Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes2004-046 Sponsored by: Shealy CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2004-46 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING CHANGES TO THE U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE) CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM (CAP) AND SUPPORTING FUNDING OF THE PROGRAM AS AUTHORIZED UNDER PL 86-645 WHEREAS, the USACE operates a series of CAP to fund small-scale water resource and environmental restoration projects; and WHEREAS, CAPs are designed to provide authority to plan, design and construct small projects that are limited in scope and complexity, the chief advantage being the Chief of the Engineers has authority to plan and build certain projects without the specific Congressional authority found in larger, more complex projects; and WHEREAS, Section 107 of the 1960 River and Harbor Act (PL 86-645) is an example of a CAP that is critical to future harbor projects in Alaska; and WHEREAS, the current levels of $35 million for the total national program limit and $4 million maximum per project has not been adjusted in over 17 years and has not been fully funded in recent years ($9 million in FY2003 and $9 million in FY2004); and WHEREAS, the cost to complete 107 projects has risen approximately 60% since 1986 according to the ACOE cost index for navigation projects (EMIII0-2-1304) meaning that in order to maintain the purchasing power of$4 million in 1986 dollars, at least $7 million must be spent today; and WHEREAS, the USACE states in their Engineering Regulation 1105-2-100 that "This mission works best when the program is used to solve the problems for which it was designed, leaving complex projects to the specifically authorized program and very small projects to other Federal or non-Federal entities"; and WHEREAS, most USACE navigation projects in Alaska are simple and limited in their scope, yet most of them are required to be approved through specifically authorized USACE procedures reserved for more complex projects and must await congressional funding through the Water Resources Development Act process, usually spanning several years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: ... CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2004-46 Section 1. The City of Seward supports raising the total funding for the Section 107 national program to $56 million and moving the maximum per project limit to $10 million. All but four ofthe most recent USACE construction projects in Alaska would be less than this proposed amount. Section 2. Smaller municipalities are at a distinct disadvantage when competing with larger communities in the General Investigative Process. The City of Seward recommends limiting the Section 107 CAP to communities with populations of 500,000 or less. Section 3. The City of Seward urges all Alaskan communities and legislative representatives to support continued improvement to navigational improvements in Alaska by increasing the total funding authorized by congress in PL 86-645. Section 4. This resolution shall take affect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska this 26th day of April 2004. THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA .^} . . : ~ ..... " II . 1 . x... l.-~. ,Ic-<-....... Vanta Shafer, MaYdr AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Branson, Dunham, Valdatta, Clark, Amberg, Shafer None None None ATTEST: (City Seal) "'"....,,,~ !il'''''' Or S€'I1/",#. I~~ofi~~~\ "I'f ~~<,jJ _ ~~.. .. ,~ :1' ---- ! ~ , . S^'r.IAT . - : 0 : ~.c:U....l: 0 : J: -:_ ~ ~ ~ : ~ "I I. .. ... . , ('\ . V'~ ...'" ' .. .;.. (.: '~"" J\I~ 1 '\~ ....~~ ~ '. '4......- I .' ~ ~ ...,.;:" .'1:: .~...... ~.,) ...~.. '''~I OF p..\.. ,,>,j. ""111"'" I I I COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Meeting Date: April 26, 2004 Through: Phil Shealy, City Manager From: Harbormaster, James B. Beckham Agenda Item: Recommending Changes to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) and Supporting Funding of the Program as Authorized Under PL 86-645. BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: The USACE operates a series of CAP to fund small-scale water resource and environmental restoration projects. These CAPs are designed to provide authority to plan, design and construct small projects that are limited in scope and complexity, the chief advantage being the Chief of the Engineers has authority to plan and build certain projects without the specific Congressional authority found in larger, more complex projects. Section 107 of the 1960 River and Harbor Act (PL 86-645) is an example of a CAP that is critical to future harbor projects in Alaska. The current levels of $35 million for the total national program limit and $4 million maximum per project has not been adjusted in over 17 years and has not been fully funded in recent years ($9 million in FY2003 and $9 million in FY2004). The cost to complete 107 projects has risen approximately 60% since 1986 according to the USACOE cost index for navigation projects (EM1110-2-1304) meaning that in order to maintain the purchasing power of $4 million in 1986 dollars, at least $7 million must be spent today. The USACE states in their Engineering Regulation 1105-2-100 that “This mission works best when the program is used to solve the problems for which it was designed, leaving complex projects to the specifically authorized program and very small projects to other Federal or non-Federal entities”. Most USACE navigation projects in Alaska are simple and limited in their scope, yet most of them are required to be approved through specifically authorized USACE procedures reserved for more complex projects and must await congressional funding through the Water Resources Development Act process, usually spanning several years. The Alaska Association of Harbormasters and Port Administrators supported by resolution raising the total funding for the Section 107 national program to $56 million and moving the maximum per project limit to $10 million. All but four of the most recent USACE construction projects in Alaska would be less than this proposed amount. Smaller municipalities are at a distinct disadvantage when competing with larger communities in the General Investigative Process. Limiting the Section 107 CAP to communities with populations of 500,000 or less would remove this disadvantage and level the playing field for smaller communities. 1. Comprehensive Plan X Economic Development, Small Boat Harbor Development: expand and maximize potential of the existing harbor. Transportation Facilities, Harbors: Continue to support, promote, enhance and develop harbor facilities… 2. Strategic Plan X_ Economic Base ,Improve and Expand Maritime Facilities: complete eastward expansion of the Small Boat Harbor 3. Other: Small Boat Harbor Management Plan X Harbor Development, New Harbor Development and Expansion: …expand the existing harbor… FISCAL NOTE: Approved by Finance Department RECOMMENDATION: Council approves Resolution 2004-46, recommending changes to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) and supporting funding of the program as authorized under PL 86-645. .