Little Rock, Arkansas

LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS

The civil works portion of this District covers an area of the District is responsible for the portion of the Little approximately 36,414 square miles in northern, western, River and its tributaries that are in the state of Arkansas, and southwestern Arkansas and a portion of Missouri. above its mouth near Fulton, AR. In the White River This area is within the Arkansas River, Little River, and Basin, the District is responsible for those portions in White River basins. In the Arkansas River Basin, the southern Missouri and northern and eastern Arkansas in District is responsible for planning, design, construction, the White River drainage basin and its tributaries above operation, and maintenance of the navigation portion of Peach Orchard Bluff, AR. The Memphis District is re- the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System sponsible for navigation maintenance on the White River (MKARNS). The District is also responsible for the ar- below Newport, AR, to the mouth of Wild Goose Bay- eas included in the Arkansas River drainage basin from ou, in Arkansas County, AR. The White River down- above Pine Bluff, AR, to below the mouth of the Poteau stream from the mouth of Wild Goose Bayou is part of River, near Fort Smith, AR. In Little River Basin, the MKARNS.

IMPROVEMENTS

NAVIGATION 1. Arkansas River Basin, AR, OK, And KS ...... 3 Multiple-Purpose Projects Including Power 2. Arthur V. Ormond Lock & Dam (No.9), AR ..... 4 3. David D. Terry Lock And Dam (No. 6), AR ...... 4 28. Beaver Lake, AR ………………………………9 4. Emmett Sanders Lock And Dam (No. 4), AR ... 4 29. Bull Shoals Lake, AR...... ….10 5. James W. Trimble Lock And Dam (No 13),AR . 4 30. Darndanelle Lock and Dam (No. 10), AR ...... 11 6. Lock No. 2 And Wilbur D. Mills (No. 2), AR .... 4 31. Greers Ferry Lake, AR ...... 11 7. Joe Hardin Lock And Dam (No. 3), AR ...... 5 32. Norfork Lake, AR ...... 11 8. Colonel Charles D. Maynard Lock And 33. Ozark-Jeta Taylor Lock and Dam (No. 12), AR 11 Dam (No. 5), AR ...... 5 34. Table Rock Lake, MO ……………………… ..12 9. Montgomery Point Lock And Dam, AR...... 5 10. Murray Lock And Dam (No. 7), AR ...... 5 INVESTIGATIONS 11. Norrell Lock And Dam (No. 1) and Entrance Channel, AR ...... 5 35. May Branch, Fort Smith, AR ...... 12 12. Toad Suck Ferry Lock And Dam (No. 8), AR ... 5 36. Pine Mountain Lake, AR ...... 12 13. Maintenance And Repair Fleet And Marine 37. Springfield, MO ...... 13 Terminals, AR ...... 5 38. Southwest Arkansas Study ...... 13 14. Other Authorized Navigation Projects ...... 6 39. White River Minimum Flows, AR …………...13 15. Navigation Work Under Special Authorization.. 6 CONSTRUCTION FLOOD CONTROL 40. Clearwater Major Rehabilitation Project, 16. Blue Mountain Lake, AR ...... 6 Clearwater Lake, MO ...... 14 17. Clearwater Lake, MO ...... 6 41. Arkansas-White Cutoff Containment Structure, 18. DeQueen Lake, AR ...... 6 AR, General Reevaluation Study…………… 15 19. Dierks Lake, AR ...... 7 42. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation 20. Fourche Bayou Basin, Little Rock, AR ...... 7 System 12-Foot Channel, AR and OK ...... 15 21. Gillham Lake, AR ...... 7 43. Ozark Powerhouse Major Rehabilitation 22. Little River Basin, AR ...... 7 Project, Arkansas River, AR ………………..15 23. Millwood Lake, AR ...... 8 24. Nimrod Lake, AR ...... 8 25. White River Basin (Little Rock District), CONTINUING AUTHORITY PROGRAM AR & MO ...... 8 NAVIGATION ACTIVITIES (SECTION 107) 26. Inspection Of Completed Flood Control Projects ...... 9 44 Slack Water Harbor, Russellville, AR………....16 27. Other Authorized Flood Control Projects ...... 9 45. Lavaca port…………………………… ………16

37-1

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION (SECTION 14)

46 Batesville Wastewater Treatment Plant, Batesville, AR ...... 16 47 Highway 71 @ Red River, Ogden, AR ...... 16 48 Little Piney Creek, Highway 164 ...... 17 49 Southside Water, White River, Batesville, AR .. 17 50 Highway 58, Guion, AR……………………… 17 51 White River, Augusta, AR…………………… . 17 52 Old Grand Glaise, Jackson County, AR……… 17 53 Paw Paw Bend Road, Conway County, AR… ... 17

FLOOD CONTROL ACTIVITIES (SECTION 205)

54 Archey Fork Creek, Clinton, AR ...... 17

55 White River, Oil Trough, MO ...... 18 56. Prairie Creek, Russellville, AR ...... 18 57. Otter Creek, Shannon Hills, AR ...... 18

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (SECTION 1135)

58. AR River Environmental Restoration Project ... 18 59. Bull Shoals Lake Tailwater Restoration ...... 18 60 Bull Shoals Nursery Pond………………… ..18 61. Millwood Lake, Grassy Lake, AR…………..…18 62. Rock Creek at Boyle Park, Little Rock, AR ….19

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (SECTION 206)

63. Coleman Creek, LR, AR……… ...... 19 64. Shirey Bay Rainey Brake Wildlife Management Area (WMA)...... 19

APPENDIX A

Table 37-A Cost And Financial Statement ...... 20 Table 37-B Authorizing Legislation ...... 27 Table 37-C Other Authorized Navigation Projects ...... 29 Table 37-E Other Authorized Flood Control Projects ...... 32 Table 37-F Multiple Purpose Projects Including Power ...... 35 Table 37-G Deauthorized Projects ...... 36

37-2

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

NAVIGATION Fort Smith, AR, and Muskogee and Catoosa (Tulsa- Rogers County), OK. Port authorities have been orga- 1. Arkansas River Basin, AR, OK, AND KS nized to develop public facilities at North Little Rock, Dardanelle-Russellville, Morrilton, Clarksville, Ozark, Location. The headwaters for the Arkansas River are and Van Buren, AR, and Sallisaw, OK. Terminal facili- in the Rocky Mountains near Leadville, CO. The river ties are in operation or being built at 35 locations in Ar- flows southeastward 1,396 miles through Colorado, kansas and at 25 locations in Oklahoma along the im- Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas to join the Mississippi proved waterways. River 599 miles above Head of Passes, LA. Operations during fiscal year. Previous projects. For details see page 1066, Annu- al Report for 1932, and pages 744, 864, and 881, Annual Flood damages prevented by Little Rock District lev- Report for 1943. ee projects in the Arkansas River Basin during FY11 are estimated at $187,947,000; flood losses prevented Existing project. The MKARNS provides naviga- through FY11 are estimated at $1,827,112,000. tion, hydroelectric power, flood control, water supply, sediment control, recreation, and fish and wildlife prop- Approximately 10.7 million tons of commerce was agation improvements in the Arkansas River Basin. The moved on the Arkansas portion of the MKARNS during MKARNS provides a navigation channel 9 feet deep and calendar year 2011. Details of the MKARNS and lakes 444.8 miles long. The channel begins at the mouth of in Arkansas are shown on the following pages. the White River, which enters the Mississippi River 599 FY11 withdrawals for water supply purposes were 77.54 miles above Head of Passes, LA, thence 9.8 miles up- acre-feet from Nimrod Lake. stream to the mouth of Wild Goose Bayou; thence 9.2 miles by a land cut, designated as Arkansas Post Canal The maintenance Dredging Contract was awarded to mile 42 (1943 survey) on the Arkansas River; thence on 30 July 2010. Early renewal of option 1 was effective 376.0 miles to the mouth of the Verdigris River at navi- on 03 June 2011. A total of 9 locations were dredged in gation mile 395.0; thence 49.8 miles up the Verdigris FY2010. NM 9.9-10.2, NM 0.0-1.1, NM 8.5-9.6, NM River to the head of navigation at Catoosa, OK. A 12 3.1-3.5, and NM 4.9-5.4 were completed in Oct/Nov foot channel depth was authorized by Section 136 of PL 2010. NM 18.7-18.9, NM 49.7-50.0, NM 178.1-179.4, 108-137 in 2004. Construction of the 12 foot channel and NM 274.6-275.0 were completed in Aug/Sep 2011. depth began in 2006. Temporary relief measures (clamming with in-house la- bor and pool deviations) helped the district maintain nav- The waterway is canalized throughout its length by igation on the MKARNS. 18 locks and dams with a total lift of 420 feet. Dar- danelle, Ozark-Jeta Taylor, Robert S. Kerr, and Webbers An IDIQ Bank Stabilization contract was awarded in Falls are multiple purpose projects that include hydro- FY09.In FY10 work was completed in Pools 3, 7, 10 and power. Lock chambers are 110 by 600 feet. A mini- 12 totaling about $6.6 million. mum channel width of 150 feet is provided for the Ver- Replacement of the service transformer and medi- digris River, 225 feet for San Bois Creek, 250 feet for um–voltage disconnect switches at Ozark Lock and Dam the Arkansas River, and 300 feet for Arkansas Post Ca- (No. 12) as well as replacement of the MCC at Emmett nal and White River Entrance Channel. Sanders Lock and Dam (No. 4), Charles Maynard Lock Other coordinated developments consist of 15 lakes, (No. 5) and D.D. Terry Lock (No. 6) were completed in of which 13 are in Tulsa District, in the states of Kansas FY11. Replacement of the MCC for Joe Hardin Lock and Oklahoma, and two are in the Little Rock District. and Dam (No. 3) is in progress, with scheduled comple- Pertinent data and estimated Federal cost are summa- tion in FY12. MCC replacement for Lock No. 2 is in the rized in Tables 37-H and 37-I, Navigation: Arkansas manufacturing phase, scheduled for completion in FY12. River Basin, AR, OK, and KS. The work for Norrell Lock (No. 1) is in design phase, FY13 completion likely. Replacement of the spillway Local cooperation. For MKARNS, local interests control cabinets was completed in FY 11 for Arthur V. must provide adequate terminal and transfer facilities Ormond Lock and Dam (No. 9) and Dardanelle Lock and bear the increased costs of maintenance and opera- (No. 10). Also, replacement was completed in FY12 for tion of all altered rail and highway routes, including Toad Suck Ferry Lock and Dam (No. 8) and Ozark-Jeta bridges and appurtenances, utilities, and other existing Taylor Lock and Dam (No. 12), and work for James W. improvements, other than federally owned. For lakes see Trimble Lock and Dam (No. 13) and D.D. Terry Lock requirements for each individual lake. (No. 6) are scheduled for completion in FY12. The entire Terminal facilities. Public port facilities are in oper- contract including the remaining Wilbur D. Mills Dam ation at Pine Bluff (Jefferson County), Little Rock, and (No. 2), Joe Hardin Lock and Dam (No. 3), Emmett

37-3

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Sanders Lock and Dam (No. 4), Charles Maynard Lock wide, 9,600-foot long highway bridge crossing the lock (No. 5) and Murray Lock & Dam (No. 7) is scheduled to and dam was completed in July 1995. The Corps of En- be completed in FY12. Limit switch prototypes for D.D. gineers, as the Federal agency, has jurisdiction and cus- Terry Lock (No. 6) and Murray Lock & Dam (No. 7) tody of the dam (23 U.S.C. 320 [Public Law 2810]). were installed in FY11, and are currently functioning. The project was 100 percent funded by the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department. Tow Condition at end of fiscal year. (See Tables 37-H haulage equipment was placed into operation in June and 37-1, Navigation: Arkansas River Basin; AR, OK, 1994. and KS, for status for individual items, navigation projects, lakes, and basin plan.) Work continues on the Ar- kansas River project in this District including a meander 5. James W. Trimble Lock And Dam (No. 13), AR cutoff levee between the Arkansas and White Rivers. Location, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. (See section 1.) 2. Arthur V. Ormond Lock & Dam (No.9), AR Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation Location, existing project, local cooperation, and and maintenance. In FY 11, the project’s three devel- terminal facilities. (See section 1.) oped parks experienced public visitation exceeding 964,645 visitor-hours. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation and maintenance. Rockefeller Lake (pool 9) has four Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began developed parks, which experienced public visitation ex- in October 1965 and the lock and dam were placed in ceeding 318,986 visitor-hours in FY11. operation in April 1969. The bridge across the dam was completed in July 1968. Construction of a non-Federal Construction began Condition at end of fiscal year. hydropower facility at the project was completed in No- in April 1965 and the lock and dam was placed in opera- vember 1988 under the authority provided by the Federal tion in July 1969. Construction of Holla Bend closure Energy Regulatory Commission. Tow haulage was structure (fish and wildlife mitigation) began in July placed into operation in 2000. 1986 and was completed in September 1987. Construc- tion of a non-Federal hydropower project, under the authority provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory 6. Lock No. 2 And Wilbur D. Mills (No. 2), AR Commission, was completed and placed into operation in Location, existing project, local cooperation, and August 1993. Construction of a widened downstream terminal facilities. (See section 1.) entrance was completed in 1998. Installation of tow Operation and haulage equipment was complete in 1999. Operations during fiscal year. maintenance continued. Wilbur D. Mills has four developed parks, which in FY 11 experienced public visitation 3. David D. Terry Lock And Dam (No. 6), AR exceeding 1.69 million visitor-hours. Location, existing project, local cooperation, and Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began terminal facilities. (See section 1.) in May 1963. The lock was placed in operation in March Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began 1968. Emergency repairs to the scour protection features in January 1965 and the lock and dam project was placed and tainter gates at the dam that resulted from a barge in operation in August 1968. Tow haulage equipment accident in December 1982 were completed in FY85. was added in June 1994. Currently, the project has one The barges that clogged the dam gates during the De- developed park, which in FY11 experienced public visit- cember 1982 flood showed that, with a certain set of cir- ation exceeding 2.66 million visitor-hours. cumstances (higher than normal head combined with the clogged gates resulted in high current velocity that 4. Emmett Sanders Lock And Dam (No. 4), AR caused both upstream and downstream scouring), the structure could fail. This condition exists primarily be- Location, existing project, local cooperation and cause the structure was constructed on piling and de-

terminal facilities. (See section 1.) signed for all of the gates to operate in unison. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation A model study by the Waterways Experiment Station de- and maintenance. Pool 4 has two developed parks, which termined the most feasible solution to this problem is to in FY 11 experienced public visitation exceeding extend the stilling basin downstream. A contract to ex- 536,000 visitor-hours. tend the stilling basin was awarded in June 1990 and Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began completed in FY94. Project costs are estimated at $21.6 in May 1964 and the lock and dam project was placed in million. Tow haulage was placed into operation in 1997. operation in December 1968. Construction of a 40-foot Construction of a non-Federal hydropower project, under

37-4

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT the authority provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began Commission is complete and was placed into operation in November 1964 and the lock and dam was placed in in December 1999. operation in October 1969. Construction of a non- Federal hydropower facility at the project was completed 7. Joe Hardin Lock And Dam (No.3), AR in May 1988 under the authority provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Tow Haulage was Location, existing project, local cooperation, and completed and operational October 1999. The Pedestri- terminal facilities. (See section 1.) an bicycle bridge project was completed in September of Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation 2006. It is the longest bridge in the nation construction and maintenance. Pool 3 has one developed park which specifically for pedestrians and bicycles, not cars. in FY 11 experienced public visitation exceeding 295,678 visitor-hours. 11. Norrell Lock And Dam (No. 1) And Entrance Channel, AR Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in May 1963 and the lock and dam were placed in opera- Location, existing project, local cooperation, and tion in December 1968. Tow haulage equipment was in- terminal facilities. (See section 1.) stalled and operational in 1994. Operations during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance continued. The project currently has one 8. Colonel Charles D. Maynard Lock And Dam developed park which in FY 11 experienced public visit- (No. 5), AR ation exceeding 44,801 visitor-hours. Location, existing project, local cooperation and Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began

terminal facilities. (See section 1.) in May 1963, and the lock and dam were placed in oper- Operation and results during fiscal year. Contin- ation in June 1967. A contract to add tow haulage ued operation and maintenance. Pool 5 has two devel- equipment to the lock was completed in 1997. oped parks which in FY 11 experienced public visitation exceeding 886,684 visitor-hours. 12. Toad Suck Ferry Lock And Dam (No. 8), AR Condition at end of fiscal year Construction began Location, existing project, local cooperation, and in November 1964 and the lock and dam were placed in terminal facilities. (See section 1.) operation in December 1968. Tow haulage equipment was installed in June 1994. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation and maintenance. In ,FY 11 the project’s five developed parks experienced public visitation exceeding 984,929 9. Montgomery Point Lock And Dam, AR visitor-hours. Location, existing project, local cooperation, and Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began terminal facilities. (See section 1.) in July 1965 and the lock and dam was placed in operation in November 1969. The Conway water supply pro- Operations during fiscal year. Operation and mainte- ject was completed and transferred to the city for opera- nance continued. tion and maintenance in July 1983. Installation of tow haulage equipment was complete in 1999. Condition at end of fiscal year . Construction began in August 1997 and the lock and dam were placed in opera- 13. Maintenance And Repair Fleet And Marine tion in February of 2005. Tow haulage equipment, Terminals, AR maintenance equipment procurement, and docking facilities have not been completed. Location, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. (See section 1.) 10. Murray Lock And Dam (No. 7), AR Operations during fiscal year. Operation and Location, existing project, local cooperation, and maintenance continued. terminal facilities. (See section 1.) Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of Operations during fiscal year. Operation and Pine Bluff Marine Terminal began March 1968 and was maintenance continued. Murray has five developed placed in operation in April 1969. Construction of the parks, which in FY 11 experienced public visitation ex- Dardanelle Marine Terminal began June 1968 and it was ceeding 1.92 million visitor-hours. . placed in operation in November 1969.

37-5

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

14. Other Authorized Navigation Projects Operations during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance continued. Flood damages prevented dur- (See Table 37-C for other authorized navigation pro- ing FY11 are estimated at $6,779,000; cumulative bene- jects.) fits through September 2011 are estimated at $277,368,000. Project currently has 6 developed parks, 15. Navigation Work Under Special Authorization which in FY 11 experienced public visitation exceeding Preauthorization studies under the small project con- 7.5 million visitor-hours. tinuing authorities program, navigation activities, Sec- Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of the tion 107, Public Law 86-645, as amended. Expenditures project began in June 1940 and was ready for beneficial for Sec. 107 activities in FY08 totaled $20,600. Coordi- use in March 1948. A new water control plan is being nation account, $8,6000; Little Rock Slack Water Har- considered that better meets the needs of the interests in bor, AR; $12,000. the basin. In January 2003, a sinkhole developed in the upstream face of the dam initiating a major rehabilitation FLOOD CONTROL study. Construction on the Major Rehabilitation started in FY06 and is scheduled for completion in 2013. Phase 16. Blue Mountain Lake, AR Ia of the contract was completed in October 2007. A second contact was awarded for Phase 1b awarded in Au- Location. (See Table 37-1: Arkansas River Basin, gust 2007 and is scheduled to be completed in Septem- AR, OK, and KS: Lakes.) ber 2009. Phase II, the cutoff wall, contract was awarded Existing project. Construction cost was approxi- in September 2008 and is scheduled to start work in mately $5.1 million. For further information see pages FY09. 906 and 907 of the 1962 Annual Report. 18. DeQueen Lake, AR Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 applies. Location. On Rolling Fork River, RM 22.8, a tributary of the Little River, in Sevier County, about 4 miles Operations during fiscal year. Operation and northwest of DeQueen, AR. maintenance of project continued. Flood damages prevented during FY11 are estimated at $1,432,000; cumu- Existing project. An earth-fill dam, 2,360 feet long, lative benefits through September 30, 2011, are estimat- constructed to 160 feet above streambed. An uncon- ed at $42,151,000. The project’s five developed parks trolled spillway, 200 feet wide, is about 1,400 feet east experienced public visitation exceeding 1.37 million vis- of main embankment. Outlet works consist of a gated itor-hours during FY 11. conduit, 12 feet in diameter; one 36-inch diameter low- flow pipe and a 42-inch diameter water supply pipe.. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreational sanitary facilities. The lake controls 169 square miles of drainage area Construction of the project began in May 1940 and it and provides a total storage of 136,100 acre-feet was placed in operation in March 1947. (101,200 acre-feet for flood control storage, 25,500 acre- feet for conservation storage, and 9,400 acre-feet for sed- 17. Clearwater Lake, MO imentation reserve). Federal cost of the project is estimated at $19,623,752. Location. (See Table 37-K: White River Basin, AR & MO: Lakes.) Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and Section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as Construction of the outlet works for Existing project. amended, apply. the dam was initiated in May 1940 and completed in March 1942. Due to work stoppage during World War Operations during fiscal year. Routine operation II, the earth embankment and uncontrolled spillway were and maintenance continued. Flood damages prevented not completed until December 1948. The spillway weir during FY11 are estimated at $355,000; cumulative ben- was completed in 1951. Cost of construction was ap- efits through September 2011 are estimated at proximately $9,715,000. For further information, see $15,719,000. In FY11, the project’s six developed parks pages 897 and 898 of 1962 Annual Report. experienced public visitation exceeding 1.11 million visitor-hours. Major rehabilitation. See Item 41. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began Section 2, Flood Control Act of Local cooperation. April 1966. Project was placed in useful operation in 1938 applies. August 1977.

37-6

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

19. Dierks Lake, AR $12,912,000. Federal funds in the amount of $3,272000 would need to be appropriated to complete the project. On Saline River, RM 56.6, a tributary of Location. $1,101,000 was appropriated in FY2009. the Little River, about 5 miles northwest of Dierks,

Howard County, AR. Operations During Current Year: In FY 2011 $27,854 Existing project. An earth-fill dam, 2,760 feet long, of CG funds were expended. and about 153 feet above the streambed. An uncontrolled spillway 800 feet wide is in a saddle at the west 21. Gillham Lake, AR end of the dam. Outlet works consisting of a gated 6- by Dam site is on the Cossatot River, RM 9-foot oblong conduit, one 24 -inch low-flow pipe, and Location. 49.0, in Howard County, about 5 miles northeast of one 30-inch water supply pipe are provided. The lake Gillham in Sevier County, AR. controls a drainage area of 114 square miles and provides for storage of 67,100 acre-feet for flood control Existing project. The dam is an earth-filled struc- and 29,700 acre-feet for water supply, conservation, and ture, 1,750 feet long, 160 feet above the streambed. The sedimentation reserve, a total of 96,800 acre-feet. The controlled spillway is 875 feet long with four 50 feet by Federal cost of the project was $16,002,903. 42 feet tainter gates. Outlet works include a 10-foot diameter conduit, one low-flow pipe, 30 inches in diameter Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of and a 24-inch water supply pipe. .Federal cost of the pro- 1938, and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. ject was $17,827,111. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation Section 2, Flood Control Act of and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during FY11 Local cooperation. 1938, and Section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as are estimated at $873,000; cumulative benefits through amended, apply. Tri-Lakes Water District furnished a September 2011 are estimated at $11,344,000. In FY11 resolution of intent to repay costs allocated to water sup- the project’s three developed parks experienced 1.06 ply storage. million visitor-hours. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction be- and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during FY11 gan in June 1968. The embankment closure was com- are estimated at $1,015,000; total cumulative flood dam- pleted in May 1975, and the project was placed in useful ages prevented are estimated at $23,314,000. In FY11 operation. the project’s four developed parks experienced public visitation exceeding 1.05 million visitor-hours. 20. Fourche Bayou Basin, Little Rock, AR Construction began Condition at end of fiscal year. in June 1968. The embankment closure was completed Location: On Fourche, Rock and Grassy Flat Creeks, in May 1975, and the project was placed in useful opera- Little Rock, AR. Fourche Creek enters the Arkansas tion. River at mile 113.5.

Existing Project: This flood control project, consisting 22. Little River Basin, AR of 11.6 miles of channel improvement with railroad and Location. Improvements are on the Little River and road bridge widening (cost of $30.7 million, non-Federal tributaries in Arkansas. More definite locations of indi- share $9.6 million), had its operation and maintenance vidual items are shown in Table 37-J. manual provided to the city of Little Rock in April 1998. The project authorization includes the acquisition of Existing project. A six-lake system for flood con- 1,750 acres of bottomlands (for flood storage and envi- trol and other purposes in the Little River Basin. The ronmental preservation) with nature appreciation facili- system consists of four lakes in Arkansas: Millwood on ties. CESWD approved on 13 July 2009 the Limited the main stem, Dierks on the Saline River, DeQueen on Reevaluation Report and submitted it to ASA (CW) to the Rolling Fork River, and Gillham on the Cossatot determine whether to budget for the remaining work - River; and two lakes in Oklahoma: Broken Bow on the acquisition of the bottomlands. Mountain Fork River and Pine Creek on the Little River. Under a District boundary change, effective in October 1980, the four projects in this system in Arkansas were Local Cooperation: The city of Little Rock, the project sponsor, signed the local cooperation agreement in Aug reassigned from the Tulsa District to the Little Rock Dis- 1987 according to the requirements of WRDA 1986. A trict. new agreement is required for the remaining work. The Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of estimated total project cost is $38,735,000 with a Federal 1938, and Section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as share of $25,823,000 and a non-Federal share of amended, apply. Tri-Lakes Water District (DeQueen, 37-7

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Gillham, and Dierks) furnished a resolution of intent to and flood supplemental funds were used and the repairs repay costs allocated to water supply storage. The were completed in January 2009. Southwest Arkansas Water District is currently repaying Construction began in costs allocated to water supply storage at Millwood Condition at end of fiscal year. September 1961 and the project was placed in full flood Lake. control operation in August 1966. Operations during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance of projects continued. See individual pro- 24. Nimrod Lake, AR jects for details. Flood damages prevented by the Little River Basin reservoirs during FY11 are estimated at Existing project. Estimated cost is $4,092,825. For $2,002,000; cumulative benefits through September further information see pages 908 and 909 of 1962 An- 2011, are estimated at $74,463,000. nual Report. FY11 withdrawals for water supply purposes were Local cooperation. Section 2 of the 1938 Flood approximately: Tri-Lakes Water District, AR, 1,083.64 Control Act applies. acre-feet from Gillham Lake; Tri-Lakes Water District, Operations during fiscal year. Operation and AR, 346.75 acre-feet from Dierks Lake; Tri-Lakes Water maintenance of project continued. Addition and im- District, AR, 911.07 acre-feet from DeQueen Lake, and provement to existing recreation sanitary facilities con- Southwest Arkansas Water District, AR, 81,046.20 acre- tinued. During FY11, flood damages prevented were es- feet from Millwood Lake. timated at $1,060,000 cumulative benefits through Sep- tember 2011 are estimated at $33,480,000. In FY11, sev- Condition at end of fiscal year. Millwood, DeQueen, Gillham, and Dierks Lakes are complete and en parks experienced public visitation exceeding 1.82 in operation. million visitor-hours. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is com- 23. Millwood Lake, AR plete. Location. On the Little River, RM 16.0, approximately 7 miles east of Ashdown, Little River County, 25. White River Basin (Little Rock District), AR & AR, and about 2 miles northeast of Millwood, Little MO River County, AR. Location. Improvements are on the White River and tributaries, Arkansas and Missouri. More definite loca- Existing project. Millwood Dam is an earth-filled structure, 17,554 feet long, 88 feet above the streambed. tion of individual items is shown in Table 37-K: White Length of the spillway is 616 long, with 13 spillway River Basin. crest gates, 40- by 32 feet. Outlet works include two out- Existing project. A general comprehensive plan for let conduits 5.67- by 6 feet and a water supply pipe, 6.5 flood control and other purposes in the White River Ba- feet in diameter. The Federal cost of the project was sin. The plan includes seven lakes; two are flood control $46,087,382. only projects and five are multiple-purpose projects. Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, Norfork, Clearwater, Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 applies. Greers Ferry and Bell Foley lakes were selected and approved for construction by the Chief of Engineers, and Operations during fiscal year. Routine operation individual reports on six of these seven lakes are pre- and maintenance continued. Flood damages prevented sented on subsequent pages. The Bell Foley project, the during FY11 are estimated at $0; cumulative benefits remaining authorized project but not constructed was through September 2011 are estimated at $24,327,000. reevaluated in FY 89; the project continues to have a fa- Millwood Lake has 12 developed parks, which in FY 11 vorable benefit-to-cost ratio since its formulation in experienced public visitation exceeding 2.75 million vis- 1968. . itor-hours. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of The design of Stabilize V-Ditch was started in FY07. 1938 applies, Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, Due to lack of funds for the construction, design was applies to Beaver, Greers Ferry, and Norfork projects. suspended at the 30% phase and placed on the shelf until additional funds were available. The funds for construc- Operations during fiscal year. Operation and mainte- tion were required for the emergency electrical repair to nance of projects continued. Flood damages prevented the Millwood Project Office, which was damaged during by the White River Basin reservoirs during FY11 are es- a storm. The floods of FY08 caused considerable dam- timated at $83,685,000; cumulative benefits through age to the v-ditch and to the embankment. Project funds September 2011 are estimated at $959,697,000. Flood damages prevented by the White River Basin levees dur-

37-8

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT ing FY11 are estimated at $29,472,000; cumulative ben- 27. Other Authorized Flood Control Projects efits through September 2011, are estimated at (See Table 37-E: Other Authorized Flood Control $170,055,700. Projects.) Electric energy delivered to Southwestern Power Administration for marketing during FY11 totaled Multiple-Purpose Projects Including Power 174,873 MWh. FY 11 water releases for fish hatcheries were: 29,038 28. Beaver Lake, AR acre-feet from Norfork Lake for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Location. (See Table 37-K: White River Basin.) Service trout hatchery; 14,519 acre-feet from Table Rock Lake for Missouri Department of Conservation trout Existing project. Estimated cost is $50,797,000. hatchery; and, 14,519 acre-feet from Greers Ferry Lake For further information see 788 and 789 of 1966 Annual for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service trout hatchery. Report. (For authorization see Table 37-B ) Major rehabilitation. Since the dam was constructed there has been a seepage problem below Dike No. 1. FY11 withdrawals for water supply purposes were: Based on detailed investigation, it was determined that Beaver Water District, AR, 51,875.98 acre-feet, and Car- the limestone foundation under Dike 1 and 200 feet of roll-Boone Water District, AR, 8,830. the north end of the main dam embankment is the main 55 acre-feet, from Beaver Lake; Madison County problem. The plan of improvement was a concrete seep- Water District, AR, 3,740.43 acre-feet, and Benton- age cutoff in Dike 1 and the north end of the main dam. Washington Counties Water District, AR, 8,333.92 acre- A $16.9-million contract to construct a concrete cutoff feet, from Beaver Lake; Marion County Regional Water wall was awarded in June 1989; the notice to proceed District, AR, 980.72 acre-feet from Bull Shoals Lake; was issued in October 1989. The contract period was es- Water and Sewer Improvement District No.3 of Moun- timated to be 760 days. However, the contractor ceased tain Home, AR, 3,604.53 acre-feet from Norfork Lake; productive work due to inability to excavate rock and and the city of Clinton, AR, 2,203.25 acre-feet; Higden., was been placed in default. An $18.8 reprocurement AR, 7,078.17 acre-feet; Red Apple Inn, AR, 133.24 acre- contract was awarded in April 1992. Work began in ft; Thunderbird Country Club, AR, 60.32 acre-ft, and, May 1992 and all work was completed in Nov 1995. Tannenbaum, AR, 85.68 acre-ft from Greers Ferry Lake. The Beaver Dam Safety Assurance study was com- Condition at end of fiscal year. Beaver, Table pleted with FY 97 expenditures of $1,359.61. Rock, Bull Shoals, Norfork, Clearwater, and Greers Fer- Water Quality Enhancement. Congress directed ry lakes are complete and in operation. Progress on the- the Corps to implement best management practices se lakes is shown in individual reports. Water Valley (BMP’s) in the Beaver Lake watershed and monitor the and Lone Rock lakes have been deauthorized. A new effects of these practices on water quality. A study was water control plan was approved and implemented in completed and a project report was approved in July December 1998. This plan was developed in close coor- 1989. The BMP’s and water quality monitoring were dination with the basins various interests and was rec- concurrently implemented over a 5-year period, which ommended as their preferred plan of operation. began in May 1991 with a project completion date of Ju- ly 1997. 26. Inspection Of Completed Flood Control Projects The BMP’s were implemented under the terms of a Approved regulations for operation and maintenance memorandum of agreement between the Corps and the of flood control works, Part 208 of Title 33, Code of Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), for- Federal Regulations, provide for periodic inspection of merly the Soil Conservation Service, with the assistance completed projects transferred to local interests for oper- of the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Ser- ation and maintenance. Inspections of local flood pro- vice. The water quality monitoring was implemented tection projects were made to determine extent of com- under terms of a local cost-sharing agreement with the pliance with approved regulations for maintenance and Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission. operation of these projects. Responsible officials of im- Water quality monitoring was performed in consultation provement districts concerned were advised of inadequa- with the Environmental Protection Agency by a Corps cies in maintenance and operation of local flood protec- administered contract. The water quality-monitoring tion works under their jurisdiction where appropriate. contract was awarded on January 29, 1992. Water quality sampling began in May 1992 and was completed on July 1, 1996. BMP implementation was completed Au- gust 31,1995. Cost in FY98 was $67,897.93 Federal,

37-9

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 and $1,434.58 non-Federal. Total project cost was for Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority $6,878,775.15 and 1,698.007 acre-feet for Marion County Regional Water District at Bull Shoals Lake from the conservation The Environmental Infrastructure Assistance. pool. The cost for reallocating storage is $1,669,990 to Water Resources Development Act of 1992 authorized Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority for 6 the Corps of Engineers to provide design and construc- million gallons per day and $280,861 to Marion County tion assistance to appropriate non-Federal interests for a Regional Water District for 1 million gallons per day. water transmission line from the northern part of Beaver The expedited final reallocation report with the envi- Lake, Arkansas, into Benton and Washington Counties. ronmental assessment was approved by ASA(W) on Au- This project is part of a $40 million project, which in- gust 9, 2010. The FONSI was signed by Little Rock cludes a water intake, treatment and storage facilities, District’s Colonel on August 17, 2010. The OMRPWA and transmission lines. The Little Rock District and the water supply agreement was executed on August 27, project sponsor, Benton/Washington County Water As- 2010, and the MCRWD water supply agreement was ex- sociation, executed a Memorandum of Agreement in ecuted on September 8, 2010. June 1997. The Little Rock District then transferred $3 million to the sponsor for construction of a segment of Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation the water transmission line. and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during FY11 are estimated at $35,108,000; total cumulative Section 2 of the 1938 Flood Local cooperation. flood damages prevented are estimated at $267,995,000. Control Act, and the 1958 Water Supply Act, as amend- During the year (FY 2011) more than 966,355 MWh of ed, apply. electrical energy were delivered to Southwestern Power Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation Administration for marketing. The project has eighteen and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during FY11 developed parks, which in FY10 experienced public vis- are estimated at $8,662,000; cumulative benefits are es- itation exceeding 15.6 million visitor-hours. timated at $83,236,000. During the year (FY 2011) Project is com- 132,133 MWh of electrical energy were delivered to the Condition at end of fiscal year. plete. Alterations to existing parks are needed to enhance Southwestern Power Administration for marketing. The fee collections, to improve efficiency, to reduce mainte- project has eleven developed parks, which in FY 10 ex- nance effort or to rehabilitate the 37-year-old park facili- perienced public visitation exceeding 18.98 million visi- ties through operations and maintenance or SRUF funds, tor-hours. An agreement to provide 21,972.14 acre-feet as appropriate. Low dissolved oxygen readings in the of storage at no charge to the Arkansas Game and Fish downstream area of Bull Shoals Dam in October 1990 Commission for fish production facilities was sent to HQ have resulted in ongoing studies to be undertaken to for approval in July 2000. minimize harmful effects on the trout fishing of the Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is com- White River. plete. Alterations to existing parks to enhance fee collec- Unguaranteed short-term solutions to the problem, tions, improve efficiency, and reduce the maintenance consisting of limiting generation, will sustain the exist- effort or rehabilitate the 26-year old park operation ing fishery, but long-term guaranteed changes will re- through operation and maintenance and SRUF funds, as quire congressional authorization. Construction of the appropriate. Construction of the project began in October project began in April 1946 and was ready for beneficial 1959 and was placed in operation for flood control in flood control use in June 1951 and generation of electri- December 1963, hydroelectric power generation with cal energy in September 1952. Units 1 through 8 were both units in May 1965, and water supply in January placed in operation September 1952, December 1952, 1966. Work on a dam seepage problem is complete. June 1953, January 1962, February 1962, August 1963, and September 1963, respectively. 29. Bull Shoals Lake, AR Major rehabilitation (Powerhouse). A major reha-

Location. (See table 37-K: White River Basin, AR & bilitation study was initiated in October 1995. The study

MO.) was to investigate a solution to the environmentally in- Existing project. Cost with eight generating units duced reliability problem (low dissolved oxygen) of the- was $88,858,711. For further information see pages 725 se units. Potential solutions include new auto-venting and 726 of 1965 Annual Report. (For authorization see turbines, a downstream weir, turbine venting, or forced- table 37-B.) air. Following preliminary study results, the turbines were modified in 1997 to increase downstream aeration. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of The study is a high priority for the division, but has been 1938 applies. The report concluded the reallocation of suspended due to the Major Rehabilitation Program be- 11,886.541 acre-feet, consisting of 10,188.463 acre-feet ing suspended.

37-10

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

30. Dardanelle Lock And Dam (No. 10), AR feet for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service trout hatchery. An all-volunteer environmental program (annual clean-

Location. (See Table 37-H: Arkansas River Basin; up) has been most successful and serves as a model for

AR, OK, and KS: Navigation.) the Nation. During the past 27 years the program has Existing project. Project is a unit of MKARNS. won more than 26 national awards. Dam is 2,683 feet long and 68 feet high. It has a spill- Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. way with 20 tainter gates 50 feet long and 39 feet high. Construction of the project began in June 1957 and was Navigation lock is 110 by 600 feet with a lift of 54 feet. ready for beneficial flood control use in January 1962. Powerhouse originally contained four 31,000-kilowatt Power units 1 and 2 were operable in March and May generators. Lake has a storage capacity of 486,200 acre- 1964, and water supply was operable in April 1971. The feet. Estimated cost was $84,270,124 . Visitors Center was completed in June 1983 at a cost of Local cooperation. (See section 1.) $813,000. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation and maintenance. Power generation continued. During 32. Norfork Lake, AR FY11, 356,019 MWh of electrical energy were delivered Location. (See Table 37-K: White River Basin, AR to the Southwestern Power Administration for market- & MO.) ing. In FY10, the project’s thirteen developed parks ex- The total estimated cost is perienced public visitation exceeding 3.7 million visi- Existing project. $70,701,629, including highway bridge construction. tor-hours. This does not include an estimate for the addition of Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is com- power units 3 and 4, which were authorized, but never plete. Construction began June 1957. Power units were built. For further information see page 896 of 1962 An- placed on line in April, May, and September 1965, and nual Report. January 1966. The lock became operable in December Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1969. The Visitors Center and resident office were Local cooperation. 1938 and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, ap- completed in May 1985. The contract to install tow plies. haulage equipment was completed in 1999. Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation Major rehabilitation. Major Rehabilitation of the and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during power plant was completed in August 2000. Turbines FY11 are estimated at $9,269,000; total cumulative flood were replaced and generators were rewound to increase damages prevented are estimated at $80,802,000. During plant capacity by 13 percent. Cost of the Major Rehabil- the year (FY11), more than 181,096 MWh of electrical itation was $28.8 million. energy were delivered to the Southwestern Power Ad- ministration for marketing. In FY11 the project released 31. Greers Ferry Lake, AR 29,038 acre-feet for a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Location. (See Table 37-K: White River, AR & MO.) trout hatchery. The project’s 18 developed parks experienced public visitation exceeding 1.82 million visi- Estimated cost is $55,125,000. Existing project. tor-hours during FY11 For further information see page 740 of 1964 Annual Report. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began in October 1940, ready for beneficial flood Section 2, 1938 Flood Control Local cooperation. control use in June 1943, and for generation of electrical Act and 1988 Water Supply Act, as amended, apply. energy with one unit in June 1944. Second unit was Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation added in February 1950. Water supply was added as a and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during purpose in December 1969. Construction of two high- FY11 are estimated at $2,689,000; total cumulative flood way bridges over Norfork Lake to replace ferries was damages prevented are estimated at $44,014,000. In completed in November 1982. The bridges were trans- FY11, 174,873 MWh of electrical energy were delivered ferred to the Arkansas Highway and Transportation De- to the Southwestern Power Administration for market- partment for operation and maintenance in July 1984. ing. The project has seventeen developed parks, which in FY11 experienced public visitation exceeding 31.79 33. Ozark-Jeta Taylor Lock And Dam (No. 12), AR million visitor-hours. The project’s operational management plan provides means by which the natural re- Location. (See Table 37-H: Arkansas River Basin, sources, including water quality, aesthetic value, forest- AR, OK, and KS: Navigation.) ry, fish and wildlife are managed and protected for future Existing project. Project is a unit of MKARNS. The generations. In FY11 the project released 14,519 acre- dam is 2,480 feet long and 58 feet above streambed; 37-11

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 spillway has 15 tainter gates, each 50 feet long and 46 Rock Lake has fifteen developed parks, which in 10 ex- feet high. Navigation lock is 110 by 600 feet with a lift perienced public visitation exceeding 15.9 million visi- of 34 feet. Powerhouse contains five 20,000 kilowatt tor-hours. This project’s operational management plan generators. Lake has a storage capacity of 148,400 acre- provides means by which the natural resources, includ- feet. In addition, one foot of power pondage is provided ing forestry, fish and wildlife are managed in the appro- in Pool 13 between elevations 391.0 and 392.0. Cost priate manner. In FY 11, the project released 14,519 was $85,629,412. (For authorization see table 37-B.) acre-feet for a Missouri Department of Conservation Trout Hatchery. Local cooperation. (See section 1.) Project is com- Continued operation Condition at end of fiscal year. Operations during fiscal year. plete. Construction of project began in October 1954. and maintenance. The project was ready for beneficial flood control use in Delivered 54,069 MWh of electrical energy to November 1958, and for generation of electrical energy Southwestern Power Administration for marketing. with units 1 and 2 in May 1959. Units 3 and 4 were Ozark Lake has 10 developed parks, which in FY 11 ex- added in April and June 1961. The Auxiliary Spillway perienced public visitation exceeding 1.52 million visi- was completed in October of 2003. tor-hours. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began INVESTIGATIONS in December 1964. Project is complete. Lock and dam was placed in operation in November 1969. Power units 35. May Branch, Fort Smith, AR were placed on line as follows: unit 1, November 1972; unit 2, August 1973; unit 3, October 1973; unit 4, De- Location. May Branch, Fort Smith, Arkansas, enters cember 1973; and unit 5, May 1974. Tow Haulage was the Arkansas River at mile 307.5. installed in 1999. Existing Project. The Chief of Engineers final report A major rehabilitation study was initiated in October was signed 19 December 2006 and was delivered to 1996. The power plant has experienced numerous me- Congress on July 8, 2008. It recommends the construc- chanical problems and major repair requirements since tion of a flood reduction project consisting of a new its construction. The study describes the condition of the 2.77-mile long open channel to convey flood waters power plant and reviews alternative solutions. The Re- from the May Branch basin to the Arkansas River. The habilitation Study Report was submitted in March 1999. channel alignment would require 15 structure reloca- Little Rock received Construction General funding in tions, 5 rail and 9 road crossings, a gated hydraulic con- FY03 to start construction on the Major Rehabilitation trol structure at the Fort Smith (Arkansas River) Levee. Project. Construction General was received in FY08 and The estimated project cost is $30.85 million including work continues on the project. two upstream reaches to be constructed at non-Federal expense. The project was authorized by WRDA 2007. 34. Table Rock Lake, MO Location. (See Table 37-K: White River Basin, AR Local Cooperation: The City of Fort Smith, Arkansas, & MO.) is the non-Federal sponsor. The non-Federal cost is estimated to be $15.8 million based on WRDA 1986, as Existing project. Cost was $119,491.90. For fur- amended. The PED Design agreement was negotiated ther information see page 893 of 1962 Annual Report. and signed on 21 October 2008 for $2,116,000. An (For authorization see table 37-B.) Amendment to the PED agreement was signed 25 July Local Cooperation. Section 2 of the 1938 Flood 2011 to allow for the accelerated use of sponsor funds. Control Act applies. Operation and Results During Fiscal Year: In FY Operations during fiscal year. Continued operation 2011, Investigations funds of $136,786 were expended and maintenance. Flood damages prevented during to continue design. FY11 are estimated at $21,178,000; total cumulative flood damages prevented are estimated at $206,282,000. 36. Pine Mountain Lake, AR During the year (FY 2011), about 537,465 MWh of electrical energy were delivered to the Southwestern Location: The project was authorized in the Flood Con- Power Administration for marketing. The District and trol Act of 1965, for a dam site at mile 35.7 on Lee the Waterways Experiment Station are investigating the Creek 12 miles north of Van Buren, Arkansas, in Craw- possibilities of improving the quality of Table Rock re- ford County. leases with a hypolimnetic oxygenation system. Table

37-12

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

Existing Project: Existing authorization provides for cludes the Lower Little River Watershed located in por- construction of a lake for flood control, water supply, tions of Southwest Arkansas and Southeast Oklahoma. recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement. Under Over time, land use, including the addition of 4 reser- Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality’s Water voirs, numerous levees, and intensive agricultural prac- Quality Regulations, Lee Creek, the stream on which tices, has dramatically altered the watershed destroying Pine Mountain Dam is proposed for construction, is des- aquatic habitat throughout the basin, increasing invasive ignated as an Extraordinary Resource Water (ERW) species, decreasing recreation, , and jeopardizing the stream. The only purpose for the impoundment of an main source of drinking water for the region. A water- ERW stream is water supply. A General Reevaluation shed management plan for this basin will provide a sci- Report (GRR) is being prepared to comply with NEPA ence-based, holistic approach to managing the vital wa- requirements and to update the project economic analy- ter resources that are shared by many throughout the re- sis. The GRR will examine options for a clean and sus- gion. The study will employ a GIS-based watershed tainable water supply for the region. model of the basin supporting simulation of hydrologic, Height of Dam: 204.5 feet above streambed geomorphic, and biological processes to include a histor- Type of Structure: Rock- fill Embankment ic perspective and conditions most recently influenced Capacity: 261,000 acre-feet through human influence. Based on this analysis, the study team will be able to develop a comprehensive wa- Local Cooperation: The River Valley Regional Water tershed plan in concert with state and federal agencies as District has opted to proceed at 100 percent federal fi- well as local interest groups. The stakeholders will iden- nancing of Preconstruction Engineering and Design tify plans using a variety of authorities from several state (PED) activities in accordance with SWD guidance pro- and Federal agencies to assure the Lower Little River is vided on September 26, 2003. The sponsor will pay a sustainable water resource in the future. The study their share of PED costs during the first year of construc- team will develop outreach plans and through public in- tion. volvement identify regional water resources needs and opportunities as well plans of action. Operations during fiscal year: The sponsor decided to put the project on hold. In FY10 the water supply and Local Cooperation: The Arkansas Natural Resources EIS contracts were terminated and the remaining funds Commission is the financially responsible sponsor. Con- were reprogrammed. The Cultural Resources contract tributing stakeholders include Arkansas Game & Fish will be completed in FY12. Commission, Little River County and Southwest Arkan- sas Water District. The sponsors, in coordination with 37. Springfield, MO the local citizens group, the Millwood Lake Focus Group, and the US Geological Survey, Fish and Wildlife Location: Jordan Creek and its tributaries are located in Service, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service Springfield, MO. It drains into Wilson Creek in the have agreed that a watershed management plan is the southern end of the city. best mechanism for identifying solutions for the basin. This region is a priority area for other cooperative organ- Existing Project: A $3,700,000 urban flood control and izations including the Nature Conservancy and Audu- ecosystem restoration feasibility study was initiated 12 bon. May 2004 with the signing of the feasibility cost sharing agreement with the City of Springfield. The study is Operations during fiscal year: The scope was revised scheduled to be completed in 2012. to include more detailed modeling of the basin. There is consensus as to the scope of the project, but there are Local Cooperation: The city of Springfield, MO is the programmatic issues that remain unresolved. sponsor. CONSTRUCTION Operations during fiscal year: Investigations funds of $58,134 were expended in FY 2010. 39. White River Minimum Flows, AR

38. Southwest Arkansas Study Location: The area involved is the cold water trout fisheries on the White River, the North Fork River, be- Location: The study area includes parts or all of four low the Corps’ high head dams at Bull Shoals and counties in Southwest Arkansas in the Red River and Norfork Lakes. Bull Shoals Dam is on the White River Little River basins. 7 miles upstream of Cotter, AR. Norfork Dam is located on the North Fork River 4.8 miles northeast of Norfork, Existing Project: The 1,152 square mile study area in- AR. 37-13

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Existing Project: The SEC. 132(A) of 2006 Energy 2009. and Water Development Appropriations Act (EWDAA) PPA was signed on 5 March 2010 and NTP contract was (Public Law 109-103), modifies the operation of the awarded on 18 June 2010 for Federal portion of the White River lakes to include specific amounts of project work. The Minimum Flows operation will not be im- storage for the tail water trout fisheries; before this, wa- plemented until the necessary lake facility modifications ter management decisions affecting lake levels and are completed and the hydropower buyout for the non- downstream flows were based primarily on flood control Federal hydropower plant at Lake Taneycommo is com- and hydropower needs. The act directs the Corps to real- pensated. locate the following amounts of storage: Bull Shoals Lake, 5 feet; and Norfork Lake, 3.5 feet. A reallocation 40. Clearwater Major Rehabilitation Project, Clear- study was completed in FY05, but did not recommend a water Lake, MO project for construction. Section 132 of the FY 2006 Location: Clearwater Dam, in Southeast Missouri on Energy and Water Resources Development Act (P.L. the Black River is an earthen dam 4,225 feet long and 109-103) authorizes the implementation of plans BS-3 at 154 feet high. The project was built for flood control Bull Shoals and NF-7 at Norfork lakes at full Federal and recreation. expense in accordance with section 906(e) of WRDA 86. Section 132 also repealed the previous project authorities Existing Project: Authorization for the Clearwater Dam in WRDA 99 and WRDA 00, resulting in a new project. project is the Flood Control Act of 1938 (Public Law Section 314 of the Energy and Water Development Ap- 761, 75th Congress, 3rd Session); Authorization for the propriations Act of 2010, Public Law 111-85, amended current project is a Major Rehabilitation Evaluation Re- Section 132 to require the Southwest Power Administra- port Approved by the ASA(CW) in August 2004. A Ma- tion, using receipts collected from the sale of Federal jor Rehabilitation Study concluded that a new seepage power and energy related services, to compensate the li- cutoff wall is necessary to solve the seepage problem at censee of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Pro- Clearwater Dam. The total project cost estimate is cur- ject No. 2221 for impacts caused by the storage realloca- rently approximately 244.7 million. A sinkhole devel- tion at Bull Shoals Lake on electric energy and capacity oped in January 2003 on the upstream face of the dam, generated at Project No. 2221 and investigations indicate seepage is the likely cause. Seasonal pool deviation requests have been denied be- Local Cooperation: The Federal Government will fully cause of the sinkhole and the overall condition of the fund all design, construction, and maintenance of mini- dam. Until the dam is rehabilitated, the pool deviations mum flows facilities, the SWPA offset, The State of Ar- are likely to be denied. The reservoir is being operated kansas will fully fund relocations and/or modifications to in accordance with the approved operating plan. Results lakeside facilities to allow reasonable continued use with from a limited seismic analysis conducted during FY05 respect to the storage reallocations. Section 132 of the indicate that the dam passes the operating basis earth- FY 2006 Energy and Water Resources Development Act quake criteria, but more detailed seismic analysis is un- (P.L.109-103) authorizes the implementation of BS-3 at derway. Additional studies on the spillway capacity and Bull Shoals and NF-7 at Norfork Lakes. erosive potential may also be conducted in the future.

Terminal Facilities: BS-3, Bull Shoals option 3, will Local Cooperation: This is a 100-prcent Federally- require a 5-foot increase in conservation pool, and modi- funded project. No cost sharing is applicable; however fication of the SCADA remote operating language for there is extensive public interest. minimumflows implementation. BS-3 minimum flows releases will be through the existing main turbines. NF- Operations during fiscal year: FY10 activities con- 7, Norfork Lake option 7, will require a 1.75-foot in- sisted of completing the Phase Ib exploratory drilling crease in conservation pool, modification to bulk heads, and grouting contract and continuing the construction of modification of SCADA remote operating language, the cutoff wall under Phase II. Phase II is scheduled to connection of the existing station service units to the be completed in FY14. The Phase II Cutoff Wall con- power grid, and design and construction of a siphon and tract was awarded in September 2008. The completion valve system. NF-7 minimum flows releases will be of the overall project is currently scheduled for 2014. through the existing station service units and the new siphon system.

Operations during fiscal year: Environmental Impact 41. Arkansas-White Cutoff Containment Structure, Statement completed and publicly reviewed, resulting in AR, General Reevaluation Study a signed Record of Decision (ROD) by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works on 13 January Location: The Arkansas/White Cutoff is an element of

37-14

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT the MKARNS project. The project is located in Arkansas Local Cooperation: Because this project is part of the County, Arkansas, from RM 0.0 to approximately RM inland navigation system, study costs were 100 percent 10.0 on the White River. Federal costs. It was determined that all remaining construction activities will be cost shared 50/50 with the In- Existing Project: Authorization for the project is the land Waterway Trust Fund. 1946 River and Harbor Act. A natural cutoff between the lower White and Arkansas Rivers was closed during Operations during fiscal year: Work was initiated on the development of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Preconstruction Engineering & Design (PED, Construc- Navigation System (MKARNS). Cutoff development tion, and Mitigation) in FY 2006. The FY 05 Senate re- continuesto threaten a breach in the land between the quest for OM appropriation of $7M in O&M funds were two rivers in spite of constructing a system of structures received in FY 05 and carried over for FY 06. In FY10, and major maintenance since 1989. A study was con- the remaining funds will be expended on adding three ducted to evaluate environmental and hydraulic condi- stone structures near Navigation Mile 146, and design of tions with the objective of implementing a long-term so- upland dredge disposal sites in Oklahoma. lution. However, the alternatives were either environmentally unacceptable or not economically justified. 43. Ozark Powerhouse Major Rehabilitation Pro- Therefore, the plan is to continue maintenance and con- ject, Arkansas River, AR struct new structures, as needed, in an attempt to keep risk of a cutoff from increasing. A Three Rivers Study is Location: The project is located on the Arkansas River recommended. at River Mile 256.8 near Ozark, Arkansas.

Local Cooperation: This is a 100 percent Federally- Existing Project: A Major Rehabilitation Study was funded study, under the authorization for the MKARNS. completed in 1999, which recommended replacement of Cost sharing is not involved. However, close coordina- the existing turbines with modern, state-of-the-art units. tion with and active participation by environmental and Funds were appropriated in FY 2003, FY 2004, and private landowner interests is critical to successful com- 2005. There were no appropriations in FY 2006,FY 2007 pletion of the project. or FY 2011. ARRA funding was received in FY 2009 and FY 2010. This project consists of redesigning and Operations during fiscal year: Activities during FY10 replacing the turbines, rehabilitation of the powerhouse consisted of preparing plans and specs for a repair of the cranes, and replacement and rehabilitation of supporting existing soil-cement containment structure, all funded systems and equipment. The project restores the Ozark through the O&M program. Funding has not appropriat- Powerhouse output capacity and power output to the ed for this project since FY05. original as-built conditions. Allocations through FY 2011 were $74,283,000. The current project estimate is 42. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation Sys- $115,300,000. tem (MKARNS) 12-Foot Channel, AR AND OK Local Cooperation: In 2005, the Southwest Power Pool Location: The project area includes the entire 445 miles hydropower customers agreed to supply supplemental of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation Sys- funding through a Memorandum of Agreement between tem in Arkansas and Oklahoma (See Section 1). the Corps of Engineers, Southwestern Power Admin- istration and the City of Jonesboro (representing the Existing Project: The existing McClellan-Kerr Arkan- Federal power customers), which was signed in 1999. sas River Navigation System begins at the mouth of the This supplemental funding was used to prevent contract White River at the Mississippi River; runs up the White shutdown due to shortage of appropriated funds in FY River for approximately 10 miles and then enters the Ar- 2006 and FY 2007. Construction General funding was kansas Post Canal. The Arkansas Post Canal is approx- received in FY08. ARRA funding was received in FY imately 9 miles long and connects the White River and 2009 and FY 2010. Work continues on the project. the Arkansas River. The system proceeds up the Arkan- sas River to approximate navigation mile 395 where it Operations during fiscal year: Efforts in FY 11 in- enters the Verdigris River. The system continues up the cluded ongoing fabrication of the turbine units, onsite Verdigris River to the Head of Navigation at navigation mobilization, and installation of the new turbine. Esti- mile 444.8 at the Port of Catoosa. There are 18 existing mated completion date is August 2016. locks and dams on the system. This project will increase the minimum depth of the system from 9 feet up to 12 feet and make changes to the flow management plan.

37-15

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

CONTINUING AUTHORITY PROGRAM 45. Lavaca Port NAVIGATION ACTIVITIES (SECTION 107) Location: Funds of $50,000 were received in September 2010 to initiate the feasibility phase and prepare a mile- 44. Slack Water Harbor, Russellville, AR stone report to determine if preliminary costs and benefits would result in an economically justified project. Location: The project area is located along the McClel- Fours alternatives were evaluated in the feasibility phase, lan-Kerr Navigation System approximately 75 miles and all sites are located along the Arkansas River in the northwest of Little Rock. The local sponsor is the River vicinity of Fort Smith, AR. One site is at N.M. 297 and Valley Regional Inter-model Facility Authority. referred to as the Crawford County Levee Port Site, one site is at N.M. 288.5 and referred to as the Vache Grasse The plans and specifications for the harbor were com- Park Port Site, one site is at N.M. 291 and referred to as pleted in September 2006.The Corps was sued by envi- the Fort Chaffee Port Site, and one site is at N.M. 258 ronmental groups in the spring of 2004 with the major and referred to as the Ozark Port Site. All alternative are compliant being an EIS should have been done on the well within the navigation servitude. The local sponsor, whole intermodal facility. FHWA, the lead agency for Western Arkansas Regional Intermodal Transportation the intermodal facility’s EIS, prepared the Draft EIS dat- Authority, understands their cost sharing requirements ed February 2006 and a Supplemental Draft EIS (SDEIS) dated July 2007. The Corps has been a cooper- and local responsibilities. Preliminary cost estimates of ating agency in the preparation of the EIS and will adopt two of the port are estimated at between $18 million and this EIS for the harbor, but will prepare a separate ROD. $21 million. We have been working with the sponsor HQ’s provided comments on the draft PCA package in since January 2011 to get the remaining port user data in July 2007 with guidance to update the PCA and resubmit order to calculate potential benefits. We are currently in for approval once the EIS for the intermodal facility is the process of finalizing the economic benefits. We ex- complete. Currently, a Phase II cultural resource survey pect a Milestone Report at the end of January 2012. is being prepared and is scheduled to be completed in Approx. $8,000 in funds were revoked in FY11. There June 2012. The Final EIS and Record of Decision are is no President’s budget for FY12 CAP funds for Section scheduled to be completed by October 2012.. .. Con- 107 studies. struction funds for the harbor of $2,850k were revoked in FY11. The FY12 budget does not include funds for Fiscal Year Cost: Section 107 projects. Funds spent thru FY 11: $42,000

The total project cost of the harbor is estimated at EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION $7,116,000, and the benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.3 to 1. The (SECTION 14) total federal share will be limited to the amount named, or $3,350,000. The total non-federal share was estimat- 46. BATESVILLE WASTEWATER ed at $3,876,000. TREATMENT PLANT, BATESVILLE, AR

Fiscal Year Cost: Congressional adds in the amount of Location: Batesville, Arkansas is located approximately $1 million for FY01, $1 million for FY02, $500K in 90 miles northeast of Little Rock, Arkansas. Project has FY03, $851K in FY04, and $150k in FY06, have been been constructed; closeout will take place in FY11. included in the appropriations bills. Administration policy is total federal project costs are limited to the total amount named, $3.5M. FY06 funds of $200,000 were Fiscal Year Cost: used to complete the plans and specs in September 2006. Funds spent through FY10: $ 457,524 Payback funds in the amount of $2,839,000 were re- Funds spent in FY11: $ 0 ceived in FY07 for construction 47. Highway 71 @ Red River, Ogden, AR Funds spent thru FY08:$ 574,375 Funds Received in FY10: $ 28,298 Location: Ogden, Arkansas is located approximately Funds Revoked in Fy11: $2,839,000 150 miles southwest of Little Rock, Arkansas. The pro- Federal Share $3,350,000 ject was successfully constructed in FY09. Final payment was made in FY10. It was closed out in FY11.

37-16

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

Fiscal Year Cost: ber 28, 2011; however, the PPA was not approved Funds spent through FY10: $ 985,353 pending restrictions on CAP funds. Do not know if con- Funds spent in FY11: $ 0 struction funds will be made available for Section 14 projects in FY2012. 48. Little Piney Creek, Highway 164 Fiscal Year Cost: Funds spent thru FY11 $200,000 Location: The project is located at the bridge over Little Piney Creek on State Highway 164 near Hagarville, 51. White River, Augusta, AR Johnson County, Arkansas. The project was successfully constructed. It will be closed out in FY11. Final pay- Location: The City of Augusta is the sponsor, and in ment was made in FY10. It was closed out in FY11. 2007, requested assistance with a bank erosion problem adjacent to the city. The White River adjacent to Augus- Fiscal Year Cost: ta is eroding endangering a sewer main, public roads and Funds spent thru FY 10: $41,736 a flood protection levee in the community. The erosion Funds spent in FY 11: $0 is accelerated when the banks of the creek is exposed to high water events. If the bank should fail, the contents 49. Southside Water, White River, Batesville, AR of the sewer main will drain directly into the White Riv- er. The possibility also exists for prolonged damages to several homes and businesses in the community by con- Location: The project is located along the south bank of the White River in the vicinity of Southside Water tinued erosion of the riverbank. In FY11 $34,500 fund- Treatment Plant. The public water authority maintains a ing was reverted back. 16” ductile iron raw water line extending parallel to the Fiscal Year Cost: river for approximately 1500’ to 2000’ carrying water Funds spent through FY11: $76,500 from the river intake facility to the water treatment plant. The high water events of March and April 2008 further 52. Old Grand Glaise, Jackson County, AR intensified the deterioration of the streambank at this site. Location: The County of Jackson, Arkansas is the sponsor and requested assistance with a bank erosion This project consists of placing 1,700 ft of Longitudinal problem by letter dated 18 May 2009. Additionally, the Fill Stone Toe Protection (LFSTP) with full bank paving Arkansas Department of Emergency Management re- and keys along the right (south) bank of the White River quested assistance by letter dated 12 May 2009. A site between RM 301 and RM 300.5. The project also in- visit was conducted with the sponsor on 15 May 2009. cludes clearing, grubbing, excavation, topsoil stripping, A large amount of bank erosion is occurring along Jack- and turfing. The feasibility report was approved May son County road no. 4 in the Old Grand Glaise commu- 2011. The Design & Implementation phase is on an ac- nity. The riverbank is eroding, endangering access to a celerated schedule. The PPA was signed on June 14, local business and several homes in the community. The 2011. The plans and specs were completed in July 2011. possibility exists for prolonged damages to several Construction funds of $450,000 were received in July homes in the community by continued erosion of the 2011. A construction contract in the amount of riverbank. Access to the community is limited by peri- $352,000 was awarded in September 2011 and construc- odic flooding of the western portion of Jackson County tion is scheduled to be completed by May 17, 2012. road no. 4. Funds in the amount of $20,000 were received in FY03, $25,000 in FY04, $25,000 in FY09 and Fiscal Year Cost: $30,000 in FY10. Funds spent thru FY11 $215,000 Fiscal Year Cost: 50. Highway 58, Guion, AR Funds spent thru FY10 $0 Funds spent in FY11: $72,227 Location: This project consists of placing approximately 750 feet 53. Paw Paw Bend Road, Conway County, AR of Longitudinal Fill Stone Toe Protection (LFSTP), full bank paving, and keys along the right bank of the White Location: Paw Paw Bend Road is 60 miles northwest of River. The project also includes clearing, grubbing, ex- Little Rock, Arkansas. The County of Conway, Arkansas cavation, topsoil stripping, and turfing. The local spon- is the Non-Federal sponsor and requested assistance with sor is the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Depart- a bank erosion problem by letter dated 15 September ment (AHTD). Plans and specifications were completed 2009. A large amount of bank erosion is encroaching on in August 2011. Project approval was received on Octo- a county road near its intersection with Arkansas High- 37-17

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 way 154. The high water events of 2008 and 2009 have Fiscal Year Costs: highlighted areas that have experienced significant Funds spent through FY10: $31,000 amount of damage due to these events. No funding re- Funds spent in FY11: $37,462 ceived for the project in FY11. Fiscal Year Cost: ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION Funds spend through FY11: $0 (SECTION 1135)

FLOOD CONTROL ACTIVITIES 58. AR River Environmental Restoration Project (SECTION 205) Location: The area to be restored is between Rus- 54. Archey Fork Creek, Clinton, AR sellville and Fort Smith. The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission requested us to study the feasibility of adding fish and wildlife features to the 6 mile creek area lo- Location: Archey Fork Creek is located in Clinton, Ar- kansas, approximately 75 miles north of Little Rock, Ar- cated near Paris. kansas. The sponsor has requested the project be put on hold because they do not have the funds to cost share. Fiscal Year Costs: Funds spent through FY10: $13,443.94 Funds spent in FY11: $ 0 Fiscal Year Cost: Funds spent through FY10: $ 71,761 Funds spent in FY11: $ 0 59. Bull Shoals Lake Tail Water Restoration

55. White River, Oil Trough, MO Location: This project is located below Bull Shoals Dam in Arkansas. The PPA was signed. The project was successfully constructed in FY09. The project was Location: Oil Trough is located about 90 northeast of Little Rock. This project has never received any funds closed out in FY11. and is on the project backlog. Fiscal Year Costs: Funds spent through FY10: $185,939 56. Prairie Creek, Russellville, AR Funds spent in FY11: $ 58,281.50

Location: Russellville is located about 80 miles west of Little Rock. This project was first studied in 2004, but at 60. Bull Shoals Nursery Pond the City’s request, had begun project termination in 2008. In 2010, the City re-approached the Corps and re- Location: Bull Shoals Dam is located at river mile quested a re-initiation of the study. 418.6 on the White River in the Ozark Mountains of Fiscal Year Cost: north central Arkansas (near the Arkansas-Missouri bor- Fund spent Through FY10:$5,000 der) approximately 10 miles northwest of Mountain Funds spent through FY11:$0 Home, Arkansas, and 115 miles north of Little Rock, Arkansas. 57. Otter Creek, Shannon Hills, AR Fiscal Year Costs: Location: Development outside the City in the headwa- Funds spent through FY10: $1,524,600 ters of Otter Creek has increased discharge into the city Funds spent in FY11: $0 since the channelization of Otter Creek in 1985. The city is experiencing frequent flooding that has required 61. Millwood Lake, Grassy Lake, AR evacuation of residents most recently in the winter of 2009-2010. Feasibility funding was obtained in FY 11. Location: Grassy Lake, a pristine wetland, is just If study costs exceed $100,000, the signing of a Feasibil- downstream of Millwood Dam along Yellow Creek in ity Cost Sharing Agreement is required with costs over southwest Arkansas. The Red River Basin dams reduced $100,000 cost shared 50/50. Construction would be cost the beneficial flooding of Grassy Lake. Study was initi- shared 35/65 (Non-Federal, Federal). The existing Otter ated in 2004 with a Congressional earmark. Creek Project is being assessed under the Inspection of Completed Works before plan formulation is conducted. Fiscal Year Costs: Funds spent through FY10: $515,717 Funds spent in FY11: $ 104,242

37-18

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

62. Rock Creek At Boyle Park, Little Rock, AR 64. Shirey Bay Rainey Brake Wildlife Management Area (WMA) Location: The area of concern on Rock Creek is located in and surrounding the vicinity of Boyle Park in Little Location: The WMA is a 10,500-acre tract set between Rock, AR. A project management plan and a schedule the Strawberry and Black Rivers in Lawrence County, were created, but the scope of the project expanded. The Arkansas team is working on estimating the costs for the revised scope. The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission requested an ecosystem restoration study to address the impacts to Fiscal Year Costs: wintering waterfowl associated with riverbank erosion Funds spent through FY110: $5,148 and water level management within a green tree reser- Funds spent in FY11: $27,032.22 voir. Bank erosion is threatening a portion of the levee system. In FY03, $10,000 was allocated for develop- ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION ment of a PRP which was forwarded to SWD in Decem- ber 2004. The project was not funded during FY05 – (SECTION 206) FY08 and was suspended due to lack of federal funding. SWL received $28,000 in FY09 and $62,000 in FY10 63. Coleman Creek, LR, AR funding to continue study. FY11 $32,000 funding reverted back. Location: The project is located off of Fourche Bayou on Coleman Creek in Little Rock AR. This project was Fiscal Year Costs: terminated due to lack of sponsor interest. Funds spent through FY10: 67,475 Funds spent through FY11: $ 35,500 Fiscal Year Costs: Funds spent through FY10: $ 8,514 Funds spent in FY11: $0

37-19

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT

See Sec. in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011 1-15 Arkansas New Work River Approp ______630,253,988 Basin Cost 166,207 ______630,253,988 AR, OK, Maint And KS Approp 28,635,500 25,728,235 37,860,400 33,116,347 Cost 23,612,965 25,181,036 29,103,344 40,424,786 Approp (ARRA) 60,033,200 -4,415,000 563,086 55,618,200 Cost (ARRA) 270,198 22,790,181 21,309,372 44,370,151

9. Montgom. New Work Point L&D Approp ______-4,774,965 261,724,015 Cost 2,205,153 ______10,706387 -1,973,501 259,366,198 Maint Approp ______Cost ______

16. Blue New Work Mountain Approp ______5,069,974 Lake Cost ______5,069,974 Maint Approp 1,785,000 1,428,500 2,065,912 1,874,163 Cost 1,443,538 1,577,387 1,602,207 1,698,396 Approp (ARRA) 268,100 94,000 125 361,975 Cost (ARRA) 22,561 336,132 361,975

17. Clearwater New Work Lake, MO Approp ______10,406,300 Cost ______10,406,300 Maint Approp 3,607,000 2,710,560 2,798,730 2,984,722 Cost 3,482,898 2,798,059 2,977,564 2,622,465 Approp (ARRA) 965,850 -20,000 -3 945,847 Cost (ARRA) 9,081 353 945,847 Major. Approp 22,745,000 23,924,000 37,791,000 39,917,092 167,052,092 Rehab. Cost 29,520,033 60,302,450 46,188,830 34,547,978 152,651,711 Approp (ARRA) 35,211,300 5,500,000 -5 40,711,295 Cost (ARRA) 22,699,180 15,268,114 2,744,001 40,711,295 18. Dequeen New Work Lake, AR Approp ______19,629,753 Cost ______19,629,753 Maint Approp 1,274,000 1,460,120 1,337,350 1,449,383 Cost 1,237,805 1,220,866 1,449,648 1,274.228 Approp (ARRA) 166,000 25,000 -1,584 189,416 Cost (ARRA) 8,552 123,216 57,648.48

37-20

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

See Sec. in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011

19. Dierks New Work Lake, AR Approp ______16,002,903 Cost ______16,002,781 Maint Approp 1,440,000 1,572,503 1,279,080 1,551,147 Cost 1,237,830 1,570,139 1,437,194 1,274,228 Approp (ARRA) 168,450 25,000 -1,516 191,934 Cost (ARRA) 1,181 127,692 63,062 191,934

20. Fourche New Work Bayou Approp 35,000 1,101,000 ______22,551,000 Basin Cost 1,863 34,828 54,839 27,854 21,531,293 Little Maint Rock, AR Approp ______Cost ______

21. Gillham New Work Lake, AR Approp ______17,827,111 Cost ______17,827,111 Maint Approp 1,197,000 1,076,540 1,285,020 1,372,909 Cost 1,053,490 1,249,002 1,106,022 1,237,791 Approp (ARRA) 351,250 22,000 -3 373,247 Cost (ARRA) 12,265 166,743 194,239 373,247

23. Millwood New Work Lake Approp ______46,087,382 Cost ______46,087,382 Maint Approp 2,433,000 3,211,500 5,786,320 4,437,737 Cost 2,414,676 1,657,041 3,959,512 2,997,510 Approp (ARRA) 159,300 -81,000 -26 78,274 Cost (ARRA) 3,573 68,360 6,341 78,274

24. Nimrod New Work Lake, AR Approp ______4,092,826 Cost ______4,092,826 Maint Approp 2,298,000 1,594,120 2,558,236 1,980,628 Cost 1,797,371 2,035,558 1,808,924 2,439,941

37-21

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

Sec. in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011

26. Insp. Of New Work Completed Approp ______Flood Ctrl. Cost ______Projects Maint Approp 124,000 120,760 285,614 293,613 Cost 135,082 126,492 189,611 335,665

28. Beaver New Work Lake, AR Approp ______46,183,033 Cost ______46,183,033 Maint Approp 4,990,900 5,256,787 8,418,970 10,050,764 Cost 4,938,357 5,182,673 5,834,021 8,497,815 Approp (ARRA) 2,597,100 31,000 -211,038 2,417,062 Cost (ARRA) 264,651 1,889,998 256,304 2,410,953

29. Bull Shoals New Work Lake, AR Approp ______88,857,611 Cost ______88,857,611 Maint Approp 6,600,000 6,907,650 13,253,076 6,854,628 Cost 6,343,131 5,795,336 9,927,972 8,381,522 Approp (ARRA) 11,707,700 -5,806,000 ______5,901,700 Cost (ARRA) 213,590 3,996,618 976,706 5,186,914

30. Greers New Work Ferry Approp ______48,987,512 Lake, AR Cost ______48,987,511 Maint Approp 6,275,000 6,262,927 6,933,248 9,880,180 Cost 5,194,240 5,432,365 5,624,995 7,273,061 Approp (ARRA) ______4,746,100 -1,186.000 -148,500 3,411,600 Cost (ARRA) ______68,750 971,746 2,042,904 3,083,401

31. Norfork New Work Lake, AR Approp ______74,578,929 Cost ______74,578,929 Maint Approp 5,060,000 3,627,303 5,693,831 6,195,508 Cost 4,043,253 4,403,741 5,169,775 5,031,089 Approp (ARRA) ______2,486,600 -812,000 ______1,674,600 Cost (ARRA) ______37,140 378,154 861,616 1,276,910

37-22

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

See Sec in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011

32. Ozark-Jeta New Work Taylor Approp ______85,629,412 L&D 12 Cost ______85,629,412 Maint Approp 4,586,000 4,846,810 5,597,590 5,325,574 Cost 4,275,808 4,190,532 5,470,349 5,115,239 Approp (ARRA) ______4,320,390 12,000 -292 4,332,398 Cost (ARRA) ______64,139 2,627,516 1,515,116 4,206,771 Major Approp 2,632,000 16,585,909 ______49,000 44,631,909 Rehab Cost ______15,100,000 14,600,000 5 37,278,700

33. Table Rock New Work Lake, MO Approp ______76,897,279 Cost 112,186 ______76,897,279 Maint Approp 6,833,000 7,416,204 7,388,207 9,358,152 Cost 6,763,129 7,067,465 8,057,096 7,907,345 Approp (ARRA) ______11,744,300 2,630,000 -200,000 14,174,300 Cost (ARRA) ______164,612 2,384,130 7,722,572 10,271,314

34. May New Work Branch Approp 107,000 109,000 179,000 197,888 1,505,959 Cost 69,540 49,925 250,921 136,786 1,420,243

35. Pine New Work Mountain Approp 461,000 478,000 381,000 -148,000 2,108,965 Lake Cost 57,665 480,622 736,686 68,653 2,085,596

36. Springfield New Work MO Approp 348,000 478,000 ______2,072,000 Cost 160,576 41,675 58,135 327,860 1,093,586

37. Southwest New Work Arkansas Approp _____ 143,000 170,000 -38,303 418,697 Study Cost 25,902 1,000 13,021 13,904 157,259

37-23

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

See Sec in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011

38. White New Work River Approp 935,000 5,000,000 ______-50,000 7,961,985 Flows Cost 524,314 129,953 314,467 1,111,155 4,185,869 Approp (ARRA) ______2,156,000 2,105,000 ______4,261,000 Cost (ARRA) ______43,089 2,953,508 2,996,597 45. Russellville New Work Slackwater Approp ______-2,851,082 518,918 Harbor Cost 30,343 224 671 23,873 518,918

46. Batesville New Work Wastewater Approp ______-4,286 754,114 Treatment Cost 188,627 453,324 7,459 32,598 722,402 Plant

47. Fourche New Work Creek Sewer Approp ______-41,694 ______58,306 Main Cost 36,809 21,413 84 ______58,306

48. Highway New Work 71 @ Red Approp 192,000 300,000 ______-27,301 1,108,199 River Cost 3,568 52,014 24,382 -36 1,108,033

49. Little New Work Piney Approp ______-50,000 -7,306 -97,410 392,083 Creek Cost 256,127 41,736 5,752 -53,527 392,083

50. Southside New Work Water, Approp 35,000 35,000 49,000 544,883 628,883 White River Cost ______33,001 1,993 161,773 196,767

51. Highway 58, New Work Guion, AR Approp 25,000 ______175,000 -32,563 167,437 Cost ______17,669 14,976 134,716 167,362

52. Archey New Work Fork Approp ______123,000 ______-120,523 94,777 Creek Cost 14,854 10,740 11,983 ______94,777

53. Hester, , New Work Adamson Approp ______-27,418 79,007 Grwd, AR Cost 21,623 7,817 716 ______79,007

37-24

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

See Sec in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011

54. High New Work School Approp ______-16 ______98,784 Branch Cost 24,837 6,148 ______98,784

55. Howell New Work Creek Approp ______-22,581 77,419 Cost 13,288 4,894 781 ______77,419

56. Jam Up New Work Creek Approp ______-6,000 -354,444 197,557 Cost 14,677 ______-587 ______197,557

57. Heber New Work Springs AR Approp ______-42,967 ______57,032 Sulphur Cost 13,074 ______12,042 57,001 Creek

58. Town New Work Branch Approp ______-17 ______99,983 Cost 17,521 ______99,983

59. White New Work River Approp ______88,000 -24,500 75,500 Augusta, Cost ______11,498 52,701 75,500 AR

60. AR River New Work Environ. Approp ______2,989 12,989 Restor. Cost ______4,371 174 8,444 12,989

61. Bull Shoals New Work Lake Approp ______-1,265,541 399,359 Tailwater Cost 35,674 113,933 46,578 58,281 399,359 Restoration

62. Bull Shoals New Work Nursery Approp ______-723 1,472,277 Pond Cost 9,004 13,196 6,650 7,141 1,471,494

63. Millwood New Work Lake Approp 350,000 25,000 181,000 -186,041 619,959 Grassy Cost 69,699 146,637 195,001 104,242 619,959 Lake

37-25

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d)

See Sec in Total to Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep 30, 2011 64. Norfork New Work Tailwater Approp ______-286 9,714 Habitat Cost ______9,714

65. Rock Creek New Work At Boyle Approp ______150,000 50,000 -135,951 74,049 Park Cost ______5,149 32,982 27,032 74,049

66. Taylor New Work Bay Approp ______258 59,742 Cost ______59,742

67. Fourche New Work Creek at Approp ______90,000 -1,047 98,953 Hindman Cost ______4,207 68,587 81,309

68. Galla New Work Creek Approp ______130,000 Cost ______130,000

69. Shirey Bay New Work Rainy Approp ______28,000 62,000 -32,125 67,475 WMA Cost 9 ______27,610 30,262 67,471

70. Little Rock New Work Slackwater Approp 200,000 ______-135,386 64,612 Harbor, Cost ______29,253 28,299 7,060 64,611 Arkansas River

71. Dardanelle New Work Approp Cost Maint Approp 6,287,000 7,084,750 9,190,040 7,862,087 Cost 6,185,418 6,366,175 6,941,403 7,947,240 Approp (ARRA) ______2,417,800 -19,000 ______2,398,800 Cost (ARRA) ______90,049 607,940 1,618,017 2,316,006

37-26

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT TABLE 37-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION

See Date of Authorizing Project and Work Documents Sec in Act Authorized Text 1. Nov 28, 1990 Arkansas River Levees WRDA 1990

43. Sep 30, 2004 ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION STUDY as amended PED & construction to Sec 136, deepen the navigation system. PL 108-137 Authorized by Chief of Engineers, Sep. 2005.

20. Nov 17, 1986 FOURCHE BAYOU BASIN Flood Control, Environmental Sec 401, Protection, & Recreation PL 99-662. Report by Chief of Engineers, Sep. 4, 1981

35. Nov 8, 2007 MAY BRANCH Flood Control Sec 1001, WRDA 2007 by Chief of Engineers, Dec. 19, 2006

36. Aug 17, 1999 NORTH LITTLE ROCK (DARK HOLLOW as amended Reevaluate replacement of Redwood Sec 576, tunnel, environmental impact, and PL 106-53. economic benefits

37. Oct 27, 1965 PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE as amended Flood Protection on Lee Creek, Sec 209, Arkansas & Oklahoma PL 89-298.

38. May 11, 1962 SPRINGFIELD, MO Not an Authorized Project Multipurpose Committee on Public Water Resources Works Resolution.

39. Jul 30, 1983 SOUTHWEST ARKANSAS STUDY as amended Flood Damage Reduction, PL 98-63. Navigation, & Ecosystem Restoration

40. Nov 19, 2005 WHITE RIVER MINIMUM FLOWS Reallocation of storage and modification of Sec 132, FY 06 Energy and Water facilities Development Appropriations Act

37-27

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d)

See Date of Authorizing Project and Work Documents Sec. in Act Authorized Text 9. Aug 6, 2004 CLEARWATER MAJOR REHABILITATION Construction Major Rehabilitation Authorized Project (Seepage Correction) by Chief of Engineers, Jun 2004

10. Jul 24, 1946 ARKANSAS-WHITE CUTOFF GRR as amended Multipurpose Project Sec 1, Arkansas River & Tributaries PL 79-525.

12. Jul 24, 1946 MONTGOMERY POINT LOCK & DAM Reduce high flows and Rivers and Harbors deepen the navigation channel. Act

13. Jul 24, 1946 OZARK-JETA TAYLOR PL 79-525. as amended POWERHOUSE MAJOR REHAB Navigation, Hydropower, Recreation and Betterment of Roads

45. Oct 22, 1974 Beaver Dam Trout Production Measures Section 105 As amended Compensation for loss of fish resources PL 94-587

37-28

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-C OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Operation and Project Status Annual Report Construction Maintenance For:

Black River, AR & MO Complete 1950 80,000 930,324

Current River, Complete 1964 17,000 132,178 AR & MO

Upper White Complete 1952 813,197 1,788,374 River, AR1

White River, AR (above Complete 1950 -- 785,666 Peach Orchard Bluff)2

White River, Complete 1987 277,600 -- Jacksonport, AR

______

1. Federal operation and maintenance termi9nated June 30, 1952 due to lack of commerce. Facilities at Locks and Dams Nos. 1,2,and 3 disposed of in accordance with authority in Public Law 996,84th Congress 2. Responsibility for maintenance of project downstream from Newport, AR, transferred to Memphis district in FY62

37-29

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Project Status Annual Report Construction Operation and For: Maintenance

Black River, Butler Completed 1995 44,500 -- County Road 607, MO

Black River, Poplar Completed 1958 84,315 -- Bluff, MO, to Knobel, AR

Black River Floodwall, Completed 1999 300,000 -- Poplar Bluff, AR

Black River Obstruction Completed 1995 -- -- Removal Butler County, MO

Bull Shoals Aquatic Completed 2005 394,600 -- Macrophyte, AR

Bull Shoals Nursery Completed 2006 (repair 1,511,600 -- Pond, AR (work, 2008)

Butler County Drainage Completed 1983 42,172 -- District 3, MO

Carden’s Bottom Completed 1951 919,955 -- Drainage District No. 2, Arkansas River, AR

Cato Springs, Completed 1996 426,000 -- Fayetteville, AR

Clarksville, AR Completed 1962 271,717 --

Collins Creek, AR Completed 2004 230,000 --

Conway County Completed 1959 187,440 -- Drainage & Levee District No. 1 Arkansas River, AR

Conway County Levee Completed 1952 1,018,840 -- Districts Nos. 1, 2 & 8, Arkansas River, AR

Conway County Levee Completed 1952 390,952 -- Districts No. 6, Arkansas River, AR

Crawford County Levee Completed 1983 53,506 -- District, AR 37-30

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (cont’d)

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Project Status Annual Report Construction Operation and For: Maintenance ______

Crawford County Levee Completed 1954 2,001,820 -- District, Arkansas River, AR

Crooked Creek, Completed 1995 1,245,000 -- Harrison, AR

Curia Creek Drainage Completed 1983 117,898 -- District, Independence County, AR

East Poplar Bluff & Completed 1958 304,699 -- Poplar Bluff, MO

Faulkner County Levee Completed 1941 99,511 -- District No. 1, Arkansas River, AR

Fort Smith, Arkansas Completed 1951 1,077,546 -- River, AR

From North Little Rock Completed 1954 845,300 -- to Gillett, AR (above Plum Bayou)

Fourche Creek, Little Cancelled 1973 22,890 -- Rock, AR1

Highway I-430, Completed -- Little Rock, AR

Jackson County Levee Completed 1986 131,699 -- District 2 White River, AR

Little Massard Creek, Completed 1983 198,096 -- Fort Smith, AR

Little Red River Completed 1988 28,968 -- District 1, AR Little Red River, White Completed 1983 63,355 -- County Road Bridge, Judsonia, AR

Little Rock Levee, AR, Completed 1975 1,901,899 -- East End Fourche Bayou, AR

37-31

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (cont’d)

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Project Status Annual Report Construction Operation and For: Maintenance

Little Rock Slackwater/ Harbor, Little Rock, AR Completed 2005 718,000 --

Massey-Alexander Levee Plans and Specs 376,000 White River, Jacksonport AR

McLean Bottom Levee Completed 1950 422,549 -- District No. 3, Arkansas River, AR

Mill Creek, Completed 2004 9,199,000 -- Fort Smith, AR

Millwood Lake, AR Completed 1966

Near Dardanelle, Completed 1953 198,096 -- Arkansas River, AR

Newport, Completed 1941 314,276 -- White River, AR

Nimrod Fisheries Completed 2000 200,000 -- Restoration, Nimrod Lake, AR

Nimrod Waterfowl Completed 1998 38,000 -- Levee, Nimrod Lake, AR

Morgan Point Bendway Completed 2000 2,603,515 -- Closure Structure, Ark River

North Little Rock, Completed 1958 512,001 -- Arkansas River, AR

Otter Creek & Completed 1987 162,204 -- Tributaries, Shannon Hills, AR

Petit Jean River, AR Completed 1966 84,350 --

37-32

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (cont’d)

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Project Status Annual Report Construction Operation and For: Maintenance

Petit Jean River, AR Completed 1991 88,379 --

Pine Mountain Lake, AR PED 1985 1,432,331 --

Point Remove Levee & Completed 1983 86,943 -- Drainage District, Conway County, AR

Red River, I-30, Little Completed 1992 119,897 -- River County, AR

Red River, Hwy. 31, Completed 1992 144,828 -- Little River Co., AR

Rockaway Beach, MO Completed 2004 351,000 --

Roland Drainage District, Completed 1950 269,907 -- Arkansas River, AR

Rolling Fork River, Completed 1983 64,500 -- Sevier County, AR

Skaggs Ferry, Black Completed 1941 81,023 -- River, AR

South Bank, Arkansas Completed 1964 1,404,852 -- River (Head Fourche Island to Pennington Bayou), AR

South Bank, Arkansas Completed 1961 409,115 -- River Little Rock to Pine Bluff, AR, Tucker Lakes

Swan Creek Bank Completed 1986 76,800 -- Stab., Taney County, MO

Van Buren, Arkansas Completed 1952 438,222 -- River, AR

Village Creek, White Completed 1972 1,567,156 -- River, & Mayberry Levee Districts, AR2

West of Morrilton, Completed 1962 1,269,959 -- Arkansas River, AR

37-33

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (cont’d)

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Operation and Project Status Annual Report Construction Maintenance For:

White River, at Completed 1981 214,308 Hwy 14, ¼ mile east of Oil Trough, AR

White River Bank Completed 1986 101,100 -- Stab., Batesville, AR

White River, Completed 1999 473,000 -- Batesville WaterTower, Sec 14, AR White River, Completed 1987 293,567 -- Jacksonport, AR

White River, Completed 1989 93,929 -- Newport, AR

White River, Completed 1990 22,400 -- St. Paul, AR ______

1 Construction of project cancelled because local interest failed to provide right of way for construction and maintenance. Later addressed as Fourche Bayou Basin project. 2 See H Doc 577.87th Cong for description. 3 Design deficiency correction to be completed 30 December 1996.

37-34

LITTLE ROCK, AR DISTRICT

TABLE 37-F MULTIPLE PURPOSE PROJECTS INCLUDING POWER

For Last Full Cost to Sep 30, 2011 Report see Operation and Project Status Annual Report Construction Maintenance For:

Beaver Lake, AR Complete 1963 46,195,000 8,497,815

Bull Shoals Lake, AR Complete 1952 75,260,000 8,381,522

Dardanelle L&D, AR Complete 1969 79,000,000 7,947,240

Greers Ferry Lake, AR Complete 1962 46,700,000 7,273,061

Norfork Lake, Complete 1943 28,602,000 5,031,089 AR & MO

Ozark-Jeta Taylor Complete 1969 86,156,000 1,515,116 L&D, AR

Table Rock Lake, Complete 1958 66,100,000 7,907,345 AR & MO

37-35

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 37-G DEAUTHORIZED PROJECTS

For Last Full Report Date Federal Contributed See Annual Report and Funds Funds Project For: Authority Expended Expended

Crooked Creek Lake 1969 ------& Levee, AR

Lone Rock, Buffalo 1959 130,653 -- River, AR

Prosperity Lake, MO 864,000 --

Water Valley, Eleven 1959 414,011 -- Point River, AR & MO

Bell Foley Lake, White 1975 1,432,116 -- River, AR

Village Creek, Jackson 1977 510,217 -- And Lawrence Counties, AR

37-36

TULSA, OKLAHOMA, DISTRICT

The civil works boundary of the Tulsa District River, extending to the Kansas-Colorado State line, includes an area of approximately 160,000 square exclusive of that portion of the South Canadian River miles covering Oklahoma and parts of Kansas and Basin and its tributaries west of the Texas-New Texas within the Arkansas and Red River Basins. Mexico State line. The District’s responsibilities The District’s responsibilities within the Arkansas within the Red River Basin cover the northern River Basin cover southern Kansas, northern portion of Texas, and the southern portion of Oklahoma, and the Texas Panhandle. These areas are Oklahoma. These areas are embraced in the drainage included in the drainage basin of the Arkansas River basin of the Red River and its tributaries above Index and its tributaries above the mouth of the Poteau Arkansas.

IMPROVEMENTS

Navigation Page 27. Marion Reservoir, KS 38-12 28. McGrath Creek, Wichita Falls, TX 38-12 1. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River 29. Mingo Creek, OK 38-12 Navigation System, OK 38-2 30. Oologah Lake, OK 38-13 2. Other Authorized Navigation Projects 38-3 31. Optima Lake, OK 38-13 32. Parker Lake, OK 38-13 33. Pat Mayse Lake, TX 38-13 Flood Control 34. Pearson-Skubitz Big Hill Lake, KS 38-14 35. Pine Creek Lake, TX 38-14 3. Arcadia Lake, OK 38-3 36. Sardis Lake, OK 38-15 4. Arkansas City, KS 38-4 37. Skiatook Lake, OK 38-15 5. Arkansas-Red River Basins Chloride 38. Toronto Lake, KS 38-16 Control Projects, KS, OK, and TX 38-4 39. Tulsa & West Tulsa Levees, OK 38-16 5a. Area V, Estelline Springs, TX 38-4 40. Waurika Lake, OK 38-16 5b. Area VIII, TX 38-5 41. Winfield, KS 38-17 5c. Red River Basin Chloride 42. Wister Lake, OK 38-17 Control, TX & OK 38-5 43. Other Authorized Flood Control Projects 38-17 6. Birch Lake, OK 38-5 44. Inspection of Completed Local Flood 7. Bowie County Levee, TX 38-6 Protection Projects 38-17 8. Candy Lake, OK 38-6 45. Scheduling Flood Control 9. Canton Lake, OK 38-7 Reservoir Operations 38-17 10. Copan Lake, OK 38-7 46. Emergency Flood Control Activities 38-17 11. Council Grove Lake, KS 38-7 47. Flood Control Work Under 12. El Dorado Lake, KS 38-8 Special Authorization 38-18 13. Elk City Lake, KS 38-8 14. Fall River Lake, KS 38-8 15. Fort Supply Lake, OK 38-9 16. Fry Creeks, Bixby, OK 38-9 17. Great Bend, KS 38-9 18. Great Salt Plains Lake, OK 38-9 19. Halstead, KS 38-10 20. Heyburn Lake and Polecat Creek, OK 38-10 21. Hugo Lake, OK 38-10 22. Hulah Lake, OK 38-10 23. John Redmond Dam and Reservoir, KS 38-11 24. Kaw Lake, OK 38-11 25. Lake Kemp, TX 38-11 26. Lake Wichita, Holliday Creek, TX 38-11

38-1 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Multiple-Purpose Projects Including Tables Power 38-A Cost and Financial Statement 38-23 48. Broken Bow Lake, OK 38-18 38-B Authorizing Legislation 38-36 49. Eufaula Lake, OK 38-19 38-C Other Authorized Navigation Projects 38-39 50. Fort Gibson Lake, OK 38-19 38-E Other Authorized Flood Control 51. Keystone Lake, OK 38-20 Projects 38-39 52. Lake Texoma (Denison Dam),OK & TX 38-20 38-F Not Applicable 53. Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam 38-G Deauthorized Projects 38-40 and Reservoir, OK 38-20 38-H Arkansas River Basin 54. Tenkiller Ferry Lake, OK 38-21 Multiple-Purpose Plan 38-41 55. Webbers Falls Lock and Dam, OK 38-21 38-I Inspection of Completed Local Flood Protection Projects 38-42 Environmental Infrastructure 38-J Flood Control Work Under Special Authorization 38-43 56. Lawton, OK 38-21 38-K General Investigations 38-44 57. Tar Creek Cleanup, OK 38-21 58. Yukon, OK 38-22

General Investigations

59. Surveys 38-22 60. Collection and Study of Basic Data 38-22

Navigation channel straighten-ing, and cutoffs as required. The navigation channel has a 1. McCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS minimum depth of 9 feet and minimum RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM widths of 250 feet on the Arkansas River and (Tulsa District Portion), OK 150 feet on the Verdigris River. The Tulsa District portion of the navigation system Location. The Tulsa District portion of the consists of Arkansas River Bank McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation Stabilization and Channel Rectification, System provides a navigation route up the Chouteau Lock and Dam, Newt Graham Lock Arkansas River from the Oklahoma-Arkansas and Dam, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam and State line to the head of navigation at Reservoir, Robert S. Kerr Marine Terminal, Catoosa, OK, near Tulsa, OK. The total Sans Bois Navigation Channel, W.D. Mayo length of the Tulsa District portion of the Lock and Dam, Webbers Falls Lock and system is 137 navigation miles. Descriptions Dam, and the pool in Oklahoma which was and costs for the entire navigation system created by Lock and Dam 13 in Arkansas. can be found in Little Rock District’s entry The other parts of the multiple-purpose plan in this Annual Report. for the Arkansas River Basin are listed in Table 29-H. Public Law 108-137 authorized Existing projects. The McClellan-Kerr a 12-foot channel on the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation project is a Arkansas River Navigation System. The component of the multiple-purpose plan for Corps is now positioning itself to operate the Arkansas River Basin, which provides for and maintain the system as a 12-foot the improvement of the basin through the channel. Deepening the remainder of the construction of coordinated developments for channel to 12 feet will allow carriers to place navigation, hydroelectric power, flood 43% more cargo on barges, which will control, water supply, water quality control, reduce the amount of fuel consumed and sediment control, recreation, and fish and emissions released. Funds in the amount of wildlife propagation. The McClellan-Kerr $7M were allocated in FY05 for this project also includes bank stabilization, deepening project with $1.5M used to

38-2 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT complete the feasibility study and Arcadia, OK, Geological Survey map, scale Environmental Impact Statement with the 1:24,000.) other $5.5M used on engineering, design and construction activities in Tulsa and Little Existing project. The plan of improvement Rock Districts. In conjunction with the provides for flood control, water supply, and deepening project, the Corps also prepared a recreation by construction of an earth fill Basin Wide Master Plan that included an dam approximately 102 feet high and 5,250 integrated major maintenance construction feet long with a high-level uncontrolled and operation maintenance prioritized list for spillway. Outlet works consist of a gated investment opportunities. Other tower and conduit. The lake has a total environmental benefits include the creation capacity of 92,000 acre-feet (27,380 for of new aquatic habitat through new dike conservation, 64,430 for flood control, and construction and the construction of Least 190 for sedimentation reserve), and controls Tern islands through beneficial use of a 105-square-mile drainage area. dredged material. There has been no activity Construction began in October 1980, and the on this project since 2007 due to inadequate project became operational for flood control funding on this deepening project. in November 1986.

Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Local cooperation. The city of Edmond, Oklahoma and the Edmond Public Works Terminal facilities. Public port facilities Authority has not met the repayment are in operation at Muskogee and Catoosa, obligations in its water storage agreement as OK, and Fort Smith, AR. Other private required by the Water Supply Act of 1958 commercial port facilities are complete and and the Consent Decree between the city of in operation at eight Oklahoma locations. Edmond, Edmond Public Works Authority and the United States Government. PL 87- Operations and results during fiscal 88, Section 10 which amended Section 301 year. Utilized ARRA funding to install (b) of the Water Supply Act of 1958, service air and water lines at W D Mayo, required the city of Edmond to enter into an Choteau and Newt Graham locks and dams. agreement to repay 100 percent of the water Stainless steel hydraulic lines, pumps and storage costs before the Arcadia Lake project motors were purchased and pumps/motors was constructed. Issues relating to the water have been installed at W D Mayo. ARRA supply storage were litigated in United funded guardrail was installed at Choteau States of America v. City of Edmond and and Newt Graham and spillway bridge at Edmond Public Works Authority. Edmond Choteau was repaired Four spillway tainter entered into a Consent Decree with the gates sills on W D Mayo spillway were United States Government on February 10, repaired and Motor Control Centers were 1992 agreeing to repay all costs associated replaced at W D Mayo and Choteau. with present and future use water storage costs as required in the water storage 2. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION agreement and Consent Decree. The PROJECTS agreement was developed under the Water Supply Act of 1958 that states that no See Table 38-C. payment need be made on future water supply storage until such supply is first used, Flood Control but in no case shall the interest-free period exceed 10 years. The city of Edmond 3. ARCADIA LAKE, OK activated the future use storage in 1999; however, the 10-year interest free period Location. On the Deep Fork River, at river expired on November 30, 1996. The city of mile 218.3, in the metropolitan area of Edmond disagrees with payment of accrued Oklahoma City and Edmond, OK, about 1.5 interest from the end of the 10-year interest miles west of Arcadia, in Oklahoma County, free period, November 30, 1996 to the date it OK. This area has experienced a significant placed the future use storage into an active increase in earthquake activity and intensity status, September 1999. The Water during calendar years 2010 and 2011. (See Resources Development Act of 2007

38-3 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 contained language that provides that the 5. ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS payments made by the city of Edmond, CHLORIDE CONTROL PROJECTS, Oklahoma to the Secretary in October 1999 KS, OK, AND TX of all costs associated with present and future water storage costs at Arcadia Lake, Location. On certain tributary streams of Oklahoma, under Arcadia Lake Water the Arkansas and Red Rivers in the western Storage Contract Number DACW56-79-C- half of the Tulsa District. 0072 shall satisfy the obligations of the city under that contract. The city of Edmond will Existing project. The project was initiated continue to be responsible for their pro rata as a result of studies involving the control of share of the joint-use operation and water pollution caused by 15 natural salt maintenance costs plus any repair, sources identified in 1957 by the U.S. Public rehabilitation or replacement costs as Health Service. The Arkansas and Red stipulated in the contract. Rivers are major national and regional water resources, which are severely limited due to Operations and results during fiscal year. poor water quality primarily caused by the During FY11 cracks were repaired in the natural pollutant, sodium chloride. The service bridge beams and the service bridge Arkansas River is polluted by five naturally corbels were repaired. Other routine occurring salt sources located in operation and maintenance continued. northwestern Oklahoma and southwestern Kansas. The Red River Basin is polluted by 4. ARKANSAS CITY, KS 10 naturally occurring salt sources located in northwestern Texas and southwestern Location. Arkansas City is located Oklahoma. Preliminary Feasibility Studies approximately 4 miles north of the Kansas- included the construction and subsequent Oklahoma state line at the crossroads of U.S. maintenance of an injection well and a ring Highway’s 77 and 166, in Cowley County, dike used for data collection. KS, immediately northwest of the confluence Preauthorization studies completed in 1966 of the Arkansas and Walnut Rivers. and 1970 recommended construction of project features at 13 of the 15 chloride Existing project. The project consists of emission areas. For a detailed discussion of raising and extending approximately 6 miles the chloride control projects, see page 19-4 of levee along the Arkansas and Walnut of the Annual Report for 1983. The Water Rivers, and rechanneling approximately 2- Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1/2 miles of the Walnut River. Structural 1986 (PL 99-662) authorized the Red River steel gates will be constructed at two Basin and the Arkansas River Basin as railroad/river crossings and stop log separate projects with separate authority structures will be constructed at two U.S. under Section 203 of the Flood Control Act Highway/river crossings. of 1966. The Arkansas River portion of the project was deferred in 1982 (not Local cooperation. A Project Cooperation economically justified). Agreement was signed on September 4, 1996. The city of Arkansas City, the local sponsor, 5a. AREA V, ESTELLINE SPRINGS, TX is currently fulfilling their requirements. Location. Chloride Control Area V is Operations and results during fiscal year. located about 0.5 miles east of Estelline, TX, During FY11 cracks were repaired in the on the Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red service bridge beams and the service bridge River. corbels were repaired. Other routine operation and maintenance continued. Existing project. For a description of the Fiscal closeout is underway and should be completed improvement, see the Annual completed during FY12. Report for 1987. Construction started in 1963, and the structure was completed in 1964.

38-4 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Local cooperation. Descriptive text County, TX; and Areas XIII-XIV are on the concerning local cooperation requirements is Jonah and Salt Creeks of Prairie Dog Town given on page 19-5 of the Annual Report for Fork of the Red River, Hall County, TX. 1983. Existing project. The plan of improvement Operations and results during fiscal year. for the Texas portions of Chloride Control Routine operation and maintenance consists of one deep-well injection system, continued. three brine storage reservoirs, four low-flow brine collection dams, two well collection 5b. AREA VIII, TX facilities, six pumping plants, and 56.3 miles of pipeline. Construction was completed at Location. Chloride Control Area VIII is Estelline Springs, Area VIII (low-flow dam, located at river mile 74.9, of the South Fork pump station and pipeline), Area X (low- of the Wichita River, in King County, TX, flow dam and pump station) and Truscott about 5 miles east of Guthrie, TX. Lake. In 1987, Area VIII began operation, pumping brines to Truscott Lake. Existing project. The plan of improvement Reevaluation efforts at Area VI, OK have consists of a low-flow brine collection dam included significant progress on the (the Bateman Low-Flow Dam) with attendant feasibility study. The draft document has pumping station and pipeline facilities. The been completed and includes the following collected brine is pumped to the storage studies without a chloride control in place reservoir behind the Truscott Brine Dam. (without project conditions): municipal and This brine dam, located at river mile 3.6 on industrial water uses, agricultural uses, Bluff Creek (a tributary of the North Fork of recreational analysis, hydrology & the Wichita River) about 3 miles northwest hydraulics analysis and initial array of of Truscott, TX, contains collected brine design alternatives. This document has been from Area VIII and will contain brine submitted for Agency Technical Review. collected in the future from Areas X and VII. Additionally, significant progress has been Construction was initiated at Area VIII and made on phase 2 of the studies to evaluate Truscott Brine Dam in 1976. The Bateman the same studies with a solution for chloride Low-Flow Dam was completed and put into control in place (with project conditions). full operation in May 1987. Local Cooperation. Section 1107 of the Local cooperation. Descriptive text Water Resources Development Act of 1986 concerning local cooperation requirements is authorized the project at full Federal given on page 19-5 of the Annual Report for expense. The Red River Authority of Texas 1983. has signed a 221 Agreement as the non- Federal sponsor. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine operation and maintenance Operation and results during fiscal year. continued. The Wichita Basin Reevaluation effort was completed and a Record of Decision (ROD) 5c. RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE was executed in March 2004. Efforts have CONTROL, TX & OK been suspended to complete the Wichita Basin portion of the project until additional Location. The project is located in Cottle, funding is provided. Area VI reevaluation Hall, and King Counties, TX, and Harmon feasibility study has been submitted for ATR County, OK, along the Wichita and Red (Agency Technical Review) and is expected Rivers. Area VI is located on the Elm Fork to complete the feasibility study phase with of the Red River in Harmon County, OK; current funding during FY12 Area VII is on the North Fork of the Wichita River, Cottle County, TX; Crowell Brine 6. BIRCH LAKE, OK Dam is on Canal Creek, a tributary of the Pease River; Area IX is on the Middle Pease Location. On Birch Creek at river mile 0.8, River, Cottle County, TX; Area X is on the about 1.5 miles south of Barnsdall, in Osage Middle Fork of the Wichita River, King

38-5 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

County, OK. (See Barnsdall, OK, Geological Local cooperation. The Government has Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) determined that this project will be cost- shared in accordance with the Flood Control Existing project. For a description of the Act of 1936. completed improvement, see the Annual Report for 1979. Construction began in Operations and results during fiscal year. November 1973, and the project was placed The final proposal for the wildlife mitigation in useful operation in March 1977. plan was forwarded to the Sponsor for approval. Work on the Environmental Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Assessment was halted pending a response from the Sponsor relative to the mitigation Operations and results during fiscal year. plan. During FY11 the guard rail was replaced along the embankment roadway using ARRA 8. CANDY LAKE, OK funds. Emergency dam safety stockpiles were procured and several repairs were made Location. On Candy Creek, a tributary of to the existing public use areas. Routine Bird Creek in the Verdigris River Basin, at operation and maintenance continued. river mile 1.9. The damsite is about 1.5 miles northeast of Avant in Osage County, 7. BOWIE COUNTY LEVEE, TX OK. (See Avant, OK, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Location. Bowie County is located in northeastern Texas, along the Red River, Existing project. The plan of improvement near Texarkana, Texas. The Bowie County provides for an earthfill dam about 4,200 Levee is situated on the south side of the Red feet long, including an uncontrolled concrete River and extends almost 9 miles from the spillway, with a maximum height of 103 feet Kansas City Southern Railroad embankment above the streambed. Outlet works will westward to an area near Wamba, Texas. consist of a gated intake structure, a (See Wamba, TX, Geological Survey map, 10x11.25-foot conduit, and a stilling basin. scale 1:24,000.) An 18x24-inch low-flow pipe and an 18-inch water supply pipe will be provided. The lake Existing project. The project, as authorized will have a total capacity of 75,420 acre-feet under the Flood Control Act of 1946, (44,160 for conservation and sediment provides for the rehabilitation of the existing reserve and 31,260 for flood control). The Bowie County, Texas, Levee. The levee was drainage area above the damsite is 43 square constructed in 1913 by the Bowie County miles. Candy Lake will be operated as a unit Levee District No. 1. The Bowie County of a seven-lake system for flood control in Levee is part of a levee system, which the Verdigris River Basin in Oklahoma. includes the Miller County Levee that Funds were not provided to complete extends downstream approximately 35 miles. construction and in 1996 deauthorization of The existing Bowie County Levee does not Candy Lake was published in the Federal meet current design standards and has not Register. received proper maintenance. Studies completed in 1994 indicated that no Local cooperation. Section 2 of the Flood economically feasible flood control Control Act of 1938, the Water Supply Act alternative was identified and Federal of 1958, and Section 221 of the Flood interest in pursuing detailed design and Control Act of 1970, apply. project construction was not warranted. Legislation passed in FY 01 re-authorized Operations and results during fiscal year. the project to include rehabilitation of WRDA 99 mandated selling deauthorized approximately 6 miles of the existing levee project lands back to the former owners or and construction of approximately 4 miles of their descendants. With funds of $360,000 new levee. This project will be constructed provided in FY 03, the sale of land was at an estimated cost of $17,300,000. completed, transfers were made on 20 of the 27 tracts and sent to ASA(CW) for signature.

38-6 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

9. CANTON LAKE, OK flood control in the Verdigris River Basin in Oklahoma. Construction began in November Location. On the North Canadian River at 1972, and the project was placed in useful river mile 394, about 2 miles north of Canton operation in April 1983. in Blaine County, OK. (See Canton, OK, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with.

Existing project. For a description of the Operations and results during fiscal year. completed improvement, see page 590 of the During FY11 numerous small repairs were Annual Report for 1969. Construction began made to the Copan Dam and the associated in December 1940, and the project was Caney Levee and pump station. These placed in useful operation in April 1948. A included installing new piezometers on the Dam Safety Report was submitted to embankment and replacing faulty sump HQUSACE in March 2001. The purpose of pumps at the dam, replacing damaged grease the report was to evaluate and select an lines to the tainter gate trunnion pins, and alternative to address the inability of the removing woody vegetation from the toe of project to safely pass the Probable Maximum the levee embankment, Numerous other Flood (PMF). In 2005, Canton was included repairs were performed in the associated in a HQ’s Screening Portfolio Risk public use areas. All other routine operation Assessment on the 10% highest risk dams and maintenance continued. within the Corps. 11. COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS Local cooperation. The Canton Lake Committee was established to improve Location. On the Grand (Neosho) River at coordination and communication between the river mile 450, about 1.5 miles northwest of multi-purpose users of Canton Lake. The Council Grove, in Morris County, KS. (See committee coordinates Oklahoma City’s Council Grove Lake, KS, Geological Survey water supply release schedule with interested map, scale 1:24,000.) parties to minimize impacts. Existing project. For a description of the Operations and results during fiscal year. completed improvement, see page 519 of the Continued Dam Safety Modification Annual Report for 1969. Construction began construction activities. FY10 activities in June 1959, and the project was placed in included awarding the $37,552,000 weir and useful operation in July 1964. hydraulic structures contract as well as continuing the new $4,100,000 auxiliary Local cooperation. Fully complied with. channel highway bridge. In addition to the Dam Safety Modification project, O&M Operations and results during fiscal year. funds were used to mitigate significant Major Maintenance work accomplished in damage to several parks that were completely FY11 (Maintenance). Constructed new destroyed by a tornado. Routine operation bulkhead for structure, put into service and and maintenance continued painted bridge deck steel.

10. COPAN LAKE, OK Major/Minor Maintenance Work accomplished FY 2011 (New Work) Location. On the Little Caney River, a tributary of the Caney River, in the Verdigris 2011 O&M Funded Projects completed: River Basin, at river mile 7.4, about 2 miles Tree and Stump Removal, crack sealed west of Copan in Washington County, OK. roadways in parks, repaired office to be (See Copan, KS, Geological Survey map, compliant with reducing energy scale 1:24,000.) consumption, completed final land boundary survey for land transferred to White Existing project. For a description of the Memorial Church Camp and repaired completed improvement, see page 19-7 of the damaged campsites. Annual Report for 1983. Copan Lake is operated as a unit of a seven-lake system for

38-7 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

12. EL DORADO LAKE, KS Existing project. For a description of the Location. On the Walnut River, a tributary completed improvement, see page 593 of the of the Arkansas River, at river mile 100.2, Annual Report for 1969. Construction began about 4 miles northeast of El Dorado in in February 1962, and the project was placed Butler County, KS. (See El Dorado, KS, in useful operation in March 1966. Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Existing project. For a description of the completed improvement, see page 19-7 of the Operations and results during fiscal year. Annual Report for 1983. El Dorado Lake Routine operation and maintenance was authorized as a unit of a three-lake continued. system for flood control in the Walnut River Basin. Construction began in October 1973, FY11 O&M funds accomplished that and impoundment began in June 1981. following projects: debris removal from dam Project is complete. embarkment, repair of slide on Rim Dike, purchased new buoys and cable for lake Local cooperation. By payment of $8.17 navigation, purchase of Rip Rap for million on May 18, 1997, the Kansas protection of dam around control structure, Department of Wildlife and Parks has fully gravel installed on levee roadway resolving complied with the Recreation Local rutting and settling, purchased wire rope for Cooperation Agreement. control structure tractor gate operations.

Operations and results during fiscal year. 14. FALL RIVER LAKE, KS WRDA 99 mandated the transfer without consideration of 51.98 acres of land to the Location. On the Fall River at river mile state of Kansas for use as Honor Camps. The 54.2, about 4 miles northwest of Fall River, state of Kansas must pay for the in Greenwood County, KS. (See Severy, KS, administrative costs of the land transfers. A Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) letter was sent to the state of Kansas informing the state of the administrative Existing project. For a description of the costs. The state of Kansas is not interested completed improvement, see page 953 of the in paying the administrative costs and is not Annual Report for 1969. Construction began pursuing the land transfer. Routine operation in May 1946, and the project was placed in and maintenance continued. full operation in April 1949.

Major/Minor Maintenance Work Local cooperation. Fully complied with. accomplished FY 2011 (New Work) Operations and results during fiscal year. 2011 O&M Funded Projects completed: Routine operation and maintenance Repaired fence barrier to keep public continued. O&M projects completed in vehicles from accessing dam embankment, FY11 include: Installation of 4 new roofs on purchased fencing supplies for boundary recreational facilities, purchase of electrical fencing, repaired wet well stem guide, upgrade equipment and sun shelters for replaced wet well gate valve, painted piping White Hall Bay Campground, purchase of and machinery in structure, repaired/painted replacement shelter house for Dam Site Park, emergency bulkhead and replaced low flow cleaning/repairing/sealing bridge deck and valve gate seals on gate and gate frame. painting road stripes the dam access and recreational roadways, sand to restore the 13. ELK CITY LAKE, KS beach, completed repair and painting of eight tainter gates along with replacing seals at Location. On the Elk River at river mile structure and replacement of vault toilet new 8.7, about 7 miles northwest of CXT. Independence, in Montgomery County, KS. (See Table Mound, KS, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.)

38-8 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

15. FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK Creek. (See Great Bend, KS, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Location. On Wolf Creek, a tributary of the North Canadian River, at river mile 5.5, Existing project. The plan, authorized by about 12 miles northwest of Woodward, in the Flood Control Act of 1965, provides for Woodward County, OK. (See Fort Supply, 6.2 miles of leveed channel to divert Walnut OK, Geological Survey Map, scale 1:24,000.) Creek flood flow around Great Bend into the Arkansas River upstream from the city; a Existing project. For a description of the 1.5-mile leveed channel to divert Little completed improvement, see page 594 of the Walnut Creek flood flow into the Walnut Annual Report for 1969. Construction began Creek diversion levees along the Arkansas in October 1938, and the project was placed River; a tie-back levee 4.3 miles long on the in full flood control operation in May 1942. Arkansas River left bank upstream from the Local cooperation. Fully complied with. junction of the Walnut diversion channel; and appurtenant facilities. Operations and results during fiscal year. During FY11 the upstream shut off valve was Local cooperation. Fully complied with. replace on the 36-inch low flow system at the dam. The lifting hook on the intake structure Operations and results during fiscal year. crane was replaced. Minor repairs to the Routine operations and maintenance bridge were made for a cost of $54K, as well continued. as numerous repairs to the public use areas. All other routine operation and maintenance 18. GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK continued. Location. On the Salt Fork of the Arkansas 16. FRY CREEKS, BIXBY, OK River at river mile 103.3, about 12 miles east of Cherokee, in Alfalfa County, OK. (See Location. In the northern part of the city of Jet, OK, Geological Survey map, scale Bixby, in Tulsa County, OK. 1:24,000.)

Existing project. The project consists of Existing project. For a description of the enlarging both Fry Creeks, diverting Fry completed improvement, see page 594 of the Creek 1 into Fry Creek 2 and then diverting Annual Report for 1969. Construction of the the combined creeks into the Arkansas River. project began in September 1938, and was The total length of the modified channels completed in July 1941. The project was would total 4.3 miles, with bottom widths of placed in full flood control operation in May 30 to 225 feet and depths of 6 to 12 feet. 1941. Three bridges were replaced and 20 acres of land acquired for mitigation of fish and Local cooperation. Fully complied with. wildlife losses. Estimated total cost of the project is $14,513,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. During FY11 several repairs were made to Local Cooperation. The Project the dam and outlet works. These included Cooperation Agreement was signed with the removing silt and debris from the drainage city of Bixby, OK, in January 1995. along the south side of the spillway, removing woody vegetation from the Operations and results during fiscal year. embankments, repairing the flap gates at Routine operation and maintenance both ends of the gallery pressure relief continued. collection troughs, and repairing the concrete steps on the south side of the spillway. All 17. GREAT BEND, KS other routine operation and maintenance continued. Location. In Barton County, KS, on the north bank of the Arkansas River about 4.5 miles above its confluence with Walnut

38-9 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

19. HALSTEAD, KS Operations and results during fiscal year. Location. In the city of Halstead, in Harvey During FY11 a bulkhead was designed and County, KS, along the Arkansas River. (See constructed for the morning glory valves Halstead, KS, Geological Survey Map, scale associated with the release structure. All 1:24,000.) other routine operation and maintenance continued. Existing project. Provides for channel modification and construction of about 4 21. HUGO LAKE, OK miles of levee in combination with straightening and widening approximately Location. On the Kiamichi River at river 3.6 miles of the Little Arkansas River mile 17.6, about 7 miles east of Hugo, in channel to a 50-foot-bottom width in the Choctaw County, OK. (See Hugo Dam, OK, vicinity of Halstead. Channel modification Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) will be restricted to one side of the channel except in transition areas. Tree planting and Existing project. For a description of the re-vegetation will be done and ten pool riffle completed improvement, see page 19-12 of areas will be established to minimize the Annual Report for 1977. Construction environ-mental impacts. began in October 1967, and the project was placed in useful operation in January 1974. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine operations and maintenance Operations and results during fiscal year. continued. Routine operation and maintenance continued during FY11. Repaired one tainter 20. HEYBURN LAKE AND POLECAT CREEK, gate gearbox and shipped another for OK repair/refurbishing. Cleared the upstream and downstream toe of the main embankment Location. On Polecat Creek, a minor to the new standard of 50’ using the Nav Hub tributary of the Arkansas River, at river mile crew and equipment. Improved the 48.6, about 11 miles west of Sapulpa, in downstream drainage per AI inspection Creek County, OK. (See Lake Heyburn, OK, recommendations. Installed new CXT vault Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) toilet at Bridgeview from FY10 funds. Painted all floor drains and relief wells per Existing project. For a description of the AI FY11 recommendations. Demolition of completed improvement, see page 599 of the 11 vault toilet Annual Report for 1969. Construction started in March 1948, and the project was 22. HULAH LAKE, OK placed in useful operation in October 1950. Channel improvements below the lake were Location. On the Caney River at river mile completed in September 1952. 96.2, about 15 miles northwest of Bartlesville, near Hulah, in Osage County, Local cooperation. The channel OK. (See Bowring, OK, Geological Survey improvement project below the lake was map, scale 1:24,000.) never maintained by the sponsor, Joint Drainage District No. 1, Tulsa and Creek Existing project. For a description of the Counties, OK. For this reason, the channel completed improvement, see page 595 of the returned to its pre-project condition and does Annual Report for 1969. Construction began not provide flood protection for the affected in May 1946, and was completed in June area. The Corps of Engineers discontinued 1950. The project was placed in full flood maintenance inspections of the channel control operation in September 1951. project in 1982, due to the condition of the project and lack of cooperation on the part of Local cooperation. Fully complied with. the sponsor. Stakeholders have identified a need for a reallocation study.

38-10 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Operations and results during fiscal year. Existing project. For a description of the During FY11 several repairs were made to completed improvement, see page 19-13 of the Hulah Dam to include repairing a skin the Annual Report for 1977. Construction slide on the main embankment, replacing the began in June 1966, and the project was tainter gate lifting chains, and sealing the placed in operation in May 1976. bridge deck. FY11 projects also included a Mod to the FY10 contract to repair the Local cooperation. Fully complied with. tainter gate brake drum for a cost of $85K. The guard rail along the embankment was Operations and results during fiscal year. replaced using ARRA funds. All other During FY11several repairs were made to the routine operation and maintenance continued. Kaw Dam which included resurfacing the embankment roadway, replacing the tainer 23. JOHN REDMOND DAM AND gate hoist wire ropes, and controlling the RESERVOIR, KS seepage on the left abutment. The embankment guard rail was replaced using Location. The dam is located on the Grand ARRA funds. The office roof was replaced (Neosho) River at river mile 343.7, about 2 and several repairs were accomplished in the miles northwest of Burlington, in Coffey public use areas. All other routine operation County, KS. (See John Redmond Dam, KS, and maintenance continued. Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) 25. LAKE KEMP, TX Existing project. For a description of the completed improvement, see page 581 of the Location. On the Wichita River at river Annual Report for 1970. Construction was mile 126.7, about 40 miles southwest of initiated in July 1959, and was completed in Wichita Falls, TX. (See Northeast Lake December 1965. The project was placed in Kemp, TX, Geological Survey Map, scale flood control operation in July 1964. 1:24,000.)

Local cooperation. Fully complied Existing project. For a description of the with.Operations and results during fiscal completed improvement, see page 19-14 of year. the Annual Report for 1977. Construction began in May 1970, and the project was Major/Minor Maintenance Work placed in useful operation in October 1972. accomplished in FY 2011 (New Work) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. FY 2011 ARRA work continues on repairs, Stakeholders have identified a need for a installation of gate seals and painting of reallocation study. tainter gates; 9 gates completed in 2011 Operations and results during fiscal year. 2011 Major/Minor O&M Funded Routine operation and maintenance Maintenance continued. FY11 projects included installing new piezometers on the embankment. During Funds were provided to award the contract to FY 11, the project was able to complete the construct the new floating bulkhead and to following major maintenance items: service award the contract to extend the inverted bridge painting and stilling basin repair. filter system at the Hartford Levee. 26. LAKE WICHITA, HOLLIDAY 24. KAW LAKE, OK CREEK, TX

Location. On the Arkansas River at river Location. The project is located in Wichita mile 653.7, about 8 miles east of Ponca City, and Archer Counties, TX. The Lake Wichita in Kay County, OK. (See Charley Creek dam and the Holliday Creek channel are West, OK, Geological Survey map, scale located in the city of Wichita Falls, TX. 1:24,000.) (See Wichita Falls, TX, Geological Survey Map, scale 1:24,000.).

38-11 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Existing project. The existing Lake Wichita 28. MCGRATH CREEK, WICHITA FALLS, TX dam was replaced with an earthen dam approximately 16,000 feet long with a Location. The project is located in the concrete spillway, an auxiliary spillway, and northern central portion of Texas, in the city low-flow outlet works. Channel of Wichita Falls. improvements along Holliday Creek from the new spillway to the Wichita River, a distance Existing project. McGrath Creek is of 9.3 miles, were also constructed. The approximately 3,900 feet long and connects project was completed October 1, 1996, and Sikes Lake and the recently constructed is fully operational. Estimated total project Holliday Creek project. The project involves cost is $48,789,000 (October 1995 price realigning and concrete lining the McGrath level base). Creek Channel, and constructing a new spillway to pass flows through Sikes Lake. Local cooperation. Fully compiled with. Local cooperation. The city of Wichita Operations and results during fiscal year. Falls, TX, is the non-Federal sponsor. The Routine operation and maintenance Project Cooperation Agreement was executed continued. in November 1994.

27. MARION RESERVOIR, KS Operations and results during fiscal year. Project construction is completed. The Total Location. On the Cottonwood River at river Project is $11,625,209 mile 126.7, about 3 miles northwest of Marion, in Marion County, KS. (See Pilson, 29. MINGO CREEK, OK KS, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Location. On the right-bank tributary of Existing project. For a description of the Bird Creek in the city of Tulsa, in Tulsa completed improvement, see page 597 of the County, OK. (See Tulsa, OK, Geological Annual Report for 1969. Construction began Survey Map, scale 1:24,000.) in June 1964, and the project was placed in flood control operation in February 1968. Existing project. The project consists of 23 detention sites to capture peak flows and Local cooperation. Fully complied with. hold them temporarily until downstream flows subside. There are approximately 9.4 Operations and results during fiscal year. miles of channelization in selected locations Regular O&M 2011 major maintenance work on the tributaries and main stem of Mingo accomplished: Removed diseased and Creek. Estimated total project cost is hazardous trees and completed roadway paint $123,960,725. stripes on embankment roadway. Ongoing: guardrail replacement, zebra mussel Local cooperation. The local sponsor is the infestation control on structure gates and city of Tulsa, OK, and has been fully lake equipment, repair the cracked girder complied with. The city has constructed block and foundation drains, and gear box 4.75 miles of channel and placed two replacements. ARRA work accomplished: excavated detention facilities into flood Updating forecast and water control manuals control operation prior to initiation of and perform flood control sedimentation Federal construction in September 1988. survey. Reimbursement for work completed by the Underway: Infrastructure modernization and city of Tulsa is $19,000,000. construction including expansion of facilities roadway base repair and resurfacing in parks Operations and results during fiscal year. and installation of utilities. Routine operation and maintenance continued.

38-12 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

30. OOLOGAH LAKE, OK 32. PARKER LAKE, OK

Location. On the Verdigris River at river Location. On Muddy Boggy Creek, a mile 90.2, about 2 miles southeast of tributary of the Red River, about 23 miles Oologah, in Rogers County, OK. (See east of Ada, in Coal County, OK. (See Oologah, OK, Geological Survey map, scale Parker, OK, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) 1:24,000.)

Existing project. For a description of the Existing project. Parker Lake, if completed improvement, see page 19-15 of constructed, would be a multipurpose the Annual Report for 1972. Construction element in a plan of improvement for the began in July 1950, but the project was Upper Muddy Boggy Creek Basin, OK. The placed in standby status in October 1951. project would consist of an earth fill dam Construction resumed in December 1955, and about 2,200 feet long, a gated outlet works was completed in May 1963 for initial for flood control and water supply, and a development. Construction for ultimate 100-foot-wide spillway. The lake created (second stage) development was initiated in would have a total storage capacity of July 1967, and was completed in 1974. 220,240 acre-feet and would yield 42 million gallons per day for municipal and industrial Local cooperation. Fully complied with. water supply. The project was authorized by WRDA of 1986, however the project has not Operations and results during fiscal year. been funded for construction. Federal During FY11several repairs were made to the accomplishment of single purpose municipal main dam and outlet works along with the and industrial water supply projects is not a auxiliary spillway and saddle dike. These current Administration priorities. included repairs to the gantry crane and controls at the gate tower, servicing and Local cooperation. The Oklahoma Water repairing the roller chains on the tower Resources Board, the sponsor, has agreed to service gates, and removing woody cost share in the flood control portion of the vegetation from the saddle dike. Work was project and the water supply provided started on replacing service gate #4 at the enough interested users for the water supply gate tower. All other routine operation and can be identified. maintenance continued. Operation and results during fiscal year. 31. OPTIMA LAKE, OK Project has not received funding since 1997.

Location. On the North Canadian River at 33. PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX river mile 623.2, about 4.5 miles northeast of Hardesty, in Texas County, OK. (See Location. On Sanders Creek, a tributary of Optima Dam, OK, Geological Survey map, the Red River, at river mile 4.6, about 12 scale 1:24,000.) miles north of Paris, in Lamar County, TX. (See Grant, TX, Geological Survey map, Existing project. For a description of the scale 1:24,000.) existing improvement, see page 19-16 of the Annual Report for 1979. Construction began Existing project. For a description of the in March 1966, and impoundment began in completed improvement, see page 584 of the October 1978. Construction was completed Annual Report for 1970. Construction began in 1981. in March 1965, and the project was placed in full flood control operation in September Local cooperation. Fully complied with. 1967.

Operations and results during fiscal year. Local cooperation. The Water Resources During FY11 only minimal caretaker routine Development Act of 2007 directed the operation and maintenance continued. Secretary to accept from the local sponsor, the city of Paris, Texas $3,461,432 as payment in full of monies owed to the United

38-13 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

States for water supply storage space in Pat 35. PINE CREEK LAKE, OK Mayse Lake, including accrued interest. The local sponsor will still be responsible for its Location. On the Little River at river mile pro rata share of the joint-use operation and 145.3, about 5 miles northwest of Wright maintenance costs and any repair, City, in McCurtain County, OK. (See Wright rehabilitation, and replacement costs. City, OK, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Operations and results during fiscal year 2011. Routine operation and maintenance Existing project. For a description of the continued. The Red River Area HL completed improvement, see page 584 of the performed repairs of the stilling basin Annual Report for 1970. Construction began including demo and replacement of 7 baffles in February 1963, and the project was placed and placement of 12” of concrete on the floor in useful operation in June 1969. of the stilling basin. A MATOC contract was issued to build 8,000’ of hog wire fence Local cooperation. Fully complied with to protect the dam embankment from hog damage. A new office security foyer was Operations and results during fiscal year. built and new flooring was installed to The initial Interim Risk Reduction Measure replace worn out carpeting throughout the implemented in FY 2010 was to lower the office. Installed 3 new CXT vault toilets at top of conservation pool from 438.0 to 433.0 Sander’s Cove and Pat Mayse West from feet. The lowered conservation pool water FY10 funds. Demolition of 3 vault toilet was maintained through FY 2011 and buildings at various parks. continues to date. The final Interim Risk Reduction Measure, replacement of the two 34. PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS 8x14 feet service gates (and the two emergency gates), is currently underway and Location. On Big Hill Creek at river mile scheduled for completion in July, 2012. A 33.3, about 4.5 miles east of Cherryvale, KS. Dam Safety Modification Study (DSMS), (See Dennis, KS, Geological Survey map, which includes geotechnical investigations, scale 1:24,000.) is ongoing and a draft is scheduled for completion in December 2012. The purpose Existing project. For a description of the of the DSMS is to gather and review data, completed improvement, see page 19-11 of perform detailed engineering analyses, the Annual Report for 1983. Construction perform risk analyses of risk reduction began in April 1974, and impoundment began alternatives in order to better define and in March 1981. confirm dam safety issues, and determines requirements and modifications to reduce Local cooperation. Fully complied with. risk associated with the dam safety issues. The IRRMP contract was executed in Operations and results during fiscal year. FY11and many investigations of the dam Routine operation and maintenance integrity were performed. The lake was continued. lowered to minimize the danger of failure as the result of a new DSAI rating in May. As O&M projects completed in FY11 include: mitigation of the lost recreational repair campsites suffering from erosion and opportunity, 5 new courtesy docks were rotten landscape timbers, paint the bridge installed at various parks around the lake and steel on the gate tower, repair the eight gate 2 boatramps were extended and lanes added. operator mechanisms in the control structure, Repairs were made to the gantry crane to replace roof on the project office, perform bring it back into safe operational condition. maintenance on radio tower, install a new Demolition of 4 CMP vault toilets was ADA compliant fishing dock for Overlook accomplished at Pine Creek Cove. Installed Park, re-seeded downstream slope of an office foyer area for improved office embankment and purchase of new buoys for security. Power washed, caulked, and lake navigation systems. stained the Pine Creek Cove gatehouse, 3 toilet buildings, 6 CMP toilet bldgs, 2 Group Shelters, and the Overlook toilet building.

38-14 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Routine operation and maintenance 2004. The United States filed their Reply on continued during FY11. February 20, 2004. On November 9, 2004, the United States filed a Memorandum of 36. SARDIS LAKE, OK Law pursuant to the Order of the Court dated October 22, 2004. The Memorandum Location. On Jackfork Creek, a tributary of addressed issues related to the validity of the the Kiamichi River, at river mile 2.8, about Sardis Lake contract No. DACW56-74-C- 2.5 miles north of Clayton, in Pushmataha 0134 under state law and the preemption of County, OK. (See Yanush, OK, Geological state law by Federal law. The state of Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Oklahoma was also directed to file a Memorandum of Law on these issues. On Existing project. For a description of the May 19, 2005, the Court entered an order completed improvement, see page 19-11 of granting the Summary Judgment Motion of the Annual Report for 1983. Sardis Lake is the United States. The state of Oklahoma operated as a unit of a two-lake system for appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the flood control in the Kiamichi River Basin. Tenth Circuit. Briefs have been filed by the (The other lake in the system is Hugo Lake). state of Oklahoma and the United States. Construction began in August 1975, and the The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth project became operational in January 1983. Circuit reviewed the briefs and issued an Order upholding the lower court’s ruling. Local cooperation. The Oklahoma Water The state of Oklahoma filed a Petition for a Resources Board (OWRB) failed to make Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court. satisfactory arrangements to pay for the The U.S. Supreme Court denied the Petition Sardis Lake water supply storage as agreed on January 8, 2007. The contract was to in a letter exchange of September 1997. declared to be valid and binding and may On July 2, 1998, the state of Oklahoma was now be enforced by the U.S. Tulsa District declared in default under the contract. On is working with DOJ to collect the monies July 14, 1998, the Department of Justice owed to the U.S. Work is ongoing. (DOJ) filed suit in the Northern District Court of Oklahoma. The litigation has not Operations and results during fiscal year. moved forward because of a taxpayer “qui Routine operation and maintenance tam” (Fent case) suit filed in January 1998 in continued. During FY11, The project the Western District Court of Oklahoma replaced 240’ of an 8” toe drain outfall pipe against the OWRB and the United States. with Hugo Area HL. Cleared the upstream The suit between OWRB and the United and downstream toe of the dam to the new States was postponed until a decision was standard of 50’. Installed an office foyer area reached on the taxpayer “qui tam” suit. On for improved office security. Replaced the March 4, 1999, the Western District Court roofing on 4 restroom facilities with metal dismissed OWRB and the United States from roofing. Applied concrete sealant to the the suit. The Fent case was appealed to the tower bridge with HL. Repairs were made to Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The the gantry crane to bring it back into safe dismissal was upheld and the case was operational condition. Installed new CXT remanded. The Fent case was appealed to vault toilet at the Narrows from FY10 funds. the Oklahoma Supreme Court (OSC) and the OSC accepted the case for review. The qui 37. SKIATOOK LAKE, OK tam lawsuit was settled when the OSC ruled that the water storage contract between the Location. On Hominy Creek, a tributary of state of Oklahoma and the United States Bird Creek in the Verdigris River Basin, at Government is a legally binding contract. river mile 14.3, about 5 miles west of Since that decision, the Federal government Skiatook, in Osage County, OK. (See Avant has re-opened its lawsuit and it is now in S.E., OK, Geological Survey map, scale litigation in the U.S. District Court for the 1:24,000.) Northern District of Oklahoma. The United States filed a motion for summary judgment Existing project. For a description of the on December 14, 2003. The state of completed improvement, see Page19-8 of the Oklahoma filed its response on January 23, Annual Report for 1987. Construction began

38-15 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 in January 1974, impoundment began in hydraulic operations, installation of new October 1984, and the project became lighting system inside the dam structure. operational in November 1984. Routine operation and maintenance continued. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Stakeholders have identified a need for a 39. TULSA AND WEST TULSA reallocation study. LEVEES, OK

Operations and results during fiscal year. Location. On the banks of the Arkansas During FY11 several minor repairs were River near Tulsa, OK. On the left bank, the made to the main flood control structure. levee extends from river mile 531.0 near These included repairing a skin slide, Sand Springs, OK, downstream to river mile modifying the gate tower ventilation system, 521.4 at Tulsa. On the right bank, the levee repairing the gate tower elevator, and making extends from near river mile 526.7 repairs to the concrete lined drainage ditches downstream to river mile 521.3 and is associated with the dam and repairing the adjacent to the major portion of the business stilling basin. Numerous minor repairs were and residential districts in West Tulsa, Tulsa made in the public use areas. A contract was County, OK. awarded to de-water the stilling basin on the outlet works and make repairs to the Existing project. The Tulsa and West Tulsa concrete. All other routine operation and Levees were completed by the Tulsa District maintenance continued. in 1945. The project was turned over to the Tulsa County Drainage District No. 12 for 38. TORONTO LAKE, KS operations and maintenance. The project consists of 3 levees with a total length of Location. On the Verdigris River at river about 20 miles and an average height of 10 mile 271.5, about 4 miles southeast of feet. The levees provide protection from Toronto, in Woodson County, KS. (See flooding to property valued at approximately Fredonia, KS, Geological Survey map, scale $1 billion dollars. 1:24,000.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with.. Existing project. For a description of the completed improvement, see page 600 of the Operations and results during fiscal year. Annual Report for 1969. Construction began Routine operation and maintenance in November 1954, and the project was continued. placed in full operation in March 1960. 40. WAURIKA LAKE, OK Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Location. On Beaver Creek, a tributary of Operations and results during fiscal year. the Red River, at river mile 27.0, about 6 ARRA funds utilized in FY11 accomplished miles northwest of Waurika, in Jefferson the following maintenance work: County, OK. (See Hastings, OK-TX, Rehabilitation and painting of flood control Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) tainter gates and replacement of flat wire rope. O&M projects completed in FY11 Existing project. For a description of the include: Repair of slide and installation of completed improvement, see page 19-12 of riprap in outlet channel, ground survey 4.15 the Annual Report for 1983. Waurika Lake miles of boundary line, Geo-Referenced is operated as a unit of a coordinated lake aerial survey of boundary/entire lake area system for flood control in the Red River and fencing of 7,100’ of boundary line, Basin. Construction began in July 1971, and manufacture of eight new replacement bridge impoundment began in August 1977. deck hatch covers, additional installation of 4 piezometers, repair and painting of steel on Local cooperation. Fully complied with. underside of bridge deck, replaced electric The Water Resources Development Act of power control cabinet/panel, completed four 2007 included language that set the way valve installation for eight sluice gate remaining obligation of the Waurika Project

38-16 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Master Conservancy District payable to the Annual Report for 1969. Construction began United States in the amounts, rates of in April 1946, and was completed in May interest, and payment schedules that existed 1949. The project was placed in full flood on June 3, 1986 and stipulated they could not control operation in October 1949. be adjusted, altered, or changed without a specific, separate, and written agreement Local cooperation. Fully complied with. between both parties. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine operation and maintenance Routine operations and maintenance continued. continued during FY11. The project minor maintenance WITS list was completed. 43. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL Significant shoreline erosion control, boat PROJECTS ramp leaning, shoreline debris removal, beaver dam removal, and boat dock bumper See Table 38-E. replacement was accomplished during sustained low elevation. Major maintenance 44. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED LOCAL items included: Toe drain replacement FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECTS project was initiated and 40% completed, seven piezometers were tied into the Federally constructed flood protection collection system, service gate painting and projects that are owned, operated, and low flow repair initiated, PUA building door maintained by local interests are inspected at replacement contract initiated, and service regular intervals. These inspections assess bridge corbel repair contract awarded. adequacy of operation and maintenance and gauge reliability of projects that are enrolled 41. WINFIELD, KS within Public Law 84-89, and “acceptable” or a “minimally acceptable” inspection rating Location. Winfield is located approximately will also ensure continuing eligibility for 15 miles north of the Kansas-Oklahoma state federal reimbursement of specific damages to line on U.S. Highway 77 in Cowley County, levees that result from high-water events. KS. The city is located immediately See Table 38-I for a list of projects inspected southeast of the confluence of the Walnut in FY11. River and Timber Creek. 45. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL Existing project. The project consists of RESERVOIR OPERATIONS raising and extending approximately 4 miles of levee along Timber Creek and the Walnut The Tulsa District Corps of Engineers is River. Road ramps will be constructed at responsible for flood control operations at 12 two locations where city streets cross the non-Corps projects. These include nine Walnut River. Bureau of Reclamation lakes, two Grand River Dam Authority lakes, and one city- Local cooperation. Fully complied with. county owned lake. All of these projects were constructed wholly or in part with Operations and results during fiscal year. Federal funds. Routine flood control Routine operation and maintenance releases were required at several of the continued. projects. Fiscal year costs for scheduling flood control reservoir operations totaled 42. WISTER LAKE, OK $780,952.

Location. On the Poteau River at river mile 46. EMERGENCY RESPONSE ACTIVITIES - 60.9, about 2 miles south of Wister, in FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL LeFlore County, OK. (See Wister, OK, EMERGENCIES Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) a. Disaster Response: The Tulsa District Existing project. For a description of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) was completed improvement, see page 601 of the activated for 15 Days in FY11. Federal

38-17 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Emergency Operations support to Kansas treatments plants, shelters and police City District (NWK) and Mississippi Valley stations. (MVK) Districts was provided under two FEMA Missions. The first mission was in d. Levee Rehabilitation Projects under response to the Joplin Tornado Debris PL84-99: There were no major floods or Mission in May 2011. The Tulsa District high water events that met the criteria for Deployed 10 Quality Assurance Emergency Levee Rehabilitation Assistance representatives and an Assistant Team under PL84-99. One ongoing previous year Leader. Debris Team QA’s remained for 30 project continues with the Wichita Levee days and the Assistant Team Leader was Project. This project is under construction at present to close out the mission in August. this time. At initiation the project received This Mission also included Temporary $9,347,913.00. Through adjusted estimates Housing and Critical Facilities. The second and revocation of funds the project stands at mission was in response to the Alabama approximately 7 Million Dollars. Tornado Debris Mission where we deployed an Englink Strike Force Team member and a 47. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER Public Affairs Specialist. Emergency Support SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION was also provided to the Missouri Flood Fight with a Public Affairs Specialist and a See Table 38-J for FY11 expenditures for Levee Quality Assurance representative. In Small Flood Control Projects Not the State of Oklahoma and Kansas we Specifically Authorized by Congress provided robust drought support in the form (Section 205); Emergency Streambank and of technical assistance and liaison officers. Shoreline Projects (Section 14). Water Bucket Missions were supported by various SWT Projects to the State of Multiple-Purpose Projects Including Power Oklahoma to combat wildfires. 48. BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK b. Federal and/or Regional Activations and Emergency Response Costs: Fiscal year Location. On the Mountain Fork River at funds expended for catastrophic disaster river mile 20.3, about 9 miles northeast of emergency response operations (either direct Broken Bow, in McCurtain County, OK. federal, federal operations or technical (See Broken Bow, OK, Geological Survey assistance) was approximately $480,000,00. map, scale 1:24,000.)

c. Emergency Preparedness and Planning Existing project. For a description of the Work in Support of Other(s): Eight completed improvements, see page 29-17 of members of the Power Team deployed for the Annual Report for 1971. Construction one week to Stuttgart Arkansas as part of the began in November 1961, and the project National Level Exercise “New Madrid” was placed in useful operation in October event. In support of other preparedness 1969. Power units 1 and 2 were placed in activities the Tulsa District completed 15 operation in January and June 1970, table top and functional planning events with respectively. stakeholders throughout the District. This planning program reached over 240 County Local cooperation. The development of a and City Emergency Management Response trout fishery in the Mountain Fork River and Elected Officials. Key information below Broken Bow Lake was implemented in provided was in relation to critical 1989, in cooperation with the Corps of Preparedness and Response information Engineers (Corps), Southwestern Power allowing in-depth pre planning within their Administration, Oklahoma Department of respective Counties. The 249th power team Wildlife Conservation, and OWRB. The completed a planning exercise in Oklahoma operation of the trout stream has been over a two week period in March. During cooperatively managed by a Memorandum of this period the team completed over 350 Understanding. WRDA of 1996, Sec. 338, courtesy assessments which are used for modified the project to provide for the preplanning of generator needs at critical reallocation of sufficient quantity of water infrastructure facilities such as waste water supply storage space to support the Mountain

38-18 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Fork trout fishery at no expense to the state only to provide information and of Oklahoma. WRDA 1999 allowed for a 3- recommendations regarding operations. The foot seasonal pool to offset losses to act also authorized a reallocation study hydropower caused by the trout fishery. The subject to appropriation of funds to develop study to determine the impacts of these a recommendation concerning the best value actions identified 16 cultural resource sites while minimizing ecological damages for that would be adversely impacted due to the current and future use of storage capacity fo 3-foot seasonal pool raise. The State the authorized project purposes and for the Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) wanted District to take into consideration every site mitigated, which would have cost recommendations for a pool management about $2.4M. After a trip to the project in plan. Work to accomplish the provisions of October 2005 by Tulsa District and SHPO this act will be ongoing. personnel, SHPO identified 8 sites it wants mitigated. Also, a Memorandum of Operations and results during fiscal year. Agreement will have to be developed Routine operation and maintenance between the two agencies outlining the continued. resolution of the adverse effects on the sites which are eligible for listing in the National 50. FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK Register for Historic Places. The reallocation study cannot be completed until Location. On the Grand (Neosho) River at all cultural resource issues are worked out. river mile 7.7, about 5 miles north of Fort Work is on-going. Gibson, in Muskogee County, OK. (See Fort Gibson Dam, OK, Geological Survey map, Operations and results during fiscal year. scale 1:24,000.) Routine operation and maintenance continued. Existing project. For a description of the completed improvement, see page 604 of the 49. EUFAULA LAKE, OK Annual Report for 1969. Construction began in March 1942, but was held in abeyance Location. On the Canadian River at river during World War II. Construction resumed mile 27.0, about 12 miles east of Eufaula, in in May 1946, and was completed in June McIntosh County, OK. (See Porum, OK, 1950. The fourth generator was installed and Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) the project placed in full operation in September 1953. Existing project. For a description of the completed improvement, see page 588 of the Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Annual Report for 1970. Construction began in December 1956, and the project was Operations and results during fiscal year. placed in full flood control operation in Routine operation and maintenance February 1964. There are numerous areas continued. Work continued on the re- along the shoreline where private property is habilitation of the tainter gates on the Fort subject to flooding and erosion as a result of Gibson Dam. the construction and operation. Erosion problems in numerous subdivisions bordering 51. KEYSTONE LAKE, OK the lake were studied in 1989 and 1993. At this time, it is estimated that there are Location. On the Arkansas River at river approximately 22 miles of shoreline in need mile 538.8, near Sand Springs, OK, and of attention. Estimated costs for repair is about 15 miles west of Tulsa, OK. (See approximately $15 million. Keystone Dam, OK, Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. The Water Resources Development Act of Existing project. For a description of the 2007 recognizes recreation as a project completed improvement, see page 589 of the purpose and directs the Secretary to establish Annual Report for 1970. Construction began an advisory committee for Lake Eufaula. in January 1957, and the project was placed The purpose of the committee is advisory

38-19 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 in flood control operation in September office roof with a new standing seam gable 1964. roof structure, utilized O&M crew to repair several slide and erosion areas on the lower Local cooperation. Fully complied with. dam embankment area, repaired lake front erosion area at campsites in WestBurns Run Operations and results during fiscal year. PUA, demolished and removed two During FY11 numerous repairs were made to decommissioned structures. Purchased the Keystone Powerhouse, the main dam and materials and supplies to upgrade campsites outlet works, and the Cleveland Levee and to 50A service in the lakeside PUA. associated pump stations. These included Continued troubleshooting and repairs to the replacing repairing the powerhouse intake Hal Malone memorial water safety complex. gates and replacing the trash racks, replacing Removed woody growth and trees at the the guard rail along the dam embankment, Cumberland Levee in accordance with Corps improving drainage at the Cleveland Levee Dam Safety regulations. The draft pump station ponding areas, modifying the Environmental Impact Statement was levee slide gate actuators from pneumatic to completed for the congressionally mandated electrical, placing gravel on the levee crest land transfer to the City of Denison. roadway, and replacing the pump station trash racks. Numerous minor repairs were 53. ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM AND made in the public use areas. All other RESERVOIR, OK routine operation and maintenance continued. The Dam Safety Modification Study (DSMS) Location. On the Arkansas River at was put on hold until completion of an Issue navigation mile 336.2, about 8 miles south of Evaluation Study (EIS), which should occur Sallisaw, in LeFlore County, OK. (See in FY12. The approved EIS will contain a Robert S. Kerr, OK, Geological Survey map, recommendation regarding further action on scale 1:24,000.) the DSMS. Existing project. For a description of the 52. LAKE TEXOMA (DENISON DAM), OK completed improvement, see page 19-21 of AND TX the Annual Report for 1972. The Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam and Reservoir is a unit Location. On the Red River at river mile of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River 725.9, about 5 miles northwest of Denison, Navigation System. Construction began in TX. (See Denison Dam, OK, Geological April 1964, and closure was completed in Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) October 1970. The lock and dam became operational for navigation in December 1970. Existing project. For a description of the Generating units 1, 2, 3, and 4 were placed completed improvement, see page 603 of the in operation in October, July, September, and Annual Report for 1969. Lake Texoma is November 1971, respectively. operated as a unit of a coordinated lake system for flood control in the Red River Local cooperation. See section 1 of this Basin. Construction started in August 1939, report. and was completed in February 1944. Commercial power generation was started in Terminal facilities. Five sites have been March 1945. Authorized work is complete developed for handling coal, grain, except for installation of the third, fourth, construction aggregates, and miscellaneous and fifth power units. cargo. The facilities are considered adequate for present traffic. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine operation and maintenance Routine operation and maintenance continued. Replaced earthen dam guardrail continued. FY11 projects continued the FY10 utilizing ARRA finding. Removed three oil gate rehabilitation project by awarding filled transformers and switches from control additional gates and the turntable house basement and disposed of under replacements for $3.0M. Replaced the project contract. Installed new Motor Control

38-20 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Center in lock control building and loading facility and a steel unloading facility rehabilitated four reverse tainter valves used built by Frontier Steel Company; grain for filling and emptying lock chamber. holding facilities built by Conagra, Inc.; and a general-purpose private dock built by the 54. TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK Fort Howard Paper Company. The facilities are considered adequate for present traffic. Location. On the Illinois River at river mile 12.8, 7 miles northeast of Gore, in Sequoyah Operations and results during fiscal year. County, OK. (See Gore, OK, Geological FY11 projects included $90K for additional Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) work on the FY10 tainter valve contract. Routine operation and maintenance Existing project. For a description of the continued. completed improvement, see page 606 of the Annual Report for 1969. Construction began Environmental Infrastructure in June 1947, and was completed in July 1953. 56. LAWTON, OK

Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Location. Lawton is located approximately Stakeholders have identified a need for a 80 miles southwest of Oklahoma City on reallocation study. Highway 44.

Operations and results during fiscal year. Existing project. The project consists of Routine operation and maintenance upgrading the existing wastewater continued. Work is underway to repair sluice distribution facilities to include piping and gates at the Tenkiller Dam. the associated appurtenances.

55. WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM, OK Local cooperation. Cost sharing on this project will be 75% Federal and 25% non- Location. On the Arkansas River at Federal. The city will be responsible for navigation mile 366.6, about 5 miles provision of LERRD and cash as necessary. northwest of Webbers Falls, in Muskogee County, OK. (See Webbers Falls, OK, Operations and results during fiscal year. Geological Survey map, scale 1:24,000.) Construction on the Environmental Infrastructure upgrade project on South Wolf Existing project. For a description of the Creek was completed during FY11. Financial completed improvement, see page 19-23 of Closeout began and should be completed the Annual Report for 1977. The Webbers during FY12. Falls Lock and Dam is a unit of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation 57. TAR CREEK CLEANUP, OK System. In January 1965, construction began and the project was placed in useful Location. Tar Creek is located in northeast operation in November 1970. The lock and Oklahoma, in Ottawa County. dam became operational for navigation in December 1970. Generating units 1, 2, and 3 Existing project. The project consists of were placed in operation in August, technical planning, design and construction September, and November 1973, assistance to non-Federal interests to remedy respectively. adverse environmental and human health impacts. Projects demonstrate practicable Local cooperation. See section 1 of this alternatives and activities which include report. measures to address lead exposure and other environmental problems related to historical Terminal facilities. Facilities at the Port of mining activities in the area. Projects Muskogee include: a cargo pier, mooring include capping of areas where surface dolphins, warehouse, terminal building, and materials containing high levels of lead are fuel facility built by the Muskogee City- easily wind-dispersed in local communities, County Port Authority; a liquid cargo plugging of open mineshafts, and a

38-21 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 subsidence potential evaluation. General Investigations

Local cooperation. Cooperating non- 59. SURVEYS Federal interests are responsible for LERRD. Fiscal year cost was $2,146,691, which Operations and results during fiscal year. included ongoing efforts on six specifically In FY05, establishment of a grass cover was authorized Feasibility Studies, three planning completed on the Boys and Girls Club assistance to states (PAS) projects, including Project in Picher, OK, and open mineshafts 1 in Oklahoma and 2 in Kansas, and the were plugged. The draft subsidence FPMS program with a special study for the evaluation was completed, and additional City of Wichita, KS.; miscellaneous mine shaft planning work began. Project has activities - special investigations, and not received funding since 2007. Interagency Water Resources Development; North American Waterfowl Management 58. YUKON, OK Plan, and Coordination with other Agencies. Table 38-K provides a specific list and Location. Yukon is located immediately respective fiscal year expenditures. adjacent to Oklahoma City’s western boundary on Highway 66. Our General Investigation (GI) Program included traditional GI studies, a very Existing project. The project consists of healthy Planning Assistance to States (PAS) constructing approximately 9 miles of Program, and the Flood Plain Management domestic water line and associated facilities Program. These programs assisted (both which will connect the city’s well field to financially and technically) municipalities the city water system. Also to be and other subdivisions of the states with constructed is a one million gallon storage flooding issues and water-related problems. facility. Studies included the Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan, Grand Lake Local cooperation. Cost sharing on this Comprehensive Study, Grand (Neosho) River project will be 75% Federal and 25% non- Basin Study, Southeast Oklahoma, Oologah Federal. The city will be responsible for Lake Watershed, and Washita River Basin. provision of LERRD and cash as necessary. We continued the re-evaluation efforts on Area VI of the Red River Chloride Control Operations and results during fiscal year. (RRCC) Project. We also received and The sponsor has opted to delay real estate executed $500K of Recovery Funds for PAS acquisition until the Federal project funds, Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan which were previously programmed off of Update. the project, are reprogrammed back onto the project. No such action occurred during 60. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF FY11. BASIC DATA. Fiscal year cost was $216,905, which includes floodplain management services. Table 38-K provides a specific list and respective fiscal year. expenditures.

38-22 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 1. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas New Work River Navigation System, Approp - - - - 8,404,053 OK, (Tulsa District Portion) Cost - -- - - 8,404,053

Maint Approp 5,583,000 6,631,980 5,570,340 5,733,068 146,703,891 Cost 5,028,230 6,873,732 5,122,895 5,340,698 146,021,016

(Recovery Act Funds) Main Approp - 11,682,850 - - 11,682,850 Cost - 40,919 2,290,900 5,418,552 9,111,722 3. Arcadia Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - 82,944,907 Cost - - - - 82,944,907

Maint Approp 774,000 429,240 490,050 465,898 9,572,465 Cost 703,738 483,351 465,414 481,246 9,539,623 (Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 508,300 - - 508,300 Cost - 21,556 162,343 - 489.021 4. Arkansas City, KS New Work Approp - - - - 21,824,120 Cost 9,984 3,300 - - 21,824,120

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 2,309,000 Cost - - - - 2,308,993

5. Arkansas-Red River New Work Basins Chloride Control,Approp - - - - 259,435 KS, OK, and TX Cost - - - - 256,177

Maint Approp 1,305,000 1,286,740 1,466,190 1,412,194 46,682,242 Cost 1,137,436 1,405,916 1,411,333 1,235,815 46,682,242

5a. Area V, New Work Estelline Springs, TX Approp - - - - 300,028 Cost - - - - 300,028

Maint Approp 1,000 34,300 42,570 42,199 312,771 Cost 1,009 34,293 42,561 40,836 308,439

38-23 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 0111 5b. Area VIII, TX New Work Approp - - - - 46,682,242 Cost - - - - 46,682,242

Maint Approp 1,305,000 1,286,740 1,466,190 - 27,445,893 Cost 1,137,436 1,405,916 1,411,333 - 27,105,992

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 4,58,500 1,181,000 - 5,239,461 Cost - 74,768 2,939,166 - 5,234,461

5c. Red River Basin Chloride/New Work Control, TX & OK Approp 936,000 2,201,000 1,332,000 449,067 44,382,872 Cost 999,748 842,209 1,297,711 1,759,749 43,369,946 6. Birch Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 10,955,127 Cost - - - - 10,955,127

Maint Approp 559,000 589,960 848,430 627,966 19,568,707 Cost 570,103 573,852 783,827 688,084 19,490,886 7. Bowie County Levee, TX/New Work Approp - - - - 3,246,615 Cost 171,032 102,594 68,108 - 3,239,454

8. Candy Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - Cost - - - -

Maint Approp - - - - 1,141,777 Cost 28,436 1,407 908 - 1,141,777

9. Canton Lake, OK New Work 6 Approp 17,023,000 20,288,000 22,911,000 36,858,483 123,795,717 6 Cost 6,194,937 28,522,020 18,303,351 10,531,235 84,447,030

Maint Approp 1,489,000 1,553,300 2,085,930 2,147,695 62,162,718 Cost 1,536,256 1,420,295 1,971,263 1,981,905 61,702,677

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 834,050 152,886 - 986,935 Cost - 29,936 662,660 334,339 986,935

Table 38-A

38-24 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 10. Copan Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 83,800,814 Cost - - - - 83,800,814

Maint Approp 1,037,000 852,600 974,160 1,064,434 24,643,052 Cost 1,066,288 830,405 872,523 1,059,601 24,463,849 (Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 582,900 - - 534,068 Cost - 7,507 489,977 36,584 527,757 11. Council Grove Lake, KS/New Work Approp - - - - 11,810,509 Cost - - - - 11,810,509

Maint Approp 1,479,000 1,272,340 1,636,470 1,618,282 38,433,925 Cost 1,154,100 1,438,039 1,357,738 1,731,219 38,086,647

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 877,000 384,000 - 1,258,060 Cost - 30,961 1,120,678 106,421 1,252,171 12. El Dorado Lake, KS New Work Approp - - - - 87,790,061 Cost - - - - 87,790,061

Maint Approp 651,000 606,620 1,120,680 662,656 13,971,944 Cost 366,634 858,852 647,482 794,570 13,595,074

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 152,900 23,000 - 175,880 Cost - - 68,314 107,566 175,880

13. Elk City Lake, KS New Work Approp - - - - 19,052,990 Cost - - - - 19,052,990

Maint Approp 949,000 1,196,380 675,180 1,020,627 26,174,917 Cost 816,874 834,088 1,144875 1,014,678 26,064,711

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,229,950 44,000 62,769 1,308,717 Cost - 15,008 874,302 416,295 1,305,605

38-25 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 14. Fall River Lake, KS New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 10,550,873 Cost - - - - 10,550,873

Maint Approp 2,418,000 1,168,160 1,206,810 1,123,646 35,157,494 Cost 1,360,052 2,191,289 1,130,911 1,027,898 34,765,798

(Contrib. Funds) Contrib. - - - - 6,120 Cost - - - - 6,120

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 5,440,796 - - 5,440,796 Cost - 56,741 4,438,624 934,926 5,430,796 15. Fort Supply Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 7,723,134 Cost - - - - 7,723,134

Maint Approp 738,000 675,220 1,038,510 925,291 26,308,776 Cost 740,146 678,633 729,605 1,187,173 26,201,221

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 237,006 - - 237,006 Cost - 53,419 68,839 114,748 237,006 16. Fry Creeks, Bixby, OK New Work Approp - - - - 8,507,508 Cost - - - - 8,506,616 (Contrib. Funds) Contrib. - - - - 902,762 Cost - - - - 902,762

17. Great Bend, KS New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 19,970,948 Cost - - - - 19,970,948

(Contrib. Funds) Contrib. - - - - 4,259,254 Cost - - - - 4,259,254 18. Great Salt Plains Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 4,626,270 Cost - - - - 4,626,270

Maint Approp 235,000 233,240 326,700 277,742 10,512,153 Cost 249,975 237,583 274,586 338,150 10,497,799

38-26 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 Great Salt Plains Lake, OK (Cont’d)

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 183,305 - - 183,305 Cost - 7,990 48,527 126,788 183,305

19. Halstead, KS New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 8,738,000 Cost - - - - 8,737,741

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 923,985 Cost - - - - 923,985 20. Heyburn Lake and New Work Polecat Creek, OK Approp - - - - 2,560,572 Cost - - - - 2,560,572

Maint Approp 792,000 504,700 703,890 577,767 20,751,926 Cost 723,650 541,005 646,785 652,554 20,690,262

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 453,239 - - 453,239 Cost - 4,807 112,431 322,776 439,575 21. Hugo Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 10,041,340 Cost - - - - 10,041,340

Maint Approp 1,261,000 2,087,280 1,635,480 1,996,438 51,777,240 Cost 1,187,892 1,356,754 2,269,911 1,753,807 51,381,194

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 839,964 - - 839,964 Cost - 6,605 104,737 728,621 839,964 22. Hulah Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 11,388,150 Cost - - - - 11,388,150

Maint Approp 901,000 471,160 1,973,070 815,215 21,365,286 Cost 879,267 391,920 788,416 1,977,726 21,201,647 (Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 558,124 - - 558,124 Cost - 37,809 501,623 18,097 557,624

38-27 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep. 30, 20111 23. John Redmond Dam New Work and Reservoir, KS Approp - - - - 28,151,470 Cost - - - - 28,151,470

Maint Approp 2,492,000 1,654,240 3,466,980 1,833,215 51,973,208 Cost 1,842,236 2,136,871 1,455,459 2,182,578 50,031,492

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 4,763,100 - - 4,763,100 Cost - 25,338 956,847 2,085,366 3,918,465

24. Kaw Lake, OK New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 33,161,006 Cost - - - - 33,161,006

Maint Approp 1,993,000 2,341,220 2,587,860 2,075,489 62,974,487 Cost 1,884,647 2,003,841 2,626,779 2,326,708 62,684,197

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 43,934 Cost - - - - 43,934

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 2,492,689 - - 2,492,689 Cost - 27,550 1,369,359 1,095,780 2,485,189

25. Lake Kemp, TX New Work Approp - - - - 14,695 Cost - - - - 14,695

Maint Approp 571,000 194,040 307,890 225,380 6,445,254 Cost 216,408 387,217 190,549 459,689 6,449,438

26. Lake Wichita, New Work Holliday Creek, TX Approp - - - - 33,963,211 (Federal) Cost - - - - 33,963,211 (Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 7,748,134 Cost - - - - 7,748,134

38-28 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Sep. 30, 20111

27. Marion Reservoir, KS New Work Approp - - - - 13,420,818 Cost - - - - 13,420,818

Maint Approp 1,551,000 1,397,080 1,712,700 1,819,953 43,612,246 Cost 1,406,407 1,491,182 1,566,776 1,521,378 43,043,978

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 5,697,900 3,386,000 540,000 9,226,900 Cost - 63,031 840,839 786,290 1,751,738 28. McGrath Creek, New Work Wichita Falls, TX Approp - - - - 8,538,349 (Federal) Cost - - - - 8,538,349

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 3,086,860 Cost - - - - 3,086,860 29. Mingo Creek, OK New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 77,783,105 Cost 14,355 - - - 77,781,169

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 15,968,400 Cost 92 - - - 15,944,970

30. Oologah Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 36,658,809 Cost - - - - 36,658,809

Maint Approp 1,936,000 1,749,300 3,862,980 2,611,521 60,275,286 Cost 1,958,521 1,639,514 2,531,974 2,016,000 58,217,180

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,891,753 - - 1,891,753 Cost - 30,600 1,717,806 143,352 1,891,758 31. Optima Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 32,923,797 Cost - - - - 32,923,797

Maint Approp 214,000 148,960 205,920 31,404 8,587,182 Cost 199,798 158,076 205,975 41,298 8,586,887 (Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 213,414 - - Cost - 1,768 210,299 1,347 213,414

38-29 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 32. Parker Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 74,974 Cost - - - - 74,974 33. Pat Mayse Lake, TX New Work Approp - - - - 9,310,661 Cost - - - - 9,310,661

Maint Approp 974,000 914,340 1,136,520 966,521 32,199,693 Cost 960,187 934,894 995,876 995,842 32,049,200 34. Pearson-Skubitz New Work Big Hill Lake, KS Approp - - - - 15,757,279 Cost - - - - 15,757,279

Maint Approp 974,000 1,038,540 1,385,010 1,348,187 32,173,666 Cost 960,187 964,003 1,109,410 1,466,554 32,032,739

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,810,612 - - 1,810,612 Cost - 26,114 1,433,062 50,927 1,807,611 35. Pine Creek Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 2,132,906 Cost - - - - 1,575,153

Maint Approp 1,110,000 1,272,600 3,600,870 2,868,776 37,942,241 Cost 1,047,639 988,690 2,091,006 2,761,110 36,028,688

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,559,888 - - 1,559,888 Cost - 17,539 726,678 815,851 1,523,033 36. Sardis Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 117,292,063 Cost - - - - 117,292,053

Maint Approp 980,000 829,080 1,180,080 1,233,951 24,665,642 Cost 909,953 875,713 1,070,023 1,192,324 24,490,877

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,563,712 - - 1,563,712 Cost - 8,565 325,830 1,229,317 1,557,817

38-30 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 37. Skiatook Lake, OK New Work 5 Approp - - - - 113,631,973 5 Cost - - - - 113,631,973

Maint Approp 1,618,000 1,259,540 1,330,560 1,568,710 32,310,498 Cost 1,626,323 1,284,778 1,279,231 1,378,716 31,937,052

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,245,728 - - 1,245,728 Cost - 63,179 1,013,604 168,361 1,239,073 38. Toronto Lake, KS New Work Approp - - - - 13,896,324 Cost - - - - 13,896,324

Maint Approp 1,222,000 486,080 3,313,530 547,855 16,519,329 Cost 1,088,337 572,154 1,059,345 1,840,891 15,519,811

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 3,916,629 - - 3,916,629 Cost - 21,954 760,953 2,686,047 3,390,968 39. Tulsa &West Tulsa, OK New Work (Federal) Approp - - - - 1,518,459 Cost - - - - 1,518,459

(Contributed Funds) Contrib - - - - 524,129 Cost - - - - 524,129

40. Waurika Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 56,360,303 Cost - - - - 56,360,303

Maint Approp 1,273,000 993,720 1,346,400 2,511,163 40,235,223 Cost 1,311,798 1,069,013 1,217,857 1,846,143 39,386,334

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 518,864 - - 518,864 Cost - 3,564 72,961 442,340 518,864

38-31 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 41. Winfield, KS New Work Approp - - - - 6,905,900 Cost - - - - 6,904,811

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - - - 54,460 Cost - - - - 54,460

42. Wister Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 10,501,226 Cost - - - - 10,501,226 Maint Approp 704,000 616,420 2,504,870 390,515 27,967,142 Cost 639,564 584,862 1,083,481 1,385,293 27,246,757

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,294,650 - - 1,294,650 Cost - 16,044 373,821 820,152 1,231,958

48. Broken Bow Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 2,599 Cost - - - - 2,599

Maint Approp 2,005,000 1,730,680 3,012,570 2,431,391 53,140,088 Cost 2,010,293 1,774,546 2,121,706 2,848,682 52,629,988

(Contributed Funds) Maint Approp - - - - 596,898 Cost 26,285 3,075 - - 541,898

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 2,278,429 - - 2,278,429 Cost - - 1,091,874 1,082,055 2,247,480 49. Eufaula Lake, OK New Work Approp - - - - 123,795,907 Cost - - - - 123,795,907

Maint Approp 4,731,000 4,864,720 6,234,336 8,583,292 150,427,097 Cost 5,020,622 4,800,212 5,164,147 5,819,378 146,347,161

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - 55,000 - 2,095,5407

Cost 211,248 249,102 - - 2,087,3907

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 6,090,796 - - 6,090,796 Cost - 50,668 2,096,693 3,758,368 6,040,489

38-32 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 50. Fort Gibson Lake, OK New Work 2 Approp - - - - 42,762,905 2 Cost - - - - 42,762,905 Maint Approp 5,824,000 8,225,300 7,677,810 4,855,534 132,665,796 Cost 5,689,121 5,539,005 7,109,534 6,821,914 130,788,024

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - 54,127 - 3,304,548 Cost 211,248 296,531 21,306 18,951 2,717,777

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 13,390,904 - - 13,390,904 Cost - - 4,303,028 4,291,981 8,941,486 51. Keystone Lake, OK New Work Approp - - 930,000 455,000 126,936,015 Cost - - 643,033 756,667 126,567,340

Maint Approp 3,875,000 5,524,260 6,535,980 5,182,674 121,067,719 Cost 3,738,301 4,269,963 5,913,900 6,142,223 119,744,246

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. 105,000 - - - 3,093,537 Cost 68,330 163,603 9,267 - 3,038,538

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 1,633,485 - - 1,633,485 Cost - 23,568 1,053,687 533,370 1,609,029

52. Lake Texoma New Work 3 (Denison Dam), Approp - - - - 65,783,564 3 OK and TX Cost - - - - 65,783,564

Maint Approp 6,818,000 6,086,865 8,669,510 11,125,974 207,823,523 Cost 6,424,401 6,324,624 6,731,806 8,244,263 202,345,582

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. 42,006 - 339,851 80,000 5,967,001 Cost 118,306 18,684 154,867 303,070 5,631,836

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 7,223,193 - - 7,223,193 Cost - 97,913 4,708,005 2,407,211 7,221,845

38-33 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 53. Robert S. Kerr Lock & New Work Dam & Reservoir, OK Approp - - - - 1,328,586 Cost - - - - 1,327,798

Maint Approp 4,967,000 6,152,500 7,941,780 7,454,065 137,159,133 Cost 5,014,173 6,273,023 6,207,130 8,243,207 135,922,563

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. 175,000 - 55,000 1,100,000 3,323,852 Cost - 120,000 - 349,197 2,674,615

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 4,748,962 - - 4,748,962 Cost - 36,466 2,840,181 1,870,815 4,746,962

54. Tenkiller Ferry Lake New Work 4 OK Approp - - - - 63,651,159 4 Cost - 47,003 - - 63,651,159 Maint Approp 3,537,000 3,451,560 6,238,442 4,373,836 109,004,384 Cost 3,368,519 3,739,773 4,011,112 6,349,725 108,393,403

(Contributed Funds) Contrib. - - 53,186 3,209 789,340 Cost 182,387 83,500 5,387 53,636 614,672

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 2,371,450 - - 2,371,450 Cost - 43,581 1,299,304 916,800 2,232,084

55. Webbers Falls New Work Lock & Dam, OK Approp - - - - 4,187,917 Cost - - - - 4,187,917

Maint Approp 3,500,000 4,490,840 5,553,900 5,600,465 119,396,095 Cost 3,438,056 4,307,972 4,088,141 5,265,329 117,192,598

(Contributed Funds) Maint Approp 41,600,000 6,632,071 9,055,000 2,910,000 65,424,952 Cost 2,130,101 17,148,366 7,960,896 7,855,496 38,584,511

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 7,461,734 - - 7,461,734 Cost - 191,367 5,197,471 1,982,294 7,371,133

38-34 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

Table 38-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 20111 56. Lawton, OK New Work Approp - 50,000 - - 1,254,100 Cost 8,262 3,995 60,791 1,064,659 1,200,149

(Recovery Act Funds) Maint Approp - 34,250 1,235,000 - 1,269,250 Cost - - 9,978 1,152,630 -

(Contributed Funds) Maint Approp - - 1,150,000 -500,000 650,000 Cost - - - 583,062 591,430

57. Tar Creek Cleanup, OK New Work Approp 3,444,000 - - - 13,456,000 Cost 6,988,733 126,014 2,465 1,479 13,215,144

58. Yukon, OK New Work Approp - 50,000 - - 93,900 Cost 996 - - - 25,090

1. Includes $2,077,900 expended by the Jobs Act (P.L. 98-8 dated, March 24, 1983) for projects listed in Tables 29-M of the FY 85 Annual Report.2. 2. Includes $49,581 Public Works acceleration funds; and $1,058,500 Hydropower. 3. Includes $433,549 Emergency Relief Funds. Exchange $1,256,068 from special contributed funds. 4. Includes $39,999 Public Works acceleration funds. Includes appropriation for Dam Safety and Dam Safety expenditures. 5. Includes appropriation for Dam Safety and Dam Safety expenditures. 6. Includes appropriation for Dam Safety and Dam Safety expenditures. 7. Contributed funds for Muddy Creek bridge replacement.

38-35 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 38-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION

See Date of Project Section Authorizing and Work In Text Act Authorized Documents

1. July 24, 1946 McCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS HD 79-758 RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM PL 79-525 October 22, 1976 Big and Little Sallisaw Creeks PL 94-587 Navigation Project November 17, 1986 W.D. Mayo Hydropower PL 99-662

3. December 31, 1970 ARCADIA LAKE HD 91-299 October 22, 1976 Changed water quality to water supply PL 94-587

4. November 17, 1986 ARKANSAS CITY PL 99-662

5. ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL 5a. October 23, 1962 Authorized Area V (Estelline Springs) SD 87-l07

5b.&5c. November 7, 1966 Authorized Areas VII, VIII, and X PL 89-789 SD 110 December 31, 1970 Authorized Areas I, II-III, VI, PL 91-6ll IX, XIII, XIV, and XV November 17, 1986 Authorized the Red River Basin and the PL 99-662 Arkansas River Basin as separate projects with separate authority.

6. October 23, 1962 BIRCH LAKE HD 87-563

7. August 26, 1994 BOWIE COUNTY LEVEE PL 103-316

8. October 23, 1962 CANDY LAKE HD 87-564

9. June 28, 1938 CANTON LAKE HD 75-569 July 24, l946 Approved Irrigation Storage June 30, 1948 Approved Water Supply Storage

10. October 23, 1962 COPAN LAKE HD 87-563

11. May l7, 1950 COUNCIL GROVE LAKE HD 80-442

12. October 27, 1965 EL DORADO LAKE HD 89-232

13. August 18, 1941 ELK CITY LAKE HD 76-440

14. August 18, 1941 FALL RIVER LAKE HD 76-440

15. June 22, 1936 FORT SUPPLY LAKE HD 74-308

16. November 17, 1986 FRY CREEKS PL 99-662

17. November 17, 1986 GREAT BEND PL 99-662

38-36 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

TABLE 38-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d)

See Date of Project Section Authorizing and Work In Text Act Authorized Documents

18. June 22, 1936 GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE HD 74-308

19. November 17, 1986 HALSTEAD PL 99-662

20. July 24, 1946 HEYBURN LAKE AND POLECAT CREEK HD 80-290

21. July 24, 1946 HUGO LAKE HD 79-602

22. June 22, 1936 HULAH LAKE HD 74-308

23. May 17, 1950 JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR HD 80-442 February l5, 1958 Authorized name change PL 85-327

24. October 23, 1962 KAW LAKE HD 87-143

25. October 23, 1962 LAKE KEMP HD 87-144

26. November 17, 1986 LAKE WICHITA, HOLLIDAY CREEK PL 99-662

27. May 17, 1950 MARION RESERVOIR HD 80-442 March 14, 1990 Authorized name change PL 101-253

28. November 17, 1988 MCGRATH CREEK WICHITA FALLS, TX PL 100-676

29. November 17, 1986 MINGO CREEK PL 99-662

30. June 28, 1938 OOLOGAH LAKE Committee Doc. No. 1, 75th Cong., 1st Session

31. June 22, 1936 OPTIMA LAKE HD 74-308

32. November 17, 1986 PARKER LAKE PL 99-662

33. October 23, 1962 PAT MAYSE LAKE HD 88-71

34. October 23, 1962 PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE HD 87-472 November 10, 1978 Authorized name change PL 95-265

35. July 3, 1958 PINE CREEK LAKE HD 85-170

36. October 23, 1962 SARDIS LAKE SD 87-145 December 4, 1981 Authorized name change PL 97-88

37. October 23, 1962 SKIATOOK LAKE HD 87-563 38. August 18, 1941 TORONTO LAKE HD 76-440 PL 77-228

39. August 18, 1941 TULSA & WEST TULSA, OK PL 77-228

38-37 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 38-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d)

See Date of Project Section Authorizing and Work In Text Act Authorized Documents

40. December 30, 1963 WAURIKA LAKE SD 88-33 PL 88-253

41. October 27, 1965 WINFIELD PL 89-298

42. June 28, 1938 WISTER LAKE Committee Doc. No. 1, 75th Cong., 1st Session July 30, 1983 Changed conservation pool elevation PL 98-63 October 12, 1996 Increase permanent pool level PL 104-303

48. July 3, 1958 BROKEN BOW LAKE HD 85-170 October 23, 1962 SD 87-137 October 12, 1996 Reallocation of water supply storage PL 104-303

49. July 24, 1946 EUFAULA LAKE HD 79-758 July 16,1984 Authorized Piney Creek and PL 98-360 Muddy Creek bridge replacement November 17, 1986 Authorized cost sharing PL99-662

50. August 18, 1941 FORT GIBSON LAKE HD 76-107 July 24, 1946 Incorporated into the multiple-purpose PL 76-228 plan for the Arkansas River Basin November 17, 1986 Added hydropower units 5 & 6 PL 99-662

51. May 17, 1950 KEYSTONE LAKE SD 81-07

52. LAKE TEXOMA (Denison Dam) June 28, 1938 Flood control and power HD 75-541 October 17, 1940 Navigation and regulating flows PL 76-868 September 30, 1944 Authorized name PL 78-454 August 14, 1953 Water supply PL 83-273 November 17, 1986 Recreation PL 99-662

53. July 24, 1946 ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND HD 79-758 DAM AND RESERVOIR July 8, 1963 Authorized name change PL 88-62

54. June 28, 1938 TENKILLER FERRY LAKE Committee Doc. No. 1, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

55. July 24, 1946 WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM HD 79-758 Cong., 1st Sess.

56. October 31, 1992 LAWTON, OK PL 102-580

57. TAR CREEK CLEANUP, OK PL 108-137 59. October 31, 1992 YUKON, OK PL 102-580

38-38 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

TABLE 38-C OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For Last Full Report Cost to September 30, 2011 See Annual Operation and Project Status Report for Construction Maintenance Big and Little Sallisaw Inactive - - 3,163 Navigation Project Poteau River Navigation Project, Complete 1983 536,952 - OK and AR Red River from Fulton, AR, Complete 1924 378,574 182,157 to Mouth of Washita River

TABLE 38-E OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For Last Full Report Cost to September 30, 2011 See Annual Operation and Project Report For Construction Maintenance Augusta LPP, KS1,2 1938 84,217 Boswell Lake, OK3 1952 - - Cherry and Red Fork Creeks LPP, OK2 1970 261,448 - Crutcho Creek LPP, OK3 1972 213,016 - Dodge City LPP, KS2 - - - Enid LPP, OK2 1963 743,612 14,599 Flat Rock and Valley View Creeks LPP, Tulsa, OK2, 4 1975 1,741,000 - Florence LPP, KS2 1965 369,782 - Hutchinson LPP, KS2 1956 3,497,718 - Iola LPP, KS2 1939 22,290 - Jenks LPP, OK2 1950 344,797 - Joe Creek LPP, OK2 - 308,041 - Larned LPP, KS2 - - - Lukfata Lake, OK3 1983 1,424,685 - Marion, KS 1988 5,488,618 Oklahoma City LPP, OK2 1960 8,047,512 - Red River Bank Stabilization Below Denison, OK and TX2, 6 1953 1,177,537 - Red River Emergency Bank Protection - 400,000 - Sand Creek LPP, KS2 1968 545,996 - Sand Lake, OK3 1963 - - Shidler Lake, OK3 1983 568,191 - Tulsa and West Tulsa LPP, OK2 1954 3,592,432 - Turtle Creek LPP, Yukon, OK3 1975 144,853 - West Branch Chisholm Creek LPP, KS2 1965 364,200 - Wichita and Valley Center LPP, KS2 1960 12,247,379 733,014

LPP - Local Protection Project. 1. Completed by Kansas Works Progress Administration. 2. Complete. 3. Deferred. 4. Federal cost limited to $1,000,000. 5. Active with no current year expenditures. 6. FY 99 – FY 02 additional funds of $955,432 were received for construction.

38-39 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 38-G DEAUTHORIZED PROJECTS

For Last Full Report Date Federal Contributed See Annual and Funds Funds Project Report for Authority Expended Expended

Arcadia Lake (Uncompleted April 16, 2002 0 0 Recreation), OK Public Law 99-662 Ark-Red Basins Chloride April 16, 2002 14,300,000 0 Control, Ark Basin, OK Public Law 99-662 Big & Little Sallisaw April 16, 2002 167,000 0 Creeks, OK Public Law 99-662 Big Pine Lake, TX 1984 November 1, 1997 1,701,670 0 Public Law 99-662 Boswell Lake, OK April 16, 2002 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Candy Lake, OK 1996 July 9, 1995 4,950,000 0 Public Law 99-662 Cedar Point Lake, KS 1980 November 17,1986 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Cow Creek, Hutchinson, KS 1971 November 17, 1986 363,720 0 Public Law 99-662 Crutcho Creek, Oklahoma April 16, 2002 0 0 County, OK Public Law 99-662 Denison Dam Power Unit 3, OK April 16, 2002 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Douglass Lake, KS April 16, 2002 668,000 0 Public Law 99-662 El Dorado, West Branch, 1977 November 17, 1986 92,319 0 Walnut River, KS Public Law 99-662 Lukfata Lake, OK April 16, 2002 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Neodesha Lake, KS 1952 November 17, 1986 97,910 0 Public Law 99-662 Lake Texoma Perimeter Access July, 9, 1995 13,200 0 Roads, Texas & Oklahoma Public Law 99-662 Sand Lake, OK April 5, 1999 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Shidler Lake, OK May 1, 1997 568,000 0 Public Law 99-662 Towanda Lake, KS 1981 November 17, 1986 393,361 0 Public Law 99-662 Tuskahoma Lake, OK 1963 July 19, 1992 0 0 Public Law 99-662 Upper Little Arkansas April 16, 2002 1,266,000 0 River Watershed, KS Public Law 99-662

38-40 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

TABLE 38-H ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN MULTIPLE-PUPOSE PLAN (See Section 1 of Text)

Feature River River Mile1 Nearest Town

LAKES Canton North Canadian 394.3 Canton, OK Elk City Elk River 8.7 Elk City, KS Eufaula Canadian 27.0 Eufaula, OK Fall River Fall River 54.2 Fall River, KS Fort Gibson Grand (Neosho) 7.7 Fort Gibson, OK Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees Grand (Neosho) 77.0 Disney, OK Keystone Arkansas 538.8 Sand Springs, OK Lake Hudson (Markham Ferry) Grand (Neosho) 47.4 Locust Grove, OK Neodesha Verdigris 222.8 Neodesha, KS Oologah Verdigris 90.2 Oologah, OK Tenkiller Ferry Illinois 12.8 Gore, OK Toronto Verdigris 271.5 Toronto, KS Wister Poteau 60.9 Wister, OK

McCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK (Tulsa District Portion) Bank Stabilization and Verdigris and N/A2 Fort Smith, AR, Channel Rectification Arkansas to Catoosa, OK Chouteau Lock and Dam (17), OK Verdigris 401.5 Okay, OK Newt Graham Lock and Dam (18), OK Verdigris 421.6 Inola, OK Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam (15), OK Arkansas 339.0 Sallisaw, OK Robert S. Kerr Marine Terminal, OK Arkansas 336.2 Cowlington, OK Sans Bois Navigation Channel, OK Sans Bois Creek 341.0 Keota, OK W.D. Mayo Lock and Dam (14), OK Arkansas 319.6 Redland, OK Webbers Falls Lock and Dam (16), OK Arkansas 366.6 Gore, OK

1. On the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System, these are navigation miles. 2. As required for a channel 9 feet deep.

38-41 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 38-I INSPECTION OF COMPLETED LOCAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECTS (See Section 44 of Text)

Projects Inspected in Fiscal Year Inspection Date

Arkansas City Levee, KS September 20, 2011 Augusta Levee, KS September 29, 2011 Bixby Creek, OK May 13, 2011 Cherry/Red Fork Creeks, OK November 16, 2010 Coffeyville Levee, KS September 28, 2011 Cowskin Creek, Wichita, KS July 21, 2011 Dodge City Levees, KS September 15-16, 2011 Enid Local Protection Project, OK August 3, 2011 Flat Rock/Valley View Creeks, Tulsa, OK November 16, 2010 Florence Levees, KS August 22, 2011 Fry Creek, Bixby, OK May 10 & 13, 2011 Great Bend Levees, KS September 12-13, 2011 Haikey Creek Levee, Tulsa, OK September 9, 2011 Halstead Levee, KS August 29, 2011 Hutchinson Levee, KS April 26-27, 2011 Iola Levee, KS June 23, 2011 Holliday Creek, Wichita Falls, TX August 25-26, 2011 Joe Creek, Tulsa, OK November 17, 2010 Larned Levee, KS February 25, 2011 Marion Levee, KS August 22, 2011 Meadowbrook Creek, Lawton, KS July 22, 2011 Mingo Creek, OK November 18, 2010 North Canadian River WWTP Levee, Oklahoma City, OK August 9, 2011 Oklahoma City Floodway, OK March 31, 2011 Park City Levee, KS July 7, 2011 South Deer Creek, Shawnee, OK July 15, 2011 Winfield Levee, KS September 23, 2011

38-42 TULSA, OK, DISTRICT

TABLE 38-J FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION (See Section 47 of Text)

Fiscal Year Study Identification/Name Cost

SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS - Section 205 Coordination Section 205 Coordination 24,664 Bixby Creek, Bixby, OK 912,731 Cowskin Creek, Wichita, KS 1,623,554 Haikey Creek, Bixby, OK - Whitewater River, Augusta, KS 183,299 Willowwood Addition, Edmond, OK - Wolf Creek, Lawton, OK - TOTAL SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 2,744,248

EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (Section 14) Section 14 Coordination 11,259 Britton Road Bridge, Jones, OK - Main Street Bridge and Dam, Halstead, KS - Neosho River Bridge, Neosho County, KS - U.S. 83 Bridge, Garden City, K - TOTAL EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION 11,259

SNAGGING AND CLEARING (Section 208) Blackwell Lake, Blackwell, OK 3,587 TOTAL SNAGGING AND CLEARING 3,587

PROJECT MODIFICATION TO IMPROVE ENVIRONMENT (Section 1135) Section 1135 Coordination 25,089 Joe Creek Habitat Restoration, OK 510,818 Sand Creek, Newton, KS 6,325 TOTAL MODIFICATION TO IMPROVE ENVIRONMENT 542,232

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206) Section 206 Coordination 22,865 Arkansas River, Arkansas City, KS 14,243 Cherokee Creek Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, OK - TOTAL AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION 37,108

38-43 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 38-K GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS (See Sections 59 and 60 of Text)

Fiscal Year Study Identification/Name Cost

SURVEYS

Flood Damage Prevention Studies Feasibility Study Grand Lake Comprehensive Study, OK 67,307

Special Studies Ecosystem Restoration Reconnaissance Studies Washita River Basin, OK 462,411 Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study Grand (Neosho) River Basin Study 358,377 Oologah Lake Watershed, OK 17,461 Southeast Oklahoma 583,650 Walnut & Whitewater Rivers Watershed, KS - Wister Lake Watershed, OK - Watershed/Comprehensive Feasibility Study Spavinaw Creek, OK 30,624 Miscellaneous Activities Special Investigations 30,403 Interagency Water Resources Development 15,965 North American Waterfowl Management Plan - Coordination with Other Federal Agencies, States, and Non-Federal Interests Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (PL 83-566) Coop with Other Water Resource Development Agencies 3,843 Planning Assistance to States Oklahoma, Arkansas River Corridor - Oklahoma, Bartlesville Water Supply Study 8,667 Oklahoma, Bristow Water Supply Study - Oklahoma, Water Plan Update 485,057 Kansas, Sunflower Water Demand Study 5,657 Kansas, Neosho PAS Water Supply Alternatives Analysis 77,269 Texas, Greenbelt Sedimentation Survey - TOTAL SURVEYS 2,146,691

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Flood Plain Management Services 81,661 NFPC 47,633 Technical Services 51,902 SS-Flood Risk Assessment-Native America 14,986 SS-Community CBG Flood Evaluations 15,148 SS-Pawnee Tribe Flood Proofing 5,575 SS-Riverine Flood Model - TOTAL COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA 216,905

38-44 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

The District includes that portion of Texas south of Red River drainage basin exclusive of drainage basin of Rio Grande and its tributaries above and including Pecos River; exclusive of drainage basins to all short streams arising in coastal plain of Texas and flowing into the Gulf of Mexico, including entire basins of Buffalo Bayou, San Jacinto, San Bernard, Lavaca, Navidad, Mission, and Arkansas Rivers; exclusive of lower basins of major streams flowing into the gulf as follows: Sabine River, Texas and Louisiana, downstream from U.S. Highway 190 crossing at Bon Wier, Texas; Neches River downstream from Town Bluff gauging station; Trinity River downstream from Texas State Highway 45 crossing at Riverside, Texas; Brazos River downstream from confluence with Navasota River; Colorado River downstream from gauging station at Austin; Guadalupe River downstream from confluence with San Marcos River; San Antonio River downstream from confluence with Escondido Creek; Nueces River downstream from confluence with Frio and Atascosa Rivers; and exclusive of Agua Dulce, San Fernando, and Olmos Creek basins draining into Baffin Bay; coastal area south thereof to Rio Grande and south to the northern boundaries of Newton, Jasper, Tyler, Polk, Trinity, Walker, Waller, Austin, Fayette, Gonzales, Karnes, Live Oak, Jim Hogg, Zapata; the northern and western boundaries of McMullan; and the western boundaries of Montgomery and Duval Counties, Texas. District also includes those portions of the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek Watershed located in the State of Texas; and that portion of western Louisiana in Sabine River drainage basin upstream from U.S. Highway 190 crossing at BonWier, Texas.

39-1

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

IMPROVEMENTS

Navigation ...... 3 29. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD 1. TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX ...... 3 CONTROL PROJECTS ...... 17 Flood Control ...... 3 30. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL 2. AQUILLA LAKE, TX ...... 3 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS ...... 17 3. BARDWELL LAKE, TX...... 3 31. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD 4. BELTON LAKE, TX ...... 3 CONTROL PROJECTS ...... 17 5. BENBROOK LAKE, TX ...... 4 32. WORK UNDER SPECIAL 6. CANYON LAKE, TX ...... 5 AUTHORIZATION ...... 17 7. CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH Multi-Purpose Projects Including UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX ..... 5 Power ...... 18 8. DALLAS FLOODWAY 33. ROBERT DOUGLAS WILLIS EXTENSION, TX ...... 6 HYDROPOWER, TX ...... 18 9. FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM - LAKE 34. SAM RAYBURN DAM AND O' THE PINES, TX ...... 6 RESERVOIR, TX ...... 18 10. GRAHAM, TX (BRAZOS RIVER 35. TOWN BLUFF DAM - B. A BASIN) ...... 7 STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX ...... 19 11. GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX ...... 7 36. WHITNEY LAKE, TX ...... 20 12. HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX ...... 8 37. WHITNEY LAKE (POWERHOUSE), TX 13. JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX ...... 8 (MAJOR REHAB) ...... 20 14. JOE POOL LAKE, TX ...... 9 General Investigations ...... 20 15. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TX .... 10 38. SURVEYS ...... 20 16. LAVON LAKE, TX...... 10 39. FEASIBILITY ...... 20 17. LAVON LAKE MODIFICATION 40. PRECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND EAST FORK CHANNEL AND DESIGN ...... 21 IMPROVEMENT, TX ...... 11 41. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF 18. LEWISVILLE DAM, TX ...... 11 BASIC DATA ...... 21 19. NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX ...... 12 MISCELLANEOUS 20. O.C. FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX ...... 12 21. PROCTOR LAKE, TX ...... 12 (WATER SUPPLY) ...... 21 22. RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX ...... 13 42. TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION 23. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL ASSESSMENT ...... 21 IMPROVEMENT, TX ...... 14 TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement ... 23 24. SAN GABRIEL RIVER PROJECT, TX .... 14 TABLE 39-B - Authorizing Legislation ...... 32 25. SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX ...... 15 TABLE 39-C - Other Authorized Flood Control 26. STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX ...... 15 Projects ...... 36 27. WACO LAKE, TX ...... 16 TABLE 39-D - Inspection of Completed Flood 28. WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, Control Projects ...... 37 TX………………………………… ...... 16 TABLE 39-E -Work Under Special Authorization…………………………..38

39 -2 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

Navigation Existing project. For a description of completed improvement and authorizing act, see the Annual Report of 1969. Construction of project was 1. TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX started August 1963 and completed for beneficial use in November 1965. Estimated cost of project is See Galveston District, Chapter 40. $10,944,505, including $54,505 for Code 711 Sanitation Facilities. Flood Control Local cooperation. Local interests must 2. AQUILLA LAKE, TX reimburse the Federal Government for costs allocated to increased water supply storage under the terms of the Water Supply Act of 1958. A contract for Location. On Aquilla Creek in Hill County, Texas, with the dam at River Mile 23.3, about 6.8 municipal and industrial water supply was approved miles southwest of Hillsboro, Texas, and about 24.0 by the Secretary of the Army on June 24, 1963, and miles north of Waco, Texas. the Trinity River Authority, a State agency, agreed to fulfill all requirements of local cooperation. To date Existing project. For description of completed the authority has paid $3,437,881 toward principal improvements and authorizing acts see Annual and $5,633,499 toward annual cost of operation and Report of 1984. Construction was started March maintenance of project, including cost of operating a 1977, and project was ready for beneficial use April 10-foot conduit. 29, 1983. Estimated cost of project is $45,503,300. Operations during fiscal year. Completed the Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of painting of the service bridge and flood gates and 1958, as amended, and the Federal Water Project installation of keeper plates. Completed Recreation Act of 1965 and Section 221, Flood approximately 1 mile of road paving in various parks, Control Act of 1970 apply. A contract with the completed cultural resource survey in WCP to Brazos River Authority for water supply storage was facilitate installation of new water line. Continued approved by the Secretary of the Army, June 29, routine operation and maintenance activities. 1976. To date, the Authority has paid $2,197,867 toward principal and $1,672,187 to operation and Benefits accrued to Bardwell Lake project: maintenance. Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 were $45,457,500. Operations during fiscal year. Constructed 2,446 feet of fire lane and cleared 51 acres of woody 4. BELTON LAKE, TX invasive species through lease offset to protect natural resources. Repaired erosion along spillway Location. Dam is on Leon River about 16.7 and installed a weir to monitor seepage. Provided miles above confluence of Leon and Lampasas public hunting opportunities to over 300 visitors and Rivers and about 3 miles north of Belton, Texas. had a total of 82,708 recreational visits for FY2011. Continued routine operation and maintenance Existing project. For a description of activities. completed improvement and authorizing acts see

Annual Report of 1962. Construction started June Benefits accrued to Aquilla Lake project: 1949 and project was ready for beneficial use in Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 March 1954. Raising water supply pool: were $45,341,800. Construction started in July 1970 and the pool raise is complete. Estimated cost of project is $16,960,549, 3. BARDWELL LAKE, TX including $2,001,340 for Code 711 Sanitation Facilities. Location. Dam is on Waxahachie Creek 5- river miles upstream from its confluence with Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Chambers Creek, a tributary of the Trinity River, and Act of 1938, applies. A contract with Brazos River about 5 miles south of Ennis, Ellis County, Texas. Authority, a State agency, for remaining water supply

39-3 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

storage in the reservoir was approved by Secretary of September 1952. Estimated cost of project is the Army on January 15, 1958, at an estimated cost $13,130,463, including $1,411,214 in Code 711 of $5,125,003. To date, $2,681,387 has been paid. Sanitation Facilities. Under the contract, Brazos River Authority must also pay annually 32.094 percent of actual annual cost of Local cooperation. Section 6, Flood Control operation and maintenance. To date $5,464,258 has Act of 1944, applies. No water supply storage is been paid. An interim contract with Brazos River included in the project. In 1956, Congress passed Authority for emergency use of water supply storage legislation enabling the City of Fort Worth to was approved by Secretary of the Army on January 2, purchase conservation storage space in Benbrook 1957. The amount of $433,083 was paid by the Lake. Contracts have been negotiated with the City Authority on March 21, 1957, for use of these of Fort Worth, the Tarrant County Water Control and facilities was credited to interest and principal Improvement District, and the Benbrook Water and payable under formal water supply contract. Sewer Authority for the use of portions of the navigation storage for water supply purposes until Operations during fiscal year. Commenced such storage is required for Trinity River Navigation. work on several flood damage reduction work To date, $2,418,119 has been paid by the City of Fort packages, including: ARRA-funded embankment Worth, $10,647 by the City of Benbrook and repairs (rip rap removal, slope reshaping, and $354,554 by Benbrook Water and Sewer Authority. replacement of rip rap); and ARRA-funded A cost-sharing contract for O&M and recreation was replacement of flood gates, with Supplemental- entered into with the City of Benbrook, Tarrant funded conduit liner repair and stilling basin dewater Regional Water District and the Benbrook Water and and inspection. Work on the embankment rip rap was Sewer Authority in 1977. To date, $340,226 has completed in March of 2011. The liner repairs and been paid by the City of Fort Worth, $1,070,030 by stilling basin de-water and inspection have also been Tarrant Regional Water District, and $365,909 by the completed. The gate replacement is nearing Benbrook Water and Sewer Authority. completion. In addition, security upgrades funded with Homeland Security funds have been completed Operations during fiscal year. Continued at the office and flood control structure. ARRA- with improvements to West Creek Circle portion of funded utility upgrades (water and electrical) in both Bear Creek Park. Continued with construction of a Cedar Ridge and Live Oak Parks were completed. model airplane flying field runway utilizing Project continues successful volunteer program and Congressional add monies. Awarded task order for has a strong water safety outreach program, such as parking lots for two precast concrete waterborne partnering with the Ft. Hood Safety Office to conduct restrooms; completed installation of utilities to the “Train the Trainer” sessions for education of soldiers structures. Continued with maintenance of boundary while recreating on area lakes. Continued routine lines, clearing old fence lines, mowing fire lanes, operation and maintenance activities. while leveraging O&M funds by using funds provided as mitigation for natural gas/seismic Benefits accrued to Belton Lake project: exploration. Continued and expanded the active Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 volunteer program by utilizing 40 volunteers for over were $781,685,300. 10,700 hours and work projects involving 270 Scouts. Continued construction of additional 5. BENBROOK LAKE, TX volunteer sites in the campground. Managed active permit hunting program, involving 210 hunters and over 400 applicants. Rangers participated in proactive Location. Dam is in Tarrant County, Texas, on Clear Fork of Trinity River 15 river miles upstream water safety program, making personal contact with from its confluence with West Fork of Trinity River over 5000 visitors and attending several water safety about 10 miles southwest of downtown Fort Worth, fairs which resulted in making contact with about Texas. 8,000 attendees. Staff worked with marina operator to relinquish lease area. Continued routine operation Existing project. For description of completed and maintenance activities. improvement and authorizing acts. see the Annual Report of 1962. Construction of project was started Benefits accrued to system consisting of May 1947 and was ready for beneficial use in Benbrook Lake, Clear Fork and West Fork

39 -4 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

Floodways: Accumulated flood damages prevented while work continues on all construction phases of through FY2011 are estimated at $8,460,955,600. ARRA-funded contracts. In addition, O&M funds were used for security upgrades at the office and 6. CANYON LAKE, TX flood control structure and a Supplemental-funded contract was awarded to repair both service gate stems and cylinders. Documentary filming was Location. Dam is on Guadalupe River, 303 conducted in the Spillway Gorge, and a “Wounded miles above its mouth, and about 12 miles northwest Warrior” deer hunt was successfully held in Canyon of New Braunfels, Comal County, Texas. Park, supported and attended by the District Commander. Continued successful volunteer Existing project. For a description of completed improvement and authorizing act, see the program and strong water safety outreach program. Annual Report of 1969. Construction started in April Continued routine operation and maintenance 1958 and project was completed for beneficial use activities.

June 1964. Estimated cost of project is $19,088,524, Benefits accrued to Canyon Lake project: in including $280,766 for Code 711 Sanitation Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 Facilities and $1,400,000 contributed by local were $600,443,800. interests.

Hydropower. The Guadalupe-Blanco River 7. CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH Authority (GBRA) was licensed by the Federal UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX Energy Regulatory Commission to construct a 6,070- kilowatt plant, which is located adjacent to the Location. The Central City project is located existing outlet channel. The project operates utilizing in the northern portion of downtown Fort Worth, conservation releases, i.e., no change from the Texas, along the Clear Fork and West Fork of the present operating regiment is anticipated. The Trinity River. GBRA has an agreement with the Pedernales Electric Cooperative for sale of power. Construction of the Existing Project. The Central City project, as hydropower was completed in 1989 with non-Federal part of a larger Trinity River Vision project, was funds. authorized based on a locally produced Master Plan and was subject to determination of technical Local cooperation. Local interest, Guadalupe sufficiency and environmental acceptability. The Blanco River Authority (GBRA). will utilize water Corps of Engineers’ component of the Central City impounded for water supply and stream flow project includes a bypass channel and appurtenant regulation for development of electric power. In a structures to control flood flows along the Clear Fork formal contract approved by Chief of Engineers on and West Fork of the Trinity River. The project October 24, 1957, Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority would restore the Standard Project Flood level of protection for the Federally-authorized Fort Worth agreed to fulfill all requirements of local cooperation. Floodway project. Preconstruction, Engineering and Required contribution of $1,400,000 was made in full Design was initiated in FY06, and the PPA was by GBRA. The estimated cost of the water storage negotiated on September 5, 2008. The authorized contract is about $9,000,000. To date, $5,377,175 project cost is $220,000,000, of which $110,000,000 has been paid. In addition, $22,848 was contributed is Federally-funded, and $110,000,000 is funded by for installation and operation of reservoir leakage the non-Federal sponsor. gages. Under the contract, the authority must pay 34.8 percent of actual annual cost of operation and Local cooperation. The non-Federal sponsor maintenance. To date, $6,699,062 has been paid. is the Tarrant Regional Water District.

Operations during fiscal year. Commenced Operations during fiscal year. FY11 work on several ARRA-funded recreation expenditures for this project were $4,958,461. modernization packages in Cranes Mill Park, which Federal funds were used to fully fund design of included road and utility improvements, campsite and bypass channel and valley storage sites B&D; and, restroom reconstruction and upgrades, and a new gate fully fund construction contracts for bypass channel- complex. Some portions of the work, such as zone 2, Gateway hydraulic mitigation sites and gatehouse and restroom construction were completed, Riverside Park and Construction management.

39-5 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

8. DALLAS FLOODWAY approximately 30% complete and is scheduled for EXTENSION, TX completion in September 2016.

Location. The Dallas Floodway Extension is 9. FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM - LAKE in the metropolitan City of Dallas, Dallas County, O' THE PINES, TX Texas, along the Trinity River. Location. The Dam is on Cypress Creek in Existing Project. The project consists of a Marion, Harrison, Upshur, Morris, Camp, and Titus 3.7-mile long (1.5 miles upper; 2.2 miles lower) Counties, Texas, 8 miles west of Jefferson, Texas. Chain of Wetlands, with an average width of 600 feet, with the alignment being placed on the west Existing project. An earthfill dam 10,600 feet Trinity River overbank; Standard Project levee of long and 77 feet high includes a 200-foot spillway protection levees (5.2 miles) protecting the Lamar with a capacity of 68,200 cubic feet per second. Street, Rochester Park, and the Cadillac Heights area; Reservoir controls runoff from 850 square miles of a levee providing a 500-year level of protection to the drainage area and has a gross storage capacity of Central Waste Water Treatment Plant (CWWTP); realignment of the Trinity River at IH-45; plus 31 842,100 acre-feet, including 587,200 acre-feet flood miles of linear recreation; and, 1,179 acres of control storage, 3,800 acre-feet conservation storage, mitigation. During flooding, the upper and lower and 251,000 acre-feet for municipal and industrial wetlands would convey floodwaters to outfalls east water supply. Reservoir extends 28 miles upstream. of IH-45 and north of Loop 12, respectively. Project affords substantial flood protection of Additionally, the wetlands would provide 123 acres Cypress Creek Valley from dam site to confluence of ecosystem restoration. The proposed Lamar Street with Red River and, together with operation of other Levee would extend a total length of 16,419 feet, reservoirs proposed in Red River Basin, will provide with an average height of 17.6 feet. The downstream flood protection along main stem of Red River below end of the levee would tie into the Rochester Park Denison Dam. Construction commenced in January Levee, previously constructed by the city of Dallas. 1955 and was completed June 1960. Estimated The proposed Cadillac Heights Levee would extend a Federal cost of project is $19,215,008, including total length of 11,891 feet, with an average height of $1,775,990 for Code 711 Sanitation Facilities and 14.9 feet. The downstream end of the Cadillac $399,739 accelerated Public Works fund. This Heights Levee would tie into the CWWTP Levee. project transferred to the Fort Worth District as of the The River and Harbor Act of 1965 authorized the end of FY79 from the New Orleans District. flood control portion of the project. The ecosystem restoration and recreation portions were authorized Local cooperation. None required. by the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, Section 356. Construction was initiated in FY05. Operations during fiscal year. Continued Estimated Federal cost of this project is volunteer program with over 13,000 service hours $107,460,000 (October 2006 price levels), and performed. Obtained new commercial grade zero- estimated cost to local interests is $51,441,000, a turn mowers, bush-hog and grounds equipment for total cost for the project of $158,901,000. volunteer grounds keepers. Hosted National Public

Lands Day activities in coordination with the Boy Local cooperation. On May 2, 1998, the citizens passed a bond election to pay for the non- Scouts of America. Completed trail rehabilitation Federal portion of the project. The PPA was within Brushy Creek Park. Hosted the Northeast executed on 14 December 2001. Texas Wildlife Contest in coordination with the NRCS, USFS, USFWS, TPWD, and the local Texas Operations during fiscal year. FY11 Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Provided expenditures for this project were $6,174,339. Funds water safety programs to local schools. Awarded 14 were used for the continued establishment of native gate attendant service contracts for the operation of riparian grassland surrounding the previously facilities within public use areas. Purchased a new constructed Lower Chain of Wetlands; continuing patrol vessel for water safety patrol activities. design of the Upper Chain of Wetlands and Lamar Completed water safety saturation weekends, in Levee; initiating the geotechnical investigations for coordination and with participation from other Lamar Levee; and initiation of a supplemental regional lakes, to promote water safety efforts environmental impact statement. The project is throughout the region. Processed

39 -6 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

customer/stakeholder requests for water intake educational/recreational trail system connecting two structure dredging activities at two power plant existing park areas. Project construction was locations. Completed one transfer of a commercial initiated in FY05. The estimated cost of the project is concession to new owner. Purchased and installed a $15,639,000 with a Federal cost of $9,698,000 and a new playground and base material for Johnson Creek non-Federal cost of $5,941,000. Campground. Provided direct support for the 55,000 plus-acre wildfire in Northeast Texas, ensuring safe Local Cooperation. The Brazos River landing areas for aircraft to obtain water from the Authority is the non-Federal sponsor. The PCA was lake’s surface; rangers conducted numerous lake executed on October 24, 1999.

patrols to ensure recreational boaters were within safe FY11 zones. Purchased and installed recreation area signs. Operations during fiscal year. expenditures for this project were $884,310. Funds Completed a $40,000 erosion control project at were used for project administration, land purchases Overlook Boat Ramp. Coordinated two special event and demolition activities required for the project. deer hunts in cooperation with Challenged The Brazos River Authority has budgeted additional Outdoorsmen of America at Brushy Creek Park. funding for the Corps to complete real estate Finalized a 401-acre. ARRA-funded cultural resource acquisition to satisfy the non-Federal share of the inventory report. Coordinated Wilkes Power Plant project. intake dredging with State Historical Preservation Office. Conducted internal ergo inspection and continued to monitor outgrants for environmental 11. GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX compliance; 8 findings were documented and 7 of those were corrected. Also, 11 historical findings Location. Dam is in Tarrant County, Texas, on were closed this year, resulting in 18 corrections at Denton Creek, 11.7 river miles upstream from its Lake O' The Pines. Giant salvinia containment and confluence with Elm Fork of Trinity River and about control actions from 2009-2010 have shown 20 miles northwest of the City of Dallas, Texas. continued success. Conducted numerous salvage timber sales throughout the project. Conducted Existing project. For a description of prescribed burning on 481 acres. Resolved one completed improvement and authorizing act, see the timber encroachment and maintained approximately Annual Report of 1962. Construction of project was 10 acres of wildlife food plots. Dewatered stilling started December 1947 and ready for beneficial use basin. Performed Periodic Inspection #10 and found in July 1952. Estimated cost of project is few minor deficiencies. Most deficiencies have been $21,312,792, including $2,040,000 contributed by corrected. Lightning protection system was installed local interests and including $61,919 for Code 711 on intake structure. Expansion joint was repaired on Sanitation Facilities. A contract for modification of the bridge across uncontrolled spillway. Continued Embankment and Spillway was awarded September routine operation and maintenance activities. 30, 1983 and completed in FY90. The improvements provided for spillway modification by construction of Benefits accrued to Ferrells Bridge Dam-Lake spillway chute and stilling basin and a berm on the O' The Pines project: Accumulated flood damages downstream side of the main embankment. Costs for prevented through FY11 were $79,928,900. the spillway modification are included in the total project cost as stated above.

10. GRAHAM, TX (BRAZOS RIVER Local cooperation. A contract with Dallas BASIN) County Park Cities Water Control and Improvement District No. 2 for 50,000 acre-feet of water supply Location. The project is located in the north storage was approved by Secretary of the Army on central Texas City of Graham, in Young County, March 21, 1955. Park Cities paid the required along Salt Creek, a tributary of the Brazos River. $607,000. A contract with the City of Dallas for 85,000 acre-feet of water supply storage was Existing project. The Graham project consists approved by the Secretary of the Army on March 17, of a buy-out of 113 structures, mostly residential; 1954. The City of Dallas paid the required installation of a flood warning system estimated to $1,433,026. A contract with the City of Grapevine, provide a 12-hour warning time; 129 acres of Texas, for 1,250 acre-feet of water supply storage restored ecosystem; and creation of a local was approved by Secretary of the Army on

39-7 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

September 14, 1953, at an estimated cost of $22,654. The City of Grapevine renewed its original Local cooperation. Completed as required. agreement on July 3, 2003. This was approved for the use of storage included in the project for municipal Operations during fiscal year Continued and industrial water supply in accordance with the successful volunteer program and strong water safety provisions of the Water Supply Act of 1958, as outreach program. Completed the removal of woody amended. A contract for 25,000 acre-feet for interim vegetation along toe of dam and slopes of use of navigation storage with the City of Grapevine uncontrolled spillway channel. Conducted two was approved by Secretary of the Army on February successful deer hunts for disabled adults and 27, 1981, at an estimated cost of $684,000, has been disadvantaged children. Completed the installation paid in full. The above contracts include payment of of a new sewer aerobic system for a restroom in operation and maintenance costs as follows: Dallas Flatrock Park. Continued routine operation and County Park Cities Water Control and Improvement maintenance activities. District No. 2, a pro rata part of the actual annual cost, which part is to be not less than $2,000 nor Benefits accrued to Hords Creek project: more than $3,000; Dallas, 9.2 percent of actual Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 annual cost; and Grapevine, its pro rata part of actual were $1,068,800. annual cost (estimated at $79.55 annually and included in total annual payment). The following 13. JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX operation and maintenance payments have been made: Park Cities, $175,231; The City of Dallas, Location. Jim Chapman Lake is located in $1,688,070 and The City of Grapevine, $1,042,665. northeast Texas about 4 miles southeast of Cooper, Texas, 13.0 miles north of Sulphur Springs, Texas, Operations during fiscal year. Executed and is at river mile 23.3 on the South Sulphur River. $257,000 in Supplemental funding to harden flood- The South Sulphur River rises in Fannin County, damaged portions of the upstream face of the dam Texas, and flows generally east for about 80 miles to near the control tower. Awarded contracts to upgrade its confluence with the North Sulphur River to form electrical service to the control tower and to install a the Sulphur River. seepage collection system on the downstream side of the dam. Replaced crane cables at flood control Existing project. For a description of structure. Awarded painting of flood gates. completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the Continued routine operation and maintenance Annual Report of 1997. Construction of project was activities. started in July 1958 and completed for beneficial use in May 1994. The Energy and Water Development Benefits accrued to system, which is comprised Appropriations Act of 1997, P.L.104-206, H.R. 3816, of Grapevine Lake and Dallas Floodway: 104th Congress, H.R. 3816, effective September 30, Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 1996, changed the name of Cooper Lake and were $14,578,776,000. Channels, Texas, to Jim Chapman Lake, Texas. The estimated cost of the project is $138,723,098, 12. HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX including $227,000 non-Federal cost of land for the levees. Location. On Hords Creek, a tributary of Pecan Bayou, about 13.5 miles west of Coleman, Local cooperation. Local interests, North Texas, and about 27.8 miles upstream from mouth of Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD), Sulphur Hords Creek. River Municipal Water District (SRMWD), and the City of Irving will utilize water impounded for Existing project. For a description of present and future water supply. The total cost completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the allocated to water supply to be reimbursed is Annual Report of 1962. Construction of project was $54,600,000. The NTMWD has contracted for started January 1947 and completed for beneficial use 36.859 percent of the water supply storage for future in April 1948. Estimated cost of project is use with deferred payments for ten years. To date, $2,709,089 including $105,000 contributed by local $1,209,676 has been paid. Under the contract, interests. NTMWD must pay 13.803 percent of actual annual

39 -8 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

cost of operation and maintenance. To date, Benefits accrued to Jim Chapman Lake project: $1,135,705 has been paid. The SRMWD has Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY contracted for 6.502 percent of the water supply 2011 are estimated at $20,264,900. storage for initial use and 19.78 percent for future use, for a total of 26.282 percent of the water supply 14. JOE POOL LAKE, TX storage. To date, $1,426,795 has been paid. Under the contract, SRMWD must pay 2.435 present and Location. Dam is located at River Mile 11.2 on 7.407 percent of future actual annual operation and Mountain Creek, a right bank tributary of the West maintenance. To date, $850,884 has been paid. The Fork of the Trinity River, and is adjacent to the city City of Irving has contracted for 16.923 percent of limits of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas, which the water supply storage for initial use and 19.936 is one of the rapid growing cities in the Dallas-Fort percent for future use for a total of 36.859 percent of Worth Metropolitan area. the water supply storage. To date, $2,641,469 has been paid. Under the contract, Irving must pay 6.337 Existing project. For description of completed percent present and 7.466 percent of future actual improvement and authorizing acts, see the Annual annual operation and maintenance. To date, Report of 1996. Construction of project was started $1,407,061 has been paid. in 1975 and completed for beneficial use in

September 1994. Public Law 97-400, H.R. 7377, The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and 97th Congress, effective December 31, 1982, changed the Corps of Engineers entered into or agreed to the name of Lakeview Lake to Joe Pool Lake. formal Operation and Maintenance contracts for Estimated cost of project is $200,229,000, including recreation facilities and wildlife conservation and $11,350,000 contributed by local interests. management. Under the contracts for recreation facilities, dated 7 November 1988 and 11 September Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of 1990, Texas Parks and Wildlife is responsible for 100 1958 as amended, and the Federal Water Project percent of the operations and maintenance of two Recreation Act of 1965 apply. Water storage space state parks constructed with Federal funds. Under the contract with the Trinity River Authority (TRA) for contracts for wildlife conservation and management, 142,900 acre-feet of water supply storage space was the state is responsible for 24.14 percent of the executed June 15, 1977. Final capital cost for water operation, maintenance and replacement annual costs storage space is $60,828,657, including interest for areas totaling approximately 35,500 acres. The during construction and contractor claims. The TRA remaining balance is the responsibility of the project has paid $29,461,324 to date for water supply. Under sponsors and the Government. the contract, TRA must pay 42.563 percent of actual

annual operation and maintenance. Recreation Placed 800 Operations during fiscal year. development contract with the TRA Joe Pool Lake tons of 24" rip rap and 250 tons of 6" bedding stone was executed August 2, 1976. Under this original for erosion control and bank stabilization. recreation contract, as amended, TRA had difficulty Constructed 3,300 foot gravel access road below dam meeting its long-term capital debt repayment and installed culverts and geo grid along entire road. obligation to the Government. As a result, H.R. 4733, Continued to clean vegetation and debris from Title I, Section 102(b), 106th Congress, 2nd Session, drainage ditches below dam. Performed trail rehab authorized the City of Grand Prairie, TX, to pay the and repair in South Sulphur Unit, Cooper State Park, Government a total of $4,290,000 in two installments 4 prescribed burns at Cooper White Oak Creek in exchange for the local sponsorship of the Mitigation Area (WMA), and 5 prescribed burns at recreation program, relieving TRA of any and all WMA to control invasive species, reduce vegetation obligations. The City of Grand Prairie made its first fuel and improve the natural ecosystem. Continued installment in the amount of $2,150,000 on to monitor out grants for environmental compliance. December 1, 2000, and the second and final The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department cultural installment, in the amount of $2,140,000, on resources coordination policy was reviewed and December 1, 2003. approved. Continued routine operation and maintenance activities in all areas. Operations during fiscal year. Continued to

repair embankment skin slides and stabilize embankment. Administered work tasks using

39-9 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

mitigation funds from commercial seismic Operations during fiscal year. FY11 exploration activities to install fencing and expenditures, comprising of work on the FCSA and a clean/maintain boundary in low density recreation new project management plan for the project, were use area. Maintained the water safety program; park $151,808. rangers made 6,000 personal contacts on the water over the course of the summer. Worked with various 16. LAVON LAKE, TX entities and adjacent landowners/partners to administer 14 easement requests. Awarded task Location. Dam is in Collin County, Texas, on order for dewatering of the outlet works stilling East Fork of Trinity River 55.9 miles above its basin. Continued routine operation and maintenance confluence with Trinity River and about 22 miles activities. northeast of Dallas, Texas.

Benefits accrued to Joe Pool Lake project: Existing project. For a description of Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the were $3,564,390,600. Annual Report of 1962. Construction of project was started January 1948 and completed for beneficial use 15. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, in September 1953. See following section for Lavon TX Lake Modification and East Fork Channel Improvement authorized by Flood Control Act of Location. The project is located in the city of 1962. Estimated cost of project is $12,864,796, Arlington, Tarrant County, Texas, along Johnson including $1,065,996 for Code 711 Sanitation Creek, a tributary of the West Fork of the Trinity Facilities. River. Local cooperation. Section 6, Flood Control Existing Project. The Johnson Creek Act of 1944, applies. A contract with North Texas Watershed, which has a drainage area of 21 square Municipal Water District (NTMWD) for water miles, lies principally in Tarrant County, with a small supply storage, including cost of intake structure, was portion lying in Dallas County. The originally approved by Secretary of the Army March 16, 1954, authorized Johnson Creek project includes a buy-out at an estimated cost of $1,405,753. Contract was of 140 structures for flood damage reduction, 155 revised in 1967 and 1985, and renewed in October acres of ecosystem restoration, and 2.25 miles of 2004; final revised contract amount is $29,589,528. hard surface trail, picnic facilities and a pavilion. To date, NTMWD has paid $52,963,953. Under the The buy-out would prevent damages during a 25-year contract, NTMWD must pay annually 12.85 percent flood event. The original project cost was estimated of actual annual cost of operation and maintenance, at $31,934,000. Estimated Federal cost was and, to date ,has paid $2,889,958. $22,339,000 (October 2006 price levels), and estimated cost to local interests was $9,595,000. Operations during fiscal year. Work Construction was started in 1997 by the City of continued on aerobics system installation and Arlington. The project was modified by P.L. 110- decommissioning of the waste water treatment plants, 161, Section 117 to reflect a new conceptual city plan both ARRA funded activities. Work continued on entitled “Johnson Creek, A Vision of Conservation paving projects at Pebble Beach and Little Ridge (Vision Plan)”. Under this new authorization, the project cost was raised to $80,000,000 ($52,000,000 Parks. Installed new and updated existing security Federal and $28,000,000 non-Federal). system at the Lavon Lake Dam and Office Compound. Demolished existing restroom at Local cooperation. The City of Arlington, Brockdale Park and installed new CXT restroom at Texas, signed the PCA on December 1, 2000. Brockdale Park. Replaced lift stations and grinder Construction of the original project was halted in pumps at multiple restrooms in Lavonia and East FY06 at the request of the City of Arlington. In July Fork Parks. Purchased patrol boat. Continued 2010, work on the project was suspended pending routine operation and maintenance activities. negotiation of a new Feasibility Cost-Sharing Agreement (FCSA). The city and USACE are Benefits accrued to Lavon Lake project: negotiating a new FCSA. Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 were $623,141,100.

39- 10 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

17. LAVON LAKE MODIFICATION northwest of City of Dallas, Texas, at a site AND EAST FORK CHANNEL downstream from old Garza Dam.

IMPROVEMENT, TX Existing project. For a description of completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the Location. Existing dam is in Collin County Annual Report of 1962. Construction of project was Texas, on East Fork of Trinity River, 55.9 miles started November 1948 and completed for beneficial above its confluence with Trinity River and about use in November 1954. Estimated cost of project is 22.0 miles northeast of Dallas, Texas. Channel $19,654,988, including $1,641,977 for Code 711 improvement of East Fork extends from its mouth to Sanitation Facilities and $1,117,409 contributed by River Mile 31.8. local interests.

For a description of Existing project. Hydropower. The City of Denton, completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the Texas, (COD) was licensed by the Federal Energy Annual Report of 1988. Construction of project was Regulatory Commission to construct a 2,000-kilowatt initiated in May 1970 and completed for beneficial plant adjacent to the existing outlet channel. The use in December 1975. Estimated Federal cost of the project operates utilizing conservation releases, i.e., modification and improvement is $70,200,000, of no change from the present operating regiment is which approximately $2,200,000 is non-Federal anticipated. COD Utilities Department utilizes this contribution for lands, damages and relocations. power for its local customers. Construction of the hydropower was completed in 1991 with non-Federal Local cooperation. Local interests must funds. reimburse the Federal Government for costs allocated to increased water supply storage under the terms of Local cooperation. A contract with city of the Water Supply Act of 1958. The NTMWD has Dallas for 415,000 acre-feet of water supply storage contracted for 43 percent of the water supply rights and interests to Garza Dam and Reservoir was (approved September 22, 1967, by the Secretary of approved by the Secretary of the Army on July 16, the Army) and to date $1,535,514 has been paid. The 1953. Local contributions have been made in full. A NTMWD has submitted assurance to contract for 57 contract with city of Denton, Texas, for remaining percent of future water supply. Reimbursement is 21,000 acre-feet of water supply storage was currently estimated at $39,933,278. approved by the Secretary of the Army on May 20,

1954, with an estimated cost of $250,064. Local Levee Districts 4 and 5, which comprise the contributions have been paid in full. Under above lower 10 miles of the East Fork Channel, entered into contracts, cities of Dallas and Denton must pay agreements as required by Section 221 of the Flood annually 42.469 and 14.921 percent, respectively, of Control Act of 1970 on January 28, 1972 and have actual annual cost of operation and maintenance. To furnished all necessary construction easements. date, Dallas has paid $7,448,408 and Denton

$344,631. Both Dallas and Denton signed contracts Levee Districts 6, 8, 10, 13, and 15, which in 1980 for additional storage space at Lewisville. comprise the upper 15 miles of the East Fork Denton's contract gives Denton permanent storage Channel, have declined to provide the necessary rights to 26 percent of the storage between 515 and assurances. On December 8, 1972, this portion of the 522 ft above sea level. Dallas' contract is for 74 project was reclassified from "active" to "inactive" precent of the storage between 515 and 522 feet category. above sea level. The contract grants the cities

permanent rights only to that storage space. Continued Operations during fiscal year. routine operation and maintenance activities. Operations during fiscal year. Installed 9 of 10 new relief well and piezometers. Installed relief 18. LEWISVILLE DAM, TX well drainage, weir, and drain as part of IRRM. Rebuilt the Hoist Motor for Flood Gate #1. Replaced Location. Dam is in Denton County, Texas, on crane cables at flood control structure. Awarded Elm Fork of Trinity River 30 river miles above its replacement of flood service gate roller chains. confluence with Trinity River and about 22 miles Completed office security lighting upgrades.

39-11 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Continued routine operation and maintenance 20. O.C. FISHER DAM AND activities. LAKE, TX

Benefits accrued to system comprised of Location. Dam is on North Concho River, a Lewisville Lake, Ray Roberts Lake and Dallas tributary of Concho River, about 6.6 miles above Floodway Systems. Accumulated flood damages mouth of North Concho River near the City of San prevented through FY2011 were $49,858,884,000. Angelo, Texas.

19. NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX Existing project. For a description of completed improvement and authorizing acts, see the Location. Dam is in Navarro County, Texas, at Annual Report of 1962. Name was changed from River Mile 63.9 on Richland Creek, a tributary of San Angelo Dam and Reservoir to O.C. Fisher Dam Trinity River, about 16.0 miles southwest of and Lake on January 3, 1975 by P.L. 93-634. Corsicana, Texas. Construction of project was started May 1947 and completed for beneficial use February 1952. The Existing project. For description of completed estimated cost of the project is $16,027,467, improvement and authorization acts see Annual including $847,767 for Code 711 Sanitation Report of 1965. Construction started December 1959 Facilities. and project completed for beneficial use March 1963. Estimated cost of project $9,846,759 including Local cooperation. Flood Control Acts of $447,958 for Code 711 Sanitation Facilities and 1941 and 1944, apply. A water supply contract with $300,000 contributed by local interests. Upper Colorado River Authority for water supply storage in reservoir was approved by Secretary of the Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of Army in 1948 and renewed in 1999 for 50 years. The 1958, as amended, applies. A formal contract with Authority has contributed $860,444 toward cost of the Trinity River Authority was approved August 27, project and $428,793 toward operation and 1959, and amended August 8, 1961, by the Secretary maintenance. The Authority must pay additional of the Army, at an estimated cost of $2,260,800. To contributions of $1 a year for useful life of project, date, the Authority has paid $2,154,267 for water beginning January 1, 1965. supply and $3,765,407 for operation and maintenance. Operations during fiscal year. Continued routine operation and maintenance activities. Operations during fiscal year. Replaced two obsolete, concrete block restrooms in Liberty Hill Benefits accrued to O.C. Fisher Dam and Lake Park with new CXT restrooms. Replaced project: Accumulated flood damages prevented deteriorated group shelter in Oak Park with new through FY11 were $21,140,800. group shelter of all metal construction. Repaired a section of the roadway in Oak Park that was 21. PROCTOR LAKE, TX experiencing severe base failure. Repaired slides on the discharge channel slope. Placed an additional Location. Dam is at River Mile 238.9 on Leon two-foot layer of riprap on the upstream embankment River, a tributary of Brazos River, about 8.0 miles to prevent erosion and provide long-term protection northeast of Comanche in Comanche County, Texas. of prime facilities. The tainter gate motor and controls were painted. Began master plan update. Existing project. For a description of Continued routine operation and maintenance completed improvement and authorization act, see activities. the Annual Report of 1969. Construction of project was started in July 1960 and completed for beneficial Benefits accrued to Navarro Mills Lake project: use in 1963. The estimated cost of the project is Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 $14,464,585, including $74,559 for Code 711 were $71,990,000. Sanitation Facilities.

Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of 1958 applies. A formal contract with the Brazos

39- 12 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

River Authority, a State agency, was approved by total controlled storage of 1,064,600 acre-feet, with a Secretary of the Army, July 1, 1960, and was water surface area of 36,900 acres. The total storage modified and approved May 9, 1966, at an estimated includes 260,800 acre-feet for flood control, 749,200 cost of $1,707,900. To date, the Authority has paid acre-feet for water supply, and 54,600 acre-feet for $802,768 for water supply and $1,560,696 for sediment reserve. The Water Resources operation and maintenance. Development Act of 1990 authorized the Greenbelt Corridor between Lewisville and Ray Roberts Lakes. Operations during fiscal year. Completed Estimated Federal cost of the project is ARRA-funded contracts consisting of upgrades to $319,653,200. Public Law 96-384, 96th Congress, utility systems in Copperas Creek, Sowell Creek and H.R. 8094, effective January 4, 1981, changed the Promontory Parks; upgraded select campsites to 50 name of Aubrey Lake to Ray Roberts Lake. amp and sewer service; chip sealed and crack sealed roads in parks and dam crest; upgraded electrical Hydropower. At the request of the City of distribution system at Project Office; repaired Denton and the approval of the Secretary of the embankment slide adjacent to outlet structure; Army, the penstock was added to the embankment as repaired benched riprap on dam abutment; repaired a minimum facility for future hydropower. The city and reshaped discharge channel; installed OSHA of Denton, Texas (COD) was licensed by the Federal required permanent fall protection system; and Energy Regulatory Commission to construct a 1,000- repaired malfunctioning tainter gate hoist and kilowatt plant adjacent to the existing outlet channel. operating equipment. Implemented IRRM’s The project operates utilizing conservation releases, consisting of maintaining sufficient emergency flood i.e., no change from the present operating regiment is materials; installed 30 new piezometers; conducted anticipated. COD Utilities Department utilizes this geotechnical investigations and analyses to determine power for its local customers. Construction of the critical soil gradients; implemented risk hydropower was completed in 1991 with non-Federal communication plan; cleared 5.5 acres of vegetation funds. along toe of dam; and identified inspection and instrumentation monitoring thresholds. Installed new Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of shelter tops in Sowell Creek and Copperas Creek 1958, as amended, and the Federal Water Project Parks and replaced electrical distribution system in Recreation Act of 1965 and Section 221, Flood Sowell Creek Park. Conducted natural resources Control Act of 1970 apply. Contracts with the Cities management by the removal of 7 acres of Willow of Dallas and Denton, Texas, for water supply Baccharis, planted 7 acres of native grasses, repaired storage and recreation were approved by the 1.5 miles of fence, cleared nearly 2 miles of fire lane Secretary of the Army, September 16, 1980. To date, along boundary, and conducted 52 acres of the Cities of Dallas and Denton have paid their share prescribed burns. Continued routine operation and of the water supply storage in full. The City of maintenance activities. Dallas has paid $2,251,864 and The City of Denton Benefits accrued to Proctor Lake project: has paid $791,172 toward annual cost of operation Accumulated flood damages prevented through and maintenance. FY2011 were $81,483,900. Operations during fiscal year. Replaced crane 22. RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX cables at flood control structure. Monitored design- build contract for low-flow butterfly valve replacement. Continued routine operation and Dam site is located at River Mile Location. maintenance activities. 60.0 on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River, Denton

County, between Sanger and Aubrey, Texas and 30 Benefits accrued to Ray Roberts Lake project: miles upstream from Lewisville Dam. Accumulated flood damage prevented is included

with Lewisville Dam, TX. The plan of improvement Existing project. provides for construction of an earthfilled dam with a maximum height of 141 feet above the streambed, a length of 15,250 feet including an uncontrolled broadcrested spillway 100 feet long, controlling 682 square miles of drainage area. The lake will have a 23. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL

39-13 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

IMPROVEMENT, TX Mission Reach ecosystem and recreation separable element. FY11 expenditures were $6,091,919. Location. Floodway is in the City of San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas, on the San Antonio Benefits accrued to San Antonio project: River and San Pedro, Apache, Alazan, Martinez, and Accumulated damages prevented through FY11 were Six Mile Creeks. $4,506,954.

Existing Project. The project consists of 24. SAN GABRIEL RIVER PROJECT, 30.7 miles of channel and associated improvements TX on six separate streams. Completion of detailed engineering and design studies revealed that the least Location. Project is a system of three costly alternative for the remaining channel proposed reservoirs in Williamson County in the improvements would consist of two tunnels 120 feet central portion of Brazos River Basin, which consists below the surface each having an inside diameter of of Granger Dam at River Mile 31.9 on San Gabriel 24 feet and vertical intake, outlet and access shafts. River, about 7.0 miles east of Granger, Texas; North The San Pedro Creek tunnel is 6,040 feet in length San Gabriel Dam at River Mile 4.3 on North Fork of and the San Antonio River tunnel is 16,360 feet in San Gabriel River, about 3.5 miles northwest of length. Construction of the initially authorized Georgetown, Texas; and a planned South Fork Dam project was initiated in FY 1957. Estimated Federal at River Mile 4.7 on South Fork of San Gabriel cost of this project is $224,900,000 (Oct. 1, 2006, River, about 3.0 miles southwest of Georgetown, base price), and estimated cost to local interests is Texas. $106,100, which includes $30,220,000 cash contributions and $75,880,000 for lands, damages, Existing project. For a description of work-in-kind, and construction, a total of completed improvements and authorizing acts, see $331,000,000. The originally authorized project for the Annual Report of 2001. Construction of Granger flood risk management is complete. The remaining Lake started in October 1972 and the project was project for ecosystem restoration and recreation completed for beneficial use in January 1980. includes the creation of 113 acres of aquatic and 320 Estimated cost of project is $35,402,860. acres of riparian habitat and 55,800 feet of multi- Construction of North San Gabriel Dam and Lake purpose recreation trails. Improvements for flood Georgetown started in October 1972 and the project risk management considered for the Woodlawn area was completed for beneficial use in March 1980. will consist of channel modifications, detention dams Estimated cost of project is $38,115,063. The South and buyouts. Fork Lake project will be proposed for

deauthorization in the next Water Resources Local cooperation. Local interests must Development Act. furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction, including purchase and removal of buildings, Local cooperation. Construction is subject to relocation or reconstruction of bridges (exclusive of condition that local interests reimburse the Federal railway bridges), channel dams where applicable, and Government for costs allocated to water supply at utility lines; hold the United States free from Granger, Georgetown, and South Fork Lakes. damages; maintain and operate all works after Reimbursement currently estimated at $13,315,000 completion; and provide a cash contribution for for Granger, $6,295,000 for Georgetown, and enhancement benefits of 2.65 percent of actual $50,563,000 for South Fork, for a total of Federal construction cost. San Antonio River $70,172,000, exclusive of interest. Brazos River Authority furnished assurances that it will comply Authority, a State agency, is the local sponsor of the with all requirements of local cooperation. These project and, by letter, dated April 18, 1966, indicated assurances were accepted by the District Engineer on its acceptance of the proposed plan of development April 15, 1957. To date $41,996,669 has been and its willingness to pay for the costs allocated to contributed by San Antonio River Authority. water supply in each reservoir in the ultimate plan.

Such water supply assurances for Granger and During FY11, Operations during fiscal year. Georgetown Lakes were approved May 24, 1968 as construction was completed on Phases 1 & 2 of the satisfactory in accordance with requirements of the Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended. FY10 water

39- 14 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

supply payments were received from the Authority, must pay annually 28.655 percent of the actual and applied as follows: $208,220 for Granger and annual cost of operation and maintenance. To date $110,348 for Georgetown. FY10 O&M receipts were the Authority has paid $295,342. submitted by the Authority as follows: $304,546 for Granger and $238,110 for Georgetown. Operations during fiscal year. Commenced work on a major ARRA funded recreation Operations during fiscal year. Granger: modernization package in both Yegua and Rocky Commenced work on several improvement packages Creek Parks, to include: road and utility made available through ARRA funding including improvements; campsite and restroom reconstruction clearing and re-fencing of boundary line and and upgrades; new gate complexes; and repaving of reconstruction and asphalt overlay of several roads, the embankment road. To date, work is complete in which was completed in early spring of this year. Rocky Creek Park and continuing in Yegua Creek Also, awarded and completed O&M funded contract Park. Continued work using ARRA funds to replace to close numerous abandoned wells in accordance the Lake Office due to the lead, asbestos, and mold with state guidelines. Continued successful volunteer levels found within the old building. Continued program by constructing a “volunteer village”; successful volunteer program and strong water safety maintained a strong water safety outreach program. outreach program. Continued routine operation and Georgetown: Commenced work on a major maintenance activities. recreation modernization package made available through ARRA funding in Cedar Breaks and Jim Benefits accrued to Somerville Lake project: Hogg Parks to install electrical upgrades, to include Accumulated flood damages prevented through replacement of conductors and installation of 50-amp FY2010 were $185,636,700. service throughout both parks. Continued successful volunteer program and strong water safety outreach 26. STILLHOUSE HOLLOW program. Continued routine operation and DAM, TX maintenance at both projects.

Benefits accrued to project consisting of Location. Dam is on Lampasas River 16, Granger and Georgetown: Accumulated flood miles upstream from its confluence with Little River, damages prevented through FY2011 were a tributary of the Brazos River, and about 5 miles $87,242,800. southwest of Belton, Texas.

Existing project. For description of completed 25. SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX improvements and authorizing act see Annual Report of 1969. Construction was initiated in July 1962 and Location. Dam is on Yegua Creek 20 miles the project was completed for beneficial use in upstream from its confluence with Brazos River and February 1968. Estimated cost of project is about 2 miles south of Somerville, Texas. $20,522,084, including $613,780 for Code 711 Sanitation Facilities. Existing project. For description of completed improvements and authorizing act see Annual Report Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of of 1969. Construction started in June 1962 and the 1958 applies. A contract with the Brazos River project was completed for beneficial use in January Authority, a State agency, for water supply storage 1967. Estimated cost of project is $27,790,437, was approved April 13, 1962, by the Secretary of the including $1,555,713 for Code 711 Sanitation Army, at an estimated cost of $6,912,430. To date, Facilities. the Authority has paid $5,505,761. Also under the contract the Authority must pay annually 27.748 Local cooperation. The Water Supply Act of percent of the actual annual cost of operation and 1958, as amended, applies. A contract with the maintenance. To date, the Authority has paid Brazos River Authority, a State agency, for water $3,840,690. supply storage approved May 10, 1962, by the Secretary of the Army, at an estimated cost of Operations during fiscal year. Completed $7,383,391. To date, the Authority has paid obligation and award of Supplemental Flood funds. $4,013,211. Also under the contract, the Authority Dana Peak Park, the final park where flood repairs

39-15 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

were necessary, was re-opened in March 2010. Texas Commission of Environmental Quality Improvements, utilizing O&M funding, are underway violations associated with the wells. Developed and to parking and traffic control in Stillhouse Park to executed the winter closure plan; which closed parks handle large fishing tournaments and a new parking that were underutilized during the winter months. area is being constructed at the Lake Office to Built fence and gates to close park areas. Improved comply with Homeland Security requirements. lighting on hike and bike trail for visitor safety and Continued successful volunteer program and strong dam security. Worked with partners on grant and water safety outreach program, such as partnering challenge partnership to create a primitive camping with the Ft. Hood Safety Office to conduct “Train the area with trail access in Reynolds Creek Park. Trainer” sessions for education of soldiers while Continued successful annual volunteer program, recreating on area lakes. Continued routine operation which included Lake Shore Cleanup and National and maintenance activities. Public Lands Day events. Improved environmental outreach through: summer amphitheater programs; Benefits accrued to Stillhouse Hollow Dam Waco Wetlands partnership; and Adopt-a-School Project: Accumulated estimate of flood damages Cedar Ridge Elementary. Partnered with the prevented through FY2011 is $149,199,300. National Audubon Society to complete the Christmas bird count in the Waco area. Organized aquatic 27. WACO LAKE, TX vegetation habitat enhancement with volunteers and partners as part of updated hydrilla management plan. Continued routine operation and maintenance Location. Dam is on Bosque River, 4.6 river activities. miles above its confluence with Brazos River, at the

City of Waco, McLennan County, Texas. Benefits accrued to Waco Lake project:

Accumulated flood damages prevented through Existing project. For a description of FY2011 were $420,262,400. completed improvements and authorizing act, see the Annual Report of 1969. Estimated cost of project is $42,952,939, including $306,877 for Code 711 28. WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND Sanitation Facilities. Construction was started in July LAKE, TX 1958 and was completed for beneficial use in February 1965. Location. Dam is on Sulphur River in Cass and Bowie Counties, Texas. Dam is 45 miles above Local cooperation. Section G of the Flood mouth of Sulphur River, and about 8 miles southwest Control Act of December 1944 applies. A contract of Texarkana, Texas. with the Brazos River Authority, a State agency, for water supply storage and the contract with the City of Existing project. For a description of Waco transferring the existing Lake Waco to the completed improvements and authorizing act, see the Government for their water storage, was approved by Annual Report of 1984. Estimated cost of project is the Secretary of the Army on April 15, 1958. To $51,793,437, which includes $1,606,418 Code 711, date, the Authority has paid $4,598,758 for their $399,939 accelerated public works funds, and portion of the water supply storage. Also, under the $13,138,004 to be reimbursed by local interests over contract, the Authority and the city must pay 14.706 a period not to exceed 50 years for water supply percent and 2.087 percent, respectively of the actual storage, including $2,092,040 for pro rata share of cost of operation and maintenance. To date, the original reservoir cost. Construction was initiated in Authority has paid $3,915,771 and the city has paid August 1948 and completed in March 1962, except $487,731. A contract with the Brazos River real estate activities, construction under Code 711, Authority, for additional storage for municipal and and conversion of 120,000 acre-feet to water supply industrial water supply, was approved by the Acting storage after completion of Cooper Reservoir (now Assistant Secretary of the Army, September 28, Jim Chapman Lake). This project transferred to the 1984. Fort Worth District as of the end of FY79 from New Orleans District. Operations during fiscal year. The city provided potable water to Parks on the west side of Local cooperation. A contract with the City of the lake to ensure reliable water source and relieve Texarkana, Texas, for reserving water supply storage

39- 16 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

space was approved by the Secretary of the Army 30. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL December 17, 1968. To date, the city has paid RESERVOIR OPERATIONS $1,264,062. The city has paid $893,713 toward operation and maintenance costs of the project. In accordance with Flood Control Act of 1944,

expenditures were made for scheduling flood control Constructed Operations during fiscal year. reservoir operations and preparation of reservoir aerobic septic system for new restroom in Clear regulation manual for Marshall Ford Dam, on the Springs Park. Repaired retainer wall at North Shore Colorado River, near the City of Austin, Texas, and Swim Beach using supplemental funds. Electrical for preparation of reservoir regulation manual for upgrade completed at Rocky Point “C” section. Twin Buttes Dam, on Middle and South Concho Constructed the pavilion and the septic system for the Rivers near the City of San Angelo, Texas. Marshall new restroom at the Sportsman’s Cove Special Event Ford Dam was authorized by the River and Harbor Area. Completed 60 acre ARRA-funded and a 501- Act of 1937. Project was constructed jointly by acre O&M funded cultural resource survey and Bureau of Reclamation and Lower Colorado River inventory report which identified archeological and Authority and was completed during FY42. Twin historical sites. Conducted timber sales on 254 acres Buttes Reservoir was authorized for construction by in three areas. Conducted prescribed burning on the Department of Interior by P.L. 152, 85th 2,754 acres to control invasive species, reduce Congress. Construction was initiated in June 1960; vegetation fuel and improve the natural ecosystem.. closure of dam started in June 1962; deliberate Conducted mulching of understory on 29 acres in impoundment was started January 23, 1963. North Shore and Clear Springs Parks and the north end of the dam. Resurveyed 10 miles of boundary Accumulated damages prevented by Marshall line in various areas, cleared 4 miles of boundary line Ford Reservoir through FY11 were $438,226,600 and for fire breaks and installed 7 miles of delineation by Twin Buttes through FY11 were $1,179,850. posts on property line. Service gate hoists in intake Twin Buttes Reservoir consists of two separate pools: structure were striped of lead paint and repainted. one on South Concho River and the other on Middle Distribution panel in intake structure was replaced. Concho River and Spring Creek. Equalizing channel Lightning protection system installed on intake between these two pools is at elevation 1925.0. structure. New LED lighting was installed in intake structure. Continued routine operation and Total expenditures for scheduling reservoir maintenance activities. operations in FY11 were $92,248.

Benefits accrued to Wright Patman Dam and Lake project: Accumulated flood damages prevented 31. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD through FY11 were $96,602,100. CONTROL PROJECTS (See Table 39-C.) 29. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 32. WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Inspection of completed local flood protection (See Table 39-E.) projects is made periodically in compliance with Section 208.10, of Title 33, Code of Federal Flood control activities pursuant to Section Regulations, which contains regulations for operation 205, P.L. 585, 80th Congress, as amended and maintenance of local flood-protection works (preauthorization); Emergency stream bank approved by the Secretary of the Army in accordance protection under Section 14, Public Law 526, 79th with authority in Section 3, Flood Control Act of Congress, as amended; Snagging and Clearing of 1936. See Table 39-D for inspections made this navigable streams and tributaries in interest of flood fiscal year. control Section 208, P.L. 780, 83rd Congress, as

amended. Emergency flood control, hurricane-flood, Total inspection costs for FY11 from regular and shore protection activities, P.L. 99, 84th funds for maintenance were $502,286. Congress, and antecedent legislation, Environmental restoration under Section 1135, P.L. 662, 99th

39-17 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Congress, as amended; Aquatic ecosystem restoration under Section 206, P.L. 303, 104th Congress. Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance crew disassembled, sent out for repairs, and Fiscal year costs were $24,732 for the Operation reinstalled the Generator #1 Governor Servo. and Maintenance-funded catastrophic disaster Replaced the Revenue Meters in cooperation with preparedness program; $294,338 for the nationwide Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) and civil works activities and recreation; and $5,717 for Entergy. Provided maintenance support to Town the National Emergency Preparedness Program. Bluff Lake Office by working on the crane at the Fiscal year costs were $441,825 for the Flood Control flood control structure. Coordinated with SWPA in and Coastal Emergencies-funded Disaster repairing the RDW transformer bushing leak. Preparedness Program: $5,794 for levee repairs and Utilized Tenneessee Valley Authority (TVA) in the rehabilitation and inspection program; $3,941 for repairing the security fence around the power plant. continuing eligibility inspections; and $226,509 for Coordinated with TVA and Hydroelectric Desgin response operations (Proctor Lake). Center on providing assessment on Wicket Gate bushings and repair. Awarded the Power Plant Multi-Purpose Projects Including Power Electric Monitoring System Supply Contract to Rockwell Automation and started installation procedures. Coordinated with Lower Neches Valley 33. ROBERT DOUGLAS WILLIS Authority and Power Customers concerning water HYDROPOWER, TX releases and power supply during current extreme drought conditions. Consulted with HDC for a study Location. For location of completed dam see to upgrade the power plant to be more efficient and Town Bluff Dam-B.A. Steinhagen Lake, Texas, provide more power output. Continued routine section 35 in this chapter. operation and maintenance activities.

Existing project. Installation of hydroelectric power generating facilities at Town Bluff Dam was 34. SAM RAYBURN DAM AND authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1945 (P.L. RESERVOIR, TX 79-14), March 2, 1945, but deferred in the original construction. Town Bluff Dam was completed and Location. Dam is on Angelina River 25.2 placed in operation in 1951. A Design Analysis miles upstream from its confluence with Neches Report completed in April 1982 and a Feasibility River and about 10.0 miles northwest of Jasper, Report approved September 9, 1983 indicated that Texas. installing hydropower at this project was economically feasible. The hydropower facilities Existing project. For a description of include a 7,400-kilowatt power plant (two units at completed improvements and authorizing act, see the 3,700 kilowatts each), intake and outlet facilities, and Annual Report of 1969. Construction was started necessary switchgear equipment is located in the August 1956 and project was completed for main embankment at the old diversion channel. The beneficial use in March 1965. The estimated cost of plant is operated remotely from the Sam Rayburn the project is $68,683,000, including $3,000,000 project. The project produces an estimated 35,900 contributed by local interests. megawatt hours of energy per year. There is no Federal cost on this project; it is completely funded Local cooperation. A contract with the Lower by non-Federal funds. The estimated non-Federal Neches Valley Authority, a State agency, to cost is $18,643,000. 101st Congress House Report contribute $3,000,000 toward the first cost and an 923, effective February 7, 1989, changed the name of additional $200,000 annually for 50 years after Town Bluff Hydropower to Robert Douglas Willis completion of the project was approved by the Hydropower. Secretary of the Army on January 22, 1957. Contribution of $3,000,000 was made in full and Local cooperation. A contract with the Sam annual payments to date, totaling, $9,000,000, have Rayburn Municipal Power Authority was approved been made by the Authority. by Secretary of the Army, June 28, 1985, relative to A contract with the City of Lufkin for water financing, escrow agreement, and power sales supply storage was approved May 27, 1969, by the agreement. Secretary of the Army at an estimated cost of

39- 18 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

$525,600. To date, the city has paid $218,691. Also, 35. TOWN BLUFF DAM - B. A. under the contract, the City of Lufkin must pay 0.692 STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX percent of the annual cost of operation and maintenance. To date, the city has paid $450,989. Location. Dam is on Neches River, about 12.4

miles below mouth of Angelina River, one-half mile An extended Operations during fiscal year. north of Town Bluff, Texas, and 93.0 river miles “exceptional” drought impacted Sam Rayburn, with north of Beaumont, Texas. lake levels dropping within fractions of an inch of the

all-time low elevation. The Sam Rayburn staff Existing project. For description of completed conducted a “Wounded Warrior” hunt, which was improvement and authorizing acts see Annual Report extremely successful and enabled soldiers to enjoy of 1962. Construction started March 1947 and outdoor activities. Completed ARRA-funded 1,324- project was completed for beneficial use in April acre cultural resource survey and inventory report 1951. Estimated cost of project is $8,577,396, which identified archeological and historical sites. including $2,000,000 contribution by local interests. Cleared and marked approximately 130 miles of

boundary line using ARRA funds. Completed Local cooperation. Completed as required. ARRA-funded timber inventory on approximately

15,000 acres. ARRA funds were also used to Operations during fiscal year. Replaced hand continue construction of four natural resource access rails around coffer dam and power house discharge roads and continue installation of 44 associated gates. channel so they would adhere to OSHA standards. Completed flood gate rehab which included the Monitored seepage downstream toe of dam. bulkhead, emergency gate and two service gates and Completed land survey for land acquisition completed underwater survey in stilling basin. The downstream of dam. Completed underwater survey in Our Lands and Waters (OLWF) partnership with the stilling basin to assist in Periodic Inspection #6. Fort Worth District and Sam Rayburn Lake is Completed Periodic Inspection #6. Purchased new continuing to provide financial benefits while fishing dock for Sandy Creek Park. Continue the increasing customer satisfaction. Due to this unique repair/relocation (due to 2 major hurricanes in last 6 partnership, all camping, day use, and other years) of the Magnolia Ridge Nature Trail. Awarded recreation fees are sent to the Treasury via Natural contract to construct a new nature trail at Magnolia Resources Reservation System and then returned to Ridge Park. Continued the Invasive Aquatic OLWF. The new lease agreement with OLWF has Vegetation Management Program through an increased their participation to include service and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with utility contracts. Sam Rayburn Power House: LNVA/TPWD, and the Invasive Terrestrial Contract work continued on the ARRA-funded Vegetation Management Program through an MOU bridge crane service contract, modifications, and with Big Thicket National Preserve. Continued to submittals. Contract work continued on ARRA- improve the project Volunteer and Water Safety funded sump pump construction contract, programs. Continued to monitor outgrants for modifications, and submittals. Prepared environmental compliance. Conducted an external specifications and coordinated with TVA for Power ergo inspection involving Lake Staff from Town Plant CO2 fire protection replacement for the plant's Bluff and the district office - 5 findings were generators. Completed the installation of new heat documented and corrected. Nature pavilion exchanger plates for the thrust bearing cooling water construction and ditch clearing/culvert cleaning at skid on Generator #2. Procured and installed the new Martin Dies Jr State Park was coordinated with governor air compressor. Repaired the Generator #1 SHPO. Conducted numerous salvage timber sales Turbine bearing oil tub. Continued routine operation throughout the project. Completed stand and maintenance activities. establishment operations on 60 acres that were

cleared/raked/piled and burned, followed with Benefits accrued to Sam Rayburn project: herbicide application and planted with loblolly pines. Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 Continued routine operation and maintenance were $1,318,254,400. activities.

39-19 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

36. WHITNEY LAKE, TX Existing Project. Replace the two turbines, rewind and uprate the two generators, and replace necessary peripheral items and equipment within the Location. Dam is on Brazos River, about 442 powerhouse. The total increase in power output of miles above mouth of river, 5.5 miles southwest of the plant will be from 30 megawatts to 42 megawatts. Whitney, Texas, and about 38 miles upstream from

City of Waco, Texas. Local Cooperation. The power produced by the project is marketed by the Southwestern Power Existing project. For description of completed Administration (SWPA) to the Brazos Electric Power improvement and authorizing acts see Annual Report Cooperative as part of the Electric Reliability Council of 1962. Construction of project was started May of Texas (ERCOT). The project was initially to be 1947 and completed for flood control use in 100 percent Federally-funded with payback from the December 1951. First power was placed on the line Southwestern Power Administration’s sale of power. in June 1953. Raise power pool is complete. However, since no Federal funds have been Estimated cost of project is $42,952,939. appropriated since FY09, SWPA provided $6,336,000 in FY09, $6,545,000 in FY10, and Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control $5,560,000 in FY11 which has allowed the project to Act of 1938, applies. A contract with the Brazos continue without interruption. Reimbursement River Authority, a State agency, for water supply payments of Federal funds previously expended will storage was approved by the Secretary of the Army be initiated at the completion of construction. November 3, 1982. To date, the Authority has paid $286,964. Operations during fiscal year. Exercised option year four of the power plant rehabilitation Operations during fiscal year. Completed contract. Rewind of Generator #1 including construction of 26 miles of boundary fencing and 38 installation of new stator coils and rotor field poles miles of fire lane clearing through ARRA-funded has been completed. Thrust bearings, generator contract, lease offset, and cooperative fencing guide bearings, and turbine guide bearings have all agreements to protect natural resources. Completed been refurbished. Generator shaft and thrust collar ARRA-funded tainter gate repair and repaint project. were machined to specified tolerances. New wicket gates have been installed and head cover torque Replaced all courtesy traffic lights across dam. Due down. Restacking of Unit #1 has begun. to record low lake elevations, extended 11 public boat-ramps. Upgraded electrical service to project office to meet current demands and requirements. General Investigations Provided public hunting opportunities to over 1,105 visitors, hosted two special hunts for wounded 38. SURVEYS warriors/disabled veterans. Recreational visits in FY 2011 totaled 1,058,071. Continued routine operation Fiscal year costs for reconnaissance and and maintenance activities. feasibility studies were $3,778,939 for flood damage prevention studies and $554,200 for ecosystem Benefits accrued to Whitney Lake project: restoration studies. Miscellaneous activities include Accumulated flood damages prevented through FY11 $1,700 for Cooperation with Other Water Agencies; were $954,650,800. $0 for Special Investigations; $50,643 for Planning Assistance to States; $8,100 for Inter-agency Water 37. WHITNEY LAKE Resource Development; and $400 for North (POWERHOUSE), TX (MAJOR American Waterfowl Management Plan. REHAB) 39. FEASIBILITY Location. Whitney Lake is located on the Brazos River, about 75 miles southwest of Dallas, DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY Texas. The powerhouse is located at the dam, RIVER BASIN, TX approximately 5.5 miles southwest of Whitney, The project area is located adjacent to the Texas, on State Highway 22. Stemmons business corridor and the central business district in metropolitan Dallas County, Dallas, Texas. The existing floodway extends along the Trinity

39- 20 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

River, upstream from the abandoned Atchison, $27,600,000 (October 2006 prices), would provide Topeka and Santa Fe (AT&SF) railroad bridge at the flood damage reduction to the city, and would consist confluence of the West and Elm Forks, then upstream of levees, a small channel modification and other along the West Fork for approximately 2.2 miles and associated drainage features. Monetary net benefits upstream along the Elm Fork approximately four for both components are estimated at $4,900,000 miles. Of the 22.6 miles of levees within this project, annually. The Pre-Construction, Engineering and the East Levee is 11.7 miles in length and the West Design (PED) Agreement was executed on July 11, Levee is 10.9 miles in length. In addition to the 2007. The project was authorized for construction by existing levees, the floodway includes a modified WRDA 2007, Section 1001 (434). In addition, credit channel within the existing reach and structures for prior work along Onion Creek was authorized in including six pumping plants, five pressure conduits, Section 4155 of WRDA 2007. FY11 activities and seven drainage structures. included preparation of the draft PPA and draft The City of Dallas’ master plan for future development on the Trinity River, entitled the Trinity Limited Evaluation Report for Onion Creek; River Corridor Project, includes flood risk continued work on the Wharton PED activities; and management, recreation, ecosystem restoration, and continued work to achieve the Alternative Technical transportation features. Section 5141 of the Water Review on Phase I of the project. Expenditures for Resources Development Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-114) this project in FY11 were $394,473. authorized construction of the flood risk management recreation and ecosystem restoration features of the RIVERSIDE OXBOW, TX City of Dallas’ comprehensive plan, at a total project The Riverside Oxbow project was incorporated cost of $459,000,000, with an estimated Federal into the Central City project in FY08. For further share of $298,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal details, see Section 7 of this report. share of $161,000,000. It was determined that further geotechnical 41. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF investigations of the levees and floodway were BASIC DATA needed before the project could move forward and the Dallas Floodway Preconstruction, Engineering and Design project was converted to feasibility phase Work continued under the Flood Plain in FY09. The preliminary estimated cost of the Management Services on the compilation of overall feasibility study is $38,600,000, based on a information on floods and potential flood damages, 50/50 cost share with the sponsor. The feasibility including identification of those areas subject to study is scheduled for completion in May 2015. inundation. FY11 expenditures for Flood Plain Investigations funds in the amount of Management Services totaled $54,900 and Technical $3,527,100 were expended in FY11. American Services totaled $33,600. Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 funds in the amount of $251,839 were expended in FY11. MISCELLANEOUS (WATER SUPPLY)

40. PRECONSTRUCTION 42. TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN ASSESSMENT

LOWER COLORADO RIVER, The study area includes the State of Texas. The WHARTON/ONION, TX study was authorized in response to Texas Senate Bill The project areas are located in southeast Austin 1 and the establishment of the Regional Planning and southeast Travis County along Onion Creek, and Groups. These planning groups are responsible for in the City of Wharton, along the lower portion of the developing plans (every five years) to meet future Colorado River. The Onion Creek component, with water supply needs in their region for the next fifty an estimated first cost of $83,200,000 (October 2006 years. The objective is to identify potential prices), would consist of a buyout of approximately opportunities for the Corps to assist the state in 490 structures, with the vacated area being meeting future water needs through immediate redeveloped to produce passive recreational and technical assistance, and/or through initiation of ecosystem restoration outputs estimated at 62.7 studies leading to possible implementation of cost- habitat units annually. The City of Wharton shared water resources projects. Work is being component, with an estimated first cost of accomplished by Fort Worth District in-house staff, other Districts in Southwestern Division, the U. S.

39-21 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Geological Survey, the Texas Water Development Board, academia, and various Architect/Engineer contractors. FY11 expenditures were $407,185. Activities for this year: conducted various studies in conjunction with the Texas Water Development Board, including groundwater/surface water interaction studies for the Upper Brazos River Basin; conducted environmental flow studies (effect of flood flows on bank stability in the Brazos River); investigated sediment transport models in the San Antonio River; studied impacts of severe drought on Texas estuaries; and conducted environmental studies related to a proposed reservoir in the Upper Brazos River Basin. The study cost is estimated to be $12,000,000 and is 100 percent Federally funded.

39- 22 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note Trinity River Project 1 TX New Work: Includes: Approp. 12,792,000 13,000,000 12,594,000 7,688 106,457,553 Channel to Liberty, Cost 6,338,456 5,658,490 10,135,694 6,174,339 91,561,438 Tennessee Colony Lake, and Dallas Floodway Extension

2 Aquilla Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 45,503,300 Cost 0 0 0 0 45,503,300 Maint. Approp. 873,000 1,231,860 1,548,360 1,070,136 16,843,071 Cost 825,614 810,833 1,637,233 1,084,530 16,255,542 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 318,500 145,400 0 318,500 Cost 0 3,493 33,254 422,111 425,604

3 Bardwell Lake, TX New Work: 18 Approp. 0 0 0 0 10,944,505 18 Cost 0 0 0 0 10,944,505 Maint. Approp. 2,005,000 4,466,860 2,096,820 1,843,998 48,928,918 Cost 1,879,628 3,056,141 1,884,199 1,903,826 46,240,476 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 4,065,350 -1,417,000 0 4,065,350 Cost 0 27,126 1,900,634 403,142 430,268

4 Belton, Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 16,960,549 1 Cost 0 0 0 0 16,960,549 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,985,000 6,251,090 3,090,991 3,627,494 80,054,217 18 Cost 2,630,569 5,217,201 2,984,789 3,270,581 77,783,956 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 15,964,300 -356,710 344,248 16,308,548 Cost 0 48,674 5,859,628 9,224,582 9,273,256

39-23 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note 5 Benbrook Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 13,130,463 2 Cost 0 0 0 0 13,069,991 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,952,000 3,050,355 2,435,379 2,540,168 63,206,694 18 Cost 2,153,948 2,446,569 2,404,885 2,428,805 58,115,512

6 Canyon Lake, TX New Work: 3 Approp. 0 0 0 0 19,088,524 Cost 0 0 0 0 19,088,524 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,978,000 3,359,334 3,782,742 3,377,975 70,526,020 18 Cost 3,401,053 3,042,162 3,131,951 3,111,889 69,172,291 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 3,373,600 207,000 0 3,373,600 Cost 0 68,918 1,073,488 2,042,438 2,111,356

Central City, Fort 7 Worth, New Work: Upper Trinity River Approp. 7,872,000 6,000,000 6,782,000 15,000 21,967,000 Basin, TX Cost 2,623,536 5,976,434 4,948,281 4,958,461 17,739,647 (Federal Funds) (Contributed Funds) Contrib. Cost 366,000 4,511,014 2,676,970 2,182,205 9,386,219 799,010 11,062 0 0 1,621,129 New Work: (American Recovery and 38 Dallas Floodway, Reinvestment Act) Dallas, TX Approp. (Feasibility Study) Cost 0 1,250,400 0 0 1,250,400 0 25,656 484,174 251,839 277,495 8 Dallas Floodway New Work: Extension Approp. (Federal Funds) Cost 12,792,000 13,000,000 12,594,000 7,688 83,882,688 6,338,456 5,658,490 10,135,694 6,174,339 68,986,573 (Contributed Funds) Contrib. Cost 0 0 0 4,834,500 9,834,500

39- 24 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note 9 Ferrels Bridge Dam- New Work: Lake O' The Pines, 4 TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 19,215,008 4 Cost 0 0 0 0 19,215,008 Maint. 18 Approp. 3,007,000 3,879,054 3,303,823 3,698,359 82,579,760 18 Cost 3,335,597 4,670,186 3,384,841 3,472,355 82,891,914 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 8,671,400 1,900,000 -82,000 8,589,400 Cost 0 100,922 7,650,003 2,705,737 2,806,659

10 Graham, TX (Brazos New Work: River Basin) Approp. 0 0 484,000 6,785,905 8,613,905 Cost 871,236 335,837 169,741 884,310 2,701,929 (Federal Funds) (Contributed Funds) Contrib. 0 0 0 0 0 Cost 0 0 0 0 0

11 Grapevine Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 21,312,792 Cost 0 0 0 0 21,312,792 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,819,000 2,668,238 2,600,042 3,011,038 72,167,488 18 Cost 2,392,289 2,395,262 2,522,593 2,734,510 70,457,052 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 1,259,850 -262,079 -5,139 1,254,711 Cost 0 6,286 920,239 0 6,286

Hords Creek Lake, 12 TX New Work: 8 Approp. 0 0 0 0 2,709,089 Cost 0 0 0 0 2,709,089 Maint. 18 Approp. 1,236,000 1,345,540 1,509,750 1,676,182 34,672,479 18 Cost 1,131,665 1,350,476 1,545,068 1,625,294 34,156,998 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 576,850 -26,056 0 576,850 Cost 0 19,073 272,738 243,019 262,092

39-25 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note Jim Chapman Lake, 13 TX New Work: (Federal Funds) Approp. 0 0 0 0 138,695,589 Cost 0 0 0 0 138,723,098 New Work: (Contributed Funds) Contrib. 0 0 0 0 227,000 Cost 0 0 0 0 227,000 (Federal Funds) Maint. Approp. 1,617,000 1,839,378 1,616,670 1,902,880 25,998,424 Cost 1,741,562 1,843,725 1,771,583 1,840,276 25,735,793 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 2,457,050 -914,000 0 2,457,050 Cost 0 4,515 1,390,518 148,004 152,519

Joe Pool Lake, TX 14 New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 188,879,000 Cost 0 0 0 0 188,873,611 Maint. Approp. 726,000 1,616,360 1,054,452 1,080,450 18,019,816 Cost 903,839 1,173,385 1,210,278 1,044,512 17,459,279 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 2,284,850 245,761 -1,088 2,283,762 Cost 0 24,714 1,855,011 649,797 674,511

Johnson 15 Creek,Arlington, TX New Work: River Basin) Approp. 1,638,000 1,914,000 1,417,000 -418,326 20,883,874 Cost 942,707 1,298,333 941,703 151,808 19,439,536 (Federal Funds) (Contributed Funds) Contrib. 0 0 0 0 0 Cost 0 0 0 0 0

16 Lavon Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 12,864,796 Cost 0 0 0 0 12,864,796 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,491,000 2,794,500 3,295,603 3,088,328 79,983,951 18 Cost 2,431,444 3,091,150 2,732,471 3,130,447 79,550,697 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 2,390,000 22,686 -17,459 2,372,541 Cost 0 22,739 653,637 1,718,850 1,741,589

39- 26 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note 17 Lavon Lake New Work: Modification and Approp. 0 0 0 0 69,796,862 East Fork Channel Cost 0 0 0 0 69,796,862 Improvement, TX

18 Lewisville Dam , TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 19,654,988 9 Cost 0 0 0 0 19,654,988 Maint. 18 Approp. 4,432,000 3,525,443 4,526,318 3,536,914 100,891,074 18 Cost 3,596,232 4,016,807 3,700,232 3,393,990 96,398,327

19 Navarro Mills New Work: Lake, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 9,846,759 11 Cost 0 0 0 0 9,846,759 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,096,000 3,322,240 3,921,390 2,715,455 49,250,650 18 Cost 2,316,486 2,117,951 3,704,430 3,577,728 48,380,594 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 10,375,300 -17,200 106 10,375,406 Cost 0 38,234 10,198,767 177,809 216,043

20 O.C.Fisher Dam New Work: and Lake, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 16,027,467 Cost 0 0 0 0 16,027,467 Maint. 18 Approp. 806,000 825,160 1,094,940 1,347,424 34,283,794 18 Cost 1,172,753 914,473 1,089,684 1,181,893 34,066,149

21 Proctor Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 14,464,585 Cost 0 0 0 0 14,464,585 Maint. 18 Approp. 2,172,000 1,960,000 2,256,910 2,292,485 55,018,469 18 Cost 2,541,073 3,438,082 2,204,455 2,322,134 55,717,823 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 8,735,400 -2,321,400 -44,000 8,691,400 Cost 0 131,356 494,157 5,629,436 5,760,792

39-27 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note Ray Roberts Lake, 22 TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 319,778,700 Cost 0 0 0 0 319,648,066 Maint. Approp. 1,315,000 2,573,980 1,245,420 1,496,591 20,632,479 Cost 1,217,463 1,903,870 1,262,515 1,379,011 19,609,198 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 800,400 411,000 -2,497 797,903 Cost 0 14,356 634,939 60,968 75,324

Robert Douglas 34 Willis New Work: Hydropower, TX Contrib. 0 0 0 0 18,628,463 (Contributed Funds) Cost 0 0 0 0 18,628,463

34 Sam Rayburn New Work: Dam and Approp. 0 0 0 0 60,670,957 Reservoir, TX Cost 0 0 0 0 60,670,957 12 Maint. Approp. 3,912,000 6,078,010 5,898,655 6,494,545 135,253,415 18 Cost 6,702,723 5,689,261 5,662,557 6,142,104 133,397,991 18 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 5,977,200 -635,820 122,000 6,099,200 Cost 0 81,125 1,545,146 2,097,809 2,178,934

23 San Antonio New Work: Channel Approp. 9,840,000 10,000,000 3,028,000 0 186,856,587 Improvement, TX Cost 4,019,616 8,749,719 6,091,919 4,506,954 181,018,708 (Federal Funds) (Contributed Funds) Contrib. 18,816,000 768,029 1,025,144 6,500 29,436,983 Cost 1,316,923 12,043,849 7,382,639 759,559 22,263,162 New Work: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 25,400,000 -1,340,000 0 25,400,000 Cost 0 0 0 17,968,040

39- 28 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note San Gabriel River 24 Project, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 100,826,966 Cost 0 0 0 0 100,826,966 Maint. 18 Granger Lake Approp. 2,161,000 2,023,700 2,434,410 2,316,038 41,559,381 18 Cost 1,941,561 1,956,897 2,154,579 2,458,718 39,821,139 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 7,262,900 600,400 -12,000 7,250,900 Cost 0 40,479 3,239,073 4,570,689 4,611,168

18 Lake Georgetown Approp. 1,857,000 1,879,640 2,241,360 2,488,759 42,677,504 18 Cost 1,960,534 2,045,916 2,082,771 2,258,348 42,333,965 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 2,124,550 -580,000 96,000 2,220,550 Cost 0 18,092 283,201 1,108,193 1,126,285

25 Somerville Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 27,790,437 Cost 0 0 0 0 27,790,437 Maint. 18 Approp. 3,638,000 4,121,400 3,167,010 3,247,516 78,861,006 18 Cost 3,772,297 4,439,551 2,799,673 2,463,112 69,288,228 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 443,050 13,703,500 -185,000 258,050 Cost 0 115,260 599,915 9,186,170 9,301,430

26 Stillhouse Hollow New Work: 13 Dam, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 20,522,084 Cost 0 0 0 0 20,522,084 Maint. 18 Approp. 1,870,000 6,508,720 2,042,080 2,109,949 53,405,722 18 Cost 1,734,047 4,616,716 1,958,745 2,465,563 51,107,245 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 582,800 -19,235 -13,065 569,735 Cost 0 1,264 504,240 44,995 46,259

Texas Water 41 Allocation Assessment Approp. 702,000 980,000 990,000 98,137 7,572,158 Cost 681,234 444,417 427,293 890,025 6,774,362

39-29 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d) See Section Total Cost to See in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY11 Sep. 30,201117 Note 35 Town Bluff Dam- New Work: B.A. Steinhagen Approp. 0 0 0 0 6,577,396 14 Lake, TX Cost 0 0 0 0 6,577,396 Maint. 18 Approp. 3,478,000 2,600,279 2,466,165 2,665,338 56,169,071 18 Cost 3,746,911 3,150,453 3,312,813 2,435,637 54,916,635 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 667,150 -92,367 0 667,150 Cost 0 13,506 557,198 0 13,506

27 Waco Lake, TX New Work: 15 Approp. 0 0 0 0 52,755,921 Cost 0 0 0 0 52,755,921 Maint. 18 Approp. 4,102,000 4,320,873 3,696,795 3,078,779 79,608,594 18 Cost 4,571,543 4,014,365 3,467,908 4,746,888 80,006,461

36 Whitney Lake, TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 42,952,939 16 Cost 0 0 0 0 42,952,939 Maint. 18 Approp. 9,341,000 9,384,892 8,807,793 7,121,748 140,681,240 18 Cost 8,507,225 10,294,900 8,077,203 6,865,147 135,832,739 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 14,090,350 3,953,000 -266,000 13,824,350 Cost 0 37,642 4,761,079 12,058,451 12,096,093

Whitney Lake 37 (Powerhouse), TX (Major Rehab) Approp. 5,058,000 0 0 0 7,744,900 Cost 790,907 2,428,219 4,682,952 1,091,542 7,036,736

(Non -Federal Contrib. 0 6,336,000 6,545,000 5,560,000 11,896,000 Reimbursement) Cost 0 16,073 2,653,609 3,693,746 3,709,819

28 Wright Patman Dam New Work: 19 and Lake, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 36,163,454 19 Cost 0 0 0 0 36,163,454 Maint. 18 Approp. 3,340,000 4,161,351 3,360,071 3,904,235 78,770,548 18 Cost 3,451,645 4,406,659 3,642,090 3,639,465 76,709,381 Maint: (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 3,717,650 318,120 -40,000 3,677,650 Cost 0 690,039 2,128,169 1,118,425 1,808,464

39- 30 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-A – Cost and Financial Statement (cont’d)

1 Excludes $47,309 receipts from reconveyance of land deposited to miscellaneous receipts. 2 Excludes $322,346 receipts from reconveyance of land deposited to miscellaneous receipts. 3 Excludes $1,422,848 expended for new work from contributed funds, including $22,848 “Contributed Funds Other” for installation and operation of gages for leakage study. 4 Includes $1,775,990 for Code 711 and $399,739 accelerated Public Works Act funds. Excludes $1,711,200 contributed funds. 5 Includes $1,376,322 for Code 711, $52,808 for Code 713, and 399 accelerated Public Works Act funds. Excludes $4,137 reimbursed in Fisca l Year 1973. 6 Claim Northeast Texas Municipal Water District $16,546. Three payments of $12,410 less real charges of $1,325, making a total of $2,811 reimbursed in Fiscal Year 1972, Fiscal Year 1973, and Fiscal Year 1974. 7 Excludes $146,795 receipts from reconveyance of land deposited to miscellaneous receipts, and $2,040,026 for new work expended from contributed funds. 8 Excludes $105,079 expended from contributed funds. 9 Excludes receipts from reconveyance of land of $426,606 that were deposited to miscellaneous receipts, and $3,676,661 for new work expended from contributed funds. Includes $1,641,977 for Code 711. 10 Includes $130,000 under appropriation 96X5125. 11 Excludes $300,000 expended from contributed funds. 12 Excludes $3,000,000 expended from contributed funds. 13Includes receipts from disposals and revocation of funds related hereto. 14 Excludes $2,000,000 contributed funds expended. 15 Excludes $2,750,000 expended for contributed funds. 16 Excludes $188,282 receipts from reconveyance of lands deposited to miscellaneous accounts. 17 Includes funds provided by the Jobs Act (PL 98-8, dated march 24,1983). 18Beginning Fiscal Year 1985 data shown on Table A includes Special Recreational Use Fees. Data for previous fiscal years have changed to conform to the new procedure. 19 Excludes $399,939 accelerated public works funds, $13,138,004 to be reimbursed by local interests over a period not to exceed 50 years for water supply storage, and $2,092,040 for pro rata share of original reservoir cost.

39-31 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-B - Authorizing Legislation See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

AQUILLA LAKE, TX 2 Aug. 13, 1968 Construction of a dam on Aquilla Creek about 6.8 miles southwest S. Doc. 52, 90th of Hillsboro, Texas and about 24 miles north of Waco, Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess.

BARDWELL LAKE, TX 3 Mar. 31, 1960 Construction of a dam on Waxahachie Creek about 5 miles south H.Doc. 424, 86th of Ennis, Texas Cong., 2nd Sess.

BELTON LAKE, TX 4 Jul. 24, 1946 Construction of a dam on Leon River, about 3 miles north of H. Doc. 88, 79th Belton, Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess. Sep. 3, 1954 Modification of the dam to provide for generation of hydroelectric H. Doc. 535, 83rd power. Cong., 1st Sess.

BENBROOK LAKE, TX 5 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the Clear Fork of the Trinity River H. Doc.403, 79th about 10 mile southwest of Fort Worth, Texas Cong., 1st Sess.

CANYON LAKE, TX 6 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the Guadalupe River about 12 miles H. Doc. 247, 79th Sep. 3, 1954 northwest of New Braunfels, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, TX 7 Nov. 19, 2004 Construction of a bypass channel and appurtenant structures to P.L. 108-447, Section convey flood flows along the Clear & West Forks of the Trinity 116 River in Fort Worth, TX.

DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TX 8 Oct. 27, 1965 Channel and SPF levees and the Trinity Navigation Project. River and Harbor Act of 1965, Section 301 Oct. 12, 1996 Levee credits. WRDA 1996, Section Aug. 17, 1999 Recreation and ecosystem restoration. 351 WRDA 1999, Section 356

FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM-LAKE O’ THE PINES, TX 9 Jul. 24, 1946 Provides for construction of an earth fill dam and reservoir area. H. Doc. 602, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess.

GRAHAM, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN) 10 Aug 17, 1999 Project includes buyout of structures within the 10-year floodplain, WRDA 1999, Section installation of a flood warning system, construction of trails, and 101(a)(3) implementation of ecosystem restoration measures.

39- 32 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-B - Authorizing Legislation (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX 11 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on Denton Creek, a tributary of the Trinity H. Doc. 403,79th River, about 20 miles northwest of Dallas, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX 12 Aug. 3, 1941 Construction of a dam on Hords Creek, a tributary of Pecan H. Doc. 370, 77th Bayou, near the city of Coleman, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX 13 Aug. 3, 1955 Construction of an earth fill dam and reservoir area. cH. Doc.488. 84th , Cong., 1st Sess. JOE POOL LAKE, TX 14 Oct. 27, 1965 Construction of a dam on Mountain Creek, adjacent to the city H . Doc. 276, 89th limits of Grand Prairie, Texas, about 3 miles above the existing Cong., 1st Sess. Mountain Creek Dam.

JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TX 15 Aug. 17, 1999 Project includes a buy-out of 140 structures for flood damage PL 106-53, Sec. reduction, 155 acres of ecosystem restoration, and 2.25 miles of 101(b)(14) hard surface trail, picnic facilities and a pavilion.

LAVON LAKE, TX 16 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the East Fork of the Trinity River, about H. Doc. 533, 79th 22 miles northeast of Dallas, Texas Cong., 1st Sess.

LAVON LAKE MODIFICATION AND EAST FORK CHANNELS IMPROVEMENT, TX 17 Oct. 23,1962 Enlarge Lavon Dam and enlargement and realignment of the lower H. Doc. 554, 87th 25 miles of the East Fork of the Trinity River, including Cong., 2nd Sess. rehabilitation of existing levees. Mar. 7, 1974 Improvement of Collin County Road 115.

LEWISVILLE DAM, TX 18 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River near the H. Doc. 403, 79th city of Lewisville, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX 19 Sep. 3, 1954 Construction of a dam on Richland Creek, a tributary of the Trinity H. Doc. 498, 83rd River, about 16 miles southwest of Corsican Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess. Dec. 31, 1970 Alteration of FM Highway 3164 in Wolf Creek Park.

O.C. FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX. 20 Aug. 18,1941 Construction of a dam on the North Concho River just above San H. Doc. 315, 77th Angelo, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

39-33 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-B - Authorizing Legislation (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

PROCTOR LAKE 21 Sep. 3, 1954 Construction of a dam on the Leon River about 8 miles northeast H. Doc. 535, 83rd of Comanche, Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess.

RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX 22 Oct. 27,1965 Construction of a dam on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River H.Doc. 276, 89th between Sanger and Aubrey Texas, about 30 miles upstream from Cong., 1st Sess. the existing Lewisville Dam.

SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX 34 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the Angelina River about 10 miles S. Doc. 98, 79th northwest of Jasper, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX 23 Sep. 3, 1954 Channel improvement of the San Antonio River and tributaries in H. Doc. 344, 83rd and near the city of San Antonio, Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess. Oct. 22, 1976 Additional measures to protect Espada Aqueduct, Six Mile Creek WRDA 1976, Section 103 Oct. 12, 1996 Authorizes Section 215 reimbursement WRDA 1996, Section 224 Dec. 11, Authorizes environmental restoration and recreation as project WRDA 2000, Section 2000 335 purposes.

SAN GABRIEL RIVER PROJECT, TX 24 Sep. 3, 1954 Construction of: (1) a dam (Granger Dam and Lake) on the San H. Doc. 535, 83rd Jan. 3, 1975 Gabriel River about 7 miles east of Granger, Texas, (2) a dam Cong., 2nd Sess. (North Fork Lake) on the north Fork of the San Gabriel River H.Doc. 591, 87th about 3.5 miles northwest of Georgetown, Texas and (3) a dam Cong., 2nd Sess. (South Fork Lake) on the South Fork of the San Gabriel River about 3 miles southwest of Georgetown, Texas.

SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX 25 Sep 3, 1954 Construction of a dam on Yegua Creek about 5 miles south of H. Doc. 535, 83rd Somerville, Texas. Cong, 2nd Sess

STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX 26 Sep. 3, 1954 Construction of a dam on the Lampasas River about 5 miles H. Doc. 535, 83rd southwest of Belton, Texas. Cong., 2nd Sess.

TOWN BLUFF DAM-B.A. STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX 35 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of a dam on the Neches River near Jasper, Texas. S. Doc. 98, 79th Cong., 1st Sess.

39- 34 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-B - Authorizing Legislation (cont’d) See Sectio n Date in Authorizing Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

ROBERT DOUGLAS WILLIS HYDROPOWER, TX 33 Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of two units at 3,000 kilowatts each of hydroelectric S. Doc. 98, 79th power generating facilities connected with Town Bluff-B.A. Cong., 1st Sess. Steinhagen Lake, Texas.

TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX 1 Oct. 27, 1965 Construction of Tennessee Colony Dam located at river mile 339.2 H. Doc. 276, 89th on the Trinity River about 16 miles west of Palestine, Texas; a Cong., 1st Sess. multiple purpose channel from the Houston, Texas ship channel to H. Doc. 364, 90th Fort Worth, Texas; a distance of approximately 363 miles, an Cong., 2nd Sess. extension of the existing Dallas, Texas, Floodway downstream approximately 9.0 miles; a realignment and enlargement of the West Fork of the Trinity River from the mouth of the West Fork to the existing Texas, Floodway, a distance of approximately 31 miles; and water conveyance facilities involving construction of about 98 miles of pipeline from Tennessee Colony Lake to the existing Benbrook Lake.

WACO LAKE, TX 27 Sep. 3, 1954 Construction of a dam on the northwest edge of Waco, Texas, H. Doc. 535, 83rd, below the confluence of the North, South and Middle Bosque Cong., 2nd Sess. Rivers

WHITNEY LAKE, TX 36 Aug. 18, Construction of a dam on the Brazos River about H. Doc. 390, 77th 1941 19 miles southwest of Hillsboro, Texas. Raise Cong., 1st Sess. the power pool 13.0 feet.

WHITNEY LAKE (POWERHOUSE), TX (MAJOR REHAB) 37 July 6, 2001 Replace the two turbines, rewind and uprate the two Whitney Lake generators, and replace necessary peripheral items and Powerhouse equipment within the powerhouse. The total increase in Major Rehabilitation power output of the plant will be from 30 megawatts to 42 Evaluation Report megawatts.

WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX 28 Jul.24, 1946 Construction of an earth-filled dam and reservoir. H. Doc. 602, 79th Cong. 2nd Sess.

39-35 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-C – Other Authorized Flood Control Projects (See Section 31 of Text) For Last Full Cost to September 30, 2011 Report See Annual Report Operation and Project For Construction Maintenance Beals Creek, Big Spring, TX1 2001 - - Belton Lake Hydropower Study, TX5 - - - Belton Lake Modification, TX3 1988 - - Big Fossil Creek, TX1 1969 - - Boggy Creek, Austin, TX1 1992 - - Brownwood Channel Improvement, TX5 - - - Calloway Branch Hurst, TX1 1986 - - Carl L. Estes Dam and Lake, TX5 1979 - - Dam "A" Lake, TX5 1987 - - Elm Fork Floodway, TX 5 1987 - - Fort Worth Floodway (Clear Fork), TX1 1971 - - Fort Worth Floodway (West Fork), TX1 1971 - - Grand Prairie, TX (Landfill)1 1987 - - Grand Prairie, TX (Meyers Road)1 1989 - - Greenville, TX 1 1983 - - Lake Worth, Tarrant County, TX2 - - - Millican, TX2 1988/2003 - - Roanoke Lake, TX5 1979 - - Rutledge Hollow Creek Channel Improvement, 1969 - - Poteet, TX1 Sam Rayburn and Reservoir, TX (Dam Safety) 1 2001 - - San Gabriel River, South Fork Lakes, TX4 - - - Waco Lake, TX (Dam Safety) 1 2003 Zacate Creek Channel, TX1 1983 - -

1Completed 2Inactive 3Deferred 4Recommended for Deauthorization 5Deauthorized

39- 36 FORT WORTH, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 39-D - Inspection of Completed Flood Control Projects (See Section 29 in Text) Dates of Project, Location Inspection Arlington Landfill, Arlington, Texas January 18, 2011 Beals Creek, Big Spring, Texas April 13, 2007 Beltline Road Bridge, Richardson, Texas September 23, 2011 Big Fossil Creek Floodway, Richland Hills, Texas December 8, 2011 Boggy Creek Floodway, Austin, Texas March 29, 2007 Calloway Branch Channel, Hurst, Texas February 14, 2011 Calloway Branch, Airline Drive Park., Richland Hills, Texas December 8, 2011 Cat Claw Creek Channel, Abilene, Texas July 19, 2011 Dallas Floodway, Dallas, Texas November 13, 2008 Delaware Branch, Irving, Texas September 20, 2011 Dry Branch, Grand Prairie, Texas July 21, 2011 Duck Creek, Garland, Texas October 1, 2007 Fort Worth Floodway, Tarrant County, Texas November 1, 2010 Grand Prairie Landfill, Grand Prairie, Texas February 16, 2011 Hutton Branch, Carrollton, Texas September 23, 2011 Irving Levee, Texas September 20, 2011 Johnson Creek Channel, Grand Prairie, Texas June 30, 2011 Long Branch Channel, Greenville, Texas April 28, 2011 Lorean Branch Channel, Hurst, Texas February 14, 2011 McCoy Road Bridge, Carrollton, Texas September 23, 2011 Meyers Road, Grand Prairie, Texas February 16, 2011 Munday Floodway, Munday, Texas April 16, 2011 Park Row Bridge, Arlington, Texas January 25, 2011 Pleasanton Floodway, Pleasanton, Texas September 13, 2007 Poteet Floodway, Poteet, Texas September 13, 2007 Ridglea Country Club Drive Bridge, Fort Worth, Texas January 18, 2011 Roaring Springs Road Bridge, Westover Hills, Texas January 12, 2011 Rush Creek Channel, Arlington, Texas January 25, 2011 San Antonio Floodway, San Antonio, Texas February 12, 2007 San Antonio Tunnel, San Antonio, Texas February 13, 2007 San Pedro Tunnel, San Antonio, Texas February 13, 2007 Singing Hills Creek Channel, Watauga, Texas September 13, 2011 Sulphur Branch Channel, Euless, Texas March 23, 2011 Ten Mile Creek, Desoto, Texas April 22, 2011 Waco Waste Water Treatment Plant, Waco, Texas March 21, 2011 Walnut Branch Channel Improvement, Seguin, TX June 29, 2007 Walnut Creek Channel, Seguin, Texas June 29, 2007 West Fork Trinity River, River Oaks, Texas October 5, 2007 Wheeler Creek Channel, Gainesville, Texas June 29, 2011 Zacate Creek Floodway, Laredo, Texas September 14, 2007

39-37 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 39-E -Work Under Special Authorization (See Section 32 of Text) Project Flood Control Activities Section 205 Cost

Farmers Branch, Tarrant County, TX 133,380 Lewis Creek, Bulverde, TX 22,787 Little Fossil Creek, Haltom City, TX 321,511 Pecan Creek, Gainesville, TX 4,295,906 Post Oak Creek, Corsicana, TX 2,985 Section 205 Coordination Account 20,854

Project Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Section 206 Cost

Concho River, Upper Colorado River Basin, TX 30,778 Lake Austin Ecosystem Restoration, Austin, TX 31,693 Olmos Creek Restoration, San Antonio, TX 33,876 Rio Grande Ecosystem Restoration, Laredo, TX 78,099 San Marcos River, San Marcos, TX 64,373 Spring Lake Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, San Marcos, TX 2,221,198 Walnut Branch, Seguin, TX 206,516 WWTP, Meridian, TX 9,888 WWTP, Stephenville, TX 120,683 Section 206 Coordination Account 24,550

Project Ecosystem Restoration Section 1135 Cost

Big Cypress Bayou Fish and Wildlife Habitat, TX 269,823 Eagleland Restoration, San Antonio, TX 10,455 Lewisville Lake, Frisco, TX 100,726 Section 1135 Coordination Account 17,974

Project Stream Bank Protection Section 14 Cost

Colorado River, Caldwell Lane, Travis County, TX 1,256,973 Nokomis Road, Ten Mile Creek, Lancaster, TX 803,703 Section 14 Coordination Account 26,434

Project Environmental Protection & Restoration Section 204 Cost

Nueces Delta and Bay, TX 232,010 Section 204 Coordination Account 7,937

39- 38 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

The Galveston District comprises drainage basins of all short streams arising in the coastal plain of Texas and flowing into the Gulf of Mexico, including the entire basin of Buffalo Bayou, San Jacinto, San Bernard, Lavaca, Navidad, Mission, and Aransas Rivers. It embraces Agua Dulce, San Fernando, and Olmos Creek Basins draining into Baffin Bay, and the coastal area south thereof to the Rio Grande and east of the western Boundary of Starr County, Texas. It includes lower basins of major streams flowing into the Gulf of Mexico: Sabine River, Texas and Louisiana, downstream from U.S. Highway 190 crossing at Bon Wier, Texas; Neches River downstream from Town Bluff gauging station; Trinity River downstream from Texas State Highway 19 crossing at Riverside, Texas; Brazos River downstream from the confluence with Navasota River; Colorado River downstream from the northern boundary of Fayette County; Guadalupe River downstream from the confluence with San Marcos River; San Antonio River downstream from the confluence with Escondido Creek; Nueces River downstream from the confluence with Frio and Atascosa River.

40-1

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

IMPROVEMENTS

25. EMERGENCY STREAM BANK AND SHORELINE NAVIGATION ...... 3 EROSION WORK AND SNAGGING AND CLEARING ACTIVITIES UNDER SPECIAL 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL, TX ...... 3 AUTHORIZATION ...... 23 2. BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX ...... 3 3. CEDAR BAYOU, TX ...... 3 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION... 23 4. CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX ...... 4 5. CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX ...... 4 26. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR 6. FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ...... 6 IMPROVEMENT OF ENVIRONMENT ...... 23 7. GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX .... 6 27. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION ...... 24 8. GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY 28. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, TX ...... 24 BETWEEN APALACHEE BAY, FL, AND THE 29. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MARINE SCIENCE MEXICAN BORDER ...... 7 INSTITUTE (UTMSI) SECTION 206, TX ...... 25 9. HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION 30. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED CHANNELS, TX ...... 9 MATERIAL ...... 25 10. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX ...... 11 11. MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ...... 12 GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS ...... 25 12. NECHES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, SALT 31. SURVEYS ...... 25 WATER BARRIER AT BEAUMONT TX ...... 12 32. COORDINATION WITH OTHER ...... 25 13. SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ...... 12 AGENCIES ...... 25 14. TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX ...... 13 33. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA25

15. TRINITY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ..... 14 34. PRE-CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND 15A. ANAHUAC CHANNEL, TX ...... 14 DESIGN...... 26 15B. CHANNEL TO LIBERTY, TX ...... 15 TABLE 40-A - COST AND FINANCIAL 15C. WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX ...... 15 STATEMENT ...... 29 16. RECONNAISSANCE AND PROJECT TABLE 40-B - AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION . 38 CONDITION SURVEYS ...... 16 TABLE 40-C - OTHER AUTHORIZED 17. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL NAVIGATION PROJECTS ...... 58 AUTHORIZATION ...... 16 TABLE 40-D - OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD SHORE PROTECTION ...... 16 CONTROL PROJECTS ...... 59 TABLE 40-E – OTHER AUTHORIZED 18. NATIONAL EROSION CONTROL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROJECTS .. 60 DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION TABLE 40-F – DEAUTHORIZED PROJECTS ...... 61 PROGRAM , JEFFERSON COUNTY, TX ...... 16 TABLE 40-G – TOTAL COST OF EXISTING PROJECTS ...... 62 FLOOD CONTROL ...... 17 TABLE 40-H – CHANNEL DIMENSIONS ...... 62 19. BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX . 17 TABLE 40-I – GIWW DIMENSIONS ...... 62 19A. ADDICKS AND BARKER TABLE 40-J – DREDGING OPERATIONS ...... 62 RESERVOIRS, TX ...... 17 19B. BRAYS BAYOU ...... 18 19C. GREENS BAYOU ...... 18 19D. HALLS BAYOU ...... 19 19E. HUNTING BAYOU ...... 19 19F. LITTLE WHITE OAK BAYOU, TX ...... 19 19G. CARPENTERS BAYOU, TX ...... 20 20. CLEAR CREEK, TX ...... 20 21. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX ...... 21 21A. ARROYO COLORADO, TX ...... 21 21B. SOUTH MAIN CHANNEL, TX ...... 21 21C. RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN, TX ...... 21 22. SIMS BAYOU, TX ...... 22 23. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL WORKS...... 22 24. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION ...... 22

40-2 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Navigation Widening Brownsville Channel from Goose Island to Brownsville turning basin and deepening southeast 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL, TX corner of Brownsville turning basin to 36 feet was completed in April 1980. The 1,000-foot extension to (SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION) 1965 ACT existing north jetty was de-authorized under Section 1001 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. Location. Navigable waters, tributary streams, The entrance channel was enlarged from 38 feet by 300 connecting channels, and other allied waters in Texas. feet to 44 feet by 300 feet in FY 92. Construction of an Previous project. For details, see Page 699 of the environmental mitigation site, consisting of the creation Annual Report for 1963. of a 16-acre tidal wetland, which included shoal grass Existing project. A comprehensive project to and black mangroves, was completed in 1997. (See provide for control and progressive eradication of Table 40-G for total cost of the existing project to 30 water-hyacinth, alligator weed, Eurasian watermilfoil, September 2011.) hydrilla, and other invasive aquatic plant growths from Local cooperation. Fully complied with. navigable waters, tributary streams, connecting Terminal facilities. Numerous terminal facilities channels, and other allied waters in Texas in the for bulk and liquid cargo are available. (See Port Series combined interest of navigation, flood control, drainage, No. 26, revised 2003.) Facilities are adequate for agriculture, fish and wildlife conservation, public existing commerce. health, and related purposes, including continued Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: A research for development of the most effective and task order for Placement Areas 3 for dewatering and economic control measures. dust control was completed in FY11, for a total cost of Local cooperation. Sec. 302, 1965 River and $385,736. Emergency repairs were made to the North Harbor Act, amended by Water Resources Development Jetty at a cost of $1,233,094 in FY11. (See Table 40-J Act of 1986, applies. for dredging operations.) Operations during fiscal year. A cost-sharing, cost-reimbursable contract, with the State of Texas ended in FY05. The State of Texas received no aquatic 3. CEDAR BAYOU, TX plant funding in FY11 and no costs were incurred. Location. The bayou is about 30 miles long. It flows to the south and empties into the northwest corner 2. BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX of upper Galveston Bay, about 1.5 miles below the mouth of San Jacinto River and about 28.5 miles north Location. At the extreme south end of coast of of Galveston, Texas. (See National Ocean Survey Chart Texas, about 7 miles north of mouth of Rio Grande and 11326.) about 5 miles east of Brownsville, Texas. (See National Previous project. For details, see the Annual Ocean Survey Chart 11301.) Report for 1938. Previous project. For details, see Page 1,017 of the Existing project. Project provides for a channel 10 Annual Report for 1932. feet by 100 feet from Houston Ship Channel to Bayou Existing project. Provides for channel dimensions Mile 11.0. Channel was completed from Houston Ship in various sections of the waterway as shown in Table Channel to first bend in Cedar Bayou above the mouth 40-H. in 1931. Channel from Mile -0.1 to Mile 3.0 was Project also provides for dual jetties at the gulf completed in March 1975. Channel from 3.0 to Mile entrance, a north jetty 6,330 feet long, a south jetty 11.0 was de-authorized under Sec. 12 of Public Law 5,092 feet long, and 1,000-foot extension to existing (P.L.) 93-251 and re-authorized in December 2000, north jetty and for maintenance of third fishing harbor under Sec. 349 (a) (2) of P.L. 106-541, the Water constructed by local interests. Under ordinary Resources Development Act of 2000. The project also conditions, mean tidal range is about 1.5 feet, and includes jetties at mouth of bayou provided for under extreme range is about 2 feet. All depths refer to mean previous project. low tide. To some extent, height of tides is dependent Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range is on the wind, and during strong “northers” in winter about 0.6 feet and extreme range 1.2 feet. Height of season, water surface in southern end of Laguna Madre tides is dependent largely on the wind, and during may be raised 4 feet or more above mean low tide in the strong "northers" in the winter season, water surface gulf. may be depressed 2 feet below mean low tide.

40-3 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

A Feasibility Report to extend the Federal channel 4. CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX further inland was prepared by the Sponsor and approved by the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works (ASA(CW)) on 10 July 2006. The recommended Location. Port Bolivar is at the end of Bolivar project extends the channel 8 miles at the dimensions of Peninsula and 4 miles north of the City of Galveston. 10 x 100 from Mile 3.0 to Mile 11.0, or just below State Channel connects the port with channel in Galveston Highway 146. The Cedar Bayou waterfront, located Harbor. (See National Ocean Survey Chart 11324.) directly across the Houston Ship Channel from the Previous project. For details, see Page 1,856 of Barbour Cut Channel and Bayport container terminals is Appendix to the Annual Report for 191. mainly industrial and is now experiencing huge Existing project. Existing project dimensions for industrial development that will result in an increase in Channel are shown in Table 40-H. (Also see Table 40- shipping up and down the proposed channel. B for authorizing legislation.) Estimated costs for New Work is $13,303,000 Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range is Federal and $198,000 non-Federal, $1,860,000 for lands about 1.3 feet and extreme range 2 feet. Height of tides and damages, and $2,317,000 for associated costs. This is dependent largely on the wind, and during strong estimate includes a Federal reimbursement of "northers" in the winter season, water surface may be approximately $1,152,000 to the Sponsor, as stated in depressed 2 feet below mean low tide. Enlargement of Section 3147 WRDA 2007, which authorized the turning basin from 1,000 to 1,600 feet is inactive. A planning and design costs conducted by the non-Federal channel, 14 feet deep, 200 feet wide, and approximately interest to be credited toward their share of project 950 feet long, is maintained across the east end of the costs. (October 1, 2011 base price.) turning basin to accommodate the Galveston-Port (See Table 40-G for total cost of existing project to Bolivar ferry. The project is complete except for the 30 September 2011.) inactive portion. The project dimensions have not been Local cooperation. Fully complied with. The maintained in the completed part since lesser non-Federal Sponsor for the project is the Chambers dimensions are adequate for existing commerce. (See County Cedar Bayou Navigation District. A Design Table 40-G for the total cost of the existing project to 30 Agreement was executed in February 2006. The September 11.) Preconstruction Engineering and Design (PED) costs Local cooperation. None required. will ultimately be cost-shared at the construction cost Terminal facilities. Terminals are privately- share ratio but will be financed through the PED period owned and consist of two slips and two piers. The at 25 percent non-Federal cost. In late FY06, the piers, 400 feet wide by 1,200 feet long and 210 feet Sponsor applied for and received the ASA (CW)’s wide by 1,200 feet long, are badly deteriorated and not approval to advance non-Federal funds in the amount of in use. The slips are used as anchorage by shallow-draft $450,000 to continue work on plans and specifications. vessels. A highway ferry landing owned by the State of The funds will be credited toward the Sponsor’s share Texas is located at the south end of the turning basin. of construction. Facilities are considered adequate for existing The Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) has not commerce. been executed, pending receipt of Federal funding for Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: See construction. During the period of construction, the Table 40-J for Dredging Operations. non-Federal Sponsor is required to pay 10 percent of the cost of the general navigation features of the project, and to pay an additional 10 percent of the cost of the 5. CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, general navigation features of the project, over a period TX not to exceed 30 years, following completion of the project. Location. This project, formerly known as Port Terminal facilities. U.S. Steel Company has a Aransas-Corpus Christi Waterway, Texas, was changed barge dock at bayou Mile 2.8, and there are a few small to Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Texas, by the 1968 wharves, privately-owned, for local use at various River and Harbor Act. This is a consolidation of old places along Cedar Bayou. Facilities are considered improvements of Port Aransas, Texas, and channel from adequate for existing commerce. Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi, Texas. Aransas Pass is Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: on the southern portion of Texas Coast, 180 miles Routine Maintenance (See Table 40-J for dredging southwest of Galveston, and 132 miles north of mouth operations). of Rio Grande. Aransas Pass connects Corpus Christi Bay with the gulf. Waterway extends from deep water in the gulf through Aransas Pass jettied entrance, thence

40-4 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

westerly 20.75 miles to and including a turning basin at 1984. Construction contract for mitigation terracing Corpus Christi, thence westerly 1.75 miles through was completed in 1997. Industrial Canal to and including turning basin at Avery Work authorized by the Water Resource Point, thence westerly 4.25 miles to and including a Development Act of 2007 will modify the project by turning basin near Tule Lake, thence northwesterly 1.8 extending the La Quinta channel 1.5 miles at a 39-foot miles to and including a turning basin at Viola, Texas. depth; deepen the Corpus Christi ship Channel to 52 (See National Ocean Survey Charts 11308, 11309, feet and widen the channel to 530 feet; construct barge 11311, and 11314.) shelves on both sides of the main channel across Corpus Previous project. For details, see Page 1,861 of the Christi Bay, construct Ecosystem Restoration Features – Annual Report for 1915. the Ingleside Breakwater and Shoreline Revetment. Existing project. (See Table 40-H for existing Estimated cost for new work is $334,027,000, which project dimensions provided for in various channels and consists of Federal $135,773,000; non-Federal basins comprising this waterway.) $123,799,000, including $86,836,000 contributed Project also provides for two rubble-stone jetties at funds, $4,207,000 lands, $24,297,000 relocations; and Aransas Pass entrance, extending into the gulf from St. $74,455,000 associated cost. (October 1, 2011 base Joseph and Mustang Islands, project lengths of which price.) (See Table 40-G for total cost of existing project are 11,190 and 8,610 feet, respectively. Project further to 30 September 2011.) provides for a stone dike on St. Joseph Island about Local cooperation. Fully complied with for the 20,991 feet long, connecting with north jetty and completed work. The Corpus Christi Ship Channel extending up this island to prevent a channel being cut project, authorized by Water Resources Development around jetty. Project also provides for a breakwater at Act of 2007, the cost-sharing and financing concepts the entrance to the harbor area at Port Aransas, and for reflected in the Water Resources Development Act of the realignment of the existing 12-feet by 100-feet 1986, as amended apply. Local interests are required to project channel to Port Aransas. The breakwater provide lands, easements, rights-of-way, roads and other consists of two overlapping sections. The one on the facilities, except railroad bridges; pay one-half of the east side of the realigned entrance channel has a length separable and joint costs allocated to recreation; and pay of 830 feet and the second, located on the west side of 10 percent of that portion of total cost of initial the entrance channel, has a length of 1,290 feet. The construction of the general navigation features to a channel to Port Aransas was relocated in the 300-feet depth not in excess of 20 feet, plus 25 percent of that clear distance between the overlapping sections. The portion in excess of 20 feet but not in excess of 45 feet, portion of the channel remaining inside the breakwaters and 50 percent of that portion in excess of 45 feet, was widened to 150 feet. during construction, including in-kind work in Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range at connection with construction; and pay an additional 10 Aransas Pass is about 1.1 feet and extreme range about percent of the costs allocated to navigation within a 2 feet, and at Corpus Christi mean range about 1 foot period of 30 years following completion if not offset by and extreme about 1.5 feet. Heights of tides are credit allowed for lands, easements, rights-of-way, and dependent largely on strength and directions of winds, relocations. Local interests are required to contribute 35 and during strong “northers” in the winter season, when percent of total costs of the ecosystem restoration water surface may be depressed as much as 3 feet below features. ,mean low tide. The Port of Corpus Christi Authority is the Sponsor The Port Aransas-Corpus Christi 40-feet project for the project. A Project Partnership Agreement was completed in 1966. The Jewel Fulton Canal was (PPA) was executed October 13, 2009. completed in 1963. The Port Aransas Breakwaters were Terminal facilities. Terminal facilities on Harbor completed in July 1973. Deepening channels to 45 feet, Island at head of Aransas Pass, Ingleside, Corpus from Tule Lake Turning Basin through Viola Turning Christi, La Quinta, Avery Point, and Viola, are Basin was completed in 1989, and constructing a considered adequate for existing commerce. (See Port mooring area at Port Ingleside with dolphins has been Series, No. 25, revised 2003, Corps of Engineers.) deferred. Entrance and jetty channels have been dredged Operations during fiscal year. Through the use of to project depth and width along with dredging of funds provided by the American Recovery and channel from Harbor Island to and through the Channel Reinvestment Act (ARRA), work continued on the Turning Basin at 45-feet depth have been completed. project and was completed in FY11 Costs incurred in Initial mooring dolphins were completed in May 1979. FY11 were Federal - $65,762 and non-Federal - Disposal area levees, Area 1 and Rincon were $16,052.l. completed in August 1984. First stage disposal area Maintenance: Construction contract continued levees, South Shore, were completed in September through FY11 on Draining and Dewatering Placement

40-5 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Areas 1 and 2. (See Table 40-J for dredging Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range is operations.) about 1.5 feet and extreme range is about 2.5 feet. Except under extreme conditions, rises on river and in 6. FREEPORT HARBOR, TX diversion channel do not cause greater variations in water surface than those caused by tidal action. Estimated cost of 45-feet channel new work is: Location. The project was formed by Federal - $63,707,000 (Corps) and $470,000 (USCG); improvement of Brazos River, Texas, from mouth to and non-Federal - $32,313,000, including contributed about 6 miles upstream to Freeport, Texas. (See funds $21,302,000 contributed work $300,000 lands, National Ocean Survey Charts 11321 and 11322.) $6,967,000 and levees and spillways 3,174,000 and Previous projects. For details, see Page 1,860 of relocations $570,000s. (October 1, 1997 base price.) the Annual Report for 1915, and Page 872 of the Local cooperation. Fully complied with except Annual Report for 1938. for Section 101 of River and Harbor Act of 1970, under Existing project. Existing project dimensions for cost-sharing tenets of the Water Resources various channels and basins are shown in Table 40-H. Development Act of 1986 and the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. Local Cooperation Existing project also provides for dual jetties and a Agreement, executed June 26, 1986, along with diversion canal for the Brazos River, including a dam, a Amendments 1, 2, 3, and 4 executed March 19, 1987; lock in the dam and necessary auxiliary equipment. July 19, 1991; July 19, 1991; and July 15, 1997; Also provides for rehabilitation of southwest jetty and respectively, require that local interest provide lands, the relocation of the northeast jetty (about 640 feet to easements, rights-of-way, including land for recreation, the northeast); realignment of the channel between the and dredged material disposal areas, presently estimated Jetty Channel and Brazosport Turning Basin; at $10,141,000, modify or relocate utilities, roads, and realignment of the channel between Brazosport Turning other facilities, except railroad bridges, where necessary Basin and Upper Turning Basin; relocation of Upper for construction of the project, presently estimated at Turning Basin; and public use facilities adjacent to the $570,000, contribute in cash one-half of the separable Freeport Jetties. The assumption of maintenance for the and joint costs allocated to recreation, presently 30-foot channel from Upper Turning Basin to Stauffer estimated at $530,000; and, during construction, pay 25 Chemical Plant, including the turning basin, was percent of the construction costs allocated to deep-draft deauthorized by Sec. 12 of P.L. 93-251. Construction of navigation, including disposal facility construction, lock in diversion dam at local expense is considered presently estimated at $21,302,000. inactive. Terminal facilities. Small privately- owned The 38-36-foot project was completed in 1962. The wharves, two oil docks, one acid dock, two shell 45-foot channel was completed in 1993 as follows: unloading docks and one caustic dock. Brazos River Relocation of the U. S. Coast Guard station was Navigation District has one large dock with four transit completed in May 1990; dredging the channel and sheds over rail facilities permitting all-weather work. turning basin to 36-feet and the Upper Turning Basin to Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. 46-feet was completed in July 1990; dredging the jetty (See Port Series No. 26, revised in 2003, for additional channel and the Lower Turning Basin was completed in facilities.) November 1990; Construction of 3,700 feet of the Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: North Jetty, was completed in March 1991; dredging Work continued on the project in FY11. A task order the entrance channel was completed in April 1992; for Emergency Jetty Rehabilitation was performed at a dredging the Main channel, Brazosport turning basin cost of $604,453. Work activities also resumed on the and jetty channel was completed in June 1992; contract for the Emergency Storm water Drainage construction of public use facilities, and grading and Repairs at a cost of $15,400. (See Table 40-J for stone protection was completed in August 1992; and Dredging Operations.) rehabilitation of the south jetty and addition of 500-feet to the north jetty was completed in May 1993. Channel adjustments to a bend near the project’s main turning 7. GALVESTON HARBOR AND basin were completed in 1998 to provide full utilization CHANNEL, TX of the 45-foot channel. Construction of additional recreation features at Surfside by the Sponsor was Location. A consolidation of authorized completed in 2005. (See Table 40-G for total cost of improvements at Galveston, Texas, which includes existing project to 30 September 2011.) projects formerly identified as Galveston Harbor, Texas; Galveston Channel, Texas; and Galveston seawall

40-6 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

extension. Entrance to Galveston Harbor is on the Gulf container ship has been completed and placed into of Mexico on the northern portion of the Texas Coast. operation by the City of Galveston at Piers 10 and 11, Galveston Channel extends from a point in Galveston on the south side of Galveston Channel. The City of Harbor between Bolivar Peninsula and Fort Point to and Galveston has also placed into operation a barge along wharf front Galveston, Texas, and is about 5 terminal equipped with two 35-ton and one 5-ton cranes miles long and 1,200 feet wide. (See National Ocean for loading and unloading barges on Lash and Seabee Survey Chart 11324/5.) ships at Pier 35 and a docking and holding area for Lash Previous projects. For details, see Page 1,854 of and Seabee barges on Pelican Island, directly across the the Annual Report for 1915. channel from Piers 35 and 36. Present facilities are Existing project. Provides for channel dimensions considered adequate for existing commerce. in sections of the waterway shown in Table 40-H. Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: A Also provided are: two rubble-mound jetties, the contract to dewater Pelican Island Placement Area was south one extending from Galveston Island and the awarded July 29, 2010, and incurred a cost of north one extending from Bolivar Peninsula, for $2,518,170 in FY11. (See Table 40-J for Dredging distances of 35,900 feet and 25,907 feet, respectively, Operations.) into the Gulf of Mexico; a concrete seawall from the angle at Sixth Street and Broadway, in the City of 8. GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY Galveston, to the south jetty, and a 16,300-foot BETWEEN APALACHEE BAY, FL, AND extension of the concrete seawall in a southwesterly THE MEXICAN BORDER direction from 61st Street; for 11 groins along the gulf shore between 12th Street and 61st Street; and for maintenance of seawall from the angle at 6th Street and Location. Extends from a point on Sabine River Broadway to the south jetty. about 3 miles below Orange, Texas, to Brownsville, Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range in Texas, about 421 miles; a navigation channel, about 7 Galveston Harbor is 1.6 feet on outer bar and 1.4 feet on miles long, in Colorado River, extending from inner bar with extreme ranges of 2.3 and 2.1 feet, Matagorda, Texas, to Gulf of Mexico; a tributary respectively. Mean range in Galveston channel is about channel in San Bernard River, extending from 1.3 feet and extreme range about 2 feet under ordinary Intracoastal Waterway crossing to State highway bridge conditions. Height of tides in both Galveston harbor some 30 miles above crossing; a tributary channel in and channel is dependent largely on the wind, and Colorado River extending from Intracoastal Waterway during strong “northers”, water surface may be upstream 15.5 miles; a tributary channel. extending depressed 2 feet below mean low tide. about 14 miles from Intracoastal Waterway to Palacios, Texas; a tributary channel, extending about 2 miles Existing project is complete. Dredging of Galveston from Intracoastal Waterway to Rockport, Texas; a channel to 36-feet deep was completed in November tributary channel extending about 6 miles from 1966. Dredging of the realigned entrance and Outer Bar Intracoastal Waterway near Port Aransas, Texas, to Channel was completed in October 1967. Rehabilitation town of Aransas Pass, Texas; a tributary channel about of the Beach Front Groins was completed June 1970. one-fourth mile long, extending from Intracoastal Dredging of Galveston Channel to 40 feet was Waterway near Port O’Connor, Texas, into Barroom completed in March 1976. See Section 14. TEXAS Bay; a tributary channel extending about 38.8 miles CITY CHANNEL, TX regarding work authorized by from Intracoastal Waterway via Seadrift to a point in Water Resources Development Act of 1986, and Section Guadalupe River 5.5 miles below Victoria, Texas; a 9,HOUSTON-GALVESTONNAVIGATION harbor of refuge for small craft at Seadrift; a channel, CHANNELS, TX, for work authorized by the Water extending from gulf to Port Mansfield, Texas, about 11 Resources Development Act of 1996. (See Table 40-G miles; and a tributary channel in Arroyo, Colorado, for total cost of existing project to September 30, 2011.) extending from Intracoastal Waterway to a point near Local cooperation. Complied with. Harlingen, Texas, about 31 miles; side channels in Terminal facilities. None on Galveston Harbor, vicinity of Port Isabel, Texas, and a small boat basin at which is entrance channel leading to terminal facilities Port Isabel, Texas, and a tributary channel extending on Galveston, Texas City, and Houston Ship Channels. from Intracoastal Waterway main channel at a point in Galveston Channel terminal facilities are mostly on West Galveston Bay into Offatts Bayou about 2.2 miles south side of channel. Principal wharves, owned by the with a west turnout (wye connection) 12 feet deep and City of Galveston, extend from 10th to 41st Street (see 125 feet wide between Offatts Bayou Channel and the Port Series No. 23, revised 2006.) A container ship Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. (See National Ocean terminal equipped with a crane capable of stacking Survey Charts 11302, 11303, 11305, 11306, 11308, containers three units high on the deck of any normal

40-7 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

11309, 11314, 11315, 11317, 11319, 11322, 11326, and Terminal facilities. There are terminal facilities at 11331.) Aransas Pass, Port Arthur, Galveston, Port Isabel, and Previous project. For details, see Page 1,859 of Brownsville. See Port Series No. 22 (revised 2001), Port Annual Report for 1915. (West Galveston Bay and Series No. 23 (revised 2006), Port Series No. 25 Brazos River Canal, Texas.) (revised 2003) and Port Series No. 26 (revised 2003), Existing Project. Existing project dimensions Corps of Engineers. Local interests constructed terminal provided for in main channel of waterway: A channel facilities at Port Mansfield and Port Harlingen. There 12 feet deep (below mean low tide) and 125 feet wide are numerous privately- owned piers and wharves along from the Sabine River to Brownsville, Texas. the waterway. A 330-foot navigation district owned Relocation of channel 12 feet deep by 125 feet wide in general cargo dock, a 770-foot private dock and a 760- Matagorda Bay, miles 454.3 to 471.3, relocation of foot private timber trestle have recently been completed channel 12 feet deep by 125 feet wide in Corpus Christi at the upper end of the Channel to Victoria. Facilities Bay, Miles 539.4 to 549.7 (mileage is west of Harvey are adequate for existing commerce. Lock, Louisiana); and alternate channel, 12 feet deep Mouth of Colorado River: Construction of jetties (below mean low tide) and 125 feet wide via Galveston at mouth of Colorado River was completed in 1986. Channel and Galveston Bay to the Galveston causeway; Construction of a navigation channel from the Gulf to maintenance of existing channel 12 feet deep by 125 the GIWW and an impoundment basin were completed feet wide through Lydia Ann Channel, between Aransas in 1991. Construction of Tiger Island Dam and Bay and Aransas Pass; provisions of such passing recreation facilities were also completed in 1991. places, widening of bends, locks and guard locks, Construction of the recreation facilities at Jetty Park was railway bridges over artificial cuts as are necessary, and completed in 1992. Construction of the diversion dam the tributary channels shown in tabulation. The and connecting channel was completed in 1993. authorized channel 16 feet deep and 125 feet wide from Construction of the oyster cultch was completed in Sabine River to Houston Ship Channel is inactive. (See 1995. Table 40-I on existing project dimensions provided for Brazos River Floodgates- Major Rehabilitation: in tributary channels.) Major rehabilitation of the East Floodgate Guide walls Removal of the railroad bridge across the canal at was completed in 1997. The cost of rehabilitation was Mud Bayou was completed and operation and care of $2,750,000 Federal (Corps) and $2,750,000 Federal the facility was discontinued on April 14, 1969. (Inland Waterways Trust Fund). Deepening the existing 6 feet by 60 feet side channels at Channel to Victoria: Work authorized by the Port Isabel to 12 feet was completed February 22, 1972, Water Resources Development Act of 1988 provides for Offatts Bayou channel was completed January 1974. enlarging the existing Channel to Victoria from a depth Relocation of main channel across Corpus Christi Bay of 9 feet and width of 100 feet to a depth of 12 feet and was completed in September 1976. The 14-foot by 175- width of 125 feet. The estimated cost for new work is foot Channel to Aransas Pass was completed in April $31,686,000 Federal (Corps), $422,000 Federal 1979. Dredging Chocolate Bayou Channel was (Department of Transportation), $62,000 Federal (U.S. completed in January 1981. Construction of a saltwater Coast Guard), and $6,530,000 non-Federal consisting of barrier in Chocolate Bayou was completed in February $3,521,000 cash, $1,646,000 lands, and $1,363,000 1981. The 12-foot by 125-foot channel relocation route levees and other associated costs. (October 1, 2002 in Matagorda Bay has been de-authorized. The Harbor base price.) The PCA for Channel to Victoria was of Refuge at Seadrift, Texas, has been placed in the executed November 17, 1994. Work remaining consists inactive category. (See Table 40-G for total cost of of constructing Moist Soil Units in the Guadalupe existing project to September 30, 2011.) Wildlife Management Area to improve habitat for ducks Mean tidal variation is 0.5 foot at Orange, 1 foot at and other wildlife. This is for mitigation for impacts Port Arthur, 1.3 feet in Galveston Bay, 1.5 feet at incurred during the Channel to Victoria construction of Freeport, 1 foot in Matagorda Bay, 1 foot in San improvements. Antonio Bay, 1 foot at Corpus Christi, 1.5 feet at Port Local cooperation. Fully complied with except Isabel, and 1.5 feet at Brownsville. Extreme ranges of for provisions of Section 101, 1968 River and Harbor tide under ordinary conditions are 1 foot at Orange, 1.5 Act and Water Resources Development Act of 1988. feet at Port Arthur, 2 feet in Galveston Bay, 2 feet at The PCA for Channel to Victoria was executed Freeport, 1.5 feet in Matagorda and San Antonio Bays, November 17, 1994. 1.5 feet at Corpus Christi, 2 feet at Port Isabel, and 1.5 Chocolate Bayou Dredged Material feet at Brownsville. Height of tides is dependent largely Management Plan (DMMP), TX: on wind. Strong north winds have depressed water Location. The Chocolate Bayou Channel is a surface as much as 2 feet below mean low tide. navigation project located about 40 miles southwest of

40-8 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Houston in Chocolate Bay in Brazoria County, along Channel to Victoria – No maintenance performed the upper coast of Texas. during fiscal year. Existing project. The Chocolate Bayou Channel Colorado River Locks - The Colorado River is federally authorized and currently maintained at 12- Locks project office was operated and maintained at an feet deep (MLT) by 125-feet wide. The channel FY11 cost of $1,813,956. The contract to repair the traverses Chocolate Bay connecting industries at the boathouse was completed July 19, 2011, for an FY11 northwest end of the bay within Chocolate Bayou with cost of $50,191. the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) between Channel to Port Mansfield – A task order contract GIWW mile markers 374.7 and 376.7. The authorized for Dewatering Placement Areas 3 was awarded with channel is 8.2 miles long (13.2 miles to the turning regular funds December 8, 2010, and work was basin) and used primarily for transport of crude completed September 20, 2011 at an FY11 cost of petroleum and petrochemical products. The $186,029. (See Table 40-J for Dredging Operations.) maintenance dredging frequency for the channel is – A contract for Channel to every four years. Channel to Harlingen Harlingen Placement Areas 15, 19, and 23 repairs was This project provides a long-term management plan awarded with regular funds July 27, 2010 and that will utilize maintenance material from dredging of completed March 18, 2011, at an FY11 cost of the Chocolate Bayou Channel, over a 20-year period, to $1,512,109. (See Table 40-J for Dredging Operations.) create and enhance approximately 560 acres of marsh and bird-nesting habitat within the Chocolate Bay area. Chocolate Bayou – The contract for Dewatering Since 1950, approximately 32,400 acres of wetlands and Dust Control incurred an FY 11 cost of $186,029. have been lost in the Chocolate Bay system. The (See Table 40-J for Dredging Operations.) development of long-term beneficial use sites will have Mouth of Colorado River – (See Table 40-J for a cumulative beneficial effect on the biological Dredging Operations.) resources of the Chocolate Bayou system. Additionally, Maintenance - ARRA: the beneficial use of the dredged material over the next Mouth of Colorado River – A construction 20 years will extend the life of existing upland confined contract for constructing a new East Jetty and Channel placement areas. The Dredged Material Management Realignment was awarded September 2, 2009 and Plan was approved in December 2004. continued in FY11 for a Federal cost of $4,709,056. Estimated cost for new work is $24,086,000 Federal (See Table 40-J for Dredging Operations.) (Corps); and $2,676,000 non-Federal. (September 30, 2011 base price.) Construction of the first cycle of cells in beneficial 9. HOUSTON-GALVESTON use sites PA 1A and PA 4A was completed in July NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX 2006. Sprigging of altheaflora was completed in April 2007. Remaining construction is scheduled to be Location. Houston Ship Channel connects accomplished in the next 5 maintenance dredging cycles Galveston Harbor, at a point opposite Port Bolivar, with for the channel, which are every four years. The City of Houston, Texas, extending 50 miles Local cooperation. The non-Federal sponsor for northwesterly across Galveston Bay through San Jacinto the project is Brazoria County Conservation and River and Buffalo Bayou to a turning basin at head of Reclamation District Number 3. The PCA was Long Reach with light-draft channel 5 miles long from executed September 13, 2005. turning basin to Jensen Drive, Houston. The entrance Operations during fiscal year: to Galveston Harbor and Channel is on Gulf of Mexico on the northern portion of the Texas Coast. Galveston Maintenance: Channel extends from a point in Galveston Harbor A task order Main Channel and Tributaries - between Bolivar Peninsula and Fort Point to and along contract for Rollover to Bolivar for Placement Area wharf from Galveston, Texas and is about 5 miles long repairs and improvements was awarded with regular and 1,200 feet wide. (See National Ocean Survey funds November 25, 2009. FY11 costs were Charts 11324/5, 11327, 11328, and 11329.) $1,452,344. Existing project. See Section 7, GALVESTON The Brazos River Brazos River Floodgates - HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX and Section 10, Floodgates project office was operated and maintained HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX for project prior to at a Fiscal Year 11 cost of $1,725,410. Contract to October 1998. New authorized project provides for repair the boathouse was awarded September 23, 2010 enlarging the Houston Ship Channel to a depth of 45 and completed July 19, 2011, for an FY11 cost of feet and a width of 530 feet. The Galveston Channel $171,012. will be enlarged to a depth of 45 feet over a width which

40-9 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 varies between 650 and 1,112 feet, and deepening the Channel, and environmental restoration features along Galveston Harbor Channel to 47 feet (45-feet authorized the Houston Ship Channel. and 2 feet for dredging inaccuracies and wind impact) Local cooperation. Complied for the completed over its original 800-foot width and 10.5 mile length; work. The Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels and extending the channel an additional 3.9 miles to the project, authorized by the Water Resources 47-foot bottom contour in the Gulf of Mexico along Development Act of 1996, the cost-sharing and existing alignment. A dredged-material disposal plan, financing concepts reflected in the Water Resources which would utilize confined or beneficial uses of Development Act of 1986, as amended, apply. Local dredged material in the bay and/or offshore disposal and interests are required to provide lands, easements, 118 acres of Oyster Mitigation is also provided in the rights-of-way, roads and other facilities, except railroad project. bridges; pay one-half of the separable and joint costs Energy and Water Development Appropriations allocated to recreation; and pay 25 percent of the costs Act of 2001, Section 1(a)(2) of P.L. 106-377 authorized allocated to deep-draft navigation, during construction construction of barge lanes. Barge lanes will be including in-kind work in connection with construction; constructed on the sides of the Houston Ship Channel to and pay an additional 10 percent of the costs allocated a depth of 12 feet and a distance of 500 feet from the to navigation within a period of 30 years following centerline of the channel from Bolivar Roads to completion if not offset by credit allowed for lands, Morgan’s Point, a distance of approximately 26 miles. easements, rights-of-way, and relocations. Fifty-four acres of oyster reef will be impacted and will The Port of Houston Authority and the City of be mitigated. Galveston are the sponsors for the project. A PCA with Estimated cost for new work is: $578,452,000 the Port of Houston Authority was executed on June 10, Federal (Corps) which includes $364,586,000 for 1998. The PCA with the City of Galveston was general navigation features and $97,966,000 for executed on June 21, 2007. environmental restoration of which $115,900,000 is for Terminal facilities. See Section 7, GALVESTON deferred environmental construction; $7,203,000 HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX and Section 10, HOUSTON Federal (U.S. Coast Guard); and $203,237,000 non- SHIP CHANNEL, TX . Federal consisting of $119,354,000 cash, $1,163,000 Operations during fiscal year. The Galveston lands, and $69,000 relocations for general navigation Channel Deepening Station 20+000-8+031.5 contract features; $11,347,000 for berthing areas; and awarded November 3, 2008 was completed in FY11, $71,288,000 cash for environmental restoration which Federal costs were $0 and non-Federal costs were includes $38,633,000 for deferred environmental $320,168 ,with total FY11 costs of $320,168. The construction. (October 1, 2009 base price.) construction contract for Pelican Island Placement Area The first construction contract to dredge the levee repairs and shoreline protection was completed in Entrance Channel Extension, awarded 1998, was FY11 for fiscal year costs of ($1,804,861 Federal and completed in 1999. The contract for dredging the $601,621 non-Federal with a total fiscal year cost of entrance channel and jetty area was completed in March $2,406,482). Construction contract for Placement 2000. The Oyster Reef Mitigation for the main channel Areas 14 and 15 Levees, awarded September 19, 2008, was completed in 2000. Construction of the Lower Bay was completed in FY11. Federal costs incurred for reach was completed in 2001. A contract for Mid Bay FY11 were $2,016 and non-Federal costs were $672, for was awarded 2001 and work was completed in 2004. a total cost of $2,688. The contract was also funded The construction contract for Redfish Island was with ARRA funds. See below for the ARRA costs. awarded 2002 and construction was completed 2002. A The Alexander Island Placement Area Levee Rehab contract for Mid Bayou (Goat Island) was awarded contract, awarded September 30, 2008, was completed 2002, and work was completed 2005. The Lower in FY11. Federal costs incurred for FY11 were Bayou contract work was completed in 2003. The $2,304,619 and non-Federal costs were $790,381 for a Upper Bay & Barge Lane contract was completed in total cost of $3,095,000. Construction contract for Phase 2005. The Barge Lane Mitigation contract was 2 Multiple Site Repairs was awarded August 5, 2009. completed in 2005. The Houston Ship Channel and Costs incurred for FY11 were $6,318,838 Federal and entrance channel was opened to allow vessels drawing $2,332,795 non-Federal for a total of $9,175,655. The 45-foot of water in 2005. A considerable amount of contract was also with ARRA funds. See below for the shoaling has been experienced in the channel since ARRA costs. The Multiple Placement Area Shoreline opening and the construction efforts now focus on Site Repairs Phase I contract was awarded August 13, establishing 20-year capacity at the existing sites. 2009 and completed in FY11, at a total costs of Remaining work includes construction to increase $3,276,902 ($2,457,703 Federal and $819,199 non- capacities in Placement Areas, deepen Galveston

40-10 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Federal). The contract was also funded with ARRA Mile 1.57 was completed in 1970. Dredging Greens funds. See below for the ARRA costs. Bayou, Mile 1.57 to Mile 2.73, has been de-authorized. ARRA: Construction contract for Phase II See Section 9, HOUSTON-GALVESTON deepening of Galveston Channel, awarded September NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX for work authorized 19, 2008, was completed in FY11. Federal costs by the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. incurred for FY11 were $1,615,486 and non-Federal (See Table 40-G for total cost of existing project to costs were $627,931 for a total cost of $2,243,417. The September 30, 2011.) contract was also funded with regular funds. See above Mean tidal range under ordinary conditions is 0.6 for the regular costs. The Multiple Placement Area foot to 1.3 feet in lower part of Galveston Bay; 0.6 foot Shoreline Site Repairs Phase I contract, awarded August to 1.3 feet in upper bay; and 0.5 to 1 foot in San Jacinto 13, 2009, was completed in FY11 at a total cost of River and Buffalo Bayou. Extreme ranges under $10,841,403 ($8,131,052 Federal and $2,710,351 Non- ordinary conditions are about 2 feet, 1.2 feet and 1 foot, Federal). The contract was also funded with regular respectively. Freshets caused rises of over 12 feet in funds. See above for the regular costs. The Buffalo Bayou; however, this condition has not construction contract for Phase 2 Multiple Site Repairs, occurred since completion of Addicks and Barker Dams awarded August 5, 2009, continued through FY11. for flood control on upper watershed of Buffalo Bayou. Fiscal year costs were $1,573,062 ($1,573,062 Federal Height of tides is dependent largely on the wind, and and $524,021 non-Federal). The contract was also during strong “northers” in winter season, the water funded with regular funds. See above for the regular surface may be depressed 2 feet below mean low tide. costs. Construction contract for the Expansion of Local cooperation. Fully complied with for Placement Areas 14 and 15, awarded on February 25, Houston Ship Channel. The LCA for assumption of 2010, continued through FY11 at a total cost of maintenance on Bayport Ship Channel was executed $9,596,539 ($7,197,404 Federal and $2,399,135 non- April 6, 1993. LCA’s for assumption of maintenance Federal). The contract was also funded with regular on Barbour Terminal Channel and Greens Bayou funds. See above for the regular costs. Channel were both executed on February 8, 1994. Maintenance: See Section 7, GALVESTON Terminal facilities. The City of Houston and Port HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX and Section 10, of Houston Authority operate modern terminals which HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX for maintenance of supplement privately owned wharves, piers, and docks, existing channels. (See Table 40-J for Dredging as described in Port Series No. 24 (revised 1999), Corps Oerations.) of Engineers. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. 10. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: Contract for Multiple Site repairs Location. Houston Ship Channel connects was awarded November 25, 2009, and continued Galveston Harbor, at a point opposite Port Bolivar, with through FY11. Levees repaired were Lost Lake, Peggy City of Houston, Texas, extending 50 miles Lake, Spillman Island, Atkinson Island and Redfish northwesterly across Galveston Bay through San Jacinto Island. Costs incurred for FY11 were $5,821,040. The River and Buffalo Bayou to a turning basin at head of contract was also funded with ARRA funds. See Long Reach with light-draft channel 5 miles long from information below on Maintenance - ARRA for costs. turning basin to Jensen Drive, Houston. See National Contract for Goat Island debris removal and repairs was Ocean Survey Charts 11324/5, 11327, 11328, and awarded September 8, 2009 and continued through 11329.) FY11. FY11 costs incurred were $61,902. The contract for House Tract Placement Area Interior Rehabilitation Previous project. For details, see Page 1,856 of was awarded June 2, 2008 and completed May 29, 2011 the Annual Report for 1915. at a cost of $140,108. (See Table 40-J for Dredging Existing project. Provides for channel dimensions Operations.) in sections of the waterway shown in Table 40-H. Maintenance – ARRA: Continued work activities Also provides for certain cut-offs, for easing sharp on contract for multiple site repairs. Levees repaired bends, an earthen dam across the upper end of Turkey were Lost Lake, Peggy Lake, Spillman Island, Atkinson Bend, and for off-channel silting basins, as deemed Island, and Redfish Island. ARRA costs incurred in necessary. by the Chief of Engineers. Construction of FY11 were $22,973,310. 26,000 linear feet of pile dike to protect the channel in upper Galveston Bay was de-authorized by Sec. 12 of P.L. 93-251. The 40-foot project was completed in March 1966. Dredging a channel in Greens Bayou to

40-11 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

11. MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX Existing project. The project provides for an overflow dam in the Neches River, a gated salt water barrier consisting of five 56 feet by 24.5 feet tainter Location. This is a consolidation of shallow draft gates; a gated navigation bypass channel with a clear channel improvements of “Channel from Pass Cavallo opening of 56 feet and a depth of 16 feet; an access road to Port Lavaca, Texas,” and deep draft channel and levee; and an auxiliary dam across a canal which improvements authorized under “Matagorda Ship drains an adjacent bayou. The project was authorized Channel, Texas.” Bar at Pass Cavallo is 125 miles for construction in the Water Resources Development southwest of Galveston entrance and 54 miles north of Act of 1976 (Sec. 102, P.L. 94-587). Aransas Pass. It connects Matagorda Bay with the gulf. Project extends across Matagorda Bay and Lavaca Bay The construction contract was awarded September to towns of Port Lavaca and Point Comfort. These two 18, 2000 and all work was completed in 2004. towns are on opposite sides of Lavaca Bay and both are Local cooperation. Non Federal Sponsor for the about 26 miles northwest from Pass Cavallo. (See project is the Lower Neches Valley Authority. The National Ocean Survey Chart 11316.) Report of the Chief of Engineers for the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 authorization cited Existing project. Existing project dimensions provided for in various channels and basins are listed in a 1974 Waterways Experiment Station report, which Table 40-H on Channel Dimensions. concluded that 75 percent of the salinity in the Neches River at Beaumont was due to the Federal deep draft Project also provides for dual jetties at entrance, navigation project to Beaumont and 25 percent was due south jetty extending 6,000 feet to 24-feet depth in the to withdrawals by water users. From 1994 to 1996, the gulf and north jetty extending 5,900 feet to 24-foot Corps reevaluated the project which resulted in a May depth. 1997 decision by the ASA (CW) to direct that the Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range is about project go forward with 75 percent Federal and 25 1 foot and the extreme range is about 2 feet. Height of percent non-Federal cost-sharing as a navigation tide is dependent largely on the wind, and during strong mitigation project. In October 1999, the ASA(CW) “northers” in the winter season, the water surface may issued a decision stating that operations and be depressed 2 feet below mean low tide. maintenance will also be cost-shared at 75 percent Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Federal and 25 percent non-Federal. A PCA was Terminal facilities. The privately- owned facilities executed on May 22, 2000. at Port Lavaca, municipally- owned facilities at mouth Terminal facilities. None. of Lynn bayou, privately-owned and publicly-owned Operations during fiscal year. Reimbursement to facilities at Point Comfort, Texas are considered Lower Neches Valley Authority for the Federal share of adequate for present commerce. Facilities at Point the operations cost. Comfort consist of a channel, turning basin with wharfs, oil dock and loading equipment, all owned by Aluminum Company of America; and a wharf built by 13. SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX local interest at Point Comfort turning basin. Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: A Location. This is a consolidation of old contract for Emergency South Jetty Repairs was improvements of “Harbor at Sabine Pass and Port awarded March 18, 2010 and continued through FY11. Arthur Canal” and “Sabine-Neches Canal, including FY11 cost incurred was $3,339,689. (See Table 40-J for Sabine River to Orange and Neches River to Beaumont, Dredging Operations.) Texas.” Sabine Pass is on the Gulf of Mexico about 58 miles east of Galveston and 280 miles west of Southwest Pass, Mississippi River. It connects Sabine 12. NECHES RIVER AND Lake with the gulf. Port Arthur canal extends 7 miles TRIBUTARIES, SALT WATER BARRIER from near upper end of Sabine Pass to Port Arthur docks AT BEAUMONT TX at mouth of Taylors Bayou. Near its upper end, Sabine- Neches canal joins and extends to mouths of Neches Location. The project is located just below the and Sabine Rivers. Waterway next extends up Neches Big Thicket National Preserve and the confluence of River to Beaumont and up Sabine River to Orange. (See Pine Island Bayou and the Neches River at Beaumont, National Ocean Survey Charts 11341, 11342, and Texas, in Jefferson and Orange Counties on the upper 11343.) coast of Texas. (See National Ocean Survey Chart Previous projects. For details, see page 1,863 of 11343.) the Annual Report for 1915, page 985 of the Annual

40-12 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Report for 1,916, and page 873 of the Annual Report for 14. TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX 1926. Existing project dimensions Existing project. Location. Texas City is on the mainland of Texas provided for in various channels and basins are set forth on the west side of Galveston Bay, about 10 miles in Table 40-H on channel dimensions. Project also northwest of the City of Galveston. (See National Ocean provides for two stone jetties at Sabine Pass entrance Survey Charts 11324/5.) from the gulf, western jetty to be 21,905 feet long and eastern jetty 25,310 feet long. Project further provides Previous projects. For details, see Page 1,856 of for removal of guard lock in Sabine-Neches Canal, Annual Report for 1915. construction of suitable permanent protective works Existing project. Provides for channel 40 feet along Sabine Lake frontage owned by city of Port deep, 400 feet wide and about 6.75 miles long, from Arthur to prevent dredged material from entering Sabine Bolivar Roads to a turning basin at Texas City, 40 feet Lake and to prevent erosion of material deposited, deep, 1,000 feet to 1,200 feet wide and 4,253 feet long; reconstruction of Port Arthur Bridge, and relocation of and an Industrial Canal, 40 feet deep and 300-400 feet Port Arthur field office. wide extending a distance of 1.7 miles southwestward Mean tidal variation at entrance is about 1.5 feet, at from the south end of Texas City Turning Basin, and a Port Arthur about 1 foot, and at Orange and Beaumont turning basin, 40 feet deep, 1,000 feet wide and 1,150 about 0.5 feet. Prolonged north winds during winter feet long. season have depressed water surface as much as 3.4 feet Project also provides for easing the approach to the below mean low tide while tropical disturbances have turning basin; a pile dike 28,200 feet long, parallel to caused heights as much as 8 feet above mean low tide. and north of the channel; and a rubble-mound dike, Existing project is complete. Removal of 27,600 feet long, along the southerly side of the pile obstructive bridge at Port Arthur was completed May dike. 1969. The high level fixed bridge across Sabine-Neches The 40-foot channel was completed in June 1967. Canal was completed October 1970. Deepening project Widening the Texas City Turning Basin; realigning the to 40 feet was completed April 1972. (See Table 40-G Texas City Turning Basin to a location 85 feet easterly for total cost of existing project to September 30, 2011.) from its present position; and enlargement through widening and deepening of the Industrial Canal and Local cooperation. Complied with. basins was initiated in July 1980 and completed in June Terminal facilities. See Volume 2, Port Series No. 1982. The only work remaining is deferred construction 22 (revised 2001), Corps of Engineers. The facilities consisting of widening the Industrial Canal from 250 are considered adequate for present commerce. feet to 300 feet at 40 feet depth. Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: The Work authorized by Water Resources Development Lower Neches Valley Authority was reimbursed Act of 1986 would modify the project by providing for $310,626 in FY11 for the Federal share of the deepening the Texas City Turning Basin to 50 feet, operations cost for the Neches River and Tributaries, enlarging the 6.7-mile long Texas City Channel to 50 Saltwater Barrier at Beaumont. A rehabilitation feet by 600 feet, deepening the existing 800-foot wide contract to repair and renovate placement areas 8 and 11 Bolivar Roads Channel and Inner Bar Channel to 50 was awarded November 4, 2009 and completed in FY11 feet, deepening the existing 800-foot wide Outer Bar at a cost of $2,684,244. The contract was also funded and Galveston Entrance Channel to a 52-foot depth for with ARRA funds. A contract for Multiple Jetties 4.1 miles at a width of 800 feet and an additional reach Repair was awarded March 18, 2010 and continued at a width of 600 feet to the 52 foot contour in the Gulf through FY11. FY11 cost incurred was $3,843,973. of Mexico. Establishment of 600 acres of wetland and The contract was also funded with ARRA funds. (See development of water-oriented recreational facilities on Table 40-J for Dredging Operations) a 90-acre enlargement of the Texas City Dike were Maintenance Work - ARRA: A contract for authorized but never constructed because the non- Multiple Jetties Repair was awarded March 18, 2010 Federal sponsor, the City of Texas City was unable to and continued through FY11. FY11 cost incurred was secure funding to initiate plans and specifications. $3,570,841. The contract was also funded with regular In November 2007, approval of the General funds. See above for the regular costs. Reevaluation Report and Environmental Assessment for A rehabilitation contract to repair and renovate deepening the Texas City Channel to 45 feet was placement areas 8 and 11 were awarded November 4, granted. This reevaluated plan consists of deepening 2009 and completed at a cost of $4,774,144. The the 6.8 mile channel and Turning Basin to 45 feet, contract was also funded with regular funds. See above perform incidental widening of a bend in the channel for the regular costs. and constructing five semi-confined open water

40-13 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 placement areas adjacent to Shoal Point and Pelican extend about 1.9 miles southwestward from south end Island, one open water placement area on the north side of Texas City Turning Basin have been constructed by of the Texas City Dike and a rock groin on the eastern local interests. See Port Series No. 23 (revised 2006), tip of the Dike. (See Table 40-G for total cost of Corps of Engineers. existing project to September 30, 2011.) Operations during fiscal year. A design-build Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range is contract for Texas City Channel was awarded October about 1.3 feet and extreme range is about 2 feet. Height 26, 2009 and continued in FY 11 with costs incurred of of tide is dependent largely on the wind and, during $3,375,000 Federal and $1,125,000 non-Federal. The strong “northers” ,water surface may be depressed 2 feet contract was also funded with ARRA funds. (See Table below mean low tide. 40-J for Dredging Operations) Estimated cost for new work is $53,279,000 Contract to remove debris from the Turning Basin Federal (Corps), and $17,775,000 non-Federal. There was awarded October 28, 2010 and was completed in are no associated cost for lands and relocations. FY11. Costs incurred were $224,509 Federal and (October 1, 2009 base price.) $74,836 non-Federal. In October 2009, a design-build contract was ARRA: A design-build contract for Texas City awarded for the deepening of the Texas City Channel Channel, awarded October 26, 2009, continued in from 40 to 45 ft. Dredging commenced in November FY11. Costs incurred were $29,631,274 Federal and 2010 and continued until June of 2011. The deeper non-Federal $9,874,476. The contract was also funded channel opened for deeper draft ships in July 2011. with regular funds. See New Work above for the costs. Construction of three dredged material placement areas Maintenance: Routine Maintenance. (See Table was completed in the summer of 2011. The placement 40-J for Dredging Operations.) areas, over time will be converted to emergent marsh and will provide environmental benefits. Remaining work on the contract includes armoring of the placement 15. TRINITY RIVER AND areas TRIBUTARIES, TX In November/December 2009, the remains of the Civil War Union gun ship, the USS Westfield were Location. The main stem of the Trinity River is removed. Eighteen cannonballs, a 10,000 pound formed at Dallas by the confluence of the West Fork Dalhgren Cannon, numerous brass fixtures and some and the Elm Fork at river mile 505.5. The mouth of the larger pieces of the ship were brought to the surface. Trinity is about one-half mile west of Anahuac, Texas. Currently the items are being restored and will (See Geological Survey base map, Texas, scale ultimately be available for museums for display. 1:500,000.) Local cooperation. Complied with. For work Previous project. For details of abandoned locks authorized by the Water Resources Development Act of and dam construction, See Page 986 of the Annual 1986, as amended, local interests are required to Report for 1933. provide lands, easements, rights-of-way, and disposal Existing project. See individual detailed reports on areas; relocate utilities, roads, and other facilities, Anahuac Channel, Channel to Liberty and Wallisville except railroad bridges; provide berthing areas; pay one- Lake. Project includes the existing Federal project half of the separable and joint costs allocated to designated as “Mouth of Trinity River, Texas,” which recreation; and bear all costs of operation, maintenance was completed in 1907, at a cost of $80,000 (no cost to and replacement of recreation facilities, and, during local interest). The project is not being maintained. (See construction, pay 25 percent of the costs allocated to Table 40-G for total cost of existing project to deep-draft navigation to a depth of 45 feet plus 50 September 30, 2011.) percent of the costs allocated to deep-draft navigation See individual detailed reports deeper than 45 feet; pay an additional 10 percent of the Local cooperation. on Channel to Liberty and Wallisville Lake. There is no costs allocated to deep-draft navigation within a period local cooperation required for Anauac Channel. of 30 years following completion if not offset by credit allowed for lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations Terminal facilities. Privately-owned wharves and and disposal areas; and pay 50 percent of the costs piers at Anahuac, Moss Bluff, Wallisville, and Liberty, incurred for operation and maintenance below the 45- Texas, are adequate for existing commerce. foot depth. Terminal facilities. Privately-owned terminal 15A. ANAHUAC CHANNEL, TX facilities are on the mainland at inner end of this channel and are considered adequate for existing Location: Extends from 6-feet depth in Galveston commerce. A deep-draft channel and turning basin Bay to Anahuac, Texas, opposite mouth of Trinity River

40-14 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

38 miles north of Galveston, Texas. (See National 15C. WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX Ocean Survey Chart 11323.) No project dimensions were Existing project. Location. Dam is at river mile 3.9, about 4 miles authorized by 1905 River and Harbor Act. A 6- by 80- northwest of Anahuac, Texas. (See National Ocean foot channel, 16,000 feet long was dredged in 1905. At Survey Chart 11323.) present a 6-foot by 100-foot channel is maintained. Under ordinary conditions tidal range is 0.6 to 1.2 feet. Existing project. Provides for construction of a Height of tide is dependent largely on wind. Strong dam and overflow spillway approximately 8 miles long north winds depress water surface 1.5 feet below mean to prevent salinity intrusion and create a 3,800 acre sea level. Latest published map is in House Document reservoir. The maximum pool elevation will be 2 feet 440, 56th Congress, 1st Session. Project was completed above National Geodetic Vertical Datum (N.G.V.D). in 1911. (The reservoir was reduced from 5600 acres with a maximum pool elevation of 4 feet N.G.V.D. by Local cooperation. None required. agreement to protect the endangered bald eagle.) Project Terminal facilities. Privately-owned wharves and provides for an 84 foot by 600-foot navigation lock to piers are the only terminal facilities at Anahuac. facilitate navigation on Channel to Liberty. The sill has Operations during fiscal year. None. a depth of minus 16 feet below National Geodetic Vertical Datum. Project also provides for two 15B. CHANNEL TO LIBERTY, TX recreational areas; and three water control structures to control salinity intrusion and regulate freshwater flows to the saltwater marsh west of the river. Dam controls a Location. Improvement is located in Galveston drainage area of 1,262 square miles below Livingston Bay and tidal reach of lower Trinity River. (See Dam (non-Federal project at channel mile 99.2) and has Geological Survey Maps for Anahuac, Cove, Moss a storage capacity of 14,000 acre-feet. Bluff, and Liberty, Texas.) Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range in bay Previous projects. For details, See page 986 of the is from 0.6 foot to 1.2 feet. Height of tide is dependent Annual Report for 1932. largely on wind. Strong northerly winds depress water Existing project. Provides for a 6-foot channel surface 1.5 feet below mean sea level. from Anahuac to Liberty, which was completed in 1925. A contract for construction of access road, Big Hog A navigable channel from the Houston Ship Channel intake structure, intake canal and access bridge was near Red Fish Bar in Galveston Bay to Liberty, Texas, completed in October 1968. Work started in July 1970 with depth of 9 feet and width of 150 feet, extending on construction of the lock and dam, roads, diversion along the east shore of Trinity Bay to the mouth of the channel, and navigation channel. Work was suspended Trinity River at Anahuac, thence in the river channel to in February 1973 because of an injunction halting a turning basin at Liberty, Texas, and a protective construction. Protective work on the lock and dam was embankment along the west side of the channel in permitted and was completed in April 1973. An Trinity Bay. exception to the injunction was granted for plugging oil The 6-foot Channel to Liberty was completed in wells, which was completed in August 1973. Notice of 1925. The 9-foot Channel to Liberty has been dredged appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was from junction with Houston Ship Channel to a point one filed in April 1973. In August 1974, the Court of mile below Anahuac, Texas. Work remaining consists Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded the case of dredging a 9- by 150-foot channel from one mile with directions that a revised or supplemental statement below Anahuac, Texas to Liberty, Texas. be prepared and judged anew. Final supplement to the Local cooperation. Fully complied with for portion Environmental Impact Statement for the modified of “Channel to Liberty” between Houston Ship Channel project authorized in the Supplemental Appropriations and 1 mile below Anahuac, Texas, as required by 1946 Act, 1983 (P.L. 98-63) was submitted to the River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 634, 79th Cong., 2nd Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September Sess.), but not complied with for remaining portion of 21, 1983. “Channel to Liberty” as required by River and Harbor In March 1986, the Court rendered its Act of 1945 (H. Doc. 403, 77th Cong., 1st Sess.). Memorandum of Order, continuing the injunction and Terminal facilities. Privately owned wharves and directing the Corps to recommence the administrative docks at Anahuac, Wallisville, Texas Gulf Sulphur process at the time when the first departure from Co.’s slip, Moss Bluff and Liberty, Texas, are adequate standard NEPA procedures occurred prior to the 1983 for existing commerce. legislative action. The Corps and non-Federal Sponsors Operations during fiscal year. None. perfected an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals and on

40-15 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

May 11, 1987, the Court ruled in favor of the Corps and 16. RECONNAISSANCE AND PROJECT dismissed the suit in its entirety. CONDITION SURVEYS The Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act of 1991 provided $9,200,000 for the project and directive language for continuation of construction. Reconnaissance and condition surveys were conducted in FY11, at a total cost of $646,988. In the fall of 1989, a pair of bald eagles were discovered nesting at the project site, which led to additional consultation under the Endangered Species 17. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER Act. Solicitation of the contract for the non-overflow SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION dam was postponed to allow for environmental coordination. An Environmental Assessment (EA) was Navigation activities pursuant to Section 107, P.L. prepared with a Finding of No Significant Impact 86-645 (preauthorization): (FONSI), which was signed in September 1991. The Environmental documents were approved and Coordination for Section 107 navigation activities construction was resumed. were conducted in FY11 at a total cost of $18,540. A contract to rehabilitate and complete the A Milestone Report was completed in June 2002 on navigation lock, complete the North and South Galveston Island Channel for the extension of a shallow navigation channels, construct a new draft channel on the west end of Galveston Channel. administrative/resident office building, and electrical Feasibility Phase began in 2003 and was placed on hold and mechanical equipment controls for the controlled in August 2004 for lack of Federal funds. Federal funds spillway structure was awarded in December 1995 and were received in FY10 and the phase resumed. It was completed in FY99. A dedication ceremony for the determined the project cost would be in excess of the Wallisville Lake Project was held on November 1, Section 107 limit, therefore the project was terminated. 1999. FY11 costs were $1,916. Construction of Control Structure A was completed Mitigation of shore damages attributable to in February 2000, and Cedar Hill Park was completed in navigation projects pursuant to Section 111, P.L. 90- October 2000. In 2001, remediation of the abandoned 483: No mitigation of shore damage studies were dam, removal of skimmers, repairs to the West-Non- performed in FY 11. Overflow dam and construction of public-use facilities were completed. Shore Protection Site improvements consisting of replacement of timbers, construction of a boat ramp and dock, new 18. NATIONAL EROSION CONTROL fencing, walkways and improvements to parking lots DEVELOPMENT AND were completed in 2003. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, The Wallisville Lake Project was turned over for JEFFERSON COUNTY, TX permanent operations at the beginning of FY00. The project’s construction was completed in 2003. Location. The project location fronts the Local cooperation. Local interest must contribute McFadden National Wildlife Refuge in the vicinity of an amount equal to cost allocated to water supply, one- Sea Rim State Park in Jefferson County, Texas. half of cost allocated to salinity control and cost Beaches at the demonstration consist of a thin veneer of allocated to recreation less cost of basic facilities and sand over mud and the average long-term annual less 15 percent of total project cost. Local interest erosion rate is approximately 5 feet. reimbursement is estimated at $12,200,000. Existing Project. The primary objectives of Operations during fiscal year. Maintenance: The the project are to minimize erosion of the cohesive project office was operated and maintained at a cost of sediment and to minimize sand overwash. These $1,145,234 in FY11. A task order for Phase 2, road objectives will be accomplished by constructing repairs was awarded March 26, 2010, and work was experimental low-volume beach nourishment templates completed in FY11. FY 11 cost incurred was $465,281. contained by geotextile tube groin cells and dune A task order for River Bank Emergency repairs was construction. The 2,500 ft-long dune is designed to awarded March 24, 2010 and work continued into withstand a 5-year return period storm. Fronting half of FY11. FY11 cost incurred was $242,450. the engineered dune corridor is a beach nourishment divided into four experimental cells of varying fill volumes and grain sizes. A geotextile tube groin separates each experimental cell.

40-16 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Local Cooperation. A Memorandum of is subject to conditions of non-Federal cost sharing Agreement (MOA) has been executed with the Texas under Federal Water Project Recreation Act of 1965. General Land Office. See individual detailed reports on Addicks and Operation During Fiscal Year. Baseline project Barker Reservoirs; and Brays, Greens, Halls, Hunting, monitoring continued through FY11 at a cost of $2,799. Little White Oak, and Carpenters Bayous. The project was significantly impacted by Hurricane Ike; as a result, no additional monitoring is planned. The Galveston District is coordinating with the Texas 19A. ADDICKS AND BARKER General Land Office for the removal of the remaining RESERVOIRS, TX geotube fabric. Location. Reservoirs are located in and west of the Flood Control City of Houston in Harris and Fort Bend Counties, Texas. 19. BUFFALO BAYOU AND Existing project. Construction of Barker Dam was complete in February 1945. Construction of Addicks TRIBUTARIES, TX Dam and 7.4 miles of channel rectification downstream from Addicks and Barker Dams was completed in Location. Improvements are on Buffalo Bayou October 1948. Modification of Barker and Addicks watershed, a part of San Jacinto River watershed, in Dams consisting of gating the final two uncontrolled Harris County, west and northwest of the City of conduits in each dam, was complete in 1963. Major Houston, Texas. (See Geological Survey quadrangle rehabilitation of Addicks and Barker Dams to prevent sheets for Harris County.) seepage through the embankment was completed in Existing project. Provides for improvements of 1982. Buffalo Bayou and its tributaries above turning basin of Work under the Dam Safety Assurance Program Houston Ship Channel to control floods for protection was initiated in FY86. Improvements included raising of the City of Houston, and prevent deposition of silt in approximately 32,400 feet of Addicks Dam 1 to 3 feet turning basin of ship channel by construction of and raising approximately 57,600 feet of Barker Dam 3 detention reservoirs, enlargement and rectification of to 5 feet and armor-plating low ends of both dams channels and construction of control works. protect against possible overtopping and to meet Channel rectification on Brays Bayou with an modern safety standards. improved channel length 25.4 miles was completed in Significant development in the Buffalo Bayou March 1971. Channel rectification on White Oak Bayou watershed since the 1991 upgrade has increased flow was completed in 1976. Work remaining consists of into the reservoir. The Dam Safety Team’s most recent rectification of approximately 22 miles of main stem of screening in November 2011 reconfirmed their findings Buffalo Bayou. of 2009 that both dams required repairs in areas which See individual detailed reports on Addicks and included the parabolic spillway and stilling basin Barker Reservoirs; and Brays, Greens, Halls, Hunting, system, outlet works and conduit, embankment, and Little White Oak, and Carpenters Bayous. erosion along the reservoirs’ rim. The Interim Risk Local cooperation. Section 203, 1954 Flood Reduction Measures (IRRMP) requires the Control Act applies. Local interests have accomplished determination of areas of potential impact and the threat all required local cooperation on Brays Bayou and to local interests from a major rainfall event. An White Oak Bayou. On Buffalo Bayou, local interests Upstream Watershed Study and the Seepage and Piping purchased interests that the United States had in 7 miles Issue Evaluation Analysis for both Addicks and Barker of rectified channel below Barker and Addicks Dams Dams, along with the Interim Risk Reduction for $256,651. Of the remaining required rights-of-way Management Plan were initiated in FY08. The Study on Buffalo Bayou, local interests have acquired about continued through FY11. 40 percent. About 53 percent of required bridge The Addicks and Barker Dams were classified as relocations and 3 percent of the required bridge extremely high risk by the National Dam Safety Cadre relocations have been accomplished. Advance of Team due to the condition of the dams together with the $4,400,000 by the Harris County Flood Control District population at risk. Concerns about the condition of the was refunded in September 1956. P.L. 86-53 authorized dams include foundation seepage and piping, erodibility reimbursement of $38,726 to Galveston, Houston and of the overflow sections, and stability of the outlet Henderson Railroad Company for bridge alterations at works. The Dam Safety Study will be completed in Brays Bayou. Non-Federal contributions totaled FY12 and construction funds will be received for major $63,661 for project betterment. Recreation development rehabilitation.

40-17 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Recreation: A contract with the City of Houston for $229,261,000 for lands and relocations (October 1, 2011 cost-sharing in the construction of recreation facilities base price). was entered into in November 1981. The lease for The project was authorized for construction in the approximately 10,534 acres of land and water areas was Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (P.L. 101- approved in February 1983. Community Park West 640). In 1995, the project was divided into two (Phase IB) and the velodrome were completed in 1986 separable elements, an Upstream (detention) Element and remain in use. Community Park West (Phase 4) (stream improvements and detention basins) and a and the development of Community Park 2 (soccer Downstream (diversion) Element. The Sponsor was fields, ball fields, and parking lots) were completed by authorized to develop the project and design and the City of Houston in 1992. Harris County Precinct 3 construct an alternative to the diversion component and completed building additional soccer fields in be reimbursed for the Federal share by the Water Community Park 2 in George Bush Park. The Fort Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303). Bend County YMCA pavilion, archery range, Dog Park Construction funds were received in 1998. Funds were and nature trails in Barker Reservoir are being heavily received in 1998 for the Upstream Element. used along with the City of Houston’s Cullen Park, Location cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor Harris County’s George Bush Park, and Fort Bend for the project is Harris County Flood Control District. County’s Cinco Ranch Park. Maintenance and The Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, improvements of these recreation areas continue by all and rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, agencies. pipelines, utilities, roads and other facilities, except for Local cooperation. None required. railroad bridges; pay five percent of the total costs Operations during fiscal year. Dam Safety allocated to flood control presently estimated at Modification Study continued in FY11 to include $30,266,000 and bear all costs of operation, conducting Public Meetings to inform the Public of the maintenance, and replacement of flood control and status of the dams. recreation facilities. A Project Cooperation Agreement Maintenance: FY11 activities included ongoing for the Upstream (detention) element was executed Interim Risk Reduction Measures that included outlet March 3, 2000. The Sponsor’s General Reevaluation works, emergency lighting and generators at both the Report, dated December 2008, was submitted to the Addicks and Barkers Dams and replacing Gate #1 at Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works, and was Barker Dam. Task Order for Addicks and Barker Dams approved April 3, 2009. An amendment to the existing Granular Filter was awarded March 24, 2010. FY11 PCA was executed on March 31, 2010, combining the cost incurred was $424,064. A Task Order for Conduit upstream and downstream into one project. and gate replacement was awarded March 24, 2010 and Operations during fiscal year. Construction by continues in FY11. FY11 costs incurred were the Non-Federal Sponsor continued in at the Old $1,518,393. Westheimer, Eldridge and Willow Waterhole Detention Fiscal year cost for operating and maintaining the Basins, and also along the down steam channel. project office was $686,565. The project is estimated to Reimbursements for the Federal share of construction have prevented damages of $0 due to drought conditions were made to the Sponsor for Discrete Segment 209 at and no flooding in FY11 for cumulative total of Willow Waterhole Detention Basin, Compartment 2 $6,369,104,000. Phase II and Compartment 5 Phase I for $13,270,484, a full reimbursement for Discrete Segment 101 at Channel Rectification, Mouth to Lawndale $6,679,695; 19B. BRAYS BAYOU Discrete Segment 206 Willow Waterhole Detention Basin, Compartment 4 $2,220,021; and a final balance Location. The project is located in the south- reimbursement for Discrete Segment 203 at Willow central portion of Buffalo Bayou, Harris County, TX. Waterhole Detention Basin, Compartment 2 Phase I Existing project. The authorized plan of $800,802. improvement consists of 3 miles of stream improvements, 3 flood detention basins, and 7 miles of 19C. GREENS BAYOU stream diversion channels. Aesthetic vegetation is included. Recreation facilities include trails, picnic facilities, sports fields, comfort stations and parking Location. Greens Bayou is a tributary of Buffalo areas. The estimated cost for new work is $313,865,000 Bayou, and is located in the north-central portion of Federal (Corps) and $259,527,000 non-Federal, Harris County, TX, and does not include the Halls consisting of $30,266,000 cash contributions, and Bayou tributary.

40-18 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Existing project. The project was authorized for Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, and construction in the Water Resources Development Act rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, pipelines, of 1990 (P.L. 101-640). The authorized project utilities, roads and other facilities, except for railroad provides for 25 miles of stream enlargement, 14 miles bridges; provide a cash contribution presently estimated of stream cleaning and 4 flood detention basins. at $10,630,000 and bear all costs of operation, Aesthetic vegetation and mitigation is included. maintenance, and replacement of flood control and Recreation facilities include trails, picnic facilities, recreation facilities. sports fields, launches, ramps, comfort stations and Operations during fiscal year. None. parking areas. The project is currently being reformulated and a new project has been identified in a 19E. HUNTING BAYOU General Reevaluation Study. The new project will consist of approximately 3.7 miles of stream enlargement in the upper reaches of the bayou between Location. Hunting Bayou is located in Houston, Veterans Memorial Drive and Cutten Road. A flood TX, approximately 4 to 5 miles from the central detention basin will be located near the downstream business district. terminus of the stream enlargement. Aesthetic Existing project. The authorized plan of vegetation is included. Recreation facilities are not improvement consists of 14.3 miles of stream currently included in the project as a local sponsor has improvements. Recreation facilities include trails, picnic not been confirmed. The estimated cost for new work is facilities, a comfort station and parking areas. The $32,922,000 Federal (Corps) and $11,213,000 non- estimated cost for new work is $95,600,000 Federal) Federal consisting of $4,560,000 cash contributions, and and $79,937,000 non-Federal consisting of $9,445,000 $6,653,000 for lands and relocations (October 1, 2011 cash contributions, $61,551,000 for lands and base price). relocations, $5,500,000 of PED, and $3,441,000 for Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor for Construction Management (October 1, 2011 base the project is Harris County Flood Control District. The price). Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, and The project was authorized for construction in the rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, pipelines, Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (P.L. 101- utilities, roads and other facilities, except for railroad 640). The non-Federal Sponsor was authorized to bridges; provide a cash contribution presently estimated design and construct an alternative to the project and be at $4,560,000 and bear all costs of operation, reimbursed for the Federal share by the Water maintenance, and replacement of flood control and Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303). recreation facilities. Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor for Operations during fiscal year. None. the project is Harris County Flood Control District. The Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, and 19D. HALLS BAYOU rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, pipelines, utilities, roads and other facilities, except for railroad bridges; provide a cash contribution presently estimated Location. Halls Bayou is a major tributary of at $9,445,000 and bear all costs of operation, Greens Bayou, located in the north-central portion of maintenance, and replacement of flood control and Buffalo Bayou, Harris County, TX. recreation facilities. Existing project. The authorized plan of Operations during fiscal year. None. improvement consists of 18 miles of stream improvements. Recreation facilities include trails, picnic facilities, boat ramps, a comfort station and parking 19F. LITTLE WHITE OAK BAYOU, TX areas. The estimated cost for new work is $97,471,000 Federal (Corps) and $66,888,000 non-Federal consisting Location. Little White Oak Bayou is a tributary of of $10,630,000 cash contributions, $49,287,000 for White Oak Bayou in north-central Houston. lands and relocations, $4,284,000 for PED, and Existing project. The authorized plan of $2,687,000 for Construction Management. (October 1, improvement consists of 6.0 miles of stream 2011 base price). enlargements. Recreation facilities include trails and The project was authorized for construction in the picnic facilities. The estimated cost for new work is Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (P.L. 101- $17,958,000 Federal (Corps) and $17,957,000 non- 640). Federal consisting of $1,996,000 cash contributions, and Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor for $15,961,000 for lands and relocations (October 1, 1990 the project is Harris County Flood Control District. The base price). The project was authorized for construction

40-19 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011 in the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (P.L. The selected plan provides channel enlargement and 101-640). easing of bends within the existing stream from Mile 3.8 Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor for to Mile 26.05 to contain at least the 10-year frequency the project is Harris County Flood Control District. The storm, and additional outlet with gated structure from Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, and Clear Lake to Galveston Bay, restriction of development rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, pipelines, in the residual 100-year flood plain and measures to utilities, roads and other facilities, except for railroad mitigate environmental effects. In 1986, at the request bridges; provide a cash contribution presently estimated of Brazoria County Drainage District No. 4, that portion at $1,996,000 and bear all costs of operation, of the project upstream of the Brazoria/Galveston maintenance, and replacement of flood control and County line, approximate improved Mile 19.1, was recreation facilities. placed in the “inactive” category. Estimated cost for Operations during fiscal year. None. new work, excluding “inactive” portion, is $173,293,000 Federal and $80,128,000 non-Federal consisting of $12,903,000 cash contributions, 19G. CARPENTERS BAYOU, TX $37,890,000 for lands, and $29,335,000 for relocations (October 1, 2011 base price). Location. Carpenters Bayou is a tributary of Environmental interest groups and agencies, private Buffalo Bayou in northeastern Houston. citizens, and some local communities located near or Existing project. The authorized plan of adjacent to Clear Lake expressed opposition to the Clear improvement consists of 9.7 miles of stream Creek Flood Control Project as currently authorized and enlargements. Recreation facilities include trails and planned for upstream reaches. In general, the picnic facilities. The estimated cost for new work is opposition to the project has been focused on $3,900,000 Federal (Corps) and $1,950,000 non-Federal environmental concerns in the upstream reaches and on consisting of $370,000 cash contributions, and induced flooding concerns downstream in Clear Lake. $2,320,000 for lands and relocations (October 1990 Construction has been delayed at the request of the base price). Non-Federal Sponsor so that an alternative to the The project was authorized for construction in the authorized project can be developed that will reduce Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (PL 101- above concerns and still provide flood protection to 640). The project was Deauthorized in Sec. 1001 (B)(2) those that are critically affected by flood waters in the Water Resources Development Act of 86 as Amended watershed. April 16, 2002. See TABLE 40-F, DEAUTHORIZED Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsors for PROJECTS. the project are Galveston and Harris counties. The LCA, Local cooperation. Non-Federal Sponsor for the executed June 30, 1986, requires local interests to project is Harris County Flood Control District. Non- provide lands, easements, rights-of-way, and material Federal Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, disposal areas; modify or relocate building, pipelines, and rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, utilities, roads and other facilities, except railroad pipelines, utilities, roads and other facilities, except for bridges, where necessary in the construction of the railroad bridges; provide a cash contribution presently project; make a cash contribution for mitigation estimated at $370,000 and bear all costs of operation, measures consistent with the non-Federal share of total maintenance, and replacement of flood control and project costs without mitigation measures; pay five recreation facilities. percent of the total costs allocated to flood control; and bear all costs of operation and maintenance of flood Operations during fiscal year. None. control facilities. By letter of June 9, 1999, Brazoria County Drainage District No. 4, indicated its intent to 20. CLEAR CREEK, TX be a project sponsor again beginning with participation in the General Reevaluation Report. Location. The project is located about midway Operations during fiscal year. Preparation of the between the two metropolitan centers of Houston, General Reevaluation Report continued. Work on plan Texas, on the north and Galveston-Texas City on the formulation, engineering analysis, socioeconomic south in Harris and Galveston Counties above and analysis, real estate analysis, and environmental studies below existing Clear Lake. continued. Existing project. The authorized plan of improvement consists of an improved channel from Mile 3.8 to Mile 34.8 to contain within its banks all flood flows up to and including that of a 100-year flood.

40-20 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

21. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX 21B. SOUTH MAIN CHANNEL, TX

Location. The project is located in Willacy, Location. The project is located in Hidalgo and Hidalgo, and Cameron Counties. The basin is bounded Willacy Counties, Texas. on the east by the Gulf of Mexico, on the south by the Existing project. The authorized project consists of Rio Grande, which forms the international boundary channel improvements that will provide flood protection between the United States and Mexico, on the west by to the city of Lyford, as well as the rural area of Starr County, and on the north by Brooks and Kenedy Willacy County north of U.S. Highway 83. The Counties. authorized plan is currently being revised to include Existing project. See individual detailed reports on project features from Edinburg to Raymondville. This Arroyo Colorado, South Main Channel, and is being developed by the Local Sponsor and will join in Raymondville Drain. the authorized Raymondville Drain project. The Local cooperation. See individual detailed reports estimated cost for new work is $168,432,000 Federal on Arroyo Colorado, South Main Channel, and (Corps) and $73,187,000 non-Federal consisting of Raymondville Drain. $12,581,000 cash, $28,107,000 lands, and $42,499,000 relocations (October 1, 2008 base prices). 21A. ARROYO COLORADO, TX Local cooperation. Originally the Non-Federal Sponsors for the project were Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 and Willacy County Drainage District #1. Location. The project is located in Hidalgo and Late in Fiscal Year 1999, Hidalgo County Drainage Cameron Counties, Texas. District #1 withdrew support of the project. In August Existing project. The authorized project will 1999, Willacy County Drainage District #1 restated provide flood protection along Highway 83 and erosion their intent to cost-share in project construction. protection for the banks of the Arroyo Colorado in the Non-Federal Sponsor is required to provide lands, city of Harlingen. The project consists of a gated water easements, and rights-of-way; modify or relocate control structure, 1.4 miles of channel improvements, buildings, pipelines, utilities, roads and other facilities, and stone armoring of selected reaches in Harlingen. except for railroad bridges; provide a cash contribution The estimated cost for new work is $5,851,000 Federal presently estimated at $10,185,000 and bear all costs of (Corps) and $1,951,000 non-Federal consisting of operation, maintenance, and replacement of flood $1,848,000 cash and $103,000 for lands and relocations control facilities. (October 1, 1993 base prices). The project has reached a stalemate as the Local Operations during fiscal year. None. Sponsor, the Hidalgo County Drainage District #1, cannot provide required guarantee to hold and save the 21C. RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN, TX Government free from all damages arising from the construction, operation, maintenance, repair and Location. The project is located in northern replacement for the project, nor are they able to operate Hidalgo and Willacy Counties, Texas. and maintain the project when completed. The Existing roject. The authorized project will International Boundary and Water Commission has provide a drainage outlet to the Laguna Madre for complete jurisdiction over the project, as it is one of the northern Hidalgo and Willacy Counties. The project elements of the Rio Grande Floodway System. The consists of 43.8 miles of channel work, including Commission is interested in the project but only if enlargement of existing channels and construction of additional funds to do operations and maintenance are new channels, a 3.88-mile long levee, and diversion provided. Legislative approval will be required to alter ditches along the west side of Raymondville. The the current status. project is being revised to include flood risk reduction Local cooperation. Non-Federal Sponsor, the to additional portions of Hidalgo County in the vicinity Hidalgo County Drainage District #1, is required to of Edinburg, Texas. The sponsor has requested and is provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way; modify or intent on pursuing project under Section 211 of the relocate buildings, pipelines, utilities, roads and other Water Resource Development Act of 1996. The facilities, except for railroad bridges; provide a cash estimated cost for authorized new work is $80,099,000 contribution presently estimated at $1,848,000 and bear Federal (Corps) and $26,700,000 non-Federal consisting all costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of of $10,952,000 cash, $6,142,000 lands, and $9,607,000 flood control facilities. relocations (October 1, 2010 base prices). Operations during fiscal year. None. Local cooperation. Non-Federal Sponsor for the project is Hidalgo County Drainage District #1. Non-

40-21 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Federal Sponsor is required to provide lands, easements, A construction contract for concrete lining from and rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, Robin Boulevard to Bathurst Drive, Reach 7b, awarded pipelines, utilities, roads and other facilities, except for July 3, 2008, and continues through FY11 at a fiscal railroad bridges; provide a cash contribution presently year costs of $6,782,636 (Federal) and $608,517 (non- estimated at $8,390,000 and bear all costs of operation, Federal). The contract was also funded with American maintenance, and replacement of flood control facilities. Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Tree planting began Operations during fiscal year. None. along the channel. Cost for FY11 was $44,278 (Federal) and $820 (non-Federal). 22. SIMS BAYOU, TX ARRA: A Construction Contract for concrete lining at Sims Reach 7b, was awarded July 3, 2008, and continued through FY11 at costs of $9,124,503. The Location. The project is located in Harris County, contract was also funded with regular funds. See New in the southern portion of Houston, Texas. Work above for the costs. Construction Contract to do Existing project. The authorized plan of channel repairs, plug removal and sediment removal improvement provides for enlargement and rectification, was awarded on September 24, 2009 and continued in with appropriate erosion control measures, of 19.3 miles FY11. Cost incurred in FY11 was $3,888,228 (Federal) of Sims Bayou to provide 25-year flood protection; and $162,864 (non-Federal). Channel rectification environmental measures and riparian habitat contract for the Croquet to South Post Oak reach 8b improvement along the entire alignment; and awarded April 23, 2010 and continued through FY11 at recreational development to include 14 miles of hike- a Federal cost of $5,236,276 and non-federal cost of and-bike trails connecting to existing public parks, $272,928 and regular non-federal cost of $10,744. The together with picnic, playground, and other leisure contract was also funded with regular funds. See above facilities. Estimated cost for new work is $300,756,000 for the regular costs. Federal (Corps) and $127,774,000 non-Federal consisting of $24,889,000 cash contributions, 23. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED $44,824,000 for lands, $57,720,000 for relocations, and $340,000 for channels (October 1, 2009 base price). FLOOD CONTROL WORKS Local cooperation. The non-Federal Sponsor for the project is Harris County Flood Control District. In Conducted routine inspections of the following accordance with the cost-sharing and financing concepts projects: reflected in the Water Resources Development Act of San Diego Creek, Alice Texas, 1986, local interests are required to provide lands, Texas City Hurricane Flood Protection Project easements, and rights-of-way; modify or relocate Lynchburg Pump Station Hurricane Flood buildings, pipelines, utilities, roads, and other facilities, Protection Project except railroad bridges, where necessary for the Galveston Seawall construction of the project; pay one-half of the separable and joint costs allocated to recreation; and bear all costs Freeport & Vicinity Hurricane Flood Protection of operation, maintenance and replacement of recreation Project facilities; and pay 5 percent of the costs allocated to Initiated a Major 408 review of Alligator Bayou flood control; and bear all costs of operation, Pump Station Expansion, Port Arthur, Texas maintenance and replacement of flood control facilities. Reviewed approximately 30 minor 408 actions on The LCA for flood control was executed on October 19, six Federal Flood Control projects. FY11 expenditures 1990. The recreation PPA is currently under review by were $344,540. the City of Houston. Operations during fiscal year. Construction 24. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER Contract to do channel repairs, plug removal and sediment removal was awarded on September 24, 2009 SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION and continued in FY11 at a Federal cost $1,283,189 and non-Federal cost $51,965. The contract was also funded Flood control activities pursuant to Section 205 of th with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. A 1970 Flood Control Act, Public Law 858, 80 Congress, construction contract for downstream of South Post Oak as amended; initial coordination for section 205 Flood to Bathurst Drive at Sims Reach 8a was awarded July 2, control activities was performed in FY11 at a cost of 2009 and continues through FY11. Costs incurred for $622. FY11 was Federal, $4,734,252 and non-Federal, $193,424.

40-22 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Emergency flood control – repair, flood fighting, Galveston and Addicks, equipment, and supplies, and rescue work (P.L. 99, 84th Congress and antecedent and coordination with other local, State, and Federal legislation): emergency management organizations, preparedness Disaster Assistance – Activities supported training for response cadres and disaster response to Hurricane Ike, which made landfall in preparedness exercises with Fort Worth District, northern Galveston County on September 13, 2008, as a Southwestern Division, and FEMA Region VI. Category 2 storm with a storm surge characteristic of a Initial Eligibility Inspection (IEI) Category 3 storm. FY11 costs totaled $785,180 for (Rehabilitation and Inspection Program) – Total disaster assistance under the Rehabilitation and fiscal year costs of $18,385 for conduct of an IEI of Inspection Program as detailed below: the Fort Bend County Perimeter Levee system Freeport Hurricane-Flood Protection Levee – ($14,098) and First Colony ($4,287). Total FY11 costs of $626,440 for repair of hurricane Hazard Mitigation – Total fiscal year costs of damage. A new contract was awarded August 12, 2011 $14,661 for support to the USACE Silver Jackets to install a fender system on the repaired flood wall and Program. activities included contract execution, supervision and – administration of the contract, and engineering and National Emergency Preparedness Program Total fiscal year costs of $440 participation in FY design. 11’s New Madrid Earthquake National Level Texas City Hurricane Flood Protection – Total Exercise. FY11 costs of $7,432 for fiscal close-out of the contract – No costs to repair damages. Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection incurred during FY 11. Galveston Harbor and Channel, Seawall and Groins – The project consists of approximately 9.7 miles of concrete gravity wall founded on treated timber 25. EMERGENCY STREAM BANK AND piles and a reinforced concrete sheet-pile cut-off wall, SHORELINE EROSION WORK AND with riprap toe protection, and a system of fifteen groins SNAGGING AND CLEARING along the Gulf of Mexico shore. A Project Information ACTIVITIES UNDER SPECIAL Report was completed January 29, 2009. The Seawall and groin system were found to have significant damage AUTHORIZATION at various locations. A construction repair contract was awarded May 12, 2009, and was completed in FY11. Stream bank and shoreline erosion activities Cost incurred for FY11 was $151,307 for the contract, pursuant to Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, supervision and administration of the contract and Public Law 525, as amended. Coordination for Stream engineering and design. bank and shoreline erosion activities was performed in Emergency Operations. FY11 costs totaled FY11 for a cost of $11,662 $5,705,170 for emergency response to Hurricanes Ike Snagging and clearing activities for flood control (‘08) and Alex (‘10), and Tropical Storm Don (‘11) , as pursuant to Section 208 of the Flood Control Act of detailed below. 1954, Public Law 780, as amended. Coordination for Operational Support costs totaled $13,506 for flood control pursuant to Section 208 of the Flood EOC activities in supporting FEMA under the National Control activities was performed in FY11 for a cost of Response Framework and the State of Texas. $20,643. Emergency Dredging costs totaled $5,691,664 for response to Hurricane Ike. A breakdown of the three Environmental Restoration emergency dredging contracts are detailed below: Cedar Bayou – Project Office Total fiscal year costs of $1,498,588 26. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR Houston Ship Channel – Project Office Total IMPROVEMENT OF ENVIRONMENT fiscal year costs of $2,570,588 Texas City Ship Channel – Project Office Total Project modifications for improvement of fiscal year costs of $1,622,504. environmental activities pursuant to Section 1135 of the Operational Program Areas. FY 11 costs totaled Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law $415,903 for disaster preparedness activities as detailed 99-662, as amended. below. Coordination of Project modifications for All-hazards Preparedness – Total fiscal year improvement of environmental activities in FY11 for a costs of $382,417 for disaster preparedness cost of $34,932. planning, maintaining emergency facilities in

40-23 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

A feasibility study was initiated in 2003 on utilize remaining funds specified for the Original Moses Taylor’s Bayou for the replacement of a saltwater Lake Scope. Funds expended for FY11 were $2,565. barrier to protect the bayou and marsh from saltwater A Preliminary Restoration Plan for Aquatic intrusion, but was placed on hold awaiting Federal ecosystem restoration of Galveston County MUD funding. In the meantime the non-Federal Sponsor (Municipal Utility District) 12 was approved July 2004. resumed work and constructed the saltwater barrier Alternative formulation began in FY04 but has been without Federal funding. Federal funds were received in placed on hold awaiting Federal funds. Federal funds FY10 and work resumed to investigate the change in were received in FY10 and work resumed. Funds scope of the original project based on new construction. expended for FY11 were $131,923. It was determined that the original scope of the project A Monitoring Plan and Letter Report for Estuary was satisfied and a new study would have to be Habitat Restoration at Half Moon Reef, Matagorda submitted in order to utilize remaining funds specified County was completed September 2010. The Project for the original scope. FY11 costs incurred were $4,536. Implementation Schedule is included for a period of 5 A preliminary Restoration Plan for Keith Lake Fish years as required in Section 5017 of WRDA 2007. Cost Pass in Jefferson County was completed in May 2002. incurred for FY 11 was $3,198. A feasibility study was initiated in January 2003 but was placed on hold awaiting Federal funding. Federal 28. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, TX funds were received in FY10 and work resumed. Cost expended in FY11 was $260,795. Location. The project is located along the south central Texas coast on the northern portion of Padre 27. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM Island, City of Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas. RESTORATION The project cuts through Mustang Island joining the Gulf of Mexico with the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway at Coordination of Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration to mile 553.0 improve the quality of the environment pursuant to Existing project. The project was authorized by Section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act the Water Resources Development Act of 1999. The of 1996, Public Law 104-303, as amended: authorized plan of improvement provides for an opening Fiscal year costs for coordination incurred for between the Gulf of Mexico and Corpus Christi Bay, FY11 $16,001. which consists of a jettied entrance and channel, Construction for the University of Texas Wetlands extending from the Gulf of Mexico through Mustang Education Center for the restoration of wetlands and Island along the existing Packery Channel; storm dunes in support of the Education Center began in 2004 damage reduction measures on the south side of the and construction was completed in 2007. See Section area; and ecosystem restoration measures at various 29. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MARINE SCIENCE locations adjacent to the project area. Tidal surges INSTITUTE (UTMSI), TX. caused by Hurricane Emily in June 2005 and Hurricane The feasibility study for the Gulf Intracoastal Rita in September 2005 caused damages to both the Waterway, Mad Island Marsh to protect the habitat at south and north jetties and to areas of the concrete the Wildlife Management Area from further erosion cellular mats. Repairs to the jetties were completed in began in FY 02. Federal funds were received in FY10 2008. Monitoring of the ecosystem restoration and and work resumed. Funds expended in FY11 were storm damage reduction feature is complete as of April $178,657. 2010. The project is physically complete. A Preliminary Restoration Plan to prevent further The Water Resource Development Act of 2007, erosion of ecosystem at the Galveston Bay Prairie Section 3151, amended the original authorization to Preserve at Moses Lake was completed in FY04. The include recreation as a project purpose. The project is project was placed on hold awaiting Federal funds. awaiting funding to initiate a study for the recreation Federal funds were received in FY10 and work purpose. resumed. In FY11 Moses Lake was constructed by the The estimated cost for new work is $24,719,000 Nature Conservancy of Texas in the absence of Federal Federal (Corps) and $15,422,000 non-Federal consisting Funding. FY11 funds were used to investigate the of $13,882,000 cash contributions, $523,000 for lands, change in scope of the original project based on new easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and 1,017,000 for construction the sponsor completed in the absence of betterments. (October 1, 2009 base price). Federal Funding. It was determined that the original Non-Federal Sponsor for the scope of the project was satisfied and a new study at Local cooperation. project is City of Corpus Christi, Texas. In accordance Moses Lake would have to be submitted in order to with the cost-sharing and financing concepts reflected in

40-24 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Non- 30. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED Federal interests are required to provide lands, MATERIAL easements, and rights-of-way; modify or relocate buildings, pipelines, utilities, roads, and other facilities, except for railroad bridges; provide a cash contribution Projects for beneficial uses of dredged material presently estimated at $13,882,000 and bear all costs of pursuant to Section 204 of the Water Resources operation and maintenance. Development Act of 1992, P.L. 102-560 incurred costs Operations during fiscal year. None. of $20,575 in FY11. The feasibility study for the South Padres Island 29. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MARINE project will address the high erosion rates along the SCIENCE INSTITUTE (UTMSI) barrier island, located at the southernmost tip of Texas near the border of Mexico. The purpose of the study is SECTION 206, TX to determine the cost feasibility of using dredged material from the Brazos Island Harbor entrance Location. The project is located on the UTMSI channel on the beaches of South Padre. The project Campus in Port Aransas, Nueces County, Texas. Port incurred a cost of $203,330 in FY11. Aransas is located on the northern most portion of Mustang Island. Mustang Island is a barrier island that General Investigations separates Corpus Christi Bay from the Gulf of Mexico. The proposed wetland restoration will be performed immediately adjacent to the Corpus Christi Ship 31. SURVEYS Channel. Existing project. The project consists of wetland Fiscal year costs for reconnaissance and feasibility restoration features which was constructed on 2.6 acres studies were $1,191,040 for navigation and $91,939 for located on the UTMSI campus. In addition, flood damage prevention. Reconnaissance and approximately 1600 feet of dunes were created. A feasibility studies on watershed and ecosystem projects broad range of estuarine habitat types were constructed incurred costs of $8,029. No cost was incurred for a by removing several feet of the existing surface reconnaissance study for shoreline protection in FY11. materials to achieve the target elevation contours Reconnaissance and feasibility studies on review of necessary to support target communities. The creation authorized projects incurred costs of $5,967 for FY 11. of a number of diverse habitats, including open water, Miscellaneous Activities for FY11 include the submerged aquatic vegetated shallows, low and high following: Special Investigations at a cost of $14,504; marsh, sand flats and upland islands and dunes, allows Interagency Water Resources Development at $17,526; for use of the area by several fish and wildlife species, National Estuary Program and the North American including fishes, invertebrates, reptiles, small mammals Waterfowl Management Plan incurred cost in FY11 at a and birds. Open water and marsh surface habitats were cost of $1,332 and $807, respectively. constructed to resemble natural marsh systems in the area with undulating surfaces, high and lows, and main 32. COORDINATION WITH OTHER channel with tributaries. The marsh system was connected to the surrounding tidal waters to provide AGENCIES daily tidal exchange by installing two 36-inch culverts that were completely submerged. The total project cost Cost for Coordination With Other Agencies was was $2,100,000. Construction was completed in 2007 $52,642 for FY11. The non-Federal share of and the project was fiscally completed in 2011. Coordination With Other Agencies was $14,281 for Local cooperation. The project sponsor is The FY11. University of Texas Board of Regents, and the U.T. Marine Science Institute. A PCA was executed in 33. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF March 2004. BASIC DATA Operations during fiscal year. The contract for Marsh excavation, erosion control blanket, and cement Floodplain management and technical services stabilize sand was fiscally completed. Costs incurred in were performed at a cost of $18,273 and $18,139; FY11 were $51,176 Federal and $27,556 non-Federal. respectively. No cost was incurred in FY11 for hydrologic studies.

40-25 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

34. PRE-CONSTRUCTION Hunting Bayou, Texas - The project was ENGINEERING AND DESIGN authorized for construction in the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-640). The authorized project provides for 14.3 miles of stream Greens Bayou, Texas – The project was improvements, recreation trails, picnic facilities, a authorized for construction in the Water Resources comfort station, access and parking areas. The Sponsor Development Act of 1990 (PL 101-640). The was authorized to design and construct an alternative to authorized project provides for 25 miles of stream the project and be reimbursed for the Federal share by enlargement, 14 miles of stream clearing and 4 flood the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (PL detention basins. Aesthetic vegetation and mitigation is 104-303). The project is currently being reformulated included. Recreation facilities include trails, picnic and will be identified by the General Reevaluation facilities, sports fields, launches, ramps, comfort Study. stations and parking areas. The project has been The planning and engineering estimate is reformulated and a new project has been identified in a $2,070,000. Planning and engineering studies were General Reevaluation Study. The General Reevaluation initiated in FY98. FY11 costs were $84,381. Report was approved. The new project will consist of approximately 3.2 miles of stream enlargement in the Colonias Along U.S. and Mexico Border, Texas - upper reaches of the bayou between Veterans Memorial The project was authorized in accordance with the Drive and Cutten Road. A flood detention basin will be Water Resources Development Act of 1992, Section located near the downstream terminus of the stream 219 (P.L. 102-580). Assistance is to be provided to enlargement. Aesthetic vegetation is included. non-Federal interests for carrying out water related Recreation facilities are not currently included in the environmental infrastructure and resource protection project as a local sponsor has not been confirmed. and development projects for selected areas along the Estimated planning and engineering cost is $9,420,000. Texas/Mexico borders. Estimated planning and Planning and engineering studies were initiated in FY90 engineering cost estimate is $1,800,000. Planning and This phase is essentially complete. An updated engineering studies were initiated in FY 2001. economic report was prepared and approved August 6, Preliminary design began in FY04 on Villa Nueva 2010. The project is awaiting Construction Colonia, Rose Acres Colonia, and LaPresa Colonia. All appropriations. FY11 costs were $7,520. three design projects are cost-shared 75% Corps and 25% Sponsor. The cost sharing Sponsors are as South Main Channel, Texas – The authorized follows: Villa Nueva- City of Brownsville; Rose Acres project consists of channel improvements, which will – Nueces County; and LaPresa – Webb County. Villa provide flood protection to the Cities of McAllen, Nueva was completed in April 2005. Rose Acres and Edinburg, Edcouch, La Villa and Lyford, as well as the LaPresa Facility Plan are both 100% complete. LaPresa rural areas of Hidalgo and Willacy Counties north of plans to seek construction assistance in the near future U.S. Highway 83. The authorized plan is currently pending availability of State funding. FY11 costs were being revised to include project features from Edinburg $86,360. to Raymondville. This is being developed by the Local Sponsor and will join in the authorized Raymondville GIWW, Matagorda Bay, Texas - The project Drain project. Estimated planning and engineering cost consist of realigning the navigation channel from mile estimate is $9,660,000. Planning and Engineering 460 to mile 472 with a channel approximately 6,000 feet studies were initiated in FY 1990. No cost was incurred north of and paralleling the existing route. Channel in FY11. dimensions are 12 feet deep by 125 feet wide for most of the channel, with a widening to 300 feet where it Raymondville Drain, Texas - The project consists crosses the Matagorda Ship Channel, and flares at each of 43.8 miles of channel work, including enlargement of of the places where the channel changes direction. existing channels, and construction of new channels, a Material dredged from the channel will be used to create 3.88-mile long levee, and diversion ditches along the marshes in Matagorda Bay and to combat erosion along west side of Raymondville, Texas. The project is being Matagorda Peninsula. The existing channel from mile revised to include flood risk reduction to additional 460 to 473 would be abandoned. Estimated planning portions of Hidalgo County in the vicinity of Edinburgh, and engineering cost estimate is $1,249,000. Planning Texas. The sponsor has requested and is intent on and engineering studies were initiated in FY 2002. This pursuing project under Section 211 of the Water phase is essentially complete. An updated economic Resource Development Act of 1996. Estimated report was prepared and approved May 1, 2010. The planning and engineering estimate is $7,753,000. project is awaiting Construction appropriations. No cost Planning and engineering studies were initiated in was incurred in FY11. FY97. No cost was incurred in FY11.

40-26 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

GIWW, High Island to Brazos River, Texas - facilities, boat ramps, a comfort station and parking The project covers the reach of the Gulf Intracoastal areas. Waterway from Rollover Pass at Mile 330 to West Bay Estimated planning and engineering cost estimate is at Mile 373, approximately 43 miles of channel in $9,533,000. Planning and engineering studies were Galveston and Brazoria Counties. The recommended initiated in 1992 but was put on hold at the end of the project includes a sediment basin at Rollover Pass, year at the request of the Sponsor, Harris County Flood widening the channel area to 75 feet for a length of Control District. In 2005, a minimal amount of funds 1,400 feet at Sievers Cove, widening the channel at the were placed on the project to update the economics and Texas City Wye, setting back existing mooring facilities cost estimate. No cost was incurred in FY11. by 80 feet at Pelican Island, protecting existing open Cedar Bayou, Texas - The project was re- channels from wave action at Greens Lake, and authorized for construction in the Water Resources establishing a mooring basin at the West Bay washout. Development Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-541) under Section The planning and engineering cost estimate is 349(a) (2) in December 2000. The recommended plan $703,000. Planning and engineering studies were of improvement consists of extending the channel 8 initiated in FY04. This phase is essentially complete. miles at the dimensions of 10 x 100 from Mile 3.0 to An updated economic report was prepared and approved Mile 11.0, or just below State Highway 146. Estimated June 1, 2010. The project is awaiting Construction planning and engineering cost estimate is $1,135,000. appropriations. FY11 costs were $9,455. Planning and engineering studies were initiated in Halls Bayou, Texas – The project was authorized FY02. This phase is essentially complete. An updated for construction in the Water Resources Development economic report was prepared and approved June 1, Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-640). The authorized plan of 2010. The project is awaiting Construction improvement consists of 18 miles of stream appropriations. FY11 costs were $11,114. improvements. Recreation facilities include trails, picnic

40-27 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

1. Aquatic Plant Control New Work: (Southwestern Division) Approp. 0 0 0 (21) 5,286,5791 1965 Act Cost 0 0 0 0 5,286,5791

2. Brazos Island New Work: Harbor, TX Approp 0 0 0 0 27,871,2022 Cost 0 0 0 0 27,871,2022

Maint: Approp 2,904,000 5,322,380 4,909,410 3,417,462 101,187,6923 Cost 6,249,921 3,592,704 5,344,427 4,010,198 100,471,7223

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 1,750,000 23,497,000 9,701,594 (699,225) 34,249,369 Cost 219,281 5,153,330 12,475,007 1,298,632 19,146,250

Major Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 2,170,080 Cost 0 0 0 0 2,170,080

3. Cedar Bayou, TX New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 65,000 0 0 0 1,099,2634 Cost 46,179 53,890 7,837 11,114 1,098,1134

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 65,000 0 0 0 717,000 Cost 110,874 6,237 5,655 2,367 711,523

(Regular Funds) Maint: Approp. 0 0 1,683,990 1,564,766 8,310,1625 Cost 0 0 307,164 1,260,386 6,628,9565

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 500,000 1,500,000 (157,105) 1,842,895 Cost 0 255,083 331,342 1,105,059 1,691,484

4. Channel to Port New Work: Bolivar, TX Approp. 0 0 0 133,9256 Cost 0 0 0 0 133,9256

Maint: Approp. 426,000 316,540 183,360 215,049 3,494,2567 Cost 80,584 0 120,000 801,309 3,196,2007

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 0 0 0 300,000 Cost 0 0 0 0 300,000

40-28 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

5. Corpus Christi Ship New Work: Channel, TX Approp. 175,149 1,148,000 921,000 58,230,545 139,338,0338 (Regular Funds) Cost 33,992 329,025 689,380 288,312 80,179,0738

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 1,500,000 (548,392) (24,778) 926,830 Cost 0 0 860,127 65,763 925,890

Maint: Approp. 9,804,000 3,090,920 4,432,020 6,737,113 186,049,8619 Cost 4,005,224 8,924,792 5,193,899 8,731,114 185,827,1269

Maint. Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 7,448,000 0 (54,241) 7,393,759 Cost 0 2,014,677 5,151,812 227,270 7,393,759

Maint: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 5,355,000 (312,002) (50,000) 4,992,998 Cost 0 2,954,600 2,028,398 0 4,982,998

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 101,215 252,008 15,752,208 22,722,519 Cost 15,449 101,292 21,945 565,200 7,168,568

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 0 263,235 (22,350) 240,885 Cost 0 0 218,150 16,052 234,202

Major Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 3,576,684 Cost 0 0 0 0 3,576,684

6. Freeport Harbor , TX New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 65,371,95610 Cost 0 0 0 0 65,367,12910

Maint: Approp. 5,306,000 6,385,680 3,119,490 3,486,622 126,526,39111 Cost 3,096,411 3,297,476 5,322,218 8,241,612 125,999,71811

Maint. Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 15,000,000 (1,081,000) (230,260) 15,688,740 Cost 232 3,909,549 3,386,135 790,355 10,086,039

Minor Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 8,935 Cost 0 0 0 0 8,935

7. Galveston Harbor and New Work: Channel, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 29,096,39212 Cost 0 0 0 0 29,096,39212

Maint: Approp 19,027,000 5,478,200 12,320,550 11,031,226 191,234,06913

40-29 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

Cost 9,226,037 11,572,385 11,497,796 8,264,284 181,769,16113 7. Galveston Harbor and Channel, TX (Continued) Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 27,400,000 1,800,000 652,584 31,992,584 Cost 54,589 7,197,519 4,536,705 2,091,833 15,951,642

Maint: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 4,146,000 (600,000) (290,187) 3,255,813 Cost 0 11,933 3,243,880 0 3,255,813

Major Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 7,969,329 Cost 0 0 0 0 7,969,329

8. Gulf Intracoastal Waterway between Apalachee Bay, FL and the Mexican Border (Galveston District) (Regular Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 163,330,04614 Cost 206,479 230,247 73,277 162,873,87414

(Inland Waterways New Work: Trust Fund) Approp 0 0 0 0 28,634,490 Cost 0 0 0 0 28,634,490

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp 0 0 0 0 631,000 Cost 0 8,422 344 11,654 543,914

(Regular Funds) Maint: Appr 22,735,000 44,098,720 30,298,950 30,961,927 851,695,83315 Cost 21,412,264 29,540,954 32,441,646 30,577,125 828,078,34216

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 16,160,000 87,628,000 (9,830,377) 10,338,196 113,680,81917 Cost 1,037,878 42,495,954 25,095,348 32,706,985 107,146,71617

Maint: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 52,004,000 (1,472,998) (618,660) 49,912,342 Cost 0 0 43,050,625 6,811,508 49,862,133

(Regular Funds) Major Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 3,390,338 Cost 0 0 0 0 3,390,338

(Inland Waterways Major Rehab: Trust Fund) Approp. 0 0 0 0 2,955,700 Cost 0 0 0 0 2,955,700 Minor Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 835,873 Cost 0 0 0 0 835,873

40-30 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

9. Houston-Galveston New Work: Navigation Channels, TX Approp. 15,730,000 21,244,000 242,000 (1,085,195) 398,647,105 (Regular Funds) Cost 22,510,097 18,717,213 20,692,694 10,441,268 386,681,884

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 8,000,000 0 0 12,217,000 Cost 1,230,940 729,464 333,923 6,318,838 11,599,225

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 86,163,500 (10,573,000) (1,337,042) 74,253,458 Cost 0 585,869 12,827,366 20,076,907 33,490,142

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 10,300,000 7,847,500 (863,435) 1,938,369 124,074,934 Cost 6,395,338 6,012,799 7,140,094 2,530,357 120,179,682

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 258,650 2,418,135 (10,118) 4,072,667 Cost 460,695 239,973 113,364 2,107,644 3,866,981

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 7,750,082 18,815,300 (1,801,251) 24,764,131 Cost 0 48,770 3,834,803 7,673,512 11,557,085

10. Houston Ship New Work: Channel, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 35,760,38218 Cost 0 0 0 0 35,760,38218

Maint: Approp. 17,293,000 18,445,727 18,862,131 18,798,442 347,758,33419 Cost 10,211,357 21,341,884 11,867,927 15,120,146 326,072,06619

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 6,000,000 38,975,000 4,747,845 (3,201,673) 66,579,17220 Cost 618,368 8,647,671 22,848,478 12,281,496 63,779,26120

Maint: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 42,700,000 0 0 42,700,000 Cost 0 528,438 18,342,997 0 18,871,435

11. Matagorda, Ship New Work: Channel, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 18,058,77721 Cost 0 0 0 0 18,058,77721

Maint: Approp. 8,060,000 5,905,400 4,353,030 5,816,671 120,834,67422 Cost 7,345,878 5,052,059 3,875,772 8,697,053 120,648,01322

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 10,700,000 565,809 (2,638,365) 8,627,444 Cost 0 2,333,107 2,777,142 3,454,941 8,565,190

40-31 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

12. Neches River Saltwater New Work: Barrier, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 40,286,843 (Regular Funds) Cost 0 0 0 0 40,286,843

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 11,971,288 Cost 0 0 0 0 11,971,288

13. Sabine-Neches New Work: Waterway, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 56,136,81523 Cost 0 0 0 0 56,136,81523

Maint: Approp. 11,667,000 8,034,220 12,623,329 14,893,949 376,644,67024 Cost 7,728,758 6,709,426 3,891,935 14,328,512 360,025,70024

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 6,000,000 31,000,000 5,819,999 (10,910,814) 65,863,185 Cost 11,601,018 11,273,801 11,776,500 10,390,389 65,245,902

Maint: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 27,700,000 (11,930,000) (330,125) 15,439,875 Cost 0 0 2,815,379 10,520,895 13,336,274

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 0 0 Cost 0 0 0 0 0

14. Texas City Channel, TX New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 2,460,000 1,914,000 6,637,000 (396,414) 29,538,05825 Cost 459,250 3,270,158 1,991,586 4,196,826 28,502,01325

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 43,754,400 (4,241,849) (8,903) 39,503,648 Cost 0 90,017 2,783,212 29,631,232 32,504,461

Maint: Approp. 4,243,000 1,348,480 3,762,990 0 50,548,17026 Cost 4,309,978 757,664 867,140 1,364,324 48,293,40626

Maint Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 2,800,000 718,444 (163,448) 4,954,996 Cost 24,387 463,103 2,408,360 503,260 4,910,064

Maint Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 3,600,000 (500,000) (236,602) 2,863,398 Cost 0 0 1,613,398 1,250,000 2,863,398

Major Rehab: Approp. 0 0 0 0 726,158 Cost 0 0 0 0 726,158

40-32 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

14. Texas City Channel, TX (Continued)

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 2,721,800 614,743 1,272,251 4,608,794 Cost 0 1,572,336 1,224,737 598,842 3,395,915

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 0 13,178,310 (10,410) 13,167,900 Cost 0 0 929,522 10,634,232 11,563,754

Maint: Approp. 0 0 0 0 0 Cost 0 0 0 0 0

15. Trinity River and New Work: Tributaries, TX Approp. 0 0 0 0 84,481,17627 (Includes Wallisville) Cost 0 0 0 0 84,481,17627

Maint: Approp. 2,182,000 2,570,246 3,141,366 1,864,416 54,925,29428 Cost 2,732,296 1,863,827 1,587,530 3,598,923 54,024,03928

Maint. Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 7,683,000 6,275,000 (5,391,042) 8,566,95829 Cost 0 1,814,498 3,923,926 610,784 6,349,20829

19. Buffalo Bayou and New Work: Tributaries, TX Approp. 13,933,000 5,011,000 17,377,000 22,863,176 185,805,44730 Cost 13,793,688 5,854,636 17,110,799 23,344,300 185,444,65230

Recreation: Approp. 0 137,000 0 (50,704) 327,100 Cost 0 24, 071 25,287 39,382 327,100

Maint: Approp. 5,803,000 2,171,020 5,471,851 3,430,817 79,882,426 Cost 2,465,664 5,571,140 2,495,866 4,557,321 77,778,197

Major Rehab: Approp. 636,000 1,720,000 3,200,000 347,278 18,378,278 Cost 108,262 1,438,240 2,340,089 1,840,431 18,202,022

Dam Safety: Approp. 0 0 0 1,527,222 14,220,922 Cost 0 0 0 779,284 13,472,984

40-33 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

20. Clear Creek, TX New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 1,461,000 478,000 1,211,000 359,253 35,182,730 Cost 1,294,817 793,673 853,035 526,378 34,680,501

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 59,189 39,643 63,738 17,966 2,305,725 Cost 66,046 65,089 60,306 20,358 2,318,942

21. Lower Rio Grande New Work: Basin, TX Approp. 492,000 0 0 (539,090) 12,338,973 Cost 300,287 7,407 0 0 12,338,973

22. Sims Bayou, TX New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 20,075,000 19,426,000 11,236,000 (5,447,635) 241,225,282 Cost 12,463,941 13,260,487 12,560,523 13,483,042 231,521,233

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 5,000,000 1,000,000 (500,000) (504) 5,499,496 Cost 0 1,129,716 3,348,861 310,131 4,788,708

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 7,767,550 8,333,000 (18) 16,100,532 Cost 0 118,088 4,375,725 9,124,503 13,618,316

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 1,500,000 1,022,421 121,462 (550,890) 16,549,35331 Cost 1,156,412 1,102,414 750,821 884,435 16,832,45731

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 315,790 0 (26,343) 289,447 Cost 0 48,856 209,835 13,785 272,476

New Work: (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act) Approp. 0 408,818 596,222 (157,644) 847,396 Cost 0 0 281,133 462,659 743,792

28. North Padre Island, TX New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 0 0 0 0 19,579,665 Cost 0 0 1,214 0 19,577,310

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 0 0 (177,546) 2,322,454 Cost 1,090,177 51,389 (176,909) 0 2,322,454

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 10,412,74332 Cost 7,668 0 7,211 6,782 10,346,81832

New Work Hurricane Suppl: Approp. 0 0 0 0 1,346,154 Cost 515,122 0 176,908 0 1,250,553

40-34 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

29. University of Texas Marine Science Inst. (UTMSI) New Work: (Regular Funds) Approp. 0 0 0 (4,752) 1,889,028 Cost. 284 0 0 51,176 1,889,028

(Contributed Funds) New Work: Approp. 0 0 0 27,556 966,926 Cost. 29,641 0 0 27,556 956,067

______

1 Excludes $1,637,270 credit for 12 Includes $8,421,996 for previous contributed work. projects. In addition, $3,648,932 expended from 2 Includes $675,855 for previous projects. contributed funds. In addition, $10,571,509 expended from contributed 13 Includes $86,126 for previous projects. In funds, of which $123,361 was for previous projects. addition, $3,276,588 expended from contributed Excludes $874,258 expended from contributed funds funds. for dock removal for the local sponsor. 14 Includes $706,709 for previous projects. 3 In addition, $1,681,103 expended from Includes Sec. 107 projects for Port Isabel Small Boat contributed funds and $34,000 expended from Basin ($46,559); Port Isabel Side Channel ($8,414); contributed funds for Port Isabel; $1,208,789 Offatts Bayou ($356,466); and Channel to Aransas expended from contributed funds from the City of Pass ($658,573). In addition contributed funds South Padre Island for beneficial placement of expended for Port Isabel Small Boat Basin ($46,559); dredged material on the South Padre Island Beach; Offatts Bayou ($49,665); Channel to Aransas Pass $1,097,790 expended from contributed funds from ($347,950); Chocolate Bayou ($658,310); Mouth of Texas General Land Office; $383,958 expended from Colorado River ($3,397,080); ($2,873,897) Channel contributed funds from the Brownsville Navigation to Victoria; ($862,716) expended for the local District for rehabilitation of levees at Placement Area sponsor's levee requirement on Channel to Victoria; #4. and $1,489,921 expended for expanding the turning 4 Includes $39,087 for previous projects. In basin addition $25,000 expended from contributed funds. 15 Includes $1,526,564 for previous projects. 5 Includes $69,784 for previous projects. In addition $22,672 contributed funds for main 6 Includes $48,711 for previous projects. channel, $1,180,779 contributed funds for Rollover 7 Includes $46,101 for previous projects. Pass (beginning 1997), and $168,414 contributed 8 Includes $1,372,534 for previous projects. funds for marsh restoration in an area between Includes $456,515 for Sec. 107 project for Port Bastrop Bayou and Galveston. Includes following Aransas Breakwaters. In addition $768 expended amounts for tributary channels separately funded from contributed funds for Port Aransas Breakwaters. starting in fiscal year 1987: Channel to Victoria 9 Includes $62,452 for previous projects. In $39,534,615. Channel to Aransas Pass $2,600. addition, $1,827,731 expended from contributed Chocolate Bayou Channel $10,420,033. In addition funds. $1,515,574 was contributed for Chocolate Bayou 10 Includes $147,098 for previous projects. Channel. Includes following amounts for tributary In addition, $21,014,645 expended from contributed channels separately funded starting in fiscal year funds. ($581,615 on 45-foot project.) 1989: Channel to Harlingen $12,335,964. Channel to 11 In addition, $229,311 expended from Port Mansfield $11,465,798. Also includes contributed funds. $23,056,533 for Mouth of Colorado River, separately funded beginning in fiscal year 1992 and $28,140

40-35 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

contributed funds for Channel to Harlingen beginning beginning in FY 1998. Expenditures for tributary in fiscal year 1998. channels separately funded starting in fiscal year 16 Includes $1,526,564 for previous projects. 1992: Greens Bayou Channel $2,467,966. Barbour In addition $22,672 expended from contributed funds Terminal Channel $5,130,091. Bayport Ship Channel for main channel, $1,006,648 contributed funds for $32,684,229. In addition $91,942 expended from Rollover Pass (beginning 1997) for the beneficial contributed funds for Bayport Ship Channel placement of dredge material at Rollover Pass., and beginning in FY 1998. $168,325 contributed funds for marsh restoration in an 20 Includes the following appropriated and area between Bastrop Bayou and Galveston. Includes expended Hurricane Supplemental funding for following amounts for tributary channels separately tributary channels of the Houston Ship Channel: funded starting in fiscal year 1987: Channel to Greens Bayou Channel - $1,315,326 appropriated Victoria $36,286,059, Channel to Aransas Pass and $1,315,326 expended; Barbour Terminal Channel $2,600, Chocolate Bayou Channel $10,367,119. In - $2,415,950 appropriated and $2,415,951 expended; addition $1,515,574 was expended from contributed Bayport Ship Channel - $8,078,677 and $8,078,677 funds for Chocolate Bayou Channel. Also includes expended. amounts for tributary channels separately funded 21 In addition, $12,259,619 expended from starting in fiscal year 1989: Channel to Harlingen contributed funds and $182,800 for contributed lands. $11,216,077. Channel to Port Mansfield $11,265,776. 22 Starting in fiscal year 1990 includes an Also includes an expended amount of $23,056,515 appropriation of $286,164 and expenditures of for Mouth of Colorado River, separately funded in $280,854 for Matagorda Ship Channel In addition, fiscal year 1992. In addition, includes $28,140 appropriation from contributed funds $1,070,636 and contributed funds expended beginning in fiscal year expenditures of $793,806. Include an appropriation of 1998 for Channel to Harlingen. $2,303,797 and expenditures of $2,303,797 for 17 Includes the following appropriated and Channel to Red Bluff. expended Hurricane Supplemental funding for 23 Includes $5,180,832 for previous projects. tributary channels of the GIWW- $77,753,469 In addition, $2,680,942 expended from contributed appropriated, and $72,544,338 expended;: Chocolate funds, of which $577,507 was for previous projects. Bayou - $5,896,241 appropriated, and $5,896,241 24 Includes $2,379,677 for previous projects. expended; Channel to Harlingen - $11,757,663 In addition, $7,713,770 expended from contributed appropriated and $11,549,576 expended; Channel to funds and $7,944 expended from contributed funds Port Mansfield - $12,326,642 appropriated and for real estate acquisition for the local sponsor. Also $12,078,744 expended; Mouth of Colorado River - includes $273,039 contributed funds expended from $1,996,805 appropriated and $1,996,202 expended; the Port of Beaumont for dredging their slip areas Channel to Victoria - $3,950,000 appropriated and between Sections 9 and 11. In addition $547,230 $3,081,614 expended. contributed funds from the Port of Port Arthur of 18 Includes $4,105,157 for previous projects. which $546,724 have been expended. In addition, $2,591,939 expended from contributed 25 Includes $366,823 for previous projects. funds, of which $1,209,179 was for previous projects. In addition, $1,443,819 expended from contributed 19 Includes $1,213,142 for previous projects. funds, of which $99,000 was for mitigation measures. In addition, $534,641 expended from contributed In addition, appropriation from contributed funds funds for Houston Ship Channel, of which $200,000 $1,941,625 and expenditures of $1,887,206. was for previous projects and $125,000 expended 26 Includes $195,083 for previous projects. from contributed funds for Greens Bayou Channel. In 27 Includes $1,966,306 for previous projects. addition, $428,449 expended from contributed funds In addition, $66,000 expended from contributed for the Greens Bayou Dock. Includes appropriated funds. funds for tributary channels separately funded 28 Includes $543,662 for previous projects. starting in fiscal year 1992: Greens Bayou Channel Includes $22,406,445 appropriated (and $21,674,967 $2,704,172. Barbour Terminal Channel $5,530,837. expended) for Wallisville Lake project beginning in Bayport Ship Channel $36,950,202. Also, includes FY 1983. $91,942 contributed funds for Bayport Ship Channel

40-36 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-A COST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT (cont’d) ______See Section Total Cost To in Text Project Funding FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Sep. 30, 201133

29Includes the following appropriated and 32 Includes $508, 812 contributed funds for expended Hurriance Supplemental funding for Utility Casing (100% Non-Federal Betterment). Wallisville Lake project - $8,566,958 appropriated 33 Includes funds ($12,544,400) provided by and $6,349,208 expended. the Jobs Act (P.L. 98-8, dated March 24, 1983) for projects listed in Table 15-I of Annual Report for 30 Includes $4,400,000 of advanced funds 1985. Also includes funds provided by the American repaid to Harris County Flood Control District. In Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 110-5, dated addition, $63,661 contributed funds expended for February 17, 2009). The American Recovery and Brays Bayou and $12,900 Federal funds and $19,104 Reinvestment Act funds are reflected in each project contributed funds expended for enlargement of receiving these appropriated funds. Clodine Ditch. 31 Excludes $2,001,622 expended from contributed funds for real estate acquisition for the local sponsor.

40-37 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL, TX Oct. 27, 1965 Provides for control of progressive eradication of aquatic plant growth H. Doc. 251, 89th from the navigable waters and streams in the U.S. Cong., 1st Sess.

Nov. 17, 1986 Amended cost sharing requirements to provide for 50 percent Federal and Sec. 103(c), PL 99- 50 percent non-Federal participation in control operations. 662

2. BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX Jun. 3, 1930 Jetties and jetty channel, inside channels and basins. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 16, 71st Cong., 2nd Sess.

May 24, 1934 Local cooperation requirement modified to provide contribution of funds to Rivers and Harbors (PWA) cover cost of original dredging of all inside channels and basins. Committee Doc. 10, Aug. 30, 1935 71st Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 26, 1937 Deepen jetty channel to 31 feet and inner channels and Brownsville and Rivers and Harbors Port Isabel turning basins to 28 feet. Committee Doc. 32, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Enlarge Port Isabel turning basin. H. Doc. 335, 76th Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Deepen entrance channel to 35 feet; deepen to 33 feet channel across H. Doc. 347, 77th Laguna Madre; deepen to 32 feet channels from Laguna Madre to Cong., 1st Sess. turning basins at Brownsville and Port Isabel; widen turning basins; and dredging present shallow-draft channel south of Port Isabel from railroad bridge to Laguna Madre and connecting channel to Port Isabel turning basin.

Jul. 24, 1946 Additional connecting channel between Port Isabel and Brownsville H. Doc. 627, 79th channels; and transfer shallow-draft channels at Port Isabel to GIWW. Cong., 2nd Sess.

May 17, 1950 Deepen to 38 feet in outer bar channels and 36 feet in all other authorized H. Doc. 192, 81st channels and basins; extend existing turning basins at Brownsville and Cong., 1st Sess. Port Isabel; and construct small-boat basin with a connecting channel next to Brownsville ship channel.

Jul. 14, 1960 Widen Brownsville Channel to 300 feet at a depth of 36 feet from former H. Doc. 428, 86th Goose Island passing basin to turning basin extension, thence at a width Cong., 2nd Sess.1 of 500 feet and same depth to turning basin proper, deepen to 36 feet in area in southeast corner of turning basin, maintain two existing basins of fishing harbor, and a connecting channel, and construct a third basin, with necessary connecting channel and extend Brazos Island Harbor north jetty seaward 1,000 feet.27

40-38 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX (Continued) Nov. 17, 1986 Enlargement of the entrance channel from deep water in the Gulf of Sec. 201, PL 99-662 Mexico to the Laguna Madre to a depth of 44 feet and a width of 400 feet; enlargement of the Turning Basin Extension to a point 800 feet beyond the grain elevator to a depth of 42 feet at widths varying from 325 to 400 feet; removal of Brownsville Navigation District Wharves 5,

6, and 9 to permit widening of the adjacent portion of the Turning Basin to 1,200 feet at a depth of 36 feet; construction of asphalt walkways with handrails on the crown of the North and South Jetties, and construction of park-type public use facilities at the inner end of the North Jetty. 3. CEDAR BAYOU, TX

Jul. 3, 1930 Channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide from Houston Ship Channel to a S. Doc 107, 71st point on bayou 11 miles above mouth.29 Cong., 2nd Sess.1

Dec. 11, 2000 Channel 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide from Houston Ship channel to a S. 349 (a)(2), PL 106- point on bayou 11 miles above mouth. 541

Nov. 8, 2007 Modified Section 349(a)(2) of Water Resources Development Act of 2000 Sec. 3147, PL110- to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with Section 222 of 114 Federal Control Act of 1970, toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project.

Specifies cost sharing for construction and operation and maintenance of the project shall be determined in accordance with Section 101 of the Water Resources Development act of 1986.

Amends Section 349(a)(2) of the water Resources Development Act of 2000 by striking “12 feet deep by 125 feet wide” and inserting “that is 10 feet deep by 100 feet wide”.

4. CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX Jun. 25, 1910 A channel 30 feet deep and 200 feet wide from deep water in Galveston H. Doc. 328, 61st Harbor extending to a turning basin 1,000 feet square and 30 feet Cong., 2nd Sess. deep.30

Mar. 4, 1919 Enlargement, extension and protection of turning basin.30 H. Doc. 1122, 65th Cong., 2nd Sess.1

5. CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX

Mar. 3, 1899 Acquisition of old curved portion of north jetty previously constructed by Specified in Act. private parties.

Jun. 13, 1902 Complete north jetty in accordance with builder’s plans. Specified in Act.

40-39 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX (Continued) Mar. 3, 1905 Complete north jetty in accordance with builder’s plans. Specified in Act.

Mar. 2, 1907 Connect old curve to St. Joseph Island, and construct south jetty. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 5 59th Cong., 2nd Sess. Feb. 27, 1911 Dredge roadstead in Harbor Island Basin to 20 feet deep and construct H. Doc. 1094, 61st 10,000 linear feet of stone dike on St. Joseph Island. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Mar. 4, 19132 Channel between jetties and Harbor Island Basin to 25 feet deep, extend H. Doc. 1125, 62nd Cong., 3rd Sess. jetties seaward, extend dike on St. Joseph Island 9,100 feet, and dredge approach channel 12 feet deep to town of Port Aransas.

Sep. 23, 1922 Dredging channel from Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi, 25 feet deep, 200 H. Doc. 321, 67th feet bottom width. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Jul. 3, 19303 Deepen entrance channel from gulf to Harbor Island and provide an inner H. Doc. 214, 70th basin at Harbor Island of reduced area but greater depth. Cong., 1st Sess.

Jul. 3, 1930 Channel from Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi Channel with depth 30 feet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 9, 71st Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 19354 Enlarge all channels from gulf to western end of basin dredge by Humble Committee Docs. 35,

Oil and Refining Co., at its docks on Harbor Island. 72nd Cong., 1st Sess., and 40, 73rd Cong., 2nd Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Maintain channel and maneuvering basin between breakwater and western H. Doc. 130, 72nd shoreline of Corpus Christi Bay. Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Maintain 30-foot depth of approach channel, turning basin at Corpus Rivers and Harbors Christi, Industrial Canal and turning basin at Avery Point. Committee Doc. 13, 74th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug 30, 1935 Rivers and Harbors Maintain and deepen to 32 feet channel from deep water at Port Aransas to Committee Doc. 63, and including turning basin at Corpus Christi. 74th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jun. 20, 1938 Extend main turning basin at Corpus Christi westward 2,500 feet at its H. Doc. 574, 75th present width and depth, deepen existing Industrial Canal and turning Cong., 3rd Sess. basin to 32 feet and extend this canal at a depth of 32 feet and general width of 150 feet, westward along Nueces Bay shore to a turning basin 32 feet by 900 feet, and 1,000 feet long near Tule Lake.

Jun 30, 1948 Deepen entrance channel to 38 feet from gulf to outer end of jetty; 38 feet H. Doc. 560, 80th decreasing to 36 feet thence to station 90 north jetty; and 36 feet in all Cong., 2nd Sess. other deep water channels and basins except 2,000-foot undredged part

of inner basin at Harbor Island, and a width of 400 feet in channel from Port Aransas to Maneuvering basin at Corpus Christi.

Sep. 3, 1954 An anchorage basin 12 feet deep, from 300 to 400 feet wide, and 900 feet H. Doc. 654, 81st long in Turtle Cove at Port Aransas, Texas. Cong., 1st Sess.

40-40 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX (Continued) rd Sep. 3, 19545 Branch channel 32 feet by 150 feet, extending northerly from main channel H. Doc. 89, 83 in vicinity of Port Ingleside, along north shore of Corpus Christi Bay to Cong., 1st Sess. Reynolds Metals Co. plant and turning basin 32 feet deep and 800 feet square near plant in general vicinity of LaQuinta, Texas.

Sep. 3, 1954 An entrance channel 36 by 400 feet on a tangent alignment from 400-foot H. Doc. 487, 83rd channel in Corpus Christi Bay, near Corpus Christi breakwater to flared Cong., 2nd Sess. approach channel to Corpus Christi turning basin.

Jul. 3, 1958 Deepen and widen LaQuinta Channel to 36 by 200 feet; enlarge LaQuinta S. Doc. 33, 85th turning basin to 36 by 800 by 1,000 feet; a flared entrance to channel; Cong., 1st Sess. and widening at curves.

Jul. 3, 1958 Deepen entrance channel to 42 feet from gulf to outer end of jetty; 40 feet H. Doc. 361, 85th in all other deep-water channels and basins except undredged northward Cong., 2nd Sess. extension to inner basin at Harbor Island and branch channel to LaQuinta; and widen Industrial Channel to 400 feet with flared entrances to Corpus Christi and Avery Point turning basins.

Jul. 3, 1958 Channel 40 by 200 feet extending 2.2 miles from Tule Lake turning basin H. Doc. 361, 85th to a turning basin 40 feet deep, 700 to 900 feet wide, 1,000 feet long at Cong., 2nd Sess. Viola, Texas.

Jul. 3, 1958 Depth of 12 feet and a width of 100 feet in locally dredged Jewel Fulton H. Doc. 361, 85th Canal from LaQuinta Channel to a turning basin 12 by 200 by 400 feet, Cong., 2nd Sess. and assumption of maintenance by United States.

Jul. 14, 1960 Construction of a breakwater at entrance to harbor area at Port Aransas, and Sec. 107, PL-86-645 (As amended by realignment of existing 12-foot by 100-foot project channel. Dec. 31, 1970)

Aug. 13, 1968 Provides for a project depth of 45 feet in the existing deep-draft channels S. Doc. 99, 90th and basins, for construction of a new deep-draft turning point, for Cong., 2nd Sess.1 construction of a deep draft mooring area and mooring facilities and for

widening of the channels and basins at certain locations. The Act also deauthorized the undredged northward extension of Inner Basin at

Harbor Island and the undredged west turnout (Wye connection) between the LaQuinta Channel and the main channel of the waterway.

Oct. 22, 1976 Modified local cooperation requirements for 1968 Act. Shifted Sec. 124, PL 94-587 responsibility for cost of disposal areas and confinement works from sponsor to joint 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-Federal responsibility.

Sep. 15, 1994 Assume maintenance of 17-foot by 100-foot Jewel Fulton Canal, after Sec. 204, PL 99-662 construction by local interest. as amended

40-41 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX (Continued) Nov 8, 2007 Deepen and widen Corpus Christi Ship Channel from Viola Turning Sec.1001 (40), Basin to the end of the jetties in the Gulf of Mexico to -52 feet MLT; PL 110-114 deepen the remainder of the channel into the Gulf of Mexico to -54 feet MLT; widen the upper and Lower Bay reaches to 530 feet. Construct barge shelves 200 feet wide and -12 feet MLT on both sides of the CCSC from its junction with the LaQuinta Channel to the entrance of the Inner Harbor. Extend the LaQuinta Channel approximately 1.4 miles beyond its current limit, at a depth of -39 feet MLT. The channel will measure 400 feet wide and include a second turning basin with a diameter of 1200 feet, to a depth of -39 feet MLT. The existing LaQuinta Channel will remain at the 45 foot depth. Adjacent to the CCSC in the Lower Bay reach of the channel, mitigate project impacts by creation of 15 acres of sea grass adjacent to the LaQuinta. Construct two ecosystem restoration features, including rock breakwaters and geotubes to protect 1,200 acres of an existing high quality, complex wetland ecosystem and protect 40 acres of highly productive sea grass. In carrying out the project, the Secretary shall enforce the navigational servitude in the Corpus Christi Ship Channel (including the removal or relocation of any facility obstructing the project) consistent with the cost sharing requirement of Section 01 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211).

6. FREEPORT HARBOR, TX Mar. 3, 1899 Dredging and other work necessary in judgment of Secretary of War for Specified in Act. improving harbor; for taking over jetties and privately built works at mouth of river.

Mar. 2, 1907 Examination authorized. Work later confined to maintenance of jetties. H. Doc. 1087, 60th Cong., 2nd Sess.

Feb. 27, 1911 Repairs to jetties and dredging. Specified in Act.

Mar. 4, 1913 Construct seagoing hopper dredge. Specified in Act.

Aug. 8, 1917 Purchase of one 15-inch pipeline dredge and equipment, its operation of 3 Specified in Act. years, operation of seagoing dredge one-half time for 3 years, and repairs to jetties.

Mar. 3, 19256 Diversion dam, diversion channel, and necessary auxiliary works. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 10, 68th Cong., 2nd Sess. Jul. 3, 1930 Maintenance of diversion channel at expense of local interest. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 18, 70th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Deepening channels and basins. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 15, 72nd Cong., 1st Sess. May 17, 1950 Deepen outer bar channel to 38 feet from gulf to a point within jetties, H. Doc. 195, 81st Cong., thence 36 feet in authorized channels to and including upper turning 1st Sess. basin.

40-42 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX (Continued) Aug. 30, 1935 Maintenance of present project dimensions of channels and basins at Rivers and Harbors Federal expense. Committee Docs. 15, 72nd Cong., 1st Sess., and 29, 73rd Cong., 2nd Sess.

Jul. 3, 1958 Relocate outer bar channel on straight alignment with jetty channel and H. Doc. 433, 84th Cong., maintain Brazos Harbor entrance channel and turning basin (constructed 2nd Sess. by local interests).

Oct. 5, 1961 Modification of HD 1469. Revoking certain provisions of local PL 394, 87th Cong. cooperation.

Dec. 31, 1970 Relocation of entrance channel and deepen to 47 feet; enlargement to a H. Doc. 289, 93rd depth of 45 feet and relocation of jetty channel and inside main channel; Cong., 2nd Sess.2 deepening to 45 feet of channel to Brazosport; enlargement of the widened area of Quintana Point to provide a depth of 45 feet with a 750- foot diameter turning area; Brazosport turning basin to 45 feet deep with

a 1,000 foot turning area; a new turning basin with a 1,200 foot diameter turning area and 45 feet deep; deepening Brazosport channel to 36 by 750 feet diameter; flared approaches from Brazos Harbor Channel; relocation of north jetty and rehabilitation of south jetty.

Nov. 17, 1986 Modified local cooperation requirements for the 1970 Act. Sec. 101, PL 99-662

Amends Sec 101 of Rivers and Harbor Act of 1970 to make all costs for Sec. 3148, PL 110-114 Nov. 8, 2007 removal of the sunken vessel COMSTOCK a Federal responsibility.

7. GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX Aug. 5, 1886 Construct 2 rubblestone jetties at entrance to Galveston Harbor. H. Doc. 85, 49th Cong., 1st Sess., and Annual Report, 1886, p. 1311.

Jun. 13, 1902 A channel 1,200 by 30 feet from Bolivar Roads (outer end of old inner bar H. Doc. 264, 56th Cong., near Fort Point) at 51st Street.8 2nd Sess.

Mar. 3, 1905 Purchase or construct hydraulic pipeline dredge. Specified in Act.

40-43 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX (Continued) Mar. 2, 1907 Extension of jetties to present project length and construction and operation H. Doc. 340, 59th Cong., of a dredge. 2nd Sess., and Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 11, 59th Cong., 2nd Sess.

Mar. 2, 19079 Extension of Galveston Channel from 51st to 57th Sts., with depth of 30 H. Doc. 768, 59th Cong., feet and width of 700 feet. 2nd Sess.

Jun. 25, 19109 Conditional extension of Galveston Channel between 51st and 57th Sts., 30 H. Doc. 328, 61st feet deep and 1,000 feet wide. Cong., 2nd Sess

Jul. 27, 1916 Extend seawall at Galveston from angle at 6th St., and Broadway to vicinity H. Doc. 1390, 62nd of Fort San Jacinto. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Jul. 18, 1918 Deepen harbor channel to 35 feet and widen to 800 feet. H. Doc 758, 65th Cong., 2nd Sess.

Sep. 22, 1922 Further extension of seawall at Galveston to a junction with south jetty; and H. Doc. 693, 66th repairing seawall in front of Fort Crockett reservation. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Jan. 21, 192711 Deepen Galveston Channel to 32 feet; and maintain Galveston Harbor H. Doc. 307, 69th channels to dimensions of 800 feet wide, 35 feet deep on outer bar and Cong., 1st Sess. 34 feet deep in inner bar.10 Aug 30, 1935 Maintain State Highway Ferry Landing Channels to dimensions of 12 by River and Harbors 100 feet. Committee Doc. 31, 72nd Cong. 1st Sess. Aug 30, 1935 Construct 13 groins along gulf shore from 12th to 61st Sts. in city of H. Doc. 400, 73rd Galveston at a limited cost of $234,000 (10 Groins constructed) Cong., 2nd Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Deepen Galveston Channel to 34 feet (Bolivar Roads to 43rd St.). Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 61, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. Aug. 30, 1935 Deepen Galveston entrance channel to 36 feet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 57, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. Apr. 4, 1938 Completion of project for construction of 13 groins. PL 463, 75th Cong.

Jun. 30, 1948 Deepen Galveston Harbor to 38 feet from gulf to a point 2 miles west of H. Doc. 561, 80th seaward end of north jetty; thence 36 feet to Bolivar Roads; revoking Cong., 2nd Sess. authority for maintenance of ferry channels; and Galveston channel to 36 feet deep from Bolivar Roads to 43rd Street. May 17, 1950 Deepen outer bar channel to 38 feet from gulf to a point within jetties, H. Doc. 195, 81st thence 36 feet in authorized channels to and including upper turning Cong., 1st Sess. basin. Jul. 3, 1958 Dredge to a depth of 42 feet over the authorized width of 800 feet from the H. Doc. 350, 85th Gulf of Mexico to a point 2 miles west of the seawall and of the North Cong., 2nd Sess. jetty thence at a depth of 40 feet to the junction of the Houston Ship Channel, with widths of 800 feet to Bolivar Roads, thence decreasing to 400 feet at the junction with the Houston Ship Channel.

40-44 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX (Continued) Jun. 23, 1971 Deepen Galveston Channel to 40 feet from Bolivar to 43rd Street. H. Doc. 121, 92nd (House Res.) Cong Nov. 18, 1971 (Senate Res.)

Oct. 12, 1996 Provides for navigation and environmental restoration improvements. The Sec. 101 (30) navigation improvements consist of deepening and widening the PL 104-303 Entrance Channel to 47 feet deep and 800 feet wide; the Houston Ship Channel to 45 feet deep and 530 feet wide; and the Galveston Channel to 45 feet deep. The environmental restoration portion consist of initial construction of marsh habitat and a colonial water bird nesting island through the beneficial use of new work dredged material, and incremental development (deferred construction) of additional marsh over the life of the navigation project through the beneficial use of maintenance materials dredged from Galveston Bay. The project is referred to as Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels.

8. GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BETWEEN APALACHEE BAY, FL AND MEXICAN BORDER Mar. 2, 1907 Channel 4 by 100 feet from West Galveston Bay across Chocolate Bay to 4 H. Doc. 445, 56th feet of water in Chocolate Bay. Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 3, 1925 Channel 9 by 100 feet, Sabine River to Galveston Bay, and a 20-inch H. Doc. 238, 68th pipeline dredge. Such passing places, widening at bends, locks or guard Cong., 1st Sess. locks and railway bridges over artificial cuts as are necessary.

Jan. 21, 1927 Channel 9 by 100 feet, Galveston Bay to Corpus Christi. H. Doc. 238, 68th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 26, 1937 Maintenance of a flood-discharge channel in Colorado River. S. Committee print, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jun. 20, 193813 Channel 9 by 100 feet in San Bernard River, Texas. H. Doc. 640, 75th Cong., 3rd Sess.

Jun. 20, 1938 Channel in Colorado River, 9 by 100 feet, with basin. H. Doc. 642, 75th Cong., 3rd Sess.

Jun. 20, 1938 Channel 9 by 100 feet from Palacios through Trepalacios and Matagorda H. Doc. 564, 75th Bays. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Jun. 20, 1938 Channel 9 by 200 feet from main channel to harbor at Rockport and H. Doc. 641, 75th improve harbor to 9-foot depth. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Jun. 20, 1938 Channel 6 by 100 feet from main channel to Aransas Pass, Texas. H. Doc. 643, 75th Cong., 3rd Sess.

Mar. 23, 1939 Enlarge waterway to depth of 12 feet and a width of 125 feet from Sabine H. Doc. 230, 76th River to Corpus Christi. Cong., 1st Sess.

Jul. 23, 1942 Construct waterway from Corpus Christi to vicinity of Mexican border to PL 675, 77th Cong. provide a depth of 12 feet and width of 125 feet throughout.

40-45 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY (continued) Mar. 2, 1945 Channel 6 by 60 feet from GIWW to a point in Chocolate Bayou near H. Doc. 337, 76th Liverpool. Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 19459 Channel 6 feet deep and 60 feet wide from main channel near Port H. Doc. 428, 76th O’Connor, Texas, in Barroom Bay. Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Enlarge channel from main channel to Aransas Pass, Texas, providing a H. Doc. 383, 77th depth of 9 feet and width of 100 feet. Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Channel 12 by 125 feet from main channel to Red Fish Landing, Texas, S. Doc 248, 78th with basin. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Mar. 2, 194514 Channel 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide from main channel to vicinity of H. Doc. 402, 77th Harlingen, Texas, via Arroyo Colorado with basin. Cong., 1st Sess. (See PL 14, 79th Cong.) Jul. 24, 1946 Fill a portion of shallow-draft channel adjacent to Port Isabel Turning H. Doc. 627, 79th Basin, construct a channel to connect shallow-draft channel with main Cong., 2nd Sess. channel near shoreline of Laguna Madre, and enlarge shallow-draft channel west of this connection, all to 12-foot depth and bottom width of 125 feet.

Jul. 24, 1946 Reroute main channel to north shore of Red Fish Bay between Aransas Bay H. Doc. 700, 79th and Corpus Christi Bay; deepen tributary channel from Port Aransas to Cong., 2nd Sess. Aransas Pass, Texas, 12 feet and extended basin at same depth.

May 17, 1950 Deauthorized 6 by 60 foot channel in Chocolate Bayou and reauthorized H. Doc. 768, 80th the 4 by 100-foot channel. Cong., 2nd Sess.

May 17, 1950 Alternate channel across South Galveston Bay between Port Bolivar and H. Doc. 196, 81st Galveston causeway. Cong., 1st Sess.

May 17, 1950 “Red Fish Landing” changed to “Port Mansfield, Texas.” PL 516, 81st Cong.

Jul. 12, 1952 Incorporate as part of Intracoastal Waterway a channel 9 by 100 feet from PL 527, 82nd Cong., main channel via Seadrift to point on Guadalupe River 3 miles above 2nd Sess. Victoria, Texas, authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1945.

Sep. 3, 195415 Small craft harbor 9 by 200 by 1,000 feet at Seadrift with an entrance H. Doc. 478, 81st channel 9 by 100 feet. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Sep. 3, 1954 Widen tributary channel between Port Aransas and Aransas Pass, Texas, to H. Doc. 376, 83rd 125 feet; straighten and widen to 125 feet connecting channel to Conn Cong., 2nd Sess. Brown Harbor, and maintain Conn Brown Harbor at Federal expense, all to 12 feet deep.

Sep. 9, 1959 Improve channels and basins comprising channel to Port Mansfield S. Doc. 11, constructed in part by Federal Government and in part by local interest; 86th Cong., constructing turnout curves at Gulf Intracoastal Waterway intersection 1st Sess. and bend easing at entrance to turning basin; construct parallel jetties at gulf entrance; maintenance of locally dredged jetty channel 16 by 250 feet; and maintenance of small craft basin.

Jul. 14, 1960 Entrance channel 7 feet deep by 75 feet wide from main channel to Gulf of Sec. 107, PL 645, Mexico to inside shoreline at Port Isabel, Texas, an inner channel 6 feet 86th Cong. deep by 50 feet wide from entrance channel to East Harbor Basin, and an irregular-shaped harbor basin 6 feet deep having a surface area of about 7 acres. 40-46 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY (continued)

Jul. 14, 1960 Deepen the existing 6-foot channel at Port Isabel to 12 feet and removing Sec. 107, PL 86-645 (As amended the submerged bars at each end of the island to a depth of -12 feet MLT. Dec. 31, 1970)

Jul. 14, 1960 Deepening the existing channel to 12 by 125 feet, and extend southeasterly Sec. 107, PL 86-645 (As amended from the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway main channel in West Galveston Dec. 31, 1970) Bay, into Offatts Bayou, a distance of 2.2 miles, and a west turnout 12 by 125 feet between the proposed Offatts Bayou Channel and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.

Jul. 14, 1960 Deepening Aransas Pass tributary channel to 14 feet from mile 0 at Harbor Sec. 107, PL 86-645 (As amended Island to mile 6.1 at the city of Aransas Pass; widening to 175 feet Dec. 31, 1970) between miles 3.5 and 4.6; and deepening Conn Brown Harbor, turning basin and connecting channel between Conn Brown Harbor and turning basin.

Oct. 23, 196216 Improve main channel 16 feet deep and 150 feet wide from Sabine River to H. Doc. 556, 87th Houston Ship Channel; with two relocations; relocate main channel in Cong., 2nd Sess. Matagorda Bay and Corpus Christi Bay; and maintaining existing Lydia Ann Channel.

Oct. 23, 1962 Deepen and widen channel to Palacios; construct two protective H. Doc. 504, 87th breakwaters; maintain and deepen existing basins; and deepen, enlarge Cong., 2nd Sess. and maintain existing approach channel to basin No. 2.

Oct. 23, 1962 Eliminates requirement of local interest to construct bridge at mile 29.2 H. Doc. 288, 87th turning basin at Victoria, and maintain turning basins at Victoria and Cong., 2nd Sess. Seadrift; provide: Federal construction of vertical-lift railroad bridge at Missouri-Pacific Railroad mainline crossing, mile 29.2; construction and future maintenance of basin near Victoria, Texas, and maintenance of basin constructed by local interests at Seadrift, Texas.

Oct. 27, 196517 Modify existing Federal navigation project to provide a channel extending H. Doc. 217, 89th from Gulf Intracoastal Waterway through Chocolate Bay and Chocolate Cong., 1st Sess. Bayou to project channel mile 8.2, thence to a turning basin near channel mile 13.2 and for salt water barrier in Chocolate Bayou about 3.7 miles upstream from basin (channel mile 16.9).

Aug. 13, 1968 Entrance channel 15 feet deep and 200 feet wide at the mouth of Colorado S. Doc. 102, 90th River Channel protected by an east jetty 3,500 feet long extending to 12- Cong., 2nd Sess. foot depth and a west jetty 2,900 feet long extending to 5-foot contour; make channel 12 feet by 100 feet from gulf shore to Matagorda, including recreation facility, a turning basin 12 feet by 300 feet wide and 1,450 feet long, and a new diversion channel 250 feet wide and varying in depth from 20 to 23 feet including a closure dam across the present river channel.

Nov. 17, 1986 Modified 1968 authorization to provide that diversion features be Sec. 812, PL 99-662 constructed at Federal expense and operation and maintenance be shared 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-Federal.

Nov. 17, 1988 Enlarge existing Channel to Victoria from a depth of 9 feet and width of Sec. 3, PL 100-676 100 feet to a depth of 12 feet and width of 125 feet.

40-47 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY (continued) Oct. 31, 1992 Provide 8 miles of erosion protection for the existing waterway in the Sec. 101 (20), vicinity of Sargent, Texas. PL 102-580

Jul. 21, 1994 National Harbors Program: Dredged Material Management Plans (DMMP)

Oct. 12, 1996 Provides for erosion protection along a 31-mile reach of the Gulf Sec. 101 (29), Intracoastal Waterway, which crosses the critical wintering habitat of PL 104-303 the endangered whooping crane, including a 13.25-mile reach within the boundary of the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge. Also, provides for limited oil spill containment features and equipment to protect those areas from accidental hazardous spills.

Nov. 8, 2007 Reroute the portion of the existing GIWW across Matagorda Bay, between Sec. 1001 (41), mile marker 460 and 472, approximately 6,000 feet north of an parallel PL 110-114 to the existing alignment, along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Brazos River to Port O’Connor, Matagorda Bay Reroute. The channel will have a depth of 12 feet and a bottom width of 125 feet, the same as the existing channel. In the vicinity of bends in the channel, the bottom width will average 300 feet. Beneficial use of dredged material will provide for the construction of approximately 135 acres of marsh at Palacios Point and 160 acres of marsh near Port O’Connor and also nourish beaches at Sundown Island and the beach at Port O’Connor. The cost of construction to be paid for ½ from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and ½ from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.

Nov. 8, 2007 Along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, High Island to Brazos River Sec. 1001 (42), construct a 24-acre sediment trap at Rollover Pass, widen the west PL 110-114 approach opening at Sievers Cove from 125 feet to 200 feet. Abandon the existing turning Channel of the Texas City Wye, widen the Texas City Channel at the intersection with the GIWW; remove navigational aids. Widen the Pelican Island Mooring Basin on the north side from 75 feet to 155 feet and combine this feature with the Texas City Wye. Construct a single 24-foot circumference, 10,000-foot long geotube barrier between the GIWW and the West Bay. The cost of construction to be paid for ½ from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and ½ from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.

9. HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX

Oct. 27, 2000 Provides for barge lanes immediately adjacent to either side of the Appendix B, Houston Ship Channel, from Bolivar roads to Morgan Point, to a PL 106-377 depth of 12 feet.

40-48 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

10. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX Mar. 5, 1905 Easing or cutting off sharp bends and construction of a pile dike.18 Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 35, 61st Cong., 2nd Sess.

Mar. 2, 1919 A channel 30 feet deep, widen bend at Manchester and enlarge turning H. Doc. 1632, 65th basin. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Mar. 3, 1925 A light-draft extension of channel to mouth of White Oak Bayou.19 H. Doc. 93, 67th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jul. 3, 1930 Widen channel through Morgan Point and to a point 4,000 feet above H. Doc. 13, 71st Baytown and widen certain bends. Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 193511 Deepen to 32 feet in main channel and turning basin, and a 400-foot width Rivers and Harbors through Galveston Bay. Committee Doc. 28, 72nd Cong., 1st Sess. Aug. 30, 1935 Deepen to 34 feet in main channel and widen from Morgan Point to turning Rivers and Harbors basin Committee Doc. 58, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. Mar. 2, 1945 Branch channel 10 by 60 feet behind Brady Island. H. Doc. 226, 76th Cong., 1st Sess. Mar 2, 1945 Widen channel from Morgan Point to lower end of Fidelity Island with H. Doc. 226, 76th turning points at mouth of Hunting Bayou and lower end of Brady Cong., 1st Sess. Island.

Mar. 2, 1945 Widen channel from lower end of Fidelity Island to Houston turning basin H. Doc. 737, 79th and dredge off-channel silting basins. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Jun. 30, 1948 Deepen to 36 feet from Bolivar Roads to and including main turning basin H. Doc. 561, 80th at Houston, Texas, including turning points at Hunting Bayou and Brady Cong., 2nd Sess. Island.

Jul. 3, 195820 Deepen to 40 feet from Bolivar Roads to Brady Island, construct Clinton H. Doc. 350, 85th Island turning basin, a channel 8 by 125 feet at Five Mile Cut, and Cong., 2nd Sess.1 improve shallow-draft channel at Turkey Bend.

Jul. 14, 1960 Barbour Terminal at Morgan Point. Sec. 107, PL 86-645

Oct. 27, 1965H. Restoring existing locally dredged channel from mile 0 to 0.34 to 36 feet H. Doc. 257, 89th Doc. 257, 89th deep and dredging a 15-12 ft. channel from mile 0.34 to 2.81, in Greens Cong., 1st Sess. Cong., 1st Sess. Bayou.21

Nov. 17, 1986 Maintenance of Greens Bayou, Barbour Terminal Channel, and Bayport Sec. 819, PL 99-662 Ship Channel to forty-foot depths at Federal expense.

40-49 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX (Continued) Oct. 12, 1996 Provides for navigation and environmental restoration improvements. The Sec. 101 (30) navigation improvements consist of deepening and widening the PL 104-303 Entrance Channel to 47 feet deep and 800 feet wide; the Houston Ship Channel to 45 feet deep and 530 feet wide; and the Galveston Channel to 45 feet deep. The environmental restoration portion consist of initial construction of marsh habitat and a colonial water bird nesting island through the beneficial use of new work dredged material, and incremental development (deferred construction) of additional marsh over the life of the navigation project through the beneficial use of maintenance materials dredged from Galveston Bay. The project is referred to as Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels.

11. MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX

Jun. 25, 1910 Channel to Port Lavaca, Texas 7 feet deep and 89 feet bottom width. H. Doc. 1082, 60th Cong., 2nd Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Extend 7-foot channel to shoreline of Lavaca Bay at mouth of Lynns Rivers and Harbors Bayou. Committee Doc. 28, 74th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 26, 1937 Deepen and widen channel to present project dimensions. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 37, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Extend channel 6 by 100 feet from Port Lavaca via Lavaca Bay, Lavaca H. Doc. 314, 76th and Navidad Rivers to Red Bluff, a distance of 20 miles. Cong., 1st Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 A harbor of refuge 9 feet deep near Port Lavaca and an approach channel H. Doc. 731, 79th 100 feet wide and equal depth. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Jul. 3, 1958 Deepen to 12 feet and widen to 125 feet Port Lavaca Channel and approach H. Doc. 131, 84th channel to harbor of refuge; deepen to 12 feet Port Lavaca turning basin Cong., 1st Sess. and basins at harbor of refuge.

Jul. 3, 1958 An entrance channel 38 by 300 feet, a channel 36 by 200 feet, 22 miles long H. Doc. 388, 84th across Matagorda and Lavaca Bays to Point Comfort, Texas, a turning Cong., 2nd Sess. basin 36 feet deep and 1,000 feet square at Point Comfort, and dual jetties at entrance from gulf.

12. NECHES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, SALT WATER BARRIER AT BEAUMONT, TX Oct. 22, 1976 Construct gated salt water barrier in Neches River consisting of seven 40 x Sec. 102, PL 94-587 24.5 foot tainter gates; gated navigation by-pass channel with clear opening of 56 feet and depth of 16 feet; access road and levee; and auxiliary dam across canal which drains adjacent bayou.

13. SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX. Jul. 25, 1912 Existing project dimensions of jetties, a 26-foot channel through Sabine H. Doc. 773, 61st Pass, Port Arthur Canal and Port Arthur turning basin; and a 26-foot Cong., 2nd Sess. turning basin at Port Arthur. A depth of 25-feet in Sabine-Neches Canal, Neches River to Beaumont and Sabine River to Orange, including cutoffs and widening channels. 40-50 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX (continued) Sep. 22, 1922 Deepen channels to 30 feet from gulf to Beaumont, with increased widths H. Doc. 975, 66th and an anchorage basin in Sabine Pass. Cong., 3rd Sess.

Sep. 22, 1922 Deepen Port Arthur east and west turning basins and approach channel to S. Doc. 152, 67th 30 feet. Take over and deepen to 30 feet channel connecting west Cong., 2nd Sess. turning basin with Taylors Bayou turning basin. For a 30-foot depth in channel from mouth of Neches River to cutoff in Sabine River near Orange.

Mar. 3, 1925 Removal of guard lock in Sabine-Neches Canal. H. Doc. 234, 68th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jan. 21, 1927 Widen Sabine Pass and jetty channel, Port Arthur Canal, and Sabine- H. Doc 287, 69th Neches Canal. For dredging 2 passing places in Sabine-Neches Canal, Cong., 1st Sess. easing of bends, removal and reconstructing Port Arthur field office, extending Beaumont turning basin upstream 200 feet above new city wharves, and an anchorage basin in Sabine Pass.

Aug. 30, 193511 A depth of 32 feet in channels from gulf to Beaumont turning basin, Rivers and Harbors including all turning basins at Port Arthur. Committee Doc. 27, 72nd Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 193511 Deepen channels to 34 feet with increased widths from gulf to Beaumont Rivers and Harbors turning basin. Committee Doc. 12, 74th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Construct suitable permanent protective works along Sabine Lake. Specified in Act. Maintain Taylors Bayou turning basin.

Aug. 26, 1937 Maintain channel from Sabine River to Orange Municipal wharf. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 3, 75th Cong., 1st Sess. Aug. 26, 1937 Dredging 500 feet from eastern end of Harbor Island and abandonment of Rivers and Harbors channel south and west of Harbor Island. Committee Doc. 20, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jun. 20, 193822 Increased widths of channels from gulf to Beaumont turning basin and H. Doc. 581, 75th channel connecting Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou Cong., 3rd Sess. turning basin, deepen Beaumont turning basin and Beaumont turning extension to 34 feet; and dredge a new cutoff from Smith’s Bluff cutoff to McFadden Bend.

Oct. 17, 1940 Abandon Orange turning basin; dredge a channel 25 by 150 feet, suitably S. Doc 14, 77th widened on bends to highway bridge, and dredge a cutoff channel Cong., 1st Sess. opposite Orange.

Mar. 2, 1945 Extend Beaumont turning basin upstream 300 feet. H. Doc. 685, 76th Cong., 3rd Sess.

Mar. 2, 1945 Widen Port Arthur west turning basin to 600 feet. S. Doc 60, 77th Cong., 1st Sess.

40-51 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX (continued) Mar. 2, 1945 Dredge a channel from Beaumont turning basin to vicinity of S. Doc 158, 77th Pennsylvania Shipyard. Cong. 2nd Sess.

Jul. 24, 194623 Deepen Sabine Pass outer bar channel to 37 feet, Sabine Pass jetty H. Doc. 571, 79th channel to 36 feet at inner end, deepen to 36 feet Sabine Pass Channel, Cong., 2nd Sess. Port Arthur Canal, Port Arthur east and west turning basins, Taylors Bayou turning basin and channel from Port Arthur west turning basin to Taylors Bayou turning basin, deepen to 36 feet and widen to 400 feet Sabine-Neches Canal from Port Arthur Canal to mouth of Neches River except through Port Arthur Bridge; deepen Neches River channel from mouth to Beaumont turning basin to 36 feet widening to 350 feet from Smith’s Bluff to Beaumont turning basin; deepen junction area on Neches River at Beaumont turning basin to 36 feet; and widen Sabine-Neches Canal between Neches and Sabine Rivers to 150 feet.

Jul. 24, 194624 Improve Cow Bayou, Texas, by construction of a channel 100 feet wide H. Doc. 702, 79th and 13 feet deep extending from navigation channel in Sabine River to Cong., 2nd Sess. a point 0.5 mile above county bridge at Orangefield, Texas, with a turning basin.

Jul. 24, 1946 Improve Adams Bayou, Texas, to provide a channel 12 feet deep and 100 H. Doc. 626, 79th feet wide extending from 12-foot depth in Sabine River to first county Cong., 2nd Sess. highway bridge across bayou.

May 17, 1950 Deepen to 36 feet and widen to 400 feet the Sabine-Neches Canal near H. Doc. 174, 81st Port Arthur bridge; reconstruct Port Arthur Bridge and relocate Port Cong., 1st Sess. Arthur field office.

Sep. 3, 195425 Rectification of certain reaches of existing Sabine Pass Channel, Sabine- S. Doc. 80, 83rd Neches Canal, and Neches River and Sabine River Channel; widen to Cong., 2nd Sess. 350 feet entrance channel to Port Arthur turning basins; widen curve at junction of Port Arthur and Sabine-Neches Canals; relocate and enlarge Sabine Pass anchorage basin to 34 by 1,500 by 3,000 feet; widen to 200 feet Sabine-Neches Canal from mouth of Neches River to mouth of Sabine River and Sabine River Channel to upper end of existing project at Orange, except for channel around Harbor Island at Orange; deepen to 30 feet Sabine River Channel from cutoff near Orange municipal slip to upper end of project, except around Harbor Island; and enlarge area at entrance to Orange municipal slip to provide a maneuvering basin.

Oct. 23, 196226 Improve outer bar channel to 42 and 40 feet for all inland channels to Port H. Doc. 553, 87th Arthur and Beaumont; width of 500 feet in Port Arthur Canal and 400 Cong., 2nd Sess.1 feet in Neches River Channel to Beaumont with three turning points in Neches River; a channel, 12 by 125 feet, extending in Sabine River to Echo; and replace an obstructive bridge at Port Arthur, Texas. Deauthorization of uncompleted portion of channel between Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou turning basin and enlargement of entrance channel to Port Arthur turning basins.

14. TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX

Mar. 4, 1913 A channel 300 by 30 feet and construct a pile dike 28,200 feet long north H. Doc. 1390, 62nd to channel. Cong., 3rd Sess.

40-52 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

Jul. 3, 1930 A harbor 800 by 30 feet at Texas City, and construct a rubblemound dike. H. Doc. 107, 71st Cong., 1st Sess.

TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX (continued) Aug. 30, 193511 Extension of rubblemound dike to shoreline. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 4, 73rd Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 30, 1935 Deepen channel and harbor to 32 feet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 46, 73rd Cong., 2nd Sess. Aug. 30, 1935 Deepen channel and harbor to 34 feet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 62, 74th Cong., 1st Sess.

Aug. 26, 1937 Extend harbor 1,000 feet southward, 800 by 34 feet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 47, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jun. 30, 1948 Deepen channel and harbor to 36 feet, widen channel to 400 feet and H. Doc. 561, 80th harbor to 1,000 feet and changing name of project to “TEXAS CITY Cong., 2nd Sess.1 CHANNEL, TEXAS.”

Jul. 14, 1960 Deepen channel and turning basin to 40 feet and construct 16-foot H. Doc. 427, 86th Industrial Barge Canal. Cong., 2nd Sess.

Oct. 12, 1972 Widen the existing main turning basin to 1,200 feet including relocation H. Doc. 199, 92nd Senate Res.) of the basin 85 feet to the east; providing a 40-foot deep channel in the Cong., 2nd Sess. Industrial Canal at widths of 300-400 feet, with a turning basin at the (Sec. 201, Oct. 12, 1972 head of the canal 40 feet deep, 1,150 feet long, and 1,000 feet wide, PL 89-298) (House Res.) and easing of the bend at the entrance to the canal, and deauthorization of shallow-draft Industrial Barge Canal not incorporated in the plan of improvement above.

Nov. 17, 1986 Deepening the Texas City Turning Basin to 50 feet, enlarging the 6.7 mile Sec. 201, PL 99-662 long Texas City Channel to 50 feet by 600 feet; deepening the existing 800-foot wide Bolivar Roads Channel and Inner Bar Channel to 50 feet; deepening the existing 800-foot wide Outer Bar and Galveston Entrance Channels to 52 feet; extending the Galveston Entrance Channel to a 52 foot depth for 4.1 miles at a width of 800 feet and an additional reach at a width of 600 feet to the 52 foot contour in the Gulf of Mexico; and establishment of 600 acres of wetland and development of water-oriented recreational facilities on a 90-acre enlargement of the Texas City Dike.

15. TRINITY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX

Jun. 18, 1878 Dredging of a channel through the bar at the mouth of the Trinity River.

1889 Modified to include two parallel jetties 275 feet apart, the westerly one of length 7,359 feet and the other of length 300 feet.

Mar. 3, 1905 Authorized the Anahuac Channel. No project dimensions were specified Specified in Act. by the Act, so a 7- by 8-foot channel, 12,238 feet long was dredged in 1905.

40-53 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

Sep. 22, 1922 Abandon improvements above Liberty and terminate all improvements by H. Doc. 989 66th lock and dam, leaving a 6-foot channel from Liberty to mouth. Cong., 3rd Sess

TRINITY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX (continued) Mar. 2, 1945 Provides for a navigable channel from the Houston Ship Channel near H. Doc. 403, 77th Red Fish Bar in Galveston and Trinity Bays to the mouth of Trinity Cong., 1st Sess. River and 9 feet deep and 150 feet wide in the river section, with a turning basin at Liberty.

Jul. 24, 1946 Modification of the project to provide for a channel 9 feet deep and 150 H. Doc. 634, 79th feet wide from the Houston Ship Channel near Red Fish Bar in Cong., 2nd Sess. Galveston Bay extending along the east shore of Trinity Bay to the mouth of the Trinity River at Anahuac, including protective spoil embankment on the bay side of the channel in lieu of the 9 by 200-foot channel in Galveston and Trinity Bays.

Oct. 23, 1962 Provides for the multiple-purpose Wallisville Reservoir, including a H. Doc. 215, 87th navigation lock in the Wallisville Dam at Channel Mile 28.30 and Cong., 1st Sess. advancement of the Channel to Liberty from one mile below Anahuac (Mile 23.2) to the Texas Gulf Sulphur Company’s slip at Channel Mile 35.8, and incorporation into existing project Anahuac Channel and mouth of Trinity River projects.

Oct. 27, 1965 Reevaluation of navigation benefits. H. Doc. 276, 89th Cong., 1st Sess.

Jul. 30, 1983 Modified Wallisville Reservoir by reducing the size to 5,600 acres and PL 98-63 confining the reservoir to east side of Trinity River.

19. BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX

Jun. 20, 1938 Barker and Addicks Reservoirs, Texas. H. Doc. 456, 75th Cong., 2nd Sess.

Oct. 27, 1965 Extend upper limits of White Oak Bayou upstream about 2.1 miles from H. Doc. 169, 89th BRI RR bridge to mouth of Cole Creek. Cong., 1st Sess.

Sep. 3, 1954 Clearing, straightening, enlarging and lining of Buffalo, Brays, and White H. Doc. 250, 83rd Oak Bayous. Cong., 2nd Sess.1

Nov. 28, 1990 Flood damage reduction improvements and recreational development for Sec. 101, PL 101-640 the Houston, Texas urban area, divided into six separable elements – Brays, Greens, Hunting, Halls, Carpenters and Little White Oak Bayous. Flood control improvements consist of 75.3 miles of stream enlargement, 14 miles of stream clearing, 7 flood detention basins, 7 miles of diversion channels and environmental revegetation. Recreation features consist of 14.7 miles of trails, 502 picnic facilities, 12 group pavilions, 2 boat launching ramps, 10 restrooms, playgrounds, exercise stations and parking facilities.

Oct. 12, 1996 Authorizes non-Federal interests to undertake flood control projects in the Sec. 211, PL 104-303 United States, subject to obtaining any permits required pursuant to Federal and State laws in advance of actual construction. For the purpose of demonstrating the potential advantages and effectiveness of non-Federal implementation of flood control projects, the Secretary

40-54 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

shall enter into agreements pursuant to this section with non-Federal interests for development of the following Buffalo Bayou projects: Brays Bayou, Hunting Bayou, and White Oak Bayou. BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX (continued) Oct. 12, 1996 The non-Federal interest for the Buffalo Bayou and tributaries authorized Sec 350, PL 104-303 flood control projects, may be reimbursed by up to $5,000,000 or may receive a credit of up to $5,000,000 toward required non-Federal project cost-sharing contributions for work performed by the non- Federal interest at each of the following locations if such work is compatible with 1 or more of the following authorized projects: White Oak Bayou, Brays Bayou, Hunting Bayou, Garners Bayou (not authorized), and the Upper Reach of Greens Bayou.

Nov. 8, 2007 Amends Section 211 (f) of Water Resources Development Act of 1996 to Sec. 5157 (15), provide an alternative to the authorized Buffalo Bayou, Texas project, PL 110-114 authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor Act of June 20, 1983 and modified by Section 3a of the Flood control Act of August 11, 1939.

Nov. 8 2007 Amends Section 211 (f) of Water Resources Development Act of 1996 to Sec. 5157 (16) provide an alternative to the authorized Halls Bayou, Texas project, PL 110-114 authorized by Section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990.

20. CLEAR CREEK, TX

Aug. 13, 1968 Channel enlargement and rectification from upper end of Clear Lake at H. Doc. 351, 90th Mile 3.8 to improved channel Mile 34.8.28 Cong., 2nd Sess.

Aug. 17, 1999 Modified the project to authorize a nonstructural flood control project. Sec. 355(a), PL 106- 53

Nov. 17, 1986 Modified local cooperation requirements of the 1968 authorization. Sec. 1001, PL 99-662

21. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX

Nov 17, 1986 Channel improvements to provide drainage protection for the area in Sec 401, PL 99-662 Hidalgo and Willacy Counties north of U.S. Highway 83, and for the area between U.S. Highway 83 and the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County; and to provide flood protection for the cities of McAllen, Edinburg, Raymondville, Edcouch, La Villa, and Lyford.

Aug. 17, 1999 Modified the project to authorize a nonstructural flood control project. Sec. 355(a), PL 106-

53 Nov. 8, 2007 Applies the Ability to Pay criteria and procedures in Section 103(m)(2) of Sec. 2019 (b) (2), the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213 (m) to PL 110-114 the Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas project.

Nov. 8, 2007 Amends Section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 Sec. 3150, to include as a part of the project flood protection works to reroute PL 110-114 drainage to Raymondville Drain constructed by the non-Federal interest in Hidalgo County in the vicinity of Edinburg, Texas, if the Secretary determines that such work is feasible.

40-55 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d) See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

Credit the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the partnership agreement. 22. SIMS BAYOU, TX Nov. 17, 1986 Enlargement and rectification, with appropriate erosion control measures of Sec. 401, PL 99-662 19.31 miles of Sims Bayou; environmental measures and riparian habitat along entire alignment, and recreational development.

Sep. 29, 1989 Amended the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA) of 1986 Sec. 103, PL 101-101 authorization as project cost estimate had exceeded limit established in Section 902 of WRDA 1986.

Oct. 31, 1992 Modified Sec.401(a) of the Water Resources and Development Act Sec. 401(a), (WRDA) 1986 authorization to direct the Secretary to include to the extent practicable, measures to improve environmental quality and riparian habitat. 28. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, TX

Aug. 17, 1999 Carry out a project for ecosystem restoration and storm damage reduction at Sec. 556, PL 106-53 North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas, if it is determined that the work is technically sound and environmentally acceptable.

Nov. 8, 2007 The project for ecosystem restoration and storm damage reduction, North Sec. 3151, Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas, authorized by section 556 of PL 110-114 the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 353) is modified to include recreation as a project purpose.

40-56 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT ______

TABLE 40-B AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION (cont’d)

See Date Section Authorizing in Text Act Project and Work Authorized Documents

1Contains latest published maps. 18 Construction of pile dike was deauthorized 2 Extension of north jetty 1,950 feet and south under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1975 Deauthorization list) jetty 1,265 feet considered inactive. (1975 Deauthorization 19 Hill Street Bridge to mouth of White Oak list) Bayou was deauthorized under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. 3 Dredging 2,000 by 650-foot northerly (1975 Deauthorization list) extension of inner basin deauthorized. 20 Deepening channel to 40 feet from Southern 4 Included in Public Works Administration Pacific Slip (mile 47) to Brady Island was deauthorized program September 6, 1933 and February 16, 1935. under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1975 Deauthorization list) 5 West leg of Wye junction with main channel 21 The 12-foot channel from mile 1.65 to mile deauthorized. 2.81 deauthorized under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1985 6 Construction of lock in diversion dam at local Deauthorization list) expense considered inactive. 22 Complete widening of channel between Port 7 Dredging upper 1.3 mile of channel to vicinity Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou turning basin of Stauffer Chemical plant was deauthorized under Sec. 12 deauthorized by 1962 R&H Act. of PL 93-251. Included in Public Works Administration 23 Complete deepening of channel between Port program September 6, 1933. (1975 Deauthorization list) Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou turning basin 8 Dredging 43rd to 51st Streets was deauthorized deauthorized by 1962 R&H Act. under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1975 Deauthorization list) 24 Channel extension above Cow Bayou turning 9 Deauthorized under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. basin near Orangefield was deauthorized under Sec. 12 of (1975 Deauthorization list) PL 93-251. (1975 Deauthorization list) 10 Deepening 43rd to 57th Streets was 25 Widening to 350 feet entrance channel to Port deauthorized under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1975 Arthur turning basin deauthorized by 1962 R&H Act. Deauthorization list) 26 The 12-foot channel in Sabine River from 11 Previously authorized September 6, 1933 by Orange to Echo, Texas deauthorized under Sec. 12 of PL Public Works Administration. 93-251. (1985 Deauthorization list) 12 H. Doc. 230, 76th Cong., 1st Sess. and project 27 Jetty extension was deauthorized under Sec. documents contain latest published maps. 1001 of PL 99-662. 13 Dredging upper 3.4 miles was deauthorized 28 Portion of project upstream of under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1975 Deauthorization list) Brazoria/Galveston County line, approximately mile 18.5, 14 Dredging upper 5 miles was deauthorized in inactive category. under Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662. 29 Cedar Bayou, miles 3 to 11 were deauthorized 15 Inactive. under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251 and were re-authorized under 16 Portion of 16-foot by 150-foot channel from Sec. 349(a)(2), PL 106-541. Sabine River to Houston Ship Channel is inactive. 30 Channel to Port Bolivar turning basin was Relocation of channel in Matagorda Bay deauthorized deauthorized under Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662. under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. (1986 Deauthorization list) 17 The 9 feet by 100 feet channel from Mile 8.2 to Mile 13.2 in Chocolate Bayou was deauthorized under Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662.

40-57 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-C OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS

For Last Full Cost to September 30, 2011 Report See Annual Report Operation and Project For Construction Maintenance

Aquatic Plant Control (1958 and 1962 River and Harbor Acts) 1967 38,2521 – Aransas National Wildlife Refuge 2009 14,123,500 – Bastrop Bayou, TX2 1931 9,920 27,129 Clear Creek and Clear Lake, TX 2004 66,934 549,599 Corpus Christi, TX, Channel to Navy Seaplane Base Encinal Peninsula 1968 1,194,344 26,467 Dickinson Bayou, TX 1954 33,942 57,553 Double Bayou, TX6 2006 226,558 3,099,174 East Bay (Hanna Reef), TX3 1922 2,476 847 Greens Bayou Bridges, TX 1993 450,000 – Johnson Bayou, LA4 1933 2,261 54,042 Little Bay, TX5 1979 – 252,728 Oyster Creek, TX 1922 6,942 7,556 Sargent Beach7 2009 29,460,000

1 Excludes $1,672 work contribution. constructed project as authorized by 1950 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 2 Widening from 60 feet to 100 feet at 4-foot depth was deauthorized 114, 81st Cong., 1st Sess.) in 1955 under Department of Army permit. under Sec. 12 of PL 93-251. 6 Excludes contributed funds in the amount of $233,325. 3 Inactive category for maintenance. 7 Excludes Inland Waterway Trust Fund in the amount of $29,460,000. 4 Channel adequate for existing commerce. 5 Aransas County Navigation District, Rockport, TX,

40-58 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-D OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS

For Last Full Cost to September 30, 2011 Report See Annual Report Operation and Project For Construction Maintenance Arroyo Colorado, Rio Hondo, TX1 1986 201,300 – Buffalo Bayou at Piney Point, TX2 1996 473,8009 – Buffalo Bayou, TX (Lynchburg Pump Station) 2006 4,335,50714 Colorado River, Matagorda, TX2 1963 273,757 – Cypress Creek, TX 2006 6,243,83015 Falfurrias, TX1 1995 103,454 – Freeport and Vicinity, Texas, Hurricane-Flood Protection2 1984 29,285,0423 – Guadalupe River at Victoria, TX2 1996 532,18710 Guadalupe River (Remove Log Jams), TX2 1978 505,749 – Highland Bayou, TX13 1984 12,254,390 – Kirbyville, TX2 1993 1,484,6134 – Lavaca-Navidad River, TX: Hallettsville Project 1961 256,043 – Port Arthur and Vicinity Hurricane-Flood Protection, TX2 1997 61,400,29211 – San Diego Creek, Alice, TX2 1963 135,175 – State Highway 111 Bridge, Lake Texana, TX2 1995 214,1555 – Taylors Bayou, TX2 1997 37,413,20912 – Texas City and Vicinity, Texas, Hurricane-Flood Protection2 1993 38,882,4007 – Tranquitas Creek, Kingsville, TX2 1956 130,239 – Three Rivers, TX5 6 5,835,9275 – Upper White Oak Bayou, TX2 1989 972,300 – U.S. 190 Bridge, Sabine River, Merryville, LA2 1993 500,0008 – Vince and Little Vince Bayous, TX2 1993 19,307,100 –

1 Inactive. amount of $1,070,806 by local interests. Work performed at 100% 2 Completed. Local Sponsor expense was in the amount of $320,347. 3 In addition, $8,695,438 expended from contributed funds, $1,126,905 8 In addition, $237,792 expended from contributed funds. estimated value of contributed lands, and $2,726,446 for relocations by 9 In addition, $92,920 expended from contributed funds. local interests. 10 In addition, $480,888 expended from contributed funds. 4 In addition, $1,484,613 expended from contributed funds, estimated 11 In addition, $16,976,675 expended from contributed funds. value of $200,096 for contributed lands, and $202,456 for relocations 12 In addition, $12,340,997 expended from contributed funds. by local interests. 13 Completed. Lower 8.6 miles of channel rectification 5 In addition, $71,370 expended from contributed funds. 6 See Annual Report for 1983, Fort Worth District, page 16-12. on Highland Bayou was de-authorized April 5, 1999. 7 In addition, $14,396,307 expended from contributed funds, estimated 14 In addition, $2,895,428 expended from contributed funds. value of $1,224,219 for contributed lands, and contributed work in the 15 In addition , $835,000 expended from contributed funds.

40-59 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-E OTHER AUTHORIZED ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROJECTS

For Last Full Cost to September 30, 2011 Report See Annual Report Operation and Project For Construction Maintenance Corpus Christi Beach, TX (Beach Restoration) 1 2000 2,120,6412 –

Laguna Madre Seagrass Restoration, TX 1 1998 225,4403 –

Salt Bayou, McFadden Ranch, TX1 1997 1,754,0004 –

Sabine-Neches Waterway Bessie Heights, TX 2006 874,0416

Sabine-Neches Waterway - Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge, TX1 2004 784,3295 –

1 Completed 2 In addition $2,009,710 expended from contributed funds. 3 In addition $75,146 expended from contributed funds. 4 In addition, $576,877 expended from contributed funds and an estimated value of contributed lands in the amount of $8,000. 5 In addition $229,254 expended from contributed funds and $32,189 Non-Federal work-in- kind

6 In addition, $286,281 expended from contributed funds.

40-60 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-F DEAUTHORIZED PROJECTS

For Last Full Report See Date Federal Contributed Annual Report And Funds Funds Project For Authority Expended Expended Baytown 1980 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 245,000 ------

Brazos River, TX, Velasco to 1924 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 216,9891 223,010 Old Washington 17 Nov 1986

Carpenters Bayou, Houston ------Sec. 1001 (B)(2) WRDA86, ------(Buffalo Bayou), TX As Amened 16 Apr 2002

Corpus Christi Ship Ch - 1913 Act Jetty ------Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 ------19 Jul 1992

Cypress Creek, TX (Structural portion) 2006 Sec 3181(23) of PL 110-114 6,243,830 835,000 8 Nov 2007

Falfurrias, TX 1995 Sec 3181(25) of PL 110-114 103,454 0 8 Nov 2007

GIWW, Harbor Refuge at Seadrift 1978 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 79,041 ------19 Jul 1992

GIWW, Sabine River, Houston Ship ------Sec. 1001(B)(2) WRDA86, ------Channel – 1962 Act As Amened 16 Apr 2002

Liberty Local Protection Project, TX 1971 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 98,517 ------17 Nov 1986

Mill Creek Brazos River, Austin Co. 1952 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 24,753 ------1946 Act 1 Jan 1990

Navidad & Lavaca Rivers, Jackson 1952 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 21,086 ------and Lavaca Counties- General 1 Jan 1990 Channel Project

Peyton Creek, TX 1975 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 66,377 ------17 Nov 1986

Port Arthur, Hurricane-Flood Protection, ------Sec. 1001 (B)(2) WRDA86 ------Gulf Oil Co. Reservoir, TX As Amended 16 April 2002

Sabine River and Tributaries, TX 1971 Sec. 1001 of PL 99-662 ------(Echo to Morgan Bluff) 17 Nov 1986

Taylors Bayou, TX ------Sec. 1001 (B)(2) WRDA86 ------(Phase III and Armor Alligator) As Amended 16 April 2002

1 Includes $123,676 for previous projects.

40-61 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-G TOTAL COST OF EXISTING PROJECTS See Total Cost Section to In Text Project Funds New Work Maintenance Rehabilitation Sep. 30, 2011

2. Brazos Island Harbor, TX Regular 24,346,787 100,471,721 0 124,818,508 Public Works 2,848,560 0 0 2,848,560 Contributed 10,571,509 1,352,092 0 11,923,601 Hurricane Supplemental 0 19,146,250 0 19,146,250 Total cost of project 37,766,856 120,970,063 0 158,736,919

3. Cedar Bayou, TX Regular 1,059,026 6,559,172 0 7,618,198 Contributed 711,523 0 0 711,523 Hurricane Supplemental 0 1,691,484 1,691,484 Total cost of project 1,770,549 8,250,656 0 10,021,205

4. Channel to Port Regular 85,214 3,150,099 0 3,235,313 Bolivar, TX Hurricane Supplemental 0 300,000 0 300,000 Total cost of project 85,214 3,450,099 0 3,535,313

5. Corpus Christi Ship Regular 78,482,252 185,764,672 0 264,246,924 Channel, TX Public Works 324,287 0 0 324,287 American Recovery & 925,890 4,982,998 0 5,908,888 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Hurricane Supplemental 0 7,393,759 0 7,393,759 Contributed 7,168,568 1,299,550 0 8,468,118 American Recovery & 234,202 0 0 234,202 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Total 87,135,199 199,440,979 0 286,576,178 Value of useful work performed 1,716,695 0 0 1,716,695 Contributed land 276,720 0 0 276,720 Total cost of project 89,128,614 199,440,979 0 288,569,593

6. Freeport Harbor, TX Regular 65,103,456 125,999,717 0 191,103,173 Public Works 116,575 0 0 116,575 Contributed 20,811,568 229,311 0 21,040,879 Hurricane Supplemental 0 10,086,039 0 10,086,039 Total 86,031,599 136,315,066 0 222,346,666 Value of useful work 0 0 0 0 performed 360,249 0 0 360,249 Total cost of project 86,391,848 136,315,066 0 222,706,915

7. Galveston Harbor and, Regular 0 31,334,465 0 31,334,465 Channel, TX Channel 11,920,187 149,823,286 0 161,743,473 Seawall 8,754,209 512,163 0 9,266,372 Hurricane Supplemental 0 15,951,642 0 15,951,642 American Recovery & 0 3,255,813 0 3,255,813 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Public Works 0 13,121 0 13,121 Contributed 3,648,932 2,982,425 0 6,631,357 Total cost of project 24,323,328 203,872,915 0 228,196,243

40-62 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-G TOTAL COST OF EXISTING PROJECTS (cont’d) See Total Cost Section to In Text Project Funds New Work Maintenance Rehabilitation Sep. 30, 2011

8. Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Regular 156,250,412 826,452,594 2,955,700 985,658,706 between Apalachee Bay, FL Public Works 466,477 0 0 466,477 and the Mexican Border Inland WW. Trust Fund 28,634,490 0 2,955,700 31,590,190 American Recovery & 0 49,862,133 0 49,862,133 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Contributed 6,797,407 1,955,617 0 8,753,024 Hurricane Supplemental 0 101,903,083 0 101,903,083 Total 192,148,786 980,173,428 5,911,400 1,178,233,613 Value of useful work performed 395,000 0 0 395,000 Contributed land 139,776 0 0 139,776 Total cost of project 192,683,562 980,173,428 5,911,400 1,178,768,389

10. Houston Ship Channel, TX Regular 29,042,293 320,034,938 0 349,077,231 Public Works 2,612,932 0 0 2,612,932 American Recovery & 0 18,871,435 0 18,871,435 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Contributed 1,382,760 551,583 0 1,934,343 Hurricane Supplemental 0 63,779,262 0 63,779,262 Total cost of project 33,037,985 403,237,218 0 436,275,203

13. Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX Regular 49,592,331 357,646,023 0 407,238,354 Public Works 1,363,652 0 0 1,363,652 American Recovery & 0 13,336,274 0 13,336,274 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Contributed 2,103,435 5,938,114 0 8,041,549 Hurricane Supplemental 0 65,245,902 0 65,245,902 Total 53,059,418 442,166,314 0 495,225,732 Value of useful work performed 32,000 0 0 32,000 Contributed land 116,760 0 0 116,760 Total cost of project 53,208,178 442,166,314 0 495,374,492

14. Texas City Channel, TX Regular 27,998,893 48,098,325 0 76,097,218 Public Works 136,296 0 0 136,296 Hurricane Supplemental 0 4,910,064 0 4,910,064 American Recovery & 32,504,461 2,863,398 0 35,367,859 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Contributed 4,419,734 0 0 4,419,734 American Recovery & 11,563,754 0 0 11,563,754 Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Total cost of project 76,623,138 55,871,786 0 132,494,924

15. Trinity River and Regular 82,514,870 53,480,377 0 135,995,247 Tributaries, TX Contributed 66,000 0 0 66,000 Hurricane Supplemental 0 6,349,208 6,349,208 Total cost of project 82,580,870 59,829,585 0 142,410,455

40-63 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-H CHANNEL DIMENSIONS Adopted Project Dimensions Improved Project Dimensions Depth in Depth in Feet Feet See (Below Bottom (Below Bottom Section Mean Low Width Mean Low Width Length In Text Project Section of Waterway Tide) (Feet) Tide) (Feet) Feet Miles

2. Brazos Island Outer Bar and Jetty Channel 44 400 44 400 2.5 Harbor, TX Padre Island to Long Island 42 250 42 250 2.1 Long Island to Goose Island 42 250 42 250 9.6 Goose Island to Turning Basin Extension 42 300 42 300 3.2 Turning Basin Extension 42 325 42 375 1.3 Brownsville Turning Basin 36 1,200 36 660-1,200 2,670 0.5 Port Isabel Channel via East Turnout 36 200 36 200 1.4 West Wye, from Brownsville Channel 36 200 36 200 0.8 Port Isabel Turning Basin 36 200-1,000 36 200-1,000 1,300 0.2 Fishing Boat Harbor:

West Basin 15 370-305 15 370-305 1,470 0.3

Middle Basin 15 370-305 15 370-305 1,200 0.2 East Basin 15 370 15 370 1,470 0.3 Connecting Channel 15 270 15 265 1,230 0.2 Entrance Channel 15 100 15 100 770 0.1

3. Cedar Bayou, TX Houston Ship Channel to Bayou Mile 3.0 10 100 10 100 5.7 Bayou Mile 3.0 to Mile 11.07 10 100 - - -

4. Channel to Port Bolivar Channel 30 200 30 200 - - Port Bolivar, TX Turning Basin 30 7501 14 200 900 0.2

5.Corpus Christi Aransas Pass Outer Bar Ship Channel, TX Channel 47 700 47 700 1.8 Aransas Pass Jetty Channel 45 600-730 45 600 1.0 Inner Basin at Harbor Island 45 730-1,720 45 Irregular 1,550 – Channel to Port Aransas 12 100-150 12 100 0.1 Port Aransas Turning Basin 12 200-4002 12 2002 200 – Anchorage Basin at Port Aransas 12 300-400 12 300-400 900 0.2

Inner Basin to Mile 8.5 45 600-500 45 600-500 8.5 Mile 8.5 to LaQuinta Junction 45 500 45 500 3.6 LaQuinta Junction to Corpus

Christi Turning Basin 45 400 40-45 400 8.6

40-64 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-H CHANNEL DIMENSIONS (cont’d) Adopted Project Dimensions Improved Project Dimensions Depth in Depth in Feet Feet See (Below Bottom (Below Bottom Section Mean Low Width Mean Low Width Length In Text Project Section of Waterway Tide) (Feet) Tide) (Feet) Feet Miles

5. Corpus Christi Ship Channel, TX Corpus Christi Turning Basin 45 800 45 1,000 5,423 1.0 (continued) Industrial Canal 45 400 45 400 1.1 Avery Point Turning Basin 45 975 45 1,000 1,150 0.2 Channel to Chemical Turning Basin 45 400 45 350 0.6 Chemical Turning Basin 45 1,2005 45 1,0505 1,690 0.3 Tule Lake Channel 45 300 40 200 3.1 Tule Lake Turning Basin 45 1,200 40 900 1,000 0.2 Viola Channel 45 300-350 40 200-250 1.8 Viola Turning Basin 45 1,200 40 700-900 1,000 0.2 Channel to LaQuinta 45 300-400 45 300-400 5.6 LaQuinta Turning Basin 45 1,200 45 1,200 800 0.1 Turning Point at LaQuinta Channel Junction 45 1,2503 45 1,2503 1,250 0.2 Jewel Fulton Canal 12 100 12 100 – 0.8 Jewel Fulton Turning Basin 12 200 12 200 400 0.1 Mooring Area at Ingleside: Mooring Area (a) 45 150 45 150 – 0.8 Mooring Area (b) 45 150 – – – –

6. Freeport Outer Bar Channel 47 400 47 300 – 3.0 Harbor, TX Jetty Channel 45 400 45 200 – 0.8 Quintana Turning Basin 45 7504 – – – – Channel to Brazosport Turning Basin 45 400 45 390 – 1.2 Brazosport Turning Basin 45 1,0004 45 1000 667 0.1 Channel to Upper Turning Basin 45 285-375 45 285-375 – 1.4 Upper Turning Basin 45 1,2004 45 12004 800 0.1 Channel to Stauffer Chemical Plant 30 200 30 200 – 1.1

40-65 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

6. Freeport Stauffer Turning Basin 30 500 25 500 500 0.1 Harbor, TX Brazos Harbor Channel 36 200 30 200 – 0.5 (continued) Brazos Harbor Turning Basin 36 7504 30 7504 675 0.1

7. Galveston Extended Entrance Channel 45 800 45 800 – 3.82 Harbor and Entrance Channel 45 800 45 800 – 4.7 Channel, TX Outer Bar Channel 45 800 45 800 – 1.7 Inner Bar Channel 45 800 45 800 – 3.2 Anchorage Basin 36 2,962 36 2,962 – 1.81 Bolivar Roads Channel 45 800 45 800 – 1.0 Bolivar Roads Channel 45 1,125 45 1,125 3.9 to 37th St. 37th St to 43rd St.. 45 1,085 45 1,085 – .5

10. Houston Ship Bolivar Roads to Morgan Channel, TX Point 45 530 45 530 – 26.2 Morgan Point to Boggy Bayou 45 530-600 45 530-600 – 12.8 Boggy Bayou to Greens Bayou 40 300 47 300 – 2.4 Greens Bayou to Sims Bayou 40 300 40 300 – 5.3 Hunting Bayou Turning Point 40 300 40 948-1,0009 1,375 – Clinton Island Turning Basin 40 8009 40 965-1,0709 1,592 – Sims Bayou to Southern Pacific Slip 36 300 40 300 – 0.6 Southern Pacific Slip to Houston Turning Basin 36 300 36 300 – 2.9 Houston Turning Basin 36 400-1,000 36 250-931.7 3,100 0.6 Upper Turning Basin 36 150 36 537-150 1,000 0.2 Brady Island Channel 10 50 10 50 – 0.9 Barbour Terminal Channel 40 300 40 300 – 3.1 Turning Basin 40 2,000 40 300-1,900 2,000 0.4 Bayport Ship Channel 40 300 40 300 – 3.8 Turning Basin 40 1,600 41 300-1,600 0.3 – Anchorage Area 40 150 40 150 – 1.9 Five-Mile Cut Channel 10 125 10 125 – Light-Draft Channel: Upper Turning Basin to Jensen Drive 10 60 12 60 – 4.1 Turkey Bend Channel 10 60 12 60 – 0.8

40-66 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Greens Bayou Channel: 40 175 15 175 0.3 10. Houston Ship Mile 0 to Mile 0.36 40 175 40 175 – 0.3 Channel, TX Mile 0.36 to Mile 1.57 15 100 15 100 – 1.3 (continued)

11. Matagorda Ship Outer Bar and Jetty Channel 38 300 38 300 – 3.2 Channel, TX Channel to Point Comfort 36 300-2006 36 300-2006 – 20.9 Approach Channel to Turning Basin 36 200-300 36 200-300 – 1.1 Turning Basin 36 1,000 36 1,000 1,000 0.2 Channel to Port Lavaca 12 125 12 125 – 4.1 Lynn Bayou Turning Basin 12 27-340 12 27-340 532 0.1 Channel to Harbor of Refuge 12 125 12 125 – 1.9 North-South Basin 12 300 12 300 1,682 0.3 East-West Basin 12 250 12 250 1,750 0.3 Channel to Red Bluff 6 100 6 100 – 20.2

13. Sabine-Neches Sabine Bank Channel 42 800-1,250 42 800-1,250 – 14.7 Waterway, TX Sabine Pass Outer Bar Channel 42 800 42 800 – 3.4 Sabine Pass Jetty Channel 40 800-500 40 800-500 – 4.1 Sabine Pass Anchorage Basin 40 1,500 40 1,200 7,200 1.4 Sabine Pass Channel 40 500-1,160 40 500-1,160 – 5.6 Port Arthur Canal 40 500-1,720 40 500-1,170 – 6.2 Entrance to Port Arthur Turning Basins 40 325-550 40 325-550 – 0.3 Port Arthur East Turning Basin 40 375-550 40 375-550 1,765 0.3 Port Arthur West Turning Basin 40 350-550 40 350-550 1,610 0.3 Channel connecting Port Arthur West and Taylors Bayou Turning Basins 40 200-250 40 200-250 – 0.6 Taylors Bayou Turning Basin 40 150-1,250 40 150-1,250 3,470 0.7 Sabine-Neches Canal, Port Arthur Canal to Neches River 40 400-1,070 40 400-1,070 – 11.2 Turning Point at Mile 19.5 40 9004 40 9004 – 0.3 Neches River, Mouth to Maneuvering Area Beaumont Turning Basin 40 400 40 400-600 – 18.0 Turning Point, Mile 31.1 40 1,0004 40 600 1,450 0.3

40-67 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

13. Sabine - Neches Turning Point, Mile 36.6 40 1,0004 40 1,000 1,150 0.2 Waterway, TX Turning Point, Mile 40.3 40 1,0004 40 1,300 1,530 0.3 (continued) Channel Extension, Mile 40.3 36 350 36 350 1,265 0.2 Maneuvering Area at Beaumont Turning Basin 40 400-540 40 400-540 1,300 0.3 Beaumont Turning Basin 34 540-1,400 34 540-1,400 1,500 0.3 Beaumont Turning Basin Extension to End of Project Channel Vicinity Bethlehem Steel Company 30 200-525 30 200-525 5,942 1.0 Sabine-Neches Canal, Neches River to Sabine River 30 400-1,400 30 400-1,400 23,000 4.4 Sabine River Channel, Mouth to Foot of Green Ave. 30 200-315 30 200-315 49,900 9.5 Orange Turning Basin 30 960 30 960 3,625 0.7 Old Channel Around Harbor Island 25 150-880 25 150-880 12,700 2.4 Adams Bayou 12 100 12 100 5800 1.1 Cow Bayou 13 100 13 100 36,800 7.0 Orangefield Turning Basin 13 100-300 13 100-300 700 0.1 Orange Municipal Slip 13 150-515 13 100-515 3,096 0.6

14. Texas City Texas City Channel 50 600 45 400 – 6.8 Channel, TX Turning Basin 50 1,000-1,200 40 1,000 4,253 .8 Industrial Barge Canal:10 Channel from Texas City Turning Basin to Mile 1.7 40 300-400 – 250-400 – 1.7 Turning Basin 40 1,000 40 1,000 – 0.2

15. Trinity River Multiple Purpose Channel Channel, TX to Fort Worth11 12 200 – – – – Channel to Liberty12 9 150 6 100 – 41.4 Anahuac Channel 6 100 6 100 – 5.8

1 Average. 10 Channel dredged 34 feet deep by 250-200 feet wide by 9,908 2 Includes 100-foot channel width. feet long and basin 34 feet deep by 1,000 feet wide by 1,150 3 Includes 450-foot channel to Corpus Christi. feet long by local interests. 4 Diameter. 11 Not constructed. 5 Includes 350-foot channel width. 12 9-foot by 150-foot channel completed from Houston Ship 6 300-foot width through Matagorda Peninsula. Channel to a point one mile below Anahuac, a distance of 23 7 Deauthorized. miles. Upper end not connected to river channel to prevent salt 8 Included in channel length. intrusion into river. River channel maintained at 6 by 100-foot 9 Includes 300-foot channel width. from mouth to Liberty, Texas.

40-68 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-I GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY APALACHEE BAY, FL. TO MEXICAN BORDER EXISTING PROJECT DIMENSIONS, PROVIDED FOR IN TRIBUTARY CHANNELS Adopted Project Dimensions Improved Project Dimensions Depth in Depth in Feet Feet (Below Bottom (Below Bottom Mean Low Width Mean Low Width Length Tributary Channel Tide) (Feet) Tide) (Feet) Feet Miles

40-69 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

Offats Bayou Main Channel 12 125 12 125 – 2.3 West Wye 12 125 12 125 2,200 0.4 Chocolate Bayou Channel1 12-Foot Channel via 12 125 12 125 39,750 7.5 East Turnout 2 12 150 14 0-150 3,680 0.7 West Turnout 3 12 125 14 0-125 3,907 0.7 9-Foot Channel 4 9 100 – – – – Turning Basin 9 600 – – – – San Bernard River Channel 5 9 100 9 100 – 26.0

Colorado River Channel 6 9 100 9 100 – 15.5 Turning Basin 9 400 9 400 500 0.1 Silting Basin 9 150 9 150 – 1.0 Mouth of Colorado River 7 15-12 100-200- 15-20 100-200-300 – – Navigation Channel, GIWW to Gulf 300 Turning Basin at Matagorda 12 350 – – – – Channel to Palacios8 12 125 12 125 – 16.1 Turning Basin No. 1 12 200 12 200 635 0.1 Turning Basin No. 2 12 300 12 300 1,130 0.2 Connecting Channel 12 150-480 12 130-400 – 0.1 Channel to Barroom Bay 9 12 60 – – – – Port Arthur Junction to High Island Bridge 12 125-175 12 125-175 162,000 30.6

Channel to Victoria Main Channel via East Turnout 12 125 12 125 – 34.8 Turning Basin 12 600(AVG) 9 500(AVG) 800(AVG) 0.1 West Turnout Channel 12 125 12 125 – 0.8 Channel to Seadrift via South Turnout 9 100 9 100 – 2.0 Turning Basin 9 250 9 200 230 – North Turnout Channel 9 100 9 100 – 0.5 Harbor of Refuge at Seadrift Channel 9 100 – – – – Basin 9 200 – – – – Channel to Rockport 9 200 9 200 – 2.1 Turning Basin 9 475 9 342(AVG) 1,225 0.2

40-70 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-I GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY APALACHEE BAY, FL. TO MEXICAN BORDER EXISTING PROJECT DIMENSIONS, PROVIDED FOR IN TRIBUTARY CHANNELS (cont’d) Adopted Project Dimensions Improved Project Dimensions Depth in Depth in Feet Feet (Below Bottom (Below Bottom Mean Low Width Mean Low Width Length Tributary Channel Tide) (Feet) Tide) (Feet) Feet Miles

Channel to Aransas Pass 14 175 14 125-175 – 6.1 Turning Basin 14 300 14 300 2,212 0.4 Channel to Conn Brown Harbor 14 125 14 0.2 125 – Conn Brown Harbor 14 300 14 300 1,800 0.3 Channel to Port Mansfield10 Entrance Channel 16 250 16 250 – 0.8 Approach Channel to Hopper Dredge Turning Basin 16 100 16 100 – 0.4 Hopper Dredge Turning Basin 16 300 16 300 300 0.1 Channel Across Padre Island and Laguna Madre 14 100 14 100 – 7.7 Turnout Channels, East Side of Main Channel, GIWW North Turnout 12 100 12 100 – 0.6 South Turnout 12 100 12 100 – 0.6 Channel West Side of Main Channel, GIWW, to P.T. of Turnout Channels 14 100 14 100 – 0.6 Turnout Channels, West Side of Main Channel, GIWW North Turnout 12 200 12 200 – 0.6 South Turnout 12 200 12 200 – 0.6 Channel from P.T. of Turnout Channels to Approach Channel to Main Turning Basin 14 125 14 125 – 0.6 Approach Channel to Main Turning Basin 14 200 14 200 – 0.3

Main Turning Basin 14 400 14 400 1,250 0.2

Turning Basin Extension 14 1,000 14 1,000 580 0.1

Small Craft Basin 8 160 8 160 860 0.2

Shrimp Basin 12 350 12 350 1,450 0.3

40-71 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

Channel to Harlingen via South Turnout from Main Channel, GIWW 12 125 12 12511 – 25.812 Turning Basin near Rio Hondo 12 400 12 400 500 0.1 North Turnout from Main Channel 12 200 12 200 – 0.7 Port Isabel Side Channels Main Channel 12 125 12 125-90 – 0.6 Main Channel 12 233-60 12 233-60 – 0.4 South Leg 12 125 12 125 – 0.2 Port Isabel Small Boat Harbor Entrance Channel 7 75 7 75 – 1.4 Harbor Channel 6 50 6 50 – 0.3 6 6 72-501 1,308 0.2 Boat Basin Variable

1 Includes the construction of a salt water barrier at Mile 16.9. 7 Authorized by R&H Act of 1968. Also provides for a dam 2 Constructed 10 feet deep by 100 feet wide by local interests. across the present discharge channel, a new 250-foot wide by 20 East turnout channel constructed 150 feet wide. to 23-feet deep discharge channel into Matagorda Bay, and a 3 Constructed by local interests. 15-foot by 200-foot wide entrance channel with parallel jetties 4 Authorized to mile 13.2. Mile 8.2 to Mile 13.2 was from the gulf shoreline into the Gulf of Mexico. East jetty to be deauthorized. 3,500 feet long and west jetty 2,900 feet long. 5 Authorized to Mile 31 above mouth (channel mile 29.41). 8 Includes two protective breakwaters at entrance to turning Upper 3.4 miles was deauthorized under Section 12 of PL 93- basins. 251. 9 In the inactive category for maintenance. 6 Includes a discharge channel from Matagorda, Texas, to the 10 Also provides for two stone jetties at the gulf entrance about gulf, which was dredged by local interests in 1939. 1,000 feet apart. (North jetty constructed 2,300 feet long and (Maintenance will be discontinued upon completion of south jetty constructed 2,270 feet long.) improvements authorized by R&H Act of 1968.) 11 South turnout is 200 feet wide. 12 Authorized to mile 31. Mile 25.8 to Mile 31 was deauthorized.

40-72 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2011

TABLE 40-J DREDGING OPERATIONS See Cubic Section Yards of In Text Project Description Period Materials FY 11 Cost

2. Brazos Island Harbor, TX (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Brownsville Jetty Channel December 8, 2010 to 525,222 $2,999,476 to Port Isabel in Cameron County, Texas August 29, 2011

3. Cedar Bayou, TX (Maintenance) Dredging Cedar Bayou and Anahuac October 1, 2010 to 728,475 $3,265,1921 Channel in Chambers County, Texas September 30, 2011 4. Channel to Pt Bolivar (Maintenance) Dredging High Island to Rollover Pass, October 1, 2010 to 76,826 $80,000 Bolivar Flare and Channel to Bolivar in June 10, 2011 Chambers and Galveston Counties, Texas

5. Corpus Christi Ship Channel, TX (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Corpus Christi Ship January 27, 2011 to 1,574,000 $6,466,800 Channel Inner Basin to Main Turning Basin, September 30, 2011 Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) Quinta Channel and Jewel October 1, 2010 0 $454,386 Fulton Canal in Nueces and San Patricio October 13, 2010 Counties, Texas

6. Freeport Harbor, TX (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline), Freeport Harbor, Texas, October 1, 2010 to 1,404,103 $3,454,808 Inner Harbor & Turning Basins, in Brazoria May 11, 2011 County, Texas

Dredging (Hopper) Freeport Harbor, Texas December 14, 2010 to 1,977,488 $4,199,253 Entrance and Jetty Channel, and Lower March 31, 2011 Turning Basin in Brazoria County, Texas

7. Galveston Harbor and Channel , TX (New Work) Dredging (Pipeline) Galveston Harbor October 1, 2010 to 1,385,099 $4,056,194 Channel, Deepening in Galveston County, February 20, 2011 Texas

(Maintenance) Dredging (Hopper) Galveston Harbor Inner, October 1, 2010 to 1,458,777 $816,420 Outer and Entrance Channel, Texas September 30, 2011

40-73 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-J DREDGING OPERATIONS (cont’d) See Cubic Section Yards of In Text Project Description Period Materials FY 11 Cost

8. Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, TX GIWW – Main Channel (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Gulf Intracoastal October 1, 2010 to 94,820 $533,828 Waterway, Texas Main Channel Across May 1, 2011 Aransas Bay in Aransas and Calhoun Counties, Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) GIWW Port Arthur to October 1, 2010 to 831,642 $10,603,872 High Island, Texas September 6, 2011

Dredging (Pipeline) GIWW, Texas San October 1, 2010 to 521,758 $122,910 Bernard River to Live Oak Bayou in Brazoria February 18, 2011 County, Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) High Island to Rollover October 1, 2010 to 629,308 $3,244,201 Pass, Bolivar Flare and Channel to Bolivar in June 10, 2011 Chambers and Galveston Counties

Dredging GIWW, Texas , Causeway to October 1, 2010 to 70,000 $9,457,0442 Bastrop, Texas September 30, 2011

Dredging (Pipeline) Colorado River to Upper October 1, 2010 to 1,687,510 $3,806,128 Matagorda Bay in Brazoria and Matagorda September 30, 2011 Counties, Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) GIWW, Texas Turnstake March 11, 2011 to 1,674,986 $3,572,693 to Live Oak Point, Texas September 30, 2011

Channel to Harlingen (Maintenance) Dredging GIWW Harlingen Main Channel December 15, 2010 to 438,445 $2,209,4733 Emergency Dredging, Texas September 30, 2011

Channel to Port Mansfield (Maintenance) Dredging Port Mansfield Emergency December 3, 2010 to 486,159 $4,886,573 Dredging, Texas August 25, 2011

Chocolate Bayou, TX (Maintenance) Dredging Chocolate Bayou in Brazoria October 1, 2010 to 658,754 $6,274,481 County, Texas September 30, 2011

Mouth of Colorado River (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Colorado River and October 1, 2010 to 226,753 $4,709,0564 Tributaries, TX, Mouth of Colorado River in September 8, 2011 Matagorda County, Texas

9. Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, TX (New Work) Dredging Bayport to Morgans Point, Texas February 25, 2010 to 1,420,880 $7,197,4045 for PA14 and PA15 expansion September 30, 2011

40-74 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-J DREDGING OPERATIONS (cont’d) See Cubic Section Yards of In Text Project Description Period Materials FY 11 Cost

10. Houston Ship Channel (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Houston Ship July 1, 2009 to 914,986 $8,814,9396 Channel TX, Bayport to Morgans Point, September 30, Texas 2011

Dredging (Pipeline) Houston Ship June 8, 2010 to 64,535 $552,790 Channel Texas, Exxon to Carpenters September 30, Bayou, in Harris County, Texas 2011

Dredging (Pipeline) Houston-Galveston October 1, 2010 to 130,347 $806,154 Ship Channel, TX Sims Bayou to September 30, Turning Basin 2011 and Light Draft Channel in Harris County, Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) Houston Ship October 1, 2010 to 2,024,913 $6,476,526 Channel, Texas, Morgans Point to July 22, 2011 Exxon and Barbours Cut Terminal

Barbour Terminal Channel, TX (Maintenance)

Dredging (Pipeline)Houston Ship October 1, 2010 to 7,362 $239,133 Channel Texas Morgans Point to Exxon July 22, 2011 and Barbours Cut Terminal, Texas

Bayport Ship Channel, TX (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Bayport Main October 1, 2010 to 741,492 $1,639,420 Channel to Turning Basin January 6, 2011

11. Matagorda Ship Channel (Maintenance) Dredging (Pipeline) Matagorda October 1, 2010 to 3,007,053 $7,800,743 Peninsula to Point Comfort in March 9, 2011 Matagorda and Calhoun Counties, Texas

13. Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX (Maintenance) Dredging Lower and Middle Reaches October 1, 2010 to 2,686,983 $8,590,7257 Neches River in Jefferson and Orange September 30, 2011 Counties, Texas

Dredging (Pipeline) Sabine Neches September 3, 2010 to 2,624,789 $6,462,932 Waterway, Texas in Jefferson County, September 30, 2011 Texas and Cameron Parish, Louisiana, Turning Basin and Junction Area, Texas

Dredging Hopper Sabine Pass Outer October 1, 2010 to 3,725,439 $2,198,877 Bar and Bank Channel in Jefferson January 11, 2011 County, Texas and Cameron Parish, Lousiana

40-75 GALVESTON, TX, DISTRICT

TABLE 40-J DREDGING OPERATIONS (cont’d) See Cubic Section Yards of In Text Project Description Period Materials FY 11 Cost

14. Texas City Channel, TX (New Work) Dredging Texas City, Texas – Design Build October 1, 2010 to 2,500,000 $33,006,2748 For Texas City Channel May 2, 2011

Dredging Texas City Turning Basin, Texas October 28, 2010 to 13,089 $244,5099 September 30, 2011

(Maintenance)

Dredging Texas City, Texas – Design Build October 1, 2010 to 1,369,007 $2,935,00410 For Texas City Channel May 2, 2011

Dredging Texas City Turning Basin, Texas October 28, 2010 to 41,772 $715,04911 September 30, 2011

15. Trinity River , TX (Maintenance)

Pipeline Dredging Cedar Bayou and June 18, 2010 to 0 $870,312 Anahuac Channel in Chambers County, Texas September 30, 2011

1 Includes $1,498,573 from Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies. 2 Includes $124,842 expended from Supplemental Funds. 3 Includes $9,296,044 expended to rehabilitate levees. 4 Includes $4,709,056 expended from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 5 In addition, $2,399,135 expended from contributed funds. Also includes $7,197,404 from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 6 Includes $2,570,588 from Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies. Also includes $6,244,350 expended from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 7 Includes $2,152,600 expended from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 8 Includes $29,631,274 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In addition, $1,125,000 expended from contributed funds. Also in addition, $9,874,476 from contributed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 9 In addition, $74,836 expended from contributed funds. 10 Includes $1,250,000 expended from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 11 Includes costs for raising Placement Areas 5&6 access road.

40-76