Overview
Title
Proposals by Non-Federal Interests for Inclusion in the Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Army wants ideas from local groups about how to improve water projects, like making lakes or cleaning rivers better. They will put these ideas into a big report for Congress, but not all ideas will get picked, and the rules for picking aren't super clear.
Summary AI
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has announced a call for proposals by non-federal groups for the 2026 Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development. This report contains ideas for new or updated feasibility studies and projects related to water resources, and it is part of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA). Proposals must be submitted by August 15, 2025, and should align with specific criteria to potentially receive Congressional authorization for new studies and projects. Non-federal entities, such as local governments and nonprofits, can participate and need to show local support and financial capability for these projects.
Abstract
The Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works (ASA(CW)) is soliciting proposals for inclusion in the 2026 Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development (Annual Report). The Annual Report includes proposals submitted by non-federal interests for new feasibility studies, proposed modifications to authorized water resources development projects or feasibility studies, and proposed modifications to environmental infrastructure program authorities. The Annual Report is authorized under Section 7001 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 2014, as amended.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document titled “Proposals by Non-Federal Interests for Inclusion in the Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development” from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a notice calling for non-federal entities to submit proposals for water resource development projects. These proposals are to be considered for the 2026 Annual Report to Congress, a yearly report aimed at assisting Congress in making informed decisions about future water resources development. The 2026 report hopes to gather proposals for new feasibility studies, project modifications, and changes to environmental infrastructure programs. Non-federal stakeholders, such as local governments and nonprofit organizations, are invited to participate by submitting their proposals by August 15, 2025.
General Summary
The Army Corps of Engineers is encouraging non-federal entities to propose new projects or modifications for inclusion in the 2026 Annual Report to Congress. This report is a critical component of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA), which guides the development and adaptation of U.S. water infrastructure. The document outlines the criteria required for proposals, describes the submission process in detail, and emphasizes the need for local support and demonstration of financial capability by the submitting parties.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Several issues arise from the document that may need further discussion or clarification:
Monetary and Non-Monetary Benefits: The document requests submitting parties to estimate both monetary and non-monetary benefits of their proposals. However, it lacks a precise method for evaluating these benefits, which may create challenges in assessing proposal value consistently.
Resource Burden: The proposal process demands detailed information, possibly placing a disproportionate burden on smaller organizations less familiar with or resourced for such an extensive process.
Local Support and Financial Ability: The document is somewhat vague about how local support is to be gauged and what constitutes adequate proof of a project's financial feasibility. This lack of clarity could result in confusion among applicants about meeting the necessary requirements.
Proposals Appendix: Proposals that meet some but not all criteria will still appear in an appendix of the report. The document does not explain the consequences or follow-up for these proposals, suggesting the need for further guidance.
Complexity Due to Legislative References: Understanding legislative acts and sections, such as those from the WRRDA, may pose a barrier, especially for individuals or entities not well-versed in such legal details.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broadly, this initiative allows local communities and smaller organizations to participate in significant federal water resource developments, potentially leading to projects that better reflect local needs and priorities. For communities at risk of flooding or those needing infrastructure improvements, this process could bring much-needed governmental support and resources.
Specific stakeholders, including smaller municipalities and nonprofits, may face challenges due to the detailed and complex nature of the proposal requirements. These entities may require additional support to effectively navigate the proposal process. On the positive side, successful proposals could lead to local improvements in flood control, water supply, ecosystem health, and economic growth.
Overall, while the call for proposals opens pathways for non-federal involvement in vital resource development, the submission and evaluation processes entail complexities that might hinder some entities from full participation. Addressing these issues could create a more accessible and beneficial framework for all potential participants.
Issues
• The document does not specify the criteria or process for evaluating the 'monetary and non-monetary benefits' of a proposal, which could lead to ambiguity in assessing the value of the proposals.
• The proposal process requires non-federal interests to provide a significant amount of detailed information, which might be burdensome for smaller organizations lacking resources.
• The language regarding the financial ability of the non-federal interest to provide the required cost share could be clarified to ensure understanding and compliance by all stakeholders.
• It is unclear how 'local support' for a proposal is evaluated or demonstrated, which could lead to inconsistencies in the assessment of this criterion.
• The document suggests that proposals which do not meet all five evaluation criteria will still be included in an appendix, but it does not detail the implications or follow-up actions for these proposals.
• The complexity of the proposal process, including the need for understanding specific legislative sections and acts (e.g., WRDA), may be seen as a barrier to entry for non-experts.
• The description of the evaluation criteria makes an exception for environmental infrastructure proposals but lacks detail on the reasoning or implications of this exception.
• The inclusion of a proposal in the Annual Report appendix without meeting all criteria could still suggest a tacit approval, which needs clear language to avoid misunderstandings.