Order Code RL33504
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA):
Corps of Engineers Authorization Issues
Updated January 10, 2007
Nicole T. Carter, Coordinator
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
H. Steven Hughes, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Jeffrey A. Zinn
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA):
Corps of Engineers Authorization Issues
Summary
Congress generally authorizes the water resources studies and projects of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
before appropriating funds to them. The 110th Congress seems likely to consider a
WRDA. Like the 107th and 108th Congress, the 109th Congress considered but did not
enact WRDA legislation. WRDA enactment previously had loosely followed a
biennial schedule, but the most recent WRDA was enacted in 2000.
Issues that shaped WRDA debates in recent Congresses are expected to receive
attention during the 110th Congress. WRDA issues likely will include the specifics
of Corps reform measures (such as independent review and fish and wildlife
mitigation provisions), as well as general concerns about the overall level of new
authorizations in light of a backlog of authorized projects awaiting construction and
maintenance funding. Different opinions about which projects to authorize, the cost-
share for large authorizations, and other specifics also are anticipated. The
Administration has expressed concerns about the level of authorizations in WRDA
bills, as well as about various policy changes and specific projects.
Policy Changes. The proposed policy change that received the most attention
in the 109th Congress was the independent review of Corps projects. Which projects
to review (i.e., the scope of the review), which projects to exempt from review, who
should perform and direct reviews, and how to treat recommendations resulting from
the reviews are all likely components of review discussions during the 110th
Congress. The Administration supports the general concept of independent peer
review of proposed projects.
Coastal Louisiana. Authorization of activities to restore wetlands in coastal
Louisiana are likely to be debated in a WRDA in the 110th Congress. On its last day,
the 109th Congress passed legislation providing potentially significant sums of money
from offshore oil and gas activities that could affect the scope of state wetland
restoration efforts. In addition, the 110th Congress may consider other provisions
authorizing Louisiana hurricane protection and navigation projects. The
Administration objected to a number of provisions in the coastal Louisiana language
of the WRDA bills considered by the 109th Congress.
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway (UMR-IWW). Authorization
of spending for navigation improvements and ecosystem restoration on the UMR-
IWW also is a likely component of WRDA discussions. Some environmental and
taxpayer advocacy groups oppose the navigation improvements. Navigation and
agricultural interests insist that these improvements are needed to reduce lock delays
and maintain global competitiveness. Whether and how to link UMR-IWW
navigation improvements and ecosystem restoration also are part of the debate.
Everglades Restoration. Authorization of federal projects planned as part of
a larger effort to restore the Florida Everglades, which began with WRDA 2000, may
also be part of the WRDA debate.
Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
WRDAs: Authorizing Corps Studies and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
WRDAs in Recent Congresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Current Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Corps Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Independent Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Coastal Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Wetlands Restoration and Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Hurricane Protection and Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Everglades Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Indian River Lagoon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Picayune Strand Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
For Additional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authorizations and WRDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Coastal Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Everglades Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA): Corps of Engineers
Authorization Issues
Most Recent Developments
The 110th Congress seems likely to consider a Water Resources Development
Act (WRDA) to authorize Corps water resources activities. During the 109th
Congress, the House and Senate each passed a version of a WRDA bill (H.R. 2864),
and conferees were named, but no further action was taken. The conference
committee was faced with numerous differences between the House and Senate
versions. Issues that have shaped the WRDA debates in recent Congresses are
expected to receive attention during WRDA consideration by the 110th Congress.
Background and Analysis
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a federal agency in the Department of
Defense with military and civilian responsibilities. At the direction of Congress, the
Corps plans, builds, operates, and maintains a wide range of water resources facilities
in U.S. states and territories. The agency’s traditional civil responsibilities have been
creating and maintaining navigable channels and controlling floods; in the last two
decades, Congress has increased the Corps’ responsibilities in ecosystem restoration,
municipal water and wastewater infrastructure, disaster relief, and other activities.
The agency’s regulatory responsibility for navigable water extends to issuing permits
for private actions that might affect wetlands and other waters of the United States.
Congressional direction comes primarily through authorization and
appropriations legislation and oversight activities. WRDA is the main legislative
vehicle for Corps civil works authorizations. After background and discussion of
WRDAs in recent Congresses, this report considers the current status of WRDA and
major issues shaping WRDA consideration in the 110th Congress: changes to Corps
project development practices and policies; coastal Louisiana wetlands restoration
activities; UMR-IWW investments; and Everglades restoration projects.
WRDAs: Authorizing Corps Studies and Projects
WRDA legislation provides the Corps with authority to study water resource
problems, construct projects, and make major modifications to projects. The
provisions and contents of a WRDA are cumulative and new acts do not supersede
or replace previous acts unless explicit language modifies, replaces, or terminates
previous authorizations. A new WRDA adds to the original language and often
amends provisions of previous acts.
CRS-2
Congress generally authorizes Corps water resources studies as part of a
periodic consideration of a WRDA, or in a survey resolution by an authorizing
committee — the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee or the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee. Authorization to construct projects and
changes to the policies guiding the Corps civil works program, such as project cost-
share requirements, are typically in WRDAs.
Authorization of Corps projects generally does not expire; however, there is a
process to deauthorize projects that have not received appropriations for seven years.
Although Congress has historically authorized Corps projects as part of a WRDA,
authorizations also have been included in appropriations bills, especially in years
when a WRDA has been delayed or not enacted at all. Corps authorizing committees
generally discourage authorizations in appropriations bills; authorization in
appropriations bills may be subject to a point of order on the House floor.
Authorization establishes a project’s essential character, which is seldom
substantially modified during appropriations. The appropriations process, however,
plays a significant role in realizing a project; appropriations determine which studies
and projects receive federal funds.1 Many authorized activities never receive
appropriations. During the last 15 years, Congress has authorized not only navigation
and traditional flood control projects, but also ecosystem restoration, environmental
infrastructure assistance, beach nourishment, and other activities, increasing
competition for construction funds. The Corps now has a “backlog” of more than
800 authorized projects, with more than 500 not consistently receiving construction
appropriations.
WRDAs in Recent Congresses
WRDA 1986 (P.L. 99-662) marked the end of a decade-long stalemate between
Congress and the executive branch regarding authorizations. In addition to
authorizing numerous projects, WRDA 1986 resolved long-standing disputes related
to cost-sharing, user fees, and environmental requirements. A cycle of biennial
consideration of a WRDA has been loosely followed. Biennial enactment has been
less consistent, with WRDAs enacted in 1988 (P.L. 100-676), 1990 (P.L. 101-640),
1992 (P.L. 102-580), 1996 (P.L. 104-303), 1999 (P.L. 106-53), and 2000 (P.L. 106-
541). Many of these WRDAs authorized or modified the authorization of more than
a hundred projects. Pressure to authorize new projects, increase authorized funding
levels, and modify existing projects is often intense, thus promoting a fairly regular
(if not always biennial) consideration of WRDA. WRDA legislation was considered,
but not enacted, during the 107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses.
There is considerable support among some stakeholders for the 110th Congress
to enact a WRDA bill because of the number of projects awaiting authorization and
the length of time since Congress enacted the last WRDA in 2000. A number of
factors that complicated WRDA passage in recent Congresses remain unresolved.
For example, independent review of Corps projects is likely to be raised in the debate
1 For more information on the Corps’ appropriations, see CRS Report RL33346, Energy and
Water Development: FY2007 Appropriations, coordinated by Carl Behrens.
CRS-3
over a WRDA bill in the 110th Congress. The performance of the Corps-constructed
hurricane protection infrastructure in New Orleans heightened concerns about the
quality of the agency’s work and increased support for changing the agency’s
processes and for stronger oversight of its projects. Provisions in the WRDA bills
in the 109th Congress (often labeled “Corps reform” provisions) would have required
independent review of most Corps project proposals.
Multi-billion dollar project authorizations also are likely elements of a WRDA
debate. Project authorizations given attention in the 109th Congress that may
continue to be the subject of debate during the 110th Congress include:
! Coastal Louisiana: actions to restore coastal wetlands over the next
decade, and conditional pre-authorization of hurricane protection
measures (no cost estimate available).
! Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway (UMR-IWW): $2.0
billion for navigation improvements and $1.58 billion for ecosystem
restoration.
! Everglades: $1.3 billion for the Indian River Lagoon-South project
for wetlands and estuarine restoration and $0.36 billion for the
Picayune Strand ecosystem restoration project.
Other controversial authorizations are for “environmental infrastructure”
projects, which focus on either municipal water supply and wastewater treatment
facilities or surface water resource protection and development. Before 1992, the
Corps had not been involved in these types of projects.
Authorization of environmental infrastructure projects and billions of dollars in
new activities is part of the debate about what the central missions of the agency are,
and how best to focus the agency’s resources and budget on projects that address
those missions. The Bush Administration’s position has been to recommend new
authorizations only for priority projects in the agency’s core mission areas of
navigation, flood control, and ecosystem restoration, and to control the federal
financial commitment through lower federal responsibility in the cost-share for
projects. The Administration — in Statements of Administration Policy on WRDA
bills of the 109th Congress written by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
and in a September 22, 2006, letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Army to the
Chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure — expressed
concerns about the authorization levels in the bills considered by the 109th Congress,
which ranged from approximately $11 billion to $15 billion.
Current Issues
Corps Reform
Support for changing the Corps’ practices gained momentum in 2000 in the
wake of a series of critical articles in the Washington Post, whistleblower allegations,
and ensuing investigations. The failure of Corps-constructed floodwalls in New
Orleans and the findings of subsequent investigations have strengthened support for
some Corps reform measures.
CRS-4
Many advocates for change, primarily environmental groups, seek to modify
Corps project planning (e.g., by changing the cost-benefit analysis and consideration
of environmental impacts and benefits), to require additional review of Corps
projects (e.g., through external review of Corps feasibility reports), and to strengthen
environmental protection (e.g., through modifications to fish and wildlife mitigation
requirements); these kinds of changes often are referred to as “Corps reform.”
Although Corps reforms were discussed in the 106th,2 107th, 108th, and 109th
Congresses, no significant changes were enacted. The Corps argues that it has
transformed itself by policies it has implemented since 2000; these include
refinements in consideration of environmental benefits during planning, internal peer
review, and guidance about optional external review.3
Other stakeholders argue that any changes should move the agency in a different
direction than the measures pursued by environmental groups. Supporters of
streamlining Corps practices, which include many of the nonfederal project sponsors
for Corps projects, argue that the provisions supported by the environmental groups
are unnecessary and add delay, cost, and uncertainty to an already lengthy project
development and construction process. They want to increase the predictability of the
Corps planning process by making changes such as standardizing planning
procedures, models, and data; limiting the length of studies; and requiring tracking
of the agency’s construction backlog.
Independent Review. Independent review of Corps projects is likely to
remain a central issue in the WRDA debate because of differences over not only the
need for review, but also other aspects of a review process. The 110th Congress is
likely to confront different opinions on whether to limit review to technical issues or
to include policy issues; which projects, documents, and planning tools to exempt
from review; who should perform and direct the reviews; what responses to review
recommendations would be required; and whether review would be conducted on
projects under construction. The Administration supports some independent peer
review.
2 Although the 106th Congress did not enact Corps changes, it asked the National Academy
of Sciences to review Corps planning in §216 of WRDA 2000. In April 2004, the
Academy’s National Research Council (NRC) published four reports from this review.
Each report recommended changes in Corps practices and the larger federal water resources
management and organizational context. The four 2004 National Research Council reports
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press) were Adaptive Management for Water
Resources Planning; Analytic Methods and Approaches for Water Resources Project
Planning; River Basins and Coastal Systems Planning Within the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers; and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources Planning: A New
Opportunity for Service.
3 The Corps released five new policy documents in 2005 to be tested as guidance for the
agency’s planning activities, which are available at [http://www.usace.army.mil/
publications/eng-circulars/ec-cw.html]. One, on collaborative planning of Corps projects,
is an update to the agency’s planning guidance. Another set out processes for the peer
review of scientific, engineering, and economic information and assessments used to inform
decision-making. Another established a Civil Works Review Board that approves the final
planning reports before submitting them to the Chief of Engineers.
CRS-5
Coastal Louisiana
The Corps has a prominent role in New Orleans and southeast Louisiana
hurricane recovery efforts, including repairing damaged floodwalls and levees and
strengthening hurricane resiliency through infrastructure fortification and long-term
wetlands restoration. The Corps is repairing and strengthening much of the area’s
hurricane protection levees and floodwalls using authority and funding provided in
supplemental appropriations legislation.
The 109th Congress, on the last day of the session (December 9, 2006), passed
the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432); it shares 37.5% of
certain offshore oil and gas revenues with four specified Gulf coast states, including
Louisiana. These funds, which may be almost $350 million over the next decade and
more than $25 billion over the next 45 years, according to a July 2006 OMB
projection, are to be used for projects and activities to provide coastal protection,
including conservation, coastal restoration, hurricane protection, and infrastructure
directly affected by coastal wetland losses, as well as fish and wildlife mitigation.
The law increases funding available in Louisiana to commit to the nonfederal portion
of restoration and hurricane protection efforts that may be considered for
authorization within the context of WRDA during the 110th Congress.
Wetlands Restoration and Protection. Coastal wetlands in Louisiana
have been disappearing at a high rate, as a result of both human activities and natural
processes. Those losses are forecast to continue if no actions are taken to reverse
current trends. Federal agencies, led by the Corps and in coordination with the state,
developed several versions of plans to slow the rate of loss and restore some of these
wetlands. The current Corps feasibility report was released in November 2004,
before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. It received a favorable recommendation in
January 2005 in a report by the Corps’ Chief of Engineers. The report recommended
measures totaling an estimated $1.997 billion — $1.123 billion for projects and
programs for immediate authorization, $0.145 billion for investigations of “large-
scale concepts” that have already been authorized, and $0.728 billion for future
authorization of ten restoration features. The Corps’ feasibility report proposed
activities to divert water from the Mississippi River to convey sediments into nearby
wetlands, and to help stabilize the coastline. The federal government would pay
about 64% of the total estimated cost. In the diversions, wetlands would gradually
reestablish themselves on newly deposited sediments.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita altered the debate over wetlands restoration
proposals and the cost-share for restoration investments. Many restoration
proponents are calling for more extensive efforts than were in the versions of WRDA
passed by the House and Senate during the 109th Congress; generally, their support
has centered on a $14 billion proposal developed by a team of state and federal
agencies in the Coast 2050 Plan from 1998.4 Decisions facing Congress include
whether to authorize any coastal Louisiana restoration effort, the extent of the
4 Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force and the Wetlands
Conservation and Restoration Authority, Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal
Louisiana (Baton Rouge, LA, 1998), available at [http://www.lacoast.gov/Programs/2050].
CRS-6
authorized effort, and how to prioritize and find synergies between wetlands
restoration and hurricane protections. These decisions may take place in the context
of WRDA or other legislation.
While generally supporting coastal Louisiana wetlands restoration language in
the 109th Congress WRDA bills, the Administration’s position differed from the
legislative language in many respects. For example, an OMB Statement of
Administration Policy on the a version of the Senate bill recommended a single
generic (programmatic) authorization covering all studies, construction, and science
activities, rather than the separate authorizations provided in the pending legislation.
The Administration argued that this would provide more flexibility and expediency.
The OMB Statements of Administration Policy for the 109th Congress WRDA bills
recommended a cost-share of 50% federal-50% nonfederal.
Hurricane Protection and Navigation. In addition to provisions
authorizing coastal wetlands restoration efforts, the 109th Congress WRDA bills also
contained numerous provisions related to Corps hurricane protection and navigation
projects in Louisiana. Both versions would have authorized the $0.9 billion
Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico project; this hurricane protection project had been
recommended by the Corps’ Chief of Engineers in 2002.
Specific measures proposed after Hurricane Katrina to fortify the structural
elements of the hurricane protection system protecting New Orleans and other
portions of southeast Louisiana may require congressional authorization. H.R. 5461
— Meeting Authorization Requirements for the Coast Act of 2006 — from the 109th
Congress provides examples of some of these measures. These specific measures
were absent from the Senate-passed version of a WRDA bill in the 109th Congress,
and the pre-Katrina House-passed bill. Although the Senate-passed H.R. 2864 did
not address these specific authorizations, it included general provisions related to
authorizing hurricane protection projects for coastal Louisiana. The Senate version
contained a provision that would require a report on comprehensive hurricane
protection to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, based on the results of an ongoing
study (which was authorized in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act for FY2006, P.L. 109-103). The Senate version would have provided the
Secretary of the Army authority to construct the projects identified in the report
following committee resolutions by the two committees. This would have differed
from the typical Corps process of projects requiring specific authorization by
Congress in enacted legislation before appropriations are directed to the Corps for
construction activities. The Administration in its Statement of Administration Policy
on the Senate version objected to conditional pre-authorization of projects; its
statement noted that the projects were yet to be identified, and the costs were likely
to measure in the tens of billions.
The Senate version included provisions for financial assistance for moving
deep-draft navigation facilities that may be affected by the possible permanent
closure of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO). For more information on the
MRGO, see CRS Report RL33597, Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO): Issues
for Congress, by Nicole T. Carter and Charles V. Stern.
CRS-7
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway
The Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway (UMR-IWW) is at the
center of a debate over the future of inland navigation, the restoration of rivers used
for multiple purposes, and the reliability and completeness of the Corps analyses
justifying investments. Consequently, authorization of investments in navigation and
ecosystem restoration of the UMR-IWW is likely to have a role in WRDA debates
in the 110th Congress; topics being debated include the urgency, necessity, and
national benefit of expanded UMR-IWW navigation capacity and ecosystem
restoration.
The UMR-IWW is a 1,200-mile, 9-foot-deep navigation channel created by 37
lock-and-dam sites and thousands of channel structures. The UMR-IWW makes
commercial navigation possible between Minneapolis and St. Louis on the
Mississippi River, and along the Illinois Waterway from Chicago to the Mississippi
River. It permits upper midwestern states to benefit from low-cost barge transport.
Since the 1980s, the system has experienced increasing traffic delays, purportedly
reducing competitiveness of U.S. products in some global markets. The river is also
losing the habitat diversity that allowed it to support an unusually large number of
species for a temperate river system. This loss is partially attributable to changes in
the distribution and movement of river water caused by navigation structures and
operation of the 9-foot navigation channel.
The Corps’ feasibility report failed to significantly reduce the debate over the
urgency, necessity, and national benefit of expanded navigation capacity.5 Following
the Corps’ Chief of Engineers approval of the completed feasibility report on UMR-
IWW improvements in December 2004,6 the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil
Works) requested that an economic reevaluation of the navigation investments be
made available by the end of September 2007.
The Corps’ ecosystem restoration plan has been less controversial than the
navigation plan. General agreement exists that the ecosystem is declining, and
general support exists for the 15-year increment of the Corps’ 50-year ecosystem
restoration plan. Debate over the restoration proposal focuses primarily on
5 For a 2004 CRS analysis of key factors affecting the attractiveness of these navigation
investments, see CRS Report RL32470, Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway
Navigation Expansion: An Agricultural Transportation and Environmental Context,
coordinated by Randy Schnepf. The National Research Council (Washington, DC: National
Academy Press) has reviewed and reported on the UMR-IWW proposals in Inland
Navigation System Planning: The Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway (2001);
Review of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Upper Mississippi-Illinois Waterway
Restructured Study: Interim Report (2003); and Review of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Restructured Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway Feasibility Study: Second Report
(2004).
6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement for the UMR-IWW System Navigation Feasibility Study
(Rock Island District, St. Louis District, St. Paul District, Sept. 24, 2004), pp. 230 and 490.
Available at [http://www2.mvr.usace.army.mil/umr-iwwsns/documents/FINAL_FES_EIS_
Report_Cover(2004).pdf].
CRS-8
implementation strategies, including linkages between the ecosystem restoration and
navigation investments, and the federal-nonfederal cost-share for restoration
activities.7 OMB’s Statements of Administration Policy have been critical of the
WRDA bills considered by the 109th Congress because of the estimated 91% federal-
9% nonfederal cost-share for ecosystem restoration for the Upper Mississippi River
Basin. The Administration recommended a 50%-50% cost-share.
Everglades Restoration
The largest Corps ecosystem restoration effort to date is in the Florida
Everglades, with a three-decade, $10.9 billion restoration program. Congress
approved the Corps’ implementation of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Plan (CERP) as a framework for Everglades restoration in WRDA 2000. The
principal objective of CERP is to redirect and store freshwater currently diverted
away from the Everglades to the ocean, and to use the retained water to restore the
natural hydrologic functions of the south Florida ecosystem. WRDA 2000
authorized an initial set of CERP restoration projects, as well as $700 million in
federal funds to implement them, and established a process for additional projects
contemplated in the 1999 CERP plan to be developed and authorized. Authorization
language for two of these additional projects — Indian River Lagoon-South (IRL-S)
wetlands and estuarine restoration and the Picayune Strand ecosystem restoration
(also known as Southern Golden Gates Estates ecosystem restoration) — was
considered in WRDA bills in the 109th Congress. These two projects are the first to
be developed under the process established in WRDA 2000; consequently, some
view their fate as a test case of the CERP framework. Consideration of WRDA in
the 110th Congress will likely include these two projects.
Indian River Lagoon. The Indian River Lagoon is a 156-mile-long estuary
located at the mouth of the St. Lucie River in eastern Florida. The IRL-S has been
altered by unnaturally large and poorly timed freshwater discharges arriving from the
St. Lucie Canal and other elements of the Central and Southern Florida drainage
project. These discharges have altered water quality and may have contributed to
depleted water supplies in the Everglades ecosystem. The significance of these
ecosystem problems is exacerbated by the high biodiversity found in the IRL-S.
A project for estuarine and wetland ecosystem restoration for the IRL-S has
been submitted to Congress and recommended for authorization following a
favorable review by various levels of the Administration. The recommended plan
would divert canal discharges to storage reservoirs and for dispersal throughout the
IRL-S ecosystem. Storage areas would improve native habitat (which is a goal of the
larger Everglades restoration plan) and reduce phosphorus and nitrogen loads into the
IRL-S. The recommended project has evolved since the activities proposed in CERP;
in that document, the estimated cost for the activities that now make up the
recommended IRL-S project was less than $1 billion and consisted primarily of
7 For more information, see CRS Report RL32630, Upper Mississippi River System:
Proposals to Restore an Inland Waterway’s Ecosystem, by Kyna Powers and Nicole T.
Carter.
CRS-9
artificial storage reservoirs. The 2006 cost estimate for this project is $1.3 billion.
The federal share would be approximately $650 million.
Some supporters of the Indian River Lagoon restoration project argue that the
project will improve estuarine and wetlands resources in the lagoon and water quality
in the larger Everglades ecosystem. Others, however, suggest that even though the
project will help the estuarine ecosystem, it will not completely attenuate the
damaging freshwater flows. Critics of the project also argue that IRL-S restoration
benefits are largely local, with little impact on the larger Everglades ecosystem.
Another concern that has been raised is increasing project costs.
Picayune Strand Restoration. The Picayune Strand restoration project
(also known as the Southern Golden Gates Estates project), if authorized, is designed
provide freshwater flows to natural areas, lower freshwater surges to the ocean, and
improve water quality. The project is awaiting a favorable review by OMB before
being submitted by the Administration to Congress for authorization. The nonfederal
project sponsor (the State of Florida) has spent nearly $100 million on land
acquisition; most of the remaining project expenses are for design and construction
of the project. The 2004 cost estimate for the project is $362 million; the federal
share would be approximately $181 million. Nearly 98% of the land needed for the
project is in public ownership and all 1,800 parcels (representing almost 1,500
landowners) have been acquired, some through eminent domain. Some stakeholders
are concerned that the accessibility of Picayune Strand for recreation will be lowered
due to restoration activities. The state has responded that it will provide areas for
off-road vehicles and other recreational activities.
Concluding Remarks
Recent debates about authorizations for the Corps’ water resources activities
have taken place in the context of omnibus WRDA bills. Like WRDA debates in
recent Congresses, the debate in the 110th Congress likely will be dominated by
different opinions over the desirability and need for changing the agency’s policies,
practices, and accountability, and for authorizing multi-billion dollar investments in
ecosystem restoration, navigation, and flood and storm damage reduction measures.
The growing backlog of Corps construction and maintenance activities, constraints
on federal water resources funds, the nation’s aging water resources infrastructure,
failure of the Corps-constructed floodwalls in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina,
and increased attention to the flood risks of urban areas have raised concerns about
continuing the practice of adding billions of dollars in authorizations to the Corps’
portfolio of activities through omnibus WRDA legislation. However, many factors
maintain the popularity of this vehicle among legislators, and nonfederal project
sponsors create demand for its passage, prompting its likely continued use.
Water resources management and policy issues facing the Corps and the nation
may arise outside of consideration of a WRDA bill. These issues may receive
legislative action in other vehicles, be the subject of amendments proposed to WRDA
bills or appropriations legislation, or be the subject of congressional oversight. An
example of an ongoing water resource issue affecting the Corps and the nation that
CRS-10
may receive congressional attention outside of WRDA is multi-use river
management. An array of interests are questioning current river management
practices across the nation and how management can balance benefits (and harm)
across multiple river uses, including in-stream uses. How the nation uses and values
its rivers has changed over time. Rivers now are seen as providing not only
economic benefits but also recreational opportunities and species habitat. This shift
has resulted in a reexamination by the courts, agencies, and stakeholders of the
distribution of economic and other benefits of management alternatives. For
example, Missouri River management raises some fundamental questions about
water resources management, such as whether some river uses should take priority
over others (e.g., threatened and endangered species protection over inland waterway
transportation, or vice versa) and how precedence should be decided (e.g., balancing
competing uses versus maximizing economic benefits). The river’s management is
a prime example of the complex issues in which the Corps is embroiled that often
result in congressional consideration through oversight or legislative language in
WRDA or other bills.
A broad water resource issue that is unlikely to be directly addressed by WRDA,
but is significant to the agency and the nation, is the federal role in water resources.
Hurricane Katrina raised questions about this role; in particular, the disaster brought
attention to the trade-offs in benefits, costs, and risks of the current division of
responsibilities among local, state, and federal entities for flood mitigation,
preparedness, response, and recovery. The question of the federal role also is raised
by increasing competition over water supplies, not only in the West but also for urban
centers in the East (e.g., Atlanta), which have resulted in a growing number of
communities seeking financial and other federal assistance, actions, and permits
related to water supply development (e.g., desalination and water reuse projects,
reservoir expansions and reoperations). Congress rarely chooses to pursue broad
legislation on federal water resources policies for many reasons, including the
challenge of enacting changes that affect such a wide breadth of constituencies.
Instead, Congress traditionally has pursued incremental changes through WRDA bills
and other legislation, and this pattern seems likely to continue.
CRS-11
For Additional Reading
Background
CRS Report RS20866, The Civil Works Program of the Army Corps of Engineers:
A Primer, by Nicole T. Carter and Betsy A. Cody.
CRS Report RL32064, Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources Activities:
Authorization and Appropriations, by Nicole T. Carter and H. Steven Hughes.
Authorizations and WRDA
Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate, H.R. 2557, Water Resources
Development Act of 2003, as ordered reported by the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure on July 23, 2003.
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of
Administration Policy on H.R. 2864 (made on July 14, 2005), available at
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/109-1/hr2864sap-h.pdf].
——. Statement of Administration Policy on S. 728 (made on July 18, 2006),
available at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/109-2/s728sap-s.
pdf].
Coastal Louisiana
CRS Report RS22110, Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Restoration: The Recommended
Corps Plan, by Jeffrey Zinn.
CRS Report RS22467, Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act
(CWPPRA): Effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, by Jeffrey A. Zinn.
CRS Report RS22276, Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Restoration After Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, by Jeffrey A. Zinn.
CRS Report RL33597, Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO): Issues for Congress,
by Nicole T. Carter and Charles V. Stern.
CRS Report RL33188, Protecting New Orleans: From Hurricane Barriers to
Floodwalls, by Nicole T. Carter.
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway
CRS Report RL32470, Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway Navigation
Expansion: An Agricultural Transportation and Environmental Context,
Coordinated by Randy Schnepf.
CRS Report RL32630, Upper Mississippi River System: Proposals to Restore an
Inland Waterway’s Ecosystem, by Kyna Powers and Nicole T. Carter.
CRS-12
CRS Report RL32915, Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway Investments:
Legislation in the 109th Congress, by Nicole T. Carter.
Everglades Restoration
CRS Report RS20702, South Florida Ecosystem Restoration and the Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan, by Pervaze A. Sheikh and Nicole T. Carter.
CRS Report RS22048, Everglades Restoration: The Federal Role in Funding, by
Pervaze A. Sheikh and Nicole T. Carter.