[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 127 (Wednesday, October 2, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9849-S9850]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Warner, and Mr. 
        Craig):
  S. 3031. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to reduce 
delays in the development of highway and transit projects, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr President, I rise today to introduce the MEGA STREAM 
ACT. Maximizing Economic Growth for America through Environmental 
Streamlining.
  Moving goods and moving people is what this Nation's transportation 
system is all about. The backbone of our economy. But delays in 
completing transportation projects threaten our economy.
  These delays add to the cost of projects and deny the public the 
benefits of the projects. And those benefits are substantial, improving 
our economy, our competitiveness, and our quality of life. 
Unfortunately, there are delays for many projects, not only for 
controversial or complex projects, and those delays sometimes result 
from the environmental review process.
  My goal is to advance a common sense approach that will both 
strengthen our transportation system and support for our environmental 
laws.
  I doubt that there is a member in this chamber that has not heard 
complaints about delays in developing transportation projects.
  I was privileged to be one of the authors of TEA 21 a revolutionary 
transportation law. I helped write sections 1308 and 1309. These are 
the sections that direct the Secretary of Transportation to find ways 
to expedite the

[[Page S9850]]

project approval process and get construction underway faster.
  I remember working with Senators Warner, Graham, Wyden and Chafee and 
with the House members to come to a compromise on the environmental 
streamlining provisions included in TEA 21.
  At the time, I had heard from my Department of Transportation and 
from others about how cumbersome a process it is to come to completion 
on a highway project. Everyone who worked on TEA 21 both the House and 
Senate, wanted to include a direction to the USDOT to streamline the 
planning and project development processes for the states.
  We were very clear, the environment and the environmental reviews 
should NOT get short shrift! But, we needed to find a way to make it 
easier to get a project done, eliminate unnecessary delays, move faster 
and with as little paperwork as possible.
  I cannot over-emphasize that the planning and environmental 
provisions of TEA-21 need to be implemented in a way that will 
streamline and expedite, not complicate, the process of delivering 
transportation projects.
  These projects that we're trying to expedite provide good paying jobs 
for the folks in Montana and for every State. Contracts must be met in 
a timely manner.
  That is why Congress directed the USDOT to include certain elements 
in their regulations on streamlining.
  We included concepts to be incorporated--like concurrent 
environmental reviews by agencies and reasonable deadlines for the 
agencies to follow when completing their reviews.
  Certainly we did not legislate an easy task to the USDOT. Trying to 
coordinate so many separate agencies is like trying to herd cats.
  The whole concept of environmental streamlining, that is, to make the 
permit and approval process work more smoothly and effectively, while 
still ensuring protection of the environment, is one of the more-
difficult challenges of TEA-21.
  So I waited for the rules to come out. And waited. And two years 
after the passage of TEA-21 I finally got them.
  I have to tell you, I was very disappointed when those rules came out 
in May of 2000. I believe those regulations hit very far from the mark.
  Those regulations were supposed to help the State DOTS get their jobs 
done better and more efficiently--not make their jobs harder.
  They were supposed to answer questions--but what is contained in 
those documents raises even more questions than before because they 
were vague where they needed to be precise.
  Those proposed rules would make it even harder, if not impossible to 
come to a decision.
  It would have been even more difficult for States to deliver their 
programs. Contracts wouldn't get met and jobs would be lost.
  So the DOT solicited comments, which I understand were overwhelmingly 
negative, and went back to the drawing board and we never heard from 
them again. Even when a new President took over. New administration. No 
new rules.
  And today we have nothing. We're exactly where we were in 1998.
  As for sections 1308 and 1309. Nothing has been done to implement 
them. Its just as cumbersome today to bring a highway project to 
completion.
  The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held 4 hearings on 
the subject of environmental streamlining since the passage of TEA 21 
in 1998.
  A few weeks ago, on the eve of the fourth EPW hearing, the President 
signed an Executive Order calling for a handful of projects to be 
supervised by the heads of USDOT and CEQ. The highest levels would 
personally make sure that there were timely environmental reviews.
  That would have been a good start in 1998. But, its too little too 
late now.
  We are on the verge of reauthorization of TEA 21. This time, I would 
like to see us specifically legislate environmental streamlining. No 
waiting for regulations or more executive orders. Congress needs to be 
clear about what they want to see and put it into law.
  To that end, along with Senator Crapo and others, I am introducing a 
proposal on environmental streamlining. It is part of a series of bills 
that we are introducing on highway reauthorization.
  This bill will address three issues.
  First, the USDOT needs to be the lead agency on at least two 
requirements, ``Purpose and Need'' for a project and ``Scope of 
Alternatives.'' This will make sure that any stalemates are resolved 
quickly.
  Second, we should allow States to take over the role of the USDOT if 
they can meet certain requirements and if they choose to take on that 
role. This will eliminate another step of bureaucracy.
  Last, we must ensure that resource agencies act in a timely manner. 
When it comes time for an agency like Fish and Wildlife to assess the 
extent of damage (if any) to a wetlands or the Army Corps of Engineers 
to issue a permit, these agencies shouldn't be able to take years to 
make these decisions.
  We need to legislate specific time limits for them to follow. No 
answer at all is not acceptable. It is unacceptable for agencies to sit 
on their decision for years. We can't make them issue the permit and we 
don't want to, but we can make them make a decision in a timely manner.
  The rest of the world works on deadlines. They can too.
  These three things will help to expedite the planning and project 
development processes.
  These three things are not meant to be comprehensive streamlining, 
but I believe that they will be a big help and a great start. The bill 
we will introduce will be a solid beginning to Congress setting some 
specific guidelines for expediting the planning and environmental 
review processes.
  Once again, I want to reiterate that I want to make sure that 
environmental laws and policies are obeyed to the letter. But, there's 
got to be a faster, easier way to do the work that needs to be done on 
our surface transportation system, while continuing to protect the 
environment.
  I believe our bill will be a means to those ends.
                                 ______