials integration..............................  ...............          20,000           20,000          +20,000   ...............
        Stewardship planning.......................................  ...............          29,086   ...............  ...............         -29,086
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Site stewardship..................................  ...............          90,374           61,288          +61,288          -29,086
 
    Environmental projects and operations:
        Long-term stewardship......................................          38,596   ...............  ...............         -38,596   ...............
    Transformation disposition.....................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
    Safeguards and security:
        Cybersecurity..............................................         121,286          122,511          122,511           +1,225   ...............
        Defense nuclear security...................................         689,510          700,044          700,044          +10,534   ...............
            Construction:
                10-D-701 Security improvements project Y-12 Plant,   ...............          49,000           49,000          +49,000   ...............
                 Oak Ridge, TN.....................................
                08-D-701 Nuclear materials S&S; upgrade project Los           44,620   ...............  ...............         -44,620   ...............
                 Almos National Laboratory.........................
                05-D-170 Project engineering and design [PED],                1,078   ...............  ...............          -1,078   ...............
                 various locations.................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Construction...........................          45,698           49,000           49,000           +3,302   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal, Defense nuclear security...............         735,208          749,044          749,044          +13,836   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Safeguards and security...................         856,494          871,555          871,555          +15,061   ...............
 
    Congressionally directed projects..............................          22,836   ...............  ...............         -22,836   ...............
    Use of prior year balances.....................................  ...............  ...............         -42,100          -42,100          -42,100
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES....................................       6,410,000        6,384,431        6,468,267          +58,267          +83,836
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
 
Nonproliferation and verification, R&D.............................;         345,332          297,300          337,300           -8,032          +40,000
    Construction:
        07-SC-05 Physical Science Facility, Pacific Northwest                18,460   ...............  ...............         -18,460   ...............
         National Laboratory, Richland, WA.........................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Nonproliferation & verification R&D............;         363,792          297,300          337,300          -26,492          +40,000
 
Nonproliferation and international security........................         150,000          207,202          187,202          +37,202          -20,000
 
International nuclear materials protection and cooperation                  400,000          552,300          552,300         +152,300   ...............
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-32.....................          55,000   ...............  ...............         -55,000   ...............
Elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program..........         141,299           24,507           24,507         -116,792   ...............
 
Fissile materials disposition:
    U.S. plutonium disposition.....................................          40,774           90,896           90,896          +50,122   ...............
    U.S. uranium disposition.......................................  ...............          34,691           34,691          +34,691   ...............
    Supporting activities..........................................  ...............           1,075            1,075           +1,075   ...............
    Construction:
        MOX fuel fabrication facilities:
            99-D-143 Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility,          ...............         504,238          504,238         +504,238   ...............
             Savannah River, SC....................................
            99-D-141-02 Waste solidification building, Savannah      ...............          70,000           70,000          +70,000   ...............
             River, SC.............................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Construction...............................  ...............         574,238          574,238         +574,238   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, U.S. surplus fissile materials disposal....          40,774          700,900          700,900         +660,126   ...............
 
    Russian surplus materials disposition..........................           1,000            1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Fissile materials disposition.........................          41,774          701,900          701,900         +660,126   ...............
 
Global threat reduction initiative.................................         395,000          353,500          333,500          -61,500          -20,000
International nuclear fuel bank....................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................           1,903   ...............  ...............          -1,903   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................       1,548,768        2,136,709        2,136,709         +587,941   ...............
 
Use of prior year balances.........................................         -11,418   ...............  ...............         +11,418   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................       1,537,350        2,136,709        2,136,709         +599,359   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION......................       1,537,350        2,136,709        2,136,709         +599,359   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                           NAVAL REACTORS
 
Naval reactors development.........................................         771,600          935,533          905,533         +133,933          -30,000
 
Construction:
    10-D-093, Security upgrades, KAPL..............................  ...............           1,500            1,500           +1,500   ...............
    10-D-904, NRF infrastructure upgrades, Idaho...................  ...............             700              700             +700   ...............
    09-D-190, PED, Infrastructure upgrades, KAPL...................           1,000            1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
    09-D-902, NRF Office Building #2, ECC upgrade, Idaho...........           8,300            6,400            6,400           -1,900   ...............
    08-D-190 Project engineering and design, Expended Core Facility             300            9,500            9,500           +9,200   ...............
     M-290 recovering discharge station, Naval Reactor Facility, ID
    07-D-190 Materials research technology complex [MRTC]..........          12,400           11,700           11,700             -700   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction.......................................          22,000           30,800           30,800           +8,800   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Naval reactors development............................         793,600          966,333          936,333         +142,733          -30,000
 
Program direction..................................................          34,454           36,800           36,800           +2,346   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS........................................         828,054        1,003,133          973,133         +145,079          -30,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                    OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
 
Office of the Administrator........................................         415,878          431,074          431,074          +15,196   ...............
Congressionally directed projects..................................          23,312   ...............  ...............         -23,312   ...............
Use of prior year balances.........................................  ...............         -10,320          -10,320          -10,320   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR...........................         439,190          420,754          420,754          -18,436   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION..............       9,214,594        9,945,027        9,998,863         +784,269          +53,836
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                    DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Closure Sites:
    Closure sites administration...................................          13,209            8,225            8,225           -4,984   ...............
    Fernald........................................................           2,100   ...............  ...............          -2,100   ...............
    Miamisburg.....................................................          30,574           33,243           33,243           +2,669   ...............
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................          19,700   ...............  ...............         -19,700   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, closure sites.....................................          65,583           41,468           41,468          -24,115   ...............
 
Hanford Site:
    Nuclear facility D&D;, river corridor closure project...........         231,837          327,955          327,955          +96,118   ...............
    Nuclear material stabilization & disposition PFP...............         122,483          118,087          118,087           -4,396   ...............
    SNF stabilization and disposition..............................         122,171           55,325           95,325          -26,846          +40,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, 2012 accelerated completions.......................         476,491          501,367          541,367          +64,876          +40,000
 
    Nuclear facility D&D--remainder; of Hanford.....................          89,903           70,250           70,250          -19,653   ...............
    Richland community and regulatory support......................          19,620           21,940           21,940           +2,320   ...............
    Soil & water remediation--groundwater/vadose zone..............         182,532          176,766          229,766          +47,234          +53,000
    Solid waste stabilization & disposition--200 area..............         198,430          132,757          159,757          -38,673          +27,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, 2035 accelerated completions.......................         490,485          401,713          481,713           -8,772          +80,000
 
    Emergency appropriations, Public Law 111-5:
        D&D; river corridor.........................................         442,265   ...............  ...............        -442,265   ...............
        D&D; remainder of Handford..................................         740,120   ...............  ...............        -740,120   ...............
        Soil and groundwater RL-100................................         145,780   ...............  ...............        -145,780   ...............
        Soil and groundwater RL-1041...............................          77,815   ...............  ...............         -77,815   ...............
        TRU and solid waste........................................         228,520   ...............  ...............        -228,520   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Hanford Site......................................       2,601,476          903,080        1,023,080       -1,578,396         +120,000
 
Idaho National Laboratory:
    SNF stabilization and disposition--2012........................          14,334           14,768           28,768          +14,434          +14,000
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition......................         191,237          137,000          137,000          -54,237   ...............
    Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition....          46,025           95,800          132,800          +86,775          +37,000
    06-D-401, Sodium bearing waste treatment project, ID...........          86,700           83,700           83,700           -3,000   ...............
    Soil and water remediation--2012...............................          99,465           71,000           84,000          -15,465          +13,000
    Nuclear facility D&D...........................................;          34,133   ...............  ...............         -34,133   ...............
    Idaho community and regulatory support.........................           3,867            3,900            3,900              +33   ...............
        D&D; (Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5)............         217,875   ...............  ...............        -217,875   ...............
        TRU and solid waste (emergency appropriation, Public Law            130,000   ...............  ...............        -130,000   ...............
         111-5)....................................................
        Soil and groundwater (Emergency appropriation, Public Law           120,000   ...............  ...............        -120,000   ...............
         111-5)....................................................
 
          Total, Idaho National Laboratory.........................         943,636          406,168          470,168         -473,468          +64,000
 
NNSA:
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.........................  ...............             910              910             +910   ...............
    NNSA Service Center/SPRU.......................................          19,443           17,938           17,938           -1,505   ...............
    Nevada.........................................................          75,674           65,674           65,674          -10,000   ...............
    Nevada soil and groundwater (Emergency appropriation Public Law          44,325   ...............  ...............         -44,325   ...............
     111-5)........................................................
    California site support........................................  ...............             238              238             +238   ...............
    Sandia National Laboratories...................................           3,000            2,864            2,864             -136   ...............
    Los Alamos National Laboratory.................................         222,734          189,000          204,000          -18,734          +15,000
    D&D; acceleration (Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5)...         118,200   ...............  ...............        -118,200   ...............
    Soil and groundwater (Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-           78,800   ...............  ...............         -78,800   ...............
     5)............................................................
    SPRU recovery acct project (Emergency appropriation, Public Law          31,775   ...............  ...............         -31,775   ...............
     111-5)........................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.......................         593,951          276,624          291,624         -302,327          +15,000
 
Oak Ridge Reservation:
    Building 3019..................................................          58,000           38,900           38,900          -19,100   ...............
    Nuclear facility D&D; ORNL......................................          64,825           38,900           38,900          -25,925   ...............
    Nuclear facility D&D; Y-12......................................          48,392           34,000           34,000          -14,392   ...............
    Nuclear facility D&D;, E. Tenn. Technology Park.................             105              100              100               -5   ...............
    OR reservation community & regulatory support..................           6,100            6,253            6,253             +153   ...............
    Soil and water remediation--offsites...........................           1,230   ...............  ...............          -1,230   ...............
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition--2012................          84,183           35,615           35,615          -48,568   ...............
 
    Emergency appropriations, Public Law 111-5:
        D&D; Y-12 footprint reduction...............................         327,000   ...............  ...............        -327,000   ...............
        D7D ORNL footprint reduction...............................         151,110   ...............  ...............        -151,110   ...............
        TRU and solid waste........................................          80,000   ...............  ...............         -80,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Oak Ridge Reservation.............................         820,945          153,768          153,768         -667,177   ...............
 
Office of River Protection:
    Waste treatment & immobilization plant:
        01-D-16A Low activity waste facility.......................         160,000          100,000          100,000          -60,000   ...............
        01-D-16B Analytical laboratory.............................          65,000           55,000           55,000          -10,000   ...............
        01-D-16C Balance of facilities.............................          75,000           50,000           50,000          -25,000   ...............
        01-D-16D High-level waste facility.........................         125,000          160,000          160,000          +35,000   ...............
        01-D-16E Pretreatment facility.............................         265,000          325,000          325,000          +60,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Waste treatment and immobilization plant.......         690,000          690,000          690,000   ...............  ...............
 
    Tank Farm activities:
        Rad liquid tank waste stabil. and disposition..............         319,943          408,000          408,000          +88,057   ...............
        Tank infrastructure (Emergency appropriation, Public Law            326,035   ...............  ...............        -326,035   ...............
         111-5)....................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Tank Farm activities...........................         645,978          408,000          408,000         -237,978   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Office of River Protection........................       1,335,978        1,098,000        1,098,000         -237,978   ...............
 
Savannah River site:
    Nuclear material stabilization and disposition:
        Nuclear material stabilization and disposition.............  ...............         385,310          385,310         +385,310   ...............
        Construction:
            08-D-414 Project engineering and design plutonium        ...............           6,315            6,315           +6,315   ...............
             preparation facility, VL..............................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, 2012 accelerated completions...............  ...............         391,625          391,625         +391,625   ...............
 
    SR community and regulatory support............................          14,800           18,300           18,300           +3,500   ...............
    Nuclear material stabilization and disposition.................         339,843   ...............  ...............        -339,843   ...............
    Spent nuclear fuel stabilization and disposition...............          24,108           38,768           38,768          +14,660   ...............
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition......................          62,599   ...............  ...............         -62,599   ...............
    Soil and water remediation.....................................          71,967   ...............          33,025          -38,942          +33,025
    Nuclear facility D&D...........................................;          12,052   ...............  ...............         -12,052   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, 2035 accelerated completions.......................         525,369           57,068           90,093         -435,276          +33,025
 
    Tank Farm activities:
        Rad liquid tank waste stabil. and disposition..............         546,250          527,138          527,138          -19,112   ...............
        05-D-405, Salt waste processing facility...................         155,524          234,118          234,118          +78,594   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Tank farm activities...........................         701,774          761,256          761,256          +59,482   ...............
 
    Emergency appropriations, Public Law 111-5:
        D&D; P and R area...........................................         579,000   ...............  ...............        -579,000   ...............
        D&D; M and D area...........................................         130,000   ...............  ...............        -130,000   ...............
        D&D; soil and groundwater sitewide..........................         365,400   ...............  ...............        -365,400   ...............
        TRU and solid waste........................................         541,000   ...............  ...............        -541,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Savannah River site...............................       2,842,543        1,209,949        1,242,974       -1,599,569          +33,025
 
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:
    Operate WIPP...................................................         137,425          144,902          159,902          +22,477          +15,000
        Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..................         172,375   ...............  ...............        -172,375   ...............
    Central Characterization Project...............................          38,206           13,730           13,730          -24,476   ...............
    Transportation.................................................          28,170           33,851           33,851           +5,681   ...............
    Community and regulatory support...............................          27,860           27,854           27,854               -6   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...........................         404,036          220,337          235,337         -168,699          +15,000
 
Program direction..................................................         309,807          355,000          355,000          +45,193   ...............
    Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5......................          25,635   ...............  ...............         -25,635   ...............
Program support....................................................          33,930           34,000           34,000              +70   ...............
 
Safeguards and Security:
    Waste Isolation Pilot Project..................................           5,124            4,644            4,644             -480   ...............
    Oak Ridge Reservation..........................................          27,020           32,400           32,400           +5,380   ...............
    West Valley....................................................           1,400            1,859            1,859             +459   ...............
    Paducah........................................................           8,196            8,190            8,190               -6   ...............
    Richland/Hanford Site..........................................          79,765           82,771           82,771           +3,006   ...............
    Savannah River Site............................................         134,336          132,064          149,064          +14,728          +17,000
    Portsmouth.....................................................           4,500           17,509           17,509          +13,009   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Safeguards and Security...............................         260,341          279,437          296,437          +36,096          +17,000
 
Technology development.............................................          32,320           55,000           55,000          +22,680   ...............
Uranium enrichment D&D; fund contribution...........................         463,000          463,000          463,000   ...............  ...............
ARRA defense unallocated (Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-           34,270   ...............  ...............         -34,270   ...............
 5)................................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP.....................      10,767,451        5,495,831        5,759,856       -5,007,595         +264,025
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Congressionally directed projects..................................          17,908   ...............           4,000          -13,908           +4,000
Use of prior year balances.........................................          -1,109   ...............  ...............          +1,109   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP........................      10,784,250        5,495,831        5,763,856       -5,020,394         +268,025
          Appropriations...........................................      (5,657,250)      (5,495,831)      (5,763,856)       (+106,606)       (+268,025)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (5,127,000)  ...............  ...............     (-5,127,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                      OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
Health, safety and security:
    Health, safety and security....................................         346,874          337,757          337,757           -9,117   ...............
    Program direction..............................................          99,597          112,125          112,125          +12,528   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Health, safety and security...........................         446,471          449,882          449,882           +3,411   ...............
 
Office of Legacy Management:
    Legacy management..............................................         174,397          177,618          177,618           +3,221   ...............
    Program direction..............................................          11,584           12,184           12,184             +600   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Legacy Management...........................         185,981          189,802          189,802           +3,821   ...............
 
Nuclear energy:
    Infrastructure:
        Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.....................          78,811   ...............  ...............         -78,811   ...............
        INL infrastructure O&M.....................................;  ...............          83,358           83,358          +83,358   ...............
 
    Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility:
        Operations and maintenance.................................          19,200   ...............  ...............         -19,200   ...............
        Construction and other project costs:
            99-D-143 MOX fuel fabrication facility.................         467,808   ...............  ...............        -467,808   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility......         487,008   ...............  ...............        -487,008   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Nuclear energy................................         565,819           83,358           83,358         -482,461   ...............
 
Defense-related administrative support.............................         108,190          122,982          122,982          +14,792   ...............
Office of Hearings and Appeals.....................................           6,603            6,444            6,444             -159   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Other Defense Activities...........................       1,313,064          852,468          852,468         -460,596   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Congressionally directed projects..................................             999   ...............           2,000           +1,001           +2,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES..............................       1,314,063          852,468          854,468         -459,595           +2,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.....................................         143,000           98,400           98,400          -44,600   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES......................      21,455,907       16,391,726       16,715,587       -4,740,320         +323,861
          Appropriations...........................................     (16,243,907)     (16,391,726)     (16,715,587)       (+471,680)       (+323,861)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (5,212,000)  ...............  ...............     (-5,212,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS
 
                 SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Purchase power and wheeling....................................          63,522           85,228           85,228          +21,706   ...............
    Program direction..............................................           7,420            7,638            7,638             +218   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance..........................          70,942           92,866           92,866          +21,924   ...............
 
    Less alternative financing [PPW]...............................         -14,002          -14,422          -14,422             -420   ...............
    Offsetting collections.........................................         -49,520          -78,444          -78,444          -28,924   ...............
    Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts..............  ...............           7,638            7,638           +7,638   ...............
    Spending in excess of receipts (proposal)......................  ...............           1,000            1,000           +1,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................           7,420            8,638            8,638           +1,218   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Operating expenses.............................................          12,865           12,775           12,775              -90   ...............
    Purchase power and wheeling....................................          46,000           48,000           48,000           +2,000   ...............
    Program direction..............................................          24,330           28,153           28,153           +3,823   ...............
    Construction...................................................           5,991            6,016            6,016              +25   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance..........................          89,186           94,944           94,944           +5,758   ...............
    Less alternative financing (for program direction).............          -2,200   ...............  ...............          +2,200   ...............
    Less alternative financing (ofr O&M;)...........................          -9,381   ...............  ...............          +9,381   ...............
    Less alternative financing [PPW]...............................         -11,000   ...............  ...............         +11,000   ...............
    Less alternative financing (Const.)............................          -3,191   ...............  ...............          +3,191   ...............
    Less alternative financing.....................................  ...............         -12,000          -12,000          -12,000   ...............
    Offsetting collections.........................................         -35,000          -69,868          -69,868          -34,868   ...............
    Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts..............  ...............          31,868           31,868          +31,868   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................          28,414           44,944           44,944          +16,530   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
    Operation and maintenance:
        Construction and rehabilitation............................          74,544          104,971          104,971          +30,427   ...............
        Operation and maintenance..................................          52,365           57,159           57,159           +4,794   ...............
            Emergency appropriation, Public Law 111-5..............          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
        Purchase power and wheeling................................         600,960          548,847          548,847          -52,113   ...............
        Program direction..........................................         166,423          180,756          180,756          +14,333   ...............
        Utah mitigation and conservation...........................           7,342            7,584            7,584             +242   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Operation and maintenance......................         911,634          899,317          899,317          -12,317   ...............
 
    Less alternative financing (for O&M;)...........................         -15,499   ...............  ...............         +15,499   ...............
    Less alternative financing (for Const.)........................         -47,663   ...............  ...............         +47,663   ...............
    Less alternative financing (for Program direction).............         -15,800   ...............  ...............         +15,800   ...............
    Less alternative financing (for PPW)...........................        -197,842   ...............  ...............        +197,842   ...............
    Less alternative financing.....................................  ...............        -288,920         -288,920         -288,920   ...............
    Offsetting collections (Public Law 108-477, Public Law 109-103)        -403,118         -349,807         -349,807          +53,311   ...............
    Offsetting collections (Public Law 98-381).....................          -3,366           -3,879           -3,879             -513   ...............
    Offsetting collections (for program direction).................  ...............        -110,492         -110,492         -110,492   ...............
    Offsetting collections (for O&M;)...............................  ...............         -37,038          -37,038          -37,038   ...............
    Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts..............  ...............         147,530          147,530         +147,530   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................         228,346          256,711          256,711          +28,365   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
         FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND
 
Operation and maintenance..........................................           2,959            2,568            2,568             -391   ...............
Offsetting collections.............................................  ...............          -2,348           -2,348           -2,348   ...............
Cost of implementing reclassification of receipts..................  ...............           2,348            2,348           +2,348   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS.......................         267,139          312,861          312,861          +45,722   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission...............................         273,400          298,000          298,000          +24,600   ...............
FERC revenues......................................................        -273,400         -298,000         -298,000          -24,600   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY............................      73,537,001       28,407,846       27,398,221      -46,138,780       -1,009,625
          (Total amount appropriated)..............................     (26,793,001)     (28,407,846)     (27,398,221)       (+605,220)     (-1,009,625)
          (Emergency appropriations)...............................     (46,570,000)  ...............  ...............    (-46,570,000)  ...............
          (Rescissions, including emergency funding)...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
          (Deferrals)..............................................        (149,000)  ...............  ...............       (-149,000)  ...............
          (Advance appropriation)..................................         (25,000)  ...............  ...............        (-25,000)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                        SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTS
 
Energy efficiency and renewable energy.............................      18,978,540        2,318,602        2,232,967      -16,745,573          -85,635
Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................       4,637,000          208,008          179,483       -4,457,517          -28,525
Nuclear energy.....................................................         792,000          761,274          761,274          -30,726   ...............
Fossil Energy Research and Development.............................       4,276,320          617,565          700,200       -3,576,120          +82,635
Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves...............................          19,099           23,627           23,627           +4,528   ...............
Strategic petroleum reserves.......................................         205,000          229,073          259,073          +54,073          +30,000
Northeast home heating oil reserve.................................           9,800           11,300           11,300           +1,500   ...............
Energy Information Administration..................................         110,595          133,058          110,595   ...............         -22,463
Non-defense environmental clean up.................................         744,819          237,517          259,829         -484,990          +22,312
Uranium enrichment D&D; fund........................................         925,503          359,377          588,322         -337,181         +228,945
Science............................................................       6,372,636        4,941,682        4,898,832       -1,473,804          -42,850
Energy transformation acceleration fund............................         400,000           10,000   ...............        -400,000          -10,000
Nuclear waste disposal.............................................         145,390           98,400           98,400          -46,990   ...............
Innovative technology loan guarantee program.......................       6,465,000        1,500,000   ...............      -6,465,000       -1,500,000
Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing loan pgm................       7,510,000           20,000           20,000       -7,490,000   ...............
Departmental administration........................................         272,643          302,071          293,684          +21,041           -8,387
    Revenues.......................................................        -117,317         -119,740         -119,740           -2,423   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental administration...........................         155,326          182,331          173,944          +18,618           -8,387
 
Office of the Inspector General....................................          66,927           51,445           51,927          -15,000             +482
 
Atomic energy defense activities:
    National Nuclear Security Administration:
        Weapons activities.........................................       6,410,000        6,384,431        6,468,267          +58,267          +83,836
        Defense nuclear nonproliferation...........................       1,537,350        2,136,709        2,136,709         +599,359   ...............
        Naval reactors.............................................         828,054        1,003,133          973,133         +145,079          -30,000
        Office of the Administrator................................         439,190          420,754          420,754          -18,436   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Administration.......       9,214,594        9,945,027        9,998,863         +784,269          +53,836
 
    Defense environmental cleanup..................................      10,784,250        5,495,831        5,763,856       -5,020,394         +268,025
    Other defense activities.......................................       1,314,063          852,468          854,468         -459,595           +2,000
    Defense nuclear waste disposal.................................         143,000           98,400           98,400          -44,600   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Atomic energy defense activities......................      21,455,907       16,391,726       16,715,587       -4,740,320         +323,861
 
Power marketing administrations:
    Southeastern Power Administration..............................           7,420            8,638            8,638           +1,218   ...............
    Southwestern Power Administration..............................          28,414           44,944           44,944          +16,530   ...............
    Western Area Power Administration..............................         228,346          256,711          256,711          +28,365   ...............
    Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund..............           2,959            2,568            2,568             -391   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power marketing administrations.......................         267,139          312,861          312,861          +45,722   ...............
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:
    Salaries and expenses..........................................         273,400          298,000          298,000          +24,600   ...............
    Revenues.......................................................        -273,400         -298,000         -298,000          -24,600   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total Summary of Accounts, Department of Energy..............      73,537,001       28,407,846       27,398,221      -46,138,780       -1,009,625
                                                                    ====================================================================================
FUNCTION RECAP:
    NON-DEFENSE....................................................      52,166,094       12,016,120       10,682,634      -41,483,460       -1,333,486
    DEFENSE........................................................      21,370,907       16,391,726       16,715,587       -4,655,320         +323,861
Environmental management...........................................     (12,454,572)      (6,092,725)      (6,612,007)     (-5,842,565)       (+519,282)
    DEFENSE RELATED................................................     (10,784,250)      (5,495,831)      (5,763,856)     (-5,020,394)       (+268,025)
    NON-DEFENSE....................................................      (1,670,322)        (596,894)        (848,151)       (-822,171)       (+251,257)
Nuclear waste disposal.............................................        (288,390)        (196,800)        (196,800)        (-91,590)  ...............
    DEFENSE RELATED................................................        (143,000)         (98,400)         (98,400)        (-44,600)  ...............
    NON-DEFENSE....................................................        (145,390)         (98,400)         (98,400)        (-46,990)  ...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    The following list of general provisions is recommended by 
the Committee. The recommendation includes several provisions 
which have been included in previous Energy and Water 
Appropriations Acts and new provisions as follows:
    Section 301. Language is included under section 302, which 
prohibits the use of funds in this act to initiate a request 
for proposal of expression of interest for new programs which 
have not yet been presented to Congress in the annual budget 
submission and which have not yet been approved and funded by 
Congress.
    Section 302. Language is included to address issues under 
section 3161 of Public Law 102-484.
    Section 303. Language is included which permits the 
transfer and merger of unexpended balances of prior 
appropriations with appropriation accounts established in this 
bill.
    Section 304. Language is included that prohibits the use of 
funds by the Bonneville Power Administration to enter into 
energy efficiency contracts outside its service area.
    Section 305. This section establishes certain notice and 
competition requirements for Department of Energy user 
facilities.
    Section 306. Language is included specifically authorizing 
intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year 
2008 Intelligence Authorization Act.
    Section 307. Language included related to laboratory 
directed research and development.
    Section 308. Language is included regarding transfer 
authority.
    Section 309. The Committee has included a provision related 
to the Bonneville Power Administration Treasury account.
    Section 310. The Committee has included a provision related 
to notification of funding awards.
    Section 311. The Committee has included a provision related 
to pensions.

                                TITLE IV

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                    Appalachian Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $75,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      76,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      76,000,000

    Established in 1965, the Appalachian Regional Commission is 
an economic development agency composed of 13 Appalachian 
States and a Federal co-chair appointed by the President. For 
fiscal year 2010, the Committee recommends $76,000,000 for the 
ARC.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of trade and 
investment opportunities to the Appalachian Region and is 
encouraged by the findings in a report that Appalachian firms 
could find significant trade and investment opportunities, 
particularly in the energy, high technology, and transportation 
sectors in the Republic of Turkey and the surrounding region. 
In this regard, the Committee supports the Appalachian-Turkish 
Trade Project [ATTP], a project to promote opportunities to 
expand trade, encourage business interests, stimulate foreign 
studies, and to build a lasting and mutually meaningful 
relationship between Appalachian States and the Republic of 
Turkey, as well as the neighboring regions, such as Greece. The 
Committee commends the ARC for its leadership role in helping 
to implement the mission of the ATTP. The Committee expects the 
ARC to continue to be a prominent ATTP sponsor.
    The Committee has included no earmarks in the ARC funds. 
The Commission allocates its funds by formula to its member 
States, based primarily on need. Under the Commission's formula 
system, earmarks out of ARC's base funding could come at the 
expense of those States that have no earmarks. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs that any earmarks in any State be taken from 
within that State's regular ARC allocation.

                Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      26,086,000
Committee recommendation................................      26,086,000

    For fiscal year 2010, the Committee recommends $26,086,000, 
the same as the President's request, for the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board [DNFSB]. This Board is responsible for 
evaluating the implementation of standards for design, 
construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department 
of Energy's defense nuclear facilities. Based on these 
evaluations, the Board makes specific recommendations to the 
Secretary of Energy to ensure that both public and employee 
heath and safety are protected. The Committee encourages the 
DNFSB to undertake the responsibility to provide cost estimates 
to accompany their recommendations.

                        Delta Regional Authority

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $13,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      13,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      13,000,000

    For the Delta Regional Authority, the Committee recommends 
$13,000,000. The Delta Regional Authority was established to 
assist the eight State Mississippi Delta Region in obtaining 
basic infrastructure, transportation, skills training, and 
opportunities for economic development.

                           Denali Commission

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $11,800,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      11,965,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,965,000

    The Denali Commission is a Federal-State partnership 
responsible for promoting infrastructure development, job 
training, and other economic development services in rural 
areas throughout Alaska. For fiscal year 2010, the Committee 
recommends $11,965,000.

                     Nuclear Regulatory Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $1,034,656,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   1,061,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,061,000,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2009....................................   -$860,857,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    -878,102,000
Committee recommendation................................    -902,402,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $173,799,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     182,898,000
Committee recommendation................................     158,598,000

    The Committee recommendation for the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission for fiscal year 2010 is $1,061,000,000. This amount 
is offset by estimated revenues of $902,402,000 resulting in a 
net appropriation of $158,598,000. The Committee has provided 
$15,000,000 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support its 
participation in an Integrated University Program as directed 
by section 313 of Public Law 111-8. The Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 of this amount to be used to support university 
education programs relevant to the NRC mission. In addition, 
not less than $5,000,000 of this amount will be used for grants 
to support research projects that do not align with 
programmatic missions but are critical to maintaining the 
discipline of nuclear science and engineering. The Committee 
expects the Commission to utilize a portion of existing 
carryover balances to support license application reviews of 
any new reactor designs, including modular reactors.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $10,860,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      10,102,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,860,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     -$9,774,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      -9,092,000
Committee recommendation................................      -9,774,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,086,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,010,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,086,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $1,086,000, 
an increase of $76,000 over the budget request. The Committee 
recommends that the current no year funding authority of the 
Office of Inspector General be retained.

                  Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $3,811,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       3,891,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,891,000

    The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board was established to 
evaluate the scientific and technical validity of the 
Department of Energy's nuclear waste disposal program. The 
Board reports its findings no fewer than two times a year to 
Congress and to the Secretary of Energy. For fiscal year 2010, 
the Committee recommends $3,891,000.

Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 
                                Projects

Appropriation, 2009.....................................      $4,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       4,466,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,466,000

    The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural 
Gas Transportation Projects was established as an independent 
agency in the executive branch on December 13, 2006, pursuant 
to the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2004. The Committee 
recommends $4,466,000, the same as the budget request.

                       Tennessee Valley Authority


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     $19,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

              OFFSET FROM TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    -$19,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommendation does not include the 
administration's proposal to establish a congressionally funded 
Office of the Inspector General to oversee the Tennessee Valley 
Authority. In recent years, the TVA has funded the requests of 
the TVA-IG office out of power revenues and receipts. This 
process has worked well, and the Committee sees no compelling 
reason to change that mechanism for funding the TVA-IG.

                General Provision--Independent Agencies

    The following general provision is recommended by the 
Committee.
    Section 401. The provision addresses an issue with the 
Delta Regional Authority.

                                TITLE V

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The following list of general provisions are recommended by 
the Committee.
    Section 501. The provision prohibits the use of any funds 
provided in this bill from being used to influence 
congressional action.
    Section 502. The provision addresses transfer authority 
under this act.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment 
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.''
    The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal 
year 2010:
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: General Investigations; 
Construction, General; Mississippi River and Tributaries; 
Operations and Maintenance; Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial 
Action Program;
    Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation;
    Water and Related Resources;
    Department of Energy: Energy Conservation and Supply 
Activities:
    Office of Fossil Energy: Fossil Energy R&D;, Clean Coal, 
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Research;
    Health, Safety and Security;
    Non-Defense Environmental Management;
    Office of Science;
    Department of Administration;
    National Nuclear Security Administration: Weapons 
Activities; Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation; Naval Reactors; 
Office of the Administrator;
    Defense Environmental Management, Defense Site Acceleration 
Completion;
    Other Defense Activities;
    Defense Nuclear Waste Fund;
    Office of Security and Performance Assurance;
    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
    Power Marketing Administrations: Southeastern, 
Southwestern, Western Area; and
    Energy Information Administration.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 9, 2009, 
the Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 1436) 
making appropriations for the energy and water development and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, 
subject to amendment and consistent with the budget allocation, 
and authorized the chairman of the committee or the chairman of 
the subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate-reported bill 
as a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the 
House companion measure, by a recorded vote of 30-0, a quorum 
being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Inouye
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu
Mr. Reed
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson
Mr. Pryor
Mr. Tester
Mr. Specter
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Mr. Voinovich
Ms. Murkowski

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the Committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law 
proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing 
law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is 
printed in italic; and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman.

 FORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM ACT OF 2000, PUBLIC LAW 106-
                                  382


SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System.--There are 
authorized to be appropriated--
            (1) to the Bureau of Reclamation [over a period of 
        10 fiscal years] through fiscal year 2015, $124,000,000 
        for the planning, design, and construction of the 
        Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System; and
            (2) to the Bureau of Indian Affairs such sums as 
        are necessary for the operation and maintenance of the 
        Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System.
    (b) Dry Prairie Rural Water System.--There is authorized to 
be appropriated, [over a period of 10 fiscal years] through 
fiscal year 2015, $51,000,000 for the planning, design, and 
construction of the Dry Prairie Rural Water System.
                                ------                                


       CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001, PUBLIC LAW 106-554


                         APPENDIX D--H.R. 5666

                TITLE V--LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER REGION

SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 503. DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY.

    The Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 
U.S.C.1921 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:

                 ``Subtitle F--Delta Regional Authority

``SEC. 382A. DEFINITIONS.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


``SEC. 382B. DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY.

    ``(a)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    ``(c) Voting.--
            [``(1) In general.--A decision by the Authority 
        shall require a majority vote of the Authority (not 
        including any member representing a State that is 
        delinquent under subsection (g)(2)(C)) to be 
        effective.]
            (1) In general--voting.--A decision by the 
        Authority shall require the affirmative vote of the 
        Federal cochairperson and a majority of the State 
        members (not including any member representing a State 
        that is delinquent under subsection (g)(2)(C)) to be 
        effective.
                                ------                                


   FARM SECURITY AND RURAL INVESTMENT ACT OF 2002, PUBLIC LAW 107-171


SEC. 2507. DESERT TERMINAL LAKES.

    (a) * * *
            (1) be used by the Secretary of the Interior, 
        acting throughthe Commissioner of Reclamation, to 
        provide water to at-risk natural desert terminal lakes; 
        [or]
            (2) remain available until expended[.] ; and
            (3) for efforts consistent with researching, 
        supporting, and conserving fish, wildlife, plant, and 
        habitat resources in the Walker River Basin.
                                ------                                


     CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2003, PUBLIC LAW 108-7

    Sec. 122. The non-Federal sponsor shall receive credit in 
an amount not to exceed [$10,000,000] $27,000,000 toward their 
share of the cost of Des Moines Recreational River and 
Greenbelt, Iowa, projects for work performed by the sponsor, or 
others on behalf of the sponsor, including planning, design, 
and construction performed after October 1, 2002, provided the 
Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, 
determines that such work is completed in accordance with 
United States Army Corps of Engineers standards and procedures 
and is integral to the Des Moines Recreational River and 
Greenbelt project.
                                ------                                


 WATER SUPPLY, RELIABILITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT ACT, PUBLIC 
                              LAW 108-361


    TITLE I--CALIFORNIA WATER SECURITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 103. BAY DELTA PROGRAM.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (e) New and Expanded Authorizations for Federal Agencies.--
            (1) In general.--The heads of the Federal agencies 
        described in this subsection are authorized to carry 
        out the activities described in subsection (f) during 
        each of fiscal years 2005 through [2010] 2015, in 
        coordination with the Governor.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (f) Description of Activities Under New and Expanded 
Authorizations.--
            (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (3) * * *
                    (A) * * *
                    (B) Report.--Not later than 180 days after 
                the date of enactment of this Act, the 
                Secretary of the Army shall submit to the 
                appropriate authorizing and appropriating 
                committees of the Senate and the House of 
                Representatives a report that describes the 
                levee stability reconstruction projects and 
                priorities that will be carried out under this 
                title during each of fiscal years 2005 through 
                [2010] 2015.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 107. FEDERAL SHARE OF COSTS.

    (a) In General.--The Federal share of the cost of 
implementing the Calfed Bay-Delta Program for fiscal years 2005 
through [2010] 2015 in the aggregate, as set forth in the 
Record of Decision, shall not exceed 33.3 percent.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 109. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.

    There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
and the heads of the Federal agencies to pay the Federal share 
of the cost of carrying out the new and expanded authorities 
described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 103 
$389,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2005 through [2010] 
2015, to remain available until expended.
                                ------                                


 ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006, PUBLIC LAW 109-
                                  103


                                TITLE II


                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


             General Provisions, Department of the Interior

    Sec. 208. (a)(1) Using amounts made available under section 
2507 of the Farm and Security Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 
U.S.C. 2211 note; Public Law 107-171), the Secretary shall 
provide [not more than] $70,000,000 to the University of Nevada 
or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The Secretary may 
provide funds to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in 
advance without regard to when exenses are incurred. The funds 
shall be subject to the provisions of the National Wildlife 
Foundation Establishment Act, excluding subsection (a) of 
section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 3709(a))--
            (A) to acquire from willing sellers land, water 
        appurtenant to the land, and related interests in the 
        Walker River Basin[, Nevada; and] ; and
            (B) to establish and administer an agricultural and 
        natural resources center, the mission of which shall be 
        to undertake research, restoration, and educational 
        activities in the Walker River Basin relating to--
                    (i) innovative agricultural water 
                conservation;
                    (ii) cooperative programs for environmental 
                restoration;
                    (iii) fish and wildlife habitat 
                restoration; and
                    (iv) wild horse and burro research and 
                adoption marketing[.] and
            (C) to design and implement conservation and 
        stewardship measures to address impacts from activities 
        carried out--
                    (i) under subparagraph (A); and
                    (ii) in conjunction with willing 
                landowners.
    (2) In acquiring interests under paragraph (1)(A), the 
University of Nevada shall make acquisitions that [the 
University determines are the most beneficial to--] the 
University of Nevada or the National Wildlife Foundation shall 
make acqusitions that the University or the Foundation 
determines to be the most beneficial to--
                                ------                                


      WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007, PUBLIC LAW 110-114


                 TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

SEC. 3111. ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

    The project for flood damage reduction, Antelope Creek, 
Lincoln, Nebraska, authorized by section 101(b)(19) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is 
modified--
            (1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in 
        accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
        1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), toward the non-Federal share 
        of the cost of the project the cost of design and 
        construction work carried out by the non-Federal 
        interest for the project before, on and after the date 
        of the partnership agreement for the project; and
            (2) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 5067. IDAHO, MONTANA, RURAL NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, RURAL UTAH, AND 
                    WYOMING.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (3) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the 
        following:
    ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section for the period 
beginning with fiscal year 2001 $150,000,000 for rural Nevada, 
[$25,000,000 for each of Montana and New Mexico] $75,000,000 
for Montana, $25,000,000 for New Mexico, $55,000,000 for Idaho, 
[$50,000,000] $100,000,000 for rural Utah, and $30,000,000 for 
Wyoming. Such sums shall remain available until expended.''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 5097. MISSISSIPPI.

Section 592(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 380; 117 Stat. 1837) is amended by striking 
``$100,000,000'' and inserting ``$200,000,000''.
                                ------                                


                        BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL


  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  of   Committee    Amount  of
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
 to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
 for 2010: Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development:
    Mandatory...............................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Discretionary...........................................       33,750       33,750       43,201    \1\43,201
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2010....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........    \2\19,820
    2011....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        9,270
    2012....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        3,004
    2013....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          607
    2014 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          804
Financial assistance to State and local governments for                NA           93           NA           19
 2010.......................................................
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
 
NA: Not applicable.

         DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS

    The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the 
purse. The Committee believes strongly that Congress should 
make the decisions on how to allocate the people's money.
    As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate, the term ``congressional directed spending item'' means 
a provision or report language included primarily at the 
request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a 
specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit 
authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, 
loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure 
with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality 
or congressional district, other than through a statutory or 
administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process.
    For each item, a Member is required to provide a 
certification that neither the Member nor the Senator's 
immediate family has a pecuniary interest in such 
congressionally directed spending item. Such certifications are 
available to the public on the website of the Senate Committee 
on Appropriations (www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm).
    Following is a list of congressionally directed spending 
items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this 
report, along with the name of each Senator who submitted a 
request to the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so 
identified. Neither the Committee recommendation nor this 
report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in rule XLIV.

                                                                             CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Agency                              Account                                             Project title                                 Funding                   Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM......................................        $500,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ALAMOGORDO, NM......................................................      $4,200,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK..........................................      $2,000,000   Murkowski
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ASCENSION PARISH, LA [EI]...........................................      $1,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ATLANTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, GA............................      $1,000,000   Chambliss, Isakson
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD......................................      $4,500,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR INLET, NJ.......................      $5,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD....................................      $4,000,000   Johnson, Thune
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO...................................        $750,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BRECKENRIDGE, MN....................................................      $5,000,000   Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BREVARD COUNTY, FL (MID AND SOUTH REACHES)..........................        $500,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET (ABSECON ISLAND), NJ.....      $2,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, BRIGANTINE, NJ..........         $80,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC........................................        $900,000   Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT...............................................        $500,000   Leahy
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM, CA..................................      $5,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY RIVER, TX...................        $500,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, MD, VA & PA      $1,000,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA.............................      $2,000,000   Mikulski, Cardin, Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CHICAGO SHORELINE, IL...............................................      $3,500,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  COMITE RIVER, LA....................................................      $8,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.....................................      $2,000,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA..............................................        $500,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY RIVER, TX........................     $22,000,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HELOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, BETHANY BEACH TO      $1,750,000   Carper, Kaufman
                                                                          SOUTH BETHANY, DE.
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, REHOBETH BEACH       $2,000,000   Carper, Kaufman
                                                                          AND DEWEY BEACH, DE.
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE.......................................        $390,000   Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DELAWARE RIVER MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, NJ, PA, DE...................     $10,000,000   Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, IA...................................      $2,700,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA.....................      $4,300,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DES PLAINES RIVER, IL...............................................      $3,500,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  DESOTO COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM, MS........................      $8,000,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA [FC]....................................      $3,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  EAST BATON ROUGE, LA [EI]...........................................        $500,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, IL.....................................        $540,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  FARMINGTON RECHARGE, CA.............................................      $1,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  FORT PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT......................................      $1,869,000   Tester, Baucus
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GENESEE COUNTY, MI..................................................        $600,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GEORGE W. KUHN DRAIN PROJECT, MI....................................        $300,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GRAND FORKS, ND--EAST GRAND FORKS, MN...............................      $2,617,000   Dorgan, Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GREAT EGG HARBOR TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NJ.............................      $3,500,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI...................      $2,000,000   Voinovich, Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV..........................................      $1,500,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  GUADALUPE RIVER, CA.................................................        $304,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ..........................................        $500,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  HAWAII WATER MANAGEMENT, HI.........................................      $2,000,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  HOLES CREEK, WEST CARROLLTON, OHIO..................................      $1,656,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  IAO STREAMS, HI.....................................................        $250,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ISLAND CREEK BASIN IN AND AROUND LOGAN, WV, VA......................     $21,750,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL.............................................        $950,000   Bill Nelson
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  JAMES RIVER DEEPWATER TURNING BASIN, VA.............................      $2,234,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX...................      $1,500,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  JOSEPH G. MINISH WATERFRONT, NJ.....................................      $3,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  KAHUKU, HI..........................................................      $4,360,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATE, VT...............................      $1,000,000   Leahy
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA [CG]....................................      $4,600,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LEE COUNTY, FL......................................................      $1,400,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA, KY.........      $6,750,000   ................................
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      VIRGINIA........................................................     ($4,000,000)  Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      WEST VIRGINIA...................................................     ($2,750,000)  Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LIVINGSTON PARISH, LA [EI]..........................................        $500,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV.........................................      $1,955,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY CITY LEVEE, MO..........................      $1,525,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MID VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA............................      $2,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELE, NM..........        $800,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MS........................     $10,000,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT, MO...............      $1,000,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (L-385), MO, IA, NE, KS.................      $2,500,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND......................................        $300,000   Conrad
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MT. ZION MILL POND DAM, FULTON COUNTY, IN...........................        $575,000   Lugar
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MUDDY RIVER, MA.....................................................      $1,000,000   Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MURRIETA CREEK, CA..................................................      $2,000,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NEGAUNEE, MI........................................................      $1,000,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY.........................................      $1,000,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NEW YORK STATE CANAL, NY............................................      $1,000,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA.........................      $1,000,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ND.......................     $15,000,000   Dorgan
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL.............................        $300,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  OHIO EI, OH.........................................................      $1,000,000   Voinovich, Brown
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ONONDAGA LAKE, NY...................................................      $1,000,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NY............................................      $1,000,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FL.............................................        $500,000   Bill Nelson
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MGMT, NJ..................................      $1,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  PLACER COUNTY, CA...................................................      $2,000,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  POPLAR ISLAND, MD...................................................        $350,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, WA.....................        $200,000   Murray, Cantwell
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RAMAPO RIVER AT MAHWAH AND SUFFERN, NJ..............................        $200,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, NJ..................................      $2,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ...................      $2,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX & OK...........................      $1,000,000   Inhofe
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM, LA, AR & TX............................      $2,000,000   Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR & TX........................      $2,000,000   Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RICHMOND CSO, VA....................................................        $150,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ROSEAU, MN..........................................................      $2,500,000   Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RURAL IDAHO.........................................................      $2,000,000   Crapo/Risch
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RURAL MONTANA, MT...................................................      $5,000,000   Tester, Baucus
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RURAL NEVADA [EI], NV...............................................     $15,000,000   Reid, Ensign
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  RURAL UTAH, UT [EI].................................................     $20,000,000   Bennett
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA..............        $500,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX.................................      $5,000,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA..............................................      $2,500,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ....................................      $2,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SAULT STE MARIE REPLACEMENT LOCK, MI................................      $1,000,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SHOALWATER BAY SHORELINE, WA........................................      $5,000,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SOUTHWEST VALLEY ALBUQUERQUE, NM....................................      $4,000,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO.........................      $4,000,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA.........................................      $3,000,000   Reid, Feinstein, Ensign
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  TAMPA HARBOR, FL....................................................        $500,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ...............................      $2,000,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS & MO.........................................      $1,000,000   Roberts, Brownback, Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  TUSCALOOSA, AL......................................................     $10,000,000   Shelby
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  UNALASKA, AK........................................................      $2,000,000   Murkowski, Begich
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA...........................................      $2,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  WYOMING VALLEY (LEVEE RAISING), PA..................................      $1,200,000   Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA................................................      $2,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CONSTRUCTION GENERAL ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES..................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL...............................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Guntersville Lake Hydrilla/Milfoil..............................        $150,000   Sessions
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Fife Lake Aquatic Weed Control, MI..............................        $145,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Black Lake, Ogdensburg, NY......................................        $100,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Sodus Bay, NY...................................................        $100,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lake Chautauqua, Jamestown, NY..................................         $50,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lake Champlain, VT..............................................        $500,000   Leahy
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM......................................  ...............  ................................
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206).........................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Upper York Creek Dam Removal, CA................................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Tamarisk Eradication along the Colorado River, CO...............  ...............  M. Udall, Bennet
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Mill River Restoration, Stamford, CT............................  ...............  Lieberman
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Chattahoochee Fall-Line Ecosystem Restoration Project, GA.......  ...............  Chambliss
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Paradise Creek, ID..............................................  ...............  Crapo/Risch
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Chariton River/Rathbun Lake, IA.................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Clear Creek and Iowa River, Johnson County, IA..................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Duck Creek, Davenport, IA.......................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Whitebreast Creek Watershed, IA.................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Buras Marina, LA................................................  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      False River Ecosystem Restoration, Point Coupee, LA.............  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lake Killarney, Louisiana State Penitentiary, LA................  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Zemurray Park Lake Restoration, Tangipahoa Parish, LA...........  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Milford Pond Restoration, Milford, MA...........................  ...............  Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Deep Run/Tiber Hudson, Howard County, MD........................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Dog Island Shoals, MD...........................................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Greenbury Point, MD.............................................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      North Beach, MD.................................................  ...............  Mikulski
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Northwest Branch, Anacostia River, MD...........................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Paint Branch Fish Passage, MD...................................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Painter Creek, MN...............................................  ...............  Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Musconetcong River Dam Removals, NJ.............................  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Blue Hole Lake State Park, NM...................................  ...............  Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Janes-Wallace Memorial Dam, Santa Rosa, NM......................  ...............  Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Kings Park, NY..................................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Mud Creek, Great South Bay, NY..................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Soundview Park, Bronx, NY.......................................  ...............  Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Spring Creek, NY................................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Concord Streams Restoration, NC.................................  ...............  Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Western Cary Stream Restoration, Cary, NC.......................  ...............  Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Codorus Creek Watershed Restoration, PA.........................  ...............  Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Narrow River, RI................................................  ...............  Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Winneapaug Pond Restoration, RI.................................  ...............  Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204, 207, 933).........  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Houma Navigation Canal Barrier Island Restoration, LA...........  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      NJIWW, Dredged Hole 35, NJ......................................  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Indian Bayou, AR................................................  ...............  Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Cosgrove Creek, Calaveras County, CA............................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Las Gallinas Creek/Santa Venetia Levee, CA......................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Pennsylvania Avenue Improvement, DE.............................  ...............  Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Indian/Dry Creek Cedar Rapids, IA...............................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Winnebago River, Mason City, IA.................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Concordia, KS...................................................  ...............  Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Neodesha, KS....................................................  ...............  Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Sedgwick, KS....................................................  ...............  Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Hopkinsville Dry-Dam, KY........................................  ...............  McConnell, Bunning
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      North River, Peabody, MA........................................  ...............  Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      McKinney Bayou, Tunica County, MS...............................  ...............  Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, MO................................  ...............  Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Hatch, NM.......................................................  ...............  Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Assunpink Creek, Hamilton Township, Mercer County, NJ...........  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Jackson Brook, NJ...............................................  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Pennsville, NJ..................................................  ...............  Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Port Jervis, NY.................................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Philadelphia Shipyard Sea Wall, Philadelphia, PA................  ...............  Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      East Providence, RI.............................................  ...............  Whitehouse
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)....................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Oyster Point Marina/Park Breakwater, CA.........................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Napolean Avenue Container Terminal Access, New Orleans, LA......  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Bass Harbor, ME.................................................  ...............  Collins
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Rhodes Point, Somerset Co, MD...................................  ...............  Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Woods Hole, Great Harbor, Woods Hole, MA........................  ...............  Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Northwestern Michigan, Traverse City, MI........................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Hampton Harbor, NH..............................................  ...............  Gregg, Shaheen
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Delaware River, Fairless Turning Basin, PA......................  ...............  Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Charlestown Breachway and Inlet, RI.............................  ...............  Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Point Judith Harbor, Expansion Study, RI........................  ...............  Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Northwest Tennessee Regional Harbor, TN.........................  ...............  Alexander, Corker
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Tangier Island Jetty, VA........................................  ...............  Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111)...........................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Mattituck Harbor, NY............................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  PROJECT MODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135)......  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lower Cache Restoration, AR.....................................  ...............  Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Millwood Lake, Grassy Lake, AR..................................  ...............  Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Rathbun Lake Habitat Restoration, IA............................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Bayou Desiard, Monroe, LA.......................................  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................     Houma Navigation Canal Mile 12-31.4 Restoration, Terrebonne        ...............  Landrieu
                                                                             Parish,  LA.
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Morganza Fore-Bay Restoration, LA...............................  ...............  Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lincoln Park West, Ecosystem Restoration Study, NJ..............  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Las Cruces Dam Environmental Restoration, Dona Ana County, NM...  ...............  Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Northport Harbor, NY............................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Smokes Creek, NY................................................  ...............  Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Lake Champlain Lamprey Barriers, VT.............................  ...............  Leahy
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103)......................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Bay Farm Island, CA (Bay Farm Dike, CA).........................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Goleta Beach, CA................................................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Pismo Beach, CA.................................................  ...............  Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Prospect Beach, West Haven, CT..................................  ...............  Lieberman
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................      Seaside Park, Ocean County, NJ..................................  ...............  Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC LAW 106-457)....................      $1,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  Construction, General.................  SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION.............      $1,000,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ABILENE, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN--ELM CREEK).........................        $190,000   Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI.............................................        $233,000   Inouye, Akaka
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  AMAZON CREEK, OR....................................................        $320,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD..............        $321,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BALTIMORE METRO WATER RESOURCES--PATAPSCO URBAN RIVER REST, MD......        $100,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BLOOMSBURG, PA......................................................        $130,000   Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BOGUE BANKS, NC.....................................................        $135,000   Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BOSSIER PARISH, LA..................................................        $150,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BRONX RIVER BASIN, NY...............................................        $130,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO..........................................        $242,000   Bond, Brownback, Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CACHE LA POUDRE, CO.................................................         $50,000   M. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA........................................        $675,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA...........................................        $153,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CEDAR RIVER TIME CHECK AREA, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA.......................        $750,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CENTRAL VALLEY INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT STUDY (SACRAMENTO-SAN            $425,000   Feinstein
                                                                          JOAQUIN COMPREHENSIVE).
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CENTRALIA, WA.......................................................      $1,000,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA............................................      $1,000,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CHERRY RIVER BASIN, WV..............................................        $600,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND COASTAL MANAGEMENT, MD...........        $170,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, MD........        $200,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CHOWAN RIVER BASIN, VA..............................................        $215,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA..........................................        $130,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CT, MA, NH & VT............        $380,000   Dodd, Lieberman, Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  COYOTE DAM, CA......................................................        $100,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  CROSS LAKE, LA......................................................        $100,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX......................      $2,125,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  DELAWARE RIVER BASIN, PINE KNOT, PA.................................        $130,000   Specter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA, DE & NJ............        $166,000   Lautenberg, Specter, Kaufman,
                                                                                                                                                                 Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  DISMAL SWAMP AND DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA.............................         $78,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD........................        $233,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, WA.............................................        $255,000   Murray, Cantwell
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  FLAGER COUNTY, FL...................................................        $496,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  FOUR MILE RUN, VA...................................................        $100,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA...................................        $255,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, MO, KS....................        $162,000   Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  GRAYSON AND MURDERER'S WALNUT CREEK BASIN, CA.......................        $100,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS (RAP), MI.........................        $850,000   Voinovich, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  HOCKING RIVER BASIN, MONDAY CREEK, OH...............................        $437,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  HOMER HARBOR MODIFICATION, AK.......................................        $340,000   Murkowski, Begich
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ....................................        $170,000   Lautenberg, Menendez, Schumer,
                                                                                                                                                                 Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  HUMBOLT BAY LONG TERM SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, CA.......................        $130,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  HUMBOLT, IA.........................................................        $130,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  JAMES RIVER, SD & ND................................................        $200,000   Dorgan
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  KALAELOA BARBERS POINT HARBOR MODIFICATION, HI......................        $300,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  KOTZEBUE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, AK......................................        $210,000   Murkowski, Begich
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY.............................................        $441,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LAKE WORTH INLET, FL................................................        $100,000   Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LANSING, GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI.....................        $215,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LIDO KEY, SARASOTA, FL (SARASOTA, LIDO KEY, FL).....................        $340,000   Bill Nelson
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA.........................        $100,000   Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOS ANGELES RIVER WATERCOURSE, HEADWORKS, CA........................        $230,000   Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY, CA...........        $130,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA.............................................        $250,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE STUDY, AR..........................        $250,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LOWER SADDLE RIVER, BERGEN COUNTY, NJ...............................        $255,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MAALAEA HARBOR, MAUI, HI............................................        $202,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MAHONING RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH...........................        $640,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA..........................................        $100,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MANHATTAN, KS.......................................................        $255,000   Roberts, Brownback
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR..........................................        $425,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MIAMI HARBOR, FL....................................................        $510,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MIDDLE CREEK, CA....................................................        $250,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MIDDLE POTOMAC COMP PLAN, MD, VA, PA, WV, DC........................        $255,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MIDDLE POTOMAC WATERSHED, GREAT SENECA CREEK AND MUDDY BRANCH, MD...        $255,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MILE POINT, FL (JACKSONVILLE).......................................        $185,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED, MN.......................................        $215,000   Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L455 & R460-471, MO..............        $340,000   Bond, Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS, MO..........................      $5,500,000   Dorgan, Conrad
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MONTAUK POINT, NY...................................................        $255,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  MONTPELIER, VT......................................................        $239,000   Leahy
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  NEW JERSEY SHORE PROECTION, HEREFORD TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ..........        $130,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM NOURISHMENT, NJ..........        $110,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA.........................................         $90,000   Webb,
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  NIAGARA RIVER WATERSHED, NY.........................................        $104,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL PORT, NC...............................        $274,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY, OH, PA................      $2,000,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ONONDAGA LAKE, NY...................................................        $215,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  OOLOGAH LAKE WATERSHED, KS AND OK...................................        $135,000   Inhofe
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PAJARO RIVER, CA....................................................        $425,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ.........................................        $215,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ.........................................        $215,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS...........................................        $200,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PECKMAN RIVER BASIN, NJ.............................................        $300,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, IL...................................         $50,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR..............................................        $425,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PLAQUEMINES PARISH, LA..............................................        $107,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PORT OF IBERIA, LA..................................................      $1,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE, IL............................................        $464,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ..............................................        $255,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ.......................        $255,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ........................         $25,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION-BEACH, NJ.....................        $110,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, DE.......................        $300,000   Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD AND MANITOBA, CANADA.......      $2,900,000   Dorgan, Klobuchar, Conrad
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA.............................................        $210,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  REEDY RIVER, SC.....................................................        $170,000   Graham
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO & TX.......................................        $120,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RIVER DES PERES, MO.................................................        $100,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAMP, CA...........................................        $221,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  S. FORK , SOUTH BRANCH, CHICAGO RIVER, (BUBBLY CREEK), IL...........        $100,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX..........................................        $170,000   Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, GRR, CA (SYSTEMS EVALUATION)........        $425,000   Feintein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAMP, CA...........................................        $100,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA......................................        $340,000   Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK, CA..........................................        $130,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), FRAZIER CREEK/STRATHMO, CA..........        $130,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), WHITE RIVER/DRY CREEK, CA...........        $130,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, CA................        $640,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WEST STANISLAUS, ORESTIMBA CREEK, CA.......        $370,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED, CA.....................................        $425,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SANTA FE, NM........................................................        $228,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, GA PH II........................        $210,000   Chambliss, Graham
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, WISSAHICKON, PA.............................        $214,000   Specter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SKAGIT RIVER, WA....................................................        $550,000   Murray, Cantwell
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA...........................................        $300,000   Murray, Cantwell
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTH BOULDER CREEK, CO.............................................         $82,000   Bennet
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ................................        $215,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA...................................        $425,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK.........................        $255,000   Inhofe
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTHWEST ARKANSAS, AR..............................................        $210,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SOUTHWEST COASTAL LOUISIANA HURRICANE PROTECTION, LA................        $425,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX...........................        $143,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ST. CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA..........................        $391,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  ST. HELENA-NAPA RIVER, CA...........................................        $170,000   Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  STILLAGUAMISH RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA.......................        $130,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ..............................        $110,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SUN VALLEY WATERSHED, CA............................................        $130,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC...............................        $187,000   Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN LOW FLOW MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL               $130,000   Mikulski
                                                                          RESTORATION STUDY, MD, PA, & NY.
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  TOPEKA, KS..........................................................        $150,000   Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV.................................................     $10,000,000   Reid, Ensign
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, FLOODPLAIN RECONNECTION, NY.........        $130,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, LIVINGSTON MANOR, NY................        $170,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER GUYANDOTTE, WV................................................        $300,000   Byrd
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER MISS RIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IL, IA, MO, MN & WI............        $640,000   Durbin, Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER MISS-ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI..................      $9,000,000   Durbin, Harkin, Bond, Grassley,
                                                                                                                                                                 Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION STUDY, PA.....................................      $1,700,000   Specter, Casey
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA (PHASE II).............................        $170,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS..............................................        $170,000   Roberts, Brownback
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  VALDEZ HARBOR EXPANSION, AK.........................................        $385,000   Murkowski
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  VICINITY OF WILLOUGHBY SPIT, VA.....................................        $243,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WAIAKEA-PALAI STREAMS, HI...........................................        $300,000   Inouye, Akaka
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WALILUPE STREAM, OAHU, HI...........................................        $175,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WALTON COUNTY, FL...................................................        $229,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK.............................................        $215,000   Inhofe
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WATERTOWN AND VICINITY, SD..........................................        $448,000   Johnson, Thune
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WELLS LOCK AND DAM, LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER, WV (LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER,          $40,000   Byrd
                                                                          WV).
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WEST MAUI FEASIBILITY STUDY, HI.....................................        $100,000   Inouye, Akaka
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WEST SACRAMENTO, CA.................................................        $950,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WEST SHORE, LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA..................................        $425,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI...............................        $340,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WESTMINSTER (EAST GARDEN GROVE) WATERSHED, CA.......................        $100,000   Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO............................        $250,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR............................        $170,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WHITTIER HARBOR, AK.................................................        $340,000   Murkowski
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OR.........................        $215,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  GENERAL INVESTIGATION ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES.................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES............................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS.........................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  LAKE TAHOE..........................................................        $400,000   Reid, Feinstein
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.......................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Delaware Estuary Salinity Monitoring Study, DE & NJ.............        $200,000   Lautenberg, Kaufman, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Hawaii DOT GIS, HI..............................................        $100,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Hawaii Water Resources Management, HI...........................        $270,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii, State of Hawaii and Pacific                   $100,000   Inouye
                                                                          Territories, HI.
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................     Waimanalo Wastewater Effluent Reuse Plan, State of Hawaii and             $67,000   Inouye
                                                                             Pacific Territories, HI.
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................     State of Hawaii General Flood Control Plan Update, State of            $1,000,000   Inouye, Akaka
                                                                             Hawaii and Pacific Territories, HI.
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Boyer River, Missouri Valley, IA................................         $36,000   Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Lake County Wetlands Restoration, IL............................        $200,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Choctaw County Reservoir, MS....................................        $100,000   Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Oklahoma Comp Water Plan, OK....................................        $500,000   Inhofe
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Storm Water Management Plan for Coastal Communities, VA.........        $220,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA..................................  ...............  ................................
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION.......................................  ...............  ................................
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      COASTAL DATA INFORMATION PROGRAM................................      $1,000,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      PACIFIC ISLAND LAND OCEAN TYPHOON EXPERIMENT, HI................      $1,000,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      SURGE AND WAVE ISLAND MODELING STUDIES, HI......................      $1,250,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES.....................................  ...............  ................................
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      White Clay Creek, New Castle, DE................................        $200,000   Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Hawaii Technical Services, HI...................................         $40,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Hurricane Evacuation Studies, Hawaii............................      $1,000,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Waiohuli Gulch Flood Hazard Study, Kula, Maui, HI...............        $200,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Iowa Multi-State Dam Safety Analyses, IA........................         $37,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Little Sioux Watershed, IA......................................         $50,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................     Mon-Maq Dam Removal Study & Local Floodplain Master Planning,            $120,000   Harkin, Grassley
                                                                             Monticello, IA.
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Chitimacha Tribe of LA, [GIS]...................................        $250,000   Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      City of Alexandria, LA [GIS]....................................        $200,000   Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      East Baton Rouge Parish, LA [GIS]...............................      $1,200,000   Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Livingston Parish, LA [GIS].....................................        $350,000   Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Floodplain maps for Manalapan and Matchaponix Brooks, NJ........        $500,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Southeastern, PA................................................        $250,000   Specter
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT............................................      $5,000,000   Cochran
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, MD................................      $1,000,000   Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  General Investigations................      Urban Flood Demonstration Program, DRI, NV......................      $2,500,000   Reid
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 106.........................................................  ...............  Cochran
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 107.........................................................  ...............  Johnson, Thune
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 108.........................................................  ...............  Bennett, Tester
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 109.........................................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 110.........................................................  ...............  Klobuchar
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 111.........................................................  ...............  Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 112.........................................................  ...............  Murkowski
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 113.........................................................  ...............  Ben Nelson
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 114.........................................................  ...............  Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 205.........................................................  ...............  Tester
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 206.........................................................  ...............  Reid
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 207.........................................................  ...............  Reid
Corps of Engineers.............  General Provision.....................  Section 208.........................................................  ...............  Reid
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR............................................     $10,000,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN...............     $16,565,000   Cochran, Pryor, Landrieu, Bond,
                                                                                                                                                                 Lincoln, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO..........................................      $3,700,000   Pryor, Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA..............................        $336,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...............................................     $10,166,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS................................      $3,200,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT, MS...........................     $23,200,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--MAIN STEM, MS..........................................         $25,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--REFORMULATION UNIT, MS.................................      $1,500,000   Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS...............................     $13,000,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU.............................         $75,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--CG..............................;  YAZOO BASIN--YAZOO BACKWATER, MS....................................        $669,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--GI..............................;  QUIVER RIVER, MS....................................................        $160,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--GI..............................;  SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR..............................................        $300,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--GI..............................;  SPRING BAYOU, LA....................................................        $350,000   Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--GI..............................;  COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA..................................      $1,665,000   Cochran, Landrieu, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR..................................        $211,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR................................         $25,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN...............      $3,697,000   Cochran, Landrieu, Pryor,
                                                                                                                                                                 Lincoln, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  BONNET CARRE, LA....................................................      $1,085,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, CAERNARVON, LA............................      $1,442,000   Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  OLD RIVER, LA.......................................................        $461,000   Landrieu
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS...............................................        $476,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS................................................        $495,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS.....................................        $779,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS................................      $2,246,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS..........................................      $1,725,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS.......................................      $1,050,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS..........................................      $1,067,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS........................................      $1,854,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS........................................         $47,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS........................         $68,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  MR&T--Maintenance.....................;  ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO..........................................      $3,600,000   Pryor, Bond, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Absecon Inlet, NJ...................................................        $250,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Appomattox River, VA................................................        $500,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Ashtabula Harbor, OH................................................      $1,000,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway--DSC, VA.............................        $320,000   Webb, Warner
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, GA..................................        $735,000   Chambliss
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, SC..................................        $500,000   Graham
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Baltimore Harbor and Channel (50 Foot), MD..........................      $4,487,000   Mikulski, Cardin
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bass Harbor, Tremont, ME............................................         $60,000   Collins
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Beaufort Harbor, NC.................................................        $250,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Blakely Mt Dam, Lake Ouachita, AR...................................        $500,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Block Island Harbor of Refuge, RI...................................      $1,250,000   Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bogue Inlet, NC.....................................................        $650,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bucks Harbor, Machiasport, ME.......................................        $750,000   Collins
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bull Shoals Lake, AR................................................        $250,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Calcasieu River and Pass, LA........................................      $6,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Carolina Beach Inlet, NC............................................        $500,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Caruthersville Harbor, MO...........................................        $760,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, SD...................      $3,000,000   Johnson, Thune
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Clairborne County Port, MS..........................................         $72,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Clearwater Lake, MO.................................................         $85,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Cleveland Harbor, OH................................................      $1,000,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Cocheco River Dredging Project, NH..................................      $2,000,000   Gregg, Shaheen
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Columbia River at Baker Bay, WA & OR................................        $641,000   Murray, Cantwell
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Columbia River Between Chinook and Sand Island, WA..................        $840,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Coos Bay, OR........................................................        $452,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  DeGray Lake, AR.....................................................        $500,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Depoe Bay, OR.......................................................        $118,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Fox River, WI.......................................................      $2,000,000   Kohl
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Garrison Dam, Lake Sakakawea, ND....................................        $200,000   Dorgan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Georgetown Harbor, SC...............................................      $1,000,000   Graham
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Great Salt Pond, Block Island, RI (New Harbor)......................        $100,000   Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Green Bay Harbor, WI................................................      $3,000,000   Kohl
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Gulfport Harbor, MS.................................................      $1,530,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Harbor of Refuge, Lewes, DE.........................................        $200,000   Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Illinois Waterway, IL & IN (MVR Portion)............................        $900,000   Durbin
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Intracoastal Waterway, Caloosahatchee River to Anclote River, FL....      $1,220,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, FL....................        $189,000   Bill Nelson, Martinez
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA....................................      $3,000,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Kodiak Harbor, AK...................................................        $240,000   Murkowski
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Lake Providence Harbor, LA..........................................        $478,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Lockwoods Folly River, NC...........................................        $600,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Lower Monumental Lock & Dam, WA.....................................      $4,000,000   Murray
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Madison Parish Port, LA.............................................         $92,000   Landrieu, Vitter
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Marina Del Rey, CA..................................................      $3,000,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Michigan Harbor Dredging, MI........................................      $7,000,000   Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Alpena Harbor, MI...................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Arcadia Harbor, MI..................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Au Sable, MI........................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bay Port Harbor, MI.................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Big Bay Harbor, MI..................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Black River (Gogebic), MI...........................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Bolles Harbor, MI...................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Clinton River, MI...................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Eagle Harbor, MI....................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Frankfort Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Inland Route, MI....................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Lac La Belle Harbor, MI.............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Leland Harbor, MI...................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Les Cheneaux Island Channels, MI....................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Little Lake Harbor, MI..............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Ludington Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Manistee Harbor, MI.................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Manistique Harbor, MI...............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Marquette Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Menominee Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  New Buffalo Harbor, MI..............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Pentwater Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Point Lookout Harbor, MI............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Port Austin Harbor, MI..............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Port Sanilac Harbor, MI.............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Portage Harbor, MI..................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Rouge River, MI.....................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Saugatuck Harbor, MI................................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  South Haven Harbor, MI..............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  White Lake Harbor, MI...............................................  ...............  Levin, Stabenow
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Missouri River--Rulo to the Mouth, IA, KS, MO & NE..................        $941,000   Harkin, Bond, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Mouth of Yazoo River, MS............................................         $72,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Narrows Dam, Lake Greeson, AR.......................................        $500,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  New Madrid Harbor (Mile 889), MO....................................        $200,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  New Madrid Harbor, MO...............................................        $310,000   Bond
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  New Topsail Inlet, NC...............................................        $600,000   Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Newburyport Harbor, MA..............................................        $350,000   Kennedy, Kerry
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Norwalk Harbor, CT..................................................      $1,000,000   Dodd, Lieberman
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Ocean City Harbor and Inlet and Sinepuxent Bay, MD..................      $1,400,000   Mikulski
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Ogdensburg Harbor, NY...............................................         $70,000   Schumer
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Osceola Harbor, AR..................................................        $403,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Oswego Harbor, NY...................................................        $300,000   Schumer, Gillibrand
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Pascagoula Harbor, MS...............................................      $3,395,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Pawcatuck River, Little Narragansett Bay & Watch Hill Cove, RI & CT.        $200,000   Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Petersburg North Harbor, AK.........................................        $500,000   Murkowski, Begich
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Port St. Joe, FL, DMMP..............................................        $500,000   Bill Nelson
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Providence Harbor Shipping Channel, RI..............................        $300,000   Reed, Whitehouse
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Raritan River, NJ...................................................        $380,000   Lautenberg, Menendez
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Red Rock Dam and Lake, Red Rock, IA.................................        $589,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Rosedale Harbor, MS.................................................        $585,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Savannah River Below Augusta, GA....................................        $300,000   Isakson
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Saylorville Lake, IA................................................        $347,000   Harkin, Grassley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Somerset County Channels, MD........................................      $1,000,000   Mikulski
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Wildlife Mitigation, AL & MS...........        $400,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, AL & MS...............................      $2,022,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Texas Water Allocation Assessment, TX...............................        $900,000   Hutchison, Cornyn
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Toledo Harbor, OH...................................................      $1,000,000   Voinovich
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Willamette River at Willamette Falls, OR............................        $831,000   Wyden, Merkley
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Wilmington Harbor, DE...............................................      $2,000,000   Carper, Kaufman
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Wilson Lake, KS.....................................................        $300,000   Roberts
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Yazoo River, MS.....................................................        $119,000   Cochran
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Yellow Bend Port, AR................................................        $111,000   Pryor, Lincoln
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  Operation and Maintenance Items Not Listed Under States.............  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM....................................      $5,000,000   Cochran, Wicker
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............  REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM..................  ...............
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      Hawaii RSM, HI..................................................        $500,000   Inouye, Akaka
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      Southeast Oahu Regional Sediment Management, HI.................        $500,000   Inouye
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      North Carolina RSM, NJ..........................................        $600,000   Burr, Hagan
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      Delaware Estuary RSM, NJ........................................        $200,000   Lautenberg, Kaufman, Menendez,
                                                                                                                                                                 Lautenberg
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      South Coastal Rhode Island Regional Sediment Management.........        $750,000   Reed
Corps of Engineers.............  Operation and Maintenance.............      Chesapeake Bay, Newpoint Comfort, Mathews County, VA............        $350,000   Webb, Warner
Bureau of Reclamation..........  California Bay-Delta Restoration......  CALFED..............................................................     $10,000,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA WATER & RECLAMATION REUSE....................        $500,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  CHIMAYO, NM.........................................................        $500,000   Bingaman
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS (NORTH LAS VEGAS, WATER REUSE)..............      $2,000,000   Reid
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  CVP--FRIANT DIVISION................................................        $500,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  CVP--SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION...........................................      $7,000,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  DESCHUTES PROJECT...................................................        $500,000   Wyden, Merkley
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY...............................        $500,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  FORT PECK DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM............................     $10,000,000   Tester, Baucus
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  INLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL WATER RECYCLING PROJECT......................        $100,000   Feinstein, Boxer
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  IRVINE BASIN GROUND & SURFACE WATER.................................        $100,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  JICARILLA APACHE RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM.....................      $4,000,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LAKE MEAD/LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM....................................      $1,200,000   Reid, Ensign
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL WETLANDS........................................      $2,500,000   Reid, Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM..................................     $14,000,000   Harkin, Johnson, Grassley,
                                                                                                                                                                 Klobuchar, Thune
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LOAN FOR WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE TRIBE, AZ............................      $3,209,000   Kyl
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION PROGRAM........      $2,500,000   Hutchison
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT...........................................        $160,000   T. Udall
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  MILK RIVER/ST. MARY DIVERSION REHABILITATION PROJECT................      $1,500,000   Tester
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  MNI WICONI PROJECT..................................................     $10,000,000   Johnson, Thune
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  MOKELUMNE RIVER REGIONAL WATER STORAGE & CONJUNCTIVE USE............        $500,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  NAVAJO GALLUP WATER SUPPLY..........................................      $7,791,000   Bingaman, T. Udall
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  NORTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................................        $500,000   Bennett
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  ODESSA SUBAREA SPECIAL STUDY........................................      $3,000,000   Murray, Cantwell
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  OREGON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.......................................        $150,000   Wyden, Merkley
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  PERKINS COUNTY RURAL WATER SYSTEM...................................      $1,000,000   Johnson, Thune
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN--GARRISON DIVERSION.......................     $33,707,000   Dorgan, Conrad
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MONTANA RURAL WATER SYSTEM.................     $15,000,000   Tester, Baucus
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION..........................        $200,000   Wyden, Merkley
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  TUALATIN VALLEY WATER SUPPLY FEASIBILITY............................        $300,000   Wyden, Merkley
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  WEBER BASIN PROJECT.................................................      $1,000,000   Bennett, Hatch
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  WICHITA PROJECT--EQUUS BEDS DIVISION................................      $2,000,000   Roberts, Brownback
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT........................      $1,500,000   Murray
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES.................  ...............
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.............................        $680,000   Feinstein
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT............................................  ...............
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM......................................      $1,000,000   Feinstein, Bennet
Bureau of Reclamation..........  Water and Related Resources...........  TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM.......................      $2,500,000   Reid
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Energy Development and Reliability (ND).............................        $325,000   Senator Dorgan
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Navajo Nation Electrification Program (NM)..........................      $1,750,000   Senators Bingaman, Tom Udall
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         North Dakota Energy Workforce Development (ND)......................      $1,900,000   Senator Dorgan
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Oswego County BOCES Wind Turbine Model Project (NY).................        $200,000   Senator Schumer
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Power Grid Reliability and Security (WA)............................      $1,000,000   Senators Murray, Cantwell
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Technology Development (ND).........................................        $300,000   Senator Dorgan
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         UVM Smart Energy Grid Research (VT).................................        $500,000   Senator Leahy
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Electricity Delivery and Energy         Watkins Glen, Schuyler County Gas Storage Project (NY)..............        $500,000   Senator Gillibrand
                                  Reliability.
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  21st Century Renewable Fuels, Energy, and Materials Initiative (MI).      $1,250,000   Senators Levin, Stabenow
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  A123Systems Large Format Nanophosphate Batteries for Solar Energy         $1,000,000   Senators Levin, Stabenow
                                                                          Storage (MI).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Algae Biofuels Research (WA)........................................      $2,000,000   Senators Murray, Cantwell
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Algae to Ethanol Research and Evaluation (NJ).......................        $750,000   Senators Lautenberg, Menendez
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Algal-Based Renewable Energy for Nevada (NV)........................        $800,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Alternative and Unconventional Energy Research and Development (UT).     $10,000,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Alternative Energy School of the Future (NV)........................      $1,200,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Bayview Gas to Energy Project (UT)..................................      $1,000,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Ben Franklin Technology Partners--Clean Technology Commercialization        $500,000   Senators Specter, Casey
                                                                          Initiative (PA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Biodiesel Blending (WI).............................................        $600,000   Senator Kohl
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Biodiesel Feedstock Development Initiative (MO).....................      $1,000,000   Senator Bond
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Biomass Energy Resources Center (VT)................................      $1,000,000   Senator Leahy
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Black Hills State Heating and Cooling Plant (SD)....................      $1,000,000   Senators Johnson, Thune
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Cellulosic Diesel Biorefinery (NJ)..................................      $1,000,000   Senators Lautenberg, Menendez
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Center for Biomass Utilization (ND).................................      $7,000,000   Senators Dorgan, Conrad
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Center for Nanoscale Energy (ND)....................................      $5,000,000   Senator Dorgan
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Center for Ocean Renewable Energy...................................        $750,000   Senator Shaheen
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Central Vermont Recovered Biomass Facility (VT).....................        $500,000   Senator Leahy
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Clean Power and Energy Research Consortium (LA).....................      $1,000,000   Senator Landrieu
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Demonstration (IL)............        $500,000   Senator Durbin
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Cooling Heating and Power (Micro-CHP) and Bio-Fuel Application            $2,000,000   Senator Cochran
                                                                          Center  (MS).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Development of an Economic and Efficient Biodiesel Production               $750,000   Senator Hagan
                                                                          Process (NC).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Development of Biofuels Using Ionic Transfer Membranes (NV).........      $1,500,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks and Biomass Conversion      $6,000,000   Senator Inouye
                                                                          (HI).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  DRI Renewable Energy Center [REC] (NV)..............................        $500,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Energy Storage/Conservation and Carbon Emissions Reduction                  $400,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
                                                                          Demonstration Project (MA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  EngenuitySC Commercialization and Entrepreneurial Training Project          $500,000   Senator Graham
                                                                          (SC).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe Demonstration Energy Park (NV).........        $200,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Fluid Flow Optimization of Aerogel Blanket Process Project (MA).....        $300,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Fuel Cell Durability Research (CT)..................................      $1,000,000   Senator Dodd
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Gas heat pump cooperative training program (NV).....................        $250,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Genetic Improvement of Switchgrass (RI).............................      $1,500,000   Senator Reed
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Great Basin College--Direct-Use Geothermal Demonstration Project          $1,000,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Great Lakes Institute for Energy Innovation (OH)....................      $1,000,000   Senator Voinovich
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Great Plains Wind Power Test Facility, Texas Tech University,             $2,000,000   Senator Hutchison
                                                                          Lubbock, TX  (TX).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Hawaii Energy Sustainability Program (HI)...........................      $6,000,000   Senators Inouye, Akaka
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Hawaii Renewable Energy Development Venture (HI)....................      $6,000,000   Senator Inouye
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  High Speed Wind Turbine Noise Model with Suppression (MS)...........      $1,000,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Hydrogen Production and Delivery Technology (CT)....................        $500,000   Senators Dodd, Lieberman
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  HyperCAST R&D; Funding for Vehicle Energy Efficiency (CO)............        $750,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Independent Energy Community Renewable Power System (UT)............      $1,000,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Institute for Sustainable Energy (AL)...............................        $750,000   Senator Sessions
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Iowa Central Community College Renewable Fuel Testing Laboratory            $750,000   Senator Harkin
                                                                          (IA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Lane Community College Energy Demonstration Building (OR)...........        $550,000   Senators Wyden, Merkley
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Lansing Plug-In Hybrid Initiative (MI)..............................        $750,000   Senators Levin, Stabenow
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Low Cost Production of Thin-film Photovoltaic (PV) Cells (PA).......      $1,200,000   Senator Specter
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Marine Energy Technology (WA).......................................      $1,750,000   Senator Murray
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  MidSouth/Southeast BioEnergy Consortium (AR)........................      $1,000,000   Senators Lincoln, Pryor
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Montana Algal BioDiesel Initiative (MT).............................        $500,000   Senators Baucus, Tester
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Montana Bio-Energy Center of Excellence (MT)........................      $2,250,000   Senators Baucus, Tester
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Nanostructured Materials for Improved Photovoltaics (MS)............      $1,000,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Nanostructured Solar Cells for Increased Efficiency and Lower Cost          $500,000   Senators Lincoln, Pryor
                                                                          (AR).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  National Center of Excellence in Energy Storage Technology (OH).....      $1,000,000   Senator Voinovich
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  National Open--Ocean Energy Laboratory (FL).........................      $2,000,000   Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  National Wind Energy Center, University of Houston, Houston, TX (TX)      $2,000,000   Senator Hutchison
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Near zero carbon footprint energy creation through thermal oxidation      $1,000,000   Senator Specter
                                                                          (PA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Nevada Renewable Energy Integration and Development Consortium (NV).      $3,000,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  NIREC--Nevada Institute for Renewable Energy Commercialization (NV).      $1,000,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Northern Nevada Renewable Energy Training Project (NV)..............        $500,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Norwich Cogeneration Initiative (CT)................................        $750,000   Senators Dodd, Lieberman
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Novel Photocatalytic Metal Oxides (NE)..............................        $250,000   Senator Ben Nelson
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Offshore Wind Initiative (ME).......................................      $5,000,000   Senators Collins, Snowe
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing Center (OH)......................        $500,000   Senator Brown
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Oregon Solar Highway--Innovative Use of Solar Technology (OR).......      $1,000,000   Senators Wyden, Merkley
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Placer County Biomass Utilization Pilot Project (CA)................      $1,000,000   Senator Feinstein
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Power Cube for Wind Power and Grid Regulation Services (PA).........        $500,000   Senator Specter
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Renewable Energy Clean Air Project [RECAP] (MN).....................      $1,000,000   Senator Klobuchar
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Renewable Energy Demonstration (IL).................................        $500,000   Senator Durbin
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Renewable Energy Feasibility Study and Resources Assessment (NV)....        $500,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Renewable Energy Initiative (IL)....................................        $500,000   Senator Durbin
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Renewable Energy Initiatives for Clark County, Nevada Parks and           $1,000,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          Recreation (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Research on Fuel Cell Powered by Hydrogen Produced from Biomass to          $675,000   Senator Schumer
                                                                          Provide Clean Energy for Remote Farms away from Electric Grids (NY).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  San Francisco Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Initiative (CA).......        $500,000   Senator Boxer
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Shenandoah Valley as a National Demonstration Project Achieving 25          $750,000   Senators Webb, Warner
                                                                          Percent Renewable Energy by the Year 2025 (VA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Smart Energy Program (CT)...........................................        $500,000   Senators Dodd, Lieberman
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Compactor Energy Efficiency Research Demonstration Project            $300,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
                                                                          (MA).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Energy Development, University of Maine, Presque Isle, ME.....        $800,000   Senator Collins
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Electric Power for Nonsectarian Educational and Social                $500,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          Services Facility (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Energy Zone Planning and Infrastructure for the Nevada Test         $1,000,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          Site and Adjacent Lands (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Panels in Municipal Owned Buildings (NJ)......................      $1,000,000   Senators Lautenberg, Menendez
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Solar Pioneer and Solar Entrepreneur Programs (NY)..................        $500,000   Senator Gillibrand
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Southern Pine Based Biorefinery Center (GA).........................      $1,000,000   Senator Chambliss
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Southern Regional Center for Lightweight Innovative Designs (MS)....      $4,000,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project (AK)............      $2,500,000   Senators Murkowski, Begich
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Strategic Biomass Initiative (MS)...................................        $500,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Student Sustainability Initiatives (VT).............................        $300,000   Senator Sanders
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Sun Grant Initiative (SD)...........................................      $2,750,000   Senator Johnson
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Sustainable Energy Research Center (MS).............................     $10,000,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Switchgrass Biofuel Research: Carbon Sequestration and Life Cycle           $500,000   Senator Ben Nelson
                                                                          Analysis (NE).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  The CUNY Energy Institute (NY)......................................      $1,550,000   Senators Schumer, Gillibrand
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Thin Film Photovoltaic Research & Development (VT)..................        $500,000   Senator Leahy
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Unconventional and Renewable Energies Research Utilizing Computer         $2,500,000   Senator Bennett
                                                                          Simulations (UT).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  University of Louisville Research and Energy Independence Program         $2,000,000   Senator McConnell
                                                                          (KY).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  University of New Haven Solar Testing and Training Lab (CT).........        $500,000   Senators Dodd, Lieberman
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  UNR--Biodiesel from Food Waste (NV).................................      $1,000,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  UNR--Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy (NV)..................      $1,000,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  UNR--Mass Exchanger Technology for Geothermal and Solar Energy            $1,200,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          Systems (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Vermont Biofuels Initiative (VT)....................................        $750,000   Senator Leahy
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VT)..........................        $450,000   Senator Sanders
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Wallowa County Integrated Biomass Energy Center (OR)................        $500,000   Senators Wyden, Merkley
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Washoe Wind Turbine Demonstration Project (NV)......................         $50,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Wind Turbine Development (MT).......................................      $1,000,000   Senators Baucus, Tester
Department of Energy...........  Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy  Wind Turbine Infrastructure for Green Energy and Research on Wind         $1,000,000   Senators Carper, Kaufman
                                                                          Power in Delaware (DE).
Department of Energy...........  Environmental Management--Defense.....  Characteristics and Cleanup of the U.S. Nuclear Legacy (MS).........      $4,000,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Design and Test of an Advanced SOFC Generator in PA (PA)............      $1,000,000   Senator Specter
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Fossil Fuel Research and Development (ND)...........................      $4,000,000   Senators Dorgan, Conrad
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Gulf of Mexico Hydrates Research Consortium (MS)....................      $1,200,000   Senator Cochran
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Hydrogen Fuel Dispensing Station (WV)...............................      $1,200,000   Senator Byrd
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Long Term Environmental and Economic Impacts of the Development of a      $1,250,000   Senator Byrd
                                                                          Coal Liquefaction Sector in China (WV).
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Montana ICTL Demonstration (MT).....................................      $1,250,000   Senator Baucus
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  National Center for Hydrogen Technology (ND)........................      $3,000,000   Senators Dorgan, Conrad
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Shale Oil Upgrading Utilizing Ionic Membranes (UT)..................      $1,500,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Shallow Carbon Sequestration Pilot Demonstration (MO)...............      $2,400,000   Senator Bond
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Utah Center for Ultra-Clean Coal Utilization and Heavy Oil Research       $8,000,000   Senator Bennett
                                                                          (UT).
Department of Energy...........  Fossil Energy.........................  Utah Coal and Biomass to Fuel Pilot Plant...........................      $2,500,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Nuclear Energy........................  Nuclear Fabrication Consortium (OH).................................      $2,000,000   Senator Voinovich
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering Equipment (IN)...............      $1,000,000   Senator Lugar
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Alaska Climate Center (AK)..........................................      $1,000,000   Senator Murkowski
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Antibodies Research (ND)............................................      $3,000,000   Senators Dorgan, Conrad
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Carbon Nanotube Technology Center [CANTEC] (OK).....................      $1,000,000   Senator Inhofe
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Center for Advanced Bio-Based Binders and Pollution Reduction               $950,000   Senators Harkin, Grassley
                                                                          Technologies at the University of Northern Iowa (IA).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems (WV)..............................      $3,000,000   Senator Byrd
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Center of Excellence and Hazardous Materials (NM)...................        $750,000   Senators Bingaman, Tom Udall
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Clean Energy Infrastructure Educational Initiative (OH).............        $500,000   Senator Brown
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Climate Model Evaluation Program (AL)...............................      $1,800,000   Senator Shelby
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Computing Capability (ND)...........................................      $5,000,000   Senators Dorgan, Conrad
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Development of Ultrafiltration Membrane-Separation Technology for           $800,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          Energy-Efficient Water Treatment and Desalination Process (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Enhancement for the Intermountain Center for River Restoration and          $600,000   Senator Bennett
                                                                          Rehabilitation (UT).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Environmental Quality Monitoring and Analysis (IL)..................        $500,000   Senator Durbin
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Fuel Cell Research, Brown University, RI (RI).......................      $1,500,000   Senators Reed, Whitehouse
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Functional MRI Research (VT)........................................      $1,200,000   Senator Leahy
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Idaho Accelerator Center Production of Medical Isotopes (ID)........      $1,500,000   Senators Crapo, Risch
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Kansas University Cancer Research Equipment (KS)....................      $4,000,000   Senators Brownback, Roberts
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Marine Systems Energy/Environmental Sustainability Research (MA)....        $300,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Martin County Microfiber Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology Development        $1,000,000   Senators Burr, Hagen
                                                                          (NC).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Material Science Smart Coatings (NE)................................        $500,000   Senator Ben Nelson
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Nanotechnology Initiative (CT)......................................        $750,000   Senators Dodd, Lieberman
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Nevada Water Resources Data, Modeling, and Visualization Center             $500,000   Senator Reid
                                                                          [CAVE]  (NV).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Performance Assessment Institute (NV)...............................      $1,000,000   Senator Reid
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Pioneer Valley Life Science Institute Translational Biomedical              $400,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
                                                                          Research (MA).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Renovation and Development of the LSU Nuclear Science Building (LA).      $1,000,000   Senators Landrieu, Vitter
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  RNAI Research (MA)..................................................        $300,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Science Center Equipment and Energy Efficient LEED Technology (UT)..        $900,000   Senator Bennett
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Smart Grid Communications Security Project (CO).....................      $1,000,000   Senator Mark Udall
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  SUU Science Center Energy Efficiency Modernization and Enhancement        $1,000,000   Senator Bennett
                                                                          Project (UT).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Targeted Radiotherapy for Melanoma (MA).............................        $300,000   Senators Kennedy, Kerry
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Technology Transfer & Commercialization of Technologies at DOE              $750,000   Senator Bingaman
                                                                          Laboratories. (NM).
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  The New School Green Building (NY)..................................      $1,000,000   Senators Schumer, Gillibrand
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  USD Catalysis Group for Alternative Energy (SD).....................      $1,100,000   Senator Johnson
Department of Energy...........  Office of Science.....................  Yttrium-90 Microspheres Research (WA)...............................      $1,250,000   Senator Murray
Department of Energy...........  Other Defense Activities..............  Burlington Atomic Energy Commission Plant [BAECP] and Ames                $1,000,000   Senator Harkin
                                                                          Laboratory Former Workers Medical Surveillance Programs [FWP] (IA).
Department of Energy...........  Other Defense Activities..............  Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN      $1,000,000   Senator McConnell
                                                                          (KY, OH, TN).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                             PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Agency                             Account                                                 Project title                                       Funding               Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  AIWW, BRIDGES AT DEEP CREEK, VA.................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ALTON TO GALE LEVEE DISTRICT, IL & MO (DEF CORR)................................        $300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON FEATURES), CA..................................      $6,700,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA.........................     $66,700,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE), CA.................................        $600,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ANTELOPE CREEK, NE..............................................................      $5,697,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NY.......................      $3,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO.............................................      $5,600,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................................................     $86,700,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX........................................................      $5,300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CANTON LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY)....................................................     $24,250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CAROLINA BEACH AND VICINITY, NC.................................................      $1,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CEDAR HAMMOCK, WARES CREEK, FL..................................................      $5,565,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CENTER HILL DAM (SEEPAGE CONTROL), TN...........................................     $56,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (DEF CORR)..........................      $6,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CHESTERFIELD, MO................................................................      $3,331,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL..........................      $5,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN...........................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CHIEF JOSEPH GAS ABATEMENT, WA..................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CLEARWATER LAKE, MO (SEEPAGE CONTROL)...........................................     $40,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, OR & WA.........................................     $85,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR & WA.............................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  DES PLAINES RIVER, IL...........................................................      $6,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  DOVER DAM, MUSKINGUM RIVER, OH (DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE)...........................     $18,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA..............................................      $2,600,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  EAST ST. LOUIS, IL..............................................................      $2,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ELK CREEK LAKE, OR..............................................................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  EMSWORTH L&D;, OHIO RIVER, PA (STATIC INSTABILITY CORRECTION)....................     $25,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY..........................................      $5,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND (REPLACEMENT)..................................      $8,620,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET & PECK BEACH, NJ.........................................      $6,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA......................................     $14,250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL).......................................    $130,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  HOWARD HANSEN DAM, WA...........................................................     $13,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA................................................      $7,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (REPLACEMENT)...........................     $16,915,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  KAWEAH RIVER, CA................................................................        $640,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY......................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (CG)................................................      $5,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN........................................................     $20,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3 AND 4, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA................................      $6,210,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY...........................................................        $700,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LOS ANGELES HARBOR MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, CA...................................        $885,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA, OR..............................      $1,650,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMP, WA, OR, ID............................      $1,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY, IL (MAJOR REHAB)....................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MARTIN COUNTY, FL...............................................................        $350,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL..............................................     $25,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO & IL.....................        $580,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MISSOURI RIVER FISH MITIGATION, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE..............................     $60,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MT. ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA.............................................      $1,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  MUDDY RIVER, MA.................................................................      $5,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CA...........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  NAPA RIVER, CA..................................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ.........................................     $60,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  NORFOLK HARBOR, CRANEY ISLAND, VA...............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA............................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY......................................    $105,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  PINELLAS COUNTY, FL.............................................................      $6,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR.................................................     $42,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  PRESQUE ISLE, PA................................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ..................................      $7,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC.........................................      $1,615,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM........................        $800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR............................................................      $5,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA..................................      $1,075,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA...........................................     $10,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA....................................     $15,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA....................................................     $52,193,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA.............................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SIMS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX.........................................................     $18,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL..............................    $163,402,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA.............................................      $2,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO..................................................        $566,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ST. PAUL HARBOR, AK.............................................................      $3,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER (DAM SAFETY), CA........................................     $10,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX..........................................................      $6,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS & MO.....................................................      $3,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI........................     $18,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WASHINGTON, DC & VICINITY.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WEST ONSLOW BEACH AND NEW RIVER INLET, NC.......................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WEST SACRAMENTO, CA.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WILLAMETTE TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR..............................................     $11,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC...........................................................      $1,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY (SEEPAGE CONTROL)...........................    $123,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL............................................................      $1,170,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES.............................  ...............  .......................
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL...........................................................      $5,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM..................................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206).................................     $25,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Goose Creek, CO............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Jackson Creek, Gwinnett Co, GA.............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Little River Watershed, Hall County, GA....................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Chariton River and Rathbun Lake Watershed, IA..............................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Emiquon Preserve, IL.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Orland Park, IL............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Storm Lake, IA.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Ventura Marsh, IA..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Malden River Ecosystem, MA.................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Wilson Bay Restoration, Jacksonville, NC...................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Drayton Dam, ND............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Camp Creek, Zumwalt Prairie Preserve, OR...................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Eugene Delta Ponds, OR.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Kellogg Creek, OR..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Oaks Bottom, OR............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Springfield Millrace, OR...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Moses Lake, TX.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Rio Grande Ecosystem Restoration, Laredo, TX...............................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Spring Lake, San Marcos, TX................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Stephenville WWTP, TX......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Carpenter Creek, WA........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material (Sections 204, 207, 933)...............  ...............  .......................
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Blackhawk Bottoms, IA......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Atchafalaya River, Shell Island Pass, St. Mary Parish, LA..................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Calc Rv, Mi 5-14 Ks, LA....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Cape Cod Canal, Sandwich, MA...............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Newbury Harbor, MA.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       NJIWW Beneficial Use of Dredge, NJ.........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Buffalo River, NY..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Manteo Old House, NC.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Maumee Bay Regional Sediment Management, OH................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Wynn Road Regional Sediment management, OH.................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       South Padre Island, TX.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SECTION 14)..................      $7,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)........................................     $38,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Wynne, AR..................................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mad Creek, Muscatine, IA...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Eureka Creek, Manhattan, KS................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Little River Diversion, Dutchtown, MO......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Livingston, MT.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Platt River, Fremont, NE...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Platt River, Schuyler, NE..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Blanchard River, Ottawa, OH (Ottawa, OH)...................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Duck Creek, OH.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Findlay, OH................................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Rio Desclabrado, PR........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Rio Guamani-Guaya, PR......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Beaver Creek and Tribs, Bristol, TN........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       WV Statewide Flood Warning System, WV......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)............................................      $7,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Savoonga Harbor, AK........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Bucks Harbor, Machiasport, ME..............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mackinac Island Harbor Breakwater, MI......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mitigation of Shore Damages (Section 111)..................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mobile Pass, AL............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       East Pass Channel, Panama City, FL.........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Brun Harbor/Jekyll Improvements, GA........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Camp Ellis, Saco, ME.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Manistee Harbor and River Channel, MI......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Fairport Harbor, OH........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Vermillion Harbor, OH......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Whitcomb Flats, WA.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      PROJECT MODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135)..............     $25,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Lower Kingman Island, DC...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Braided Reach, ID..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Shorty's Island, ID........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Green River Dam Mod, KY....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Bloomington State Park, MO.................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Blue Valley Wetlands, Jackson County, MO...................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Duck Creek, Stoddard County, MO............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Aquatic Habitat Restoration at Pueblo of Santa Ana, NM.....................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Prison Farm Shoreline Habitat, ND..........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Tappan Lake, OH............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Lower Columbia Slough, OR..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Walla Walla River, OR......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Bennington Lake Diversion Dam, WA..........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Shore Protection (Section 103).............................................  ...............  .......................
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Coastal Areas, Marshfield, MA..............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Fort San Geronimo, PR......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Lincoln Park Beach, WA.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Snagging and Clearing (Section 208)........................................  ...............  .......................
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Camp Bayou Canal, Morehouse Parish, LA.....................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Snagging and Clearing Upper Bayou Boeuf, LA................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Auglaize River, OH.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Blackwell Lake, Blackwell, OK..............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       SWCD Flood Reduction, OR...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM.............................     $49,100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Isabella Dam, CA...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Martis Creek Dam, CA & NV..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Cherry Creek Dam, CO.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Dworshak Dam, ID...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       John Day Lock and Dam, OR & WA.............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      Seepage/Stability Correction Studies........................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Blakely Mountain Dam, AR...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Hidden Dam, CA.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       San Antonio Dam, CA........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Terminus Dam, CA...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Whittier Narrows Dam, CA...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Trinidad Dam, CO...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Hop Brook Dam, CT..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mansfield Hollow Dam, CT...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Herbert Hoover Dike (Reach 2&3), FL........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Dworshak Dam, ID...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       La Grange L&D;, IL..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Lake Shelbyville Dam, IL...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mississippi River, Lock and Dam 24, IL&MO..................................;  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mississippi River, Lock and Dam 25, IL&MO..................................;  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Thomas J. O'Brien Controlling Works L&D;, IL................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Brookville Dam, IN.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       J. Edward Roush Dam, IN....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Patoka Lake Dam, IN........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Salamonie Lake Dam, IN.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Hartford Levee at John Redmond, KS.........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Green River Lake Dam, KY...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Markland Locks and Dam, KY & OH............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Nolin Lake Dam, KY.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Rough River Lake, Dam, KY..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Salamonie Lake Dam, KY.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Russell B. Long L&D;, LA....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Westville Lake Dam, MA.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mississippi River Lock and Dam 1, MN.......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mississippi River Lock and Dam 2, MN.......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mississippi River Lock and Dam 3, MN.......................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Orwell Reservoir Dam, MN...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Arkabutla, MS..............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Cape Fear River Lock and Dam 1, NC.........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Beach City Dam, OH.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Bolivar Dam, OH............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Delaware Dam, OH...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Magnolia Levee,(Bolivar Dam), OH...........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mohawk Dam, OH.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Cumberland Dike--Texoma, OK................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Keystone Lake Dam, OK......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, OK............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Bonneville Lock and Dam, OR & WA...........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Foster Dam, OR.............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Willamette Falls Lock, OR..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Charlerois (MonoR), PA.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Curwensville Dam, PA.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       East Branch Dam, Clarion River, PA.........................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Hammond Dam, PA............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Montgomery Locks and Dam, PA...............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       J. Percy Priest, TN........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Addicks Dam, Buffalo Bayou, TX.............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Barker Dam (Buffalo Bayou,), TX............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Lewisville Dam, TX.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Proctor Dam, TX............................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Stillhouse-Hollow Dam, TX..................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Town Bluff Dam, TX.........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Whitney Levee, TX..........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Ball Mountain Dam, VT......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Howard Hansen Dam, WA......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Mill Creek and Mill Creek Diversion Dam, WA................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       New Cumberland L&D;, WV.....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Cedars Lock and Dam, WI....................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Depere Gen Laws, WI........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Little Chute, WI...........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............       Rapide Croche Lock and Dam, WI.............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROGRAM (DMDF).............................      $5,199,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      Jacksonville Harbor, FL.....................................................     ($1,000,000)  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      Savannah Harbor, GA.........................................................       ($900,000)  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      Calumet Harbor and River, IL & IN...........................................     ($1,501,000)  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............      Charleston Harbor, SC.......................................................     ($1,798,000)  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION FUND.....................................................     $21,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC LAW 106-457)................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (BOARD EXPENSES)....................................         $60,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Construction, General.............  INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (COE EXP)...........................................        $275,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI.........................................................        $408,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  AUGUSTA, GA.....................................................................        $278,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA...........................................................      $1,239,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA.............................................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL, TX...................................        $526,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  BUFFALO RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, NY........................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  CALCASIEU LOCK, LA..............................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA.....................................        $900,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  COYOTE & BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA...................................................        $950,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  CURRITUCK SOUND, NC.............................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  DELAWARE RIVER COMPREHENSIVE, NJ................................................        $290,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II)................................................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD....................................        $483,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  EDISTO ISLAND, SC...............................................................        $167,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  FREEPORT HARBOR, TX.............................................................        $675,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENTS, TX..............................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  GREAT LAKES NAV SYST STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA & WI.....................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  GREEN RIVER WATERSHED, KY.......................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX......................................        $423,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  HAGATNA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL.....................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  HAMILTON CITY, CA...............................................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  HASHAMOMUCK COVE, SOUTHOLD, NY..................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ.............................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL............................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  INDIAN RIVER LAGOON NORTH, FL...................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  INDIANA HARBOR, IN..............................................................        $300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AQ NUISANCE, IL, IN, OH, WI        $300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH NY.....................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (Section 216)............................        $300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS...........................................................        $224,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA................................     $23,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  LOUISIANA COASTAL PROTECTION & RESTORATION (LACPR), LA..........................      $3,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX..................................................        $425,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA & OR.............................        $300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VA.......................................................        $112,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK...................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA........................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN.......................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, MN & SD (MN RIVER AUTHORITY)...................        $350,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION, MO & KS.............................................        $600,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC...........................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX................................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, GA...................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  PILGRIM LAKE, TRURO & PROVINCETOWN, MA..........................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  PIMA COUNTY, AZ.................................................................        $275,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL......................................................        $510,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, WA............................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  PUYALLUP RIVER, WA..............................................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD AND MANITOBA, CANADA...................      $3,050,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX............................................................        $304,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SAC-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA....................................        $468,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA...................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SHREWSBURY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ............................................        $511,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA..................................................        $278,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  ST LOUIS, MO (WATERSHED)........................................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  SUTTER COUNTY, CA...............................................................        $339,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  TOPEKA, KS......................................................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  TYBEE ISLAND, GA................................................................        $206,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA......................................................        $386,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  VA SHLY-AY AKIMEL SALT RIVER RESTORATION, AZ....................................        $658,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  WALLA WALLA RIVER WATERSHED, OR & WA............................................        $203,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  WILD RICE RIVER, RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN...............................        $271,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR.....................................        $240,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK..............................................................        $450,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT..................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  GENERAL INVESTIGATION ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES.............................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES........................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      ACCESS TO WATER DATA (TECH ASSIST--SEC 2017 WRDA 2007)......................        $750,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS..................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS.................................................      $4,730,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES...............................................      $8,051,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Arizona Department of Water Resources, AZ..................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       City of Los Angeles, CA....................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       City of Palmdale, CA.......................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Los Angeles County, CA.....................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       San Bernadino County, CA...................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       San Manuel Band of Indians, CA.............................................         $66,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Soboba Band of Indians, CA.................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       West Canal/Willow Brook Flood Management Study, New Britain, CT............         $20,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       South Bethany Tidal Pump System Study, DE..................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Effingham County Storm Water Management Plan, GA...........................         $60,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Northwest GA Watershead, GA................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Nishnabotna Watershed, IA..................................................        $341,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Willow Creek, IA...........................................................         $45,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Big Wood River--Belvue Idaho, ID...........................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Weiser R. Floodplain Analysis, ID..........................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       KS River Water Resources, KS...............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS Tribal Support, KS.....................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Bardstown, KY..............................................................         $88,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Louisville Parks, KY.......................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Chitimacha Watershed Planning, LA..........................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       New Orleans River Park, LA.................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Port of Lake Charles Master Plan, LA.......................................        $125,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       River Parishes Pedestrian Plan, LA.........................................        $125,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       St. Johns Parish Monumentation, LA.........................................        $125,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Tunica Recreation Trail, Tunica-Biloxi Tribe, LA...........................        $125,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Penn's Hill Drainage Study, Quincy, MA.....................................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Town Line Brook Drainage Assessment, Malden, MA............................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Montgomery County, MD......................................................         $20,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Macomb County Drain Mapping & Database, MI.................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Stream Characteristics Study for Saganing River, MI........................         $80,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Cape Girardeau Groundwater Study, MO.......................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       City of Marquand Flood Study, MO...........................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS MO MDNR Northwest Missouri, MO.........................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Peruque Creek Water Quality, MO............................................         $30,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       St Charles Riverfront Micro-Model, MO......................................         $90,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Henry R Dam, Burke, Co., NC................................................         $48,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Goochs Milll, Grnadville, Co., NC..........................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Fontenelle/Bellevue, NE....................................................         $40,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Spicket River Watershed Study, NH..........................................         $55,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Grants Drainage Management Plan, NM........................................         $56,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Tarrytown, NY..............................................................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Town of Clarence, NY.......................................................         $80,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Wappingers Falls, NY.......................................................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Harpersfield Dam, Grand River, OH..........................................         $88,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       State of Ohio GIS, OH......................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS Boone Nute Slough, OR..................................................         $27,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS City of Medford Floodplain, OR.........................................         $60,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS Nehalem River ODOT Flood Mapping, OR...................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS Portland Balanced Cut and Fill Study, OR...............................         $35,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       PAS Toutle River Radio Tracking, OR........................................         $30,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Allegheny Co Aquatic Assessment Study, PA..................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Northern Allegheny Co Stormwater Mangt Study, PA...........................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Pennsylvania Flood Inundation Mapping, PA..................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SW PA Spill Response Study, PA.............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       USS Yorktown, SC...........................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Kingsport Riverfront, TN...................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       TN Dept of Env and Conserv Pilot Study--Wtr Res Tech ADVISORY Committee, TN        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Charlottesville Water Quality Management, VA...............................         $40,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       James City Surry Non-Structural, VA........................................         $35,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Virginia Department of Transportation, VA..................................        $114,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Williamsburg Stormwater Management, VA.....................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       South Burlington, VT.......................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Clover Island--Port of Kenewick, WA........................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Elwha River, WA............................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Half Moon Lake Alum Dosing Study, WI.......................................         $30,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Internal Phosphorus Loading Assessment Study, Big Eau Pleine Flowage, WI...         $31,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Oneida Nation Floodplain Delineation, WI...................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       City of Ravenwood, WV......................................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Putnam County Drainage, WV.................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA..............................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT TRI-CADD..............................        $350,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION...............................................      $6,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES..................................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      FLOOD DAMAGE DATA...........................................................        $220,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES.............................................     $13,200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Mobile District Hurricane Evacuation Studies, AL...........................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Special Study--Crowdabout Creek, AL........................................         $81,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--SFHE Montgomery Al, Little Sandy Creek, AL.............................         $40,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Beaver/Clear Creeks, Camp Verde, AZ....................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Cochise County, AZ.....................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Gila River/Duncan, AZ..................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Hopi Tribe Floodplain Mapping, AZ......................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Tohono O'odham Gu Vo Wash, AZ..........................................         $95,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Tohono O'odham Nationwide Floodplain Maopping, AZ......................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Humboldt County, CA Tsunami PAS, CA........................................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Raymond Basin Conjunctive Use Drought Study, CA............................        $125,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       San Mateo County, CA Levee Survey, CA......................................         $30,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Anaverde Creek Floodplain Delineation, CA..............................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Soboba Band of Indians Flood Mapping, CA...............................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Carbon County, CO..........................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Durango, LaPlata County, CO................................................         $60,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Green River City, CO.......................................................         $80,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       La Plata County, CO........................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Mesa County, CO............................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Flood/Hurricane Evacuation, DC.............................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Savannah District Hurricane Evac Studies, GA...............................         $40,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--GA Clarksville Stream Survey, GA.......................................         $20,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Anahola Flood Hazard Study, Kauai, HI......................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Kaluanui Stream Flood Hazard Determination, Oahu, HI State Parks, DLNR.....        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Nuuanu Reservoir Flood Study, HI...........................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Waimea River Zone A Flood Determination, Kauai, HI.........................        $185,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Waiohuli Gulch Flood Hazard Study, Kula, Maui, HI..........................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Evaluation of Flooding Scenarios, IA...................................        $120,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Regulated Frequency Curves.............................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Boulder Creek Donnelly, ID.............................................         $35,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Warm Springs Creek vic of Challis, ID..................................         $38,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Warm Springs Creek vic of Ketchum, ID..................................         $45,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--IL Levees Evaluation Support, IL.......................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Will County Survey, IL.....................................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Nodaway County Bridge Study, KS............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Hurricane Evacuation Study, SE Louisiana Update Support Data...............        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--City of Gretna GIS, LA.................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--East Baton Rouge GIS, LA...............................................        $450,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Livingston Parish GIS, LA..............................................        $650,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Clay Pit Brook Flooding Study, MA..........................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Hoosic River Flood Mitigation Study, Cheshire, MA..........................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Saw Mill Brook Flood Study, Newton, MA.....................................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Spear Brook Flood Control Study, Wilbraham, MA.............................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Hurricane Evacuation Studies, MD...........................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       AuTrain River Scour Study, MI, MI..........................................         $71,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Floodplain Management Training, MO.........................................         $30,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Lincoln County, MO.....................................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Jordan, MT.................................................................         $80,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Nashua Flood Risk Assessment, MT...........................................         $55,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       North Carolina HES Restudy, NC.............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Beaver & Black Brooks Flooding Study, Londerry, NH.........................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Manalapan Brook, NJ....................................................        $110,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Elbow Creek, NY............................................................         $60,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Forecast Studies, NY.......................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Hurricane Evacuation Studies, NY...........................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Onondaga Creek, Syracuse, NY...............................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Special Study--Finger Lakes, NY............................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       New Jersey--Port Authority Study Update, NY, NJ............................        $180,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Special Study--Crawford County, OH.........................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS City of John Day, OR....................................................        $160,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Crooked River FIS (City of Prineville), OR..............................        $140,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Juniper Canyon FIS (City of Prineville), OR.............................        $137,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Wahkiakum Co FIS #1 (Gray's River), OR..................................        $155,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Wahkiakum Co FIS #2 (Elochoman River), OR...............................        $130,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Wahkiakum Co FIS #3 (Wilson Creek), OR..................................        $128,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Wahkiakum Co FIS #4 (Skamokawa Creek), OR...............................        $128,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Philadelphia Hurricane Evacuation Study, PA................................         $10,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Southeastern, PA...........................................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Puerto Rico HES Behavior Study, PR.........................................        $112,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       South Carolina HES Restudy, SC.............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--City of Gallatin, TN...................................................         $85,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Unincorparated Weber Co., UT...............................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       City of Galax, VA..........................................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Town of Abingdon, VA...................................................         $56,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Dam Break Studies, VT......................................................         $31,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       East Long Pond Dam, VT.....................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Lake Hardwick Dam, VT......................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Mackville Pond Dam, VT.....................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Nichols Pond Dam, VT.......................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Rugg Brooks, St. Albans City, VT...........................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Stevens Brooks, Town of St. Albans, VT.................................         $75,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS--Vermont, VT............................................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Warren Lake Dam, VT........................................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS Lind Coulee, vicinity of Lind, WA.......................................         $35,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       SS McCoy Creek, vicinity of Oakesdale, WA..................................         $67,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............       Bear River Study--Uinta Co., WY............................................        $140,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      HYDROLOGIC STUDIES..........................................................        $250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES.................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE)............................        $225,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT......................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS................................         $50,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY)......................................        $600,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS......................................................        $350,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT........................................................     $25,392,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............  OTHER--MISC.....................................................................  ...............
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT.......................................................      $2,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW.....................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      NATIONAL SHORELINE..........................................................        $375,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM....................................................      $2,100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM..................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  General Investigations............      WATER RESOURCES PRIORITIES STUDY............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--CG..........................;  Channel Improvement, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, NO, TH.................................     $47,721,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--CG..........................;  MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN...........................     $45,439,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--CG..........................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA..........................................      $3,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--CG..........................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...........................................................     $15,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--CG..........................;  MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA....................................................      $2,250,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--GI..........................;  ALEXANDRIA TO THE GULF, LA......................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--GI..........................;  DONALDSONVILLE TO THE GULF, LA..................................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--GI..........................;  MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MGMT STUDY, TN & MS.............................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--GI..........................;  COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA..............................................      $1,665,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN................................     $67,350,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR..............................................  ...............  The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR...............................................        $425,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR............................................        $223,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR............................................        $175,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN...........................     $11,708,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR.......................................................      $1,217,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL...............................................        $191,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY...............................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA..........................................      $2,532,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...........................................................     $12,374,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA.............................................         $43,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA..............................................         $54,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  BONNET CARRE, LA................................................................      $3,500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA...............................................      $1,716,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, CAERNARVON, LA........................................      $1,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  OLD RIVER, LA...................................................................     $10,200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA..........................................        $100,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA..................................      $2,485,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA...........................................      $3,660,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS...........................................................        $500,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS...............................................         $25,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS............................................................        $537,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS.................................................      $6,870,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS............................................      $2,400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS......................................................      $7,640,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS......................................................        $807,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS...................................................      $7,381,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS......................................................      $2,800,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS....................................................      $9,183,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS....................................................        $825,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS....................................        $400,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS...........................................        $544,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS.....................................................        $731,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO...............................................        $150,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO......................................................      $9,843,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO.............................................................      $5,416,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN...............................................         $45,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN...............................................      $1,417,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  MR&T--Maintenance.................;  MAPPING.........................................................................      $1,112,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Abiquiu Dam, NM.................................................................      $3,305,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Alabama-Coosa Comprehensive Water Study, AL.....................................        $253,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Alabama River Lakes, AL.........................................................     $16,785,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Alamo Lake, AZ..................................................................      $1,542,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Albeni Falls Dam, ID............................................................      $1,545,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Allatoona Lake, GA..............................................................      $7,077,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Allegheny River, PA.............................................................      $9,039,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Almond Lake, NY.................................................................        $524,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Alum Creek Lake, OH.............................................................      $1,545,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Alvin R. Bush Dam, PA...........................................................        $659,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Anchorage Harbor, AK............................................................     $18,659,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Apalachicola, Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers, GA, AL & FL.......................      $2,437,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Applegate Lake, OR..............................................................      $1,302,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Aquilla Lake, TX................................................................      $1,564,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Arcadia Lake, OK................................................................        $521,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Arkansas-Red River Basins Chloride Control--Area VIII, TX.......................      $1,558,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Arkport Dam, NY.................................................................        $298,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Ashtabula Harbor, OH............................................................      $1,840,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Assateague, MD..................................................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Boeuf & Black, LA...........................     $11,640,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway--ACC, VA.........................................      $2,620,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway--DSC, VA.........................................      $1,311,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, GA..............................................      $1,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, NC..............................................      $4,300,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, SC..............................................      $1,295,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Aylesworth Creek Lake, PA.......................................................        $215,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  B. Everett Jordan Dam and Lake, NC..............................................      $1,898,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Ball Mountain, VT...............................................................        $858,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Baltimore Harbor and Channel (50 Foot), MD......................................     $20,000,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Baltimore Harbor, MD (Drift Removal)............................................        $360,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barataria Bay Waterway, LA......................................................        $165,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barbers Point Harbor, HI........................................................        $201,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bardwell Lake, TX...............................................................      $2,229,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barkley Dam and Lake, Barkley, KY & TN..........................................     $10,393,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barnegat Inlet, NJ..............................................................        $225,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barre Falls Dam, MA.............................................................        $753,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Barren River Lake, KY...........................................................      $2,514,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou Bodcau Reservoir, LA......................................................        $954,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou LaFourche and LaFourche Jump Waterway, LA.................................      $1,211,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou Pierre, LA................................................................         $24,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou Segnette Waterway, LA.....................................................         $49,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou Teche and Vermillion River, LA............................................         $15,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayou Teche, LA.................................................................        $200,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bayport Ship Channel, TX........................................................      $4,968,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Bear Creek Lake, CO.............................................................        $395,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Beaver Lake, AR.................................................................      $8,864,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Beech Fork Lake, WV.............................................................      $1,405,000   The President
Corps of Engineers..............  Operation and Maintenance.........  Belton Lake, TX.................................................................      $3,280,000   The President
Corps of Eng