This week, the Energy and Water appropriations bill is
expected to be debated on the House floor.
The second of 12 appropriations
bills providing discretionary funding for the federal government, the bill
provides funding for projects under the direction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, the
Department of Energy, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The fiscal year (FY) 2017 Energy and Water appropriations
bill provides $37.5 billion in discretionary budget authority, an increase of
$259 million over the 2016 enacted level and $168 million above the President’s
request. This is a modest increase compared to the almost $3 billion in new
funding provided by last year’s omnibus appropriations act. The bill also
includes a number of policy riders that will help to stop continued government
overreach on environmental issues.
In some cases, the legislation continues to provide funding
to programs with poor track records or missions that fall beyond the scope of
the federal government. In others, the bill reduces spending for programs that
should be eliminated.
Heritage Foundation analysts have recommended funding for
Energy and Water to be $35.5 billion in 2017, about $1.9 billion less than the
level proposed in this bill.
Army Corps of Engineers
The Army Corps of Engineers is a Department of Defense
agency that carries out both domestic and military projects, especially those
dealing with water-related construction or facilities. The 2017 bill provides a
total of $6.1 billion to the Corps, an increase of $100 million over the 2016
enacted level and $1.5 billion above the President’s request. Included in the
total are $2.7 billion for navigation projects and studies, and $1.8 billion
for public health and safety initiatives to fund flood and storm damage
reduction activities.
Throughout its history, the Corps has played the primary
role in managing the nation’s water infrastructure. However, existing project
developments as well as budget realities reflect a need for the Corps to scale
back its mission to its original intent: managing critical water
infrastructure. With the nation’s waterways largely built, the Corps’ focus
should be on managing and rehabilitating its existing estate.
Department of the Interior
The Bureau of Reclamation within the Department of the
Interior is funded annually through the Energy and Water appropriations bill.
This year’s bill provides the Bureau of Reclamation with $1.1 billion in
funding, $131 million below last year’s level and slightly below the
President’s request. The funds are used to manage, develop, and protect water
resources in the western U.S., including the operation of dams, canals, and
hydroelectric plants. It is the largest wholesaler of water in the nation.
As with the Army Corps of Engineers, most of the necessary
infrastructure under the Bureau of Reclamation’s purview has already been
constructed. The Bureau of Reclamation continues to provide water to the
western states at artificially low prices, while the agency’s policies continue
to create economic distortion and environmental damage.
With current projects underfunded and the system in need of
reform, the Bureau should focus on existing projects rather than starting new
ones. Alternatively, Congress should revamp the cost-sharing criteria to
require more investment from water users, and revisit federal policy concerning
water rights, water transfers, and water pricing in the western U.S. Further
privatization of water services could also help to improve efficiency and the
quality of the water utilities being provided.
Department of Energy
The bill provides the Department of Energy with $30.0
billion in funding for 2017. This is a slight increase above the 2016 enacted
level and about $1.5 billion below the President’s requested level. This
includes $12.9 billion for the Department’s National Nuclear Security
Administration which includes Weapons and Activities, Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation, and Naval Reactors. This represents a $327 million increase
over the 2016 level. While the increase in funding for nuclear weapons is
warranted, Congress should ensure that the funds are aimed at weapons programs
rather than non-weapons activities and support programs.
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy, and
Nuclear Energy. The bill provides $1.8 billion for Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, $248 million below last year’s level and over $1 billion less
than the President’s request. These programs have received numerous funding
increases in the past several years and these reductions are a step in the
right direction.
The Department of Energy should not use taxpayer dollars to
address cost reduction, risk reduction, or energy savings for any energy source
or technology. These are activities the private sector can and will undertake
if the investment is seen as worth the risk. Such wasteful spending is not
unique, however, to Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Congress should
eliminate similar spending activities for oil, nuclear, or conventional
electricity sources such as coal and natural gas. Regrettably, the bill instead
recommends increasing spending for many fossil-fuel programs.
Yucca Mountain
The bill provides $150 million for the Department of Energy
and $20 million for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the purpose of
completing the licensing process of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage
facility. This bill also calls for sound policy by clearly stating that none of
these funds may be used to terminate activities related to review of Yucca
Mountain or activities “that irrevocably remove the possibility” of a
repository there. Funding the completion of Yucca Mountain’s license review is
necessary for several reasons:
The federal government is currently required to do so under
current law.
Ratepayers have set aside sufficient funds to complete the
review.
There is a need for deep geologic storage, like what could
be made available at Yucca Mountain.
The license brings all information to the fore for Congress
to make wise decisions about the future of nuclear waste management.
Policy Riders
The following are crucial policy riders to the House Water
and Energy appropriations bill.
Clean Water Act (CWA) and “fill material” regulation. Section
108 of the bill would prohibit the Corps from redefining “fill material” or
“discharge of fill material” under the CWA regulations. There is concern that
the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could redefine the
terms in a manner that would require mining companies to secure Section 402
permits as opposed to Section 404 permits for various mining activities. While there are certainly obstacles
to securing Section 404 permits, Section 402 permits are even more stringent,
and industry groups have argued that they would effectively prohibit numerous
mining activities. Existing regulations provide more than
adequate environmental protection without imposing unnecessary restrictions
that could harm the mining industry and the communities that benefit from
mining operations.
Dredge-and-fill permits and the “recapture” provision. Under
the CWA, Section 404 permits are not required for normal farming activities,
construction of stock ponds, and other related activities. However, there are
significant exceptions, including under what is referred to as the “recapture”
provision. The American Farm Bureau Federation
explained this provision as:
[W]here discharges of dredged or fill material are used to
bring land into a new use (e.g. making wetlands amenable to farming) and impair
the reach or reduce the scope of jurisdictional waters, those discharges are
not exempt. The Agencies have broadly interpreted the “recapture” provision to
apply even when the “new use” is simply a change from one crop to another crop.
Section 109 of the House bill would limit the application of
the recapture provision. This would help to prevent the weakening of the
exemptions that are critical for farmers and ranchers.
Waters of the United States rule. Section 110 of the
bill would prohibit the Corps from using funds to implement the proposed
“waters of the United States” rule. This controversial rule, published
by both the Corps and the EPA, would greatly expand the types of waters that
could be covered under the CWA from most ditches to waters that are actually
dry land most of the time. Fortunately, the Sixth Circuit Court
of Appeals issued a stay, blocking implementation of the rule. Congress should
not rely, however, on the judicial branch to strike down this rule.
National Ocean Policy Initiative. The bill prohibits
the use of any funds to implement President Obama’s National Ocean Policy
Initiative executive order. The executive order came shortly after British
Petroleum’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and is an incremental move toward
greater, unnecessary authority over oil and gas permits for offshore drilling.
Conclusion
The 2017 House Energy and Water Development appropriations
bill commendably includes policies that limit the scope of government in some
areas. This bill, however, does not go far enough in reducing spending,
ultimately increasing the overall size and scope of government. It continues to
fund certain programs, such as Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and other
energy research programs, that have produced questionable results and are not
core functions of the federal government. The bill has flaws but does make
progress in some areas. Members of the House should continue to improve upon
the bill and lower the overall spending level.
No comments:
Post a Comment