How to Kill Zombies: Deauthorization

This week the Obama Administration hosted their first listening session on the 2014 Water Resources Reform and Development Act to solicit ideas on how to implement the Water Resources Reform and Development Act signed into law last June. 

The Act is huge and sweeping and the Administration is hosting four sessions that focus on different parts of the bill.  This week, we talked about deauthorization and project planning.  I came prepared to talk about the chosen topics.  But a contingent of farmers had something else in mind.

Photo by Olivia Dorothy

Within the first minute a farmer from Illinois called on the Corps to fund the Navigation Ecosystem Sustainability Program…  Totally off topic.  Unfortunately the Illinois farmer wasn't alone.  The session was crashed by a team of pro-NESP cheerleaders.  Ugh!

What’s even more troubling is that some of the Team NESP cheerleaders actually had some articulate suggestions for the deauthorization guidance like “ensuring non-federal sponsors approve the project deauthorization.” 

I’m sorry, but nothing would ever be deauthorized if every single local interest group had the power to approve or deny a Corps project.  It’s bad enough local interests can pressure the Corps to reprogram funds to keep projects like NESP walking dead.

But it is not Congress's intent to make deauthorization harder.  The 2014 Act requires the Corps to produce a list of projects that total $18 billion for deauthorization.  But there is no way a penny will be deauthorized if local sponsors have the power to deny it.

Hopefully, the Administration will see through this and take a heavy hand to downsize the $60 billion plus list of unfunded Corps projects.  And I hope NESP will be taken out with the other dead ones.

How to comment on WRRDA implementation

Dragonflies on Illinois River by Olivia Dorothy

On Wednesday, the Army Corps of Engineers will host their first listening session on the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) signed into law a few months ago.  At the listening session, the Corps will take public comments on how they should implement the new WRRDA.  These listening sessions will be held every two weeks through the end of September.  This week’s session will cover backlog reduction, deauthorization, and project planning. 

A lot of environmental and conservation groups are very interested in the project planning discussion. This part of WRRDA significantly changed how the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act are applied water resources development projects. 

NEPA is credited with producing less damaging and more effective projects; preventing some of the most damaging and ill-conceived projects from moving forward; protecting wetlands vital to flood protection, migratory waterfowl, and water quality; and saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Unfortunately, these changes in WRRDA did not strengthen environmental laws like NEPA. 

The listening session on Wednesday is an opportunity for the public to help the Corps develop implementation guidance that ensures robust public participation and protects natural resources.

If you’re planning to attend Wednesday’s listening session, make a comment!  Here are some suggestions.

Ensure agencies like the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Environmental Protection Agency can work effectively to review and deny projects as appropriate. 

WRRDA language establishes a system that, if abused, allows the Corps of Engineers to pressure, harass, and fine other regulating agencies if they take too long to review Corps’ project proposals.  How will the Corps make sure other agencies aren’t being punished for doing their jobs?

Ensure there are steps in the planning process to vet and remove bad projects. 

WRRDA eliminated what was called the “reconnaissance phase” in project planning.  This short, cheap, cursory review created an opportunity to toss the duds if the Corps identified obvious problems.  Without reconnaissance studies, at what point will the Corps vet project proposals?

Ensure environmental reviews are robust. 

WRRDA language promotes less detailed environmental reviews for a broad range of programs and activities.  These “cursory reviews” will promote the use of outdated information and lead to uninformed decision-making.  How will the Corps ensure their expedited environmental reviews will protect natural resources?

Need more background?  Check out this great article about WRRDA written by Nicollet Island Coalition member Eileen Fretz Shader.