ȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ
DZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱǯȱȱ
ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ
ǯȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ
iki/CRS-RL32064
ȱŘŜǰȱŘŖŖŞȱ
g/w
s.or
ak
le
://wiki
ttp
h
ȱȱȱ
ŝȬśŝŖŖȱ
ǯǯȱ
řŘŖŜŚȱ
ȱȱȱ
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱ
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 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).
Annual Agency Appropriations. Federal funding is provided for the civil works activities of the
iki/CRS-RL32064
Corps primarily through the annual Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. These
g/w
appropriations acts also may include authorizations of Corps activities; authorization provisions
s.or
in appropriations provisions, however, may be subject to points of order on the Senate or House
ak
le
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
://wiki
in recent years.
ttp
h
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.
ȱȱȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ
Army Corps of Engineers and Its Civil Works Program ................................................................. 1
Initiating a Corps Project: Study Authorization .............................................................................. 1
Corps Project Development Process ............................................................................................... 2
Reconnaissance Study ............................................................................................................... 2
Feasibility Study and Construction Authorization .................................................................... 3
Engineering and Design ............................................................................................................ 4
Changes After Construction Authorization ............................................................................... 4
Continuing Authorities Programs .................................................................................................... 4
Water Resources Development Acts................................................................................................ 4
WRDA in the 111th Congress? .................................................................................................. 5
Energy and Water Development Appropriations ............................................................................. 6
Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Activities and Appropriations..................................... 6
National Response Framework Activities ................................................................................. 6
Corps Natural Disaster and Emergency Response Authority.................................................... 7
ȱ
iki/CRS-RL32064
g/w
Table 1. Project Phases, Average Duration, and Federal Cost......................................................... 3
s.or
ak
le
ȱ
://wiki
Author Contact Information ............................................................................................................ 7
ttp
h
ȱȱȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ
ȱ
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is a unique federal agency in the Department of
Defense with military and civilian responsibilities. 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, 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.
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.,
iki/CRS-RL32064
municipal water and wastewater treatment systems), disaster relief, and other nontraditional
g/w
activities.
s.or
ak
le
ȱȱȱDZȱ¢ȱ£ȱ
://wiki
ttp
A Corps project often begins with a request for assistance from a community (e.g., citizens or
h
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 successfully initiate a study. The Corps generally requires
two types of congressional authority to initiate a study—study authorization, then appropriations.
A study authority allows the Corps to investigate a problem and determine if there is a federal
interest. 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.3 If the Corps has not previously investigated, the study needs to be authorized in an
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.
3 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
(continued...)
ȱȱȱ
ŗȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
act of Congress, typically a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).4 Once authorized,
appropriations for Corps studies are sought through the annual Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Acts. The purpose of the study is to inform decisionmakers on whether 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. The authorizations of Corps studies
generally are not time-limited; however, there is a process to begin deauthorization of studies
without funding for five years.
ȱȱȱȱ
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.
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 1.5 All
three are conducted under a single congressional study authorization. The length of each phase
iki/CRS-RL32064
varies project by project, with the size and the complexity of a project typically resulting in a
g/w
longer process.
s.or
ak
le
ȱ¢ȱ
The reconnaissance study is used to understand the nature of the water resources problem and
://wiki
determine the federal government’s interest. The reconnaissance study also examines the interest
ttp
h
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 generally are limited to $100,000 at full federal expense. Around
a third of the reconnaissance studies eventually lead to feasibility studies; only 16 of every 100
reconnaissance studies lead to constructed projects.6
(...continued)
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.
4 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. The most recent WRDA was enacted in November 2007 (P.L.
110-114). For more information on WRDA 2007, see CRS Report RL33504,
Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA) of 2007: Corps of Engineers Project Authorization Issues, by Nicole T. Carter et al.
5 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.
6 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
(continued...)
ȱȱȱ
Řȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
Table 1. Project Phases, Average Duration, and Federal Cost
Reconnaissance Feasibility Preconstruction and
Engineering Design
Construction
O&M
Avg.
authorized
Duration
1
2-3 approx.
2 varies project
(years)
duration
Federal
Share of
100%
50%b
varies by
Costs
project purpose
varies by
project purpose 0% with some
exceptions
a
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 “local” by their nature.
¢ȱ¢ȱȱȱ£ȱ
If a nonfederal sponsorship is secured and the Corps recommends proceeding, a feasibility study
begins. Its objective is to formulate and recommend solutions to 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
iki/CRS-RL32064
environmental impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C.
§4321).7 The evaluation of federal water resources projects, including Corps activities, is
g/w
governed by the 1983
Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related Resources
s.or
Implementation Studies, written by the Water Resources Council.8 An important outcome of the
ak
le
feasibility analysis is the determination of whether the project warrants further federal investment
(i.e., if the project has sufficient National Economic Development benefits).
://wiki
The cost of the feasibility and environmental studies is split equally between the Corps and the
ttp
h
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.
(...continued)
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.
7Generally, the district produces an environmental impact statement (EIS) during the feasibility phase. Preparation
includes public meetings to determine the view of local interests on the extent and type of improvement desired.
8 Available at http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecw-cp/library/Principles_Guidelines.pdf.
ȱȱȱ
řȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
ȱȱȱ
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.
ȱȱȱ£ȱ
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 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 without funding for five years.
iki/CRS-RL32064
g/w
s.or
ȱȱȱ
ak
le
Although the two-step authorization process is the typical process, some technical assistance and
://wiki
small projects can be conducted under the Corps’ Continuing Authorities Programs (CAPs).
ttp
Projects under these authorities can be performed at the Corps’ discretion based on the
h
availability of funds. That is, Congress does not need to specifically authorize either the study or
the construction of the project for the Corps to initiate a CAP project. 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. In recent years, Congress has reduced some of the Corps’ discretion in managing the
CAPs by directing funds to particular CAP projects.
ȱȱȱȱ
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.
ȱȱȱ
Śȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
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).9 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) of 2007:
Corps of Engineers Project Authorization Issues, by Nicole T. Carter et al.)
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.10 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 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.
iki/CRS-RL32064
ȱȱȱŗŗŗȱǵȱ
g/w
s.or
In 2008, the House T&I Committee requested submission of requests for items to be included in a
ak
WRDA 2008, and its Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on
le
WRDA 2008 on April 30, 2008. At the hearing, the Bush Administration expressed its concerns
about the growing backlog of already authorized Corps projects and pointed out how a WRDA
://wiki
2008 could either exacerbate the backlog by adding to it or be used to establish priorities for
ttp
h
managing the backlog and requests for new authorizations. This position contrasts with the
perspective of many in Congress 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
another WRDA is needed to reestablish the biennial authorization of Corps projects to address the
nation’s water resources needs. The debate over the necessity of a WRDA and what types of
activities ought to be authorized in the next bill is likely to continue, especially as alternative
avenues for economic stimulus are considered.
9 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.
10 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.
ȱȱȱ
śȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱ
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 focused its budget request on funding priority projects and those projects near
completion for flood and storm damage reduction, navigation, and environmental restoration. It
also substantially reduced appropriation requests for studies and eliminated the start of most new
studies and construction projects.
Civil works funding often is contentious 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 project backlog and the limited federal budget
resources, decisionmakers are sometimes forced to make difficult choices among competing
authorized activities as they prepare annual appropriations. Members of Congress may request
iki/CRS-RL32064
that appropriations for a Corps activity be included (or altered) in an Energy and Water
g/w
Development appropriations bill by sending a letter to the Subcommittee Chairman or the
s.or
Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. In
ak
le
recent years, recommended deadlines for these requests have been in March or April. 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
://wiki
and Bush Administration priorities resulted in deviations from this pattern.
ttp
h
ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ
ȱȱȱ
ȱȱ ȱȱ
The Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. §5170b) authorizes FEMA to direct Department of Defense to
provide assistance in the event of a major disaster or emergency declaration by the President.
Under the National Response Framework,11 the Corps is designated as the coordinator for
emergency support for
public works and engineering. This includes technical assistance,
engineering, and construction management as well as emergency contracting, power, and repair
of public water and wastewater and solid waste facilities. The Corps also is charged with
assistance to monitor and stabilize damaged structures and demolish structures designated as
11 Section 502(6) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 authorized the Secretary of Homeland Security to consolidate
federal emergency response plans. The framework is available at http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/committees/
editorial_0566.shtm.
ȱȱȱ
Ŝȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱDZȱ£ȱȱȱ
ȱ
immediate hazards to public health and safety. It also provides technical assistance in clearing,
removing, and disposing of contaminated and uncontaminated debris from public property, and
establishing ground and water routes into affected areas; contaminated debris management is
coordinated with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Corps’ funding for these
activities is provided through FEMA appropriations, often through supplemental appropriations.
ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱ
In addition to work performed as part of the National Response Framework, P.L. 84-99 (33
U.S.C. §701n) provides the Corps authority for emergency response and disaster assistance.12 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 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.
iki/CRS-RL32064
ȱȱ ȱ
g/w
s.or
ak
Nicole T. Carter
le
H. Steven Hughes
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
ncarter@crs.loc.gov, 7-0854
hhughes@crs.loc.gov, 7-7268
://wiki
ttp
h
12 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).
ȱȱȱ
ŝȱ