Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 5754 - Water Resources Development Act of 1992

(House Floor)
(Roe (D) NJ)

The Administration strongly opposes enactment of H.R. 5754, because the bill departs from the water resources policies and principles that the Administration and Congress have adhered to since 1986. Further, the cost and number of projects and programs that would be authorized by the bill far exceed what realistically can be expected to be funded in the foreseeable future. Additionally, the Administration's proposal to recover the cost of operating recreational areas is not included in the bill.

Unless H.R. 5754 is substantially amended to delete its numerous unacceptable provisions, the Secretary of the Army would recommend that the president veto the bill. Among the most objectionable provisions are those which would:

—   Violate the cost-sharing principles established by the landmark Water Resources Development Act of 1986.

—   Authorize projects and programs that are not the responsibility of the Federal Government or within the traditional missions of the Army Corps of Engineers. There is no justification for undertaking such costly activities, particularly during this period of high budget deficits.

—   Authorize billions of dollars for projects or project modifications which have not been subject to the established water resources review process. Such a review is crucial to determine a project's (1) economic justification, (2) environmental and engineering feasibility, and (3) compliance with Administration programs and policies.

—   Expand Federal funding for disposal areas for operation and maintenance dredging at navigation projects around the country. Such an expansion would require the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to provide more than $1 billion in additional funds. This would require a significant increase in the port use tax imposed on importers, exporters, and shippers.

— Needlessly duplicate existing programs of other Federal agencies.

There are more than one hundred specific provisions which are unacceptable for the reasons stated above. In addition, the Administration strongly objects to any amendment that would modify the discount rate and criteria now used to evaluate the benefits and cost of Federal water resources projects. The established rate and evaluation criteria ensure that scarce Federal and non-Federal resources are wisely and appropriately invested.

The bill also contains in excess of 50 other provisions which the Administration finds troublesome. For example, the Administration strongly opposes the bill's requirement that Senior Executive Service (SES) employees of the Corps of Engineers be given special locality pay adjustments. Currently, no SES employee receives such adjustments. This provision is inconsistent with the President's authority, under the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act, to decide which categories of employees should receive these adjustments.

The Administration urges the House to adopt the Administration's proposal, transmitted by the Department of the Army-Civil Works on March 11, 1992, and introduced as S. 2500, rather than enact H.R. 5754.

Pay-As-You-Go Scoring

H.R. 5754 would increase Federal receipts and is, therefore, subject to the pay-as-you-go requirement of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1991 (OBRA). OMB's preliminary scoring estimates of this bill are presented in the table below. Final scoring of this legislation may deviate from these estimates. If H.R. 5754 were enacted, final OMB scoring estimates would be published within 5 days of enactment, as required by OBRA. The cumulative effects of all enacted legislation on direct spending will be issued in monthly reports transmitted to Congress.

Estimates For Pay-As-You-Go
($ in millions)