Order Code RL32064
Army Corps of Engineers
Water Resources Projects:
Authorization and Appropriations
Updated May 1, 2008
Nicole T. Carter
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
H. Steven Hughes
Analyst in Environmental Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources Projects:
Authorization and Appropriations
Summary
Congress authorizes and appropriates funds for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to conduct water resources studies and projects for navigation,
flood and storm protection, ecosystem restoration, and an array of other purposes.
This report explains how the congressional authorization and appropriations process
overlays the Corps’ project development process. Special attention is given to
initiating a water resources study, the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
process, civil works appropriations, and emergency response activities.
Authorization of Water Resources Activities. Congress generally authorizes
Corps studies generally as part of a WRDA or in a survey resolution passed by an
authorizing committee. WRDAs also include authorizations to construct projects and
changes to policies guiding the Corps civil works program, such as the split of
project costs between the federal government and the nonfederal project sponsors.
Beginning in 1986, a biennial WRDA cycle was loosely followed for a number
of years. Pressure to authorize new projects, increase authorized funding levels, and
modify existing projects is often intense, thus promoting a fairly regular biennial
consideration of WRDA. Controversial projects and policy changes contributed to
a seven-year gap in enactment between WRDA 2000 in December 2000 and WRDA
2007 in November 2007 (P.L. 110-114). WRDA 2007 was the first congressional
override of a veto by President George W. Bush. WRDA 2007 authorized
approximately 900 Corps projects, studies, and modifications to existing
authorizations. (For more information on WRDA 2007, see CRS Report RL33504,
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2007: Corps of Engineers Project
Authorization Issues, coordinated by Nicole T. Carter.) The House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee has begun the process for a WRDA 2008.
Annual Agency Appropriations. Federal funding is provided for the civil
works activities of the Corps primarily through the annual Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act. These appropriations acts also may include
authorizations of Corps activities; authorization provisions in appropriations
provisions, however, may be subject to points of order on the Senate or House floor.
Due in part to competition for limited funding, many authorized activities do not
receive appropriations, resulting in a backlog of authorized construction and
maintenance activities. Few new studies and new construction activities have been
included in the President’s budget request in recent years. For information on recent
Corps appropriations issues, see CRS Report RL34417, Energy and Water
Development: FY2009 Appropriations, by Carl E. Behrens et al.
Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Activities and Appropriations.
In addition to its role in water resources development, the civil works responsibilities
of the Corps include emergency and natural disaster response; some of this work is
conducted through mission assignments directed by Federal Emergency management
Agency (FEMA), and other work is conducted independently through the Corps’
natural disaster response authority.
Contents
Army Corps of Engineers and Its Civil Works Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Initiating a Corps Project: Study Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Corps Project Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Water Resources Development Acts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
WRDA 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Energy and Water Development Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Activities and Appropriations . . 7
National Response Plan Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Corps Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Authority . . . . . . . . 7
List of Tables
Table 1. Project Phases, Duration, and Federal Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources
Projects: Authorization and Appropriations
Army Corps of Engineers and Its Civil Works Program
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is a unique federal agency located
in the Department of Defense with military and civilian responsibilities. At the
direction of Congress under its civil works program, the Corps plans, builds,
operates, and maintains a wide range of water resources facilities.1 The Corps
attracts much congressional attention because its projects can provide significant
economic stimulation, locally and regionally, in addition to their basic resource
development purposes. Congress plays a significant role in the direction of the
agency’s civil works program, particularly through the authorization and
appropriations of studies and projects. In addition to its role in water resources
development, the civil works responsibilities of the Corps include emergency and
natural disaster response, such as flood fighting operations, structural repairs to
levees, and water supply assistance. Some of the agency’s emergency response work
is conducted through mission assignments directed by Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), and other work is conducted independently through
the Corps’ natural disaster response authority.
Within the Corps, projects are largely planned at the district level and approved
at the division and headquarters levels.2 The civil works program is headed by a
civilian Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. A military Chief of
Engineers oversees the Corps’ civil and military operations and reports on civil
works matters to the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works. The agency’s traditional
civil responsibilities are creating and maintaining navigable channels and controlling
floods. During the last decade, Congress has increased Corps responsibilities in the
areas of ecosystem restoration, environmental protection, environmental
infrastructure (e.g., municipal water and wastewater treatment systems), disaster
relief, and other nontraditional activities.
Initiating a Corps Project: Study Authorization
A Corps project often begins with a request for assistance from a community
(e.g., citizens or businesses) or a local or state government entity with a water
resource need (e.g., navigation, flood or storm protection, or ecosystem restoration)
beyond its capability. Congressional sponsorship is generally necessary to
1 For more information on the Corps, its civil works program, and the types of projects that
it undertakes, see CRS Report RS20866, The Civil Works Program of the Army Corps of
Engineers: A Primer, by Nicole T. Carter and Betsy A. Cody.
2 The Corps has 9 civil works divisions and 41 districts. A division and district map is
available at [http://www.usace.army.mil/howdoi/civilmap.htm].
CRS-2
successfully initiate a study. The Corps generally requires two types of congressional
authority to initiate a study — study authorization, then appropriations.3
A study authority allows the Corps to investigate a problem and determine if
there is a federal interest in proceeding further. If the Corps has performed a study
in the geographic area before, a new study can be authorized by a resolution (known
commonly as a “survey resolution”) of either the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee or the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.4
If the Corps has not previously investigated the area, the study needs to be authorized
in an act of Congress, typically a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).5 The
most recent WRDA was enacted in November 2007 (P.L. 110-114).6 The majority
of Corps studies are currently authorized via survey resolutions. Once authorized,
appropriations for Corps studies are sought through the annual Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Acts. The objective of Corps studies is to guide the
decision to authorize a Corps project for construction. Early in the study process, the
Corps assesses the level of interest and support of nonfederal entities that may be
potential sponsors. Nonfederal sponsors are state, tribal, county, or local agencies
or governments that join the Corps in the effort. The authorizations of Corps studies
generally are not time-limited; however, there is a process to begin deauthorization
of studies that have not received appropriations for five years.
Corps Project Development Process
Nonfederal sponsors are involved in not only identifying the water resources
needs, but also contributing to each phase of the development process. Since WRDA
1986 (P.L. 99-662), nonfederal sponsors are responsible for a significant portion of
the financing of studies, construction, and operation and maintenance (O&M) of
most projects. Moreover, nonfederal support is useful in shepherding a project
through the many stages from study initiation to final project construction.
3 Technical assistance and some small projects can be conducted under the Corps’
Continuing Authorities Programs (CAPs) without obtaining a study authorization or specific
appropriations. They are performed at the Corps’ discretion based on the availability of
funds. The CAPs include beach erosion, navigation, flood control, streambank and
shoreline protection, snagging and clearing, modifications to existing projects for the benefit
of the environment, and aquatic ecosystem restoration.
4 To request a study’s inclusion in a resolution, a Member of Congress may send a letter to
the Chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure or the Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works. The number of studies authorized by
resolution varies by Congress. The 108th Congress authorized 63 studies via survey
resolutions; the 109th Congress authorized 29. A survey resolution is permitted under the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1913 (33 U.S.C. §542) for the examination and review of an
earlier Corps report. To be eligible for authorization in a resolution, the new study must stay
within the scope of the authorization of the original report.
5 These acts are commonly distinguished from each other by including a reference to the
year of enactment; for example, WRDA 1986 refers to the act passed in 1986.
6 For more information on WRDA 2007, see CRS Report RL33504, Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA): Corps of Engineers Project Authorization Issues, coordinated
by Nicole T. Carter.
CRS-3
There are three phases that a project passes through before construction begins:
reconnaissance study, feasibility study, and preconstruction engineering and design,
as shown in Table 1.7 All three are conducted under a single congressional study
authorization. The length of each phase varies project by project, with the size and
the complexity of a project typically resulting in a longer process.
Table 1. Project Phases, Duration, and Federal Cost
Preconstruction
Recon-
Feasibility
& Engineering
Construction O&M
naissance
Design
Avg.
authorized
Duration
1
2-3 approx.
2
varies
project
(years)
duration
Federal
varies by
0% with
Share of
100%
50%b
varies by project
project
some
purpose
Costsa
purpose
exceptions
a. For more information on federal and nonfederal cost-share responsibilities for various project
purposes, see CRS Report RS20866, The Civil Works Program of the Army Corps of Engineers:
A Primer, by Nicole T. Carter and Betsy A. Cody.
b. Inland waterways feasibility studies are a 100% federal responsibility (33 U.S.C. §2215). These
projects are not considered to be “local” by their nature, and therefore, do not require a
nonfederal sponsor for the feasibility study.
The reconnaissance study is used to better understand the nature of the water
resources problem and to determine the likelihood of a plan that the Corps can
eventually implement that is in the federal government’s interest. The
reconnaissance study also examines the interest of nonfederal sponsors who are
involved in all phases of project development. Corps policy is to complete most
reconnaissance studies within 12 months; the cost of reconnaissance studies and their
related project study plans are generally limited to $100,000 and done entirely at
federal expense. Around a third of the reconnaissance studies eventually lead to
feasibility studies; only 16 of every 100 reconnaissance studies undertaken by the
Corps lead to constructed projects.8
If a nonfederal sponsorship is secured and the Corps recommends proceeding,
a feasibility study begins. Its objective is to formulate and recommend solutions to
7 More information on the planning process is available in the Planning Guidance Notebook
(Engineer Regulation 1105-2-100), at [http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-regs/
er1105-2-100/toc.htm], and the Project Partnership Kit (IWR Report 96-R-10), at
[http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecw-cp/library/ppkit.pdf]. Corps policies are available in
its Digest of Water Resources Policies and Authorities (EP 1165-2-1), at
[http://www.usace.army.mil/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep1165-2-1/toc.htm].
8 General Robert B. Flowers, Army Corps Chief of Engineers, “Oral Statement,” Reforms
to Address the Corps of Engineers Feasibility Studies, hearing before Senate Environment
and Public Works Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure on March 15, 2001.
The hearing is hereafter referred to as Reform of Feasibility Studies hearing, March 15,
2001. The testimony is available at [http://www.senate.gov/~epw/stm1_107.htm#03-15-01].
CRS-4
the water resources problem. During the first few months of a feasibility analysis,
the local Corps district formulates alternative plans, investigates engineering
feasibility, conducts benefit-cost analyses, and assesses environmental impacts under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. §4321).9 The
evaluation of federal water resources projects, including Corps activities, is governed
by the 1983 Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related Resources
Implementation Studies, written by the Water Resources Council.10 An important
outcome of the feasibility analysis is the determination of whether the project
warrants further federal investment (i.e., if the project has sufficient National
Economic Development benefits).
The cost of the feasibility and environmental studies is split equally between the
Corps and the nonfederal project sponsor. The feasibility phase ends when the Chief
of Engineers signs a final recommendation on the project, known as the Chief’s
Report. In recent years, the Congress has used a favorable Chief’s Report as the basis
for authorizing projects.
The Corps sends an informational copy of the Chief’s Report to Congress when
it transmits the report to the Assistant Secretary and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Since the mid-1990s, Congress has authorized a significant number
of projects based on these informational copies, prior to the projects receiving a full
review by the Assistant Secretary and OMB. Some recent WRDAs have also
included authorizations for projects that were still undergoing feasibility analyses;
these projects generally were authorized contingent on a Chief’s Report being
available by December 31 of the year the WRDA was enacted.
The study phase — preconstruction engineering and design — that follows the
feasibility analysis takes about two years, on average, and is conducted while
pursuing congressional authorization for the project and construction funding. The
preconstruction costs are distributed between the federal and nonfederal sponsor in
the same proportion as the cost-share arrangement for the construction phase. Once
the project receives congressional authorization, federal funds for construction are
sought annually in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. The
federal cost-share for construction varies by project purpose. Nonfederal parties are
responsible for all operation and maintenance expenses, absent a few exceptions
mainly for harbors and inland waterways.
A project is likely to undergo some changes after authorization. If project
features or the estimated project cost changes significantly, an additional
congressional authorization may be necessary. Authorization of a significant
modification is typically sought in a WRDA. For less significant modifications,
however, additional authorization is often not necessary. Section 902 of WRDA
9 Generally, the district produces an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a project
during the feasibility phase; however, projects conducted under continuing authorities
programs may undergo a more limited environmental assessment. An important part of the
feasibility phase are public meetings that are normally held to determine the view of local
interests on the extent and type of improvement desired.
10 Available at [http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecw-cp/library/Principles_Guidelines.pdf].
CRS-5
1986 allows for increases in total project costs of up to 20% due to modifications that
do not materially change the project’s scope or function without requiring additional
authorization. The authorization of Corps construction projects generally are not
time-limited; however, there is a process to begin deauthorization of projects that
have not received appropriations for five years.
Water Resources Development Acts
WRDAs are legislative vehicles that typically are exclusively dedicated to
authorizing Corps activities and establishing policies for Corps civil works activities,
such as cost-share requirements. Authorizations in WRDA usually fall under four
general categories: studies, projects, modifications to existing authorizations, and
programmatic authorizations. Although Congress has historically authorized Corps
projects in a WRDA, authorizations also have appeared in appropriations bills,
especially in years when WRDA passage has been delayed. Authorizations in
appropriations bills, however, generally are discouraged as standard procedure and
may be subject to a point of order on the floor.
Beginning in 1986, a biennial WRDA cycle was loosely followed for a number
of years. WRDAs were 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).11
Pressure to authorize new projects, increase authorized funding levels, and modify
existing projects is often intense, thus promoting a fairly regular biennial
consideration of WRDA, although enactment has been less consistent. Controversial
projects and policy changes contributed to WRDA bills in the 107th, 108th, and 109th
Congresses not being enacted. The 110th Congress enacted WRDA 2007 in
November 2007, by overriding a presidential veto. It authorized $23 billion in Corps
activities. (For more information on WRDA 2007, see CRS Report RL33504, Water
Resources Development Act (WRDA): Corps of Engineers Project Authorization
Issues, coordinated by Nicole T. Carter. )
Once the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee or the
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee decides to consider a WRDA,
Members of Congress may send a letter to the appropriate Committee Chair
requesting the inclusion of a study authorization, project authorization, or project
modification.12 If the WRDA has been introduced in February or early March
(according to a traditional WRDA cycle), Committee staff generally recommend that
letters be sent by late spring; however, no formal deadline exists. The bill reported
11 WRDA 1986 marked the end of a decade or more of stalemate between the 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. Prior to 1986, disputes over these and other matters had
largely prevented enactment of major civil works legislation since 1970. Biennial
authorizations were resumed after WRDA 1986 to avoid long delays between the planning
and execution of projects and for Congress to review proposed projects on a regular basis.
12 If the Administration chooses to make a WRDA proposal, Congress generally receives
the proposal during February of the second year of a Congress, at the same time as the
President’s budget.
CRS-6
by the Committee generally passes that chamber with few changes. Although the
appropriations process determines which studies and projects receive federal funds,
the essential character of a project is established during the authorization process and
is seldom modified substantially during appropriations.
WRDA 2008. The House T&I Committee requested submission of requests
for items to be included in a WRDA 2008 by late April 2008. The committee’s
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on WRDA 2008
on April 30, 2008. At the hearing, the Administration expressed its concerns about
the growing backlog of already authorized Corps projects and pointed out how a
WRDA 2008 could either exacerbate the backlog by adding to it or be used to
establish priorities for managing the backlog and requests for new authorizations.
This position contrasts with the perspective that WRDA 2007 was used primarily to
address the pent-up demand for project authorizations that had accumulated since the
last WRDA in 2000, and that a WRDA 2008 is needed to reestablish the biennial
authorization of Corps projects to address the nation’s water resources needs.
Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Each Congress, through a WRDA and survey resolutions, typically authorizes
dozens or hundreds of new projects; however, many new studies and new
construction projects do not receive appropriations. Fiscal priorities and public
attitudes in recent decades have resulted in declining federal funding for water
resources activities, thus increasing competition for funding among authorized
activities. Moreover during the 1990s and in 2000, Congress authorized not only
navigation and flood control projects, but also ecosystem restoration, environmental
infrastructure assistance, and other nontraditional activities. With enactment of
WRDA 2007, the Corps now has an estimated “backlog” of roughly 1,000 authorized
activities.
To concentrate limited resources and to move projects through construction, the
Bush Administration has focused its budget request on funding priority projects and
those projects near completion that are for flood and storm damage reduction,
navigation, and environmental restoration. It also has substantially reduced
appropriation requests for studies and eliminated the start of most new studies and
construction projects.
Civil works funding often has been a contentious issue between the
Administration and Congress, with final appropriations typically providing more than
requested, regardless of which political party controls the White House and Congress.
Given the backlog of authorized Corps activities and the limited federal budget
resources, Congress and the Administration are sometimes forced to make difficult
choices among competing authorized activities as they prepare annual appropriations.
One consequence of limited resources may be that the appropriated funds for an
individual study or project are insufficient to permit the optimum programming of
work by the Corps. Members of Congress may request that appropriations for a Corps
activity be included (or altered) in an Energy and Water Development appropriations
bill by sending a letter to the Subcommittee Chairman or the Ranking Member of the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. In recent years,
recommended deadlines for these requests have been in March or April for both the
CRS-7
House and Senate. Once appropriations have been allocated for a Corps activity,
funding requests for subsequent years are typically accorded priority until the study
or construction is complete. However, fiscal constraints and Administrative
priorities in recent years have resulted in deviations from this pattern. For
information on recent Corps appropriations issues, see CRS Report RL34417, Energy
and Water Development: FY2009 Appropriations, by Carl E. Behrens et al.
Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Activities
and Appropriations
National Response Plan Activities. The Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. §5170b)
authorizes FEMA to direct Department of Defense to use its resources to provide
assistance in the event of a major disaster or emergency declaration by the President.
Under the National Response Plan,13 the Corps is designated as the coordinator for
emergency support for public works and engineering. Public works and engineering
support include technical assistance, engineering, and construction management as
well as emergency contracting, power, and repair of wastewater and solid waste
facilities. The Corps also is charged with providing assistance in monitoring and
stabilizing damaged structures and demolishing structures designated as immediate
hazards to public health and safety. The Corps’ funding for these activities is
provided through FEMA appropriations, often through supplemental appropriations
legislation.
Under the National Response Plan, the Corps’ responsibilities include
managing, monitoring, and providing technical assistance in clearing, removing, and
disposing of contaminated and uncontaminated debris from public property, and
establishing ground and water routes into affected areas. The management of
contaminated debris is coordinated with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) which is responsible for hazardous materials. Similarly, as part of the Corps’
role in emergency response for public works and engineering, the agency manages
the repair, replacement, and restoration of public water and wastewater systems in
conjunction with other federal agencies, such as EPA, and state and local authorities,
as appropriate.
Corps Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Authority. In
addition to work performed as part of the National Response Plan, P.L. 84-99 (33
U.S.C. §701n) provides the Corps authority for emergency response and disaster
assistance.14 It authorizes disaster preparedness, advance measures, emergency
operations (disaster response and post-flood response), rehabilitation of flood control
works threatened or destroyed by floods, protection or repair of federally authorized
shore protection works threatened or destroyed by coastal storms, emergency
13 Section 502(6) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 authorized the Secretary of
Homeland Security to consolidate federal government emergency response plans into a
single, coordinated National Response Plan, available at:
[http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NRPbaseplan.pdf].
14 The Corps also has other authorities that have emergency response (e.g., an Emergency
Streambank and Shoreline Erosion Protection program) and recovery-related components
(e.g., a Snagging and Clearing for Flood Control program).
CRS-8
dredging, and flood-related rescue operations. These activities are limited to actions
to save lives and protect improved property (public facilities/services and residential
or commercial developments). Although the Corps’ account paying for these
activities may receive some appropriations in the annual Energy and Water
Development Appropriations acts, this initial appropriation is often supplemented
with emergency appropriations specific to the emergency being addressed.