The bill establishes the "Coastal Storm Risk Management Trust Fund," credited with $1 billion each fiscal year drawn from miscellaneous receipts under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and with earnings on invested balances. The Treasury will administer and may invest unobligated balances in U.S. government obligations; unobligated amounts at termination revert to the general fund.
Money in the Fund is available, subject to advance appropriations, to cover the Federal share of construction, operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and periodic nourishment of Congress‑authorized coastal storm risk management projects carried out by the Army Corps of Engineers. The bill also requires an annual Corps budget submission tied to the Fund’s projected balance and amends budget enforcement rules under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act to treat Fund‑derived appropriations in a specific way for sequestration adjustments.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act directs $1 billion per year from Outer Continental Shelf receipts into a new trust fund, authorizes the Treasury to invest idle balances in U.S. obligations, and permits the Corps to obligate Fund amounts for the Federal share of congressionally authorized coastal storm risk management projects—but only when appropriations Acts make those amounts available. It adds a reporting and budget‑submission rule tying the Corps’ request to projected Fund balances.
Who It Affects
The Army Corps of Engineers will receive a new dedicated funding stream for coastal projects; the Department of the Treasury will administer and invest the Fund; coastal states, local governments, and project sponsors that rely on Corps projects are primary beneficiaries; OMB, CBO, and congressional budget committees will see new scoring and sequestration implications tied to Fund‑derived appropriations.
Why It Matters
The bill creates a predictable revenue source for coastal protection that could accelerate construction and nourishment programs while changing how those Corps appropriations are treated under federal budget enforcement. For budget and compliance officers, the law alters appropriation mechanics, reporting requirements, and sequestration calculations for relevant Corps accounts.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Coastal Trust Fund Act creates a standing Treasury trust called the Coastal Storm Risk Management Trust Fund and specifies its two revenue components: a statutory $1 billion annual deposit sourced from miscellaneous receipts tied to Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) fees, royalties, and similar receipts, plus any interest or proceeds from investments. The Secretary of the Treasury certifies receipts quarterly and may invest amounts not needed for current withdrawals only in obligations of, or guaranteed by, the United States; investment income is credited to the Fund.
Having money credited to the Fund does not itself obligate spending. The Act makes Fund balances available for obligation and expenditure only when Congress provides advance appropriations in regular appropriations Acts.
Eligible uses are narrowly defined: the Federal share of costs for construction, operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and periodic nourishment of coastal storm risk management projects that are specifically authorized by Congress and executed by the Secretary of the Army through the Corps of Engineers, including related feasibility and preconstruction engineering and design activities.Operationally, the Corps must include in its annual submission to OMB an amount equal to the total projected Fund balance at the start of the fiscal year—an unusual rule that effectively aligns the Corps’ budget request with Fund resources. The Secretary of the Army must also send an annual report to the relevant House and Senate committees within 60 days after fiscal year end, listing amounts obligated, projects funded, and the Fund’s unobligated balance.
Finally, the bill amends the procedural language in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act so that, when Congress enacts appropriations derived from this Fund and designates them for coastal storm risk management projects, those appropriations are used in the statute’s adjustment for Corps accounts—altering how sequestration and cap adjustments are calculated.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Fund receives $1,000,000,000 each fiscal year from miscellaneous receipts tied to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCS receipts), plus any investment earnings.
Treasury administers and may only invest unneeded Fund balances in interest‑bearing U.S. obligations or obligations guaranteed by the United States; investment returns are credited back to the Fund.
Fund amounts are available for obligation only if and when Congress provides advance appropriations; depositing money into the Fund does not itself obligate or appropriate those dollars.
The Corps’ annual budget submission to OMB must equal the total amount projected to be in the Fund at the beginning of the fiscal year, creating a direct reporting link between Fund balance and Corps requests.
The bill amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act so that appropriations derived from this Fund and designated for coastal storm risk management projects are counted toward the statute’s adjustment for Corps accounts, affecting sequestration calculations.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the measure the "Coastal Trust Fund Act." This is purely formal but signals the bill’s purpose and provides the statutory citation for subsequent references.
Establishes the Coastal Storm Risk Management Trust Fund and funding source
Creates a Treasury trust fund that is credited with (1) $1 billion each fiscal year derived from OCS miscellaneous receipts under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and (2) any investment earnings. The deposits are specified as being credited to the Fund; the statutory source ties coastal protection financing directly to offshore energy and resource receipts rather than general revenues.
Administration, investment rules, hold‑harmless, and termination
Assigns administration to the Secretary of the Treasury, who must certify quarterly the amounts to be credited and may invest unobligated cash only in U.S. interest‑bearing obligations or obligations guaranteed by the U.S., with earnings returning to the Fund. The subsection includes a 'held harmless' clause preserving deposits to the Land and Water Conservation Fund and amounts made available under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, and it directs that any unobligated balance at termination go to the general fund.
Uses, availability, reporting, and definitions
Limits Fund use to the Federal share of costs for Corps of Engineers coastal storm risk management projects that Congress has specifically authorized and that the Secretary carries out, including construction, operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, nourishment, and associated design and feasibility work. Crucially, Fund balances are available only to the extent Congress enacts advance appropriations. The Secretary must submit an annual budget request tied to the projected Fund balance and provide an annual report within 60 days after fiscal year end listing obligations, projects funded, and the unobligated balance. The section also defines key terms including 'coastal storm risk management project' and 'Secretary.'
Budget enforcement — BBEDCA amendment
Amends section 251(b)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to add a new subcategory: when appropriations for certain Corps accounts are enacted that are derived from this Trust Fund and are statutorily designated for coastal storm risk management projects, those appropriations must be included in the statute’s adjustment for Corps accounts. Practically, that changes how sequestration adjustments and budgetary caps interact with appropriations drawn from the Fund.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Infrastructure across all five countries.
Explore Infrastructure in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Coastal communities and local governments that host Corps‑authorized storm risk projects — they gain a dedicated federal revenue stream that can support construction, nourishment, and upkeep of protective infrastructure.
- Sponsors and non‑federal project partners (states, municipalities) — projects with a clearer federal funding source may face reduced uncertainty when matching and timing requirements are negotiated with the Corps.
- The Army Corps of Engineers — the Corps receives an identifiable funding pool it can draw from once Congress appropriates those funds, helping plan multi‑year construction and maintenance schedules.
- Regions dependent on beach nourishment and shoreline protection — predictable deposits and permitted investment earnings can support ongoing periodic nourishment cycles critical to some barrier islands and resort economies.
Who Bears the Cost
- Other federal priorities funded by OCS receipts in the general Treasury — while the bill holds certain programs harmless, routing $1 billion per year to this Trust Fund reduces the pool of miscellaneous receipts available for non‑earmarked discretionary spending unless other offsets are identified.
- Congressional appropriations committees and OMB — the new requirement that the Corps’ budget submission equal the projected Fund balance and the BBEDCA change create new scoring and workload implications for budget analysts and may complicate ceiling and sequestration calculations.
- Treasury and Corps administrative units — Treasury must certify quarterly deposits and manage investments, while the Corps must align budget submissions and prepare annual reports and project accounting tied to the Fund.
- Taxpayers broadly if OCS receipts decline — reliance on variable offshore receipts means potential volatility; if revenues fall short, either projects are delayed or Congress must find alternative funds, creating contingent fiscal exposure.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between creating a reliable, dedicated revenue stream to accelerate coastal resilience projects and preserving congressional control over appropriations and fiscal discipline: earmarking OCS receipts for coastal defense improves predictability for the Corps and communities but reduces discretionary flexibility and complicates budget enforcement, particularly when revenues fluctuate or when Congress prefers to allocate limited appropriations across competing priorities.
The bill ties coastal project funding to OCS miscellaneous receipts, which can fluctuate with energy markets and lease activity. That link provides political appeal (using resource receipts to fund coastal protection) but creates revenue volatility: a $1 billion statutory deposit may be harder to meet in lean OCS revenue years, forcing either reduced deposits, use of alternative funding, or pressure on appropriators to backfill.
Although the law requires advance appropriations for Fund amounts to be obligatable, it also requires the Corps to submit a budget equal to the Fund’s projected beginning balance—an unusual mechanical tie that could create pressure to request and spend the full balance even when project prioritization might advise pacing.
The amendment to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act is consequential but narrow: it changes how appropriations derived from the Fund interact with sequestration adjustments for Corps accounts. That creates potential for shifts in enforcement outcomes across affected Corps accounts and could invite disputes over designation language in appropriations Acts (i.e., whether an appropriation is 'derived from' the Fund and 'designated' for covered projects).
Implementation will require new interagency coordination among Treasury, OMB, CBO, and the congressional budget committees to agree on scoring, certification, and treatment of these receipts. The bill leaves open operational priorities and criteria for selecting projects—Congress retains authorization authority—so the Fund supplies money only where Congress has already acted or chooses to act in future appropriations.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.