Editorial: White House Water Policy Move Could Pose Threat

The ongoing revision of the Principles and Standards for Water Resources Planning (formerly known as Principles and Guidelines) by a White House office, the Council on Environmental Quality, seems like the kind of arcane Washington story of interest only to those inside the Beltway, full of boring bureaucratic details and back-room maneuvering. The way the CEQ has been proceeding is very much behind the scenes.

Nevertheless, this effort is vitally important for not only the inland shipping industry, but for all industries located on, or concerned with, the inland waterways. The Principles and Standards used to be prepared by the Corps of Engineers (the last time in 1983) until they were taken over by the White House. The Corps operated under various laws, rulings and other constraints, which is one reason why it takes the Corps so long to complete a revision. The White House apparently does not feel bound by these constraints.

The new P&S will be binding on all federal agencies that have anything to do with water policy. In the CEQ’s vision of the P&S, environmental concerns are given a greater weight than any economic benefits of activities on floodplains and waterways.

If the P&S go through the way the CEQ apparently wants them to, towboat companies and terminal operators could wake up to find that all kinds of expensive new federal restrictions have been imposed on their operations. Terminal operators might find that once-routine expansion plans are suddenly being denied or scrutinized closely.

Fortunately, there would seem to be time to influence the process. A public comment period runs until March 5. After that, the draft P&S goes to the National Academy of Sciences, whose review won’t be complete until November.

But is there time, in fact? The National Waterways Conference sent out an alert January 6 because the CEQ was moving ahead with a second stage of revisions to the P&S, even before the public comment period was closed and well before the scientists had been heard from. Observers can legitimately wonder whether this is an administration effort to do an end run around established procedures and ram through its initiatives in secrecy.

Recent events have shown that the American public is fed up with a political elite that is out of touch and not focused on jobs and the economy. The P&S revisions could well prove to be another job-killer that imposes more costs on inland waterway industries that not only provide good-paying jobs, but are a vital link in our transportation system that supports much of our economic life.

The P&S revision process calls for the utmost in transparency and public and industry involvement. We must demand nothing less from the CEQ.

The Waterways Journal encourages letters to the editor.
Have something on your mind?
Send letters to: jshoulberg@waterwaysjournal.net.
(Please indicate whether or not your letter is intended for publication.)