|
The Administration appreciates Congress' commitment to address the serious
problems facing the Salton Sea. Although the Administration endorses the
concept of restoring the Salton Sea, it strongly opposes H.R. 3267. The
Administration has worked and will continue to work with the Congress to
develop legislation that we can support. However, the amended bill
contains certain provisions that would compromise the Government's ability
to develop a cost-effective, environmentally sensitive restoration for the
Salton Sea ecosystem. Some of the bill's provisions also raise significant
constitutional issues as described below.
The Salton Sea ecosystem is under severe stress. Although it currently
functions as the permanent home for a number of wildlife and fish species
and as an important stop for thousands of migratory birds, its increasing
salinity, combined with other contaminants in the ecosystem, are harming
much of this wildlife. In recent years, there have been a significant
number of serious bird and fish kills at the Sea. In addition, the Sea's
value as a recreational resource has declined.
As a result of the Administration's concern about the situation, the
Secretary of the Interior has initiated an open review process under the
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to identify and evaluate the potential
options for the Salton Sea on an expedited schedule.
The Secretary has also been working with leaders from the State of
California, the Salton Sea Authority, the Torrez-Martinez Tribe, and the
local area to coordinate and focus research and funding related to the
Sea's restoration. As part of these intergovernmental efforts, a Science
Subcommittee has been formed to address scientific issues related to the
Sea.
H.R. 3267 is inconsistent, as described below, with the principles that
the Administration believes should underlie the Salton Sea restoration
effort.
- Preauthorization of Project Construction. H.R. 3267 would
authorize $350 million to construct an as yet unidentified remedy that
would be selected following the completion of the NEPA review process. The
Administration believes that this type of authorization is premature and
would, instead, favor legislation that authorizes and appropriates funding
for scoping and feasibility studies.
- Funding Mechanisms. H.R. 3267 would authorize construction
funds to be appropriated jointly to the EPA Administrator and the Secretary
of the Interior to fund a Department of the Interior project. In addition,
H.R. 3267 would allow funding for the project to be derived from the Land
and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Administration opposes this type
of funding scheme and the unprecedented use of LWCF funds for water
projects.
- Cost Sharing. H.R. 3267 would exempt irrigators from cost
sharing responsibilities for project implementation. In addition, the
Federal government would be required to assume all costs associated with
NEPA compliance, feasibility studies, and research. The Administration
believes that it is premature to exempt any parties from cost sharing
requirements.
- Limitations on Liability. H.R. 3267 would include broad
limitations on liability for the local water and irrigation districts, the
Salton Sea Authority, and the San Diego Water Authority for any actions
taken under the bill. This would have the effect of transferring all
liability to the Federal government. The Administration objects to
exposing the Federal government to extensive liability for virtually all
actions associated with the Salton Sea.
- Clean Water Act (CWA) Exemption. The bill would exempt certain
activities from CWA requirements. The Administration supports the
enforcement of all environmental laws designed to protect the health and
safety of the American people, and opposes such an exemption.
- Congressional Review. The bill would require the Secretary to
submit the Salton Sea feasibility study to certain congressional committees
and make initiation of project construction contingent on approval by these
committees. The Department of Justice advises that provisions granting
congressional committees the authority to approve or disapprove Executive
actions without the enactment of legislation would be
unconstitutional.
The Administration prefers the approach taken in the proposed Miller
substitute which would authorize a study of options to restore the Salton
Sea, and then require the Secretary, in part, to submit a report on the
recommendations of the study. The Miller substitute would require action
on the part of the Secretary without assuming or providing funding for
undefined and costly construction. The Administration would support the
Miller substitute.
|
