In "Troubled Waters," a report to be released today, Taxpayers for Common Sense and the National Wildlife Federation charge that the Corps could save $6 billion and preserve important habitat if it scuttled the projects and 23 others around the country. It's the first report to single out the most "egregious" projects, according to the federation's Mary Burnette.

The 10 worst projects cited in the report include a $311 million deepening of the Delaware River to accommodate bigger ships, $9 billion to pump sand onto all 127 miles of New Jersey's coast, a $1 billion irrigation project in eastern Arkansas intended to help rice farmers and $1.2 billion to expand locks on the Upper Mississippi River to improve barge traffic.

The report blames both the Corps -- citing arrogant "19th century thinking" that engineers can control nature -- and Congress for ordering many of the projects as "pork" to tout to constituents, regardless of the value to taxpayers.

"It is increasingly clear that as budget pressures ease ... a resurgence of wasteful and damaging projects is looming on the horizon and in many cases has already begun," the report says. Congress this year will once again write the legislation that dictates which projects the Corps undertakes.

The Corps will have no comment before the report is released, spokesman Homer Perkins said.

Rep. Bud Shuster, R-Pa., chairman of the House committee that oversees the agency, has called for increased oversight of Corps activities, but said he would not "rush to judgment."

He said through spokesman Scott Brenner that the committee relies on Corps studies to determine whether a project is a good investment. Brenner said opponents of projects, whether it's a road widening or a river deepening, often try to use environmental arguments to kill projects.

Projects cited in the report are typical of those that its authors consider wasteful and environmentally harmful.

Deepening rivers, for example, benefits a few local ports, shipping companies or oil refineries, "leaving the environment to deal with mountains of dredge spoils, some of which are highly contaminated," the report said.

Replenishing beaches, which Congress has ordered the Corps to get more involved in, is something local governments should fund, the report said. Whether it's a good idea at all is questionable, because the Army Corps is fighting beach erosion and encouraging coastal development at the same time.

Instead, the groups argue, the Corps should begin fewer projects and spend more to maintain current ones while making local governments pay more and, if necessary, imposing user fees.

Backers of criticized projects say their benefits outweigh their costs. The Delaware River deepening, for example, will bring jobs and maintain commerce on the Philadelphia waterfront, said Robert Traynham, spokesman for Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.

Beach replenishment in New Jersey actually saves taxpayers money, said Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J. If sand that erodes into the ocean were not pumped back to shore, storms would cause more damage to boardwalks, buildings and utilities, costing taxpayers millions in disaster aid. As for complaints of beach replenishment leading to Shore development, Pallone said that's unlikely.

"The Jersey Shore is already almost completely developed," he said.

The report comes on top of a Washington Post story last month that said the Corps tried to rig a study to justify a major expansion of locks on the Upper Mississippi. The newspaper also reported that Corps officials have worked behind the scenes with the five-year goal of increasing its budget by 50 percent.

The Corps, with an annual budget of about $4 billion, was established in 1779. It has built and maintains some 1,500 water projects around the country, including dams, harbors, levees, jetties and seawalls.

-- By CARL WEISER
Gannett News Service