Agenda - Public Works Committee - 10/20/2020

Home

S. 3021-6 the study carried out under subsection (a) to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. (d) CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL. —The Secretary may not imple- ment the findings of the study carried out under subsection (a) unless expressly authorized by Congress. SEC. 1103. STUDY ON ECONOMIC AND BUDGETARY ANALYSES. (a) IN GENERAL. —Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to— (1) carry out a study on the economic principles and analyt- ical methodologies currently used by or applied to the Corps of Engineers to formulate, evaluate, and budget for water resources development projects; and (2) make recommendations to Congress on potential changes to such principles and methodologies to improve trans- parency, return on Federal investment, cost savings, and prioritization, in the formulation, evaluation, and budgeting of such projects. (b) CONSIDERATIONS. —The study under subsection (a) shall include— (1) an analysis of the current economic principles and analytical methodologies used by or applied to the Corps of Engineers in determining the total benefits and total costs during the formulation of, and plan selection for, a water resources development project; (2) an analysis of improvements or alternatives to how the Corps of Engineers utilizes the National Economic Develop- ment, Regional Economic Development, Environmental Quality, and Other Social Effects accounts developed by the Institute for Water Resources of the Corps of Engineers in the formula- tion of, and plan selection for, such projects; (3) an analysis of whether such principles and methodolo- gies fully account for all of the potential benefits of project alternatives, including any reasonably associated benefits of such alternatives that are not contrary to law, Federal policy, or sound water resources management; (4) an analysis of whether such principles and methodolo- gies fully account for all of the costs of project alternatives, including potential societal costs, such as lost ecosystem serv- ices, and full lifecycle costs for such alternatives; (5) an analysis of the methodologies utilized by the Federal Government in setting and applying discount rates for benefit - cost analyses used in the formulation, evaluation, and budg- eting of Corps of Engineers water resources development projects; (6) an analysis of whether or not the Corps of Engineers — (A) considers cumulative benefits of locally developed nrniert.a_ inclndinsr Master Plans annrnverl by the Corns-