U.S. ports at “crossroads” without adequate dredging

U.S. ports at “crossroads” without adequate dredging

U.S. ports at “crossroads” without adequate dredging

A group of maritime industry associations and companies collectively warned a House subcommittee Wednesday that U.S. ports are at a “crossroads” without much-needed dredging.
   “Without a channel dredged to its authorized depth, nothing else comes into play,” said James H.I. Weakley, president of Lake Carriers’ Association and a representative of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund Fairness Coalition, to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s water resources and environment subcommittee.

Weakley

   “Attracting new customers, dealing with labor issues, environmental concerns and the public — all go away — because without a properly dredged channel, business goes away,” he said.
   The coalition cited a recent Army Corps of Engineers study that found almost 30 percent of the 95,550 vessels calls at U.S. ports are constrained due to inadequate channel depths.
   “Dredging can literally make or break our industry, and a lack of dredging is an issue throughout the United States,” Weakley said.
   The Corps estimates that removing the backlog of 18 million cubic yards of sediment in the Great Lakes harbor channels alone would cost more than $230 million. (May American Shipper, page 38.)
   “In some cases, ports on the Great Lakes have actually shut down due to inadequate dredging,” Weakley said. “There are similar examples of dredging problems in ports and harbors on all coasts of our nation.”
   The coalition blames the U.S. port dredging crisis on the federal government’s failure to spend tax revenues collected through the Harbor Maintenance Tax. Shippers pay the 0.125 percent ad valorem tax on imports and domestic cargo.
   In 2007, the government collected $1.4 billion for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, but spent only $751 million for dredging projects. The trust fund now holds a $4.7 billion surplus.
   The coalition urged House lawmakers to draft legislation that mandates the fund be used for its intended purpose — to dredge the nation’s harbors.
   “Our coalition believes Congress should consider an approach similar to that taken with the Highway Trust Fund in 1998 and with the Airport and Airway Trust Fund in 2000,” Weakley said. “In those cases, Congress legislatively enacted ‘firewalls’ around the trust funds — essentially guaranteeing minimum levels of spending that could only be used to support eligible projects.
   “Although there are some variations between the highway, aviation and harbor maintenance trusts, the point of a firewall in each case is the same — ensuring that monies from a tax would be used for their intended purpose and not merely for deficit reduction,” he said. ' Chris Gillis