Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Dredging topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port staff outlines WRDA submissions for jetty extension and channel deepening, with multibillion‑dollar cost implications
Summary
Port staff reported two Army Corps of Engineers submissions to the WRDA report — a 1.5‑mile east jetty extension (Corps estimate ~$190.6M) and channel deepening to 45 feet (Corps estimate ~$953M) — and explained that authorization does not guarantee federal funding and that feasibility studies carry non‑federal cost shares.
Port staff briefed the board on Dec. 18 about two navigation projects submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for inclusion in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) report: an East Jetties extension of about 1.5 miles and a channel deepening from the current template (discussed as 40 feet) to 45 feet.
The Corps’ preliminary cost estimates presented at the meeting were approximately $190.6 million for the jetty extension and about $953 million for the channel deepening. Staff warned the actual deepening cost could be materially higher depending on the cost and availability of dredged‑material disposal real estate and the need to relocate pipelines.
Staff explained the federal process: projects included in the Corps’ WRDA report are candidates for authorization but authorization does not guarantee construction funding; next steps include requests for feasibility‑study funding in federal budgets. Staff cited the Corps’ informal “3 by 3 by 3” expectation for feasibility studies (up to 3 years, not more than about $3 million, and limited thickness in the study document) and noted non‑federal sponsors must pay 50% of feasibility study costs — implying the port could be required to contribute roughly $1.5 million per feasibility study if both projects proceed.
Board members discussed the operational benefits of deeper draft (additional under‑keel clearance, potential for larger loads or fewer vessel calls) as well as practical obstacles such as likely additional environmental and real‑estate costs. Staff said they will continue to monitor WRDA/Corps activity and send supporting documentation (letters of support) to commissioners.
No board vote was required on the briefing itself; staff advised next steps include tracking the legislative timetable and seeking feasibility‑study authorization and federal funding.
