Located within the Department of Defense, the Corps has both military and civilian responsibilities. Through its Civil Works program, the Corps plans, designs, constructs, operates, and maintains a wide range of water resources infrastructure projects for purposes such as flood control, navigation, and environmental restoration. The Civil Works program is organized into three tiers: a national headquarters in Washington, D.C.; eight regional divisions that were established generally according to watershed boundaries; and 38 districts nationwide (see fig. 1). Corps headquarters primarily develops policies and provides oversight. The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, appointed by the President, establishes the policy direction for the Civil Works program. The Chief of Engineers, a military officer, oversees the Corps’ civil works operations and reports on civil works matters to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. The eight divisions, commanded by military officers, coordinate civil works projects in the districts within their respective geographic areas. Corps districts, also commanded by military officers, are responsible for planning, engineering, constructing, and managing water resources infrastructure projects in their districts. Districts are responsible for coordinating with the nonfederal sponsors, which may be state, tribal, county, or local governments or agencies. Each project has a project delivery team of civilian employees that manages the project over its life cycle. The team is led by a project manager and comprises members from the planning, engineering, construction, operations, and real estate functions. In addition, the Civil Works program maintains a number of centers of expertise and research laboratories to assist the Corps divisions and districts in the planning, design, and technical review of civil works projects. The Corps established these centers to consolidate expertise, improve consistency, reduce redundancy, and enhance institutional knowledge, among other things. Unlike many other federal agencies that have budgets established for broad program activities, most Corps civil works funds are appropriated for specific projects. In general, the Corps receives “no-year” appropriations through the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act—that is, there are no time limits on when the funds may be obligated or expended, and the funds remain available for their original purposes until expended. The conference report accompanying the annual Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act generally lists individual projects and specific allocations of funding for each project. Through this report, the appropriations committees essentially outline their priorities for the Corps’ water resources projects. Congress directs funds for many individual projects in increments over the course of several years. The Corps is responsible for planning, designing, and operating much of the nation’s water resources infrastructure. To do so, the Corps generally goes through a series of steps involving internal and external stakeholders. Usually, the Corps becomes involved in water resources infrastructure projects when a local community perceives a need or experiences a problem that is beyond its ability to solve and contacts the Corps for assistance. If the Corps does not have the statutory authority required for studying the problem, the Corps must obtain authorization from Congress before proceeding. Studies have been authorized through legislation, typically a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), or, in some circumstances, through a committee resolution by an authorizing committee. Next, the Corps must receive an appropriation to study the project, which it seeks through its annual budget request to Congress. After receiving authorization and an appropriation, a feasibility study is to be conducted. A Corps district office is to conduct a feasibility study, the cost of which is generally shared by a nonfederal sponsor, which may be a state, tribal, county, or local government, or agency. The feasibility study investigates the problem and makes recommendations on whether the project is worth pursuing and how the problem should be addressed. The district office is to conduct the study and any needed environmental studies and document the results in a feasibility report. At specific points within the feasibility stage, a new infrastructure project is to undergo a series of technical reviews at the district, regional, and national level to assess the project’s methodology and to ensure that all relevant data and construction techniques are considered. At the district level, all decision documents and their supporting analysis for a new project are to undergo a district quality control review by district leadership. This review is to assess the science and engineering work products to ensure that they are fulfilling project quality requirements. At the regional level, decision documents are to undergo an agency technical review by Corps officials from districts outside of the one conducting the study. This review verifies the district quality control review, assesses whether the analyses presented are technically correct and comply with published Corps guidance, and determines whether the documents explain the analyses and results in a reasonably clear manner for the public and decision makers. In some instances, a new project meeting certain criteria may also undergo an Independent External Peer Review. For these Independent External Peer Reviews, the Corps is required by law to contract with the National Academy of Sciences, a similar independent scientific and technical advisory organization, or an “eligible organization” to establish a panel of experts that will review a project study. Several criteria are used for selecting peer review panel members, including assessing and balancing members’ knowledge, experience, and perspectives in terms of the subtleties and complexities of the particular scientific, technical, and other issues to be addressed. After going through various levels of review, depending on the project, the Chief of Engineers is to review the report and decide whether to sign a final decision document, known as the Chief’s Report, recommending the project for construction. The Chief of Engineers is to transmit the Chief’s Report and the supporting documentation to Congress through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works and the Office of Management and Budget. Congress may authorize the project’s construction in a WRDA or other legislation. Most infrastructure projects are authorized during the preconstruction engineering and design phase, which begins after the feasibility study is complete. The purpose of this phase is to complete any additional planning studies and all of the detailed technical studies and designs needed to begin construction of the infrastructure project. Once the construction project has been authorized, the Corps seeks funds to construct the infrastructure project through the annual budget formulation process. As part of the budget process, the Army, with input and data from Corps headquarters, division, and district offices, develops a budget request for the agency. In fiscal year 2006, the Corps introduced what it refers to as performance-based budgeting, which uses performance metrics to evaluate projects’ estimated future outcomes and gives priority to those it determines have the highest expected returns for the national economy and the environment, as well as those that reduce risk to human life. Congress directs funds for individual projects in increments over the course of several years. If the infrastructure project has been appropriated funds, the district enters into a cost-sharing agreement with the nonfederal sponsor. Section 2035 of WRDA 2007 as amended (Pub. L. No. 110-114, § 2035 (2007), as amended by Pub. L. No. 113-121, § 3028 (2014)) requires the Chief of Engineers to ensure that the design and construction activities for hurricane and storm damage reduction and flood damage reduction projects have a safety assurance review by independent experts if the Chief of Engineers determines that such a review is necessary to assure public health, safety, and welfare, prior to initiation of physical construction and periodically thereafter until construction activities are completed. authorized purposes in consultation with interested stakeholders in the area of the project that may be impacted by its operations. In addition to water control manuals for individual projects, the Corps may also have master water control manuals that outline the operations of a system of projects. The Corps may also develop operational guidance for non- Corps projects if, for example, the Corps has responsibility for flood control or other operations at that project. Water control manuals typically outline the operating criteria and guidelines for varying conditions and specifications for water storage and releases from a reservoir, including instructions for obtaining and reporting appropriate hydrologic data. The Corps uses a variety of hydrologic data—data relating to the movement and distribution of water—and forecasting data in its planning, designing, and operation of water resources infrastructure that can help it plan for extreme weather events. Much of these data are collected by other federal agencies as part of nationwide efforts to gather weather and hydrologic data. Table 1 shows examples of the type of hydrologic data collected by various federal agencies and used by the Corps. Corps officials and reports by federal agencies have highlighted limitations in some of the data the Corps uses in its planning, design, and operations of water resources infrastructure. Examples include the following: Streamflow. The Corps uses streamflow information from the National Streamflow Information Program in its planning, designing, and daily operations. However, according to Corps officials and USGS data, loss of streamgages due to funding constraints has reduced the available information about streamflows. According to USGS, from 1995 to 2008, 948 critical streamgages with 30 or more years of records were discontinued. Further, a USGS report noted that the loss of long-record streamgages reduces the potential value of streamflow information for infrastructure operations and design applications. Streamgage data are also used to produce climate change information upon which the Corps bases its adaptation planning. Despite these losses, the Corps has a formal agreement to provide funding to USGS to operate streamgages that provide data for the Corps’ water management activities and in fiscal year 2013 provided USGS with $18 million. Precipitation related to extreme storms. Until 1999, the Corps used NWS Hydrometeorological Reports (site-specific probable maximum precipitation studies) for its designs. However, NWS discontinued providing these services in 1999 due to lack of funding, and some Corps officials said they have been using outdated data since that time. In response, the Corps has worked with the Interagency Federal Work Group on Extreme Storm Events since 2008 and established its own Extreme Storm Team to address Corps data needs, as well as the needs of other agencies. Plains snowpack. The Corps uses plains snowpack data in its runoff forecasting for operations.