Order Code RL33504
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA):
Corps of Engineers Authorization Issues
Updated April 13, 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 new Army Corps of Engineers water resources
studies and projects in a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) before
appropriating funds to them. The 107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses considered but
did not enact WRDA legislation; WRDA enactment previously had loosely followed
a biennial schedule. The most recent WRDA was enacted in 2000. Pent-up demand
for new authorizations is prompting interest in passing a WRDA in 2007. WRDA
2007 — H.R. 1495, which would authorize more than $13 billion in Corps water
resources activities — was reported out of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee on March 15, 2007. The Senate Environment and Public
Works Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure held a hearing on WRDA
topics the same day. On March 29, 2007, the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works met to mark up its version of WRDA 2007; the reported bill is not yet
available.
Issues that shaped WRDA debates in recent Congresses continue to receive
attention. Administration representatives have expressed that the concerns they
raised over the WRDA bills of the 109th Congress continue to exist. The
Administration does not support significant new authorizations in light of a backlog
of authorized construction projects and maintenance activities. The Administration
had expressed concerns about particular provisions of the bills in the 109th Congress;
some, but not all, of these provisions are in H.R. 1495. A draft version of the
Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) for H.R. 1495 reportedly includes not only
concerns raised in SAPs for previous bills but also additional issues, including
concerns with the specifics of the independent review provisions of the bill. Other
issues that may shape WRDA 2007 include different opinions about the specifics of
other Corps reform measures and the specifics of project authorizations, including
authorization for coastal Louisiana, Florida Everglades, and Upper Mississippi River
projects.
H.R. 1495 is based largely on the WRDA bill that passed the House in the 109th
Congress; for example, provisions in H.R. 1495 to change Corps policies (e.g., the
independent review provisions) are the same as in the earlier bill. H.R 1495’s
sponsors generally did not include projects that were not in the 109th House-passed
bill; the sponsors, however, allowed some changes to the contents of the project
authorizations.
H.R. 1495 includes authorizations for a few multibillion-dollar projects. It
would authorize approximately $1.1 billion in activities to restore wetlands in coastal
Louisiana, as well as for additional planning activities. The bill also would authorize
actions to improve hurricane protection and navigation in coastal Louisiana.
Authorization of spending for navigation improvements ($2.0 billion) and ecosystem
restoration ($1.6 billion) on the Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway is
included in H.R. 1495; a House-floor amendment to limit the authorization of the
navigation improvements failed in the 109th Congress. H.R. 1495 would also
authorize $2 billion in activities related to Florida Everglades restoration.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Issues Shaping WRDA Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
WRDAs: Authorizing Corps Studies and Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
WRDAs in Recent Congresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Current Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Corps “Reform” and Policy Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Coastal Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Wetlands Restoration and Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Hurricane Protection and Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Everglades Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Projects Under the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan . . . . 10
Modified Water Deliveries Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
For Additional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authorizations and WRDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Coastal Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Everglades Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

---

Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA): Corps of Engineers
Authorization Issues
Most Recent Developments
The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (H.R. 1495), which would
authorize more than $14 billion in Corps water resources activities, was reported out
of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on March 15, 2007. The
Senate held a hearing on WRDA topics the same day. The Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works met on March 29 to mark up its version of WRDA
2007; the reported bill is not yet available.
H.R. 1495 is based largely on the House-passed WRDA bill (H.R. 2864) of the
109th Congress, which was not enacted. H.R. 1495’s provisions to change Corps
policies (e.g., the independent review provisions) are the same as those in the earlier
bill. H.R. 1495’s sponsors generally did not include projects that were not in the
109th House-passed bill; the sponsors, however, did allow some changes to the
contents of the project authorizations. For example, the Everglades title appears in
both bills, but H.R. 1495 would authorize two projects that were not in the earlier bill
— the $81 million Site 1 Impoundment, and the $144 million Tamiami Trail bridge.
Similarly, the coastal Louisiana restoration title in H.R. 1495 is different in many
respects from the same title in the earlier bill, which was passed before Hurricane
Katrina. Other examples of content changes range from a $4 million authorization
of the Upper Mississippi River dispersal barrier project for aquatic nuisance species,
to a modification to the American River Watershed’s Folsom Dam projects that
would authorize $683 million in construction activities to reduce the City of
Sacramento’s vulnerability to flooding.
Issues Shaping WRDA Consideration. In mid-April 2007, it was reported
that a draft version of the Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) for H.R. 1495
contained not only concerns raised in SAPs for previous bills but also additional
issues, including concerns with the independent review provisions of the bill. In
SAPs and other Administration documents related to WRDA bills considered in
recent Congresses, the Administration has expressed that it does not support
significant new authorizations in light of a backlog of authorized construction

---

CRS-2
projects and maintenance activities and changes to existing federal-nonfederal cost
shares that would increase the cost to the federal government.1
Other issues shaping WRDA 2007 include different opinions about the specifics
of other Corps reform measures and the specifics of project authorizations. Specific
project authorizations shaping WRDA’s consideration include authorization for:
! Coastal Louisiana wetlands restoration, flood and storm protection,
and navigation projects (including authorization of the Morganza to
the Gulf project, and the appropriations level and specifics of the
wetlands restoration authorization for coastal Louisiana),
! Florida Everglades ecosystem restoration projects (including
authorization of activities under the Modified Water Deliveries
Project), and
! Upper Mississippi River navigation and ecosystem restoration
projects (including concerns about linking the funding of navigation
and restoration activities).
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
1 For example, §2002 of H.R. 1495 would increase the federal cost share from 40% to 65%
for construction of deepwater navigation projects, and from 50% to 100% for operation and
maintenance of these projects.

---

CRS-3
previous authorizations. A new WRDA adds to the original language and often
amends provisions of previous acts.
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.2 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, 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.
Because of the number of projects awaiting authorization and the length of time
since Congress enacted the last WRDA in 2000, there is considerable support among
some stakeholders for the 110th Congress to enact a WRDA bill in 2007.
2 For more information on the Corps’ appropriations, see CRS Report RL33346, Energy and
Water Development: FY2007 Appropriations, coordinated by Carl Behrens.

---

CRS-4
A number of factors that complicated WRDA passage in recent Congresses
remain unresolved.3 The authorizations in WRDA are part of a general debate about
the missions of the Corps, and how best to use the agency’s resources and budget.
The Bush Administration has not sent Congress a WRDA proposal; instead, the
Administration expressed concerns about the authorization levels in WRDA bills
from the 109th Congress, which ranged from approximately $11 billion to $15 billion.
The Administration is concerned about the addition of new authorizations to the
existing backlog of authorized Corps activities; some estimates of the existing
backlog exceed $50 billion.
Additionally, the Administration and some stakeholders and policymakers
oppose authorizations for projects outside the agency’s core mission areas of
navigation, flood control, and ecosystem restoration; in particular, they oppose
“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. Environmental infrastructure authorizations in the House-passed bill in the
109th Congress reportedly were one of the issues that complicated conference
negotiations. H.R. 1495 does not authorize new environmental infrastructure
projects; however, it increases the authorization levels for some already authorized
environmental infrastructure projects.
Billion-dollar project authorizations in H.R. 1495 that may receive attention
include:
! Coastal Louisiana: Approximately $1.1 billion in actions to restore
coastal wetlands over the next decade.
! Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway (UMR-IWW): $2.0
billion for navigation improvements and $1.6 billion for ecosystem
restoration.
! Everglades: $2.0 billion for projects under the Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) and other Everglades activities,
including work on Tamiami Trail.
Furthermore, some stakeholders may seek changes to the agency and its
procedures, while other may oppose some of the changes in H.R. 1495. For example,
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.
In the 109th Congress, the Senate-passed language on independent review of Corps
3 Other issues that have not been actively debated in recent WRDA debates also may arise
during the course of congressional consideration in the 110th Congress..For example, §2009
would allow in-kind construction work by nonfederal project sponsors to be credited against
local cost-share responsibilities for Corps projects; this may raise the issue of the
responsibility of these nonfederal sponsors to pay prevailing wages under the 1931 Davis-
Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. §§276a-276a-5). The application of prevailing wages to activities of
nonfederal sponsors was an issue that delayed a WRDA bill’s consideration in 2000. For
more information on the Davis-Bacon Act, see CRS Report 94-908, Davis-Bacon: The Act
and the Literature, by William G. Whittaker.

---

CRS-5
projects differed from the language in H.R. 1495 and previously passed House bills.
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.
Current Issues
Corps “Reform” and Policy Changes
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. Many of the allegations raised were particularly critical
of the Corps UMR-IWW navigation studies that were underway in the 1990s. The
failure of Corps-constructed floodwalls in New Orleans and the findings of
subsequent investigations have strengthened support for some Corps reform
measures.
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,4 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.5
4 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.
5 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-6
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.
H.R. 1495 contains a range of provisions that would change Corps policies. For
example, Section 2037 would create a process for review of studies undertaken
during the development of Corps projects; different opinions persist over how to
structure and limit independent review of Corps projects. Other provisions in H.R.
1495 that would alter the agency’s policies include Sections 2009 and 2019, which
alter agency policies related to the agreements that the agency has with its nonfederal
partners. Sections 2013 and 2014 are related to the wetlands mitigation banking and
fish and wildlife mitigation at Corps projects, respectively. Section 2036 would alter
the consideration of environmental and economic benefits when evaluating project
alternatives during the planning process. Many other sections of the bill would also
change Corps policies.
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 continues to repair and strengthen much of the
area’s hurricane protection levees and floodwalls using authority and funding
provided in supplemental appropriations legislation; funding for this work is an
ongoing appropriations issue.
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 being considered in WRDA 2007.

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,

---

CRS-7
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. (It is important to note that even if this
plan is fully implemented, losses will continue, but at a much slower rate.) The
federal government would pay about 64% of the total estimated cost. In the
diversions, wetlands would gradually reestablish themselves on newly deposited
sediments. The Corps is currently updating its overall plan, and, reportedly, may
release it by the end of 2007.
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 1998.6 Decisions facing Congress include
whether to authorize any coastal Louisiana restoration effort, the extent of the
authorized effort, and how to prioritize and find synergies between wetlands
restoration and hurricane protections. At the state level, the Louisiana Coastal
Protection and Restoration Authority released a draft plan in February 2007 titled
Integrated Ecosystem Restoration and Hurricane Protection: Louisiana’s
Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast. A final version of this plan is
to be submitted to the state legislature later in 2007. While the state is considering
this plan, federal decisions in 2007 seem most likely in the context of WRDA.
The Coastal Louisiana title of H.R. 1495 is similar in some ways to House-
passed WRDA legislation of the 109th Congress, but it has some significant
differences as well. The current legislation calls for the development and periodic
update of a comprehensive plan for coastal Louisiana, and lists several planning
priorities, including not only wetlands creation but also flood protection. It also
would authorize the Corps to carry out a Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) program for
ecosystem restoration, and create a federal-state task force to participate in
developing and implementing the plan. The task force would also function as the
“exclusive peer review panel” for projects subject to the peer-review requirements
established in other sections of H.R. 1495. While the title discusses cost-sharing, it
does not specify the percentage to be paid by nonfederal partners. It would authorize
$10 million for modification of existing projects; $100 million for related scientific
and technical work; $100 million for demonstration projects; $828.3 million for five
specific restoration projects that are close to ready to start (including $105.3 million
for the environmental restoration of the controversial Mississippi River Gulf Outlet);
$100 million to explore using dredged materials in restoration; and $184.6 million
6 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-8
for four additional projects that are in the earlier stages of planning. H.R. 1495 also
would require expedited reports on several specific projects and multiple reports to
Congress on accomplishments and adjustments as the restoration effort moves
forward.
The Administration has not announced a position on this legislation. While it
generally supporting coastal Louisiana wetlands restoration language in the 109th
Congress, 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
Administration’s SAP 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, H.R. 1495 also contains numerous
provisions related to Corps hurricane protection and navigation projects in Louisiana.
The bill would authorize multiple activities to improve New Orleans-area flood and
hurricane storm damage reduction projects, including work to provide a level of
protection that would protect the area from a 1% event, and thus qualify the area for
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Generally these activities were
already appropriated funds through supplemental appropriations legislation in
FY2006. H.R. 1495 provides language that stipulates that the projects can exceed
25% of their authorized amounts; any expenditures above that would require an
increase in the authorization level approved by both the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee. Standard Corps policy requires projects that exceed 20% of their
authorizations to get an increased authorization enacted in legislation.
Among its other provisions, H.R. 1495 also would authorize other hurricane
protection and navigation projects, such as the $0.9 billion Morganza to the Gulf of
Mexico project, and modifications to the New Orleans to Venice hurricane protection
project.
H.R. 1495 would deauthorize the controversial deep-draft Mississippi River
Gulf Outlet (MRGO, Mr. Go) and require a plan for closure and restoration of the
channel within 180 after enactment. It would not authorize financial assistance for
moving deep-draft navigation facilities that may be affected by the possible
permanent closure, which had been included in the Senate-passed version in the 109th
Congress.
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

---

CRS-9
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.7 Following
the Corps’ Chief of Engineers approval of the completed feasibility report on UMR-
IWW improvements in December 2004,8 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 $2.0
billion in navigation investments proposed in recent WRDA bills and in H.R. 1495.
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 implementation strategies,
including linkages between the ecosystem restoration and navigation investments,
and the federal-nonfederal cost-share for restoration activities.9 OMB’s Statements
of Administration Policy on WRDA bills in the 109th Congress were critical of the
7 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).
8 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].
9 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-10
cost-share language for this restoration effort; as the result of numerous exceptions
to the 65% federal-35% nonfederal cost share, the cost of the $1.6 billion in
restoration activities has been estimated as being split at 91% federal-9% nonfederal.
The Administration’s SAP for the 109th Congress WRDA bills recommended a cost-
share of 50% federal-50% nonfederal.
Everglades Restoration
Projects Under the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
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 as a
framework for Everglades restoration in WRDA 2000. The principal objective of
CERP is to redirect and store freshwater that currently flows to the ocean back to the
Everglades, where it originally was kept. The retained water is expected to help
restore the natural hydrologic functions of the Everglades ecosystem. WRDA 2000
authorized an initial set of CERP restoration projects and $700 million in federal
funds to implement them. It also established a process for additional projects
outlined in CERP to be developed and authorized. H.R. 1495 would authorize more
than $1.7 billion in CERP activities, including three projects developed under the
CERP process, in addition to the $1.7 billion authorized in WRDA 2000. Some view
the fate of these first projects as a test case of the CERP framework.
Modified Water Deliveries Project. Prior to CERP, the federal government
and the State of Florida had undertaken other Everglades restoration activities. The
Modified Water Deliveries Project (Mod Waters) is a controversial ecological
restoration project in south Florida designed to improve water delivery to Everglades
National Park.10 The implementation schedule of Mod Waters is of interest to
Congress partly because its completion is required before the implementation of
portions of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. H.R. 1495 addresses
Mod Waters by authorizing the construction of a project known as Tamiami Trail
Modifications (§6008) at a total cost of $144 million and specifying that the
Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior shall equally share the
construction costs. The Tamiami Trail Modifications project aims to increase water
flows to Everglades National Park by raising Tamiami Trail (a state highway) with
a 2-mile and 1-mile bridge. Some contend that this project is part of Mod Waters and
therefore authorized, whereas others contend that is a separate project that requires
authorization. H.R. 1495 would authorize the project and $144 million to fund the
project. The Corps identified this project design as the most cost-effective. Some
stakeholders support a more ecologically desirable design, consisting of a 10.7-mile
bridge (commonly called the skyway), at an estimated cost of $280 million.
Concluding Remarks
10 This project was authorized by the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion
Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-229)

---

CRS-11
Recent debates about authorizations and policies 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 billions of dollars
in 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
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

---

CRS-12
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.
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-13
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 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.
crsphpgw

---