Senate
approves FY2010 energy & water appropriations bill
Yesterday, the Senate approved their FY2010 energy &
water spending bill by a vote of 85-9.
The bill included $5.4 billion for the Corps of Engineers, $27.4 billion
for the Department of Energy and nearly $1.2 billion for the Bureau of
Reclamation.
Congress must now reconcile several funding differences
between the Senate and House bills.
While in negotiations, they will need to specifically address
differences on funding for new Corps projects.
As reported in PNWA Nor'wester
#335, #336 and #338, the House and Senate bills includes project increases for
a number of PNWA member projects. PNWA
will now advocate for the highest possible funding numbers for these projects
as the two chambers work to resolve the differences in their bills. It is expected that discussions between the
two chambers will run smoothly, and a conferenced bill be released relatively
quickly and sent to President Obama to be signed into law. PNWA members are hopeful the Corps of
Engineers, Department of Energy, and Bureau of Reclamation will be provided
FY2010 funding prior to the start of the new fiscal year on October 1st.
Notable in the Senate's floor consideration of the bill
was a proposed amendment from Sen. John McCain that would have stripped all
earmarks from the bill. This amendment
was defeated 27-72, and was accompanied by several responses from Senators who
explained the need for Congress to have the authority to earmark and provide
specific project funding. PNWA strongly
supports the ability of Congress to earmark.
PNWA strongly supports increased funding for the Corps,
and encourages conferees to accept the House level of $5.5 billion. For more information on PNWA's funding priorities for
FY2010, visit our website www.pnwa.net.
PNWA staff contact: Kristin Meira
|
Administration's lockage
fee proposal would increase barge taxes eight-fold
The
Obama Administration recently released details of its proposed lockage fee to
the House of Representatives. The
proposal by the Administration is an effort to adequately fund the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF). The IWTF is
designed to pay for 50% of construction and major rehab costs on the nation's
inland waterways, and is financed through a 20 cents/gallon diesel tax on those
waterways. Currently, the IWTF contains
less money than is needed to fund infrastructure needs on the inland systems of
the US, and collections are expected to be below need for the foreseeable
future.
This
Administration's proposed lockage fees are quite similar to what was put forth
by the Bush Administration. The fee
would be imposed only on commercial barges, whether full or empty, using locks
operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Each barge would be taxed for every lock it passes. The proposed lockage fee would be phased in
beginning January 1, 2010, at a rate of $45 per barge for locks of the length
found on the Columbia Snake River System (CSRS). For a four-barge tow that transits all eight
locks on the CSRS, a payment of $2,880 would be required, plus the existing
diesel tax of 20 cents/gallon.
The
proposal would then double the fee on January 1, 2012, to $90 per barge per
lock. This would bring the cost of
transiting our system by a 4-barge tow, one-way, to $5,760. In addition, a diesel tax of 10 cents per
gallon would still be in effect, and would not be phased out until 2014.
The
average amount of diesel tax that is currently paid for a one-way transit from
Portland to Lewiston is $684.
Furthermore,
the Secretary of the Army would be permitted to make periodic adjustments to
the fee beginning in 2014, based on the total net assets in the IWTF. The proposal would also allow the Secretary
to institute congestion fees at crowded locks, and would expand lock fees to
currently non-taxed waterways.
PNWA
strongly opposes the Administration's proposed fee, and does not support a
shift from the diesel tax to lockage fees.
The Bush Administration's lockage fee proposal met with swift rejection
on Capitol Hill, and it is expected that the same fate will meet this very
similar proposal from the Obama Administration.
Following
are just a few of the reasons we oppose lockage fees:
Implementing the new lockage fees will hurt the nation's
economy. Barges move more cargo per mile with less
horsepower. The Administration's proposed
fee would increase the cost of barging, making American products and farm goods
less competitive in international markets.
This would result in fewer exports and an increase in the trade deficit.
Lockage fees could hurt our environment.
Increasing the cost of barging may result in a shift of cargo from barge
to other, less fuel efficient and more polluting modes of transportation. Each year, barging on the Columbia and
Snake Rivers keeps 700,000 trucks off the highways that run through the Columbia
River Gorge.
Lockage fees are counter to the Administration's climate
change policies. The Administration should be encouraging
barging, rather than increasing its cost. The shift to other modes will
increase fossil fuel consumption and air emissions at a time when our nation is
seeking to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, decrease air pollution and
address climate change.
Lockage fees will hurt America's farmers.
An average 4-barge tow on our system traveling between Portland,
OR/Vancouver, WA and Lewiston, ID currently pays about $684 in diesel taxes,
one-way. Under the Administration's
lockage fee proposal, a 4-barge tow transiting the same route would incur a fee
of $5,760, each way, in 2012, plus 10 cents/gallon in diesel tax. This would increase the cost of wheat
exported out of the Columbia River System and reduce international sales.
Inland navigation must be viewed as a complete system.
The IWTF collects money for the rehabilitation and construction of our
inland waterway systems, and is not solely focused on locks. By switching from a diesel tax to a lockage
fee, a larger burden is placed on shippers and companies who use locks. The existing diesel tax is the most equitable
way to continue investing in that system.
New fees should not be assessed until there is
consistency in navigation trust funds. Over $4.7B in Harbor Maintenance Tax revenue
has been collected but not spent, while operation and maintenance needs at
coastal harbors and deep draft ports have been underfunded. A few years ago the Bush Administration tried
to expand the use of the IWTF beyond that authorized by Congress. While underfunding needed construction and
rehab projects, they sought to use a perceived surplus in the IWTF to pay for
operations & maintenance. Affected
industries and stakeholders resist new or increased fees because they have lost
faith that the government will honor its commitment to spend these fees for
their intended purposes.
The
PNWA membership, however, does recognize that the IWTF is dwindling. Thus, we support a national dialogue to
determine equitable stakeholder funding levels to maintain the viability of the
fund. Our members look forward to
working with the Administration, Congress and industry to identify reasonable
and appropriate funding sources to rebuild the Fund.
PNWA
urges Congress to reject this new fee, and to continue to actively invest in
our nation's waterway infrastructure.
PNWA
staff contact: Kristin Meira
|