Washington Report

The Waterways Journal
6 July 2009
By Carlo J. Salzano, WJ Washington Correspondent

Washington, D.C.—The barge and towing industry plans to be ready by the end of the year with a new plan to fund construction and maintenance of locks and dams on the nation’s inland waterways system.

Interviewed after a press briefing on waterway revenue issues June 24 in Washington, D.C., Cornel J. Martin, president and chief executive officer of Waterways Council Inc., said that his organization is working with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Inland Waterways Users Board “to develop a long-term funding mechanism that’s going to provide a revenue stream to upgrade the system for the long haul.

“So we’re looking to developing a 20-year capital development plan that’s going to look at the long-term needs of the entire inland waterway system, figure out how much it’s going to cost, and figure out a way to pay for it over the long term.”

Indicating that the current fuel tax may be in the mix of possible options the industry is considering, Martin said consideration could be given to something “other than the fuel tax, maybe in addition to; we’re not there yet.”

The WCI executive said industry and government negotiators would be looking at “I’m sure, a multitude of options, including infrastructure needs, bonding, and fuel tax. We will look at all the options and all the proposals that might come up. So we’re not there yet. That’s part of the program that’s commonly referred to as the White Paper process that we’re working on with the Corps today.”

Whatever the industry may be considering, one thing is sure: the options will not include the administration’s proposed lockage fee.

“We see lockage fees as a disincentive,” Martin said. “We don’t want to see a lockage fee because we think it penalizes certain segments of the river where you have a lot of infrastructure. We would rather look at the system as a whole rather than pitting one section of the system against another.”

Martin believes that the White House favors lockage fees as a source of money. “I think they are just trying to derive more revenue and they haven’t looked at other options; they haven’t considered other options.” Martin noted that the current administration’s lockage fee proposal is the same proposal the Bush administration put out last year and which got no support from any member of Congress. “It was never seriously considered,” he said. “I think they put it in there looking to try to get more revenue out of the waterways industry.”

“At a time when the president is asking our citizens to be more environmentally conscious and more fuel-efficient, they are trying to tax the one mode of transportation that’s the most environmentally sound, the most fuel-efficient,” Martin said. “So, it just doesn’t make sense. So, hopefully, we can push back on that and come up with a long-term revenue stream for the long haul.”

Martin wouldn’t say whether he would prefer an increase in the diesel fuel tax. “I’m not going to put a number on it because we don’t know what the needs are. That’s what we’re trying to develop in this process. What are the needs, and how are we going to pay for them.”
Martin’s goal is to have a plan ready to present to lawmakers by the end of the year “so that if we do have a Water Resources Development Act of 2010 our proposals could be included for legislative action.”

Corps Budget In House

The House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee has approved $5.54 billion for the fiscal year 2010 Army Corps of Engineers civil works program. The Obama administration had requested $5.1 billion. This fiscal year’s funding level was $5.4 billion. The bill approved by the subcommittee calls for $2.1 billion for construction, $2.5 billion for operations and maintenance, and $142 million for investigations.

At a hearing on agency budgets and priorities for fiscal year 2010, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), chairwoman of the House Water Resource and Environment Subcommittee, said she was disappointed that the requests for Army Corps of Engineers’ investigations and construction were far below this fiscal year’s appropriated levels.

Johnson said the $100 million sought for investigations, 40 percent below this year, would not enable the Corps to plan and design the next generation of navigation projects. Furthermore, she said, while the Corps has identified about $12 billion in so-called “ready-to-go” construction projects, the administration requested only $1.7 billion for the next fiscal year.

Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, also criticized the cut in construction funds but said he was pleased that the administration had asked for $2.5 billion, an increase of $304 million, for operation and maintenance. Rep. John Boozman (R-Ark.), ranking member of the subcommittee, said in opening remarks that “given the fact that the navigation projects and flood damage reduction projects provide economic benefits to the nation, I would like to see the administration place a higher interest in the Corps’ work.”