Water Resources Development Act of 2007

Water Resources Development Act of 2007
U.S. Government · Public domain · source
Name	Water Resources Development Act of 2007
Enacted by	110th United States Congress
Effective date	December 26, 2007
Public law	Public Law 110–114
Introduced in	United States Senate
Sponsor	Ted Stevens (sponsor in Senate version), Jim Oberstar (House)
Committees	Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Passed	December 2007
Signed by	George W. Bush
Signed date	December 26, 2007

Water Resources Development Act of 2007 The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 was a comprehensive United States federal statute authorizing water resources projects and policies administered principally by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and enacted by the 110th United States Congress. The law combined project-specific authorizations with policy directives affecting coastal restoration, flood control, navigation, and ecosystem restoration across multiple states and territories. Its enactment followed long-standing legislative patterns exemplified by earlier statutes such as the Rivers and Harbors Act series and prior Water Resources Development Acts.

Background and Legislative History

Congressional action leading to the act drew on procedural precedent in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Debates referenced prior legislation including the Water Resources Development Act of 2000, the Water Resources Development Act of 2002, and the WRDA 2000 enactments, as well as executive policy under George W. Bush. Sponsors such as Ted Stevens and Jim Oberstar negotiated across regional caucuses including the Louisiana delegation and the Florida delegation to resolve differences over coastal projects, navigation improvements, and flood protection priorities. Stakeholders included the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, regional authorities like the South Florida Water Management District, and nonfederal partners such as the State of Louisiana and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Hearings featured testimony from representatives of the Mississippi River Commission, the Chesapeake Bay Program, and the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force.

Key Provisions and Authorizations

Major authorizations in the act covered navigation channel deepening and maintenance for ports such as Port of New York and New Jersey, Port of Houston, and Port of Long Beach, as well as inland projects on the Mississippi River, Columbia River, and Ohio River. The statute included provisions for ecosystem restoration in regions including the Everglades, the Chesapeake Bay, the Louisiana Delta, and the San Francisco Bay estuary. It authorized construction, study, and modification of flood-control works tying into programs like the National Flood Insurance Program and coordination with FEMA. The act amended cost-sharing formulas for projects involving nonfederal sponsors such as parishes and state agencies, and defined criteria for project feasibility studies to be conducted under the Principles, Requirements, and Guidelines used by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.

Funding and Appropriations

Although authorizations do not automatically appropriate funds, the act set spending ceilings and project cost limits that affected annual appropriations by the United States Congress and committees including the House Appropriations Committee. Funding mechanisms contemplated a mix of federal appropriations, cost sharing with state and local sponsors such as the State of Florida and State of Louisiana, and contributions from port authorities like the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Budget considerations intersected with wider fiscal debates involving the Office of Management and Budget and appropriations riders in spending bills for the Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program. The act impacted entitlement-linked programs and leveraged authorities such as the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for dredging and channel maintenance.

Environmental and Regulatory Impacts

Provisions in the law required coordination with federal agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for compliance with statutes such as the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. Ecosystem restoration projects referenced habitats for species listed under the Endangered Species Act like federally protected fish and bird species in the Everglades National Park and the Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Regulatory implications affected permitting under the Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program and Section 404 dredge-and-fill permitting connected to the Clean Water Act. The act prompted coordination with regional partnerships such as the Greater Everglades Partnership and the Gulf of Mexico Alliance to integrate restoration objectives with coastal resilience planning after events like Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Ike.

Implementation and Projects

Implementation responsibilities rested primarily with the United States Army Corps of Engineers through district offices including the New Orleans District, the Baltimore District, the Sacramento District, and the Galveston District. Specific projects authorized for construction, modification, or study included navigation improvements at Port of New Orleans, flood risk reduction measures in the Mississippi Delta, ecosystem restoration in the Florida Everglades, and sediment management programs beneficial to the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority. Nonfederal sponsors ranged from state agencies such as the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to municipal entities like the City of New Orleans and regional bodies including the South Florida Water Management District. Project selection and prioritization interacted with programs administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and academic partners including Louisiana State University and University of Florida for technical studies.

Controversies and Legal Challenges

The act generated controversies over cost allocation, environmental trade-offs, and project selection, eliciting litigation and administrative challenges involving stakeholders such as environmental NGOs (including Sierra Club affiliates), industry groups like the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association, and state governments including State of Louisiana and State of Alaska. Legal disputes invoked interpretations of statutes like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act and administrative law doctrines adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and district courts. Contentious projects—ranging from deepening navigation channels to marsh restoration—prompted debate in publications such as reports from the Government Accountability Office and testimony before committees in both chambers of Congress. Policy disputes tied into broader federal debates over disaster response following Hurricane Katrina and infrastructure investment strategies advanced in plans like the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program.

Category:United States federal public land legislation