Port Maintenance Aff Classic bt file completed by the following hard working students
Download 0.92 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Solvency Deficit
- Perm do Both
A2: Off-CaseA2: States CPLinks to PTXState dredging causes political fights over spending in Congress Barnett, 12, reporter for Greenville News and writer for USA Today (Ron, “East Coast ports scramble to dig deep, for supersize ships,” USA Today , May 24 2012 http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-05-24/deepening-harbors/55653540/1)//BL Ports on the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, whose harbors have been too shallow to accommodate these behemoths, are gearing up to spend more than $40 billion over the next five years to deepen their shipping channels and make other upgrades, according to Aaron Ellis, director of communications for the American Association of Port Authorities.¶ The ports of Norfolk, Va., and Baltimore have completed projects that put them in position to be the first to receive the big ships, some of them 1,110 feet long with the capacity to haul up to 13,000 boxcar-size freight containers, Ellis said.¶ •The Army Corps of Engineers is expected to finish dredging a 50-foot deep channel to three terminals in New York Harbor by the end of the year and to the main New York terminal by 2014, according to New York/New Jersey Port Authority spokesman Hunter Pendarvis. The authority has committed $1 billion to raise the Bayonne Bridge by 64 feet to allow the bigger ships to pass under, he said.¶ •Miami-Dade County reached an agreement in April with environmental groups that had raised concerns about the Port of Miami's Deep Dredge project. It is expected to be able to handle the big ships by 2014 or soon thereafter, according to Ellis.¶ •The Corps of Engineers completed a study in April finding that Savannah, Ga.'s proposed $652-million channel deepening project is viable.¶ •The Corps is in the midst of a study of Charleston harbor, said Jim Newsome, president and CEO of the South Carolina Ports Authority.¶ •Philadelphia and Corpus Christi are currently involved in dredging projects, according to Ellis. Boston, Jacksonville, Canaveral and Freeport, Texas, are among other ports pursuing deeper channels, he said. ¶ The association is lobbying Congress for approval, which is required by the Constitution for such projects, and for funding. But, "Because freight doesn't really have as strong a voice as the movement of people, it's going to take a lot of heavy lifting," Ellis said.¶ "We're fighting hard enough in this country just to keep our navigation channels maintained at their authorized depths and widths."¶ South Carolina's Legislature this month designated $300 million to the Charleston project — enough to do the job even if the federal government doesn't come up with its 40% match.¶ "I think everyone is starting to suspect that there may not be enough federal funding for any harbor, basically, today," Newsome said. "So we have to operate under the assumption that we're not going to get held up by a lack of federal funding."¶ There are other hurdles, both environmental and political.¶ U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has introduced legislation that would require the Corps of Engineers to rank the ports for funding priority. ¶ Even if federal money isn't approved, congressional authorization would be needed for the work to go ahead, said Lt. Col. Ed Chamberlayne, commander of the Corps of Engineers Charleston District. Solvency DeficitSee Fed Key warrants in Solvency and solvency for specific advantagesA2: Privatization CPCP is normal meansNormal means is USACE contracting out to private sector Frittelli, 2011 – Specialist in Transportation Policy (John, “Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund Expenditures”, Congressional ReseaCch Service, January 10, 2011, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41042.pdf) Over the last decade, maintenance dredging has accounted for about seven out of every ten federal dredging dollars and about 84% of the total material dredged (construction dredging has accounted for the remaining three dollars and 16% of total material dredged). About 80% of maintenance dredging is performed by private contractors under the USACE’s direction. On a per cubic yard basis, construction dredging is over twice as expensive as maintenance dredging. In constant dollars (2000), the USACE calculates that maintenance dredging costs per cubic yard have increased from $1.53 in 1963 to $3.19 in 2008.8 The Corps dredges only the federally designated channels in harbors. Port authorities are responsible for dredging berths, which is the area next to the pier where a ship docks. Perm do BothPrivatization perm solves best- Federal government expected to repay private investors IWR 6/20 – Institute for Water Resources (“U.S. Port and Inland Waterways Modernization: Preparing for Post-Panamax Vessels”, Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, June 20, 2012, http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/docs/portswaterways/rpt/June_20_U.S._Port_and_Inland_Waterways_Preparing_for_Post_Panamax_Vessels.pdf)//BL The creation of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) has been proposed as a solution to supporting¶ infrastructure modernization in a number of different venues. The success in forming such¶ partnerships varies, but there are successes that can be pointed to for what has been termed¶ "fixed guideway" infrastructure. However, a basic requirement for private participation in a PPP¶ is assurance that there will be adequate revenues to allow the private entity to recover its costs¶ and earn a return on investment from joining the partnership. Therefore, for a PPP to work in¶ the inland waterway context it would require a commitment on behalf of the federal¶ government to honor payment commitments made in the PPP contracts.¶ A PPP contract would define the sharing of risk from sources outside the control of either party¶ (e.g., unexpected technical difficulties in executing the project) and the retention of other risks¶ by the public entity (e.g., changes in regulatory rules or regulatory decisions that affect costs or¶ technical feasibility¶ 121¶ ). Therefore, for a PPP to work in the inland waterway context would¶ require contracts that address the sharing and assignment of these risks. Solvency DeficitP3’s require federal approval to change federal regulations Feigenbaum, 12 - transportation policy analyst with Reason Foundation (Baruch, “Government Bureaucracy Is Sinking Port Deepening Projects,” reason.org 2/13, http://reason.org/news/show/1012613.html)//BL Most ports do not have the local funds to deepen their harbors. The cost of deepening ranges from $600 million for the port of Savannah to $1.3 billion for the port of New York. ¶ Ports must go through a cumbersome, lengthy, and unpredictable process to obtain federal funding that is governed by the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (WRDA 2007). The first task in the current federal process is a reconnaissance study, which examines the cost-benefit ratio. Conducting the study requires a Congressional authorization and an appropriation and must show a cost-benefit ratio of 1.0 or higher, where the benefits of deepening the port are greater than the costs, for the process to continue. ¶ The feasibility study, the next step, includes an Environmental Impact Study, Design Overview, and Economic Analysis. This Economic Analysis often compares one port to another port to determine if a project has a net national benefit. In the analysis the Army Corps of Engineers studies incremental increases such as deepening a harbor from 42 to 43 feet and then from 43 to 44 feet. The Corps studies each incremental increase until it finds the deepening with the greatest benefit. After the Corps has completed the study it transmits the findings, labeled a Chief's Report, to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. The findings recommend proceeding - if it is appropriate - with the process. If the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works agrees with the recommendation, the plan will be forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget, which must also approve the project, and Congress. ¶ At this stage the project is approved, but it is not yet funded. Currently OMB has a freeze on funding all new port deepening projects because it is prioritizing public safety projects. The Port of New Jersey/New York is the only port to have received sufficient funds -over $600 million- to deepen its harbor. And it took the port almost 10 years from the start of the process until the port began the dredging process in 2008. Many other East Coast and Gulf Coast ports are on a waiting list for federal funds to permanently deepen their harbors. The following ports have expressed an interest: Boston, MA; Morehead City, NC; Charleston, SC: Savannah, GA; Jacksonville, FL; Canaveral, FL; Fort Lauderdale, FL; Miami, FL; Mobile, AL; Port Arthur, TX; Galveston, TX; Texas City, TX; Freeport, TX; Corpus Christi, TX; and Brownsville, TX. ¶ The current situation is problematic for two reasons. First, with the Panama Canal opening in 2015, other ports cannot afford to wait for a 10-year-long process. Second, with limited federal money available and the prioritization of safety projects, some ports may not receive any federal funding at all. Current federal investment is unpredictable – can’t leverage private investment without a strong federal signal Brinson ’12, former president of the American Association of Ports Authorities and former president of the Port of New Orleans (Ryan, “Federal ‘reforms’ for port upgrade are long overdue”, The Post and Courier, April 21 2012, http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120421/PC1002/120429847/1023&source=RSS) //BL In 2012, as many U.S. ports plan anxiously for the Panama Canal expansion, the federal performance in development and maintenance of the federal channel system is as unpredictable and as unreliable as ever. Today, local port authorities pay as much as 60 per cent of the cost of federal channel deepening.¶ With its Harbor Maintenance Tax, the government has collected nearly $6 billion more than it has spent on channel maintenance since 1986. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office concluded, “Full channel dimensions are, on average, available less than about a third of the time at the 59 highest use U.S. harbors.”¶ Despite the promises of the 1986 “reforms” and the well-documented needs for wider and deeper federal channels, there has been one new work authorization bill in the last decade — one!¶ Of the $2.4 billion authorized for deeper channels over the last 12 years, 75 percent was designated for New York Harbor.¶ Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.92 Mb. Share with your friends:
|