[Senate Report 107-328]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 745
107th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 107-328
======================================================================
A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE PROJECT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AT SMITH
ISLAND, MARYLAND
_______
November 4, 2002.--Ordered to be printed
Filed, under the authority of the order of the Senate of October 17,
2002
_______
Mr. Jeffords, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[to accompany S. 2984]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred a bill (S. 2984) to authorize the project for
environmental restoration at Smith Island, Maryland having
considered the same, reports favorably without amendment and
recommends that the bill do pass.
General Statement and Background
Projects and project modifications are ready for
authorization by Congress after they have completed a
reconnaissance and a feasibility study and received a positive
recommendation from the Chief of Engineers in the form of a
completed, signed Chief's Report. The project authorized by S.
2984 has a completed, signed Chief's Report and has received a
positive recommendation. This bill authorizes a project for
environmental restoration at Smith Island, Maryland.
This project is located in the Chesapeake Bay on Smith
Island, located about 95 miles south of Baltimore. The island
straddles the Maryland-Virginia State line, but all of the
population and all project features are on the Maryland side.
Smith Island is comprised of 97 percent emergent wetlands. The
project area is within the largest contiguous submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) bed in the Bay. This area has experienced
continual decrease in coverage of SAV. It is believed that this
is due in part to erosion taking place on Smith Island. In the
last 150 years, Smith Island lost over 3300 acres of wetlands.
Between 1992 and 1998, it lost almost 2400 acres. This project
will protect and restore lost wetlands through the construction
of offshore breakwaters, which will protect Smith Island from
erosion. The Chief's Report was completed in October 2001, and
the project received a favorable recommendation.
Objectives of the Legislation
S. 2984 authorizes the project.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Smith Island, Maryland
This section authorizes the project at a cost of $7,400,000
with an estimated Federal cost of $4,800,000 and a non-Federal
cost of $2,600,000.
Legislative History
Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski introduced S. 2984 on
September 19, 2002. The bill was referred to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works. The Committee considered the bill
in a business meeting on September 26, 2002 and ordered the
bill reported to the Senate.
This type of project authorization bill would normally be
included in a Comprehensive Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA). However, the Administration did not submit a WRDA
proposal to Congress this year for the first time since 1986.
In the absence of a WRDA bill, the Committee passed S. 2984 to
ensure that this project which has met requirements to be
authorized can move forward.
Rollcall Votes
The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to
consider S. 2984 on September 26, 2002. The committee favorably
reported the bill by voice vote. Senators Smith and Voinovich
recorded a ``no'' vote.
Regulatory Impact Statement
The bill does not create any additional regulatory burdens,
nor will it cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of
individuals.
Mandates Assessment
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4), the committee finds that S. 2984 would
impose no unfunded mandates on State, local, or tribal
governments.
Cost of Legislation
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 7, 2002.
Hon. James M. Jeffords, Chairman,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2984, a bill to
authorize a project for environmental restoration at Smith
Island, Maryland.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie
Middleton, who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen.
----------
S. 2984, A bill to authorize a project for environmental restoration at
Smith Island, Maryland, as ordered reported by the Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works on September 26, 2002
Summary
S. 2984 would authorize the Secretary of the Army through
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to conduct an environmental
restoration project on Smith Island in the Chesapeake Bay. This
project would be designed to protect the shoreline, restore
wetlands, and control erosion. The bill would authorize a total
project cost of $7.4 million (in 2000 dollars) that could be
adjusted for inflation. Under this bill, the Federal share of
the cost would be $4.8 million and the non-Federal share of the
cost would be $2.6 million.
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, including
adjustments for anticipated inflation, CBO estimates that the
Federal cost for implementing S. 2984 would total about $5
million over the 2003-2007 period. Enacting S. 2984 would not
affect direct spending or revenues.
S. 2984 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal
governments. The Federal assistance authorized by this bill
would benefit any State and local governments choosing to
participate in this project. Any costs they would incur to
comply with the conditions of this assistance, including
matching requirements, would be voluntary.
Estimated Cost to the Federal Government
The estimated budgetary impact of S. 2984 is shown in the
following table. The costs of this legislation fall within
budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).
By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO
APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level... 0 2 2 1 0
Estimated Outlays............... 0 1 2 2 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of Estimate
For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 2984 will be enacted
in fiscal year 2003 and that amounts will be appropriated to
meet the Corps' anticipated construction schedule for the
project. Based on information from the Army Corps of Engineers,
CBO estimates that implementing S. 2984 would cost about $5
million over the 2003-2007 period, including adjustments for
anticipated inflation. (That amount reflects the Federal share
of the project's cost.)
Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Impact
S. 2984 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on State,
local, or tribal governments. The Federal assistance authorized
by this bill would benefit any State and local governments
choosing to participate in this project. Any costs they would
incur to comply with the conditions of this assistance,
including matching requirements, would be voluntary.
Estimate Prepared By: Federal Costs: Julie Middleton; Impact on
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller; Impact
on the Private Sector: Lauren Marks.
Estimate Approved By: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Minority Views of Senators Smith and Voinovich
While we understand that this project would have met
committee criteria if it were under consideration for the
biennial Water Resources Development Act, we oppose its passage
as freestanding legislation. Given the lack of a Water
Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2002, we think it is a bad
precedent to set for the Committee to authorize projects
piecemeal, regardless of the favorable status of the Chief of
Engineer's report. It is our belief that proceeding in this
manner undermines the WRDA process and could result in its
ultimate collapse. Furthermore, authorizing this project
outside the context of a WRDA bill reduces the possibility of
pursuing key policy provisions.
Changes in Existing Law
Section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate
requires the committee to publish changes in existing law made
by the bill as reported. Passage of this bill will make no
changes to existing law.