Today, the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee (T&I) passed their Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA, H.R.3080). WRRDA was first introduced by the Committee last week and was passed unanimously by voice vote out of Committee this morning. A Manager's Amendment was included in the final bill, with minor corrections and additional changes.
Minimal edits were made to previously reported language regarding the three main PNWA issues in the bill - Section 214, the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) and the Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF). That said, there were quite a few proposed amendments to the HMTF language, including increases to the expanded uses section and increasing the target appropriations to 100% rather than the 80% proposed. These were later withdrawn due to lack of support from T&I Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) and Ranking Member Nick Rahall (D-WV). WRRDA is expected to be voted on by the full House in October and then to be conferenced with the Senate bill (S.601) at a later date.
PNWA will provide additional information, including the final bill language, when it is available. As the process moves forward, however, we thought it would be helpful to provide a brief comparison of the House and Senate language regarding our key issues. Please find that below. If you have any follow up questions, or would like our feedback on additional sections of the bill, please contact Heather Stebbings.
Section 214 (Section 102/H.R.3080, Section 2042/S.601). PNWA is pleased to report that language making Section 214 permanent was included in both H.R.3080 and S.601. Section 214 is the funding authority that allows the Corps to accept funds from non-Federal public entities, like ports, to hire additional regulatory staff to expedite the permitting process. You will note that the bill language strikes subsection (e). This is the subsection from the 2010 extension bill that notes the sunset date, without which the authority will be made permanent. While both the House and Senate did include this permanency language, there were a few differences in their approach. The Senate bill stayed true to the original language, with some additional guidance to make the authority as transparent and consistent as possible. The House WRRDA, however, expands the authority to include "Public Utility companies". PNWA is currently working with our colleagues to better understand the impacts of broadening the authority, and we continue to work to ensure that permanency language is included in the final bill.
Inland Waterways Trust Fund (Sections 211-220/H.R.3080, Title VII/S.601). Neither the House nor Senate bill propose changes to the current IWTF revenue structure, or to the threshold for a major rehabilitation project. Both bills instead recognize that current IWTF revenues are insufficient and must be addressed; propose a series of project delivery reforms; authorize studies evaluating current diesel tax collections and all means of increasing revenue/collections; and increased communication between the IWUB, the Assistant Secretary of the Army and Congress. Both bills also require utilization of the Inland Waterway User Board's (IWUB) 20 year Capital Development Plan, which is a list of recommended projects to pull from the IWTF. Currently, no Northwest projects are on this 20-year plan. While PNWA recognizes the challenges facing inland waterways elsewhere in the country, we have been concerned that there could be little to no opportunity for Columbia Snake River System projects to benefit from the fund for several decades. We are pleased to report, however, that the House bill requires representation of all U.S. geographic areas on the list and also requires that the list be reviewed every 5 years, providing an on-ramp for major rehab projects that develop after the list is submitted. PNWA continues to partner with the Portland and Walla Walla Districts of the Corps to ensure that the needs on our river system are anticipated, identified, and addressed in a timely, operations & maintenance (O&M) fashion. It is our goal to avoid any of our projects from becoming so large that they must be categorized as a major rehab, however, we are pleased with the House language which provides an opportunity for all regions to benefit from the fund.
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (Sections 201-205/H.R.3080, Title VIII/S.601). The Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) is currently levied on the value of imported cargo and domestic coastwise shipping, and is symbolically placed in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF). The HMTF was intended to pay for 100% of our nation's deep draft and coastal operations & maintenance (O&M). Annually, approximately $1.5 billion is collected, yet only $800-$900 million has actually been spent in recent years. Navigation channels and other coastal infrastructure across the nation remain critically underfunded, yet the federal government continues to utilize the remaining funds to offset the deficit.
The House and Senate propose very different "fixes" to the HMTF. The House bill proposes phased in spending or "target appropriations" of HMT revenues, beginning at 65% in FY2014 and rising incrementally to 80% spending in FY2020 and beyond. While the 80% would be a significant increase in O&M funding, it is not the full spending that navigation stakeholders would like to see. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of the Army to utilize 5% of annual HMTF expenditures for expanded uses. The Senate's approach to additional spending would begin with $1B in FY2014 HMTF expenditures, and add $100M each fiscal year thereafter until full spending of receipts is achieved in FY2020. In FY2020 and beyond, the Senate bill authorizes that all HMT collected must be provided to the Corps. The Senate bill uses FY2012 HMTF spending levels ($868M) as a baseline for these additional funds, with any amount over FY2012 levels subject to certain prioritization rules including expanded uses and rebates for donor states and ports. In the Senate bill, Great Lakes navigation projects would receive 20% of these additional funds and high use deep draft (HUDD) ports would receive 80%. PNWA would want to see full spending of all HMTF receipts prior to expanding uses.
In their HMTF fixes, both bills also recognize the critical underfunding of our nation's small ports, or projects with less than 1M tons of associated commercial cargo. The House bill guarantees 10% of HMT expenditures for FY15 and FY16 be designated to these projects. While this funding level would likely not be much higher than current spending on small projects, H.R.3080 goes a step further to encourages the Secretary of the Army to base future HMTF expenditures on equitable allocation of funds among all harbor types, not solely based on commercial tonnage or size. The Senate bill, on the other hand, would only provide funding to "low use" projects after HUDD and Great Lakes projects are fully dredged to their authorized width and depth. In the Senate bill's scenario, our small/low-use projects in the Northwest would continue to see little to no funding year after year. In a final bill, PNWA would want to see funding for these small ports up front, not in a prioritized fashion where they will continue to fall to the bottom of the list.
PNWA has been a vocal leader for decades in addressing issues surrounding the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF). Our membership has a long history in the region and in DC of supporting full use of the HMTF. PNWA was one of the earliest supporters of the RAMP effort, which generated the momentum that has brought the national HMTF conversation to its current state. We continue to believe that full spending of HMTF revenues is vital to ensuring that our deep draft harbors and small coastal ports receive the funding they need to remain competitive players in the global marketplace. Recently, PNWA expanded our policy positions and is also advocating to level the playing field between U.S. ports and international competitors; ensure that U.S. tax policy does not disadvantage U.S. jobs and goods movement; and ensure that funds contributed to the improvement of U.S. transportation infrastructure include improvements to naturally deep-water ports. For an overview of PNWA's full HMTF position, please review the attached fact sheet or click here.