WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration Monday raised objections to a water resources bill drawn up by Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and David Vitter, R-La. The White House specifically objected to some of the streamlining provisions Vitter added to the bill to deal with what he said are unacceptable delays in moving needed flood control and hurricane protection projects through...
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration Monday raised objections to a water resources bill drawn up by Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and David Vitter, R-La. The White House specifically objected to some of the streamlining provisions Vitter added to the bill to deal with what he said are unacceptable delays in moving needed flood control and hurricane protection projects through the Army Corps of Engineers bureaucracy.
"The administration is deeply concerned that the project permitting provisions in S. 601 are counterproductive, may actually slow project approval, and do not adequately protect communities, taxpayers, or the environment," the White House Office of Management and Budget wrote. "The bill constrains science-based decision making, increases litigation risk, and undermines the integrity of several foundational environmental laws, including the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act."
The statement said that the administration is making progress in improving efficiency of federal permitting and reviews "in a manner that encourages early collaboration, stakeholder engagement and better environmental outcomes while not jeopardizing bedrock environmental laws."
It expressed hope that Vitter and Boxer will be open to compromise on the bill that is beginning Senate debate this week. Boxer is the chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, while Vitter is the panel's top Republican.
"The administration is aware that discussions on these provisions are ongoing and urges the Senate to reaffirm the current foundational environmental review framework for all water resources projects that fosters transparency, informed decision-making, and strong environmental outcomes, and to encourage the Corps to continue efforts to evaluate the full range of reasonable alternatives and to promote better environmental stewardship," OMB said.
The report, on behalf of President Barack Obama, also raised concerns about the cost of the legislation to the federal government.
"For example, the bill would effectively require a tripling of the amount that the federal government spends for harbor maintenance and related work -- a $15 billion increase in spending over the next 10 years without regard to the return to the nation from this investment," OMB said. "Additionally, the bill would undermine a key reform enacted by the Congress in the landmark Water Resources Development Act of 1986 by eliminating cost-sharing for maintaining channels deeper than 45 feet, and by expanding the federal role in other areas, which have always been non-federal responsibilities."
The report also called for increases in fees that fund the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
"The proposal would establish an annual per vessel fee to raise $1.1 billion in additional revenue over 10 years from the commercial users of the inland waterways," OMB said. "This user fee is needed to help finance their 50 percent share of inland waterways capital investments under current law. It would support economic growth, and reflect actual costs incurred by the Corps on their behalf."
Vitter has said that the Corps of Engineers only uses a small portion of the trust fund now, and it ought to be required to use it for the intended purpose - of dredging and maintaining key waterways.