Water Resources Development Act of 2016
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today I wish to engage in a colloquy with my ranking member, Senator Boxer, Senator Blumenthal, and Senator Murphy, to speak about section 2004 of S. 2848, the Water Resources Development Act of 2016, or WRDA 2016.
Section 2004 of S. 2848 reaffirms current law that the Army Corps of Engineers must adhere to State water quality standards under the Clean Water Act when determining the least costly, environmentally acceptable alternative for the disposal of dredged material, known as the Federal standard.
Although reaffirming current law, this section is not an endorsement by Congress of the Corps' current practices.
Instead, Congress is letting the Corps know that Congress is paying attention and that the Corps must meet its legal obligations to abide by State water quality standards when determining whether it is meeting the Federal standard.
I have heard concerns that, in some cases, that the Corps has not met this legal requirement and instead self-certifies its determination of the Federal standard rather than meeting State water quality standards. Senators Portman and Brown have raised this concern with me about the Corps' intention to dispose of dredged material in Lake Erie.
This section is therefore intended to clarify that the Federal standard is a legal, fact-based definition and that neither party is empowered to make the final decision on the Federal standard, should a dispute arise.
By not giving one party veto power over another, Congress is affirming that the Federal standard can be challenged in court. This means that a State can appeal the Corps' interpretation of the Federal standard if the State believes the Corps has failed to meet State water quality standards and that such challenges will be resolved on a case- by-case basis.
I also have heard from members who are worried about whether the permitting of new dredged material disposal sites would be affected by the adoption of new State water quality standards that could ban open water disposal of dredged material.
Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency must approve new disposal sites and have a very rigorous process for making those decisions. WRDA 2016 does not affect this process at all.
The Clean Water Act also governs the adoption of new State water quality standards. These standards must carry out the purposes of the act. Blocking disposal of dredged material is not a purpose of the Clean Water Act. Any new State water quality standard must go through notice and comment rulemaking and also can be litigated. WRDA 2016 does not affect that process.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. Yes, the Senator is correct.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. No. The Federal standard applicable to the disposal of dredged material from Federal projects is found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 33 C.F.R., section 335.7. That regulation requires that the method of disposal must be the least costly alternative that is consistent with sound engineering practices and environmentally protective, as provided under the guidelines established by EPA under section 404(b)(l) of the Clean Water Act. EPA's guidelines are found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 C.F.R., part 230.
Under EPA's guidelines, ``No discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if it: (1) Causes or contributes, after consideration of disposal site dilution and dispersion, to violations of any applicable State water quality standard.'' S. 2848 does not change this requirement.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. No, it does not.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, at 11:30, we will be voting on the WRDA bill, which we have talked extensively about for the last 2 weeks and the benefits it has. I applaud my Senate colleagues for advancing the WRDA bill to the floor to get to this point. We all have a lot to be proud of in the bipartisan passage of another critical infrastructure bill. We are kind of on a roll, really, when we think about our FAST Act and the chemical bill. We have a lot of things we have been doing, and we are authorizing the Engineers' 30 Chief's reports that recommend the construction of new projects with significant economic benefits. The modernization projects bill will modernize our Nation's ports and make our waterways safe and reliable.
This Panamax chart shows that we have a problem in this country with some of our ports because as the Panama Canal has expanded--and we have this Panamax, which the top shows the new capacity and then the old capacity--we have to do something to help our various ports.
Take the Port of Charleston, It has a 45-foot deck. That is fine for the old ships, but for the new ones it is not. The alternative is to take the ships into the Caribbean, change them, offload some things, which is a great deal of expense. It is not necessary.
We deal with flood control projects in this bill. If we look at this chart and the picture, we must provide the necessary level of protection to our communities before another unfortunate disaster occurs like the one we are looking at in Louisiana. Of course, WRDA helps to do that.
The environmental projects in the bill also help our Nation's critical ecosystems, including water off the coast of Florida which is experiencing the algae blooms that are disrupting the economy. Of course, the occupier of the Chair is very much responsible for that.
It is important to note that this bill does a lot more than authorize new projects. WRDA 2016 includes substantive reforms to the Army Corps policy so local sponsors will be empowered to participate in the funding. This is a big deal, because we would think we shouldn't have to pass a law to accommodate those individuals who want to pay for things that otherwise the government is going to have to pay for. So we change the law.
It also establishes the FEMA assistance program to help States rehabilitate the unsafe dams. There are 14,726 which have been identified called high-hazard potential dams located all around the country. We can see that around the country--the term ``high hazard potential'' means that if a dam breaks or if a levee breaks, it will take American lives. It will cost lives. We have 14,000 of these scattered around the country.
The WRDA bill also provides reforms and assistance that will help communities address clean water and safe drinking water infrastructure mandates and help address aging infrastructure like this broken water main in Philadelphia. We can see it is not just in the larger, older parts of America. This is one where we have problems in the newer sections and the less-populated areas, such as my State of Oklahoma.
WRDA also supports innovative approaches to address drought and water supply issues, which is particularly a problem out West and in my State.
Finally, in addition to supporting infrastructure--and therefore the economy--WRDA carries four significant priority policies: It addresses the affordability of Clean Water Act mandates, unfunded mandates. We have been living with these since I was mayor of the city of Tulsa. Our biggest problem is unfunded mandates. In our area, we have a real serious problem in our smaller communities so it does address that.
It addresses EPA's coal ash rule. The coal ash rule is something that has been batted around for a long time. There are a lot of diverse thoughts on it. We came to a compromise on this, and it is something that will allow us to use the value of the coal ash for building roads and also taking care of the disposal problem.
WRDA 2016 includes exemptions from the SPCC rule for farmers. Senator Fischer has championed this issue, and I have been with her all the way on this. The WRDA bill will exempt all animal feed tanks, and up to two tanks on separate parcels, to allow farmers to refuel their equipment out in the field without being subject to onerous regulations. She has done a great job.
Finally, the WRDA bill includes Gold King Mine legislation that will guarantee EPA will reimburse States, local governments, and tribes for the costs they incur cleaning up the mess that EPA makes.
So we are one step closer to getting back on track with passing the WRDA bill every 2 years. We went 7 years, from 2010 to 2017, without doing a WRDA bill. We are back on a 2-year schedule now. We want to stay that way. Senator Boxer and I have talked about this, and we have worked together to make sure this does get done. We have also talked to Chairman Shuster and Chairman Upton of the House to make sure this gets done. As when I came way back many years ago, he feels very strongly about the relief that Flint has and the drinking water emergency. I will talk a little bit more about this later after we vote on the bill.
I thank not just Senator Boxer for being chair of the committee, she has been the ranking member, and then when Democrats were in charge, she was the chairman and I was the ranking member, all the way through this. We were able to do what we were supposed to do; that is, infrastructure. I do applaud Senator Boxer. I will share my time before our vote with her. Maybe we can visit more about the benefits of this. I look forward to thanking the rest of the people afterward.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. I am the conservative.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. Just for one comment because we want to make sure we get this clear. We still have to go to the House, and Senator Boxer and I are hoping we are going to be able to resolve this. In fact, we may see House action as soon as next week. I know there are some Members in the House who have said they are going to make it difficult on Chairman Shuster to pass the WRDA bill because it doesn't have the Senate provisions that address the water crisis across our Nation that involves failing and outdated critical infrastructure and the situation in Flint. I promise to address this in conference. I have been standing with my colleagues in Michigan from the beginning on our fiscally responsible solution to help the Flint community, and I will continue to do so in conference.
So let me be clear. It would be a shortsighted mistake for those trying to help the people of Flint to prevent the quick movement of WRDA in the House so we can conference immediately. I am confident that is going to happen, and this bill will become law before the end of this Congress. I just want to be sure we got that in the record before the vote took place today.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. INHOFE. 4979, as amended, the following amendments be reported by number, called up, and agreed to en bloc: Isakson No. 5075; Sanders No. 5063, as modified; Cochran No. 5076; Paul No. 5068; Cardin No. 5069; Hoeven No. 5074, as modified; Tester No. 5077; and Sasse No. 5066, as modified.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source