South Florida Ecosystem: Restoration Is Moving Forward but Is	 
Facing Significant Delays, Implementation Challenges, and Rising 
Costs (31-MAY-07, GAO-07-520).					 
                                                                 
The South Florida ecosystem covers about 18,000 square miles and 
is home to the Everglades, a national resource. Over the past 100
years, efforts to manage the flow of water through the ecosystem 
have jeopardized its health. In 2000, a strategy to restore the  
ecosystem was set; restoration was expected to take at least 40  
years and cost $15.4 billion. The restoration comprises hundreds 
of projects, including 60 key projects known as the Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), to be undertaken by a	 
partnership of federal, state, local, and tribal governments.	 
Given the size and complexity of the restoration, GAO was asked  
to report on the (1) status of project implementation and	 
expected benefits, (2) factors that determine project sequencing,
(3) amount of funding provided for the effort and extent that	 
costs have increased, and (4) primary mathematical models that	 
guide the restoration.						 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-07-520 					        
    ACCNO:   A70125						        
  TITLE:     South Florida Ecosystem: Restoration Is Moving Forward   
but Is Facing Significant Delays, Implementation Challenges, and 
Rising Costs							 
     DATE:   05/31/2007 
  SUBJECT:   Cost analysis					 
	     Cost overruns					 
	     Ecosystem management				 
	     Ecosystems 					 
	     Federal legislation				 
	     Program evaluation 				 
	     Schedule slippages 				 
	     Wildlife						 
	     Wildlife conservation				 
	     Cost estimates					 
	     Program implementation				 
	     Army Corps of Engineers Comprehensive		 
	     Everglades Restoration Plan			 
                                                                 
	     Everglades (FL)					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-520

   

     * [1]Results in Brief
     * [2]Background

          * [3]South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
          * [4]Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
          * [5]CERP-Related and Non-CERP Projects
          * [6]Use of Mathematical Models in Decision Making

     * [7]Although Many Restoration Projects Have Been Completed or Ar

          * [8]Completed Restoration Projects Primarily Improve Water Quali
          * [9]Projects Being Implemented Primarily Include Land Acquisitio
          * [10]Projects Not Yet Implemented Are Largely Part of CERP and Ar
          * [11]Officials Report Progress in Several Areas, Including Key CE

     * [12]The Overall Restoration Effort Has No Sequencing Criteria, a

          * [13]Required Sequencing and Other Criteria Have Been Developed f
          * [14]Implementation Decisions for CERP-Related and Non-CERP Proje

     * [15]Federal Agencies and Florida Have Provided over $7 Billion f
     * [16]Although Estimated Restoration Costs Have Increased Since 20

          * [17]Estimated Restoration Costs Have Increased
          * [18]Increases in Total Restoration Costs Are Likely to Continue

     * [19]Twenty-Seven Primary Models Guide the Restoration Effort, bu

          * [20]Twenty-Seven of More Than 100 Models Are Primary to the Rest
          * [21]Additional Interfaces Are Needed to Enhance Models' Usefulne

     * [22]Conclusions
     * [23]Recommendations for Executive Action
     * [24]Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
     * [25]GAO Contact
     * [26]Staff Acknowledgments
     * [27]GAO's Mission
     * [28]Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

          * [29]Order by Mail or Phone

     * [30]To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * [31]Congressional Relations
     * [32]Public Affairs
     * [33]PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf

          * [34]Order by Mail or Phone

Report to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of
Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

May 2007

SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM

Restoration Is Moving Forward but Is Facing Significant Delays,
Implementation Challenges, and Rising Costs

GAO-07-520

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 6
Background 9
Although Many Restoration Projects Have Been Completed or Are Ongoing, Key
Restoration Benefits Are Expected to Come from Projects Not Yet
Implemented 15
The Overall Restoration Effort Has No Sequencing Criteria, and While CERP
Projects Have Criteria, These Criteria Have Not Been Fully Applied 24
Federal Agencies and Florida Have Provided over $7 Billion for a Variety
of Restoration Activities Since 1999 29
Although Estimated Restoration Costs Have Increased Since 2000, Total Cost
Estimates Are Incomplete and Likely to Rise 34
Twenty-Seven Primary Models Guide the Restoration Effort, but Additional
Interfaces Are Needed to Enhance Their Usefulness 38
Conclusions 41
Recommendations for Executive Action 42
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 42
Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 45
Appendix II Project Status and Cost by CERP, CERP-Related, and Non-CERP
Categories 51
Appendix III Funding Allocations by Federal and State Agencies for the
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Initiative, FY 1999-2006 72
Appendix IV Summary of the Primary Models 74
Appendix V Comments from the Department of Defense 79
Appendix VI Comments from the Department of the Interior 83
Appendix VII Comments from the State of Florida 86
Appendix VIII GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 90

Tables

Table 1: Primary Purposes and Number of Associated CERP Projects 13
Table 2: Status of the 222 Restoration Projects by Project Group 16
Table 3: Type of Project, Primary Purpose, Timing, and Number of CERP
Projects Scheduled for Completion, 2005-2040 27
Table 4: Project Purpose and Funding Allocated among CERP, CERP-Related,
and Non-CERP Projects and Activities, Fiscal Years 1999-2006 32
Table 5: Model Types and Study Areas of the 27 Primary Models That Guide
the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Effort 39
Table 6: 222 Restoration Projects, Sponsor, Primary Purpose, Completion
Date, and Project Cost 51
Table 7: 43 Completed Restoration Projects, Sponsor, Primary Purpose,
Completion Date, and Reported Cost 61
Table 8: 107 Restoration Projects Now Being Implemented, Sponsor, Primary
Purpose, Expected Completion Date, and Estimated Cost 63
Table 9: 72 Restoration Projects Not Yet Implemented, Sponsor, Primary
Purpose, Expected Completion Date, and Estimated Cost 68

Figures

Figure 1: Map of the South Florida Ecosystem before and after Construction
of the Central and Southern Florida Water Control Project 11
Figure 2: Types and Locations of Completed Restoration Projects and Their
Primary Purposes 18
Figure 3: Federal Funding Provided for the Restoration Effort, Fiscal
Years 1999-2006 30
Figure 4: Federal and State Funding Provided for CERP, CERP-Related, and
Non-CERP Projects and Activities, Fiscal Years 1999-2006 31
Figure 5: Total Expected and Actual Federal and State Funding for CERP,
Fiscal Years 1999-2006 33
Figure 6: Total Estimated Increases in Restoration Costs for CERP,
CERP-Related, and Non-CERP Projects, and Support Activities, 2000 to 2006
35

Abbreviations

BSWCD Broward Soil and Water Conservation District
CERP Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Decomp Water Conservation Area 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow
  Enhancement
DOI U.S. Department of the Interior
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FDCA Florida Department of Community Affairs
FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection
FDEP (OGT) Florida Department of Environmental Protection--Office of
  Greenways and Trails
FWS U.S. Department of the Interior--U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
MISP Master Implementation Sequencing Plan
Mod Waters Modified Water Deliveries
NEWTT Noxious Exotic Weed Task Team
NOAA U.S. Department of Commerce--National Oceanic and
  Atmospheric Administration
NPS U.S. Department of the Interior--National Park Service
RECOVER Restoration Coordination and Verification
SFERC South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Council
SFRPC South Florida Regional Planning Council
SFWMD South Florida Water Management District
USDA (ARS) U.S. Department of Agriculture--Agricultural Research Service
USDA (NRCS) U.S. Department of Agriculture--Natural Resources Conservation
  Service
WRDA Water Resources Development Act

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548

May 31, 2007

The Honorable James L. Oberstar
Chairman
The Honorable John Mica
Ranking Republican Member
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
House of Representatives

The South Florida ecosystem, which covers about 18,000 square miles,
extends from the Kissimmee Chain of Lakes south of Orlando, Florida, to
the reefs southwest of the Florida Keys. This vast ecosystem is home to
the Everglades, one of the world's unique environmental resources, and to
the only living coral reef in North America. The South Florida ecosystem
is also home to a rapidly growing population of more than 6 million people
and supports a large agriculture-, tourism-, and recreation-based economy.
Over the past 100 years, engineering projects designed to control floods
and supply water to the residents of South Florida have diverted water
from the Everglades. This alteration of the water flow, coupled with
agricultural and industrial activities and urbanization, has jeopardized
the ecosystem's health and reduced the Everglades to about half its
original size. In 2000, when the strategy for restoring the South Florida
ecosystem was set, the restoration effort was expected to take at least 40
years and cost $15.4 billion.

In response to growing signs of ecosystem deterioration, federal agencies
established the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force in 1993 to
coordinate ongoing federal restoration activities. The Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 formally established the Task Force and expanded
its membership to include state, local, and tribal representatives, and
charged it with coordinating and facilitating efforts to restore the
ecosystem.^1 To accomplish the restoration, the Task Force established the
following three goals:

^1The Task Force consists of 14 members representing 7 federal agencies, 2
American Indian tribes, and 5 state or local governments. Representatives
from the state's major industries, environmental groups, and other
stakeholders provide comments to the Task Force through public meetings
and forums.

           o Get the water right. The purpose of this goal is to deliver the
           right amount of water, of the right quality, to the right places,
           at the right times. However, restoring a more natural water flow
           to the ecosystem while providing adequate water supplies and
           controlling floods will require efforts to expand the ecosystem's
           freshwater supply and improve the delivery of water to natural
           areas. Natural areas of the ecosystem are made up of federal and
           state lands, and coastal waters, estuaries, bays, and islands.

           o Restore, preserve, and protect natural habitats and species. To
           restore lost and altered habitats and recover the endangered or
           threatened species native to these habitats, the federal and state
           governments will have to acquire lands and reconnect natural
           habitats that have become disconnected through growth and
           development, and halt the spread of invasive species.

           o Foster compatibility of the built and natural systems. To
           achieve the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem, the
           restoration effort has the goal of maintaining the quality of life
           in urban areas while ensuring that (1) development practices limit
           habitat fragmentation and support conservation and (2) traditional
           industries, such as agriculture, fishing, and manufacturing,
           continue to be supported and do not damage the ecosystem.

To achieve these three overall goals, agencies participating in the
restoration effort are implementing 222 ecosystem restoration projects.
These 222 projects comprise a full spectrum of restoration activities and
include the following:

           o Water storage and flow. These types of projects include (1)
           constructing reservoirs and underground wells to store rainwater
           that would otherwise flow to the ocean through Florida's canal
           system; (2) removing barriers such as canals, levees, and roads to
           allow this stored water to flow naturally throughout the
           ecosystem; (3) reducing seepage of groundwater from natural areas;
           and (4) developing new protocols for managing water levels and
           flows across South Florida to ensure that the right quantity of
           water gets to the right places at the right times.

           o Water quality. These types of projects involve (1) constructing
           man-made wetlands that can function as stormwater treatment areas
           and help reduce contaminants such as phosphorus and nitrogen in
           urban and agricultural runoff and (2) developing regulatory
           approaches and promoting best management practices that can
           further help reduce these contaminants.
           o Water supply. These types of projects help reduce the amount of
           water used by the public and in commerce, landscaping, and
           agriculture as well as increase water resources. These projects
           include revising water permitting procedures, encouraging the
           reuse of wastewater in regions throughout the ecosystem, and
           developing alternative technologies.

           o Habitat acquisition and improvement. These types of projects
           include federal and state purchases of land tracts or easements,
           or improvements made to lands already in public ownership, that
           can be used to preserve habitat for native plants and animals,
           provide sites for reservoirs, and act as buffers near existing
           natural areas.

           o Invasive species control. These types of projects include
           efforts to eradicate invasive plants that have displaced native
           plant and animal species throughout the South Florida ecosystem.

One of the key components of the restoration effort is the Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)--the primary means by which the goal of
"getting the water right" will be achieved. Approved by the Water
Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000), CERP is one of the most
ambitious restoration efforts the federal government has ever undertaken.
It currently encompasses 60 individual projects that will be designed and
implemented over approximately 40 years.^2 These projects are intended to
increase the water available for the natural areas by capturing much of
the water that is currently being diverted, storing the water in many
different reservoirs and storage wells, and releasing it when it is
needed. The cost of implementing CERP will be shared equally between the
federal government and the state of Florida and will be carried out
primarily by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) and the South
Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), which is the state authority
that manages water resources for South Florida.^3 After the Corps and
SFWMD complete the initial planning and design for individual CERP
projects, they must submit the proposed projects to the Congress to obtain
authorization and funding for construction.

^2The original number of individual projects in CERP was 68. In addition
to these 68, CERP included 6 pilot projects and 3 proposed feasibility
studies. Since CERP's approval in 2000, the Corps and the South Florida
Water Management District have reorganized the projects to group those
that are logically connected into broader projects. For example, several
projects around Lake Okeechobee have been combined into one project. At
the time of this review, CERP consisted of 60 projects, but the total
number of projects that make up CERP may continue to change as
implementation progresses and projects are added, combined, divided into
multiple parts or phases, or deleted.

In addition to the CERP projects, another 162 projects are also part of
the overall restoration effort. Twenty-eight of these projects, when
completed, will serve as the foundation for many of the CERP projects and
are intended to restore a more natural water flow to Everglades National
Park and improve water quality in the ecosystem. Nearly all of these
"CERP-related" projects were already being designed or implemented by
federal and state agencies, such as the Department of the Interior and
SFWMD, in 2000 when the Congress approved CERP. The remaining 134 projects
include a variety of efforts that will, among other things, expand
wildlife refuges, eradicate invasive species, and restore wildlife
habitat, and are being implemented by a number of federal, state, and
tribal agencies, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and the Seminole Tribe of
Florida. Because these projects were not authorized as part of CERP and do
not serve as CERP's foundation, for the purposes of this report we refer
to them as "non-CERP" projects.

Success in completing the restoration effort to achieve the expected
benefits for the ecosystem as quickly as possible and in the most
cost-effective manner depends on the order, or sequencing, in which many
of the 222 projects will be designed and completed. Appropriate sequencing
is also important to ensure that interdependencies among restoration
projects are not ignored. For example, projects that will construct water
storage facilities and stormwater treatment areas need to be completed
before undertaking projects that remove levees and restore a more natural
water flow to the ecosystem.

The Task Force has identified a set of key guiding principles for managing
the restoration effort and its many related projects. One of the key
principles is that decisions about restoration projects will be based on
sound scientific information. A tool that can provide agencies with this
kind of scientific information is the use of mathematical models that
simulate hydrological, ecological, and water quality processes and shows
how restoration projects will change, or have changed, the ecosystem. The
models also help identify project adjustments that are needed to achieve
the restoration goals. Because no single model can comprehensively predict
and assess all of the effects of a project, models may need to be designed
to interface with other models so that they can exchange information for a
more holistic simulation of a project's impact.

^3Although SFWMD is CERP's primary nonfederal sponsor, the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection as well as three county governments
and two American Indian tribes also serve as nonfederal sponsors for
portions of the plan.

Given the complexity and enormity of the South Florida ecosystem
restoration, you asked us to review the current status of the effort,
focusing specifically on the (1) status of restoration projects and their
expected benefits; (2) factors that influence the sequencing of project
implementation; (3) amount of funding provided to the restoration effort
since 1999; (4) extent to which cost increases have occurred and the
reasons for these increases; and (5) primary mathematical models used to
guide the restoration effort and the extent to which these models have
interfaces.

To determine the extent to which restoration projects have been completed
and to identify their expected benefits, we obtained and analyzed
documents from the Task Force and agencies participating in the
restoration effort and interviewed agency and Task Force officials. On the
basis of this information, we compiled a master list of completed,
ongoing, and planned restoration projects and their benefits. For this
review, we generally categorized projects and expected benefits by their
primary purpose, as identified by the Task Force.

To determine the factors that participating agencies considered when
deciding on the sequence for implementing restoration projects, we
contacted the agencies responsible for the largest number of restoration
projects--the Corps, the Department of the Interior, SFWMD, and FDEP. We
also selected certain CERP projects for more detailed analysis, obtained
and reviewed documents and related material, and conducted interviews with
the Corps and SFWMD officials responsible for sequencing decisions related
to these projects. In addition, we reviewed comments by other agencies and
external stakeholders about the appropriateness of the factors used to
determine the sequencing of CERP projects. To determine the amount of
funding that participating agencies provided and the extent to which
restoration costs have increased, we asked participating federal and state
agencies to provide funding information for fiscal years 1999 through 2006
and estimated project costs through June 30, 2006. We interviewed agency
officials about the factors contributing to cost increases. All funding
and cost data presented in this report are in constant 2006 dollars. We
assessed the reliability of the funding and cost data and determined that
the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our study. To
determine the primary models that can be used to guide the restoration
effort and the interfaces among them, we compiled a universe of models
available for the restoration effort, and then asked managers and
scientists familiar with modeling and the restoration effort to identify
those primary models and their interfaces. We also reviewed academic and
agency Web sites to obtain supplemental information about these models and
their interfaces.

A more detailed description of our scope and methodology is presented in
appendix I. We performed our work between January 2006 and April 2007 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief

Although many of the projects that make up the South Florida ecosystem
restoration effort are either completed or ongoing, a core group of
projects that are critical to the overall success of the effort are behind
schedule or not yet started. Of the 222 projects that currently make up
the restoration effort, 43 have been completed, 107 are being implemented,
and 72 are either being designed, being planned, or have not yet started.
Of the 43 projects, 9 were completed before 2000, and 34 between 2000 and
2006. The 34 projects completed since the beginning of 2000 represent only
a third of the 91 projects originally scheduled for completion between
2000 and 2006. Many of the completed projects will either improve water
quality in natural areas or provide additional habitat for wildlife. The
107 projects currently being implemented will generally restore wildlife
habitat and include some key CERP-related projects that will improve water
flow to the natural areas. The remaining 72 projects currently being
designed, being planned, or that have not yet started, include primarily
CERP projects, which are the projects most critical to achieving the
overall restoration goals. Some of these CERP projects are significantly
behind their original implementation schedule. For example, nine CERP
projects--in implementation, in design, or in planning--were originally
planned for completion between 2001 and 2006, but instead will be
completed as many as 6 years behind schedule. According to restoration
officials, CERP project delays have occurred because it took longer than
expected to develop the procedures and legal assurances that WRDA 2000
required and because the projects lacked congressional authorization and
federal funding, among other reasons. Nevertheless, these officials
believe that significant progress has been made, particularly in acquiring
land, constructing water quality projects, and restoring a more natural
water flow to the Kissimmee River, which is the headwater of the
ecosystem. In addition, many of the policies, strategies, and agreements
required to guide the overall restoration in the future are now in place.
Given the continuing delays in implementing critical CERP projects, the
state has begun expediting the design and construction of some of these
projects with its own resources. The state hopes that its efforts will
provide some immediate environmental, flood control, and water supply
benefits and will help jump-start the larger CERP effort once the Congress
authorizes individual projects.

There are no overarching criteria to ensure that the 222 projects that
make up the restoration effort are implemented in a sequence that would
ensure the achievement of environmental benefits as early as possible.
Instead, implementation decisions about the 28 CERP-related and 134
non-CERP projects are largely driven by available funding; for the 60 CERP
projects, sequencing decisions have been made without fully complying with
the clearly defined criteria established for these projects in the federal
regulations. Recognizing the criticality of the CERP projects to the
restoration effort, both the Congress and the Corps established criteria
to ensure the goals and purposes of CERP are achieved. However, when the
Corps developed a sequencing plan for CERP projects in 2005, it did not
have key data and other information to fully apply the criteria
established in its regulations. Consequently, the decisions in the plan
were based primarily on technical dependencies among projects and funding
availability. Recently, the Corps began a process to revise its existing
CERP project schedules and sequencing plan, but it still does not have the
key information needed to fully apply the established criteria and meet
the regulatory requirements. As a result, there is little assurance that
the Corps' revised sequencing plan, when it is final, will lead to a CERP
project implementation plan that will provide restoration benefits as
early as possible and in the most cost-effective manner. We are,
therefore, recommending that the Corps obtain the information it needs,
and once obtained, comprehensively reassess its sequencing decisions to
ensure that CERP projects have been appropriately sequenced to maximize
the achievement of the restoration goals. In commenting on a draft of this
report, the Department of Defense concurred with our recommendation.
However, Florida expressed concern that our recommendation might lead to
further delays and increased costs. While we understand the state's
concerns, we believe, given the delays that have already occurred and the
criticality of CERP sequencing decisions to the success of the restoration
effort, that implementation of this recommendation is necessary.

Participating federal and state agencies provided a total of $7.1 billion
for the restoration effort from fiscal years 1999 through 2006. Since
1999, the federal government contributed about $2.3 billion to the
restoration effort and Florida contributed about $4.8 billion. Allocations
from the $7.1 billion total by type of project funded were: $2.3 billion
for CERP projects, nearly $2.0 billion for CERP-related projects, and $2.8
billion for non-CERP projects. Allocations from the total by type of
activity funded were: $2.6 billion for land acquisition; over $1.9 billion
for construction; and $2.6 billion for restoration support activities,
such as controlling invasive species, conducting feasibility studies, and
developing habitat or water management plans. Although the federal and
state governments provided $2.3 billion for CERP projects, this amount was
about $1.2 billion less than the amount of funding that participating
agencies had estimated they would need from fiscal years 1999 through
2006. Specifically, participating agencies had estimated that they would
need approximately $3.5 billion for implementing CERP projects from fiscal
years 1999 through 2006. However, the federal government's contribution
for CERP projects was short by $1.4 billion, primarily because CERP
projects did not receive the congressional authorization and
appropriations that the agencies had expected would occur during this
period. The overall shortfall was reduced to $1.2 billion because Florida
increased its contribution for CERP projects by $250 million during this
period.

The total projected cost of the restoration effort has increased by 28
percent--from $15.4 billion in 2000 to at least $19.7 billion in 2006--but
neither total reflects the true cost of the restoration effort, which
could be significantly higher. The growth in total projected costs between
2000 and 2006 occurred, in large part, because of cost increases in CERP
projects, from $8.8 billion in 2000 to $10.1 billion in 2006. According to
Corps officials, the overall cost increases are due to project scope
changes, increased construction costs, and higher land costs. However, the
projected total cost estimates of the restoration effort do not reflect
its true costs because the full cost of most CERP projects is not yet
known. This is because most CERP projects are still in the conceptual
phase--that is, detailed design and implementation has not yet been
undertaken or completed. Until the design is finalized and construction
begins, a more complete estimate of the costs of these projects will not
be known and captured in the total estimated restoration cost. For
example, in the conceptual phase, the cost estimate for the Site 1
Impoundment project--a CERP project in southern Palm Beach County to
capture and store local runoff during wet periods and then use the water
to supplement water deliveries during dry periods--was $46 million. Once
preliminary planning and design work was completed, however, the Corps'
estimate for this project increased to $81 million. If similar kinds of
cost increases occur for the remaining CERP projects for which initial
planning and design work has not yet been undertaken or completed, the
cost of CERP, as well as the overall restoration effort, could increase
significantly.

There are 27 primary mathematical models that can be used to guide the
restoration effort, and while many of these models have interfaces, many
restoration experts believe that additional interfaces are needed to
provide more comprehensive information that can better guide the
restoration effort. These 27 models include (1) hydrological models, which
simulate processes such as runoff, the movement of groundwater, and the
flow of surface water in rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans; (2) water
quality models that simulate the migration of pollutants in both surface
water and groundwater systems; and (3) ecological models that simulate how
plant and animal communities interact with their habitat. At least 21 of
the 27 models have some interfaces that allow the models to share
information with some of the other models and thereby provide restoration
officials with a better understanding of the restoration's impact on the
ecosystem. However, many agency officials we spoke with stated that
additional interfaces are needed to provide them with a more comprehensive
and accurate understanding of the ecosystem, but developing these
interfaces would require improved coordination among agencies. Currently,
coordinating their efforts to develop models and interfaces has been a low
priority for the participating agencies. Given the importance of models
and interfaces in helping officials manage the restoration effort, we are
recommending that the Task Force, as the coordinating body for the
restoration effort, should take the lead on helping participating agencies
better coordinate the development of models and their interfaces. In
commenting on a draft of this report, the Department of the Interior and
the state of Florida supported our recommendation. The Department of
Defense did not support this recommendation and stated that the
Interagency Modeling Center, established by the Corps and SFWMD to
coordinate and oversee the modeling needs of CERP, should serve as the
single point of responsibility for modeling services. While we recognize
that the Interagency Modeling Center plays an important role in supporting
and coordinating modeling for CERP, it does not provide support for the
entire restoration effort. As a result, we continue to believe that the
Task Force should take the lead in helping all of the participating
agencies, including the Corps and SFWMD, better coordinate the development
of models and interfaces needed for the overall effort.

Background

The South Florida ecosystem covers about 18,000 square miles in 16
counties and extends from the Kissimmee Chain of Lakes south of Orlando to
Lake Okeechobee, and continues south past the Florida Bay to the reefs
southwest of the Florida Keys. The ecosystem is in jeopardy today because
of past efforts that diverted water from the Everglades to control
flooding and to supply water for urban and agricultural development. The
Central and Southern Florida project, a large-scale water control project
begun in the late 1940s, constructed more than 1,700 miles of canals and
levees and over 200 water control structures that drain an average of 1.7
billion gallons of water per day into the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of
Mexico. This construction resulted in insufficient water for the natural
system and for the growing population, along with degraded water quality.
Today, the Everglades has been reduced to half its original size and the
ecosystem continues to deteriorate because of the alteration of the water
flow, impacts of agricultural and industrial activities, and increasing
urbanization. Figure 1 shows the South Florida ecosystem before and after
the Central and Southern Florida project construction.

Figure 1: Map of the South Florida Ecosystem before and after Construction
of the Central and Southern Florida Water Control Project

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

In an effort to stem the deterioration of the ecosystem and restore the
Everglades to a more natural state, federal agencies created the South
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (Task Force) in 1993, an
interagency partnership to coordinate federal restoration activities. The
Congress formally established the Task Force and expanded its membership
in 1996 to include state and local agencies and two American Indian tribes
and charged the Task Force with the following responsibilities for
restoring the South Florida ecosystem:

           o coordinating the development of consistent policies, strategies,
           plans, programs, projects, activities, and priorities for
           addressing the restoration, preservation, and protection of the
           ecosystem;
           o exchanging information on programs, projects, and activities of
           the agencies and entities represented on the Task Force to promote
           ecosystem restoration and maintenance;
           o facilitating the resolution of interagency and intergovernmental
           conflicts associated with the restoration of the ecosystem among
           the agencies and entities represented on the Task Force;
           o coordinating scientific and other research associated with the
           restoration effort; and
           o providing assistance and support to agencies and entities
           represented on the Task Force in their restoration activities.
			  
			  Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

           The centerpiece for achieving the goal to get the water right is
           the CERP, approved by the Congress in WRDA 2000. CERP provides a
           conceptual framework for increasing freshwater volume and
           improving the delivery and quantity of water to natural areas in
           the South Florida ecosystem. It also provides for the region's
           other water-related needs, such as water supply and flood
           protection in urban and agricultural areas. The estimated cost for
           CERP in 2000 was $8.8 billion, to be shared on an equal basis
           between the Corps and the state of Florida. Table 1 details the
           primary purposes for the 60 CERP projects.

           Table 1: Primary Purposes and Number of Associated CERP Projects
			  
Primary project purpose                            Number of CERP projects 
Water storage and flow (including five pilot                            33 
projects)                                                                  
Habitat acquisition and improvement                                      9 
Water quality                                                            8 
Feasibility studies                                                      4 
Water supply (including one pilot project)                               5 
Invasive species control                                                 1 
Total                                                                   60 

           Source: GAO's analysis of project documents prepared by Task Force
           and participating agencies.

           Before the Corps can proceed with implementing a CERP construction
           project, WRDA 2000 requires that the Corps obtain congressional
           authorization by submitting a detailed report on the project's
           design, cost, and other information (known as a project
           implementation report). WRDA 2000 also required the Corps to issue
           programmatic regulations for implementing CERP projects. These
           regulations, effective in December 2003, required the Corps, among
           other things, to take the following actions:

           o Issue no later than December 13, 2004, a master implementation
           sequencing plan (MISP) that establishes the order in which CERP
           projects will be planned, designed, and constructed, and
           periodically update the plan.
           o Issue an interim goals agreement, no later than December 13,
           2004, signed by the Secretaries of the Army and of the Interior
           and the Governor of Florida,^4 for evaluating the restoration's
           success and for assessing improvements in the quantity, quality,
           timing, and distribution of water to restore the natural system.
           o Establish an adaptive management program, which is an approach
           for addressing the uncertainty associated with project decisions
           by continuously incorporating new and updated information. Where
           performance is determined to be less than anticipated, the
           adaptive management approach allows for making needed changes to
           the interim goals, projects, and the overall CERP program. Many of
           the program's efforts are led by a federal and state interagency
           science group known as the Restoration Coordination and
           Verification (RECOVER) team. RECOVER's responsibilities under the
           program include assessing and reporting whether interim goals are
           being achieved, developing monitoring and assessment programs, and
           preparing technical reports.

^4The Secretary of the Army signs the agreement on behalf of the Corps.

           CERP-Related and Non-CERP Projects

           Agencies participating in the restoration effort are also
           implementing a number of projects that serve as CERP's foundation
           (CERP-related) as well as projects that are not as closely related
           to CERP (non-CERP). The CERP-related projects are a group of 28
           projects, carried out primarily by the Corps and SFWMD, that lay
           the foundation for the CERP projects. The projects are being
           constructed throughout the ecosystem and are related to storing,
           treating, and moving water. The 28 CERP-related projects also
           include some projects that were authorized in WRDA 1996 and are
           referred to as Critical Projects for the restoration of the South
           Florida ecosystem. These water quality and related projects are
           essential to successfully achieving the goal of getting the water
           right.

           The non-CERP projects are a group of 134 projects that are being
           sponsored by federal, state, local, and tribal agencies in South
           Florida. A number of these projects had started--and some were
           completed--prior to WRDA 2000. The projects vary in their
           purposes, with some involving feasibility studies or plans to
           control invasive species and others focusing on land acquisition
           for conservation and restoring habitat. Although these projects
           are part of the overall restoration of the South Florida
           ecosystem, their implementation generally does not depend upon
           other projects. However, certain CERP and CERP-related projects
           will incorporate portions of non-CERP land acquisitions into their
           project footprints as the restoration progresses.
			  
			  Use of Mathematical Models in Decision Making

           Among the guiding principles of the South Florida ecosystem
           restoration initiative is a commitment to managing projects and
           making decisions on the basis of sound scientific information.
           Models, particularly mathematical models, are among the tools that
           agency managers and scientists use to support decision making on
           the basis of sound science. These models are important to simulate
           ecosystem changes resulting from restoration activities and to
           provide managers and scientists with assurance that projects will
           work as intended to achieve environmental benefits. Managers and
           scientists use mathematical hydrological, ecological, and water
           quality models to predict regional or systemwide impacts of
           project alternatives and to predict benefits that may result from
           various possible alternatives.

           To increase the ability of hydrological, ecological, and water
           quality models to effectively predict environmental benefits and
           evaluate changes to possible project alternatives, interfaces are
           needed. Interfaces allow models to share and exchange data and
           simulate the impact of projects on the ecosystem more
           comprehensively and effectively. The term interface can cover a
           variety of mechanisms that allow a model to interact with other
           models, such as computer software that allows users to
           simultaneously view the results of multiple individual models, and
           programs that allow for the exchange of input or output data
           between models, or allow for hydrological, water quality, and
           ecological processes to be simulated simultaneously in real time.
			  
			  Although Many Restoration Projects Have Been Completed or Are
			  Ongoing, Key Restoration Benefits Are Expected to Come from Projects
			  Not Yet Implemented

           Forty-three of the 222 projects that constitute the South Florida
           ecosystem restoration effort have been completed, while the
           remaining projects are currently being implemented or are either
           in design, being planned, or have not yet started. Many of the
           completed projects are intended primarily to improve water quality
           in natural areas or to acquire or improve tracts of land in order
           to preserve wildlife habitat. The projects now being implemented
           also emphasize the restoration of wildlife habitat by acquiring or
           improving land, as well as the construction of key CERP-related
           projects that will improve water flow to natural areas. The
           projects not yet implemented are largely CERP projects that are
           crucial to realizing the restoration's overall goals, but these
           projects are progressing slowly. However, both agency and Task
           Force officials report a number of achievements, such as
           finalizing key CERP agreements and restoring a more natural water
           flow to the Kissimmee River. Table 2 shows the status of the 222
           restoration projects.

           Table 2: Status of the 222 Restoration Projects by Project Group
			  
                                                Not yet implemented           
                                                                Not yet       
                Completed In implementation Planning/design     started Total 
CERP                 0                 7              21          32    60 
CERP-related        15                10               3           0    28 
Non-CERP            28                90               2          14   134 
Total               43               107              26          46   222 

           Source: GAO analysis of documents provided by Task Force and
           participating agencies.
			  
			  
           Completed Restoration Projects Primarily Improve Water Quality or
			  Provide Wildlife Habitat

           Of the 222 projects the Task Force and participating agencies
           identified as part of the South Florida ecosystem restoration, 43
           have been completed since the beginning of the restoration effort:
           9 before 2000 (including 1 as early as 1986), and 34 between 2000
           and 2006. However, this latter total is far short of the 91
           projects the Task Force and participating agencies reported in
           2000 would be completed by 2006.^5 The nine projects completed
           before 2000 are expected to provide benefits primarily in the area
           of habitat acquisition and improvement. The primary purposes of
           the 34 projects completed between 2000 and 2006 range from the
           construction of stormwater treatment areas, to the acquisition or
           improvement of land for habitat, to the drafting of water supply
           plans. (App. II includes detailed information on the 43 completed
           projects, their sponsors, primary purposes, completion dates, and
           reported costs; the only projects completed to date belong to the
           CERP-related and non-CERP categories.)

           For the 43 completed projects, the three most common primary
           purposes were water quality, habitat acquisition and improvement,
           and related studies. For example, to improve water quality SFWMD
           constructed Stormwater Treatment Areas 1, 2, 3/4, 5, and 6 within
           the Everglades Agricultural Area located south of Lake Okeechobee.
           Similarly, for the Cayo Costa project--a habitat acquisition and
           improvement project--Florida purchased a total of 1,954 acres,
           over 24 years, in southwestern Florida off the coast of Fort
           Myers. This purchase is located within a small chain of barrier
           islands that provide protection for Charlotte Harbor, one of the
           state's most productive estuaries. The project's natural areas
           demonstrate high species diversity, including some species that
           may be unique to the islands. Figure 2 shows the types and
           locations of the 43 completed projects and their primary purposes.
			  
			  ^5South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, Coordinating
			  Success: Strategy for Restoration of the South Florida Ecosystem,
			  Volume 2 (Miami, Fla.: July 31, 2000).

           Figure 2: Types and Locations of Completed Restoration Projects
           and Their Primary Purposes

           ^aOne completed invasive species control project was a statewide
           effort (not pictured).

           ^bTwelve plans and studies were also completed (not pictured).
			  
			  Projects Being Implemented Primarily Include Land Acquisitions
			  to Preserve Wildlife Habitat and Two Key CERP-Related Projects

           Of the 222 ecosystem restoration projects, 107 are now being
           implemented.^6 Seven of the 107 are CERP projects, 10 are
           CERP-related projects, and 90 are non-CERP projects. Five of the
           seven CERP projects are being built by the state in advance of the
           Corps' completion of the necessary project implementation reports
           and submission of them to the Congress for authorization and
           appropriations. Nonetheless, some of the CERP projects currently
           in implementation are significantly behind schedule. For example,
           four of the seven CERP projects in implementation were originally
           scheduled for completion between November 2002 and September 2006,
           but instead will be completed from 1 to 6 years behind their
           original schedule, because it has taken the Corps longer than
           originally anticipated to design and obtain approval for CERP
           projects. Overall, 19 of the 107 projects currently being
           implemented have expected completion dates by or before 2010. Of
           the remaining 88 projects, most are non-CERP habitat acquisition
           and improvement projects that have no firm end date because the
           land will be acquired from willing sellers as it becomes
           available. Of the 24 non-CERP projects being implemented that have
           established end dates, at least 9 are expected to be completed by
           or before 2010. (App. II presents detailed information on the
           sponsor, primary purpose, expected completion date, and estimated
           cost of each of the 107 projects that are currently being
           implemented.)

           More than half--65--of the 107 projects being implemented will
           acquire or improve land for habitat, and at least 12 of these
           projects are on federal lands. For example, the U.S. Fish and
           Wildlife Service is purchasing land in the Big Cypress-Everglades
           region to provide additional habitat for the endangered Florida
           panther, as part of its Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge
           acquisition. Other ongoing projects combat invasive species on
           federal lands--such as the Hole-in-the-Donut, a non-CERP project
           that is expected to restore approximately 6,000 acres within
           Everglades National Park by eradicating Brazilian pepper, an
           invasive plant species.

           Among the projects currently being implemented are two key
           CERP-related construction projects that are expected to benefit
           Everglades National Park as well as the natural areas outside of
           the park. The first is the Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades
           National Park (Mod Waters) project, which is expected to restore
           natural hydrologic conditions across 190,000 acres of habitat in
           Everglades National Park and assist in the recovery of threatened
           and endangered plants and wildlife. According to Everglades
           National Park officials, this project is crucial to the park's
           rehydration and subsequent restoration. When we reported on the
           restoration in 1999, Mod Waters was expected to be completed in
           2003 at a total cost of $157 million;^7 the project is currently
           scheduled for completion in 2009 at a total cost of $410 million,
           according to its most recent capital asset plan (though agency
           officials do not expect the 2009 date to be met). The second
           project is known as C-111 South Dade, which involves modifications
           to a north-south canal system (C-111) that runs parallel to
           Florida's east coast and provides flood protection and water
           supply for urban and agricultural areas east of Everglades
           National Park. The Corps and SFWMD are modifying the canals in the
           Miami-Dade County area so that increases in freshwater and more
           natural flows will enter the eastern panhandle of the park and
           Florida Bay. This project will help restore the park's natural
           vegetation, while maintaining flood protection for urban and
           agricultural interests in south Miami-Dade County. A combined
           operating plan will integrate the goals of this project with those
           of Mod Waters. The Corps and SFWMD expect to complete the C-111
           South Dade project in 2012.
			  
			  ^6Some projects have multiple components, and while the entire
			  project cannot be counted as completed, important components of
			  it may be finished. Unless all components of the project were
			  complete, we counted these projects as being implemented.
			  
			  Projects Not Yet Implemented Are Largely Part of CERP and Are
			  Crucial to Achieving Overall Restoration Goals

           Of the 72 restoration projects not yet implemented--in other words
           that are in design, planning, or not yet started--53 are CERP
           projects that are expected to be completed in the later years of
           the restoration effort and will provide benefits such as increased
           habitat for native species, improved water flow, and additional
           water for restoration as well as other water-related needs. The
           other 19 projects not yet implemented include 3 CERP-related and
           16 non-CERP projects. (App. II includes detailed information about
           all 72 projects not yet implemented, including their sponsors,
           primary purposes, expected completion dates, and estimated costs.)
           All CERP-related and non-CERP projects in this grouping that have
           established end dates are expected to be completed by or before
           2013. In contrast, CERP projects in design, planning, or not yet
           started will be implemented over the next 30 years. Consequently,
           the full environmental benefits for the South Florida ecosystem
           restoration that the CERP projects were intended to provide will
           not be realized for several decades.
			  
			  ^7GAO, South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: An Overall Strategic
			  Plan and a Decision-Making Process Are Needed to Keep the Effort
			  on Track, [35]GAO/RCED-99-121 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 1999).

           Several of the projects now in planning and design directly
           benefit federal lands and are representative of the significant
           natural system benefits that were expected from CERP. One of the
           most important projects of this kind is the Water Conservation
           Area 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement (Decomp)
           project. This project involves filling canals, removing levees,
           and building bridges along the road north of Everglades National
           Park to allow water to flow more naturally through the water
           conservation areas above the park and into the park itself. This
           project is also designed to increase the connectivity between
           portions of the Everglades habitat, thus improving the quantity
           and quality of this habitat for native vegetation and wildlife.
           Officials from the park and other participating agencies stressed
           Decomp's importance to natural system restoration. In addition,
           park officials told us that the full realization of benefits from
           the Mod Waters project depends upon Decomp, which WRDA 2000 does
           not allow to be constructed until Mod Waters is completed. Decomp
           has been divided into three phases, and the Corps has recently
           proposed a major revision to its conceptual design. Pending this
           re-design, phase 1 is currently scheduled for completion in 2015.

           As with CERP projects currently being implemented, progress has
           also been slow on CERP projects in design, in planning, or not yet
           begun. For example, five projects that are not yet implemented
           were originally planned for completion between December 2001 and
           December 2005, but instead will be completed from 2 to 6 years
           behind their original schedule. According to officials from the
           Corps, SFWMD, and other participating agencies, CERP project
           delays have occurred for the following reasons:

           o It took longer than expected to develop the appropriate policy,
           guidance, and regulations that WRDA 2000 requires for the CERP
           effort.
           o Some federal and state officials we spoke with noted design
           delays that were caused by the need to modify the conceptual
           design of some projects to comply with the requirements of WRDA
           2000's savings clause. According to this clause, CERP projects
           cannot transfer or eliminate existing sources of water unless an
           alternate source of comparable quantity and quality is provided,
           and they cannot reduce existing levels of flood protection.^8 
           o Less federal funding than expected and a lack of congressional
           authorization for some of the CERP projects have limited CERP
           progress.
           o The extensive modeling that accompanies the design and
           implementation of each project in addition to the "cumbersome"
           project review process can contribute to delays, as well as
           stakeholder comment, dispute resolution, and consensus-building
           that occurs at each stage of a project. However, other restoration
           participants valued this opportunity for input and noted that it
           could prevent costly litigation.
           o Delays have occurred in completing Mod Waters, which is a major
           building block for CERP. These delays, in turn, have delayed CERP
           implementation.

           While the completion of the CERP projects is expected to provide
           comprehensive environmental benefits to the ecosystem, concerns
           remain about how the water will be allocated between the natural,
           urban, and agricultural areas for many of these projects, and who
           will ultimately benefit from these water allocation decisions.
           Corps regulations require that the allocation decisions are to be
           included in the project implementation reports submitted to the
           Congress for authorization of each CERP project. These allocations
           are determined by each project's design team--which would normally
           include the Corps, SFWMD, and other participating agencies. The
           allocation decisions are constrained by a federal-state agreement
           that promises to allocate each CERP project's stored water in a
           manner that provides a sufficient amount for restoring the natural
           system before water is made available for the region's other
           water-related needs, such as urban and agricultural water supply.
           Once these water allocations are finalized, they are to be enacted
           into state law. Until these water allocation decisions are agreed
           upon by federal and state agencies and enacted into law by the
           state government, the distribution of benefits that the CERP
           projects will deliver remains unclear.
			  
^8The sources of water and levels of flood protection that must be
protected are those that were in existence on the date of WRDA 2000's
enactment--December 11, 2000.

           Officials Report Progress in Several Areas, Including Key CERP
			  Agreements and State Efforts to Advance Overall Restoration Goals

           Although construction progress for the restoration effort has been
           uneven, restoration officials report progress in other areas that
           they expect will provide a solid foundation for the wider
           restoration effort in the future. These officials identified the
           following developments that they expect will improve the prospects
           for future success for the overall restoration effort:

           o Acceler8. Acceler8 is a state effort intended to expedite the
           implementation of CERP projects. Many of the CERP projects
           advanced by Acceler8 are among WRDA 2000's 10 initially authorized
           projects, whose costs were to be shared by the federal government
           and the state. According to Florida officials, by advancing the
           design and construction of these projects with its own funds, the
           state hopes to more quickly realize restoration benefits for both
           the natural and human environments and to jump-start the overall
           CERP effort once the Congress begins to authorize individual
           projects. The Acceler8 projects include seven that are affiliated
           with CERP and an eighth that expands existing stormwater treatment
           areas. The state expects to spend more than $1.5 billion to design
           and construct these projects by 2011.
           o Kissimmee River restoration. The Corps and SFWMD have completed
           phase 1 of this project to restore the ecological integrity of the
           South Florida ecosystem's headwater--the historical Kissimmee
           River and its surrounding floodplain. State officials report
           promising results from the restored areas, such as improved water
           quality and flow, the return of fish-eating birds, and the
           reappearance of shoreline vegetation.
           o Land acquisition. For the ecosystem restoration projects that
           are solely or partially federally funded, including CERP, the Task
           Force estimates that 62 percent of the land needed for getting the
           water right (goal 1) and 99 percent of the land needed for
           restoring, preserving, and protecting natural habitats and species
           (goal 2) has already been acquired.^9 Moreover, 55 percent of the
           land needed for CERP projects, 98 percent of Acceler8 project
           land, and all 102,061 acres needed for the Kissimmee River
           restoration have been acquired. Restoration land acquisition is
           ahead of schedule because the state accelerated its acquisition
           efforts in order to acquire land before it was lost to
           development. Similarly, the federal government provided early
           support to the effort through its Farm Bill funding,^10 and local
           governments have made significant land contributions as well.			  

^9The Task Force did not estimate the percentage of land acquired to
foster compatibility of the built and natural systems (goal 3), but did
note that participating agencies have secured easements on 15,370 acres
and another 4,265 acres have been acquired. Percentages do not include
state, local government, or nongovernmental organization land acquisition
projects undertaken without federal funding, many of which are part of
goal 2.

^10Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, Pub. L. No.
104-127, S 390, 110 Stat. 888, 1022.
			  
           o State water quality projects. In addition to the stormwater
           treatment areas south of Lake Okeechobee, the state's Lake
           Okeechobee Protection Program and Lake Okeechobee and Estuary
           Recovery Plan expand the water quality effort to mitigate nutrient
           discharges from urban and agricultural lands north of the lake and
           within its watershed. The state is also implementing pollution
           reduction strategies for other impaired surface waters within
           SFWMD's boundaries.
           o CERP's administrative framework. In accordance with WRDA 2000
           and subsequent requirements, CERP's participating agencies have
           formulated key policies, strategies, and agreements intended to
           guide the program during its three decades of implementation.
           o RECOVER's efforts. CERP's interagency science team--known as
           RECOVER--prepared a Monitoring and Assessment Plan for CERP
           implementation, among other important products. This plan is the
           primary tool that RECOVER will use to assess the ecosystem's
           response to CERP projects.
			  
			  The Overall Restoration Effort Has No Sequencing Criteria, and
			  While CERP Projects Have Criteria, These Criteria Have Not Been
			  Fully Applied
			  
           No overall sequencing criteria guide the implementation of the 222
           projects that comprise the South Florida ecosystem restoration
           effort. For the 60 CERP projects, the Corps has issued
           regulations, as directed by WRDA 2000, that identify the criteria
           to be applied when making CERP project sequencing decisions so
           that restoration benefits will be achieved as early as possible
           and in the most cost-effective manner. However, the Corps and
           SFWMD did not follow these criteria when they developed the 2005
           master implementation sequencing plan for CERP projects (the
           MISP). The Corps has recently started to revisit priorities for
           CERP projects' and alter project schedules that were established
           in the 2005 MISP (this process is referred to as CERP-reset).
           However, because the Corps continues to lack certain key data for
           making sequencing decisions, the revised plan, when completed,
           will also not fully adhere to the criteria. Furthermore, while
           CERP-related projects provide the foundation for many CERP
           projects, there are no established criteria for determining the
           implementation schedule for these projects and their estimated
           start and completion dates largely depend upon available funds.
           Similarly, for non-CERP projects, agencies reported that they do
           not have any sequencing criteria; instead, they decide on the
           scheduling and timing of these projects primarily if and when
           funding becomes available.
			  
			  Required Sequencing and Other Criteria Have Been Developed for
			  CERP Projects, but the Corps Has Not Fully Applied the Criteria

           The Corps has clearly defined criteria to be considered in
           determining the scheduling and sequencing of CERP projects.^11 As
           laid out in the CERP program regulations,^12 the Corps and SFWMD
           should consider the following factors to maximize opportunities
           for achieving the plan's goals and purposes:

           o Technical dependencies and constraints. Because many projects
           are interdependent, they have to be designed and constructed
           either before or after other CERP and CERP-related projects,
           depending on engineering and structural requirements.
           o Project benefits. Projects should be constructed in an order
           that achieves environmental benefits as early as possible.
           o Land availability. If land is available, a CERP project can be
           scheduled earlier.
           o Legal constraints. The Corps must ensure that CERP projects do
           not eliminate or transfer current sources of water from urban and
           agricultural water supplies, and for fish and wildlife, or reduce
           flood protection.
           o Funding constraints. The regulations also state that funding
           constraints may be taken into account in determining the timing
           and order of projects.

           In addition, CERP program regulations require the Corps and the
           SFWMD to revise the project sequencing that had been originally
           developed in 2000 to reflect new scientific, technical, and other
           information. Examples of such information include population
           growth, additional data on the topography of the South Florida
           ecosystem, rainfall data, and existing sources of water and flood
           controls. According to the regulations, the restoration partners
           were to conduct model simulations and revise, among other things,
           their sequencing decisions if the models indicated that changes to
           the sequence of project implementation were warranted to achieve
           environmental benefits sooner. The CERP program regulations also
           required that the sequencing decisions include a consideration of
           whether the projects, as sequenced, would meet interim goals.
           These goals were to be established in an agreement signed by the
           Secretaries of the Army and the Interior and the Governor of
           Florida no later than December 2004.^13
			  
^11The program regulations required the MISP to be issued by December 13,
2004, and to be revised at least every 5 years.

^12Programmatic Regulations for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Plan, 33 C.F.R. pt. 385 (effective Dec. 12, 2003).

^13The Secretary of the Army is to sign the agreement on behalf of the
Corps.

           However, when the Corps and SFWMD developed the 2005 MISP for CERP
           projects, they did not comply with the requirements of the Corps
           regulations. Specifically, the MISP was not based on new
           information because the model used to run the simulations and
           generate the data--the South Florida Water Management Model--had
           not been updated by the Corps as anticipated when the sequencing
           decisions were made. As a result, the Corps and SFWMD staff used
           outdated modeling data from 1999.^14 In addition, the Secretaries
           of the Army and the Interior, and the Governor of Florida did not
           sign an agreement that established interim goals for the
           restoration effort until late April/early May 2007--over 2 years
           after the program regulations deadline.^15 Consequently, the 2005
           MISP was developed without the benefit of the interim goals that
           the regulations required to help guide interagency planning,
           monitoring, assessment, and project sequencing.

           Because the agencies lacked updated environmental benefits data
           and lacked interim goals, the 2005 MISP for CERP projects was
           primarily based on an assessment of the technical dependencies and
           constraints among projects and available funding. Specifically,
           Corps and SFWMD officials first considered whether the technical
           constraints laid out in the 2000 CERP conceptual plan were still
           appropriate or whether new information had changed those
           constraints and, hence, the sequence of projects. Based on these
           technical dependencies and constraints, all CERP projects were
           placed in one of seven 5-year periods covering 2005 to 2040. Once
           Corps and SFWMD officials completed their technical constraints
           analysis, they reviewed the costs of projects scheduled for
           completion in each 5-year interval and the estimated funding
           available for that period, as well as available staff resources.
           When resources--primarily funding--were insufficient to complete
           projects within the initial designated 5-year period, the projects
           were delayed and scheduled for completion at a later date. Table 3
           shows the number of projects in the MISP and their primary
           purpose, by 5-year increments, over the life of CERP. As the table
           shows, the ultimate benefits from the CERP projects will not be
           fully realized until 2040.
			  
^14The CERP Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement of 1999 laid out the conceptual plan and an
initial schedule for implementing the projects based on modeling and other
information known at the time.

^15The Department of the Army and the state of Florida reported that they
signed an Interim Goals Agreement on April 27, 2007, and the Secretary of
the Interior signed the agreement on May 2, 2007.			  

Table 3: Type of Project, Primary Purpose, Timing, and Number of CERP
Projects Scheduled for Completion, 2005-2040

                           Timing and number of projects by completion date^a
Type of project and      2005-10  2010-15  2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2035-40 
purpose^b                                                                  
Water storage and flow         4                 1                         
pilots                                                                     
Water storage and flow         4        5       11     3^c       1       2 
Water quality                  2        1        4       1                 
(stormwater treatment                                                      
and management                                                             
operations)                                                                
Water supply pilot                               1                         
Water supply                                             2                 
Habitat acquisition and        4        2                1                 
improvement                                                                
Invasive species               1                                           
control                                                                    
Feasibility studies                     1                                  
Total--51                     15        9       17       7       1       2 

Source: GAO's analysis of Corps and SFWMD MISP and project data.

Note: The total number of projects in the table is 51, which differs from
the 60 current CERP projects discussed earlier in this report. The
difference occurs because nine projects, primarily operational and study
projects, did not have a planned start date when the MISP was developed.

^a The CERP partners did not list projects for 2030 through 2035 because
no projects were scheduled for completion during this time.

^b Projects may have multiple purposes and some are defined as phases
where construction may take several 5-year periods to complete.

^c The schedule for the Indian River Lagoon-South project includes the
construction of water storage components in the first 10 years, with the
natural lands acquisition component scheduled for completion by 2020.

Owing to delays in meeting its commitments for implementing CERP projects
in a timely manner, as well as its commitment to support the state's
Acceler8 effort, the Corps is revising its schedules and sequencing of
CERP projects. For example, in an October 2004 letter to the state, the
Corps had committed to a list of dates for completing the project
implementation reports necessary to obtain project approval by the Corps'
management and the Congress for the CERP projects that were being
implemented through the state's Acceler8 effort. However, the Corps has
not met the dates outlined in that letter. To address these delays and
other project implementation issues, the Corps is revising the sequencing
plan and schedules for CERP projects (known as CERP-reset). As part of
this restructuring, they are planning to incorporate the National Academy
of Sciences' recommendation to use an incremental adaptive management
approach that allows projects to move forward with incremental steps.
However, we are concerned that the Corps' current effort is also being
undertaken without key information on updated environmental benefits for
these projects. As a result, the revised schedules for sequencing the CERP
projects will most likely still not meet all of the sequencing criteria
outlined in the Corps regulations, and the revised CERP sequencing plan,
when issued, will continue to be based largely on technical dependencies
and funding availability.

Implementation Decisions for CERP-Related and Non-CERP Projects Are Based
Largely on Available Funding

Decisions about starting and completing CERP-related and non-CERP projects
largely depend upon when and if the implementing agency will have
sufficient funding to implement the project. Specifically, implementation
of the 162 CERP-related and non-CERP projects is to be carried out by over
14 different federal, state, local, and tribal agencies as part of their
larger missions. Many of these agencies do not have a specific program
focused on the South Florida ecosystem restoration effort. Consequently,
the priorities assigned to many of the CERP-related and non-CERP projects
are driven by the agencies' overall priorities and available funding in
any given year, not necessarily the sequencing needs of the restoration
effort. For example, the construction of the CERP-related Mod Waters
project has been delayed several times since 1997 because, among other
things, Interior did not receive enough funding to complete the
construction of this project. While currently scheduled for completion in
2009, agency officials stated that they do not expect this project to be
completed until at least 2011. However, because completion of this project
is critical to the implementation of the CERP Decomp project, these delays
have caused completion dates for Decomp to be pushed back as well.
Similarly, FDEP has a land acquisition program to acquire lands for
conservation and habitat preservation throughout the state, including for
some non-CERP projects that are part of the South Florida ecosystem
restoration effort. FDEP has identified lands and added them to a list of
priority projects proposed for acquisition throughout the state.^16
However, whether or not these lands will be acquired for non-CERP projects
is dependent on whether there is available funding in the annual budget,
there are willing sellers, and the land is affordable based on the
available funding.

Federal Agencies and Florida Have Provided over $7 Billion for a Variety of
Restoration Activities Since 1999

From fiscal year 1999 through fiscal year 2006, federal and state agencies
participating in the restoration of the South Florida ecosystem provided
$7.1 billion. Of this total, federal agencies provided $2.3 billion and
Florida provided $4.8 billion. Two agencies--the Corps and the Department
of the Interior--provided over 80 percent of the federal contribution.
Figure 3 shows each federal agency's contribution.^17

16FDEP contracts with willing sellers to acquire land at an agreed price
in advance of the actual purchase. Depending upon funding, FDEP may
commence with partial purchases of the land over the period of the
contract.

^17While funding documents show that $1 billion was allocated for
restoring the ecosystem during fiscal years 1999 through 2006, the Corps
only received $735 million primarily because of its internal funding
polices and practices. Before fiscal year 2006, the Corps reprogrammed
individual project funding by moving excess funds from projects which did
not require all the funds to complete the projects or that had fallen
behind in their construction schedules so that the projects did not
require the funding allocated to them. The Corps agreed to limit this
practice beginning with its fiscal year 2006 budget in response to GAO
recommendations. See GAO, Army Corps of Engineers: Improved Planning and
Financial Management Should Replace Reliance on Reprogramming Actions to
Manage Project Funds, [36]GAO-05-946 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 16, 2005).
For example, for fiscal years 1999 through 2006, the Corps received $292
million for CERP. However, the Corps reduced that amount--reprogrammed
it--by $39 million, so that the CERP received only $251 million after a
rescission of $2 million.

Figure 3: Federal Funding Provided for the Restoration Effort, Fiscal
Years 1999-2006

Note: Percentages do not equal 100 due to rounding.

As figure 4 shows, federal and state agencies allocated the largest
portion of the $7.1 billion to non-CERP projects for fiscal years 1999
through 2006.

Figure 4: Federal and State Funding Provided for CERP, CERP-Related, and
Non-CERP Projects and Activities, Fiscal Years 1999-2006

Note: Amounts do not total to $7.1 billion due to rounding. The amounts
are $1.93 billion for CERP-related, $2.35 billion for CERP, and $2.80
billion for non-CERP.

Table 4 shows how the federal and state agencies used the funds allocated
to CERP, CERP-related, and non-CERP projects and activities. As the table
shows, while federal and state funding was used to support a range of
activities, land acquisition alone accounted for about 36 percent of the
$7.1 billion. Land acquisition is such a large category primarily because
Florida has devoted significant resources to purchase land for restoration
projects.

Table 4: Project Purpose and Funding Allocated among CERP, CERP-Related,
and Non-CERP Projects and Activities, Fiscal Years 1999-2006

Dollars in millions
                  CERP projects     CERP-relatedprojects  Non-CERP projects         Total                
Type of project Federal^c  State^d   Federal^c   State^d  Federal^c  State^d   Federal    State    Total 
Land                    0 $1,788.6           0         0     $283.4   $485.5    $283.4 $2,274.1 $2,557.5 
acquisition^a,e                                                                                          
Project                 0     25.7       835.7   1,097.4          0        0     835.7  1,123.1 $1,958.7 
construction                                                                                             
Support             341.4    191.7           0         0      795.6  1,230.1   1,137.0  1,421.9 $2,558.9 
activities^b                                                                                             
Total              $341.4 $2,006.0      $835.7  $1,097.4   $1,079.0 $1,715.7  $2,256.1 $4,819.0 $7,075.1 

Source: GAO's analysis of federal and state agencies restoration funding
data.

^a Certain judgments were made in allocating the funding by purpose based
on the available funding data. As a result, land costs for some fiscal
years are only for a partial fiscal year and do not include the entire
fiscal year.

^bSupport activities included RECOVER efforts, adaptive assessment and
monitoring, the Interagency Modeling Center, program coordination, and
science- and mission-related activities that indirectly benefit the
restoration, such as invasive species control. In addition, for the Corps
and SFWMD, support activities include, $74.4 million and $36.8 million,
respectively for project design; $13.1 million and $11.8 million for pilot
project design; and $9.0 million and $6.7 million for feasibility studies.

^cFederal funding data were provided by the agencies in response to a GAO
data request, except for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, for which we used the funding data from the Task Force's
annual cross-cut budgets.

^dState funding data used were found in the Task Force's annual cross-cut
budgets, except for SFWMD, which provided funding data in response to a
GAO data request.

^eLocal government entities spent $207 million on non-CERP land
acquisition projects currently identified as restoration projects and $213
million on other land acquisition projects that will become restoration
projects.

CERP projects. As table 4 shows, most CERP funds have been used to
purchase land--210,642 acres over the last 8 years. The state is
responsible for acquiring all land for CERP projects; the federal agencies
have not purchased any land for CERP. The Corps and Florida spent $533
million on support activities primarily to meet the administrative
framework requirements of WRDA 2000.

While federal agencies and Florida provided about $2.3 billion during
fiscal years 1999 through 2006 for CERP projects, this amount was about
$1.2 billion less than they had estimated needing for these projects over
this period. Although the federal contribution was significantly less than
expected when the CERP project list was developed in 1999, the state
contribution increased significantly later in the period, partially
closing the funding shortfall. Initially, federal and state agencies
anticipated that they would receive a total of $400 million each year if
the funding was to keep pace with the planned project schedule.
Restoration partners reported that it was expected that this amount would
be provided equally--$200 million annually from federal agencies and $200
million from the state. As figure 5 shows, however, federal CERP funding
fell significantly short in each year during fiscal years 1999 through
2006--by a total of $1.4 billion. This shortfall occurred primarily
because CERP projects did not receive the congressional authorization and
appropriations that the agencies had expected. In contrast, Florida
provided a total of $2.0 billion over the period, exceeding its expected
contribution to CERP by $250 million.

Figure 5: Total Expected and Actual Federal and State Funding for CERP,
Fiscal Years 1999-2006

CERP-related projects. Project construction activities constituted the
only allocation of restoration funding to CERP-related projects, with
federal agencies providing a total of $836 million and the state $1,097
million. For example, the Corps provided $170 million for removing levees
and filling a drainage canal among other things that altered the natural
flow of the Kissimmee River. Florida provided $404 million to complete
construction of six stormwater treatment areas, totaling 41,089 acres,
between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades National Park.

Non-CERP projects. The largest portion of federal and state funding for
non-CERP projects was used for support activities, followed by land
acquisition. Interior bureaus, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
provided a total of $283 million to purchase land for habitat. For
example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provided $15 million to
purchase 913 acres in the J.N. "Ding" Darling National Wildlife Refuge to
help preserve and protect endangered and threatened species; feeding,
nesting, and roosting areas for migratory birds; and habitat for over 220
species of birds. Florida provided $486 million for land purchases for
non-CERP projects, such as the $28 million provided to buy Cayo Costa
Island.

Appendix III contains additional information on funding provided by
federal and state agencies for the various restoration activities of the
South Florida ecosystem restoration effort.

Although Estimated Restoration Costs Have Increased Since 2000, Total Cost
Estimates Are Incomplete and Likely to Rise

Between July 31, 2000, and June 30, 2006, the total estimated cost for the
South Florida ecosystem restoration effort grew by 28 percent, from $15.4
billion to $19.7 billion. This increase occurred primarily because of
project scope changes, increased construction costs, and higher land
costs. However, the cost estimate for the restoration effort is likely to
increase even more, in part because the current estimate does not include
the costs for the remaining land acquisitions and final design cost
estimates for CERP projects, which are not yet known.

Estimated Restoration Costs Have Increased

Between July 31, 2000, and June 30, 2006, the total estimated cost for the
South Florida ecosystem restoration grew from $15.4 billion to $19.7
billion, or by 28 percent. As figure 6 shows, estimated costs increased
for all categories of projects and for support activities, such as the
WRDA 2000 administrative requirements.

Figure 6: Total Estimated Increases in Restoration Costs for CERP,
CERP-Related, and Non-CERP Projects, and Support Activities, 2000 to 2006

As the figure also shows, estimated CERP project costs increased from $8.8
billion to $10.1 billion. This 15-percent increase represents nearly 31
percent of the increase in the total estimated cost for the restoration.
However, the most significant project cost increase--47 percent--was for
non-CERP projects.

Federal and state officials reported that estimated CERP costs increased
primarily because of inflation and changes in the scope of work for two
CERP projects with completed project implementation reports. For example,
in the conceptual phase, the cost estimate for the Site 1 Impoundment
project--a CERP project in southern Palm Beach County to capture and store
local runoff during wet periods and then use the water to supplement water
deliveries during dry periods--was $46 million. Once the initial planning
and design was complete, however, the Corps' estimate increased to $81
million to include changes in the scope of the project and increased cost
of construction. In addition, the Picayune Strand Restoration project--a
CERP project to restore and enhance wetlands and distribute water across a
larger area--was $53 million in the conceptual phase. Once the initial
planning and design was complete, however, the Corps' estimate increased
to $363 million in part to include the cost of acquiring the 55,247 acres
of land needed for the project. Similarly, the scope of the Indian River
Lagoon-South project was expanded to include the acquisition of over
92,000 acres of natural lands that will provide water storage and habitat
restoration. The scope expansion increased the project's estimated cost by
$354 million. For CERP-related projects, estimated costs increased
primarily because of inflation and delays in receiving federal funding,
which led to additional increases in the costs of labor and materials
beyond that attributed to inflation, according to federal officials.

Increases in Total Restoration Costs Are Likely to Continue for Multiple Reasons

The costs of restoring the South Florida ecosystem are likely to continue
to increase for a number of reasons. First, the estimated costs for some
of the projects are not known or fully known. Specifically, for eight
nonconstruction CERP projects--addressing water management operations and
water supply plans--the estimated costs were not known as of September
2006. These nonconstruction projects seek to improve the delivery of water
to areas such as the water conservation areas and Everglades National
Park, the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, and the Rotenberger and
Holey Land Wildlife Management Areas. For the remaining 44 CERP projects
that require construction, the full estimated cost is likely to rise if
they, like other CERP projects, have higher completion costs than
originally anticipated. For example, as mentioned above for one project
that we examined--the Site 1 Impoundment project--after the project
implementation report was completed the estimated total costs grew by $36
million, from $46 million to $81 million.^18 If other CERP projects, for
which initial planning and design have not yet been completed, also
experience similar increases in project costs then the estimated total
costs of not only CERP but the overall restoration effort will grow
significantly. Since the federal government provides 50 percent of the
cost for CERP and for certain CERP-related projects, its contribution to
cover these rising costs will also continue to increase.

^18Total does not add due to rounding.

Second, the full cost of acquiring land for the restoration effort is not
known. For 56 non-CERP land projects, expected to total 862,796 acres,
land acquisition costs have not been reported. Costs are not estimated due
to price escalation and also to avoid adversely impacting ongoing
negotiations of land acquisitions. For these non-CERP land acquisitions,
the Task Force computed an estimated range of land costs from $2.5 billion
to $4.1 billion based on the 779,000 acres remaining to be acquired as of
2004. However, the higher cost may be more realistic, and could be a
conservative estimate, given the rising costs of land in Florida.
According to state officials, Florida land prices are escalating rapidly,
owing primarily to development pressures. Consequently, future project
costs are likely to rise with higher land costs. While land acquisition
costs for CERP projects are included as part of the total estimated
project costs, thus far, the state has acquired only 54 percent of the
land needed for CERP projects, at a cost of $1.4 billion. An additional
178,000 acres have yet to be acquired; the cost of these purchases is not
yet known and is therefore not fully reflected in the cost of CERP and
overall restoration costs.

Third, the cost of using new technologies for the restoration effort is
unknown. The Congress authorized pilot projects in 1999 and 2000 to
determine the feasibility of applying certain new technologies for storing
water, managing seepage, and reusing treated wastewater. Under this
authority, the Corps implemented six pilot projects that are estimated to
cost a total of $123 million. While the pilot projects have been
authorized, the cost to construct or implement projects based on the
results of the pilots is not yet known. For example, one of the key water
storage technologies proposed is the use of aquifer storage and recovery
(ASR). Using ASR technology would require the Corps and SFWMD to drill
many wells deep into an aquifer to store water and then to pump it out as
needed. While ASR technology has been used successfully in the state in
the past, the restoration agencies plan to create water storage reservoirs
that are larger than any previously created. Three ASR pilot projects have
been approved to address the technical uncertainties related to the
implementation of these large scale ASRs. The agencies reported that the
ASR pilot costs constitute approximately 20 percent of the cost of CERP,
but they do not know what the ASR technology on the scale envisioned will
cost or what the costs would be for alternative water storage if the ASR
technology proves to be infeasible.

Twenty-Seven Primary Models Guide the Restoration Effort, but Additional
Interfaces Are Needed to Enhance Their Usefulness

Of more than 100 available mathematical models, 27 primary models guide
the restoration effort. At least 21 of the 27 have some interfaces, but
agency officials told us that they need additional interfaces to make the
most effective use of the models. However, current agency efforts are
focused on meeting the modeling needs of individual agencies, not on
coordinating the efforts and needs of all the agencies involved in the
restoration effort. Agency officials recognize the need for better
coordination, but given other demands for their time, this has not been a
high priority for them.

Twenty-Seven of More Than 100 Models Are Primary to the Restoration Effort

Although there is no comprehensive list of all the mathematical models
available for guiding the restoration of South Florida's ecosystem, we
identified more than 100 such models. Of these 100 models, 27 are primary
for the restoration effort, according to federal and state officials.^19
Federal and state agencies, private organizations, and academic
institutions have developed the 27 models. These 27 models can be used to
represent the unique characteristics of the South Florida ecosystem. For
example, according to federal and state officials the South Florida Water
Management Model, which was developed by SFWMD, is one of the most
valuable modeling tools used for the restoration. This regional model is
used to simulate the hydrology and management of water resources over a
7,600 square mile area in South Florida and to evaluate CERP's
performance. However, a RECOVER modeling task team reported that the
current model does not provide the level of precision and detail needed to
simulate flow rates of surface and ground water; cannot predict the
effects of restoration alternatives on the salinity levels of coastal
wetlands and aquifers; and does not provide detailed enough information
about the different habitat types that exist within the analyzed area. To
address these shortcomings, SFWMD is developing the Regional Simulation
Model to replace this model, which is expected to be ready for use in
2008. Table 5 shows the primary models used in the South Florida ecosystem
restoration effort by model type and study area.

^19Federal and state officials pointed to the 2006 RECOVER Report on
Evaluation Tools, Models, Work Plans, and Budgets, which lists 29 models,
for a list of models that are primary. However, two models--the Regional
Engineering Model for Ecosystem Restoration (REMER) and the Regional
Simulation Model (RSM)--are not yet developed; therefore, we concluded
that only 27 models are primary.

Table 5: Model Types and Study Areas of the 27 Primary Models That Guide
the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Effort

Model types and study areas       Number of models 
Model type                                         
Hydrological                                    11 
Hydrological/water quality                       8 
Water quality                                    5 
Ecological                                       3 
Study area                                         
Regional/sub-regional and project               17 
Project                                          7 
Regional/sub-regional                            3 

Source: GAO's analysis of model Web sites, agency interviews, and the 2006
RECOVER Report on Evaluation Tools, Models, Work Plans, and Budgets.

As table 5 shows, there are a total of 19 primary models that can be used
in the restoration effort to simulate hydrological processes--such as
water runoff, the movement of groundwater in aquifers, and the force of
water flow in rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. These models take into
account different aspects of the unique hydrology of South Florida--flat
topography, a high water table, sandy soils, and the easy movement of
water through the aquifer system. A total of 13 primary models simulate
water quality processes--such as the migration of pollutants in both
surface water and groundwater systems. The three primary ecological models
simulate how plant and animal species interact with their habitat. For
example, an ecological model might simulate changes in the population of
an endangered species, like the Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow, in relation to
changes in hydrological conditions and the availability of food. The 27
models may simulate changes that could occur in a region or sub-region of
the ecosystem as a result of multiple restoration activities or changes
that could occur as a result of a specific restoration project.

Additional Interfaces Are Needed to Enhance Models' Usefulness

We determined that at least 21 of the 27 primary models have interfaces
that allow the models to interact with other models and provide a more
comprehensive and accurate assessment of the ecosystem. Agency scientists
and officials identified three broad types of interfaces. The first type
enables the models to share data with other models. This type of interface
requires less hands-on data processing and, according to a Corps official,
yields immediate returns for guiding the restoration effort in terms of
facilitating and expediting the exchange of required data among models.
The second type of interface allows scientists to run multiple models and
then layer the results of each model onto a single graphic. This process
expedites the review of simulation results and enables scientists and
managers to better understand the results of different project activities.
The third type of interface--known as an integrated interface--allows
scientists to simultaneously run multiple hydrological, water quality, and
ecological models. This type of interface provides the most holistic
approach for simulating the long-term responses of the landscape and
habitat to the restoration effort, although it is the most complex and
time-consuming to develop.

However, scientists and agency officials we spoke with noted the need for
additional interfaces for these 27 models. According to agency officials
and reports by the National Academy of Sciences and the RECOVER
interagency science team, the existing model interfaces do not allow them
to provide the most comprehensive and accurate understanding of the impact
of the restoration effort. These sources identified the need for multiple
interfaces between and across the hydrological, ecological, and water
quality models and the regional, sub-regional, and project-specific
models. Such interfaces would (1) improve model predictions; (2) expedite
project-related simulations; and (3) streamline efforts for planning,
evaluation, monitoring, and adaptive management.

Although agency scientists and officials recognize the need for additional
interfaces, neither the individual agencies nor the Task Force, as the
coordinating body for science-related activities, have compiled a list of
interfaces needed for the entire restoration effort. Instead, agency
scientists and managers focus on their specific needs to carry out their
agency's mission. For example, the Corps and SFWMD are each focusing on
certifying the reliability of the models that they developed through a
peer review process, while Interior is setting priorities for ecological
science activities that affect the development of ecological models.
However, because the agencies do not have a formal, restoration-wide
coordination effort, they rely on an informal network to coordinate model
development, create interfaces, and set science research priorities. As a
result, the agencies' mission-related activities may not support the
overall restoration effort. The National Academy of Sciences has stated
that improved coordination would enhance the restoration effort by helping
to identify and reduce scientific uncertainties.^20 To improve
coordination, the Corps and SFWMD established the Interagency Modeling
Center in 2003 as the single point of responsibility for CERP modeling
services. However, the Interagency Modeling Center focuses primarily on
applying models to CERP projects, and does not focus on developing and
coordinating models and interfaces for the entire restoration effort.
Agency officials agree that coordination and communication across agencies
involved in identifying interfaces could be improved. However, they also
stated that agency staff involved with the restoration efforts have other
duties that take precedence over the coordination of modeling interface
activities.

Conclusions

Restoring the South Florida ecosystem is a vast and complex undertaking
that will ultimately depend on the successful implementation of more than
200 different projects. In particular, the successful achievement of the
restoration's three overall goals depends to a large degree on the
effective implementation of approximately 88 key CERP and CERP-related
projects. In this context, therefore, the order in which these projects
are implemented becomes critical to ensuring that the maximum
environmental benefits are achieved as quickly as possible in the most
cost-effective manner. However, the process that participating agencies
have used so far to make sequencing decisions for these projects, and in
particular for the CERP projects, has been governed largely by funding
availability and technical dependencies and constraints among projects,
not the full range of criteria that the Corps developed under WRDA 2000.
These criteria were not fully applied when sequencing decisions were made
for the CERP projects in 2005. This happened because key data, such as
updated benefits information and interim goals for CERP, which are needed
to fully apply these criteria were not available. In this regard, the
Secretaries of the Army and the Interior, in conjunction with the Governor
of Florida, did not reach agreement on CERP interim goals until late
April/early May 2007--more than 2 years after the date required by the
regulations.

Moreover, from the outset, the restoration effort has sought to use a
science-based approach to guide its decision-making processes. A
significant contributor to this approach has been the use of mathematical
models that help agencies gauge the effects of the restoration effort on
the ecosystem. However, the effectiveness of these models is reduced by
the limited number of interfaces between and among them. Without
additional interfaces, these models cannot provide the participating
agencies with the comprehensive information that they need. The current
informal network that agency officials rely on to coordinate their model
and interface development efforts may not be the most effective approach
to ensure that the needs of the overall restoration effort are met. In
this context, we believe that the Task Force as the coordinating body for
the overall restoration effort could provide the needed direction and
emphasis.

^20Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration
Progress, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences,
Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The First Biennial Review, 2006
(Washington, D.C.: 2006).

Recommendations for Executive Action

Because the correct sequencing of CERP projects is essential to the
overall success of the restoration effort, we are recommending that the
Secretary of the Army direct the Corps of Engineers to obtain the key data
that are needed to ensure that all required sequencing factors are
appropriately considered when deciding which projects to implement. Once
this information is available, the Corps should comprehensively reassess
its sequencing decisions to ensure that CERP projects have been
appropriately sequenced to maximize the achievement of restoration goals.

In addition, given the importance of modeling and interfaces to managing
the restoration effort, we are recommending that, as chair of the Task
Force, the Secretary of the Interior take the lead on helping
participating agencies better coordinate their efforts to develop models
and their interfaces.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Defense and the
Interior and the state of Florida for review and comment. We received
written comments from both federal agencies and the state of Florida.

The Department of Defense generally concurred with our recommendation that
the Corps obtain the key data needed to ensure all sequencing factors are
considered in its project sequencing decisions and to comprehensively
reassess its decisions so as to ensure CERP projects maximize the
achievement of restoration goals. The state of Florida, however, expressed
concerns that our recommendation would serve to delay restoration and
increase costs and stated that it supports the Incremental Adaptive
Restoration process recommended by the National Research Council. While we
understand the state's concerns, we do not believe that implementing the
adaptive management approach recommended by the Council is incompatible
with our recommendation. In fact, our report discusses the Corps' plans to
incorporate this approach and allow CERP projects to move forward in
incremental steps. Furthermore, given the delays that have already
occurred and the criticality of CERP to the success of the restoration, we
believe that it is even more important for the Corps to apply the full set
of sequencing factors, as outlined in the program regulations, to ensure
that CERP sequencing decisions will achieve maximum restoration benefits
as early as possible and in the most cost-effective manner.

In responding to our recommendation that the Departments of Defense and
the Interior reach an agreement on interim goals with the Governor of
Florida, both federal agencies and the state of Florida reported that the
Secretaries of the Army and the Interior and the Governor of Florida
signed an Interim Goals Agreement in late April/early May 2007. Because
this happened after our report was sent to the agencies and the state for
comment, we have revised our report and removed the recommendation to
reflect this recent action. We believe that having the interim goals in
place will provide a way of measuring the progress made in implementing
CERP and achieve its goals as early as possible and in a cost-effective
manner.

The Department of the Interior and the state of Florida agreed with our
recommendation that the Secretary of the Interior, as chair of the Task
Force, take the lead on helping participating agencies better coordinate
their efforts to develop models and their interfaces and that such an
effort should include the Interagency Modeling Center. Interior said that
it agreed that coordination in the area of modeling will be beneficial and
that the Task Force's Science Coordination Group and the Interagency
Modeling Center could assist in this effort. Interior also said that it
will make such a recommendation to the Task Force. The state of Florida
said that it is important that the Task Force provide direction to the
model development process and that interfaces for models are important.
The state also recognized that while coordination of modeling could be
improved, it is important that the Interagency Modeling Center continue to
provide policy guidance. Although this recommendation was not addressed to
the Department of Defense, in its comments the department stated that it
did not agree with the recommendation because the Interagency Modeling
Center has responsibility for coordinating and developing models and
interfaces. We have included information in the report to recognize the
role of the Interagency Modeling Center. However, we believe that because
the Interagency Modeling Center's responsibilities pertain primarily to
CERP, and not the whole restoration effort, the Task Force as the science
and research coordinating body for the overall restoration is the most
appropriate body for coordinating the development of models and their
interfaces.

We also received technical comments from the state of Florida, which we
have incorporated, as appropriate, throughout the report. The Department
of Defense's written comments are presented in appendix V, the Department
of the Interior's written comments are presented in appendix VI, and the
state of Florida's written comments are presented in appendix VII.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of
this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from
the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to
interested congressional committees and Members of Congress; the Secretary
of the Interior; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of the Army; the
Secretary of Commerce; the Secretary of Agriculture; the Administrator,
EPA; and the Governor of Florida. We will also make copies available to
others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no
charge on GAO's Web site at [37]http://www.gao.gov .

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202)
512-3841 or [38][email protected] . Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are
listed in appendix VIII.

Anu K. Mittal
Director, Natural Resources and Environment

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Given the complexity and enormity of the South Florida ecosystem
restoration, we were asked to review the current status of the effort,
focusing specifically on the (1) status of restoration projects and their
expected benefits; (2) factors that influence the sequencing of project
implementation; (3) amount of funding provided to the restoration effort
since 1999; (4) extent to which cost increases have occurred and the
reasons for these increases; and (5) primary mathematical models used to
guide the restoration effort and the extent to which these models have
interfaces.

To determine the status of restoration projects and to identify their
expected benefits, we first met with the South Florida Ecosystem
Restoration Task Force (Task Force) and representatives from many of its
participating agencies to determine how best to collect project status and
benefit information. On the basis of these interviews, we determined that
the most complete list of current restoration projects was found in the
Task Force's 2005 Integrated Financial Plan.^1 This list, updated
annually, is intended to contain all of the restoration projects
completed, implemented, and planned by the federal, state, local, and
tribal entities participating in the South Florida ecosystem restoration.
The list is supplemented by project profile sheets that give additional
details about each project. Using the Task Force's list as a baseline and
supplementing it with research and agency interviews, we identified 222
restoration projects. We requested and received information on these
projects from the participating agencies that sponsor nearly all of the
222 projects: the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps); the Departments of
Agriculture (USDA)--including the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS); Commerce--including the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the
Interior--including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National
Park Service (NPS); the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP); Miami-Dade County; the Miccosukee Tribe; the Seminole Tribe; and
the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD).

Specifically, we requested data on project status, project start and end
dates, and related information. We conducted follow-up interviews where
appropriate to clarify the project information we received. On the basis
of this information, we compiled a master list of completed, ongoing, and
planned restoration projects. Using the information collected regarding
project status, we grouped the projects into the following four
categories: (1) completed, (2) in implementation, (3) in planning or
design, and (4) not yet started.

^1South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, Tracking Success: 2005
Integrated Financial Plan for the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task
Force (Miami, Fla.: undated).

To separate the 222 projects into smaller groups for further analysis, we
relied upon the project information in the Task Force's 2005 Integrated
Financial Plan, as well as in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Plan (CERP) 2005 report to the Congress.^2 On the basis of our analysis of
these two documents and verification provided by responses on project
status from participating agencies, we developed the following three
project groups: (1) CERP projects--60 individual projects approved by the
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 to restore, preserve, and
protect the South Florida ecosystem while providing for other
water-related needs of the region, including water supply and flood
control; (2) CERP-related projects--28 projects that provide a foundation
for CERP--many of these were authorized before WRDA 2000; and (3) non-CERP
projects--134 restoration projects that are not as closely related to
CERP.

To identify project benefits, we generally categorized expected benefits
for each project by its primary purpose, as identified by the Task Force
in its 2005 Integrated Financial Plan. According to the Task Force, these
primary purposes are identified by communications between the Task Force
and each project's sponsor(s). We reviewed the project descriptions as
reported by the Task Force, as well as other available project
information, to assess the reasonableness of the Task Force's
determination for each project's primary purpose. For projects that did
not appear in the 2005 Integrated Financial Plan, or for those that
appeared in the plan but did not have a supporting project profile sheet,
we requested and reviewed project information from the project's
sponsor(s) where available. Through this analysis, we developed broad
categories of expected benefits--water storage, habitat acquisition and
improvement, and water quality, among others--and assigned each project to
one of them on the basis of its primary purpose.

^2U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of the Interior,
Central and Southern Florida Project, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Plan: 2005 Report to Congress (Washington, D.C.: undated).

Following our initial data collection, we conducted additional outreach
through April 2007 to ensure that our master project list was as complete
as possible and incorporated any changes that may have occurred. We (1)
reviewed the Task Force's draft 2006 Integrated Financial Plan to
incorporate newly completed projects and other relevant changes; (2)
requested the Task Force's assistance in reconciling our project list with
the original project list that it published in 2000 to incorporate
projects that may have been completed and then removed from the Integrated
Financial Plans issued between 2000 and 2005;^3 and (3) contacted
participating agencies and followed up on ongoing projects with estimated
end dates that were reported as "2006" in the agencies' original status
response to determine if these projects had in fact been completed.

To determine the factors that influence the sequencing of project
implementation for the restoration projects, we obtained and reviewed
available agency guidance, regulations, and related material from the
Corps; the Department of the Interior (including NPS and FWS); FDEP; and
SFWMD. We selected these agencies because they are responsible for the
largest number of CERP, CERP-related, and non-CERP projects. To learn
about sequencing criteria and to determine whether there are any
overarching criteria for all of the restoration projects, we interviewed
officials at these agencies, as well as officials at the Department of
Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service and Natural Resources
Conservation Service; Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration; Department of the Interior's U.S. Geological
Survey; the Seminole and Miccosukee tribes; Miami-Dade County; and the
South Florida Regional Planning Council. Once we determined that only the
CERP projects have clearly established criteria, we met with Corps and
SFWMD officials to determine the extent to which they applied these
criteria in making the sequencing decisions listed in the 2005 sequencing
plan and to identify other factors and considerations that they took into
account. In doing so, we selected certain CERP projects for more detailed
discussion and reviewed Corps documentation in support of its sequencing
decisions. Finally, we reviewed comments by other agencies and external
stakeholders about the appropriateness of the factors used to determine
the sequencing of CERP projects.

^3South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, Coordinating Success:
Strategy for Restoration of the South Florida Ecosystem, Volume 2 (Miami,
Fla.: July 31, 2000).

To determine the amount of funding federal and state agencies have
contributed to the restoration effort for fiscal years 1999 through 2006,
we obtained information from the following lead project sponsors: the
Department of Agriculture, the Corps, the Department of the Interior,
SFWMD, and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. We also
obtained information from the Environmental Protection Agency. Federal
agencies account for their funds independently, and therefore no complete
and consolidated financial data on the restoration were available. For the
other agencies participating in the restoration effort, we used the
funding data for this period that these agencies had provided in the Task
Force's annual cross-cut budgets. These agencies included the Department
of Commerce, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs, Florida Department of
Community Affairs, Florida Department of Transportation, and Florida
Department of Environmental Protection. In reporting the funding data in
total and by category type, we used funding amounts that were sometimes
rounded to the nearest million and sometimes rounded to the nearest
billion, and as a result, the amounts we report may not always equal the
funding totals originally provided by each agency. We made certain
judgments in allocating the funding based on the available funding data.
As a result, land costs for some fiscal years are only for a partial
fiscal year and do not include the entire fiscal year. We converted all
funding data to constant 2006 dollars. To assess the reliability of the
funding data the agencies provided, we asked the agencies to provide
appropriation or budget allocation documents that supported their funding
contributions; the lead project sponsors listed above provided supporting
documentation. Our review of the funding and the supporting documentation
indicated that the funding data were sufficiently reliable for the
purposes of this review.

To determine any increases in estimated project costs and the reasons for
these increases, we used as our baseline the list of projects and their
associated costs in the Task Force's 2000 Integrated Financial Plan. We
updated this project list for any changes in projects from July 31, 2000,
through June 30, 2006. We then submitted the updated project list to the
participating federal and state agencies that were the lead project
sponsors and co-sponsors and asked them to provide the total estimated
cost for each project as of June 30, 2006, and identify factors that
contributed to increases in project costs. However, in 2000, the state of
Florida discontinued reporting acquisition costs for lands not yet
acquired for habitat protection. Therefore, the Task Force did not include
these costs in its 2002 through 2006 reports. Instead, to account for
future land costs in its 2004 Biennial Report, the Task Force computed a
range of estimated costs for future land acquisitions using a low and a
high price per acre. Moreover, the 2000 Task Force restoration cost
estimate consisted of total estimated costs for some projects, and total
remaining costs for other projects. In some instances where the cost
estimate provided a total remaining project cost, this was listed as "to
be determined," because the Task Force did not identify a cost for land
still to be purchased. The 2006 restoration cost estimate we developed
also includes total estimated costs for some projects, and total remaining
costs for other projects. However, we developed cost estimates for some
projects whose costs were previously listed as "to be determined."
Specifically, we conservatively estimated total remaining project costs
for uncompleted land acquisitions by multiplying the remaining acreage to
be purchased using the same low price per acre that the Task Force used in
computing these land costs in 2004. This difference in methodology could
account for some part of the estimated cost increase we report; however,
we did not assess the potential impact of this difference. In addition,
for the lead agencies that did not or could not provide estimated project
costs as of June 30, 2006, we used the estimated project costs these
agencies had provided in the 2005 Integrated Financial Plan and converted
the costs to constant 2006 dollars. We realize that converting these 2005
project costs to 2006 dollars may not capture all of the factors that may
contribute to increases in project costs, but given the small number of
projects involved--30--we do not believe the omission of some contributing
factors would significantly alter the total estimated cost of the
restoration. In arriving at a total estimated cost for the restoration for
2000 and 2006, we added together the estimated project costs, future land
costs, and non-project estimated costs for each year. Having calculated
total estimated restoration costs for 2000 and 2006, we subtracted the
2000 total estimated restoration cost from the 2006 total estimated
restoration cost to determine the increase in the total estimated cost of
the restoration. In reporting the cost data in total and by category type,
we used cost amounts that were sometimes rounded to the nearest million
and sometimes to the nearest billion.

In determining the reliability of the project and program support cost
estimates, we researched and reviewed audit reports prepared by agencies'
internal auditors, inspectors general, and outside independent auditors
for fiscal years 1999 through 2006 for information on actual costs
incurred. For estimated costs, we reviewed the processes and policies the
Corps and SFWMD used to estimate the costs for completing the projects. We
limited our data reliability review to the following agencies that were
lead project sponsors because they are responsible for tracking and
reporting project costs. These agencies were the Department of
Agriculture, the Corps, the Department of the Interior, SFWMD, and FDEP.
Our review of the audit reports and cost estimation policies and
procedures indicated that the cost data were sufficiently reliable for the
purposes of this review.

To identify the primary models that can be used to guide the restoration
and their interfaces, we obtained and analyzed key documents from managers
and scientists at the Corps, the Department of the Interior, SFWMD, and
other participating agencies. We also researched academic and model Web
sites to identify additional information related to models and interfaces
for the restoration. From these sources, we compiled a universe of over
100 mathematical models available for the restoration effort.
Additionally, we conducted interviews with agency scientists and managers,
and other stakeholders, including the external scientific community, to
determine which models are considered primary to guide the restoration and
to obtain additional information about these models. We defined primary
models as those that have broad application for use at the project,
sub-regional, or regional level. Through our conversations with agency
scientists and managers, and our analysis of agency documents and academic
and model Web sites, we identified 27 primary models. We also determined
who developed the models, the type, and study area of the models, and the
interfaces for each of the models. We did not independently assess the
reliability or adequacy of the models we reviewed.

We performed our work between January 2006 and April 2007 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Appendix II: Project Status and Cost by CERP, CERP-Related, and Non-CERP
Categories 

This appendix provides detailed information on the 222 projects that
comprise the restoration effort. Table 6 shows the projects by project
category--CERP, CERP-related, and non-CERP. Tables 7, 8, and 9 provide
information on the status of the restoration projects--completed, being
implemented, or not yet implemented (planning, design, or not yet
started).

Table 6: 222 Restoration Projects, Sponsor, Primary Purpose, Completion
Date, and Project Cost

Dollars in millions    
Project name           Sponsor(s)       Primary purpose Completion date   Cost^a 
60 CERP projects                                                                 
Acme Basin B Discharge Corps/SFWMD      Habitat                  2008^b    $26.5 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Aquifer Storage and    Corps/SFWMD      Study                      2010     73.4 
Recovery Regional                                                                
Study                                                                            
Big Cypress / L-28     Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2022     51.4 
Interceptor                                                                      
Modifications                                                                    
Biscayne Bay Coastal   Corps/SFWMD      Habitat                  2011^b    386.9 
Wetlands                                acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Broward County         Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2014     15.5 
Secondary Canal System                  and flow                                 
Broward County Water   Corps/SFWMD      Water quality            2009^b    408.3 
Preserve Areas                                                                   
C-4 Structure          Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2013      2.8 
                                        and flow                                 
C-43 Basin Storage     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage            2011^b    530.6 
Reservoir - Part 1                      and flow                                 
C-43 Basin Aquifer     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2019       ^c 
Storage and Recovery -                  and flow                                 
Part 2                                                                           
C-111 Spreader Canal   Corps/SFWMD      Water quality            2015^b    117.6 
Caloosahatchee         Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2018     99.7 
Backpumping with                                                                 
Stormwater Treatment                                                             
Caloosahatchee River   Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2009      7.9 
(C-43) Aquifer Storage                  and flow                                 
and Recovery Pilot                      (pilot)                                  
Central Lake Belt      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2035    155.4 
Storage                                 and flow                                 
Change Coastal         Corps/SFWMD      Water supply      To be decided       ^d 
Wellfield Operations                                                             
Comprehensive          Corps/FDEP       Study                      2014      9.3 
Integrated Water                                                                 
Quality Feasibility                                                              
Study                                                                            
Environmental Water    Corps/SFWMD      Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Supply Deliveries to                    acquisition and                          
St. Lucie Estuary                       improvement                              
Environmental Water    Corps/SFWMD      Habitat           To be decided        d 
Supply Deliveries to                    acquisition and                          
the Caloosahatchee                      improvement                              
Estuary                                                                          
Everglades             Corps/SFWMD      Water storage            2015^b    542.2 
Agricultural Storage                    and flow                                 
Reservoir                                                                        
Everglades National    Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2015    390.9 
Park Seepage                            and flow                                 
Management                                                                       
Everglades Rain Driven Corps/SFWMD      Water storage     To be decided       ^d 
Operations                              and flow                                 
Florida Bay and the    Corps/SFWMD      Study                      2012      6.3 
Florida Keys                                                                     
Feasibility Study                                                                
Florida Keys Tidal     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2010      1.5 
Restoration                             and flow                                 
Flow to Northwest and  Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2018     36.3 
Central Water                           and flow                                 
Conservation Area 3A                                                             
Flows to Eastern Water Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2017      8.0 
Conservation Area                       and flow                                 
Henderson Creek /      Corps/FDEP       Water quality              2011      5.8 
Belle Meade                                                                      
Restoration                                                                      
Hillsboro Aquifer      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2020       ^c 
Storage and Recovery -                  and flow                                 
Phase 2                                                                          
Hillsboro Aquifer      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2009      9.4 
Storage and Recovery                    and flow                                 
Pilot                                   (pilot)                                  
Indian River           Corps/SFWMD      Water storage          2022^b,e  1,309.7 
Lagoon-South                            and flow                                 
L-31N (L-30) Seepage   Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2010     11.3 
Management Pilot                        and flow                                 
                                        (pilot)                                  
Lake Belt In-Ground    Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2026     26.5 
Reservoir Technology                    and flow                                 
Pilot                                   (pilot)                                  
Lake Okeechobee        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2027  1,223.4 
Aquifer Storage and                     and flow                                 
Recovery                                                                         
Lake Okeechobee        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2009     32.3 
Aquifer Storage and                     and flow                                 
Recovery Pilot                          (pilot)                                  
Lake Okeechobee        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2007      1.1 
Regulation Schedule                     and flow                                 
Lake Okeechobee        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2014    575.5 
Watershed                               and flow                                 
Lakes Park Restoration Corps/Lee County Habitat                    2009      6.0 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Lower East Coast       Corps/SFWMD      Water supply      To be decided       ^d 
Utility Water                                                                    
Conservation                                                                     
Loxahatchee National   Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2015      9.1 
Wildlife Refuge                         and flow                                 
Internal Canal                                                                   
Structures                                                                       
Melaleuca Eradication  Corps/SFWMD      Invasive                   2025      6.6 
and Other Exotic                        species control                          
Plants                                                                           
Miccosukee Water       Corps/Miccosukee Water quality              2016     29.0 
Management Plan                                                                  
Modify Holey Land      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2011       ^d 
Wildlife Management                     and flow                                 
Area Operation Plan                                                              
Modify Rotenberger     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2009        d 
Wildlife Management                     and flow                                 
Area Operation Plan                                                              
North Lake Belt        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2035    308.2 
Storage Area                            and flow                                 
North Palm Beach       Corps/SFWMD      Water quality            2015^f    533.2 
County - Part 1                                                                  
North Palm Beach       Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2019    203.9 
County - Part 2                         and flow                                 
Operational            Corps/SFWMD      Water storage     To be decided       ^d 
Modification to                         and flow                                 
Southern Portion of                                                              
L-31N and C-111                                                                  
Palm Beach County      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2016    154.4 
Agriculture Reserve                     and flow                                 
Reservoir - Part 1                                                               
Palm Beach County      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2018       ^c 
Agriculture Reserve                     and flow                                 
Aquifer Storage and                                                              
Recovery - Part 2                                                                
Picayune Strand        Corps/SFWMD      Habitat                2009^b,g    362.6 
Restoration                             acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Restoration of         Corps/Miami-Dade Habitat                    2021      0.7 
Pineland and Hardwood  County           acquisition and                          
Hammocks in C-111                       improvement                              
Basin                                                                            
Seminole Tribe Big     Corps/Seminole   Water quality              2021     89.5 
Cypress Reservation                                                              
Water Conservation                                                               
Plan                                                                             
Site 1 Impoundment     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage          2009^b,h    153.7 
                                        and flow                                 
South Miami-Dade Reuse Corps/Miami-Dade Water supply               2022    430.6 
                       County                                                    
Southwest Florida      Corps/SFWMD      Study                      2009     12.0 
Feasibility Study                                                                
Strazzulla Wetlands    Corps/SFWMD      Habitat                    2010     70.4 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Wastewater Reuse       Corps/SFWMD      Water supply               2021     35.4 
Technology Pilot                        (pilot)                                  
Water Conservation     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2021    539.4 
Area 2B Flows to                        and flow                                 
Everglades National                                                              
Park                                                                             
Water Conservation     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2020    253.4 
Area 3                                  and flow                                 
Decompartmentalization                                                           
and Sheetflow                                                                    
Enhancement (Decomp)                                                             
Water Preserve Area    Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2016    331.7 
Conveyance                              and flow                                 
West Miami-Dade Reuse  Corps/Miami-Dade Water supply               2022    518.1 
                       County                                                    
Winsberg Farm Wetlands Corps/Palm Beach Habitat                    2008     17.1 
Restoration            County           acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
28 CERP-related                                                                  
projects                                                                         
C-111 (South Dade)     Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2012    287.6 
                                        and flow                                 
Chapter 298 Districts  SFWMD            Water quality              2005     24.1 
/ Lease 3420                                                                     
Improvements                                                                     
Critical Project:      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage     To be decided     16.5 
Additional Water                        and flow                     ^i          
Conveyance Structures                                                            
Under Tamiami Trail                                                              
Critical Project: East Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2003      3.7 
Coast Canal Structures                  and flow                                 
(C-4)                                                                            
Critical Project: Keys Corps/FDCA       Study                      2003      6.0 
Carrying Capacity                                                                
Study                                                                            
Critical Project: Lake Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2006     21.9 
Okeechobee Water                                                                 
Retention / Phosphorus                                                           
Removal                                                                          
Critical Project: Lake Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2007     30.0 
Trafford                                                                         
Critical Project:      Corps/Seminole   Water storage              2010     52.2 
Seminole Big Cypress                    and flow                                 
Reservation Water                                                                
Conservation Plan                                                                
Critical Project:      Corps/SFWMD      Water storage     To be decided     33.3 
Southern CREW                           and flow                                 
Critical Project: Ten  Corps/SFWMD      Water storage              2006     40.7 
Mile Creek                              and flow                                 
Critical Project:      Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2006     18.1 
Western C-11 Water                                                               
Quality Treatment                                                                
East Water             SFWMD            Water storage              2012      5.3 
Conservation Area 3A                    and flow                                 
Hydropattern                                                                     
Restoration                                                                      
Everglades             SFWMD            Water quality              2010    226.7 
Agricultural Area                                                                
(EAA) Stormwater                                                                 
Treatment Areas                                                                  
Expansion                                                                        
Indian River Lagoon    Corps/SFWMD      Study                      2002      7.9 
Restoration                                                                      
Feasibility Study                                                                
Kissimmee River        Corps/SFWMD      Water storage            2016^j    575.4 
Restoration                             and flow                                 
Manatee Pass Gates     Corps/SFWMD      Habitat                    2010     13.8 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Melaleuca Quarantine   USDA (ARS)       Invasive                   2004      8.0 
Facility                                species control                          
Modified Water         NPS/Corps        Water storage              2009    398.4 
Deliveries to                           and flow                                 
Everglades National                                                              
Park (Mod Waters)                                                                
Rotenberger            SFWMD            Water storage              2005      3.6 
Restoration                             and flow                                 
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2005     12.7 
Area 1 Inflow and                                                                
Distribution Works                                                               
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2000     82.1 
Area 1 West Works and                                                            
Outflow Pump Station                                                             
(G-310)                                                                          
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2000    100.4 
Area 2 Works and                                                                 
Outflow Pump Station                                                             
(G-335)                                                                          
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2005    170.4 
Area 3/4 Works                                                                   
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2005     36.2 
Area 5 Works                                                                     
Stormwater Treatment   SFWMD            Water quality              2006     14.6 
Area 6 (includes                                                                 
Sections 1 and 2)                                                                
Water Conservation     SFWMD            Water storage              2012      4.9 
Area 2A Hydropattern                    and flow                                 
Restoration                                                                      
West Palm Beach Canal  Corps/SFWMD      Water quality              2008    288.6 
(C-51) and Stormwater                                                            
Treatment Area 1E                                                                
West Water             SFWMD            Water storage              2012      7.4 
Conservation Area 3A                    and flow                                 
Hydropattern                                                                     
Restoration                                                                      
134 Non-CERP projects                                                            
2002 Farm Bill         USDA (NRCS)      Other                      2007    100.4 
A.R.M. Loxahatchee     FWS              Habitat           To be decided     30.1 
National Wildlife                       acquisition and                          
Refuge                                  improvement                              
A.R.M. Loxahatchee     FWS              Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
National Wildlife                       acquisition and                          
Refuge Prescribed Fire                  improvement                              
Program                                                                          
Achieve "Maintenance   FWS/SFWMD/FDEP   Invasive                   2020     64.1 
Control" Status for                     species control                          
Brazilian Pepper,                                                                
Melaleuca, Australian                                                            
Pine, and Old World                                                              
Climbing Fern in All                                                             
Natural Areas                                                                    
Statewide by 2020                                                                
Agriculture and Rural  Miami-Dade       Study                      2001       ^d 
Area Study                                                                       
Allapattah Flats /     FDEP             Habitat                    2005        d 
Ranch                                   acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Alternative Water      SFWMD            Water supply      To be decided    466.0 
Supply Grant                                                                     
Aquatic and Upland     FDEP             Invasive          To be decided       ^d 
Invasive Plant                          species control                          
Management                                                                       
Atlantic Ridge         FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided        d 
Ecosystem                               acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Babcock Ranch          FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Belle Meade            FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Best Management        USDA (NRCS)      Water quality              2011    145.4 
Practices (BMPs) for                                                             
Agriculture                                                                      
Big Bend Swamp /       FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Holopaw Ranch                           acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Big Cypress National   NPS              Habitat           To be decided     75.5 
Preserve Addition                       acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Big Cypress National   NPS              Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Preserve Mineral                        acquisition and                          
Rights                                  improvement                              
Big Cypress National   NPS              Habitat           To be decided    244.1 
Preserve Private                        acquisition and                          
Inholdings                              improvement                              
Big Pine and No Name   FDCA             Study                      2001       ^d 
Keys Multi-Species                                                               
Habitat Conservation                                                             
Plan                                                                             
Biscayne Bay           Corps/Miami-Dade Study                      2010      6.4 
Feasibility Study      County                                                    
Biscayne Coastal       SFWMD/Miami-Dade Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Wetlands Land          County           acquisition and                          
Acquistion                              improvement                              
Bombing Range Ridge    FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
C-4 Flood Mitigation   SFWMD            Flood                      2008      4.3 
Projects                                protection                               
Caloosahatchee         FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Ecoscape                                acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Catfish Creek          FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Cayo Costa             FDEP             Habitat                    2004     29.2 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Charlotte Harbor       FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Estuary / Flatwoods /                   acquisition and                          
Cape Haze                               improvement                              
Complete an Invasive   NEWTT/FDEP/NPS   Invasive          To be decided      5.2 
Exotics Plant                           species control                          
Prevention, Early                                                                
Detection, and                                                                   
Eradication Plan by                                                              
2005                                                                             
Complete Land          NPS              Habitat           To be decided     33.7 
Acquisition for                         acquisition and                          
Biscayne National Park                  improvement                              
Coordinate the         NEWTT            Invasive                   2011      0.6 
Development of                          species control                          
Management Plans for                                                             
Top 20 South Florida                                                             
Exotic Pest Plants                                                               
Corkscrew Regional     FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Ecosystem Watershed                     acquisition and                          
(CREW)                                  improvement                              
Corkscrew Regional     SFWMD            Habitat                    1999      2.7 
Mitigation Bank                         acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Coupon Bight / Key     FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Deer / Big Pine Key                     acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Crocodile Lake         FWS              Habitat           To be decided     15.4 
National Wildlife                       acquisition and                          
Refuge                                  improvement                              
Cypress Creek /        SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Loxahatchee                             acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Cypress Creek / Trail  SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
Ridge                                   acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Devil's Garden         FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Dupuis Reserve Land    SFWMD            Habitat                    1986     23.7 
Acquistion                              acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
East Coast Buffer /    FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Water Preserve Areas                    acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
East Everglades        NPS              Habitat           To be decided    109.9 
Addition to Everglades                  acquisition and                          
National Park                           improvement                              
Eastward Ho!           SFRPC            Other                      2010       ^d 
Brownfields                                                                      
Partnership                                                                      
Eastward Ho! Corridor  FDCA             Study                      1998        d 
Rival Development                                                                
Trends Fiscal Impact                                                             
Analysis                                                                         
Estero Bay             FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Estero Bay Aquatic     FDEP             Invasive                   2004        d 
Preserve and Buffer                     species control                          
Reserve Enhancement                                                              
and Exotic Removal                                                               
Project                                                                          
Everglades             SFWMD/DOI        Habitat           To be decided        d 
Agricultural Area                       acquisition and                          
(EAA) / Talisman Land                   improvement                              
Acquistion                                                                       
Everglades National    NPS              Invasive          To be decided        d 
Park Exotic Control                     species control                          
Program                                                                          
Everglades National    NPS              Water quality              2008     19.0 
Park Water and                                                                   
Wastewater                                                                       
Everglades Regulation  SFWMD            Water quality              2016       ^d 
Division                                Appendix V:                              
                                        Comments from                            
                                        the Department                           
                                        of Defense                               
Exotic Species Removal Seminole         Invasive                   2020      1.0 
                                        species control                          
Exotic Vegetation      NPS Appendix VI: Invasive          To be decided      4.1 
Control (Critical) Big Comments from    species control                          
Cypress National       the Department                                            
Preserve               of the Interior                                           
                       Appendix VI:                                              
                       Comments from                                             
                       the Department                                            
                       of the Interior                                           
Fakahatchee Strand     FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                 Appendix 
                                        improvement                         VII: 
                                                                        Comments 
                                                                        from the 
                                                                        State of 
                                                                         Florida 
                                                                        Appendix 
                                                                            VII: 
                                                                        Comments 
                                                                        from the 
                                                                        State of 
                                                                         Florida 
Fisheating Creek       SFWMD/FDEP       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Florida Aquifer        USDA (NRCS)      Water quality     2006 Appendix   0.9GAO 
Restoration                                                     VIII: A  Contact 
                                                         Appendix VIII:          
                                                        GAO Contact and          
                                                                  Staff          
                                                        Acknowledgments          
Florida Greenways and  FDEP (OGT)       Other Staff     2009In addition      4.6 
Trails Designation                      Acknowledgments          to the          
Project                                                      individual          
                                                           named above,          
                                                                 Sherry          
                                                              McDonald,          
                                                              Assistant          
                                                        Director; David          
                                                         Brown; Maureen          
                                                          Driscoll; Les          
                                                         Mahagan; Leigh          
                                                         Ann Nally; and          
                                                                  Carol          
                                                             Herrnstadt          
                                                           Shulman made          
                                                                    key          
                                                          contributions          
                                                        to this report.          
                                                                   Also          
                                                        contributing to          
                                                            this report          
                                                             were Kevin          
                                                        Bray, Katherine          
                                                        Raheb, and Greg          
                                                               Wilmoth.          
Florida Keys Ecosystem FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Florida Keys National  FWS              Habitat           To be decided     55.0 
Wildlife Refuge                         acquisition and                          
Complex                                 improvement                              
Florida Keys Overseas  FDEP             Other                      2009     41.2 
Heritage Trail                                                                   
Florida Panther        FWS              Habitat           To be decided     12.9 
National Wildlife                       acquisition and                          
Refuge                                  improvement                              
Frog Pond / L-31N      FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Half Circle L Ranch    SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Hen Scratch Ranch      SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Hobe Sound National    FWS              Habitat           To be decided      5.8 
Wildlife Refuge                         acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Hole-in-the-Donut      NPS              Invasive                   2017    123.8 
                                        species control                          
Indian River Lagoon    FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Blueway                                 acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Integration of         NPS              Invasive                   2006        d 
Federal, State, and                     species control                          
Local Agency Invasive                                                            
Exotic Control                                                                   
Programs into                                                                    
Florida-wide Strategy                                                            
J.N. "Ding" Darling    FWS              Habitat           To be decided     71.8 
National Wildlife                       acquisition and                          
Refuge                                  improvement                              
Juno Hills / Dunes     FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Jupiter Ridge          FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Kissimmee Basin Water  SFWMD            Study                      2006      5.5 
Supply Plan (KB Plan)                                                            
Kissimmee Prairie      FDEP/SFWMD       Water storage              1997     22.6 
(Ecosystem)                             and flow                                 
Kissimmee River (Lower SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Basin)                                  acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Kissimmee River (Upper SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
Basin)                                  acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Kissimmee-St. Johns    FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Connector                               acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Lake Hatchineha        SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
Watershed /                             acquisition and                          
Parker-Poinciana                        improvement                              
Lake Okeechobee        SFWMD            Water quality              2009    200.0 
Fast-Track Projects                                                              
Lake Okeechobee        SFWMD            Water quality              2015  1,300.0 
Protection Program                                                               
Lake Okeechobee Scenic FDEP             Other             To be decided     25.8 
Trail                                                                            
Lake Okeechobee        SFWMD            Water quality              2003      1.0 
Sediment Removal                        (pilot)                                  
Feasibility Study and                                                            
Pilot Project                                                                    
Lake Okeechobee        SFWMD            Water quality              2004      0.5 
Tributary Sediment                      (pilot)                                  
Removal Pilot Project                                                            
Lake Wales Ridge       FDEP             Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Ecosystem                               acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Lake Walk-in-Water     SFWMD            Habitat                    1998      4.1 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Long Term Plan (LTP)   SFWMD            Water quality              2016    580.9 
Projects                                                                         
Lower East Coast       SFWMD            Study                      2006     12.1 
Regional Water Supply                                                            
Plan (LEC Plan)                                                                  
Lower West Coast       SFWMD            Study                      2002       ^d 
Regional Irrigation                                                              
Distribution System                                                              
Master Plan Study                                                                
Lower West Coast Water SFWMD            Study                      2006     10.4 
Supply Plan (LWC Plan)                                                           
Loxahatchee            FWS              Habitat                    2012      6.1 
Impoundment Landscape                   acquisition and                          
Assessment (LILA)                       improvement                              
                                        (pilot)                                  
Loxahatchee River      SFWMD            Habitat                    2001     13.5 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Loxahatchee Slough     SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Miami-Dade County      FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Archipelago                             acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Miccosukee Water       Miccosukee       Water quality     To be decided     26.0 
Resources Management                                                             
Model Lands            SFWMD/Miami-Dade Habitat                    2007       ^d 
                       County           acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Monitoring of Organic  USDA (NRCS)      Other                      2017      1.3 
Soils in the                                                                     
Everglades                                                                       
Nicodermus Slough      SFWMD            Habitat                    1988      2.0 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
North Fork St. Lucie   FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
River                                   acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
North Key Largo        FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Hammocks                                acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Northern Palm Beach    SFWMD            Study                      2002        d 
County and Southern                                                              
Martin County                                                                    
Reclaimed Water Master                                                           
Plan                                                                             
North Savannas         SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Okaloacoochee Slough   FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Okeechobee Battlefield FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Orlando / Kissimmee    SFWMD            Study                      2004        d 
Area Regional                                                                    
Reclaimed Water                                                                  
Optimization Plan                                                                
Osceola Pine Savannas  FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Pal-Mar                FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Panther Glades         FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Paradise Run           SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Pine Island Slough     FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Ecosystem                               acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Pineland Site Complex  FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Planning and           NOAA             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Implementation of the                   acquisition and                          
Tortugas Ecological                     improvement                              
Reserve                                                                          
Ranch Reserve          SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Rookery Bay            FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Rotenberger-Holey Land FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Tract                                   acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
S-5A Basin Runoff      SFWMD            Water quality              2005     12.8 
Diversion Works                                                                  
Seminole Tribe Best    Seminole         Water quality              2012      4.9 
Management Practices                                                             
for the Big Cypress                                                              
Reservation                                                                      
Seminole Tribe Best    Seminole         Water quality              2012      0.3 
Management Practices                                                             
for the Brighton                                                                 
Reservation                                                                      
Seminole Tribe         Seminole         Water storage              2010     16.3 
Comprehensive Surface                   and flow                                 
Water Management                                                                 
System for the                                                                   
Brighton Reservation                                                             
Seminole Tribe Water   Seminole         Water quality              2012     50.5 
Conservation Project                                                             
for Big Cypress                                                                  
Reservation                                                                      
Shingle Creek          SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Six Mile Cypress I and SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
II                                      acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Soil Survey Update for USDA (NRCS)      Other                      2012      1.5 
the Everglades                                                                   
Agricultural Area                                                                
Soil Survey Update for USDA (NRCS)      Other                      2013      5.8 
the Everglades                                                                   
National Park, Big                                                               
Cypress National                                                                 
Preserve, and Water                                                              
Conservation Areas                                                               
South Florida          USDA (NRCS)      Other             To be decided      1.6 
Ecosystem Restoration                                                            
Earth Team                                                                       
South Florida          BSWCD/SFERC/     Other             To be decided     15.5 
Ecosystem Restoration  USDA (NRCS)                                               
Non Point Source                                                                 
Pollution and Disease                                                            
Prevention Project                                                               
South Florida          FWS              Habitat                    2010    386.1 
Multi-Species Recovery                  acquisition and                          
Plan                                    improvement                              
South Fork St. Lucie   SFWMD            Habitat                    1996      2.6 
River                                   acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
South Savannas         FDEP/SFWMD       Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Southern Glades        SFWMD/Miami-Dade Habitat           To be decided        d 
                       County           acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Southern Golden Gate   FDEP             Habitat           To be decided        d 
Estates                                 acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Technical Assistance   USDA (NRCS)      Water quality              2011     15.5 
to Seminole and                                                                  
Miccosukee Indian                                                                
Reservations                                                                     
Ten Mile Creek (Land   SFWMD            Habitat                    2004      5.5 
Acquisition)                            acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Tibet-Butler Preserve  SFWMD            Habitat                    1999      3.7 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Total Maximum Daily    FDEP             Water quality              2011       ^d 
Load (TMDL) for South                                                            
Florida                                                                          
Twelve Mile Slough     SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Upper East Coast       SFWMD            Study                      2006      4.4 
Regional Water Supply                                                            
Plan (UEC Plan)                                                                  
Upper Lakes Basin      SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided       ^d 
Watershed                               acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Water Conservation     Corps            Study             To be decided        d 
Area 2A Regulation                                                               
Schedule Review                                                                  
Water Conservation     SFWMD            Habitat           To be decided        d 
Areas 2 and 3                           acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              
Yamato Scrub           FDEP             Habitat                    1996     26.7 
                                        acquisition and                          
                                        improvement                              

Source: GAO analysis of documents provided by Task Force and participating
agencies.

Note: Ten projects had primary purposes--such as recreation or soil
monitoring--that fell outside of our established categories. These project
purposes are designated "Other" in this table and in tables 7, 8, and 9.

^aProject cost shown is reported cost for completed projects and estimated
cost for all other projects.

^bSFWMD is expediting the design and construction of this project with its
own funds in advance of congressional authorization, which may result in
earlier project completion.

^cThe estimated cost of this aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) project is
included in the cost estimate for the project's initial part or phase.
Specifically, the estimated cost of the C-43 Basin ASR is included in the
cost estimate for the C-43 Basin Storage Reservoir; the estimated cost of
the Hillsboro ASR is included in the cost estimate for the Site 1
Impoundment; and the estimated cost of the Palm Beach County Agriculture
Reserve ASR is included in the cost estimate for the Palm Beach County
Agriculture Reserve Reservoir.

^dWe did not receive cost information for this project.

^eA project implementation report was submitted to the Congress in 2005
for this project, but it has not yet received authorization.

^fSFWMD is expediting a portion of this project with its own funds in
advance of congressional authorization. It is constructing a water storage
reservoir that it expects to finish by 2008.

^gThis project is currently being reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget before its project implementation report is submitted to the
Congress for authorization.

^hThis project is currently being reviewed by the Assistant Secretary of
the Army before its project implementation report is submitted to the
Congress for authorization.

^iPhase 1 of this project has been completed; phase 2 is on hold pending
additional funding.

^jThis date encompasses construction completion and several years of
post-construction monitoring.

Table 7: 43 Completed Restoration Projects, Sponsor, Primary Purpose,
Completion Date, and Reported Cost

Dollars in millions          
                                                             Completion       
Project name                 Sponsor(s)  Primary purpose        date  Cost 
15 CERP-related projects                                                   
Chapter 298 Districts /      SFWMD       Water quality          2005 $24.1 
Lease 3420 Improvements                                                    
Critical Project: East Coast Corps/SFWMD Water storage          2003   3.7 
Canal Structures (C-4)                   and flow                          
Critical Project: Keys       Corps/FDCA  Study                  2003   6.0 
Carrying Capacity Study                                                    
Critical Project: Lake       Corps/SFWMD Water quality          2006  21.9 
Okeechobee Water Retention /                                               
Phosphorus Removal                                                         
Critical Project: Ten Mile   Corps/SFWMD Water storage          2006  40.7 
Creek                                    and flow                          
Critical Project: Western    Corps/SFWMD Water quality          2006  18.1 
C-11 Water Quality Treatment                                               
Indian River Lagoon          Corps/SFWMD Study                  2002   7.9 
Restoration Feasibility                                                    
Study                                                                      
Melaleuca Quarantine         USDA (ARS)  Invasive species       2004   8.0 
Facility                                 control                           
Rotenberger Restoration      SFWMD       Water storage          2005   3.6 
                                            and flow                          
Stormwater Treatment Area 1  SFWMD       Water quality          2005  12.7 
Inflow and Distribution                                                    
Works                                                                      
Stormwater Treatment Area 1  SFWMD       Water quality          2000  82.1 
West Works and Outflow Pump                                                
Station (G-310)                                                            
Stormwater Treatment Area 2  SFWMD       Water quality          2000 100.4 
Works and Outflow Pump                                                     
Station (G-335)                                                            
Stormwater Treatment Area    SFWMD       Water quality          2005 170.4 
3/4 Works                                                                  
Stormwater Treatment Area 5  SFWMD       Water quality          2005  36.2 
Works                                                                      
Stormwater Treatment Area 6  SFWMD       Water quality          2006  14.6 
(includes Sections 1 and 2)                                                
28 Non-CERP projects                                                       
Agriculture and Rural Area   Miami-Dade  Study                  2001    ^a 
Study                                                                      
Allapattah Flats / Ranch     FDEP        Habitat                2005     a 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Big Pine and No Name Keys    FDCA        Study                  2001     a 
Multi-Species Habitat                                                      
Conservation Plan                                                          
Cayo Costa                   FDEP        Habitat                2004  29.2 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Corkscrew Regional           SFWMD       Habitat                1999   2.7 
Mitigation Bank                          acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Dupuis Reserve Land          SFWMD       Habitat                1986  23.7 
Acquistion                               acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Eastward Ho! Corridor Rival  FDCA        Study                  1998    ^a 
Development Trends Fiscal                                                  
Impact Analysis                                                            
Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve  FDEP        Invasive species       2004     a 
and Buffer Reserve                       control                           
Enhancement and Exotic                                                     
Removal Project                                                            
Florida Aquifer Restoration  USDA (NRCS) Water quality          2006   0.9 
Integration of Federal,      NPS         Invasive species       2006    ^a 
State, and Local Agency                  control                           
Invasive Exotic Control                                                    
Programs into Florida-wide                                                 
Strategy                                                                   
Kissimmee Basin Water Supply SFWMD       Study                  2006   5.5 
Plan (KB Plan)                                                             
Kissimmee Prairie            FDEP/SFWMD  Water storage          1997  22.6 
(Ecosystem)                              and flow                          
Lake Okeechobee Sediment     SFWMD       Water quality          2003   1.0 
Removal Feasibility Study                (pilot)                           
and Pilot Project                                                          
Lake Okeechobee Tributary    SFWMD       Water quality          2004   0.5 
Sediment Removal Pilot                   (pilot)                           
Project                                                                    
Lake Walk-in-Water           SFWMD       Habitat                1998   4.1 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Lower East Coast Regional    SFWMD       Study                  2006  12.1 
Water Supply Plan (LEC Plan)                                               
Lower West Coast Regional    SFWMD       Study                  2002    ^a 
Irrigation Distribution                                                    
System Master Plan Study                                                   
Lower West Coast Water       SFWMD       Study                  2006  10.4 
Supply Plan (LWC Plan)                                                     
Loxahatchee River            SFWMD       Habitat                2001  13.5 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Nicodermus Slough            SFWMD       Habitat                1988   2.0 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Northern Palm Beach County   SFWMD       Study                  2002    ^a 
and Southern Martin County                                                 
Reclaimed Water Master Plan                                                
Orlando / Kissimmee Area     SFWMD       Study                  2004     a 
Regional Reclaimed Water                                                   
Optimization Plan                                                          
S-5A Basin Runoff Diversion  SFWMD       Water quality          2005  12.8 
Works                                                                      
South Fork St. Lucie River   SFWMD       Habitat                1996   2.6 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Ten Mile Creek (Land         SFWMD       Habitat                2004   5.5 
Acquisition)                             acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Tibet-Butler Preserve        SFWMD       Habitat                1999   3.7 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       
Upper East Coast Regional    SFWMD       Study                  2006   4.4 
Water Supply Plan (UEC Plan)                                               
Yamato Scrub                 FDEP        Habitat                1996  26.7 
                                            acquisition and                   
                                            improvement                       

Source: GAO analysis of documents provided by the Task Force and
participating agencies.

^aWe did not receive cost information for this project.

Table 8: 107 Restoration Projects Now Being Implemented, Sponsor, Primary
Purpose, Expected Completion Date, and Estimated Cost

Dollars in millions                                                        
Project name        Sponsor(s)        Primary purpose   Completion    Cost 
                                                                 date         
7 CERP projects                                                            
Acme Basin B        Corps/SFWMD       Habitat               2008^a   $26.5 
Discharge                             acquisition and                      
                                         improvement                          
Everglades          Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and     2015^a   542.2 
Agricultural                          flow                                 
Storage Reservoir                                                          
Hillsboro Aquifer   Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and       2009     9.4 
Storage and                           flow (pilot)                         
Recovery Pilot                                                             
Indian River        Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and   2022^a,b 1,309.7 
Lagoon-South                          flow                                 
Lake Okeechobee     Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and       2009    32.3 
Aquifer Storage and                   flow (pilot)                         
Recovery Pilot                                                             
North Palm Beach    Corps/SFWMD       Water quality         2015^c   533.2 
County - Part 1                                                            
Picayune Strand     Corps/SFWMD       Habitat             2009^a,d   362.6 
Restoration                           acquisition and                      
                                         improvement                          
10 CERP-related                                                            
projects                                                                   
C-111 (South Dade)  Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and       2012   287.6 
                                         flow                                 
Critical Project:   Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and      To be    16.5 
Additional Water                      flow              decided ^e         
Conveyance                                                                 
Structures Under                                                           
Tamiami Trail                                                              
Critical Project:   Corps/SFWMD       Water quality           2007    30.0 
Lake Trafford                                                              
Critical Project:   Corps/Seminole    Water storage and       2010    52.2 
Seminole Big                          flow                                 
Cypress Reservation                                                        
Water Conservation                                                         
Plan                                                                       
Critical Project:   Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and      To be    33.3 
Southern CREW                         flow                 decided         
Everglades          SFWMD             Water quality           2010   226.7 
Agricultural Area                                                          
(EAA) Stormwater                                                           
Treatment Areas                                                            
Expansion                                                                  
Kissimmee River     Corps/SFWMD       Water storage and     2016^f   575.4 
Restoration                           flow                                 
Manatee Pass Gates  Corps/SFWMD       Habitat                 2010    13.8 
                                         acquisition and                      
                                         improvement                          
Modified Water      NPS/Corps         Water storage and       2009   398.4 
Deliveries to                         flow                                 
Everglades National                                                        
Park (Mod Waters)                                                          
West Palm Beach     Corps/SFWMD       Water quality           2008   288.6 
Canal (C-51) and                                                           
Stormwater                                                                 
Treatment Area 1E                                                          
90 Non-CERP                                                                
projects                                                                   
2002 Farm Bill      USDA (NRCS)       Other                   2007   100.4 
A.R.M. Loxahatchee  FWS               Habitat                To be    30.1 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge                                improvement                          
A.R.M. Loxahatchee  FWS               Habitat                To be      ^g 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge Prescribed                     improvement                          
Fire Program                                                               
Achieve             FWS/SFWMD/FDEP    Invasive species        2020    64.1 
"Maintenance                          control                              
Control" Status for                                                        
Brazilian Pepper,                                                          
Melaleuca,                                                                 
Australian Pine,                                                           
and Old World                                                              
Climbing Fern in                                                           
All Natural Areas                                                          
Statewide by 2020                                                          
Alternative Water   SFWMD             Water supply           To be   466.0 
Supply Grant                                               decided         
Aquatic and Upland  FDEP              Invasive species       To be      ^g 
Invasive Plant                        control              decided         
Management                                                                 
Atlantic Ridge      FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be       g 
Ecosystem                             acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Belle Meade         FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Best Management     USDA (NRCS)       Water quality           2011   145.4 
Practices (BMPs)                                                           
for Agriculture                                                            
Big Bend Swamp /    FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
Holopaw Ranch                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Big Cypress         NPS               Habitat                To be    75.5 
National Preserve                     acquisition and      decided         
Addition                              improvement                          
Big Cypress         NPS               Habitat                To be   244.1 
National Preserve                     acquisition and      decided         
Private Inholdings                    improvement                          
Biscayne Bay        Corps/Miami-Dade  Study                   2010     6.4 
Feasibility Study   County                                                 
Biscayne Coastal    SFWMD/Miami-Dade  Habitat                To be      ^g 
Wetlands Land       County            acquisition and      decided         
Acquistion                            improvement                          
Bombing Range Ridge FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
C-4 Flood           SFWMD             Flood protection        2008     4.3 
Mitigation Projects                                                        
Caloosahatchee      FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
Ecoscape                              acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Catfish Creek       FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Charlotte Harbor    FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Estuary / Flatwoods                   acquisition and      decided         
/ Cape Haze                           improvement                          
Complete Land       NPS               Habitat                To be    33.7 
Acquisition for                       acquisition and      decided         
Biscayne National                     improvement                          
Park                                                                       
Coordinate the      NEWTT             South Florida           2011     0.6 
Development of                        Ecosystem                            
Management Plans                      Invasive species                     
for Top 20 South                      control South                        
Florida Exotic Pest                   Florida Ecosystem                    
Plants                                South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem South                      
                                         Florida Ecosystem                    
                                         South Florida                        
                                         Ecosystem                            
Corkscrew Regional  FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
Ecosystem Watershed                   acquisition and      decided         
(CREW)                                improvement                          
Coupon Bight / Key  FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Deer / Big Pine Key                   acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Crocodile Lake      FWS               Habitat                To be    15.4 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge                                improvement                          
Cypress Creek /     SFWMD             Habitat                To be      ^g 
Loxahatchee                           acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Cypress Creek /     SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
Trail Ridge                           acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
East Coast Buffer / FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be       g 
Water Preserve                        acquisition and      decided         
Areas                                 improvement                          
East Everglades     NPS               Habitat                To be   109.9 
Addition to                           acquisition and      decided         
Everglades National                   improvement                          
Park                                                                       
Eastward Ho!        SFRPC             Other                   2010      ^g 
Brownfields                                                                
Partnership                                                                
Estero Bay          FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Everglades          SFWMD/DOI         Habitat                To be       g 
Agricultural Area                     acquisition and      decided         
(EAA) / Talisman                      improvement                          
Land Acquistion                                                            
Everglades National NPS               Invasive species       To be       g 
Park Exotic Control                   control              decided         
Program                                                                    
Everglades National NPS               Water quality           2008    19.0 
Park Water and                                                             
Wastewater                                                                 
Everglades          SFWMD             Water quality           2016      ^g 
Regulation Division                                                        
Exotic Species      Seminole          Invasive species        2020     1.0 
Removal                               control                              
Exotic Vegetation   NPS               Invasive species       To be     4.1 
Control (Critical)                    control              decided         
Big Cypress                                                                
National Preserve                                                          
Fakahatchee Strand  FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Fisheating Creek    SFWMD/FDEP        Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Florida Greenways   FDEP (OGT)        Other                   2009     4.6 
and Trails                                                                 
Designation Project                                                        
Florida Keys        FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
Ecosystem                             acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Florida Keys        FWS               Habitat                To be    55.0 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge Complex                        improvement                          
Florida Keys        FDEP              Other                   2009    41.2 
Overseas Heritage                                                          
Trail                                                                      
Florida Panther     FWS               Habitat                To be    12.9 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge                                improvement                          
Frog Pond / L-31N   FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Hobe Sound National FWS               Habitat                To be     5.8 
Wildlife Refuge                       acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Hole-in-the-Donut   NPS               Invasive species        2017   123.8 
                                         control                              
Indian River Lagoon FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be      ^g 
Blueway                               acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
J.N. "Ding" Darling FWS               Habitat                To be    71.8 
National Wildlife                     acquisition and      decided         
Refuge                                improvement                          
Juno Hills / Dunes  FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Jupiter Ridge       FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Kissimmee River     SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
(Lower Basin)                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Kissimmee River     SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
(Upper Basin)                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Lake Okeechobee     SFWMD             Water quality           2015 1,300.0 
Protection Program                                                         
Lake Okeechobee     FDEP              Other                  To be    25.8 
Scenic Trail                                               decided         
Lake Wales Ridge    FDEP              Habitat                To be      ^g 
Ecosystem                             acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Long Term Plan      SFWMD             Water quality           2016   580.9 
(LTP) Projects                                                             
Loxahatchee         FWS               Habitat                 2012     6.1 
Impoundment                           acquisition and                      
Landscape                             improvement                          
Assessment (LILA)                     (pilot)                              
Loxahatchee Slough  SFWMD             Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Miami-Dade County   FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Archipelago                           acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Model Lands         SFWMD/Miami-Dade  Habitat                 2007       g 
                       County            acquisition and                      
                                         improvement                          
Monitoring of       USDA (NRCS)       Other                   2017     1.3 
Organic Soils in                                                           
the Everglades                                                             
North Fork St.      FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be      ^g 
Lucie River                           acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
North Key Largo     FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Hammocks                              acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Okaloacoochee       FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be       g 
Slough                                acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Okeechobee          FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Battlefield                           acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Osceola Pine        FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Savannas                              acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Pal-Mar             FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Panther Glades      FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Paradise Run        SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Pineland Site       FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Complex                               acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Planning and        NOAA              Habitat                To be       g 
Implementation of                     acquisition and      decided         
the Tortugas                          improvement                          
Ecological Reserve                                                         
Ranch Reserve       SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Rookery Bay         FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Rotenberger-Holey   FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Land Tract                            acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Seminole Tribe Best Seminole          Water quality           2012     4.9 
Management                                                                 
Practices for the                                                          
Big Cypress                                                                
Reservation                                                                
Seminole Tribe Best Seminole          Water quality           2012     0.3 
Management                                                                 
Practices for the                                                          
Brighton                                                                   
Reservation                                                                
Seminole Tribe      Seminole          Water quality           2012    50.5 
Water Conservation                                                         
Project for Big                                                            
Cypress Reservation                                                        
Shingle Creek       SFWMD             Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Six Mile Cypress I  SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
and II                                acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
South Florida       USDA (NRCS)       Other                  To be     1.6 
Ecosystem                                                  decided         
Restoration Earth                                                          
Team                                                                       
South Florida       BSWCD/SFERC/ USDA Other                  To be    15.5 
Ecosystem           (NRCS)                                 decided         
Restoration Non                                                            
Point Source                                                               
Pollution and                                                              
Disease Prevention                                                         
Project                                                                    
South Florida       FWS               Habitat                 2010   386.1 
Multi-Species                         acquisition and                      
Recovery Plan                         improvement                          
South Savannas      FDEP/SFWMD        Habitat                To be      ^g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Southern Glades     SFWMD/Miami-Dade  Habitat                To be       g 
                       County            acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Southern Golden     FDEP              Habitat                To be       g 
Gate Estates                          acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Technical           USDA (NRCS)       Water quality           2011    15.5 
Assistance to                                                              
Seminole and                                                               
Miccosukee Indian                                                          
Reservations                                                               
Total Maximum Daily FDEP              Water quality           2011      ^g 
Load (TMDL) for                                                            
South Florida                                                              
Twelve Mile Slough  SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
                                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Upper Lakes Basin   SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
Watershed                             acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          
Water Conservation  SFWMD             Habitat                To be       g 
Areas 2 and 3                         acquisition and      decided         
                                         improvement                          

Source: GAO analysis of documents provided by Task Force and participating
agencies.

^aSFWMD is expediting the design and construction of this project with its
own funds in advance of congressional authorization, which may result in
earlier project completion.

^bA project implementation report was submitted to the Congress in 2005
for this project, but it has not yet received authorization.

^cSFWMD is expediting a portion of this project with its own funds in
advance of congressional authorization. It is constructing a water storage
reservoir that it expects to finish by 2008.

^dThis project is currently being reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget before its project implementation report is submitted to the
Congress for authorization.

^ePhase 1 of this project has been completed; phase 2 is on hold pending
additional funding.

^fThis date encompasses construction completion and several years of
post-construction monitoring.

^gWe did not receive estimated cost information for this project.

Table 9: 72 Restoration Projects Not Yet Implemented, Sponsor, Primary
Purpose, Expected Completion Date, and Estimated Cost

Dollars in millions                                                        
Project name              Sponsor(s)       Primary      Completion    Cost 
                                              purpose            date         
53 CERP projects                                                           
Aquifer Storage and       Corps/SFWMD      Study              2010   $73.4 
Recovery Regional Study                                                    
Big Cypress / L-28        Corps/SFWMD      Water              2022    51.4 
Interceptor Modifications                  quality                         
Biscayne Bay Coastal      Corps/SFWMD      Habitat          2011^a   386.9 
Wetlands                                   acquisition                     
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Broward County Secondary  Corps/SFWMD      Water              2014    15.5 
Canal System                               storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Broward County Water      Corps/SFWMD      Water            2009^a   408.3 
Preserve Areas                             quality                         
C-4 Structure             Corps/SFWMD      Water              2013     2.8 
                                              storage and                     
                                              flow                            
C-43 Basin Storage        Corps/SFWMD      Water            2011^a   530.6 
Reservoir - Part 1                         storage and                     
                                              flow                            
C-43 Basin Aquifer        Corps/SFWMD      Water              2019      ^b 
Storage and Recovery -                     storage and                     
Part 2                                     flow                            
C-111 Spreader Canal      Corps/SFWMD      Water            2015^a   117.6 
                                              quality                         
Caloosahatchee            Corps/SFWMD      Water              2018    99.7 
Backpumping with                           quality                         
Stormwater Treatment                                                       
Caloosahatchee River      Corps/SFWMD      Water              2009     7.9 
(C-43) Aquifer Storage                     storage and                     
and Recovery Pilot                         flow (pilot)                    
Central Lake Belt Storage Corps/SFWMD      Water              2035   155.4 
                                              storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Change Coastal Wellfield  Corps/SFWMD      Water supply      To be       c 
Operations                                                 decided         
Comprehensive Integrated  Corps/FDEP       Study              2014     9.3 
Water Quality Feasibility                                                  
Study                                                                      
Environmental Water       Corps/SFWMD      Habitat           To be      ^c 
Supply Deliveries to St.                   acquisition     decided         
Lucie Estuary                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Environmental Water       Corps/SFWMD      Habitat           To be       c 
Supply Deliveries to the                   acquisition     decided         
Caloosahatchee Estuary                     and                             
                                              improvement                     
Everglades National Park  Corps/SFWMD      Water              2015   390.9 
Seepage Management                         storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Everglades Rain Driven    Corps/SFWMD      Water             To be      ^c 
Operations                                 storage and     decided         
                                              flow                            
Florida Bay and the       Corps/SFWMD      Study              2012     6.3 
Florida Keys Feasibility                                                   
Study                                                                      
Florida Keys Tidal        Corps/SFWMD      Water              2010     1.5 
Restoration                                storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Flow to Northwest and     Corps/SFWMD      Water              2018    36.3 
Central Water                              storage and                     
Conservation Area 3A                       flow                            
Flows to Eastern Water    Corps/SFWMD      Water              2017     8.0 
Conservation Area                          storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Henderson Creek / Belle   Corps/FDEP       Water              2011     5.8 
Meade Restoration                          quality                         
Hillsboro Aquifer Storage Corps/SFWMD      Water              2020       b 
and Recovery - Phase 2                     storage and                     
                                              flow                            
L-31N (L-30) Seepage      Corps/SFWMD      Water              2010    11.3 
Management Pilot                           storage and                     
                                              flow (pilot)                    
Lake Belt In-Ground       Corps/SFWMD      Water              2026    26.5 
Reservoir Technology                       storage and                     
Pilot                                      flow (pilot)                    
Lake Okeechobee Aquifer   Corps/SFWMD      Water              2027 1,223.4 
Storage and Recovery                       storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Lake Okeechobee           Corps/SFWMD      Water              2007     1.1 
Regulation Schedule                        storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Lake Okeechobee Watershed Corps/SFWMD      Water              2014   575.5 
                                              storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Lakes Park Restoration    Corps/Lee County Habitat            2009     6.0 
                                              acquisition                     
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Lower East Coast Utility  Corps/SFWMD      Water supply      To be      ^c 
Water Conservation                                         decided         
Loxahatchee National      Corps/SFWMD      Water              2015     9.1 
Wildlife Refuge Internal                   storage and                     
Canal Structures                           flow                            
Melaleuca Eradication and Corps/SFWMD      Invasive           2025     6.6 
Other Exotic Plants                        species                         
                                              control                         
Miccosukee Water          Corps/Miccosukee Water              2016    29.0 
Management Plan                            quality                         
Modify Holey Land         Corps/SFWMD      Water              2011      ^c 
Wildlife Management Area                   storage and                     
Operation Plan                             flow                            
Modify Rotenberger        Corps/SFWMD      Water              2009       c 
Wildlife Management Area                   storage and                     
Operation Plan                             flow                            
North Lake Belt Storage   Corps/SFWMD      Water              2035   308.2 
Area                                       storage and                     
                                              flow                            
North Palm Beach County - Corps/SFWMD      Water              2019   203.9 
Part 2                                     storage and                     
                                              flow                            
Operational Modification  Corps/SFWMD      Water             To be      ^c 
to Southern Portion of                     storage and     decided         
L-31N and C-111                            flow                            
Palm Beach County         Corps/SFWMD      Water              2016   154.4 
Agriculture Reserve                        storage and                     
Reservoir - Part 1                         flow                            
Palm Beach County         Corps/SFWMD      Water              2018      ^b 
Agriculture Reserve                        storage and                     
Aquifer Storage and                        flow                            
Recovery - Part 2                                                          
Restoration of Pineland   Corps/Miami-Dade Habitat            2021     0.7 
and Hardwood Hammocks in  County           acquisition                     
C-111 Basin                                and                             
                                              improvement                     
Seminole Tribe Big        Corps/Seminole   Water              2021    89.5 
Cypress Reservation Water                  quality                         
Conservation Plan                                                          
Site 1 Impoundment        Corps/SFWMD      Water          2009^a,d   153.7 
                                              storage and                     
                                              flow                            
South Miami-Dade Reuse    Corps/Miami-Dade Water supply       2022   430.6 
                             County                                           
Southwest Florida         Corps/SFWMD      Study              2009    12.0 
Feasibility Study                                                          
Strazzulla Wetlands       Corps/SFWMD      Habitat            2010    70.4 
                                              acquisition                     
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Wastewater Reuse          Corps/SFWMD      Water supply       2021    35.4 
Technology Pilot                           (pilot)                         
Water Conservation Area   Corps/SFWMD      Water              2021   539.4 
2B Flows to Everglades                     storage and                     
National Park                              flow                            
Water Conservation Area 3 Corps/SFWMD      Water              2020   253.4 
Decompartmentalization                     storage and                     
and Sheetflow Enhancement                  flow                            
(Decomp)                                                                   
Water Preserve Area       Corps/SFWMD      Water              2016   331.7 
Conveyance                                 storage and                     
                                              flow                            
West Miami-Dade Reuse     Corps/Miami-Dade Water supply       2022   518.1 
                             County                                           
Winsberg Farm Wetlands    Corps/Palm Beach Habitat            2008    17.1 
Restoration               County           acquisition                     
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
3 CERP-related projects                                                    
East Water Conservation   SFWMD            Water              2012     5.3 
Area 3A Hydropattern                       storage and                     
Restoration                                flow                            
Water Conservation Area   SFWMD            Water              2012     4.9 
2A Hydropattern                            storage and                     
Restoration                                flow                            
West Water Conservation   SFWMD            Water              2012     7.4 
Area 3A Hydropattern                       storage and                     
Restoration                                flow                            
16 Non-CERP projects                                                       
Babcock Ranch             FDEP             Habitat           To be      ^c 
                                              acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Big Cypress National      NPS              Habitat           To be       c 
Preserve Mineral Rights                    acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Complete an Invasive      NEWTT/FDEP/NPS   Invasive          To be     5.2 
Exotics Plant Prevention,                  species         decided         
Early Detection, and                       control                         
Eradication Plan by 2005                                                   
Devil's Garden            FDEP             Habitat           To be      ^c 
                                              acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Half Circle L Ranch       SFWMD            Habitat           To be       c 
                                              acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Hen Scratch Ranch         SFWMD            Habitat           To be       c 
                                              acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Kissimmee-St. Johns       FDEP             Habitat           To be       c 
Connector                                  acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Lake Hatchineha Watershed SFWMD            Habitat           To be       c 
/ Parker-Poinciana                         acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Lake Okeechobee           SFWMD            Water              2009   200.0 
Fast-Track Projects                        quality                         
Miccosukee Water          Miccosukee       Water             To be    26.0 
Resources Management                       quality         decided         
North Savannas            SFWMD            Habitat           To be       c 
                                              acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Pine Island Slough        FDEP             Habitat           To be       c 
Ecosystem                                  acquisition     decided         
                                              and                             
                                              improvement                     
Seminole Tribe            Seminole         Water              2010    16.3 
Comprehensive Surface                      storage and                     
Water Management System                    flow                            
for the Brighton                                                           
Reservation                                                                
Soil Survey Update for    USDA (NRCS)      Other              2012     1.5 
the Everglades                                                             
Agricultural Area                                                          
Soil Survey Update for    USDA (NRCS)      Other              2013     5.8 
the Everglades National                                                    
Park, Big Cypress                                                          
National Preserve, and                                                     
Water Conservation Areas                                                   
Water Conservation Area   Corps            Study             To be       c 
2A Regulation Schedule                                     decided         
Review                                                                     

Source: GAO analysis of documents provided by Task Force and participating
agencies.

^aSFWMD is expediting the design and construction of this project with its
own funds in advance of congressional authorization, which may result in
earlier project completion.

^bThe estimated cost of this aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) project is
included in the cost estimate for the project's initial part or phase.
Specifically, the estimated cost of the C-43 Basin ASR is included in the
cost estimate for the C-43 Basin Storage Reservoir; the estimated cost of
the Hillsboro ASR is included in the cost estimate for the Site 1
Impoundment; and the estimated cost of the Palm Beach County Agriculture
Reserve ASR is included in the cost estimate for the Palm Beach County
Agriculture Reserve Reservoir.

^cWe did not receive estimated cost information for this project.

^dThis project is currently being reviewed by the Assistant Secretary of
the Army before its project implementation report is submitted to the
Congress for authorization.

Appendix III: Funding Allocations by Federal and State Agencies for the
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Initiative, FY 1999-2006

Dollars in millions
                                           Fiscal years                                    
Agency             1999   2000      2001     2002   2003   2004     2005     2006    Total 
Federal agencies                                                                           
Department of                                                                              
Agriculture ^a                                                                             
Agricultural       $4.8   $4.8      $4.8     $5.4   $5.7   $5.7     $6.3     $4.9    $42.4 
Research Service                                                                           
Natural                                                                                    
Resources                                                                                  
Conservation                                                                               
Service             6.0    7.5       6.0     42.1   23.3   25.0     64.4     61.5    235.9 
Department of                                                                              
Commerce^b                                                                                 
National Oceanic                                                                           
and Atmospheric                                                                            
Administration     19.3   21.4       4.8      4.5    4.4    4.6      4.5      3.0     66.7 
Department of                                                                              
Defense^a,d                                                                                
U.S. Army Corps    42.7  116.6     137.2    157.1  145.4  146.0    122.6    137.0  1,004.6 
of Engineers                                                                               
Department of                                                                              
the Interior^a,e                                                                           
National Park     150.8  140.1      64.0     97.7   73.1   47.0     46.5     44.7    663.8 
Service                                                                                    
U.S. Fish and       9.5   15.4      21.1     21.0   18.1   17.3     12.4     10.7    125.6 
Wildlife Service                                                                           
Bureau of Indian    0.5    0.5       0.4      0.4    0.4    0.6      0.6      0.4      3.8 
Affairs                                                                                    
U.S. Geological    10.2    9.9       9.7      9.5   13.2    8.3      8.0      7.8     76.7 
Survey                                                                                     
Environmental       7.3    5.5       5.2      5.2    3.7    3.3      3.0      3.4     36.6 
Protection                                                                                 
Agency^a                                                                                   
Total federal    $251.2 $321.7    $253.2   $343.0 $287.4 $258.0   $268.2   $273.4 $2,256.1 
Florida agencies                                                                           
Florida                                                                                    
Department of                                                                              
Agriculture and                                                                            
Consumer                                                                                   
Services^b         $6.1        $7.2  $28.0   $8.5  $16.9  $17.2     $8.8     $5.1    $97.9 
Florida                                                                                    
Department of                                                                              
Community                                                                                  
Affairs^b          44.1        31.6   36.1   10.9   10.9   48.6     39.0     37.0    258.3 
Florida                                                                                    
Department of                                                                              
Environmental                                                                              
Protection^c       81.3       179.6  255.2  181.7  283.4  210.1    238.1    305.1  1,734.5 
Florida                                                                                    
Department of                                                                              
Transportation^b   51.7         4.0   18.3    5.5   11.5    2.1      8.1      5.4    106.5 
Florida Fish and                                                                           
Wildlife                                                                                   
Conservation                                                                               
Commission^b       11.2        11.4   19.9   22.4   23.7   27.7     28.6     27.9    173.0 
South Florida                                                                              
Water Management                                                                           
District^a, f     208.1       126.8  120.2  362.7  306.8  352.0    409.3    563.1  2,449.0 
Total state      $402.5      $360.6 $477.7 $591.7 $653.2 $657.7   $732.1   $943.6 $4,819.0 
Total                                                                                      
restoration      $653.7      $682.3 $730.9 $934.7 $940.6 $915.7 $1,000.2 $1,217.0 $7,075.1 

Source: Federal and state agencies restoration funding data.

^aFunding data provided in response to a GAO funding data request.

^bFunding data used were as reported in the Task Force's annual cross-cut
budgets.

^cFunding data used as reported in the Task Force's annual cross-cut
budgets, except for data on certain land acquisitions, which were provided
in response to a GAO funding data request.

^d The funding data provided by the Corps differed from that reported in
the cross-cut budgets because the amounts in the cross-cut budgets
represent the amounts in the President's budget and the amounts provided
to GAO represent the amounts contained in the conference report according
to the Corps.

^e The funding data provided by Interior differed from that reported in
the cross-cut budgets because of the timing differences in agency budget
execution and cross-cut budget data submission timeframes; moving funding
among departmental budget lines; and/or the application of
across-the-board reductions, supplementals, and rescissions, according to
an Interior official.

^f The funding data provided by the South Florida Water Management
District differed from that reported in the cross-cut budgets because of
variations in the financial systems used to derive the funding information
according to a SFWMD official.

Appendix IV: Summary of the Primary Models
                                                                                Does the                          
                                Entity                                          model have                        
                                responsible for Model study                     an                                
Model name                   development     area          Model type        interface? Model description      
1  ATLSS--Across Trophic Level  DOI and         Regional,     Ecological        Yes        A suite of individual  
System Simulation            University of   project                                    ecological models that 
                                Tennessee                                                  compare the impact of  
                                                                                           changes in hydrology   
                                                                                           on the biotic          
                                                                                           components of the      
                                                                                           ecosystem, from        
                                                                                           zooplankton, to        
                                                                                           different species of   
                                                                                           fish, to the Florida   
                                                                                           panther.               
2  CH3D--Curvilinear-grid       Corps, Iowa     Sub-regional  Hydrological      No         A three-dimensional    
Hydrodynamic Three           Institute of                  (hydrodynamic)^a             model that simulates   
Dimensional Model            Hydraulic                                                  the major physical     
                                Research, and                                              processes affecting    
                                Y. Peter Sheng                                             circulation and mixing 
                                of Titon                                                   of a large water body, 
                                Corporation                                                taking into account    
                                                                                           the hydrology,         
                                                                                           salinity, and          
                                                                                           temperature.           
3  DMSTA--Dynamic Model for     W. Walker and   Project       Water quality,    No         Used in evaluating     
Stormwater Treatment Areas   R. Kadlec for                 hydrological                 hydrological and water 
                                DOI and Corps                                              quality impacts of     
                                                                                           stormwater treatment   
                                                                                           areas in South         
                                                                                           Florida.               
4  ECO Lab                      Danish          Regional,     Ecological        Yes        Simulates chemical,    
                                Hydraulic       project                                    biological,            
                                Institute                                                  ecological, and        
                                                                                           physical interactions  
                                                                                           that occur as a result 
                                                                                           of a number of         
                                                                                           variables that         
                                                                                           influence hydrodynamic 
                                                                                           processes. Also        
                                                                                           simulates water        
                                                                                           quality.               
5  EFDC--Environmental Fluids   John Hamrick of Project       Hydrological      Yes        A hydrodynamic model   
Dynamics Code                Tetra Tech,                   (hydrodynamic),^a            that simulates aquatic 
                                Inc.                          water quality                systems in one, two,   
                                                                                           and three dimensions,  
                                                                                           and rainy and arid     
                                                                                           cycles, taking into    
                                                                                           account the salinity,  
                                                                                           temperature, and       
                                                                                           contaminants.          
6  ELM--Everglades Landscape    SFWMD           Regional,     Ecological        Yes        Predicts the landscape 
Model                                        project                                    response to different  
                                                                                           water management       
                                                                                           scenarios in South     
                                                                                           Florida. In simulating 
                                                                                           changes to habitat,    
                                                                                           the model dynamically  
                                                                                           integrates hydrology,  
                                                                                           water quality, soils,  
                                                                                           algae, and vegetation  
                                                                                           in the Everglades      
                                                                                           region.                
7  E-MCM--Everglades Mercury    EPA, SFWMD, and Project       Water quality     Yes        Predicts the movement  
Cycling Model                FDEP                                                       and deposit of the     
                                                                                           major forms of mercury 
                                                                                           in marsh areas and     
                                                                                           considers physical,    
                                                                                           biological, and        
                                                                                           chemical factors       
                                                                                           affecting fish mercury 
                                                                                           concentration.         
8  HEC-RAS--Hydrologic          Corps           Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        Simulates steady and   
Engineering Center's River                   project                                    unsteady water flows   
Analysis System                                                                         and stages, and the    
                                                                                           movement of sediment.  
                                                                                           Also used to simulate  
                                                                                           canal network for      
                                                                                           flood analysis.        
9  LOEM--Lake Okeechobee        SFWMD           Sub-regional  Hydrological,     No         Simulates how water    
Environmental Model                                        water quality                transports sediment in 
                                                                                           Lake Okeechobee. Also  
                                                                                           provides long term     
                                                                                           information on water   
                                                                                           circulation patterns,  
                                                                                           and the location of    
                                                                                           sediment under         
                                                                                           different hydrological 
                                                                                           and management         
                                                                                           scenarios.             
10 LOWQM--Lake Okeechobee Water EPA             Regional,     Water quality     Yes        Simulates impacts of   
Quality Model                                sub-regional,                              sediment management on 
                                                project                                    water quality,         
                                                                                           specifically           
                                                                                           phosphorus levels, in  
                                                                                           Lake Okeechobee.       
11 Mike 11                      Danish          Regional,     Hydrological,     Yes        Simulates water flow,  
                                Hydraulic       project       water quality                level, and quality,    
                                Institute                                                  and sediment transport 
                                                                                           in rivers, irrigation  
                                                                                           canals, reservoirs,    
                                                                                           and other inland water 
                                                                                           bodies.                
12 Mike She                     Danish          Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        An integrated          
                                Hydraulic       project                                    hydrological model     
                                Institute                                                  that covers the entire 
                                                                                           land phase of the      
                                                                                           hydrological cycle.    
                                                                                           Also simulates         
                                                                                           groundwater flow, the  
                                                                                           movement of substances 
                                                                                           found in water, and    
                                                                                           agricultural           
                                                                                           practices.             
13 MODHMS                       HydroGeologics, Regional,     Hydrological,     Yes        Simulates interactions 
                                Inc.            project       water quality                between overland flow, 
                                                                                           channel flow, and      
                                                                                           groundwater under      
                                                                                           different water supply 
                                                                                           management scenarios.  
                                                                                           Also simulates flood   
                                                                                           control, river flow,   
                                                                                           and wetland            
                                                                                           restoration.           
14 MODBRANCH--MODFLOW/BRANCH    DOI             Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        Simulates hydrology,   
Coupled Flow Model                           project                                    including groundwater  
                                                                                           and canal flow, in     
                                                                                           three dimensions under 
                                                                                           different water        
                                                                                           management scenarios.  
15 MODFLOW--Modular             DOI             Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        The recognized         
Three-Dimensional                            project                                    standard model for     
Groundwater Flow Model                                                                  simulating the         
                                                                                           movement of            
                                                                                           groundwater under a    
                                                                                           variety of             
                                                                                           hydrological           
                                                                                           conditions.            
16 RAS-MODFLOW--HEC-RAS/MODFLOW Corps and DOI   Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        Simulates projects     
Coupled Model                                project                                    where there are large  
                                                                                           stormwater-groundwater 
                                                                                           exchanges and where    
                                                                                           groundwater pumping    
                                                                                           affects the water flow 
                                                                                           in streams. Models the 
                                                                                           effects of floodplain  
                                                                                           water lost to          
                                                                                           groundwater on         
                                                                                           downstream water flows 
                                                                                           and stream flow on     
                                                                                           adjacent wetlands.     
17 RMA 2--Resource Management   Norton, King    Project       Hydrological      Yes        Calculates water       
Associates 2                 and Orlob of                                               levels and             
                                Water Resources                                            distribution of water  
                                Engineers for                                              flow for islands,      
                                the Corps                                                  bridges, hydropower    
                                                                                           plants, river          
                                                                                           junctions, and pumping 
                                                                                           plant channels. Also   
                                                                                           simulates the          
                                                                                           circulation and        
                                                                                           transport in bodies of 
                                                                                           water with wetlands,   
                                                                                           and general water      
                                                                                           levels and flow        
                                                                                           patterns in rivers,    
                                                                                           reservoirs, and        
                                                                                           estuaries.             
18 RMA 4--Resource Management   Corps and       Project       Water quality     Yes        Simulates water        
Associates 4                 Research                                                   levels, flow           
                                Management                                                 distribution,          
                                Associates                                                 circulation, flow      
                                                                                           patterns, and water    
                                                                                           quality in rivers,     
                                                                                           reservoirs, and        
                                                                                           estuaries. Used to     
                                                                                           study the              
                                                                                           hydrodynamics and      
                                                                                           salinity-flow          
                                                                                           relationships in the   
                                                                                           St. Lucie estuary and  
                                                                                           the southern reach of  
                                                                                           Indian River Lagoon,   
                                                                                           as well as to assess   
                                                                                           the circulation        
                                                                                           patterns in a water    
                                                                                           conservation area.     
19 SFWMM--South Florida Water   SFWMD           Regional      Hydrological      Yes        Simulates the major    
Management Model                                                                        components of the      
                                                                                           hydrological cycle in  
                                                                                           South Florida,         
                                                                                           including rainfall,    
                                                                                           overland and           
                                                                                           groundwater flow and   
                                                                                           pumping, and the       
                                                                                           management of the      
                                                                                           water resources system 
                                                                                           for a 7,600 square     
                                                                                           mile area, from Lake   
                                                                                           Okeechobee to Florida  
                                                                                           Bay.                   
20 SICS--Southern Inland and    DOI             Sub-regional, Hydrological      Yes        Simulates flows,       
Coastal Systems Model                        project                                    stages, and salinities 
                                                                                           in the southern        
                                                                                           Everglades and Florida 
                                                                                           Bay. Can be linked to  
                                                                                           the South Florida      
                                                                                           Water Management Model 
                                                                                           and be used to         
                                                                                           quantify the effects   
                                                                                           of restoration         
                                                                                           alternatives on flows, 
                                                                                           stages, and salinities 
                                                                                           in the SICS area.      
21 SWMM--Storm Water Management SFWMD           Regional,     Water quality     No         Evaluates changes in   
Model                                        project                                    water restrictions and 
                                                                                           hydrological           
                                                                                           performance of new     
                                                                                           storage areas in the   
                                                                                           Lower East Coast and   
                                                                                           Lake Okeechobee        
                                                                                           Service Areas under    
                                                                                           different management   
                                                                                           scenarios.             
22 TABS-MDS (RMA 10)            Corps           Project       Hydrological      Yes        Simulates water        
                                                                                           movement, salinity,    
                                                                                           and sediment transport 
                                                                                           in three dimensions.   
23 TIME--Tides and Inflows in   DOI             Regional,     Hydrological      Yes        Examines the           
the Mangroves of the                         sub-regional,                              interaction between    
Everglades                                   project                                    wetland sheet flows    
                                                                                           and the dynamic forces 
                                                                                           in the zone between    
                                                                                           the southern           
                                                                                           Everglades and the     
                                                                                           coast. Will be used to 
                                                                                           evaluate the combined  
                                                                                           response of cyclical   
                                                                                           water periods in       
                                                                                           wetlands and           
                                                                                           salinities in the      
                                                                                           mangrove zone to       
                                                                                           changes in water       
                                                                                           flows.                 
24 WAMView--Watershed           Soil and Water  Regional,     Water quality,    No         Assesses the water     
Assessment Model             Engineering     project       hydrological                 quality of both        
                                Technology,                                                surface water and      
                                Inc. and Mock,                                             groundwater based on   
                                Roos and                                                   land use, soils,       
                                Associates                                                 climate, and other     
                                                                                           factors and simulates  
                                                                                           the primary physical   
                                                                                           processes important    
                                                                                           for watershed          
                                                                                           hydrological and       
                                                                                           pollutant transport.   
25 WASH123D--WAterSHed Systems  Dr. George Yeh, Regional,     Hydrological,     No         Simulates flow         
of 1-D Stream-River Network, University of   project       water quality                movement from one CERP 
2-D Overland Regime, and 3-D Central Florida                                            project component to   
Subsurface Media                                                                        another and can be     
                                                                                           adapted to simulate on 
                                                                                           both a sub-regional    
                                                                                           and project-specific   
                                                                                           level.                 
26 WASH--WAterSHed Water        URS Greiner,    Regional,     Hydrological,     Yes        Simulates hydrology in 
Quality Model                Inc., with some project       water quality                watersheds with high   
                                funding by                                                 groundwater tables and 
                                SFWMD                                                      dense drainage canal   
                                                                                           networks.              
27 WASP--Water Quality Analysis EPA             Project       Water quality     Yes        Used to interpret and  
Simulation Program                                                                      predict water quality  
                                                                                           responses to natural   
                                                                                           phenomena and manmade  
                                                                                           pollution for various  
                                                                                           pollution management   
                                                                                           decisions. Can         
                                                                                           dynamically simulate   
                                                                                           different aquatic      
                                                                                           systems.               

Source: GAO's analysis of agency documents, model Web sites, and agency
interviews.

^aHydrodynamic models include the mathematical study of the forces,
energy, and pressure of liquids in motion, and represent the various flow
and transport processes in rivers, lakes, and oceans.

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Defense

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of the Interior

Appendix VII: Comments from the State of Florida

Appendix VIII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Anu K. Mittal (202) 512-3841 or [email protected]

Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the individual named above, Sherry McDonald, Assistant
Director; David Brown; Maureen Driscoll; Les Mahagan; Leigh Ann Nally;
and Carol Herrnstadt Shulman made key contributions to this report. Also
contributing to this report were Kevin Bray, Katherine Raheb, and Greg
Wilmoth.

(360662)

[39]www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-520 .

To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Anu K. Mittal at (202) 512-3841 or
[email protected].

Highlights of [40]GAO-07-520 , a report to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure, House of Representatives

May 2007

SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM

Restoration Is Moving Forward but Is Facing Significant Delays,
Implementation Challenges, and Rising Costs

The South Florida ecosystem covers about 18,000 square miles and is home
to the Everglades, a national resource. Over the past 100 years, efforts
to manage the flow of water through the ecosystem have jeopardized its
health. In 2000, a strategy to restore the ecosystem was set; restoration
was expected to take at least 40 years and cost $15.4 billion. The
restoration comprises hundreds of projects, including 60 key projects
known as the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), to be
undertaken by a partnership of federal, state, local, and tribal
governments.

Given the size and complexity of the restoration, GAO was asked to report
on the (1) status of project implementation and expected benefits, (2)
factors that determine project sequencing, (3) amount of funding provided
for the effort and extent that costs have increased, and (4) primary
mathematical models that guide the restoration.

[41]What GAO Recommends

GAO is recommending actions to ensure that agencies apply the established
sequencing criteria when making implementation decisions for some projects
and that the development of models and their interfaces is better
coordinated. The agencies generally agreed with these recommendations,
although the state was concerned that the first recommendation could lead
to further delays and cost increases.

While many of the restoration effort's 222 projects have been completed or
are ongoing, a core set of projects that are critical to the success of
the restoration are behind schedule or not yet started. Specifically, 43
projects have been completed, 107 are being implemented, and 72 are in
design, in planning, or are not yet started. The completed projects will
provide improved water quality and additional habitat for wildlife, and
the ongoing projects will also help restore wildlife habitat and improve
water flow within the ecosystem. However, the projects most critical to
the restoration's overall success--the CERP projects--are among those that
are currently being designed, planned, or have not yet been started. Some
of these projects are behind schedule by up to 6 years. Despite project
delays, officials believe that significant progress has been made in
acquiring land, constructing water quality projects, and restoring a
natural water flow to the Kissimmee River--the headwater of the ecosystem.
In addition, many of the policies, strategies, and agreements required to
guide the restoration in the future are now in place. To help provide
further momentum to the restoration, Florida recently began expediting the
design and construction of eight key projects, with the hope that they
would immediately benefit the environment, enhance flood control, and
increase water supply.

There are no overarching sequencing criteria that restoration officials
use when making implementation decisions for all 222 projects that make up
the restoration effort. Instead, decisions for 162 projects are driven
largely by the availability of funds. For the remaining 60 projects--which
are among the most critical to the success of the restoration effort--the
Corps of Engineers and the Congress established criteria to ensure the
goals and purposes of CERP are achieved. However, the sequencing plan
developed for these projects in 2005 is not consistent with the criteria
established by the Corps. Therefore, there is little assurance that the
plan will be effective.

From fiscal years 1999 through 2006, the federal government contributed
$2.3 billion, and Florida contributed $4.8 billion, for a total of about
$7.1 billion for the restoration. However, CERP funding was about $1.2
billion short of the funds originally projected for this period. In
addition, the total estimated costs for the restoration have increased by
28 percent--from $15.4 billion in 2000 to at least $19.7 billion in 2006.
More importantly, these cost estimates do not represent the true costs for
the overall restoration effort because they do not include all cost
components for a number of projects.

There are 27 primary mathematical models that guide the restoration
effort. These include (1) hydrological, (2) water quality, and (3)
ecological models. Although 21 of the 27 models are able to interface with
other models and provide a more comprehensive pictureof the impact of
restoration efforts on the ecosystem, many agency officials stated that
additional interfaces are needed. Because coordinating the development of
these interfaces is resource intensive, it has been a low priority for the
agencies.

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( [42]www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
[43]www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: [44]www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
[45][email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470

Congressional Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [46][email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548

Public Affairs

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [47][email protected] (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548

References

Visible links
  35. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/RCED-99-121
  36. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-946
  37. http://www.gao.gov/
  38. mailto:[email protected]
  39. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-520
  40. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-520
  42. http://www.gao.gov/
  43. http://www.gao.gov/
  44. http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
  45. mailto:[email protected]
  46. mailto:[email protected]
  47. mailto:[email protected]
*** End of document. ***