I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4879
To reform the Army Corps of Engineers.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JULY 18, 2000
Mr. KIND (for himself, Mr. BLUMENAUER, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure
A BILL
To reform the Army Corps of Engineers.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the
‘‘Corps of Engineers Reform Act of 2000’’.
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings and purposes.
Sec. 3. Definition of Secretary.
TITLE I—PROJECT PLANNING
Sec. 101. Independent review.
Sec. 102. Stakeholder involvement.
Sec. 103. Monitoring.
Sec. 104. Recommendations.
Sec. 105. Principles and guidelines.
Sec. 106. Environmental Advisory Board.
TITLE II—MITIGATION
Sec. 201. Full mitigation.
Sec. 202. Concurrent mitigation.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:
(1) The Army Corps of Engineers is the pri-
mary Federal agency responsible for developing and
managing the Nation’s harbors, waterways, shore-
lines, and water resources.
(2) Scarce Federal resources require more effi-
cient use of Corps of Engineers funding and greater
oversight of Corps of Engineers analyses.
(3) Demand for recreation, clean water, and
healthy wildlife habitat must be reflected in the
Corps of Engineers project planning process.
(4) The social and environmental impacts of
dams, levees, shoreline stabilization structures, and
other projects must be adequately mitigated.
(5) Affected interests must play a larger role in
Corps of Engineers project development.
(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act are as fol-
lows:
(1) To ensure that the Nation’s water resources
investments are economically justified and enhance
the environment.
(2) To provide independent review of Corps of
Engineers feasibility studies.
(3) To ensure that mitigation for Corps of En-
gineers projects is successful and cost-effective.
(4) To enhance the involvement of affected in-
terests in Corps of Engineers feasibility studies.
(5) To revise Corps of Engineers planning prin-
ciples to meet the economic and environmental needs
of riverside and coastal communities.
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Sec-
retary of the Army.
TITLE I—PROJECT PLANNING
SEC. 101. INDEPENDENT REVIEW.
Title IX of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4183 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
‘‘SEC. 952. INDEPENDENT REVIEW.
‘‘(a) PROJECTS SUBJECT
TO INDEPENDENT RE-
VIEW.—The Secretary shall ensure that feasibility reports
for the following water resources projects are subject to
review by an independent panel of experts established
under this section:
‘‘(1) Projects with an estimated total cost of
more than $25,000,000, including mitigation costs.
‘‘(2) Projects that are controversial, as de-
scribed in subsection (f).
‘‘(b) OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT REVIEW.—
‘‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established in
the Corps of Engineers an Office of Independent Re-
view (in this section referred to as the ‘Office’).
‘‘(2) DIRECTOR.—
‘‘(A) APPOINTMENT.—The head of the Of-
fice shall be the Director of the Office of Inde-
pendent Review (in this section referred to as
the ‘Director’), who shall be appointed by the
Secretary for a term of 3 years.
‘‘(B) 
QUALIFICATIONS.—The 
Secretary
shall select the Director from among individuals
who are distinguished scholars.
‘‘(C) TERMS.—An individual may not serve
for more than 1 term as the Director.
‘‘(3) DUTIES.—The Director shall establish a
panel of experts to review each project subject to re-
view under subsection (a).
‘‘(c) ESTABLISHMENT OF PANELS.—
‘‘(1) MEMBERSHIP.—A panel of experts estab-
lished by the Director for a project shall be com-
posed of not less than 5 and not more than 9 inde-
pendent experts who represent a balance of areas of
expertise, including biologists, engineers, and econo-
mists.
‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON APPOINTMENTS.—The Di-
rector shall not appoint an individual to serve on a
panel of experts for a project if the individual has
a financial or close professional association with any
organization or group with a strong financial or or-
ganizational interest in the project.
‘‘(3) CONSULTATION.—The Director shall con-
sult with the National Academy of Sciences in devel-
oping lists of individuals to serve on panels of ex-
perts under this section.
‘‘(4) COMPENSATION.—An individual serving on
a panel of experts under this section shall be com-
pensated at a rate of pay to be determined by the
Secretary.
‘‘(5) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—An individual serv-
ing on a panel of experts under this section shall re-
ceive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and
5703 of title 5, United States Code.
‘‘(d) DUTIES OF PANELS.—A panel of experts estab-
lished for a project under this section shall—
project is likely to have a significant adverse effect
on fish and wildlife after taking into account any
proposed mitigation plan.
‘‘(g) RECOMMENDATIONS OF PANEL.—After receiv-
ing a report on a project from a panel of experts under
this section, the Secretary shall—
‘‘(1) consider any recommendations contained
in the report;
‘‘(2) make the report available for public re-
view; and
‘‘(3) include a copy of the report in any report
transmitted to Congress concerning the project.
‘‘(h) COSTS.—The cost of conducting a review of a
project under this section shall not exceed $250,000 and
shall be considered as part of the total cost of the project.
The Secretary may waive the $250,000 limitation in the
preceding sentence for good cause.’’.
SEC. 102. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 905 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(e) STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY GROUP.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall estab-
lish a stakeholder advisory group to assist the Sec-
retary with the development of each feasibility study
under subsection (a) and to enhance public partici-
pation in the feasibility study.
‘‘(2) MEMBERSHIP.—The membership of the
advisory group shall include balanced representation
of social, economic, and environmental interest
groups.
‘‘(3) APPLICABILITY
OF FEDERAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
ACT.—The Federal Advisory Com-
mittee Act (15 U.S.C. App.) shall apply to the advi-
sory group.’’.
SEC. 103. MONITORING.
Title IX of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4183 et seq.) is further amended by add-
ing at the end the following:
‘‘SEC. 953. MONITORING.
‘‘The Secretary shall monitor the economic and envi-
ronmental results (including the results of mitigation) of
each water resources project with an estimated total cost
of more than $25,000,000, for a period of not less than
15 years, and shall provide annual reports to Congress on
the performance of the project. The cost of such moni-
toring shall be a Federal expense.’’.
SEC. 104. RECOMMENDATIONS.
Title IX of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4183 et seq.) is further amended by add-
ing at the end the following:
‘‘SEC. 954. RECOMMENDATIONS.
‘‘The Secretary shall not recommend an initial rec-
ommended plan for a proposed project until all project
costs, including mitigation costs, have been calculated.’’.
SEC. 105. PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.
Section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42
U.S.C. 1962–2) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘SEC. 209. CONGRESSIONAL STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It is the intent of Congress that
economic development and environmental protection and
restoration be co-equal goals of water resources planning
and development.
‘‘(b) REVISION OF PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.—
The Secretary shall revise the principles and guidelines for
flood control projects—
‘‘(1) to incorporate—
‘‘(A) a national ecological restoration ac-
count;
‘‘(B) a national economic development ac-
count; and
‘‘(C) an optimum trade-off plan to maxi-
mize the benefits of the accounts;
‘‘(2) to incorporate new techniques in risk and
uncertainty analysis;
‘‘(3) to eliminate biases and disincentives for
nonstructural flood damage reduction projects;
‘‘(4) to incorporate new analytical techniques;
and
‘‘(5) to encourage, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable, the restoration of aquatic ecosystems.
‘‘(c) UPDATE OF GUIDANCE.—The Secretary shall
update the Guidance for Conducting Civil Works Planning
Studies (ER 1105–2–100) to comply with this section.’’.
SEC. 106. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD.
Section 905(b) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282(b)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘(b) Before initiating’’ and in-
serting the following:
‘‘(b) RECONNAISSANCE STUDIES.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Before initiating’’;
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(2) REVIEW
BY
ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVISORY
BOARD.—The Environmental Advisory Board of the
Corps of Engineers shall review all reconnaissance
studies performed under this subsection to assess
whether a proposed project is likely to have environ-
mental impacts that cannot be successfully or cost-
effectively mitigated and shall make recommenda-
tions to the Secretary based on the review. The Sec-
retary shall consider the recommendations of the
Environmental Advisory Board on a project before
recommending that a feasibility study be conducted
for the project based on a reconnaissance report.’’;
and
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of
paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1) of
this subsection) with paragraph (2) (as added by
paragraph (2) of this subsection).
TITLE II—MITIGATION
SEC. 201. FULL MITIGATION.
Section 906(d) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(a)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘(d) After the date’’ and insert-
ing the following:
‘‘(d) MITIGATION PLANS AS PART OF PROJECT PRO-
POSALS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—After the date’’;
(2) in the first sentence of paragraph (1) (as so
designated) by inserting ‘‘fully’’ before ‘‘mitigate’’;
(3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(2) STANDARDS FOR MITIGATION.—To miti-
gate losses to fish and wildlife resulting from a
water resources project, the Secretary shall meet the
highest standards typically required of private par-
ties under related Federal programs and shall, at a
minimum, acquire and restore an acre of habitat to
replace each acre of habitat negatively impacted by
the project. If the project negatively impact re-
sources other than aquatic and terrestrial habitat,
the Secretary shall take steps to ensure that im-
pacted resources, such as fish killed by vessels, are
replaced on at least a one-to-one basis.
‘‘(3) DESIGN OF MITIGATION PROJECTS.—The
Secretary shall design mitigation projects to reflect
contemporary understanding of the importance of
spatial distribution of habitat and the natural hy-
drology of aquatic ecosystems, and shall fully miti-
gate the adverse hydrologic impacts of projects.
‘‘(4) RECOMMENDATION
OF
PROJECTS.—The
Secretary shall not recommend a water resources
project alternative or choose a project alternative in
any final record of decision, environmental impact
statement, or environmental assessment completed
after the date of enactment of this paragraph unless
the Secretary determines that the mitigation plan
for the alternative will cost-effectively and success-
fully mitigate the adverse impacts of the project on
aquatic resources and fish and wildlife.
‘‘(5) COMPLETION
OF
MITIGATION
BEFORE
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW PROJECTS.—The Secretary
shall complete all planned mitigation in a particular
watershed before constructing any new water re-
sources project in that watershed.’’; and
(4) by aligning the remainder of the text of
paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1) of
this subsection) with paragraphs (2) through (5) (as
added by paragraph (3) of this subsection).
SEC. 202. CONCURRENT MITIGATION.
Section 906(a)(1) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(a)(1)) is amended by
adding at the end the following: ‘‘To ensure concurrent
mitigation, the Secretary shall complete 50 percent of re-
quired mitigation before beginning project construction,
and shall use a proportionate amount of project construc-
tion funding to complete the required mitigation.’’.
Æ