Welcome, General Flowers.
In the short time I have been in the Senate, I have taken an active interest in the civil works mission of the Army Corps of Engineers. As the former Chairman of this subcommittee, I have worked on both Water Resources Development Act bills that were considered in the 106th Congress. I am proud to have been the sponsor of WRDA 2000, which Congress passed last November and was signed into law in December.
The year 2000 was a difficult one for the Corps. A series of articles in the Washington Post headlined increasing criticism about the objectivity of the Corps' project evaluation process of significant water development projects across the country, including the Upper Mississippi River Illinois Waterway navigation project.
Last December, both the findings of the Special Counsel and the report of the Army Inspector General were released, substantiating earlier allegations that Corps officials exerted improper influence and manipulated a cost-benefit analysis in order to justify lock extensions on the Upper Mississippi River Illinois Waterway.
These findings raise doubts about the integrity of the Corps's project evaluation and development processes. Quite frankly, there are many in Congress who have lost faith in the Corps.
Candidly, I am upset that the Corps patently dismissed as "exaggerations" the allegations made public by whistleblower Dr. Donald Sweeny who said that senior Corps officials manipulated the Upper Mississippi study to produce results favoring large scale construction. These "exaggerations" that the Corps dismissed were later substantiated by the Army's own Inspector General. In addition, the Corps' economic analysis that was part of the Upper Mississippi study was verified to be "flawed" by the independent National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council.
However, I believe the Corps plays a vital role in navigation and storm-damage mitigation throughout the United States and should be given the opportunity to redeem itself.
The Corps needs to ensure that its process of planning and recommending projects is open, objective, and inclusive and that each project evaluation meets the highest standards of professionalism and quality. Further, we must be able to continue to rely on the Corps to recommend to Congress for authorization and funding only projects that make maximum net contributions to economic development and environmental quality.
To that end, I supported a provision in WRDA 2000 that directs the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of independent peer review of Corps projects and a study of Corps methods of conducting economic and environmental analysis or projects. In fact, the National Research Council recently recommended that Congress direct the Corps to have its feasibility study of the Upper Mississippi River project reviewed by an outside interdisciplinary group of experts.
I believe the Secretary of the Army took the appropriate action in directing the Chief of Engineers to review the Inspector General's report and the recently-released National Research Council's evaluation report on the Upper Mississippi Illinois River feasibility study to determine what changes should be undertaken in the Corps' conduct of its studies. I look forward to hearing from General Flowers this morning about the status and preliminary findings of this review process.
In addition to restoring Congress' and the general public's confidence in the Corps, the Corps faces other major challenges. Key among these challenges is the relationship between the Chief of Engineers and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. Last year there was a very public and acrimonious argument about the respective roles of the Chief and the Assistant Secretary in the supervision of the Corps civil works program.
These roles were to have been clarified in the memorandum that was signed by the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of the Army for Civil Works on November 28, 2000, and I would appreciate hearing General Flowers' comments on how this memorandum will improve and strengthen their working relationship. Congress will be watching to ensure that the Chief and the new Assistant Secretary, whomever he or she may be, follow through on the agreements laid out in the memorandum. This Senator stands ready to "take another look" at the implementation of this memorandum, and, if need be, make recommendations that additional management reforms be made.
The backlog for construction and operation and maintenance projects is another important and daunting challenge the Corps faces. As my colleagues may well know, there is currently a backlog of $38 billion in active water resources projects awaiting federal funding and a backlog of $450 million in critical maintenance. We need to develop a strategy to address the backlog. Whether it comes from Congress or the Corps or some other outside source, whatever strategy must consider management of the backlog to assure that it only includes needed projects that are economically-justified, environmentally-acceptable, and supported by willing and financially-capable non-federal sponsors.
In constant dollar terms, our federal investment in water resources development is less than one-half of the levels spent in the 1960s. At the same time, we are asking the Corps to do more particularly in the area of environmental restoration.
Although President Bush's "Blueprint Budget" proffers a strategy for addressing some of the backlog, and for giving a high priority to projects and programs in the Corps' principal mission areas, the overall Corps civil works budget is being reduced by 14 percent in fiscal year 2002. I believe we need to address higher levels of funding for both operation and maintenance and construction functions. However given the Administration's approach, I am concerned that the Corps will not be able to adequately meet its current responsibilities. I would be interested to hear if today's witness could possibly shed some light on how the Corps can address its backlog while simultaneously absorbing such a reduction.
Again, I look forward to hearing from General Flowers on all of the challenges facing the Corps and what management reforms are necessary to restore confidence and integrity in the Corps' ability to meet these needs.
Although I am no longer Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, I intend to be quite an active member. I am not going to let up on my call for reforms at the Corps, nor will I let this issue "fall by the wayside." I will ask the Chairman for another hearing later this year to make sure that the Corps is doing what they say they are going to do.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.