After months of negotiations, a joint House-Senate Conference Committee reached an agreement Thursday night on the $8.2 billion Water Resources Reform and Development Act, the bill that could allow Savannah’s harbor deepening to proceed.
Voting on the legislation, which is expected to pass easily, could come as early as May 19.
Committee members U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, U.S. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana and U.S. Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia released this statement Thursday evening:
“We are proud to deliver what the American public wants and needs. This conference report maintains ports and navigation routes for commerce and the movement of goods, provides flood control that protects lives and property and restores vital ecosystems to preserve our natural heritage. This important measure will strengthen our nation’s infrastructure and keep America competitive in the global marketplace.”
Details on specifics in the bill won’t be released until the conference report is filed next week, but U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., said Friday he is confident the compromise includes language that will allow the Savannah port project to proceed.
“It would be a total surprise if it doesn’t,” Isakson told the Associated Press, adding that negotiators have assured him the Savannah port section wasn’t a contentious issue and he could expect to see it in the final compromise bill.
U.S. Rep Jack Kingston, R-Savannah, a longtime supporter of the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project said he also is confident the bill will eliminate the last major hurdle, clearing the way for the state and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to finalize a cost-sharing project partnership agreement and begin construction.
Georgia Ports Authority Executive Director Curtis Foltz was excited but cautious at the news, calling Thursday’s agreement a critical next step but adding “it’s not done until the president signs it into law.”
When that happens, Foltz said, he expected the state and the Corps to immediately conclude the partnership agreement.
That agreement has been in draft form for several months, as both parties had expected wording in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014, approved by Congress in January, would green-light the project early in the year.
Instead, the Obama administration insisted only the water bill — in conference committee since October — could increase the project’s outdated $459 million spending cap by the $193 million now needed for completion.
If the agreement is approved by Congress and signed by the president as expected, Foltz said dredging should begin in the coming months.
“We’ve had to wait so long, you can be sure we’ll move as quickly as possible to start digging,” he said.