Sun Sentinel: Port Everglades and Army Corps divided on dredging

Washington, DC, May 21, 2014
Attending the meeting were Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio, Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Weston and Lois Frankel of West Palm Beach, port officials and Army Corps leader Jo-Ellen Darcy. According to the members, the Army Corps agreed to make every effort to finish its feasibility study by January, which could clear the project for construction.
By William E. Gibson
Port Everglades and the Army Corps of Engineers are a foot apart when it comes to dredging the port’s harbor to lure bigger vessels. That makes a difference of about $10 million.
The port and its backers want federal engineers to dig down to 48 feet to accommodate the huge vessels expected to pass through a widened Panama Canal in 2016.
The Army Corps recommends 47 feet, according to Florida members of Congress who met with the Corps’ leader on Wednesday. They said the Corps has agreed to “revisit some of the assumptions made in the modeling.”
If the Corps remains adamant, the port would have to pay for the additional foot – which costs $10 million.
The meeting followed U.S. House passage of a major water-projects bill on Tuesday. In includes language that will allow Broward County and the port to be partly reimbursed for initial spending on the project once it's cleared for construction by the Army Corps.
Attending the meeting were Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio, Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Weston and Lois Frankel of West Palm Beach, port officials and Army Corps leader Jo-Ellen Darcy.   
According to the members, the Army Corps agreed to make every effort to finish its feasibility study by January, which could clear the project for construction.
The Senate, meanwhile, is expected to vote on the water-projects bill later this week.
“I’m cautiously optimistic that the Army Corps is making progress on its feasibility study for the Port expansion project, but remaining issues must quickly be resolved,” Wasserman Schultz said afterward. “Further delay is simply unacceptable.”