.
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and
Implementation Progress
Charles V. Stern
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
November 18, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42007
c11173008
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
Summary
The Everglades is a unique network of subtropical wetlands in South Florida that is
approximately half of its historical size, due in part to degradation from federal water projects. In
2000, Congress authorized a plan, termed the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
(CERP), for the restoration of the Everglades ecosystem in southern Florida. When originally
authorized, it was estimated that CERP would cost a total of $8.2 billion and take approximately
30 years to complete. More recent estimates indicate that the plan would take approximately 50
years to implement, and would cost approximately $1.63 billion more than originally thought,
plus additional adjustments for inflation.
Under CERP, the federal government (through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
Department of the Interior) is required to fund half of the costs for restoration, with an array of
state, tribal, and local agencies paying the other half. In addition to activities under CERP, a
number of ongoing federal and state efforts that pre-date CERP (known collectively as “nonCERP,” or “Foundation” activities) also contribute to Everglades restoration. While non-CERP
efforts are technically not included in CERP, the two sets of activities are widely viewed as
complementary.
Since passage of CERP in 2000, the federal investment in Everglades restoration has increased.
As of the end of FY2014, the federal government had provided more than $1 billion in funding
for CERP, with the state providing matching funds for CERP projects, as well as advanced
funding for land acquisition and construction for expected future CERP projects. Federal funding
for non-CERP activities (most of which pre-date CERP) has also continued over this time period.
Together with CERP, all Everglades restoration efforts are estimated to have totaled more than $5
billion since FY1993. While estimates of nonfederal (i.e., state) funding contributions to CERP
and related restoration efforts vary widely depending on what methodology and assumptions are
used, most agree that to date, the state of Florida has spent significantly more on Everglades
restoration than has the federal government.
Progress has been made on a number of Everglades restoration projects, although overall progress
to date has fallen short of initial goals. As of late 2014, eight CERP projects were authorized, the
majority of the land necessary for restoration projects under CERP had been acquired, and
significant progress has been made on non-CERP activities (including improved water deliveries
to Everglades National Park). Construction had been initiated on four CERP projects, and studies
have been completed or are underway for a number of other projects. Despite this progress, some
projects have seen setbacks in the form of schedule delays and cost escalations. Additionally, new
or revised authorizations will be required for other major CERP projects, such as the Central
Everglades Planning Project (CEPP), to go forward. These and other impediments have been
noted as possible causes of further delays to restoration benefits in the future.
Reductions to state funding and the enactment of four new CERP project authorizations in the
Implementation Progress
October 30, 2015
(R42007)
Jump to Main Text of Report
Summary
The Everglades is a unique network of subtropical wetlands in South Florida that is approximately half of its historical size, due in part to degradation from federal water projects. In 2000, Congress authorized a plan, termed the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), for the restoration of the Everglades ecosystem in southern Florida. When originally authorized, it was estimated that CERP would cost a total of $8.2 billion and take approximately 30 years to complete. More recent estimates indicate that the plan would take approximately 50 years to implement, and would cost approximately $1.63 billion more than originally thought, plus additional adjustments for inflation.
Under CERP, the federal government (through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of the Interior) is required to fund half of the costs for restoration, with an array of state, tribal, and local agencies paying the other half. In addition to activities under CERP, a number of ongoing federal and state efforts that pre-date CERP (known collectively as "non-CERP" or "Foundation" activities) also contribute to Everglades restoration. While non-CERP efforts are technically not included in CERP, the two sets of activities are widely viewed as complementary.
Since passage of CERP in 2000, the federal investment in Everglades restoration has increased. As of the end of FY2015, the federal government had provided in excess of $1.2 billion in funding for CERP, with the state providing matching funds for CERP projects, as well as advanced funding for land acquisition and construction for expected future CERP projects. Federal funding for non-CERP activities (most of which pre-date CERP) has also continued over this time period. Together with CERP, all Everglades restoration efforts are estimated to have totaled in excess of $5 billion since FY1993. While estimates of nonfederal (i.e., state) funding contributions to CERP and related restoration efforts vary widely depending on what methodology and assumptions are used, most agree that to date, the state of Florida has spent significantly more on Everglades restoration than has the federal government.
Progress has been made on a number of Everglades restoration projects, although overall progress to date has fallen short of initial goals. As of late 2015, eight CERP projects were authorized, the majority of the land necessary for restoration projects under CERP had been acquired, and significant progress has been made on non-CERP activities (including improved water deliveries to Everglades National Park). Construction had been initiated on four CERP projects, and studies have been completed or were under way for a number of other projects. Despite this progress, some projects have seen setbacks in the form of schedule delays and cost escalations. Additionally, new authorizations will be required for other major CERP projects, such as the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP), to go forward. These and other impediments have been noted as possible causes of further delays to restoration benefits in the future.
Reductions to state funding and the enactment of four new CERP project authorizations in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA, P.L. 113-121) in June 2014
have
increased attention to(which will require new funding) have brought renewed attention on the congressional role in facilitating Everglades restoration. Debate and
resolution of these issues has implications, both for ecosystem restoration in the Everglades and
for large-scale restoration initiatives elsewhere. This report provides
information on federal
funding for Everglades restoration. It also provides an overview of the federal role in Everglades
restoration, including funding structures and major accomplishments to date.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Everglades Projects: CERP and Non-CERP .................................................................................... 1
Funding for Everglades Restoration ................................................................................................ 2
DOI Funding.............................................................................................................................. 3
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Funding .................................................................................... 3
Funding Trends .......................................................................................................................... 4
Comparing Federal and State Funding ...................................................................................... 5
Implementation Progress/Challenges .............................................................................................. 6
Status and Accomplishments ..................................................................................................... 6
Foundational Elements: Land Acquisition and Pilot Efforts, and
Non-CERP Projects .......................................................................................................... 7
Generation 1 CERP Projects ............................................................................................... 8
Generation 2 CERP Projects ............................................................................................... 8
Generation 3 CERP Projects ............................................................................................... 8
Challenges ................................................................................................................................. 9
Figures
Figure 1. Corps/DOI Funding for Everglades Restoration .............................................................. 5
Tables
Table 1. Corps and DOI Funding for Everglades Restoration, FY2010-FY2015 ............................ 3
Table 2. Corps and DOI Funding for Everglades Restoration, FY2007-FY2015 .......................... 11
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 12
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
restoration, including funding structures and major accomplishments to date.
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
Introduction
Introduction
The Florida Everglades is a unique network of subtropical wetlands that is now half its historical
size. The federal government has a long history of involvement in the Everglades, beginning in
the 1940s with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) constructing flood control projects
that shunted water away from the Everglades to make way for agricultural and urban
development. Additional factors, including nonfederal development efforts, have contributed to
the shrinking and altering
of the Everglades ecosystem.
In recognition of the unique ecosystem services provided by the Everglades, federal and state
agencies began ecosystem restoration activities in the Everglades in the early 1990s. However, it
was not until 2000 that federal and state restoration activities were coordinated under an
integrated plan. In the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000, P.L. 106-541
), ),
Congress approved the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) as a framework for
Everglades restoration and authorized an initial round of projects by the Corps and the
Department of the Interior (DOI). According to the process, additional Everglades projects are to
be presented to Congress for authorization as their planning is completed. To date, eight CERP
projects have been authorized
, including: one in WRDA 2000, three in WRDA 2007 (P.L.
110114110-114), and four in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA, P.L.
113121113-121). Pilot projects authorized in WRDA 1999 and WRDA 2000
have also been installed. Other
projects are undergoing study and pending authorization.
also have been constructed. Other projects are ongoing in the study phase (including projects that have completed the study phase and are awaiting congressional authorization).
To date, some progress has been made on Everglades restoration, but much more time and
funding will be required to complete restoration as currently contemplated. Previously
, some have
highlighted
the overall slowwhat they consider to be the "slow" pace of restoration as an argument for
expeditedincreased and expedited financial support. Conversely,
others have argued that restoration activities in the Everglades
already receive too much funding
relative to other priorities, and that the level of support provided for these activities is not
appropriate given larger fiscal concerns and the uncertainty of results.
Stakeholders involved with planning other large-scale restoration initiatives look to the
Everglades as a model and a test case. Some believe the types of activities funded and the level of
funding for the Everglades
may set a precedent for other restoration initiatives
, and should thus be
a priority. Others assert that Everglades restoration efforts have been disproportionately favored
relative to similar projects, and should be subject to the same cost-cutting efforts as other areas of
the budget.
This report summarizes historical and current funding trends for
This report provides background information on Everglades restoration, with a
focus on
federalthe federal role in funding, including recent funding totals and issues for Congress. It also provides a brief summary of some
of the major accomplishments in Everglades restoration since the enactment of CERP in
WRDA 2000, as
well as ongoing challenges facing the effort.
Everglades Projects: CERP and Non-CERP
Federal CERP funding was first authorized in WRDA 2000, with a focus on increasing storage
and treatment of excess water in the rainy season to provide more water during the dry season for
the ecosystem and for urban and agricultural users. As of 2010, it was estimated that CERP will
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
1
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
take more than 50 years and $13.5 billion to complete.
11 The federal government is expected to
pay half of CERP
’'s costs, and an array of state, tribal, and local agencies (i.e., nonfederal
sponsors) will pay the other half. This same cost
- share is expected to apply to all project
operation and maintenance costs.
WRDA 2000 authorized initial projects (including pilots), established federal/nonfederal
costsharingcost-sharing ratios for Everglades restoration, and created a process for additional projects to be
authorized as part of the CERP framework. WRDA 2007 authorized
anthree additional
three CERP
CERP projects. Four other projects completed the study phase in 2012 and were authorized for
construction in WRRDA 2014, while two other CERP projects remained in the study phase
and
when that bill was enacted and were thus not yet authorized. The status of these projects is discussed later in this report.
Federal Everglades restoration activities not authorized under CERP are often referred to as
“nonCERP” or “Foundation” activities. This includes, among other things, work related to the
Modified Water Deliveries Project, which is expected to augment flows to Everglades National
Park. Depending on how broadly this"non-CERP" or "Foundation" activities. Most (but not all) of the authorities for this funding predate the enactment of CERP in 2000. For example, this category includes funding for the Modified Water Deliveries Project that originally was authorized under the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-229).2 Depending on how broadly the non-CERP category is defined, it can encompass a wide variety of
Everglades restoration activities undertaken by multiple agencies.
2 Most (but not all) of the
authorities for this funding predate the enactment of CERP in 2000. However, similar to CERP
funding, most funding for non-CERP Everglades restoration is provided to However, similar to CERP funding, non-CERP activities of the Department of the
Interior and the Corps of Engineers
. Thus, the Corps and DOI are often the focal point for
funding debates surrounding the Everglades.
Funding for Everglades Restoration
Federal typically receive the most attention and are often the focal point of congressional consideration.
Funding for Everglades Restoration
As noted above, federal funding for Everglades restoration is largely provided through DOI and the Corps
, and is
concentrated in two
annual appropriations bills—the Interior and Environment appropriations bill (which
provides funds to DOI) and the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill (which
provides funds to the Corps).
Additionally,Additional funding in other appropriations bills is sometimes
noted as contributing to Everglades restoration, but is not formally tracked under the
Administration’ Administration's non-CERP totals.
3
Although the Administration
’'s budget request identified restoration funding totals for CERP and
non-CERP in the budget request, appropriations laws and conference reports typically do not
specify tabulate and specify their recommended appropriations levels for Everglades restoration activities (including CERP and
nonCERP totals). Rather, actual expenditure information for previous appropriations is tracked by the
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force. A summary of funding for both CERP and nonCERP activities within DOI and the Corps for recent years is provided in Table 1.
1
This figure represents the estimated cost to the federal government in October 2009 dollars according to the Corps.
See U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, 2010 Report to Congress. Available
at http://www.sfrestore.org/documents/index.html. Hereinafter 2010 CERP Report to Congress. More recent estimates
are not available.
2
In addition to the Corps and DOI, the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force also tracks funds that are
provided to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, among others. However, in its annual budget request, the Administration typically
only tracks “non-CERP” funding for the Corps and DOI. For additional information, see crosscut budget documents
available at http://www.sfrestore.org/documents/index.html.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
2
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
non-CERP totals). Rather, these totals are embedded within project and account-level totals of the Corps and DOI. Actual expenditure information for previous appropriations is tracked by the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, with input from the relevant agencies.4 A summary of funding for CERP and non-CERP activities within DOI and the Corps for recent years is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Corps and DOI Funding for Everglades Restoration, FY2010-
FY2015
(thousands of dollars)
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
Proposed
DOI
79,424
70,600
99,884
66,355
70,452
62,000
CERP
8,449
8,401
8,347
7,883
8,376
8,000
70,975
62,199
91,537
58,472
62,076
54,000
Corps
167,364
131,066
142,486
96,008
47,616
66,000
CERP
119,966
79,860
57,886
76,212
38,499
61,000
47,398
41,108
84,600
19,796
9,117
5,000
246,788
201,666
242,370
158,683
118,068
128,000
Non-CERP
Non-CERP
Total
Source: FY2015 Congressional Budget Justifications for the U.S. Department of the Interior and Army Corps of
Engineers and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Crosscut Budget Report for FY2014.
Notes: “ARRA” represents funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 110-5).
DOI Funding
Funding within the Interior and Environment bill is allotted to four agencies within DOI: the
National Park Service (NPS), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Within these agencies, two types of Everglades
funding are often highlighted: funding for CERP and funding for the Modified Water Deliveries
Project for Everglades National Park (also known as the “Mod Waters” project). The latter is a
non-CERP project that has received significant attention from Congress, and that aims to improve
water deliveries to Everglades National Park by removing barriers in and around the Tamiami
Trail. DOI’s CERP funding is typically provided to NPS and FWS, while funding for the
Modified Waters project has been provided to NPS in recent years.3 Although Mod Waters is
technically a non-CERP project, it is widely considered to be a keystone project for Everglades
restoration, with an important nexus to CERP. Recent DOI funding totals are shown in Table 1.
The FY2015 Administration request for Everglades funding was $62 million in DOI funding for
Everglades restoration, including $8 million for CERP projects and $54 million for non-CERP
projects. No funding was requested for the Mod Waters project, as the initial construction of its
1-mile bridge component was completed.4
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Funding
Funding for Corps Everglades restoration projects in the Energy and Water Development bill is
listed under project-level headings within the Corps Construction account. Currently, these
projects include the Central and Southern Florida Project, Kissimmee River Restoration project,
and Everglades and South Florida Restoration. Historically, funding was also included for two
3
4
c11173008
Originally, this funding was provided to the Corps.
For additional information on this project, see the “Challenges” section at the end of this report.
Congressional Research Service
3
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
other areas, Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement and Modified Waters Deliveries Project.5
Corps funding is directed toward planning and construction of projects authorized under CERP
and other authorities. Within Corps totals, funding for CERP is considered a key benchmark for
Everglades restoration commitment and progress.
Table 1 shows funding totals for Corps Everglades restoration in recent fiscal years and the
FY2015 President’s request. For FY2014, the enacted amount for Corps Everglades restoration
work for FY2014 was $47.6 million, and the FY2015 requested level for the Corps was $66
million. This funding level was below previous years due to a number of factors, including the
availability of unobligated funds from prior years, the drawdown of needed funding for
authorized, ongoing projects, and the lack of new and modified project authorizations prior to the
enactment of WRRDA in June 2014.
Funding Trends
The federal government has funded restoration of the Everglades in some form since at least the
early 1990s. Overall, from FY1993 to FY2014, the total federal investment in Everglades
restoration (including agencies other than the Corps and DOI) is estimated to have exceeded $5
billion. From FY1993 through FY2000, prior to the enactment of CERP, federal appropriations
for Everglades restoration activities totaled more than $1.2 billion. More recently, since the
enactment of CERP (i.e., since FY2001), total federal funding from all agencies is estimated to
have exceeded $4 billion, with Corps and DOI funding for Everglades restoration accounting for
more than $3.15 billion of that amount.6
As previously noted, Everglades funding for the Corps and DOI typically receives the most
FY2016
(thousands of dollars)
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015 Enacted
FY2016 Proposed
DOI
79,424
70,600
99,884
66,355
70,452
62,272
64,000
CERP
8,449
8,401
8,347
7,883
8,376
8,408
8,000
Non-CERP
70,975
62,199
91,537
58,472
62,076
53,864
56,000
Corps
167,364
131,066
142,486
96,008
47,616
68,551
124,000
CERP
119,966
79,860
57,886
76,212
38,499
61,001
86,000
Non-CERP
47,398
41,108
84,600
19,796
9,117
7,550
38,000
Total
246,788
201,666
242,370
158,683
118,068
130,823
188,000
Source: FY2015 Congressional Budget Justifications for the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Crosscut Budget Report for FY2014.
Note: Unless otherwise indicated, funding levels are final/actual.
DOI Funding
Everglades restoration funding within the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill is generally allotted to four agencies within DOI: the National Park Service (NPS), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Within these agencies, two types of Everglades funding are often highlighted: funding for CERP and funding for the Modified Water Deliveries Project for Everglades National Park (also known as the "Mod Waters" project). The latter is a non-CERP project that has received significant attention from Congress, and that aims to improve water deliveries to Everglades National Park by removing barriers in and around the Tamiami Trail. DOI's CERP funding is typically provided to NPS and FWS, while funding for the Modified Waters project has been provided to NPS in recent years.5 Although Mod Waters is technically a non-CERP project, it is widely considered to be a keystone project for Everglades restoration, with an important nexus to CERP.
The FY2016 Administration request for Everglades restoration for DOI bureaus was $64 million, including $8 million for CERP projects and $56 million for non-CERP projects. No funding was requested for the Mod Waters project, as the construction of its 1-mile bridge component was complete.6
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Funding
Corps funding is directed toward planning and construction of projects authorized under CERP and other authorities. Within Corps totals, the amount allocated to CERP projects is widely considered a key benchmark for Everglades restoration commitment and progress. Funding for Corps Everglades restoration projects in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill is listed under project-level headings within the Corps Construction and Operations and Maintenance accounts. Currently, these projects include the Central and Southern Florida Project, Kissimmee River Restoration project, and Everglades and South Florida Restoration. Historically, funding also was included for two other areas, Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement and Modified Waters Deliveries Project.7 The FY2016 request for the Corps includes funding to continue construction on two ongoing CERP projects (Picayune Strand and Indian River Lagoon-South) authorized in WRDA 2007, as well as funding to initiate design and other work necessary prior to proceeding with construction on the four projects authorized in WRRDA 2014.8
The FY2016 requested level for Corps Everglades restoration funds was $124 million, including $86 million for CERP activities and $38 million for non-CERP activities. Recent funding levels have been below previous averages due to a number of factors, including the availability of unobligated funds from prior years, the drawdown of needed funding for authorized, ongoing projects, and the lack of new and modified project authorizations prior to the enactment of WRRDA 2014 in June 2014.
Funding Trends
The federal government has provided and tracked its funding for restoration of the Everglades since the early 1990s. Overall, from FY1993 to FY2015, the total federal investment in Everglades restoration (i.e., including agencies other than the Corps and DOI) is estimated to have exceeded $5 billion. From FY1993 through FY2000 (i.e., prior to the enactment of CERP), federal appropriations for Everglades restoration activities totaled more than $1.2 billion. More recently, since the enactment of CERP in WRDA 2000 through FY2015, total federal funding from all agencies has exceeded $4 billion, with Corps and DOI accounting for approximately 75% of that total, or $3 billion.9 CERP projects accounted for approximately $1.1 billion of this funding.
As previously noted, Everglades funding for the Corps and DOI typically receives the most attention from Congress.
Figure 1 Table 1shows the split of CERP and non-CERP totals between the two agencies since 2001. Although overall funding for Everglades restoration by the Corps and DOIFigure 1 shows Everglades funding since 2001 for those two agencies,
including CERP and non-CERP totals. As shown in that figure, while overall funding for
Everglades restoration by these agencies has remained somewhat constant since the enactment of
CERP, the distribution between CERP and non-CERP funding has changed over time. CERP
projects gradually increased from FY2001 to FY2010 (including
ARRAsignificant increases under P.L. 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Over the same period,
funding for non-CERP projects (such as Mod Waters) decreased from
their earlier levels.
Finally,
overOver the last two years, overall spending in both categories has decreased.
Total funding for
CERP projects from FY2001 to FY2014 is estimated to have exceeded $1 billion.
Fluctuations in Everglades federal funding can be explained by
In recent years, Congress has for the most part agreed with the Administration's funding request for the Everglades. Fluctuations in requested and enacted funding levels can be attributed to a number of factors. For instance,
after authorization in FY2007, federal funding for
“"Generation 1
” CERP projects increased as
project construction commenced, and began declining in FY2012. The subsequent decrease in
funding for CERP beginning at that time was a combined result of “Generation 1” CERP Projects
(i.e., projects authorized in WRDA 2007) winding down certain construction activities while
“Generation 2”" CERP projects (i.e., projects authorized in WRDA 2007) increased as project construction commenced after years of study and pilot projects; these funding levels began to decline in FY2012 as Generation 1 project construction activities wound down, while "Generation 2" projects (i.e., projects with completed project
-implementation reports that were
proposed and eventually authorized in WRRDA 2014) were awaiting authorizing legislation
before they could be funded. For non-CERP
projectsfunding trends, more recent decreases in funding can
in part
be attributedbe attributed in part to the completion of the initial phases of construction on the Mod Waters project.
5
As noted above, in recent years Mod Waters funding has been provided solely to DOI. Florida Keys Water Quality
Improvement was completed in FY2009.
6
CRS analysis of departmental data for FY1993-FY2014.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
4
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
Figure 1. Corps/DOI
FundingAppropriations for Everglades Restoration
400
350
Funding ($- millions)
300
250
Federal Non-CERP
200
Federal CERP
150
100
50
0
Fiscal Year
Source: CRS estimates based on
Corps and DOI budget documents from FY2001-FY2015.
the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Crosscut Budget.
Notes: Does not include agency funding for
non-CERP activities outside of the Corps and DOI.
Appropriated funding may differ from actual spending due to transfers, etc. FY2010 includes FY2010 includes
additional funding under P.L. 111-5
(ARRA).
Comparing Federal and State CERP Funding
(ARRA).
Comparing Federal and State Funding
Many view the status and amount of federal CERP funding relative to nonfederal funding for
this
initiativerestoration activities under CERP as an important indicator of the federal government
’'s commitment to Everglades
restoration, and restoration. While there is widespread agreement that the state has invested more funding in CERP
than has the federal government
. However, comparisons between federal and state funding levels
for Everglades restoration are complicated for a number of reasons.
As previously noted
Pursuant to WRDA 2000, CERP funding is to be cost
- shared equally between the federal government
and nonfederal entities in Florida. Notably, much of the nonfederal funding for Everglades
restoration efforts has been for land acquisition related to the expected “footprint” of future CERP
projects, rather than construction funding for federal projects that have been authorized by
Congress. That is, state CERP funding has anticipated or accelerated multiple Everglades
restoration projects that have yet to be federally approved.7
7
Funding is not formally “credited” by the Corps toward CERP project cost-shares until a number of requirements
have been met. These requirements include completion of a project implementation report (PIR) and authorization for
construction of the project by Congress, as well as signing of a project partnership agreement, or PPA.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
5
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
and nonfederal entities in Florida. And pursuant to general Corps policies under Section 101 of WRDA 1986 (P.L. 99-662), local project sponsors must fund the costs for project lands, easements, relocations, right-of-way, and disposal sites. As a result, a considerable amount of nonfederal funding for Everglades restoration has been provided early in the process by the state of Florida for land acquisition related to the expected "footprint" of future CERP projects. Although state CERP funding is widely acknowledged to be considerable, it has in some cases anticipated details of Everglades restoration projects that have yet to be federally approved and designed in detail by the Corps.10 Thus, assigning a specific value of "state CERP expenditures" can be complicated.
Although some reference large nonfederal contributions toward CERP, the proportion of these
expenditures that have been formally credited toward CERP is
actually much smaller.
Indeed, it is
It is possible that, depending on subsequent actions of the Corps and Congress, some of the
aforementioned nonfederal funds will never be credited to federal CERP projects. Thus, the size,
scope, and
relative scheduling priority of new federal CERP projects
and their relation to previous state expenditures
receives significant attention, and may in some cases be a matter of disagreement.
often receives significant attention, and the state of Florida may disagree with federal agencies on certain restoration project details.
Differences between initial reported state expenditures and the amounts actually credited under
CERP result in a wide range of state funding levels being attributed to Everglades restoration. For
instance, in its annual crosscut budget the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
previously estimated that from 2001 to 2011,
itthe state spent approximately $3 billion on CERP,
or
which was considerably more than the federal government spent over that time. However, actual credited
state and federal expenditures over the same period
were comparable.
(as reported in other documents) were roughly equal.
In recent years, the state of Florida
’'s funding
onof CERP has decreased due to a number of factors,
including a decline in state tax revenues and a focus on other aspects of Everglades restoration
,
such as. For instance, the state has increased its funding for projects under its Restoration Strategies Regional Water Quality Plan, which
is intended to address EPA narrative and numeric nutrient criteria in the Everglades.
811 It is unclear
whether state funding for CERP will return to previous levels
at some point in the future. Previous estimates
indicated that approximately $584 million in previous state expenditures would
be “available” for
become "available" for crediting when
the “"Generation 2
”" projects were authorized by Congress (as occurred in June
2014). Assuming no major influx of new funding by the state of Florida in the near future, the
status of federal authorizing legislation for subsequent Everglades restoration projects may
receive added attention.
Implementation Progress/Challenges
Reporting
Congress has mandated several reports that regularly evaluate Everglades restoration. Pursuant to
congressional direction, the National Research Council (NRC) publishes reviews of Everglades
restoration biennially
, with the. The most recent report
was published in 2014.
912 Separately, a report to
Congress focusing specifically on CERP is published every five years, with the most recent report
completed in 2010.
1013 Both reports outline accomplishments and challenges related to
both CERP
CERP and non-CERP projects.
Status and Accomplishments
Additionally, another report, this one by the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, publishes a strategy and report on accomplishments biennially and is based on reporting requirements in WRDA 1996, among other things.14
Status and Accomplishments
Since passage of CERP in 2000, progress has been made on Everglades restoration for both
CERP and non-CERP projects. Significant actions have included the construction of
pilot
a number of pilot projects, the completion of studies, and the initiation of several construction projects (including
completion of the initial phases of some projects). As discussed below, some
of the non-CERP
“foundation”non-CERP projects are nearing completion, and some Generation 1 CERP projects are expected
8
These efforts, which began in 2012, are being undertaken in response to a court-ordered Amended Determination by
the EPA.
9
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration, National Research Council, Progress
Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Fifth Biennial Review, Washington, DC, 2014.
10
2010 CERP Report to Congress.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
6
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
to be completed in the near future. In addition to progress on construction, baseline information
and processes have also been established, and the scientific understanding of many of the issues
associated with Everglades restoration has improved.
Tangible ecosystem benefits resulting from
progress to date are for the most part yet to be realized or noted. In many cases, these benefits are
expected toTo date there have not been significant ecosystem benefits as a result of these projects. Supporters expect that most benefits will lag several years behind project construction and restoration of hydrologic conditions
,
and are. Furthermore, maximizing these benefits is expected to require extensive monitoring and adaptive management
to confirm and refine.
, which would further confirm and refine approaches to restoration.
Selected CERP and non-CERP accomplishments as of 2014 are discussed below.
Foundational Elements:
Land Acquisition and Pilot Efforts, and
Non-CERP Projects
As noted above, as of 2014, Everglades restoration had achieved several milestones. Major
achievements included accomplishment of several
foundational steps required for the eventual
of the early steps that will be critical to the eventual completion of larger restoration projects. This includes the purchase by nonfederal project
sponsors of most of the land expected to be required for CERP projects (a necessary first step in
project construction by the Corps).
15 As discussed previously, many of these projects are expected
to be credited toward the nonfederal cost
- share for individual projects.
Early pilot projects that will influence the eventual prioritization and construction of larger CERP
projects
are also largelyalso have been completed. Specifically, design and installation of six pilot projects
authorized in WRDA 1999 and WRDA 2000 have taken place in recent years. Examples include
Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR)
Pilotpilot projects
, authorized in WRDA 1999 and WRDA 2000
,
which. These pilots assessed the feasibility of
thisASR technology at specific sites as they applied to Everglades
restoration. Based on the findings from these projects (published in 2013), ASR is expected to be
among the options considered for future water storage projects in South Florida. Other
projects
are achieving benefits already andpilot projects have been completed and are achieving benefits, and they may be added to in future years.
AFor example, a pilot groundwater seepage
barrier to the southeast of the Mod Waters project was completed and has been found to be
successful in blocking subsurface migration of groundwater. This pilot project may be expanded
in the future.
As previously noted, non-CERP projects are a key part of Everglades restoration that pre-date
in the future.
Many non-CERP projects predate CERP and are therefore
in several caseslargely more established than CERP projects. Some non-CERP
accomplishments as of
20132015 included the completion of the Florida Keys Water Quality
Improvement Project, as well as the
NPSNational Park Service (NPS)-constructed 1-mile bridge component of the Modified
Water Deliveries project, which may be expanded in the future.
1116 Another major restoration
project that pre-dated CERP, the Kissimmee River Project (authorized in 1992 and initiated in
1999), was nearing completion. Some outside observers have noted that this project has already
resulted in significant benefits that demonstrate the potential for planned CERP projects.
12
Another project, the Seminole Big Cypress Reservation Water Conservation Plan Critical Project,
was expected to be complete by 2015.
11
Another planning project, known as the Next Steps project, is being directed by the National Park Service and may
eventually lead to the bridging of up to an additional 5.5 miles of the roadway.
12
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration, National Research Council, Progress
Toward Restoring the Everglades, the Fourth Biennial Review, Washington, DC, 2014, p 102. Hereinafter referred to
as the Fourth Biennial Review.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
7
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
17
Generation 1 CERP Projects
Among the
“"Generation 1
”" CERP projects authorized in WRDA 2007 (Picayune Strand
Restoration, Site 1 Impoundment, Indian River Lagoon-South or IRL-South, and the
programmatic authority for Melaleuca Eradication that was authorized by Congress in WRDA
2000), as of 2014 planning/design was complete and construction was
underwayunder way to some extent
for all four projects. However, none of these projects is fully operational, and two of them
(Picayune Strand and Site 1 Impoundment) may require additional congressional authorization
in
the near future.
to allow for alterations to the projects.
Generation 2 CERP Projects
As previously noted,
the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA 2014,
WRRDA 2014 (P.L. 113-121) authorized four additional
“"Generation 2
”" CERP projects with completed project
implementation reports
at that time: the C-111 Spreader Canal, Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands, C-43 West
Basin Storage Reservoir, and Broward County Water Preserve Areas (WPAs). Congressional
authorization of WRRDA will allow construction to be initiated on two new projects (C-43
Reservoir and Broward County WPAs) and will allow federal funding to flow toward two other
projects (the C-111 Spreader Canal and Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands) whose construction was
previously initiated by the state. At the time of their authorization, these four projects were
expected to have a total cost of approximately $1.9 billion.
Generation 3 CERP Projects
Two other CERP projects, the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP) and the Loxahatchee
River Watershed Project, were still in the study process when WRRDA 2014 was enacted and
were thus not authorized for federal construction. These
“"Generation 3
”" projects are currently
expected to be among the next CERP projects
proposed to be authorized for construction. CEPP in particular is
widely considered to be a high-priority project for Everglades restoration, and its status has
received considerable attention (see box below).
The exact path to authorization for Generation 3 projects remains uncertain. Notably, pursuant to
a new process established in WRRDA 2014, these projects could potentially be approved outside
of the traditional authorization process for water resources projects.
1318 However, if this process is
not available in the future, federal work on these projects could not take place until they receive
full federal authorization.
13
For more information, see CRS Report R43298, Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014:
Comparison of Select Provisions, by Nicole T. Carter et al.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
8
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
full federal authorization.
Central Everglades Planning Project
The Central Everglades Planning Project (or CEPP) is an Everglades restoration study under the CERP framework
that was initiated in 2011 by the Corps and the Department of the Interior, with the state of Florida. It is expected to
recommend a suite of restoration projects in the central Everglades that would be a part of the broader CERP
program aiming to address problems associated with the timing and distribution of freshwater flows in the central
Everglades.
CEPP was initiated due to a perceived need to prioritize restoration projects in the central portion of the Everglades
ecosystem and enhance the prospects for Everglades restoration overall. To date, most restoration projects in the
Everglades have focused on the periphery of the historic Everglades (rather than flows to the Central Everglades).
CEPP would incorporate multiple CERP projects that were envisioned in the original 1999 plan, at a preliminary
estimated cost of approximately $1.9 billion.
Due to the interest in expediting CEPP
’'s authorization and construction, the Corps included this study among those
investigations being undertaken as part of its National Planning Pilot Program. The aim of this effort is to complete
feasibility studies in less time than is traditional for Corps investigations. Among other goals, studies initiated under
the pilot are expected to adhere to a
“3x3x3”"3x3x3" rule, which means that feasibility studies will be completed with no
more than $3 million in federal costs, in three years or less, and with the involvement of the three levels of Corps
review (districts, divisions, and
Headquartersheadquarters). Initially, final approval of CEPP was envisioned for December 2013.
However, the Chief
’'s Report was delayed and the project was not authorized with the other Generation 2 Everglades
projects in WRRDA 2014.
Thus, theThe final Chief's Report was released on December 23, 2014. The status of CEPP moving forward will depend on how (and when) Congress
approaches approaches future water resources project authorizations.
Challenges
Challenges
Despite the achievement of some milestones, outside reviewers have frequently noted the
relatively slow overall pace of Everglades restoration compared to the ambitious timetables laid
out in
the original program documents in 1999 and, more recently, in 2011. These observers have
pointed out that while there has been some progress toward restoring the Everglades, project
implementation has been considerably slower than expected due to a number of factors, such as
inadequate appropriations and delayed project authorization.
14 At the same time, estimated costs
for Everglades restoration have gone up19 Costs are another challenge: The total estimated cost of restoring the Everglades has gone up significantly over time. While CERP was originally estimated to cost a total of
$8.2 billion, the 2010 update to these estimates indicated that it would take 50 years to complete,
at a cost of $13.5 billion. According to the report, approximately $1.63 billion of the increased
costs since the initial estimates could be attributed to price/scope changes (i.e., costs other than
inflation).
15
20
Individually, some CERP projects have been implemented more slowly than anticipated. As of
2014 2015, no major CERP project receiving federal funds had been completed, and many of the
projects and schedules envisioned in earlier program documents have proven to be inaccurate.
16
21 Only a fraction of the project implementation reports originally envisioned under CERP have
been finalized
or completed in draft form. Further, of these,
only eight projects have been
authorized by Congress and four have had federal construction initiated.17
14
The lack of project authorizations in a WRDA appears to have occurred mostly during the 2012-2014 time period,
since PIRs for three projects were completed and awaiting congressional authorization beginning in 2012.
15
According to the Corps, the increased cost estimates since 2000 are attributed to (1) $3.63 billion in inflation
adjustments; and (2) $1.63 billion in price /scope changes.
16
While WRDA 2000 conditionally authorized 10 projects, many of these projects will need to have their
authorizations amended due to substantive changes in project scope.
17
In several other cases, CERP projects have yet to be authorized by Congress, but nonfederal construction work has
begun.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
9
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
authorized by Congress and four have had federal construction initiated.22
Reviewers have noted that funding has been a challenge for
authorized Everglades restoration
projects, and this challenge could grow in future years. Recently authorized Generation 2 CERP
projects will
presumably have to compete for fundsin several cases compete with ongoing Generation 1 and non-CERP
projects, as well as projects for funding, and all of these projects must compete with other water resource projects and appropriations priorities. Even if
funding were to stay at current levels, project implementation could slow if funding is spread out
among multiple projects. Attaining new state funding where required for project cost-shares may
also be challenging in light of decreased funding and the among multiple projects as they are authorized. In light of decreased funding by the state of Florida and its shift toward other restoration priorities
by the state of Florida in recent years. If these trends continue, the pace of implementation for
some projects could slow further.
in recent years, attaining new state funding where required for project cost shares may also be challenging.
Another challenge for Everglades restoration may be the status of potential new project
authorizations under
Water Resources Development Actswater resources development acts (WRDAs). CERP originally anticipated
regular enactment of WRDAs and related Everglades restoration projects as they were studied
and recommended to Congress. However, since 2000, only two WRDAs have been enacted, in
2007 and 2014. With enactment of WRRDA 2014, attention has
largely shifted to the status of a
large CERP project in the Central Everglades, the Central Everglades Planning Project, whose
current path to authorization is unclear.
23 Absent new authorizations, federal work on Everglades
restoration could slow considerably if ongoing projects wind down and the Corps is not
authorized to expend funds
andto match prior state expenditures for some projects (as was the case
in recent years). Such a scenario would likely delay CERP further relative to
the current expected
timeline.
expected timelines.
Once construction projects are complete, ecological benefits associated with restoration are not
expected immediately
, and
they will be dependent on a number of factors. While preliminary
benefits in the early stages of project operations are possible,
most note that it will it will likely take time for projects
to individually and collectively refine their operations and demonstrate
maximumsignificant positive effects
on species and the environment. In many cases, benefits may depend on the successful
completion of one or more other projects, further highlighting the interconnected nature of the
overall restoration effort. Thus, completion of project construction represents only one hurdle for
Everglades restoration, with
refined operations and monitoring of performance representing
challenges in their own right.
Other challenges to Everglades restoration
that may be of interest to Congress have been widely noted. These challenges include
ongoing issues associated with water quality in
the Evergladescentral and south Florida that are being
addressed by the state
,; the adequacy of some restoration efforts in recreating historical hydrologic
conditions, conditions; and ongoing degradation of species and ecosystems in south Florida
, which has in
some cases due to invasive species and other factors (which in some cases appears to have accelerated in recent years
). The interaction of one or more of these factors
may
has the potential to impact the operational status of federal restoration projects. For instance, although construction
has been completed on the 1-mile bridge portion of the Mod Waters project, a number of other
hurdles related to water quality, land easements, and operational planning must be overcome
before the project can
actually be operated to achieve the flows and benefits that
were originally
expectedare expected to generate a positive ecological response. Similar variables and complications could impact the implementation of other
Everglades restoration projects in the future.
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
10
.
Table 2. Corps and DOI Funding for Everglades Restoration, FY2007-FY2015
(thousands of dollars)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
ARRA
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
Proposed
DOI
75,152
87,355
128,862
23,264
79,424
70,600
99,884
66,355
70,452
62,000
CERP
8,481
8,383
9,459
—
8,449
8,401
8,347
7,883
8,376
8,000
66,671
78,972
119,403
23,264
70,975
62,199
91,537
58,472
62,076
54,000
157,553
112,694
115,712
95,412
167,364
131,066
142,486
96,008
47,616
66,000
CERP
64,000
64,000
83,640
87,896
119,966
79,860
57,886
76,212
38,499
61,000
Non-CERP
93,553
48,694
32,072
7,516
47,398
41,108
84,600
19,796
9,117
5,000
232,705
200,049
244,574
118,676
246,788
201,666
242,370
158,683
118,068
128,000
Non-CERP
Corps
Total
Source: CRS estimates based on Congressional Budget Justifications for the U.S. Department of the Interior and Army Corps of Engineers, FY2007-FY2015.
Notes: DOI funding includes funding for the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. “ARRA”
represents funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 110-5). For FY2013, no funding breakdown for CERP and Non-CERP funding for the Corps
was available.
c11173008
CRS-11
Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress
.
Author Contact Information
Charles V. Stern
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
cstern@crs.loc.gov, 7-7786
c11173008
Congressional Research Service
12
Everglades restoration projects in the future.
Author Contact Information
[author name scrubbed], Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
Footnotes
| 1.
|
This figure represents the estimated cost to the federal government in October 2009 dollars according to the Corps. See U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, 2010 Report to Congress. Available at http://www.sfrestore.org/documents/index.html. Hereinafter 2010 CERP Report to Congress. More recent estimates are not available. Pursuant to WRDA 2000, the Secretaries of the Army and the Interior jointly submit a progress report on Everglades restoration every five years.
|
| 2.
|
This project is expected to augment flows to Everglades National Park. For more information, see National Park Service, "Modified Water Deliveries (MWD)," http://www.nps.gov/ever/learn/nature/modwater.htm.
|
| 3.
|
In addition to the Corps and DOI, the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force also tracks funding provided to other federal agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, among others. However, in its annual budget request, the Administration typically only cites funding for the Corps and DOI under the designation of "non-CERP" Everglades restoration funding. For additional information, see crosscut budget documents available at http://www.sfrestore.org/documents/index.html.
|
| 4.
|
These documents are available at http://www.evergladesrestoration.gov/content/cross-cut_budget.html.
|
| 5.
|
Originally, this funding was provided to the Corps.
|
| 6.
|
Additional funding is expected to be requested for this project in the future. For additional information, see the "Challenges" section at the end of this report.
|
| 7.
|
In recent years Mod Waters funding has been provided solely to DOI. Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement was completed in FY2009.
|
| 8.
|
For more information, see below section, "Generation 3 CERP Projects."
|
| 9.
|
CRS analysis of departmental data for FY1993-FY2014.
|
| 10.
|
Funding is not formally "credited" by the Corps toward CERP project cost shares until a number of requirements have been met. These requirements include completion of a project implementation report (PIR) and authorization for construction of the project by Congress, as well as signing of a project partnership agreement.
|
| 11.
|
These efforts, which began in 2012, are being undertaken in response to a court-ordered Amended Determination by the EPA.
|
| 12.
|
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration, National Research Council, Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Fifth Biennial Review, Washington, DC, 2014.
|
| 13.
|
2010 CERP Report to Congress.
|
| 14.
|
These reports are available at http://www.evergladesrestoration.gov/content/Strategic_Plan_Biennial_Report.html.
|
| 15.
|
The state estimated that as of 2014, it had acquired nearly 63% of lands needed for CERP. See South Florida Water Management District, "Quick Facts on Everglades Restoration Progress," January 2015, at http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xrepository/sfwmd_repository_pdf/spl_everglades_progress.pdf.
|
| 16.
|
Another planning project, known as the Next Steps project, is being directed by the National Park Service and may eventually lead to the bridging of up to an additional 5.5 miles of the roadway.
|
| 17.
|
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration, National Research Council, Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades, the Fourth Biennial Review, Washington, DC, 2014, p 102. Hereinafter referred to as the Fourth Biennial Review.
|
| 18.
|
For more information, see CRS Report R43298, Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014: Comparison of Select Provisions, by [author name scrubbed] et al.
|
| 19.
|
The lack of project authorizations in a WRDA appears to have occurred mostly during the 2012-2014 time period, since PIRs for three projects were completed and awaiting congressional authorization beginning in 2012.
|
| 20.
|
According to the Corps, the increased cost estimates since 2000 are attributed to (1) $3.63 billion in inflation adjustments; and (2) $1.63 billion in scope/price changes.
|
| 21.
|
While WRDA 2000 conditionally authorized 10 projects, many of these projects will need to have their authorizations amended due to substantive changes in project scope.
|
| 22.
|
In several other cases, CERP projects have yet to be authorized by Congress, but nonfederal construction work has begun.
|
| 23.
|
See previous section, "Generation 3 CERP Projects."
|