Printable Version

Water Resources (11-19-07)

With long-term aridity facing much of the nation, particularly the Western states, water resource issues are becoming a growing concern for Congress. Some places, such as the Colorado River basin and parts of Montana, are entering their seventh year of drought. A February 22, 2007 Associated Press article reports that the U.S. Climatic Data Center predicts that 67 percent of the western United States will be in moderate to extreme drought by the end of spring in 2007, as well as a large portion of the southern U.S. These dry conditions have led to low municipal, industrial, commercial, and agricultural water supplies. Concerns about maintaining adequate water supplies across the nation have prompted Congress to schedule a number of hearings to consider steps to mitigate the current problem and to prepare for future water demands.

President Vetoes Water Resources Legislation
President Bush vetoed the $23 billion Water Resources Development Act on Friday November 2, 2007. In a written statement following the veto, the President explained his reasons: "The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete. This authorization bill makes promises to local communities that the Congress does not have a track record of keeping."

Congress has vowed to override the veto within one week and based on previous voting differentials on the legislation, they should have the two-thirds votes that they need. (11-19-07)

Congress Passes Water Resources Legislation
On September 24, 2007, the Senate voted 81 to 12 in favor of the Water Resources Development Act (H.R. 1495) and the measure now goes to the President. The legislation would authorize more than 900 Army Corps of Engineers projects for flood control, navigation, hurricane protection and coastal restoration across the nation. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost to be about $23.2 billion over the many years needed to complete all of these projects. About $2 billion in projects were added to the bill during the conference to iron out differences between the House and Senate versions. The President has threatened to veto the bill because of its cost, however, Congress has responded to the threat by suggesting they have enough votes to override a veto. Given that the House approved the measure earlier by a vote of 381 to 40, it is likely that Congress does have the two-thirds majority needed to override any veto.

Congress has not passed a WRDA bill since 2000 and many legislators believe the current price tag of the bill is in line with the lack of authorized funding over the past 7 years. E&E Daily quoted Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) who stated "If we had passed a $5 billion bill every two years, we are not out of step with where we should be". In the same news story, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), who voted for the measure, reminded everyone that this bill is only for authorization, not appropriation. Inhofe stated "The argument that no one will listen to … is that authorization is not appropriation," Inhofe indicated that he would oppose appropriation for some projects and the real battles are likely to occur in the annual appropriation process over the next few years.

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) opposed the final measure as he indicated he would earlier because the language regarding an independent review of Corps projects has been weakened. Feingold believes the legislation gives too much authority to the Corps in guiding the review process and will keep the process from being independent, transparent and objective.

Some of the largest authorized projects include $3.6 billion for flood control, navigation and hurricane protection in the Gulf Coast, $2 billion for locks and dams on the upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers, $1.7 billion for ecosystem restoration on these rivers, $1.8 billion for Everglades's projects and $1.3 billion for the Indian River Lagoon project.

The full text of the bill is available from Thomas. (10-4-07)

White House Releases Fresh Water Report
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released a study on the national challenges to ensure adequate fresh water supplies. The nation is facing greater competition for water resources and must make ever more critical decisions about allocations. The three scientific and technical challenges include: 1. Measure and account for the Nation's water; 2. Develop methods that will allow expansion of fresh water supplies while using existing supplies more efficiently; and 3. Develop and improve predictive water management tools. The study then outlines a federal strategic plan for addressing these challenges and provides a guide for how federal agencies will be a part of this plan. One major element is to develop a National Water Census.

The full report, "A Strategy for Federal Science and Technology to Support Water Availability and Quality in the United States" is posted on the Office of Science and Technology Policy web page. (10-4-07)

House Passes Water Resources Development Act
The House passed the Water Resources Development Act (H.R. 1495) by a vote of 381 to 40 on August 1st and now the measure awaits a final vote in the Senate before it can be sent to the President.

The massive legislation would fund over 900 Army Corps of Engineers flood and environmental restoration projects and would cost $21 billion. This is much larger than the original House bill ($15 billion) or the original Senate bill ($14 billion) and the President has threatened to veto the legislation because of its cost. The Ranking Member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Congressman John Mica (R-FL) promised to have enough votes to override the veto. Although the Senate has not set a time table for considering this bill, in an unusual meeting of the minds, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) both pledged to get enough votes in the Senate to override a possible veto too.

The full text of the bill is available from Thomas. (8/2/07)

Clean Water Amendment Gets a Hearing
Congressmen John Dingell (D-MI) and Jim Oberstar (D-MN) have introduced a measure that would erase the term "navigable" and replace that term with "waters of the United States." in the Clean Water Act. The bill (H.R. 2421) would increase the number of waterways protected by the Clean Water Act by removing the requirement that only navigable waterways are protected. The measure is in response to two recent Supreme Court decisions that focused on what Congress intended by the phrase "navigable waters of the United States". The Supreme Court cases in question are Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the joint cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The legislation also includes a clause that would retain existing Clean Water Act exemptions, including those for agriculture, mining and silviculture.

The measure was introduced in May and is currently sitting in the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. A hearing on the legislation took place in July and the measure currently has 169 co-sponsors.

The full text of the bill is available from Thomas. (8/1/07)

Water Bill Approved in Senate
The total cost of the Senate's Water Resources Development Act (WRDA, S.1248) was slashed in half, from $31.5 billion to $14 billion, in an attempt to protect the bill from Senators unhappy with the initial cost estimates. The slimmed-down bill easily passed on May 16, 2007, by a vote of 91 to 4.

The Committee on Environment and Public Works was able to cut out over $15 billion from the bill in part by reducing a provision that would have expedited hurricane related projects on the Gulf Coast by allowing the Army Corps of Engineers to construct projects to protect the region from a category five storm surge. Despite the cut, Louisiana in particular still stands to benefit from the bill, thanks to the authorization of almost $3.6 billion for projects in the state. Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and David Vitter (R-LA) fought to keep some level of funding for Louisiana in the bill, considering the immense damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The bill also creates a National Levee Safety Program, improves flood protection for dozens of specific communities across the country, and improves dams and infrastructure over the length of the Mississippi River.

Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (D-CA) said the newest version is "a bill that meets everyone's needs." The House overwhelmingly passed a $13 billion WRDA bill in April (H.R. 1495); the two bills will now go to a bicameral conference. If passed, the amended WRDA would be the first change to the water resources infrastructure bill in seven years. (6/18/07)

Seven States Sign Pact on Colorado River
Seven Western U.S. states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, California and Nevada) jointly filed a plan with the Department of the Interior (DOI) that would clarify use of water from the Colorado River during times of drought.

"The adversity of drought has brought the states together and forced us to rethink how we manage this precious resource," said George Caan, executive director of Nevada's Colorado River Commission. Under the proposed plan, upstream states could use more water during a drought, or if a less-than-average snow pack accumulates on the western slopes of the Rocky Mountains. Downstream states would make up for this loss by using alternate sources of water, such as a reservoir in Southern California's Imperial Valley which will be created by the pact.

The proposal is expected to ease tensions between the states over escalating water access issues and will affect 30,000,000 people who use the river for drinking water. (6/18/07)

Senators Wade Into Water Resources Act
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed the Water Resources Development Act without additional amendments and sent the measure to the full Senate, where it awaits a floor vote. The re-authorization of WRDA, which provides funds for about 200 Army Corps of Engineers projects, has been delayed for years. The bill would pay for navigation and ecosystem restoration to the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Waterway, ecosystem and restoration projects in Florida, environmental restoration of the controversial Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet in Louisiana, remediation of abandoned mines, restoration of Chesapeake Bay, an assessment of the national levee system and other projects. (04/23/07)

The House and the Senate are out of time to reconcile their differences on two bills which would re-authorize the Water Resources Act. The Senate version, S.728 costs $15 billion, while the House version, H.R. 2864 costs $12 billion. Besides the differences in costs, enactment of the Water Resources Development Act has been complicated by proposed changes to Army Corps of Engineers practices and policies. H.R. 2864 is seen by some as a first step toward increasing environmental considerations in program planning and stricter mitigation requirements. While S. 728 includes some similar provisions, it also takes steps in the opposite direction by supporting changes in program planning that are aimed at shortening length, increasing predictability and avoiding cost increases. Congressional experts also hinted that lawmakers were uneasy about passing a pork-laden bill before the mid-term elections. Both bills await further discussion during the lame-duck session in November. (10/12/06)

Since 1974, the Water Resource Development Act (WRDA) has been a project authorization bill for the Army Corps of Engineers. The bill authorizes funds but does not appropriate them. The Corps authorized projects include water navigation, flood control, shoreline protection, hydropower, dam safety, water supply, recreation, environmental restoration and protection, and disaster response and recovery. The two most recent WRDA bills were passed during the 106th Congress: the WRDA of 1999, S.507, authorized funds near $6.1 billion and the WRDA of 2000, S.2796, authorized funds near $5 billion. During the 107th Congress, no WRDA bills were passed due to the accusations that the Corps has been manipulating cost-benefit studies to justify projects (E&E News).

In December of 2001, Rep. John Linder (R-GA) introduced the Twenty-First Century Water Policy Commission Establishment Act, H.R.3561. The bill would establish a commission that would develop a comprehensive water policy for the next fifty years. On May 22, 2002, the House Committee on Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on H.R. 3561. The hearing's complete written testimonies can be found on the committee's website. During his testimony, Linder asked the committee to take action and not wait for a national water scarcity crisis to occur. He said, "Our water resources will be utilized to their fullest capacity in the coming decades, and current water supplies will prove inadequate." Some witnesses were skeptical of the bill because the proposed panel would be composed of members from governmental agencies. Others were worried that the commission's recommendations would not add any new information to the current pool of knowledge on water resources. After the hearing the bill had no further action.

In January 2003, Rep. John Linder (R-GA) reintroduced the Twenty-First Century Water Commission Act, H.R. 135. The bill, modeled after the 1968 National Water Commission Act, would have instituted a seven-member commission to provide recommendations for a national comprehensive water strategy for the next 50 years. The commission's recommendations would be based on their assessments of water management plans and future water supply and demand with the aim of protecting the environment and the economy. The bill was referred to the House Committees on Resources and Transportation and Infrastructure. The bill received favorable attention in subsequent hearings and was passed in the House. It was sent to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works where it has stayed ever since.

In May 2003, the Department of the Interior released "Water 2025: Preventing Crises and Conflict in the West", which calls for concentrating existing federal financial and technical resources in key western watersheds and in critical research and development, such as water conservation and desalinization that will help to predict, prevent, and alleviate water supply conflicts." More information on Water 2025 can be found on http://www.doi.gov/water2025/.

In May 2004, the National Water Quality Assessment Program presented findings of several regional water quality assessments carried out between 1991 and 2001. NAWQA recently released the final 15 of its 51 comprehensive reports, which together indicate that "the nation's waters generally are suitable for irrigation, drinking-water supply, and other home and recreational uses . . . [although] in areas of significant agricultural and urban development the quality of our nation's water resources has been degraded by contaminants." The assessments found that contaminants and their effects are controlled by a complex set of both human and naturally induced factors such as land use, chemical use, urbanization, geology, and hydrology.

For additional information on water policy issues in the 109th Congress, see AGI's Clean Water Issues, Wetlands and Coastal Resources Policy, and Great Lakes and Other Watersheds pages.

Sources: THOMAS, US House of Representatives, US Senate, US Army Corps of Engineers, E&E News, National Library for the Environment, Congressional Research Service Report, USGS Circular 1265.

Contributed by Linda Rowan, Director of Government Affairs, Erin Gleeson, 2007 AGI/AAPG Spring Intern, and Paul Schramm, 2007 AGI/AAPG Summer Intern.

Information for the background taken from AGI's Water Resources Page for the 108th Congress.

Please send any comments or requests for information to AGI Government Affairs Program.

Last updated on August 20, 2007.

© 2008 All rights reserved. American Geological Institute, 4220 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22302-1502.
Please send any comments or problems with this site to: webmaster@agiweb.org.
Privacy Policy