A cursory review of this document shows that it lacks the specificity of a traditional feasibility report. For instance, it lacks a complete analysis of the water quality aspects of the Plan. Restoration of the South Florida ecosystem will involve restoring the appropriate quantity, quality, timing, and distribution of water to the natural system. This restoration effort raises a number of serious questions to me. First, is the Plan adequate to address water quality concerns in the Everglades natural system? Second, what is the magnitude of the likely additional investment required to achieve adequate water quality for restoration of the Everglades natural system? Third, what is the expectation of the State of Florida about federal participation in the additional investment that will be needed to achieve appropriate water quality for the natural system?
I asked the GAO to review the big picture of Everglades restoration and water quality issues on March 29 at a time when my colleagues and I began to take a close look at the Comprehensive Restoration Plan. At that time there were a lot of unanswered questions about how much this would cost and how the package would be put together.
Additionally, I am pleased that GAO was able to act on my request in a swift manner and produce this informative report. In its report, GAO lists several uncertainties in the Plan that will likely lead to additional water quality projects that could increase the total cost of the Plan over the Corp's current estimate of $7.8 billion. For example, the report suggests that the Corps could have a role in future efforts to improve water quality, such as the cleanup of Lake Okeechobee, which is estimated to cost approximately $1 billion. I think it is clear from this report that there are too many unknowns and uncertainties in the Plan to estimate what the final price tag will be.
As authorizers, we need to stay on top of this. This is why I am conducting this hearing today. I cannot emphasize enough the fact that the Corps currently has a construction backlog which consists of over 500 active projects with federal cost to complete of about $38 billion. When the Everglades restoration is considered, this backlog includes the $5.4 billion federal share of work within the State of Florida, representing about 14 percent of the backlog across the country.
With the construction appropriations for the Corps averaging about $1.6 billion a year in the 1990s, there is not enough money to accomplish all of the proposed work in the State of Florida and address the water resources needs of the rest of the nation. Unless the Corps' construction appropriations is substantially increased to meet these needs, the State of Florida in particular and the nation in general are going to have to make some very difficult and painful decisions on priorities.
The GAO recommends that the Secretary of the Army provide the Congress with updates that (1) reflect the cumulative project and cost changes to the overall Plan and (2) indicate the progress being made toward implementing the Plan. GAO recommends that these updates should be made at the same time as Congress considers the Corps' biennial WRDA proposals. I look forward to hearing from GAO this morning about how this recommendation differs from the reporting requirement that has been included in the WRDA 2000 bill on the Everglades.
In addition, I would also like to hear from our witnesses today about opportunities to save costs on the Everglades restoration project and how costs will be shared between the state and federal government if more water quality projects are identified.
On a side note, I am pleased that after months of hard work, the Senate will soon begin floor consideration of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000, legislation that I have sponsored and which includes a $1.4 billion authorization for the Everglades. Perhaps we will even consider it today -- at least we're scheduled to consider the bill today.
Again, I would like to thank all our today's witness for coming to testify on the GAO investigation on the Everglades and water quality issues. I look forward to your testimony and responses to any questions that may follow.