[House Report 107-717]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 107-717
======================================================================
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2002
_______
October 2, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 5428]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 5428) to provide for the
conservation and development of water and related resources, to
authorize the Secretary of the Army to construct various
projects for improvements to rivers and harbors of the United
States, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that
the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Water Resources
Development Act of 2002''.
(b) Table of Contents.--
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary.
TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS
Sec. 101. Project authorizations.
Sec. 102. Small projects for flood damage reduction.
Sec. 103. Small projects for emergency streambank protection.
Sec. 104. Small projects for navigation.
Sec. 105. Small projects for improvement of the quality of the
environment.
Sec. 106. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 107. Small projects for shoreline protection.
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Annual passes for recreation.
Sec. 202. Non-Federal contributions.
Sec. 203. Harbor cost sharing.
Sec. 204. Funding to process permits.
Sec. 205. National shoreline erosion control development and
demonstration program.
Sec. 206. Written agreement for water resources projects.
Sec. 207. Assistance for remediation, restoration, and reuse.
Sec. 208. Compilation of laws.
Sec. 209. Dredged material disposal.
Sec. 210. Wetlands mitigation.
Sec. 211. Remote and subsistence harbors.
Sec. 212. Beneficial uses of dredged material.
Sec. 213. Cost sharing provisions for certain areas.
Sec. 214. Revision of project cooperation agreement.
Sec. 215. Cost sharing.
Sec. 216. Credit for work performed before cooperation agreement.
Sec. 217. Recreation user fee revenues.
Sec. 218. Expedited actions for emergency flood damage reduction.
Sec. 219. Watershed and river basin assessments.
Sec. 220. Tribal partnership program.
Sec. 221. Treatment of certain separable elements.
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 301. Cook Inlet, Anchorage Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 302. Galena, Alaska.
Sec. 303. King Cove Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 304. St. Paul Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 305. Sitka, Alaska.
Sec. 306. Tatilek, Alaska.
Sec. 307. American and Sacramento Rivers, California.
Sec. 308. Cache Creek Basin, California.
Sec. 309. Grayson Creek/Murderer's Creek, California.
Sec. 310. John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel,
California.
Sec. 311. Los Angeles Harbor, Los Angeles, California.
Sec. 312. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California.
Sec. 313. Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa River, California.
Sec. 314. Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California.
Sec. 315. Pinole Creek, California.
Sec. 316. Prado Dam, California.
Sec. 317. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California.
Sec. 318. Sacramento River, Glenn-Colusa, California.
Sec. 319. San Lorenzo River, California.
Sec. 320. Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, California.
Sec. 321. Upper Guadalupe River, California.
Sec. 322. Walnut Creek Channel, California.
Sec. 323. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California.
Sec. 324. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California.
Sec. 325. Brevard County, Florida.
Sec. 326. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Florida.
Sec. 327. Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida.
Sec. 328. Manatee Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 329. Rose Bay, Volusia County, Florida.
Sec. 330. Tampa Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 331. Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida.
Sec. 332. Little Wood River, Gooding, Idaho.
Sec. 333. Indiana Harbor, Indiana.
Sec. 334. Little Calumet River, Indiana.
Sec. 335. Little Calumet River Basin (Cady Marsh Ditch), Indiana.
Sec. 336. Long Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 337. White River, Indiana.
Sec. 338. Wolf Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 339. Harlan County, Kentucky.
Sec. 340. Amite River and Tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge
Parish Watershed.
Sec. 341. J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to
Shreveport, Louisiana.
Sec. 342. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana.
Sec. 343. West Bank of the Mississippi River (east of Harvey Canal),
Louisiana.
Sec. 344. Union River, Maine.
Sec. 345. Cass River, Spaulding Township, Michigan.
Sec. 346. Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan.
Sec. 347. Water Resources Institute, Muskegon, Michigan.
Sec. 348. Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan.
Sec. 349. Ada, Minnesota.
Sec. 350. Duluth Harbor, Mcquade Road, Minnesota.
Sec. 351. Granite Falls, Minnesota.
Sec. 352. Red Lake River, Minnesota.
Sec. 353. Silver Bay, Minnesota.
Sec. 354. Taconite Harbor, Minnesota.
Sec. 355. Two Harbors, Minnesota.
Sec. 356. Bois Brule Drainage and Levee District, Missouri.
Sec. 357. Turkey Creek basin, Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas City,
Kansas.
Sec. 358. Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York.
Sec. 359. Times Beach, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 360. Port of New York and New Jersey, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 361. New York State Canal System.
Sec. 362. Ashtabula River, Ohio.
Sec. 363. Willamette River Temperature Control, Mckenzie Subbasin,
Oregon.
Sec. 364. Lackawanna River at Olyphant, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 365. Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 366. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 367. Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania.
Sec. 368. Solomon's Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 369. South Central Pennsylvania.
Sec. 370. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 371. Little Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, Tennessee.
Sec. 372. Bowie County Levee, Texas.
Sec. 373. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas.
Sec. 374. North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas.
Sec. 375. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas.
Sec. 376. Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia.
Sec. 377. Great Bridge, Chesapeake, Virginia.
Sec. 378. Roanoke River Upper Basin, Virginia.
Sec. 379. Blair and Sitcum Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington.
Sec. 380. Greenbrier River Basin, West Virginia.
Sec. 381. Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin.
Sec. 382. Continuation of project authorizations.
Sec. 383. Project reauthorization.
Sec. 384. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 385. Land conveyances.
Sec. 386. Extinguishment of reversionary interests and use
restrictions.
TITLE IV--STUDIES
Sec. 401. Great Lakes navigation system.
Sec. 402. John Glenn Great Lakes basin program.
Sec. 403. St. George Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 404. Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway, Illinois,
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin.
Sec. 405. Hamilton, California.
Sec. 406. Oceanside, California.
Sec. 407. Sacramento River, California.
Sec. 408. San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California.
Sec. 409. Tybee Island, Georgia.
Sec. 410. Calumet Harbor, Illinois.
Sec. 411. Paducah, Kentucky.
Sec. 412. West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 413. City of Mackinac Island, Michigan.
Sec. 414. Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 415. Mississippi River, Missouri and Illinois.
Sec. 416. Arthur Kill Channel and Morses Creek to Perth Amboy, New
Jersey.
Sec. 417. Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico.
Sec. 418. Hudson-Raritan Estuary, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 419. Lake Carl Blackwell, Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Sec. 420. Sac and Fox Nation, Oklahoma.
Sec. 421. Sutherlin, Oregon
Sec. 422. Ecosystem restoration and fish passage improvements, Oregon.
Sec. 423. Northeastern Pennsylvania aquatic ecosystem restoration and
protection.
Sec. 424. Brownsville Ship Channel, Texas.
Sec. 425. Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay, Texas.
Sec. 426. Chehalis River Basin, Washington.
Sec. 427. Sprague, Lincoln County, Washington.
Sec. 428. Monongahela River basin, northern West Virginia.
Sec. 429. Wauwatosa, Wisconsin.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Sec. 501. Maintenance of navigation channels.
Sec. 502. Watershed management.
Sec. 503. Dam safety.
Sec. 504. Structural integrity evaluations.
Sec. 505. Flood mitigation priority areas.
Sec. 506. Additional assistance for authorized projects.
Sec. 507. Expedited completion of reports and construction for certain
projects.
Sec. 508. Expedited completion of reports for certain projects.
Sec. 509. Southeastern water resources assessment.
Sec. 510. Upper Mississippi River environmental management program.
Sec. 511. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers enhancement project.
Sec. 512. Membership of Missouri River Trust.
Sec. 513. Watershed management, restoration, and development.
Sec. 514. Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 515. Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River basins.
Sec. 516. Chesapeake Bay environmental restoration and protection
program.
Sec. 517. Montgomery, Alabama.
Sec. 518. Alaska.
Sec. 519. Akutan Small Boat Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 520. Lowell Creek Tunnel, Seward, Alaska.
Sec. 521. St. Herman Harbor, Kodiak, Alaska.
Sec. 522. Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas.
Sec. 523. Loomis Landing, Arkansas.
Sec. 524. St. Francis River basin, Arkansas and Missouri.
Sec. 525. Cambria, California.
Sec. 526. East San Joaquin County, California.
Sec. 527. Harbor/South Bay, California.
Sec. 528. Sacramento Area, California.
Sec. 529. San Francisco, California.
Sec. 530. San Francisco, California, waterfront area.
Sec. 531. Stockton, California.
Sec. 532. Everglades restoration, Florida.
Sec. 533. Mayo's Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa River, Rome, Georgia.
Sec. 534. Riley Creek recreation area, Idaho.
Sec. 535. Grand Tower drainage and levees, Grand Tower Township,
Illinois.
Sec. 536. Kaskaskia River basin, Illinois, restoration.
Sec. 537. Natalie Creek, Midlothian and Oak Forest, Illinois.
Sec. 538. Illinois River basin restoration.
Sec. 539. Calumet region, Indiana.
Sec. 540. Rathbun Lake, Iowa.
Sec. 541. Mayfield Creek and tributaries, Kentucky.
Sec. 542. Southern and Eastern Kentucky.
Sec. 543. Coastal Louisiana ecosystem protection and restoration.
Sec. 544. Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Sec. 545. West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 546. Chesapeake Bay shoreline, Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania,
and Delaware.
Sec. 547. Delmarva conservation corridor, Maryland.
Sec. 548. Detroit River, Michigan.
Sec. 549. Oakland County, Michigan.
Sec. 550. St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan.
Sec. 551. Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota.
Sec. 552. Northeastern Minnesota.
Sec. 553. St. Louis, Missouri.
Sec. 554. Rural Nevada.
Sec. 555. Hackensack Meadowlands area, New Jersey.
Sec. 556. Atlantic Coast of New York.
Sec. 557. College Point, New York City, New York.
Sec. 558. Flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New York.
Sec. 559. Little Neck Bay, Village of Kings Point, New York.
Sec. 560. Stanley County, North Carolina.
Sec. 561. Piedmont Lake Dam, Ohio.
Sec. 562. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 563. Columbia River, Oregon.
Sec. 564. Eugene, Oregon.
Sec. 565. John Day Lock and Dam, Lake Umatilla, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 566. Lowell, Oregon.
Sec. 567. Hagerman's Run, Williamsport, Pennyslvania.
Sec. 568. Northeast Pennsylvania.
Sec. 569. Susquehannock Campground access road, Raystown Lake,
Pennsylvania.
Sec. 570. Upper Susquehanna River basin, Pennsylvania and New York.
Sec. 571. Washington, Greene, Westmoreland, and Fayette Counties,
Pennsylvania.
Sec. 572. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Sec. 573. Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Carolina.
Sec. 574. Upper Big Sioux River, Watertown, South Dakota.
Sec. 575. Fritz Landing, Tennessee.
Sec. 576. Memphis, Tennessee.
Sec. 577. Town Creek, Lenoir City, Tennessee.
Sec. 578. Tennessee River partnership.
Sec. 579. Clear Creek and tributaries, Harris and Galveston Counties,
Texas.
Sec. 580. Halls Bayou, Texas.
Sec. 581. Harris Gully, Harris County, Texas.
Sec. 582. Onion Creek, Texas.
Sec. 583. Pelican Island, Texas.
Sec. 584. Riverside Oxbow, Fort Worth, Texas.
Sec. 585. Richmond National Battlefield Park, Richmond, Virginia.
Sec. 586. Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington.
Sec. 587. Chehalis River, Centralia, Washington.
Sec. 588. Hamilton Island campground, Washington.
Sec. 589. Puget Island, Washington.
Sec. 590. West Virginia and Pennsylvania flood control.
Sec. 591. Lower Kanawha River Basin, West Virginia.
Sec. 592. Central West Virginia.
Sec. 593. Southern West Virginia.
Sec. 594. Additional assistance for critical projects.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the Army.
TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS
SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.
Except as otherwise provided in this section, the following projects
for water resources development and conservation and other purposes are
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary substantially in
accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions, described in
the respective reports designated in this section:
(1) Pine flat dam and reservoir, california.--The project for
environmental restoration, Pine Flat Dam and Reservoir, Fresno
County, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated
July 19, 2002, at a total cost of $37,100,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $24,116,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $12,984,000.
(2) Morganza to the gulf of mexico, louisiana.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm
damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico,
Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated
August 23, 2002, at a total cost of $680,00,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $442,000,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $238,000,000.
(B) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the
non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost
of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for
interim flood protection after March 31, 1989, if the
Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
(3) Smith island, maryland.--The project for environmental
restoration and protection, Smith Island, Maryland: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated October 29, 2001, at a total cost
of $7,442,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $4,838,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,604,000.
(4) Chickamauga lock and dam, tennessee.--The project for
inland navigation, Chickamauga Lock and Dam, Tennessee: Report
of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 30, 2002; except that the
Secretary shall construct the project in accordance with the
plan that includes a 110-foot by 600-foot replacement lock at a
total cost of $267,167,000. The costs of such construction
shall be paid \1/2\ from amounts appropriated from the general
fund of the Treasury and \1/2\ from amounts appropriated from
the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
SEC. 102. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is
feasible, may carry out the project under section 205 of the Flood
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s):
(1) Cache river basin, grubbs, arkansas.--Project for flood
damage reduction, Cache River basin, Grubbs, Arkansas.
(2) Santa ana river basin and orange county streams,
california.--Project for flood damage reduction, Santa Ana
River basin and Orange County streams, California.
(3) Nashua river, fitchburg, massachusetts.--Project for
flood damage reduction, Nashua River, Fitchburg, Massachusetts.
(4) Saginaw river, hamilton dam, flint, michigan.--Project
for flood damage reduction, Saginaw River, Hamilton Dam, Flint,
Michigan.
(5) South branch of the wild rice river, borup, minnesota.--
Project for flood damage reduction, South Branch of the Wild
Rice River, Borup, Minnesota
(6) Blacksnake creek, st. joseph, missouri.--Project for
flood damage reduction, Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri.
(7) James river, greene county, missouri.--Project for flood
damage reduction, James River, Greene County, Missouri.
(8) McKeel brook, new jersey.--Project for flood damage
reduction, McKeel Brook, New Jersey.
(9) East river, silver beach, new york city, new york.--
Project for flood damage reduction, East River, Silver Beach,
New York City, New York.
(10) Little mill creek, southampton, pennsylvania.--Project
for flood damage reduction, Little Mill Creek, Southampton,
Pennsylvania.
(11) Little neshaminy creek, warrenton, pennsylvania.--
Project for flood damage reduction, Little Neshaminy Creek,
Warrenton, Pennsylvania.
(12) Surfside beach, south carolina.--Project for flood
damage reduction, Surfside Beach and vicinity, South Carolina.
(b) Special Rules.--In carrying out the project for flood damage
reduction, South Branch of the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota,
referred to in subsection (a)(4) the Secretary may consider national
ecosystem restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in
the project and shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in
the financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent
that the Secretary's evaluation indicates that applying such section is
necessary to implement the project.
SEC. 103. SMALL PROJECTS FOR EMERGENCY STREAMBANK PROTECTION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following project and, if
the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, may carry out
the project under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33
U.S.C. 701r):
(1) Middle fork grand river, gentry county, missouri.--
Project for emergency streambank protection, Middle Fork Grand
River, Gentry County, Missouri.
SEC. 104. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is feasible,
may carry out the project under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577):
(1) Blytheville county harbor, arkansas.--Project for
navigation, Blytheville County Harbor, Arkansas.
(2) Evanston, illinois.--Project for navigation, Evanston,
Illinois.
(3) Niagara frontier transportation authority boat harbor,
buffalo, new york.--Project for navigation, Niagara Frontier
Transportation Authority Boat Harbor, Buffalo, New York.
(4) Woodlawn marina, lackawanna, new york.--Project for
navigation, Woodlawn Marina, Lackawanna, New York.
SEC. 105. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE
ENVIRONMENT.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following project and, if
the Secretary determines that the project is appropriate, may carry out
the project under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a):
(1) Smithville lake, missouri.--Project for improvement of
the quality of the environment, Smithville Lake, Missouri.
SEC. 106. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is
appropriate, may carry out the project under section 206 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330):
(1) Colorado river, yuma, arizona.--Project for aquatic
ecosystem restoration, Colorado River, Yuma, Arizona.
(2) Chino valley, california.--Project for aquatic ecosystem
restoration, Chino Valley, California.
(3) Stockton deep water ship channel and lower san joaquin
river, california.--Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel and lower San Joaquin River,
California.
(4) Sweetwater reservoir, san diego county, california.--
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Sweetwater
Reservoir, San Diego County, California, including efforts to
address aquatic invasive plant species.
(5) Biscayne bay, florida.--Project for aquatic ecosystem
restoration, Biscayne Bay, Key Biscayne, Florida.
(6) Chattahoochee river, columbus, georgia, and phenix city,
alabama.--Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, City Mills
Dam and Eagle and Phenix Dam, Chattahoochee River, Columbus,
Georgia, and Phenix City, Alabama.
(7) Chattahoochee river and ocmulgee river basins, georgia.--
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Chattahoochee River
and Ocmulgee River basins, Gwinnett County, Georgia.
(8) Snake river, jerome, idaho.--Project for aquatic
ecosystem restoration, Snake River, Jerome, Idaho.
SEC. 107. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SHORELINE PROTECTION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following project and, if
the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, may carry out
the project under section 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing
Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly
owned property'', approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g):
(1) Nelson lagoon, alaska.--Project for shoreline protection,
Nelson Lagoon, Alaska.
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. ANNUAL PASSES FOR RECREATION.
Section 208(c)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (16
U.S.C. 460d-3 note; 110 Stat. 3681; 113 Stat. 294) is amended by
striking ``the December 31, 2003'' and inserting ``December 31, 2004''.
SEC. 202. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2213) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(n) Non-Federal Contributions.--
``(1) Prohibition on solicitation of excess contributions.--
The Secretary may not solicit contributions from non-Federal
interests for costs of constructing authorized water resources
development projects or measures in excess of the non-Federal
share assigned to the appropriate project purposes listed in
subsections (a), (b), and (c) or condition Federal
participation in such projects or measures on the receipt of
such contributions.
``(2) Limitation on statutory construction.--Nothing in this
subsection shall be construed to affect the Secretary's
authority under section 903(c) of this Act.''.
SEC. 203. HARBOR COST SHARING.
(a) Payments During Construction.--Section 101(a)(1) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211(a)(1); 100 Stat.
4082) is amended in each of subparagraphs (B) and (C) by striking ``45
feet'' and inserting ``53 feet''.
(b) Operation and Maintenance.--Section 101(b)(1) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 2211(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``45 feet'' and inserting
``53 feet''.
(c) Definitions.--Section 214 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2241; 100 Stat.
4108) is amended in each of paragraphs (1) and (3) by striking ``45
feet'' and inserting ``53 feet''.
(d) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsections (a), (b), and
(c) shall apply only to a project, or separable element of a project,
on which a contract for physical construction has not been awarded
before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 204. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.
Section 214 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C.
2201 note; 114 Stat. 2594) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``2003'' and inserting
``2005''; and
(2) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following:
``The acceptance and expenditure of funds under subsection (a)
shall not affect the order in which permits are considered or
approved by the Secretary.''.
SEC. 205. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
(a) Extension of Program.--Section 5(a) of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores
of publicly owned property'', approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C.
426h(a)), is amended by striking ``6 years'' and inserting ``10
years''.
(b) Extension of Planning, Design, and Construction Phase.--Section
5(b)(1)(A) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking
``3 years'' and inserting ``6 years''.
(c) Cost-Sharing; Removal of Projects.--Section 5(b) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 426h(b)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (5)
and (6), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary may enter into a cost-
sharing agreement with a non-Federal interest to carry out a
project, or a phase of a project, under the erosion control
program in cooperation with the non-Federal interest.
``(4) Removal of projects.--The Secretary may pay all or a
portion of the costs of removing a project, or an element of a
project, constructed under the erosion control program if the
Secretary determines during the term of the program that the
project or element is detrimental to the environment, private
property, or public safety.''.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 5(e)(2) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 426h(e)(2)) is amended by striking ``$21,000,000'' and inserting
``$31,000,000''.
SEC. 206. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.
(a) Liquidated Damages.--Section 221(a) of the Flood Control Act of
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(a)) is amended by inserting after ``$25,000.''
the following: ``Such agreement may include a provision for liquidated
damages in the event of a failure of one or more parties to perform.''.
(b) Local Cooperation.--Section 912(b) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (101 Stat. 4190) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``shall'' the first place it appears
and inserting ``may''; and
(B) by striking the last sentence; and
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by inserting after ``injunction, for'' the
following: ``payment of liquidated damages or, for'';
(B) by striking ``to collect a civil penalty imposed
under this section,''; and
(C) by striking ``any civil penalty imposed under
this section,'' and inserting ``any liquidated
damages,''.
SEC. 207. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RESTORATION, AND REUSE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may provide to State and local
governments assessment, planning, and design assistance for
remediation, environmental restoration, or reuse of areas located
within the boundaries of such State or local governments where such
remediation, environmental restoration, or reuse will contribute to the
improvement of water quality or the conservation of water and related
resources of drainage basins and watersheds within the United States.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost of
assistance provided under subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2003 through 2007.
SEC. 208. COMPILATION OF LAWS.
Within one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the laws of
the United States relating to the improvement of rivers and harbors,
flood control, beach erosion, and other water resources development
enacted after November 8, 1966, and before January 1, 2003, shall be
compiled under the direction of the Secretary and the Chief of
Engineers and printed for the use of the Department of the Army,
Congress, and the general public. The Secretary shall reprint the
volumes containing such laws enacted before November 8, 1966. In
addition, the Secretary shall include an index in each volume so
compiled or reprinted. Not later than December 1, 2003, the Secretary
shall transmit at least 25 copies of each such volume to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate.
SEC. 209. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL.
Section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C.
2326a; 110 Stat. 3694-3696) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d);
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Governmental Partnerships.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may enter into cost-sharing
agreements with 1 or more non-Federal public interests with
respect to a project, or group of projects within a geographic
region if appropriate, for the acquisition, design,
construction, management, or operation of a dredged material
processing, treatment, or disposal facility (including any
facility used to demonstrate potential beneficial uses of
dredged material) using funds provided in whole or in part by
the Federal Government. One or more of the parties of the
agreement may perform the acquisition, design, construction,
management, or operation of a dredged material processing,
treatment, or disposal facility. If appropriate, the Secretary
may combine portions of separate construction or maintenance
appropriations from separate Federal projects with the
appropriate combined cost-sharing between the various projects
when the facility serves to manage dredged material from
multiple Federal projects located in the geographic region of
the facility.
``(2) Public financing.--
``(A) Agreements.--The agreement used shall clearly
specify the Federal funding sources and combined cost-
sharing when applicable to multiple Federal navigation
projects and the responsibilities and risks of each of
the parties related to present and future dredged
material managed by the facility.
``(B) Credit.--Nothing in this subsection supersedes
or modifies existing agreements between the Federal
Government and any non-Federal sponsors for the cost-
sharing, construction, and operation and maintenance of
Federal navigation projects. Subject to the approval of
the Secretary and in accordance with existing laws,
regulations, and policies, a non-Federal public sponsor
of a Federal navigation project may seek credit for
funds provided in the acquisition, design,
construction, management, or operation of a dredged
material processing, treatment, or disposal facility to
the extent the facility is used to manage dredged
material from the Federal navigation project. The non-
Federal sponsor shall be responsible for providing all
necessary lands, easements, rights-of-way, or
relocations associated with the facility and shall
receive credit for these items.''; and
(3) in each of subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2)(A), as so
redesignated, by inserting ``processing, treatment, or'' after
``dredged material'' the first place it appears.
SEC. 210. WETLANDS MITIGATION.
In carrying out a water resources project that involves wetlands
mitigation and that has impacts that occur within the service area of a
mitigation bank, the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable and
where appropriate, shall give preference to the use of the mitigation
bank if the bank contains sufficient available credits to offset the
impact and the bank is approved in accordance with the Federal Guidance
for the Establishment, Use and Operation of Mitigation Banks (60 Fed.
Reg. 58605) or other applicable Federal law (including regulations).
SEC. 211. REMOTE AND SUBSISTENCE HARBORS.
(a) In General.--In conducting a study of harbor and navigation
improvements, the Secretary may recommend a project without the need to
demonstrate that the project is justified solely by national economic
development benefits if the Secretary determines that--
(1)(A) the community to be served by the project is at least
70 miles from the nearest surface accessible commercial port
and has no direct rail or highway link to another community
served by a surface accessible port or harbor; or
(B) the project would be located in the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, or American Samoa;
(2) the harbor is economically critical such that over 80
percent of the goods transported through the harbor would be
consumed within the community served by the harbor and
navigation improvement; and
(3) the long-term viability of the community would be
threatened without the harbor and navigation improvement.
(b) Justification.--In considering whether to recommend a project
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the benefits of the
project to--
(1) public health and safety of the local community,
including access to facilities designed to protect public
health and safety;
(2) access to natural resources for subsistence purposes;
(3) local and regional economic opportunities;
(4) welfare of the local population; and
(5) social and cultural value to the community.
SEC. 212. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.
(a) In General.--Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326) is amended by striking subsections (c) through
(g) and inserting the following:
``(c) In General.--The Secretary may carry out projects to transport
and place suitable material dredged in connection with the
construction, operation, or maintenance of an authorized navigation
project at locations selected by a non-Federal public entity for use in
the construction, repair, or rehabilitation of public projects
associated with navigation, flood damage reduction, hydroelectric
power, municipal and industrial water supply, agricultural water
supply, recreation, hurricane and storm damage reduction, aquatic plant
control, and environmental protection and restoration.
``(d) Cooperative Agreement.--Any project undertaken pursuant to this
section shall be initiated only after non-Federal interests have
entered into an agreement with the Secretary in which the non-Federal
interests agree to pay the non-Federal share of the cost of
construction of the project and 100 percent of the cost of operation,
maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation of the project in
accordance with section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213).
``(e) Determination of Construction Costs.--Costs associated with
construction of a project under this section shall be limited solely to
construction costs that are in excess of those costs necessary to carry
out the dredging for construction, operation, or maintenance of the
authorized navigation project in the most cost effective way,
consistent with economic, engineering, and environmental criteria.
``(f) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), for any project carried out
under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit
entity, with the consent of the affected local government.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated $30,000,000 annually for projects under this section. Such
sums shall remain available until expended.
``(h) Regional Sediment Management Planning.--In consultation with
appropriate State and Federal agencies, the Secretary may develop, at
Federal expense, plans for regional management of material dredged in
conjunction with the construction, operation, or maintenance of
navigation projects, including potential beneficial uses of dredged
material for construction, repair, or rehabilitation of public projects
for navigation, flood damage reduction, hydroelectric power, municipal
and industrial water supply, agricultural water supply, recreation,
hurricane and storm damage reduction, aquatic plant control, and
environmental protection and restoration.''.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) In general.--Section 145 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j) is repealed.
(2) Hold harmless.--The repeal made by paragraph (1) shall
not affect the authority of the Secretary to complete any
project being carried out under such section 145 on the day
before the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Priority Areas.--In carrying out section 204 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C 2326), the Secretary shall
give priority to a project in the vicinity of Morehead City, North
Carolina.
SEC. 213. COST SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN AREAS.
Section 1156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33
U.S.C. 2310; 100 Stat. 4256) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 1156. COST SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN AREAS.
``The Secretary shall waive local cost-sharing requirements up to
$500,000 for all studies and projects in the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, in Indian country (as
defined in section 1151 of title 18, United States Code, and including
lands that are within the jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian
tribe, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, and are
recognized by the Secretary of the Interior as eligible for trust land
status under part 151 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations) or on
land in the State of Alaska conveyed to an Alaska Native Village
Corporation under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C.
1601 et seq.).''.
SEC. 214. REVISION OF PROJECT COOPERATION AGREEMENT.
Upon authorization by law of an increase in the maximum amount of
Federal funds that may be allocated for a project or an increase in the
total cost of a project authorized to be carried out by the Secretary,
the Secretary shall revise the project cooperation agreement for the
project to take into account the change in Federal participation in the
project.
SEC. 215. COST SHARING.
An increase in the maximum amount of Federal funds that may be
allocated for a project or an increase in the total cost of a project
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary shall not affect any cost
sharing requirement applicable to the project under title I of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 et seq.).
SEC. 216. CREDIT FOR WORK PERFORMED BEFORE COOPERATION AGREEMENT.
If the Secretary is authorized to credit toward the non-Federal share
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the
date of the cooperation agreement for the project and such work has not
been carried out as of the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall enter into an agreement with the non-Federal interest for the
project under which the non-Federal interest shall carry out such work,
and the credit shall apply only to work carried out under the agreement
entered into under this section.
SEC. 217. RECREATION USER FEE REVENUES.
Section 225 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
297-298) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1) by striking ``During fiscal years
1999 through 2002, the'' and inserting ``The''; and
(2) in subsection (a)(3) by striking ``September 30, 2005''
and inserting ``expended''.
SEC. 218. EXPEDITED ACTIONS FOR EMERGENCY FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.
The Secretary shall expedite any authorized planning, design, and
construction of any project for flood damage reduction for an area
that, within the preceding 5 years, has been subject to flooding that
resulted in the loss of life and caused damage of sufficient severity
and magnitude to warrant a declaration of a major disaster by the
President under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster and Emergency Relief
Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
SEC. 219. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 729(f)(1) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (114 Stat. 2588; 100 Stat. 4164) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the costs
of an assessment carried out under this section on or after
December 11, 2000, shall be 25 percent.''.
(b) Revision of Cooperation Agreement.--The Secretary shall revise
the cooperation agreement for any assessment being carried out under
such section 729 to take into account the change in non-Federal
participation in the assessment as a result of the amendment made by
subsection (a).
SEC. 220. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.
Section 203(b)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(33 U.S.C. 2269(b)(1)(B); 114 Stat. 2589) is amended by inserting after
``Code'' the following ``, and including lands that are within the
jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe, as determined by the
Secretary of the Interior, and are recognized by the Secretary of the
Interior as eligible for trust land status under part 151 of title 25,
Code of Federal Regulations''.
SEC. 221. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN SEPARABLE ELEMENTS.
(a) In General.--If, in carrying out a water resources project, the
Secretary identifies a separable element that would advance a primary
mission of the Corps of Engineers, with benefits that could be achieved
more cost-effectively if carried out in conjunction with the project,
the Secretary, in consultation with the non-Federal interest, may carry
out such separable element at Federal expense not to exceed 3 percent
of the Federal project cost or $1,000,000, whichever is less.
(b) Operation and Maintenance.--Operation and maintenance of work
carried out under this section shall be a non-Federal responsibility.
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. COOK INLET, ANCHORAGE HARBOR, ALASKA.
The project for navigation improvements, Cook Inlet, Alaska
(Anchorage Harbor, Alaska), authorized by section 101 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 299) and modified by section 199 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2944), is further
modified to authorize the Secretary to establish a harbor depth of 45
feet for a length of 5,000 feet at the Port of Anchorage marine
facility, at a total cost of $14,500,000. Federal maintenance shall be
in accordance with such section 101; except that the project shall be
maintained at a depth of 45 feet for such 5,000 feet.
SEC. 302. GALENA, ALASKA.
The project for emergency bank stabilization, Galena, Alaska,
authorized by title I of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act, 2001 (114 Stat. 1441A-61), is modified to direct
the Secretary to construct the project, at a total cost of $6,000,000.
SEC. 303. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the
project for navigation, King Cove Harbor, Alaska, being carried out
under section 107 of the River Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577),
shall be $8,000,000.
SEC. 304. ST. PAUL HARBOR, ALASKA.
(a) In General.--The project for navigation, St. Paul Harbor, Alaska,
authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667) and modified by section 303 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 298-299), is further
modified to direct the Secretary to construct the project, at a total
cost of $65,000,000.
(b) Limitation on Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share for the
project shall not exceed $14,400,000.
SEC. 305. SITKA, ALASKA.
The Thompson Harbor, Sitka, Alaska, element of the project for
navigation Southeast Alaska Harbors of Refuge, Alaska, authorized by
section 101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat.
4801), is modified to direct the Secretary to take such action as may
be necessary to correct design deficiencies in such element, at a
Federal expense of $6,300,000.
SEC. 306. TATILEK, ALASKA.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the
project for navigation, Tatilek, Alaska, being carried out under
section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall
be $10,000,000.
SEC. 307. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood damage reduction, American and Sacramento
Rivers, California, authorized by section 101(a)(1) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3662-3663) and modified by
section 366 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
319-320), is further modified to direct the Secretary to carry out the
project, at a total cost of $205,000,000.
SEC. 308. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control, Cache Creek Basin, California,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4112), is modified to direct the Secretary to mitigate
the impacts of the new south levee of the Cache Creek settling basin on
the city of Woodland's storm drainage system, including all appurtenant
features, erosion control measures, and environmental protection
features. Such mitigation shall restore the city's preproject capacity
(1,360 cubic feet per second) to release water to the Yolo Bypass,
including channel improvements, an outlet work through the west levee
of the Yolo Bypass, and a new low-flow cross channel to handle city and
county storm drainage and settling basin flows (1,760 cubic feet per
second) when the Yolo Bypass is in a low flow condition.
SEC. 309. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER'S CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Grayson Creek/
Murderer's Creek, California, being carried out under section 206 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is
modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share
of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project and to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem
restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in the
project.
SEC. 310. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCKTON SHIP CHANNEL,
CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, San Francisco to Stockton, California,
authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat.
1091) is modified--
(1) to provide that the non-Federal share of the cost of the
John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel element
of the project may be provided in the form of in-kind services
and materials; and
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of such element the cost of planning and
design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the
date of an agreement for such planning and design if the
Secretary determines that such work is integral to such
element.
SEC. 311. LOS ANGELES HARBOR, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Los Angeles Harbor, Los Angeles,
California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2577), is modified to direct the
Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of the planning, design, and construction work carried
out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 312. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur,
California, authorized by section 601(d) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is modified to direct the
Secretary to prepare a limited reevaluation report to determine whether
maintenance of the project is feasible. If the Secretary determines
that maintenance of the project is feasible, the Secretary shall carry
out the maintenance.
SEC. 313. NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, NAPA RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
In carrying out the feasibility study for the project for aquatic
ecosystem restoration, Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa and
Sonoma Counties, California, the Secretary shall determine whether work
carried out by the non-Federal interest is integral to the project. In
any case in which the work is determined to be integral to the project
before completion of the final report of the Chief of Engineers on the
project, such work shall be included as part of the project, and the
cost of such work shall be recommended in the final report for credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project. Work carried
out after submission of the final report and before the date of the
cooperation agreement for the project that is determined to be integral
to the project shall be considered as part of the project, and the cost
of such work shall be credited toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project.
SEC. 314. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Pacific Flyway Center,
Sacramento, California, being carried out under section 206 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified
to authorize the Secretary to expend $1,000,000 to enhance public
access to the project.
SEC. 315. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, Pinole
Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under section 1135 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified
to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the
cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project
if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 316. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA.
Upon completion of the modifications to the Prado Dam element of the
project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, California,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4113), the Memorandum of Agreement for the Operation
for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Water Conservation between the
Department of the Army and the Orange County Water District (including
all the conditions and stipulations in the memorandum) shall remain in
effect for volumes of water made available prior to such modifications.
SEC. 317. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel,
California, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is modified to direct the
Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 318. SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control, Sacramento River, California,
authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the
control of the floods of the Mississippi River and of the Sacramento
River, California, and for other purposes'', approved March 1, 1917 (39
Stat. 949), and modified by section 102 of the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 649), section 301(b)(3)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3110), title
I of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1999 (112
Stat. 1841), and section 305 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1999 (113 Stat. 299), is further modified to direct the Secretary to
credit the non-Federal interest up to $4,000,000 toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project for costs incurred by the non-Federal
interest in carrying out activities (including the provision of lands,
easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged material disposal
areas) associated with environmental compliance for the project if the
Secretary determines that the activities are integral to the project.
SEC. 319. SAN LORENZO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control, San Lorenzo River, California,
authorized by section 101(a)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3663), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit
not more than $2,000,000 toward the non-Federal share of the cost of
the project for the cost of the work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project
if the Secretary determines the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 320. TERMINUS DAM, KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control and water supply, Terminus Dam, Kaweah
River, California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667) and modified by
section 307 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
299), is further modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the
project, at a total cost of $50,000,000.
SEC. 321. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Upper
Guadalupe River, California, described as the Bypass Channel Plan of
the Chief of Engineers dated August 19, 1998, authorized by section
101(a)(9) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
275), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project,
at a total cost of $140,328,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$70,164,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost of $70,164,000. The non-
Federal share of the cost of the project shall be subject to section
103(a)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2213(a)(3)).
SEC. 322. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Walnut Creek Channel,
California, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the
Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before
the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary
determines that the work is integral to the project and to authorize
the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in
determining the Federal interest in the project.
SEC. 323. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALIFORNIA.
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment,
Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 324. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wildcat/San Pablo
Creek Phase II, California, being carried out under section 206 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified
to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the
cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project
if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project
and to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem
restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in the
project.
SEC. 325. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Section 310 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
301) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Credit.--After completion of the study, the Secretary shall
credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost
of nourishment and renourishment associated with the shore protection
project incurred by the non-Federal interest to respond to damages to
Brevard County beaches that are the result of a Federal navigation
project, as determined in the final report for the study.''.
SEC. 326. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA.
The project for shore protection, Gasparilla and Estero Island
segments, Lee County, Florida, authorized under section 201 of the
Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073) by Senate Resolution dated
December 17, 1970, and by House Resolution dated December 15, 1970, and
modified by section 309 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(114 Stat. 2602), is further modified to direct the Secretary to credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of
work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the
cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that
the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 327. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA.
The project for shore protection, Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
1819), deauthorized under section 1001(b) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), and reauthorized by
section 364(2)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113
Stat. 313), is modified to direct the Secretary to construct the
project, at a total cost of $12,926,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $6,547,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,379,000, and at
an estimated average annual cost of $925,000 for periodic nourishment
over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $468,500 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of $456,500.
SEC. 328. MANATEE HARBOR, FLORIDA.
The project for navigation, Manatee Harbor, Florida, authorized by
section 202(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100
Stat. 4093) and modified by section 102(j) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4612), is further modified--
(1) to include the construction of an extension of the south
channel a distance of approximately 1584 feet consistent with
the general reevaluation report, dated April 2002, prepared by
the Jacksonville District Corps of Engineers, at a total cost
of $9,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,350,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,450,000;
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project the cost of in-kind services
and materials provided for the project by the non-Federal
interest; and
(3) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design,
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if
the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 329. ROSE BAY, VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Rose Bay, Volusia
County, Florida, being carried out under section 206 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to
direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project the costs incurred by the Florida Department of
Transportation in constructing that portion of United States Highway 1
bridge that the Secretary determines is required for the proper
functioning of the project.
SEC. 330. TAMPA HARBOR, FLORIDA.
The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, Florida, referred to in
section 4 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of September 22, 1922 (42 Stat.
1042), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design,
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest before
the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary
determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 331. TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FLORIDA.
The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida,
authorized by section 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 (113 Stat. 276) is modified to direct the Secretary to credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of
planning, design, and construction work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project
if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 332. LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, IDAHO.
The project for flood damage reduction, Little Wood River, Gooding,
Idaho, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of
1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified--
(1) to authorize the non-Federal interest to provide any
portion of the non-Federal share of the cost of the project in
the form of services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind
contributions;
(2) to authorize the non-Federal interest to use funds made
available under any other Federal program toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project if such use of the
funds is permitted under the other Federal program; and
(3) to direct the Secretary, in calculating the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project, to make a determination under
section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) on the non-Federal interest's ability to
pay.
SEC. 333. INDIANA HARBOR, INDIANA.
The project for environmental dredging, Indiana Harbor, Indiana,
being carried out under section 312 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1252 note; 104 Stat. 4639), is modified to
direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project the cost of design work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project
if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 334. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, INDIANA.
The project for flood control, Little Calumet River, Indiana,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4115), is modified to authorize the Secretary to carry
out the project in accordance with the post authorization change report
dated August 2000, at a total cost of $186,300,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $136,600,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$49,700,000.
SEC. 335. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER BASIN (CADY MARSH DITCH), INDIANA.
The project for flood control, Little Calumet River Basin (Cady Marsh
Ditch), Indiana, authorized by section 401(a) the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4115), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to construct the project, at a total cost of $23,146,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $17,359,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $5,787,000.
SEC. 336. LONG LAKE, INDIANA.
(a) Cost Sharing.--The project for ecosystem restoration, Long Lake,
Indiana, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the
Secretary to carry out the components of the project located on Federal
land at full Federal expense.
(b) Reimbursement.--After completion of the project referred to in
subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the
Secretary of the Interior of an amount equal to the costs of the
project allocated to benefits to the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore.
SEC. 337. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA.
The project for flood control, Indianapolis on West Fork of White
River, Indiana, authorized by section 5 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing the construction of certain public works on rivers and
harbors for flood control, and other purposes'', approved June 22, 1936
(49 Stat. 1586), and modified by section 323 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3716) and section 322 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 303-304), is further
modified to authorize the Secretary to undertake the riverfront
alterations described in the Central Indianapolis Waterfront Concept
Plan, dated February 1994, for the Fall Creek Reach feature, at a total
cost of $28,545,000.
SEC. 338. WOLF LAKE, INDIANA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wolf Lake, Indiana,
being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to
credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost
of planning, design, and construction work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 339. HARLAN COUNTY, KENTUCKY.
The Harlan County, Kentucky, element of the project for flood
control, Levisa and Tug Fork of the Big Sandy and Cumberland Rivers,
West Virginia, Virginia, and Kentucky, authorized by section 202(a) of
the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat.
1339), is modified to direct the Secretary to take measures to provide
a 100-year level of flood protection.
SEC. 340. AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, LOUISIANA, EAST BATON ROUGE
PARISH WATERSHED.
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Amite River
and Tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Watershed,
authorized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 (113 Stat. 277), is modified to direct the Secretary to carry
out the project with the cost sharing for the project determined in
accordance with section 103(a) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(a)) as in effect on October 11, 1996, at a
total cost of $158,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$102,700,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $55,300,000.
SEC. 341. J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, MISSISSIPPI RIVER TO
SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA.
The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, J. Bennett
Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to Shreveport, Louisiana,
authorized by section 601(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4142) and modified by section 4(h) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4016), section 102(p) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4613), section
301(b)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3710), and section 316 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(114 Stat. 2572), is further modified to authorize the purchase and
reforesting of lands which have been cleared or converted to
agricultural uses, at a total cost of $33,000,000.
SEC. 342. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOUISIANA.
The Mississippi Delta Region project, Louisiana, authorized as part
of the project for hurricane-flood protection on Lake Pontchartrain,
Louisiana, by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat.
1077) and modified by section 365 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3739), is further modified to direct the
Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the costs of relocating oyster beds in the Davis Pond project
area if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
Mississippi Delta Region project.
SEC. 343. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (EAST OF HARVEY CANAL),
LOUISIANA.
Section 328 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
304-305) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``operation and maintenance'' and
inserting ``operation, maintenance, rehabilitation,
repair, and replacement''; and
(B) by striking ``Algiers Channel'' and inserting
``Algiers Canal Levees''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the project
shall be 35 percent.''.
SEC. 344. UNION RIVER, MAINE.
The project for navigation, Union River, Maine, authorized by the
first section of the Act entitled ``An Act making appropriations for
the construction, repair, and preservation of certain public works on
rivers and harbors, and for other purposes'', approved June 3, 1896 (29
Stat. 215), is modified by redesignating as an anchorage area that
portion of the project consisting of a 6-foot turning basin and lying
northerly of a line commencing at a point N315,975.13, E1,004,424.86
thence running north 61 degrees 27 minutes 20.71 seconds west about
132.34 feet to a point N316,038.37, E1,004,308.61.
SEC. 345. CASS RIVER, SPAULDING TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN.
(a) In General.--The project for flood damage reduction, Cass River,
Spaulding Township, Saginaw County, Michigan, being carried out under
section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is
modified to incorporate flood control works constructed by the non-
Federal interests between Sheridan Road and East Street (M-13) if the
Secretary determines that the inclusion of such flood control works is
feasible.
(b) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share
of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 346. DETROIT RIVER SHORELINE, DETROIT, MICHIGAN.
(a) In General.--The project for emergency streambank and shoreline
protection, Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan, being carried
out under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r),
is modified to include measures to enhance public access.
(b) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of Federal funds
that may be expended for the project shall be $3,000,000.
SEC. 347. WATER RESOURCES INSTITUTE, MUSKEGON, MICHIGAN.
(a) In General.--The project for emergency streambank and shoreline
protection, Water Resources Institute, Muskegon, Michigan, being
carried out under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33
U.S.C. 701r), is modified to provide for completion of shoreline
protection measures in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications for Grand Valley State University, Lake Michigan Center,
dated August 6, 2001.
(b) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of Federal funds
that may be expended for the project shall be $2,000,000.
(c) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share
of the cost of the project the cost of design and implementation of
shoreline protection measures carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the
Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 348. SAGINAW RIVER, BAY CITY, MICHIGAN.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the
project for emergency streambank protection, Saginaw River, Bay City,
Michigan, being carried out under section 14 of the Flood Control Act
of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), shall be $2,000,000.
SEC. 349. ADA, MINNESOTA.
(a) In General.--The project for flood damage reduction, Wild Rice
River, Ada, Minnesota, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in
determining the Federal interest in the project.
(b) Evaluation of Benefits and Costs.--In evaluating the economic
benefits and costs for the project, the Secretary shall not consider
the emergency levee adjacent to Judicial Ditch No. 51 in the
determination of conditions existing prior to construction of the
project.
(c) Special Rule.--In evaluating and implementing the project, the
Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in the
financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that
the Secretary's evaluation indicates that applying such section is
necessary to implement the project.
SEC. 350. DULUTH HARBOR, MCQUADE ROAD, MINNESOTA.
(a) In General.--The project for navigation, Duluth Harbor, McQuade
Road, Minnesota, being carried out under section 107 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and modified by section 321 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2605), is further
modified to authorize the Secretary to provide public access and
recreational facilities as generally described in the Detailed Project
Report and Environmental Assessment, McQuade Road Harbor of Refuge,
Duluth, Minnesota, dated August 1999.
(b) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of Federal funds
that may be expended for the project shall be $5,000,000.
SEC. 351. GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the
project for flood damage reduction, Granite Falls, Minnesota, being
carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33
U.S.C. 701s), shall be $12,000,000.
SEC. 352. RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA.
The project for flood control, Red Lake River at Crookston,
Minnesota, authorized by section 101(a)(23) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 278), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to construct the project, at a total cost of $25,000,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $16,250,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $8,750,000.
SEC. 353. SILVER BAY, MINNESOTA.
The project for navigation, Silver Bay, Minnesota, authorized by
section 2 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 19),
is modified to include operation and maintenance of the general
navigation facilities as a Federal responsibility.
SEC. 354. TACONITE HARBOR, MINNESOTA.
The project for navigation, Taconite Harbor, Minnesota, carried out
under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577),
is modified to include operation and maintenance of the general
navigation facilities as a Federal responsibility.
SEC. 355. TWO HARBORS, MINNESOTA.
(a) In General.--The project for navigation, Two Harbors, Minnesota,
being carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960
(33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to include construction of a dredged
material disposal facility at the J&J Castings site, including actions
required to clear the site.
(b) Lands, Easements, and Rights-of-Way.--Non-Federal interests shall
be responsible for providing all lands, easements, rights-of-way, and
relocations necessary for the construction of the dredged material
disposal facility.
(c) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of Federal funds
that may be expended for the project shall be $5,000,000.
SEC. 356. BOIS BRULE DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, MISSOURI.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the
project for flood damage reduction, Bois Brule Drainage and Levee
District, Missouri, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), shall be $25,000,000.
SEC. 357. TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, AND KANSAS CITY,
KANSAS.
The project for flood damage reduction, Turkey Creek Basin, Kansas
City, Missouri, and Kansas City, Kansas, authorized by section
101(a)(24) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
278), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 358. ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NEW YORK.
The project for shoreline protection, Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York,
authorized by section 554 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3781), is modified to authorize the Secretary to
construct the project, at a total cost of $18,000,000.
SEC. 359. TIMES BEACH, BUFFALO, NEW YORK.
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, Times
Beach, Buffalo, New York, being carried out under section 1135 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4251), is modified
to direct the Secretary to credit not more than $750,000 toward the
non-Federal share of the cost of the project for the cost of planning,
design, and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the
Secretary determines the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 360. PORT OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY.
The Secretary may not require as an item of local cooperation in the
construction of the project for navigation, Port of New York and New
Jersey, New York and New Jersey, authorized by section 101(a)(2) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), that the non-
Federal interest agree that the container facilities at the former
Military Ocean Terminal at the Bayonne, New Jersey, site along the Port
Jersey Channel be operational prior to construction of the 50-foot deep
Port Jersey Channel. Such container facilities may be made operational
concurrent with the navigation project.
SEC. 361. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM.
Section 553(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110
Stat. 3781) is amended to read as follows:
``(c) New York State Canal System Defined.--In this section, the term
`New York State Canal System' means the 524 miles of navigable canal
that comprise the New York State Canal System, including the Erie,
Cayuga-Seneca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals and the historic alignments
of these canals, including the cities of Albany and Buffalo.''.
SEC. 362. ASHTABULA RIVER, OHIO.
The project for environmental dredging, Ashtabula River, Ohio, being
carried out under section 312 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1990 (33 U.S.C. 1252 note; 104 Stat. 4639; 110 Stat. 3679), is modified
to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the
cost of the project the cost of design and construction work provided
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 363. WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE CONTROL, MCKENZIE SUBBASIN,
OREGON.
(a) In General.--The project for environmental restoration,
Willamette River Temperature Control, McKenzie Subbasin, Oregon,
authorized by section 101(a)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665) and modified by section 344 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 308), is further modified
to direct the Secretary to pay, subject to the availability of
appropriations, compensation for losses to small business attributable
to the implementation of the draw down conducted as a part of project
implementation in 2002.
(b) Establishment of Program.--Not later than 120 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish, and provide
public notice of, a program--
(1) to receive claims for compensation for losses to small
business attributable to the implementation of the draw down
conducted as a part of project implementation in 2002;
(2) to evaluate claims for such losses; and
(3) to pay claims for such losses.
(c) Implementation of Program.--In carrying out the program
established under subsection (b), the Secretary shall provide--
(1) public notice of the existence of the program sufficient
to reach those in the area that may have suffered losses to
small businesses;
(2) a period for the submission of claims of not fewer than
45 days and not greater than 75 days from the date of the first
public notice of the existence of the program;
(3) for the evaluation of each claim submitted to the
Secretary under the program and a determination of whether the
claim constitutes a loss to a small business on or before the
last day of the 30-day period beginning on the date of
submission of the claim; and
(4) for the payment of each claim that the Secretary
determines constitutes a loss to a small business on or before
the last day of the 30-day period beginning on the date of the
Secretary's determination.
(d) Loss to a Small Business Defined.--In this section, the term
``loss to a small business'' means documented financial losses
associated with commercial activity of a small business that can be
attributed to the turbidity levels in the McKenzie River being higher
than those anticipated in the original planning documents and public
announcements existing before the initiation of the draw down in 2002.
Commercial losses include decline in sales, loss of revenue (including
loss of revenue from canceled or delayed reservations at lodging
establishments), and any other financial losses that can be shown to be
associated with the elevated turbidity levels in the McKenzie River in
2002.
(e) Payment of Claims.--The payment of claims for losses to small
businesses shall be a Federal responsibility.
SEC. 364. LACKAWANNA RIVER AT OLYPHANT, PENNSYLVANIA.
The project for flood control, Lackawanna River at Olyphant,
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 101(16) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4803), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to construct the project, at a total cost of $20,000,000.
SEC. 365. LACKAWANNA RIVER AT SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA.
The project for flood control, Lackawanna River at Scranton,
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 101(17) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4803), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to construct the project, at a total cost of $23,000,000.
SEC. 366. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA.
The Secretary may take such action as may be necessary, including
construction of a breakwater, to prevent shoreline erosion between .07
and 2.7 miles south of Pennsylvania State Route 994 on the east shore
of Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
SEC. 367. SHERADEN PARK STREAM AND CHARTIERS CREEK, ALLEGHENY COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Sheraden Park Stream
and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, being carried out
under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33
U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit up to
$400,000 toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for
planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before
the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary
determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 368. SOLOMON'S CREEK, WILKES-BARRE, PENNSYLVANIA.
The project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4124), is modified to include as a project element the
project for flood control for Solomon's Creek, Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania.
SEC. 369. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA.
Section 313(h)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106
Stat. 4847; 107 Stat. 407) is amended by striking ``Armstrong, Bedford,
Blair, Cambria, Clearfield, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, Huntingdon,
Indiana, Juniata, Mifflin, Somerset, Snyder and, Westmoreland
Counties'' and inserting ``Allegheny, Armstrong, Bedford, Blair,
Cambria, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana,
Juniata, Somerset, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties''.
SEC. 370. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.
In carrying out the project for flood control, Wyoming Valley,
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), the Secretary shall
coordinate with non-Federal interests to review opportunities for
increased public access.
SEC. 371. LITTLE LIMESTONE CREEK, JONESBOROUGH, TENNESSEE.
In evaluating and implementing the project for flood damage
reduction, Little Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, Tennessee, under
section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), the
Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in the
financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184), to the extent that
the Secretary's evaluation indicates that applying such section is
necessary to implement the project.
SEC. 372. BOWIE COUNTY LEVEE, TEXAS.
The project for flood control, Red River Below Denison Dam, Texas and
Oklahoma, authorized by section 10 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (60
Stat. 647), is modified to direct the Secretary to implement the Bowie
County Levee feature of the project in accordance with the plan defined
as Alternative B in the draft document entitled ``Bowie County Local
Flood Protection, Red River, Texas Project Design Memorandum No. 1,
Bowie County Levee'', dated April 1997.
SEC. 373. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TEXAS.
The project for flood control, Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4125), is modified--
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design,
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if
the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project; and
(2) to direct the Secretary, in calculating the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project, to make a determination under
section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) on the non-Federal interest's ability to
pay .
SEC. 374. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TEXAS.
The project for ecosystem restoration and storm damage reduction,
North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas, authorized by section
556 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 353), is
modified to include recreation as a project purpose.
SEC. 375. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
The project for flood control, San Antonio Channel, Texas, authorized
by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1259) as part
of the comprehensive plan for flood protection on the Guadalupe and San
Antonio Rivers in Texas and modified by section 103 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2921) and section 335 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2611), is
further modified to authorize the Secretary to credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of construction work
carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the
cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that
the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 376. ELIZABETH RIVER, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA.
Section 358 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
312) is amended by striking ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting ``May
4, 1997''.
SEC. 377. GREAT BRIDGE, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA.
The project for navigation at Great Bridge, Virginia, Highway 168
over the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Chesapeake, Virginia,
authorized by section 339(h) of the National Highway System Designation
Act of 1995 (109 Stat. 606) is modified to authorize the Secretary to
construct the project, at a total cost of $48,000,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $39,400,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $8,600,000.
SEC. 378. ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, VIRGINIA.
The project for flood control, Roanoke River Upper Basin, Virginia,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4126) and modified by section 110 of the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 650), is further
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project, at a
total cost of $64,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$42,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $22,200,000.
SEC. 379. BLAIR AND SITCUM WATERWAYS, TACOMA HARBOR, WASHINGTON.
(a) In General.--The project for navigation, Blair and Sitcum
Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington, authorized by section 202(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4096), is
modified to direct the Secretary to review the locally prepared plan
for the Blair and Sitcum Waterways, Washington, and, if the Secretary
determines that the plan meets the evaluation and design standards of
the Corps of Engineers and that the plan is feasible, to authorize the
Secretary to carry out the plan, at a Federal cost of $4,240,000.
(b) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share
of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 380. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.
Section 579(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110
Stat. 3790; 113 Stat. 312) is amended by striking ``$47,000,000'' and
inserting ``$89,000,000''.
SEC. 381. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN.
The project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin, authorized
by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1852, is modified to direct
the Secretary to deepen the upstream reach of the navigation channel
from 12 feet to 18 feet, at a total cost of $300,000.
SEC. 382. CONTINUATION OF PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 1001(b)(2) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)), the following
projects shall remain authorized to be carried out by the Secretary:
(1) The project for navigation, Fall River Harbor,
Massachusetts, authorized by section 101 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731).
(2) The project for flood control, Agana River, Guam,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4127).
(b) Limitation.--A project described in subsection (a) shall not be
authorized for construction after the last day of the 7-year period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, unless, during such
period, funds have been obligated for the construction (including
planning and design) of the project.
SEC. 383. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATION.
That portion of the project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor,
Wisconsin, consisting of the channel in the south part of the outer
harbor, deauthorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962
(76 Stat. 1176), may be carried out by the Secretary if the Secretary
determines that it is feasible.
SEC. 384. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.
The following projects are not authorized after the date of enactment
of this Act:
(1) Bridgeport harbor, connecticut.--The portion of the
project for navigation, Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut,
authorized by the River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 (46
Stat. 919), consisting of an 18-foot channel in Yellow Mill
River and described as follows: Beginning at a point along the
eastern limit of the existing project, N123,649.75,
E481,920.54, thence running northwesterly about 52.64 feet to a
point N123,683.03, E481,879.75, thence running northeasterly
about 1,442.21 feet to a point N125,030.08, E482,394.96, thence
running northeasterly about 139.52 feet to a point along the
east limit of the existing channel, N125,133.87, E482,488.19,
thence running southwesterly about 1,588.98 feet to the point
of origin.
(2) Island end river, massachusetts.--The portion of the
project for navigation, Island End River, Massachusetts,
carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of
1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), described as follows: Beginning at a
point along the eastern limit of the existing project,
N507,348.98, E721,180.01, thence running northeast about 35
feet to a point N507,384.17, E721,183.36, thence running
northeast about 324 feet to a point N507,590.51, E721,433.17,
thence running northeast about 345 feet to a point along the
northern limit of the existing project, N507,927.29,
E721,510.29, thence running southeast about 25 feet to a point
N507,921.71, E721,534.66, thence running southwest about 354
feet to a point N507,576.65, E721,455.64, thence running
southwest about 357 feet to the point of origin.
(3) City waterway, tacoma, washington.--The portion of the
project for navigation, City Waterway, Tacoma, Washington,
authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor
Appropriations Act of June 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 347), consisting
of the last 1,000 linear feet of the inner portion of the
waterway beginning at Station 70+00 and ending at Station
80+00.
SEC. 385. LAND CONVEYANCES.
(a) Milford, Kansas.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the provisions of this section,
the Secretary shall convey by quitclaim deed without
consideration to the Geary County Fire Department, Milford,
Kansas, all right, title, and interest of the United States in
and to a parcel of land consisting of approximately 7.4 acres
located in Geary County, Kansas, for construction, operation,
and maintenance of a fire station.
(2) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage
and the description of the real property referred to in
paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is
satisfactory to the Secretary.
(3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the property
conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in public
ownership or to be used for any purpose other than a fire
station, all right, title, and interest in and to the property
shall revert to the United States, at the option of the United
States.
(b) Hickory Point, Lake Eufaula, Oklahoma.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the provisions of this section,
the Secretary shall convey by quitclaim deed without
consideration to the Choctaw Nation all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to approximately 265 acres
in the vicinity of Hickory Point, Lake Eufaula, Oklahoma,
together with any improvements thereon, for public ownership
and use for public recreation.
(2) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage
and the legal description of the real property referred to in
paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is
satisfactory to the Secretary.
(3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the property
conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in public
ownership or to be used for public recreation, all right,
title, and interest in and to the property shall revert to the
United States, at the option of the United States.
(c) Boardman, Oregon.--Section 501(g)(1) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3751) is amended--
(1) by striking ``city of Boardman,'' and inserting ``the
Boardman Park and Recreation District, Boardman,''; and
(2) by striking ``such city'' and inserting ``the city of
Boardman''.
(d) Generally Applicable Provisions.--
(1) Applicability of property screening provisions.--Section
2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to any
conveyance under this section.
(2) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary may
require that any conveyance under this section be subject to
such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary considers
appropriate and necessary to protect the interests of the
United States.
(3) Costs of conveyance.--An entity to which a conveyance is
made under this section shall be responsible for all reasonable
and necessary costs, including real estate transaction and
environmental compliance costs, associated with the conveyance.
(4) Liability.--An entity to which a conveyance is made under
this section shall hold the United States harmless from any
liability with respect to activities carried out, on or after
the date of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed. The
United States shall remain responsible for any liability with
respect to activities carried out, before such date, on the
real property conveyed.
SEC. 386. EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY INTERESTS AND USE
RESTRICTIONS.
(a) In General.--With respect to each deed listed in subsection (b),
the reversionary interests and use restrictions relating to industrial
use purposes are extinguished.
(b) Affected Deeds.--The deeds with the following county auditor's
file numbers are referred to in subsection (a):
(1) Auditor's Instrument No. 399218 of Nez Perce County,
Idaho--2.07 acres.
(2) Auditor's Instrument No. 487437 of Nez Perce County,
Idaho--7.32 acres.
(c) No Effect of Other Rights.--Nothing in this section affects the
remaining rights and interests of the Corps of Engineers for authorized
project purposes.
TITLE IV--STUDIES
SEC. 401. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM.
Section 456 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
332) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``If the Government
of Canada and the Government of the United States have entered into a
bilateral agreement that provides for the financial participation of
the Government of Canada in the study, the Secretary may accept such
participation.''.
SEC. 402. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM.
Section 455 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
330-332) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) In-Kind Contributions for Study.--The non-Federal interest may
provide up to 100 percent of the non-Federal share required under
subsection (f) in the form of services, materials, supplies, or other
in-kind contributions.''.
SEC. 403. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal expense, a study to determine
the feasibility of providing navigation improvements at St. George,
Alaska.
SEC. 404. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WATERWAY, ILLINOIS,
IOWA, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, AND WISCONSIN.
The Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of
the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway Restructured System
Navigation Feasibility Study, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and
Wisconsin, no later than July 1, 2004.
SEC. 405. HAMILTON, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary is directed to continue planning, preconstruction,
engineering, and design efforts on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River
Basins Comprehensive Study-Hamilton City Flood Damage Reduction and
Ecosystem Restoration Initial Project and shall include in the study an
area 2 miles north and 4 miles south of State Highway 32.
SEC. 406. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA.
Section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat.
2636) is amended by striking ``32 months'' and inserting ``44 months''.
SEC. 407. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study to determine the
feasibility of, and alternatives for, measures to protect water
diversion facilities and fish protective screen facilities in the
vicinity of river mile 178 on the Sacramento River, California.
SEC. 408. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of the beneficial use of dredged material from the San
Francisco Bay in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California,
including the benefits and impacts of salinity in the Delta and the
benefits to navigation, flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration,
water quality, salinity control, water supply reliability, and
recreation.
(b) Cooperation.--In conducting the study, the Secretary shall
cooperate with the California Department of Water Resources and
appropriate Federal and State entities in developing options for the
beneficial use of dredged material from San Francisco Bay for the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area.
(c) Review.--The study shall include a review of the feasibility of
using Sherman Island as a rehandling site for levee maintenance
material, as well as for ecosystem restoration. The review may include
monitoring a pilot project using up to 150,000 cubic yards of dredged
material and being carried out at the Sherman Island site, examining
larger-scale use of dredged materials from the San Francisco Bay and
Suisun Bay Channel, and analyzing the feasibility of the potential use
of saline materials from the San Francisco Bay for both rehandling and
ecosystem restoration purposes.
SEC. 409. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
including the northern end of Tybee Island extending from the north
terminal groin to the mouth of Lazaretto Creek as a part of the project
for beach erosion control, Tybee Island, Georgia, carried out under
section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5).
SEC. 410. CALUMET HARBOR, ILLINOIS.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project for navigation at Calumet Harbor, Illinois.
SEC. 411. PADUCAH, KENTUCKY.
The Secretary is authorized to complete a rehabilitation evaluation
report for the project for flood damage reduction, Paducah, Kentucky,
and, if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, proceed
to preconstruction engineering and design for rehabilitation of the
project.
SEC. 412. WEST FELICIANA PARISH, LOUISIANA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project for riverfront development, including enhanced
public access, recreation, and environmental restoration, on the
Mississippi River in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana.
SEC. 413. CITY OF MACKINAC ISLAND, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project for navigation at the city of Mackinac Island,
Michigan.
SEC. 414. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.
Section 425(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114
Stat. 2638) is amended by inserting ``Lake Michigan and'' before ``the
Chicago River''.
SEC. 415. MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
modifying the project for the Mississippi River (Regulating Works),
between the Ohio and Missouri Rivers, Missouri and Illinois, to provide
for navigation and environmental restoration enhancements.
SEC. 416. ARTHUR KILL CHANNEL AND MORSES CREEK TO PERTH AMBOY, NEW
JERSEY.
The Secretary shall reevaluate the results of the study for the
project for navigation, Arthur Kill Channel and Morses Creek to Perth
Amboy, New Jersey, to determine whether the benefits of the project
have increased as a result of a change in circumstances. In conducting
the reevaluation, the Secretary shall review the locally prepared study
entitled ``Pre-Feasibility Study for Channel Improvements--Arthur Kill
from Morses Creek to Perth Amboy and Raritan Bay Approaches''.
SEC. 417. PUEBLO OF ZUNI, NEW MEXICO.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out projects for water resources development, environmental
restoration, and natural resources protection for the Pueblo of Zuni,
New Mexico, under section 203 of the Water Resources Development Act of
2000 (33 U.S.C. 2269).
SEC. 418. HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY.
In carrying out the study for environmental restoration, Hudson-
Raritan Estuary, New York and New Jersey, the Secretary shall establish
and utilize watershed restoration teams composed of estuary restoration
experts from the Corps of Engineers, the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, and the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey and other experts designated by the Secretary for the purpose of
developing habitat restoration and water quality enhancement.
SEC. 419. LAKE CARL BLACKWELL, STILLWATER, OKLAHOMA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem
restoration at Lake Carl Blackwell, Stillwater, Oklahoma.
SEC. 420. SAC AND FOX NATION, OKLAHOMA.
The Secretary shall complete a water and related land resource
conservation and management plan for the Sac and Fox Nation, Oklahoma,
under section 203 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (33
U.S.C. 2269).
SEC. 421. SUTHERLIN, OREGON.
(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of water resources
along Sutherlin Creek in the vicinity of Sutherlin, Oregon, to
determine the feasibility of carrying out a project to restore and
enhance aquatic resources using a combination of structural and
bioengineering techniques and, if the Secretary determines that the
project is feasible, may carry out the project.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $2,500,000.
SEC. 422. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS, OREGON.
(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of undertaking ecosystem restoration and fish passage
improvements on rivers throughout the State of Oregon.
(b) Requirements.--In carrying out the study, the Secretary shall--
(1) work in coordination with the State of Oregon, local
governments, and other Federal agencies; and
(2) place emphasis on--
(A) fish passage and conservation and restoration
strategies to benefit species that are listed or
proposed for listing as threatened or endangered
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and
(B) other watershed restoration objectives.
(c) Pilot Program.--
(1) In general.--In conjunction with conducting the study
under subsection (a), the Secretary may carry out pilot
projects to demonstrate the effectiveness of ecosystem
restoration and fish passages.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this subsection.
SEC. 423. NORTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND
PROTECTION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in
the counties of Lackawanna, Lycoming, Susquehanna, Wyoming, Pike,
Wayne, Sullivan, Bradford, Northumberland, Union, Snyder, and Montour,
Pennsylvania, particularly as related to abandoned mine drainage
abatement and reestablishment of stream and river channels.
SEC. 424. BROWNSVILLE SHIP CHANNEL, TEXAS.
(a) Mitigation.--In carrying out the study to determine the
feasibility of the project for navigation, Brownsville Ship Channel,
Brownsville, Texas, the Secretary shall examine the feasibility of
restoring wetlands in the vicinity of the Bahia Grande, Port Isabel,
Texas, for the purpose of mitigating project impacts.
(b) Credit.--If the Secretary determines that the wetlands
restoration referred to in subsection (a) is appropriate to meet
mitigation requirements for the project and the non-Federal interest
undertakes such restoration before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project, the Secretary shall credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of planning, design, and construction of the
project the cost of such restoration work carried out by the non-
Federal interest if the Secretary determines that the work is integral
to the project.
SEC. 425. SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TEXAS.
In conducting a feasibility study for shore protection and related
improvements between Sabine Pass and the entrance to Galveston Bay,
Texas, the Secretary may include any benefits related to the use of
State Highway 87 as an emergency evacuation route in the determination
of national economic development benefits of the project.
SEC. 426. CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary shall conduct a river basin study for the Chehalis
River basin, Washington, including a study of the uses of the basin's
water resources to assist users in developing a fair and equitable
distribution of such resources.
SEC. 427. SPRAGUE, LINCOLN COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary may accept from the non-Federal interest to pay all or
a part of the non-Federal share of the cost of feasibility study for
the project for flood control in the vicinity of Sprague, Lincoln
County, Washington, funds made available under any other Federal
program if such use of the funds is permitted under the Federal
program.
SEC. 428. MONONGAHELA RIVER BASIN, NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in
the watersheds of the Monongahela River basin lying within the counties
of Hancock, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, Doddridge,
Monongalia, Marion, Harrison, Taylor, Barbour, Preston, Tucker,
Mineral, Grant, Gilmer, Brooke, and Rithchie, West Virginia,
particularly as related to abandoned mine drainage abatement.
SEC. 429. WAUWATOSA, WISCONSIN.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and environmental
restoration, Menomonee River and Underwood Creek, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
SEC. 501. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS.
(a) In General.--Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the
Secretary shall be responsible for maintenance of the following
navigation channels constructed or improved by the non-Federal interest
if the Secretary determines that such maintenance is economically
justified and environmentally acceptable and that the channel was
constructed in accordance with applicable permits and appropriate
engineering and design standards:
(1) Pix Bayou navigation channel, Chambers County, Texas.
(2) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, Pidgeon Industrial Park,
Memphis Harbor, Tennessee.
(3) Racine Harbor, Wisconsin.
(b) Completion of Assessment.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of receipt of a request from a non-Federal interest for Federal
assumption of maintenance of a channel listed in subsection (a), the
Secretary shall make a determination as provided in subsection (a) and
advise the non-Federal interest of the Secretary's determination.
(c) Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas.--The Secretary shall remove sunken
vessels and debris between miles 35 and 43 of the Channel to Orange,
Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas, for the purpose of improving navigation
safety and reducing the risk to the public.
SEC. 502. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may provide technical, planning, and
design assistance to non-Federal interests for carrying out watershed
management, restoration, and development projects at the locations
described in subsection (d).
(b) Specific Measures.--Assistance provided under subsection (a) may
be in support of non-Federal projects for the following purposes:
(1) Management and restoration of water quality.
(2) Control and remediation of toxic sediments.
(3) Restoration of degraded streams, rivers, wetlands, and
other waterbodies to their natural condition as a means to
control flooding, excessive erosion, and sedimentation.
(4) Protection and restoration of watersheds, including urban
watersheds.
(5) Demonstration of technologies for nonstructural measures
to reduce destructive impacts of flooding.
(c) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost of
assistance provided under subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
(d) Project Locations.--The locations referred to in subsection (a)
are the following:
(1) Choctawhatchee, Pea, and Yellow Rivers watershed, in
Barbour, Bullock, Coffee, Covington, Crenshaw, Dale, Geneva,
Henry, Houston, and Pike Counties, Alabama.
(2) Spring Branch watershed, Huntsville, Alabama.
(3) Cucamonga basin, Upland, California.
(4) Tuolumne County, California.
(5) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois.
(6) Those portions of the watersheds of the Concord, Charles,
Blackstone, Neponset, Taunton, Nashua, Shawsheen, and Merrimack
Rivers, Massachusetts, lying within the Interstate Route 495
corridor.
(7) Jackson Brook watershed, New Jersey.
(8) Those portions of the watersheds of the Beaver, Upper
Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower Allegheny, Kiskiminetas, Lower
Monongahela, Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Rivers lying
within the counties of Beaver, Butler, Lawrence, and Mercer,
Pennsylvania.
(9) Southampton Creek watershed, Southampton, Pennsylvania.
(10) Unami Creek watershed, Milford Township, Pennsylvania.
(11) Amite River basin, Louisiana.
(12) Iberville Parish, East Atchafalaya River basin,
Louisiana.
(13) Genesee River watershed, New York.
(14) Tonawanda Creek watershed, New York.
(15) Buffalo River watershed, New York.
(16) Eighteenmile Creek watershed, Niagara County, New York.
(17) Cattaragus Creek watershed, New York.
(18) Oswego River basin, New York.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.
SEC. 503. DAM SAFETY.
(a) Assistance.--The Secretary may provide assistance to enhance dam
safety at the following locations:
(1) Mountain Park Dam, Mountain Park, Georgia.
(2) Barber Dam, Ada County, Idaho.
(3) Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho.
(4) Lost Valley Dam, Adams County, Idaho.
(5) Salmon Falls Dam, Twin Falls County, Idaho.
(6) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York.
(7) Lake Carl Blackwell Dam, Stillwater, Oklahoma.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $6,000,000.
SEC. 504. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATIONS.
(a) In General.--Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the
Secretary shall evaluate the structural integrity and effectiveness of
a project for flood damage reduction and, if the Secretary determines
that the project does not meet such minimum standards as the Secretary
may establish and, absent action by the Secretary, the project will
fail, the Secretary may take such action as may be necessary to restore
the integrity and effectiveness of the project.
(b) Priority.--The Secretary shall evaluate under subsection (a) the
following projects:
(1) Project for flood damage reduction, Arkansas River
Levees, river mile 205 to river mile 308.4, Arkansas.
(2) Project for flood damage reduction, Marianna Borough,
Pennsylvania.
(3) Project for flood damage reduction, Nonconnah Creek,
Tennessee.
SEC. 505. FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS.
Section 212(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (33
U.S.C. 2332(e); 114 Stat. 2599) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (27);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (28) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(29) La Crosse County, Wisconsin;
``(30) Crawford County, Wisconsin;
``(31) Buffalo County, Wisconsin;
``(32) Calhoun County, Illinois;
``(33) Saint Charles County, Missouri;
``(34) Saint Louis County, Missouri;
``(35) Dubuque County, Iowa;
``(36) Scott County, Iowa;
``(37) Rock Island County, Illinois;
``(38) Ascension Parish, Louisiana;
``(39) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana;
``(40) Iberville Parish, Louisiana; and
``(41) Livingston Parish, Louisiana.''.
SEC. 506. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AUTHORIZED PROJECTS.
Section 219(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106
Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 334) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (8) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(20);
``(10) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(25);
``(11) $15,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(26);
``(12) $7,800,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(27);
``(13) $18,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(31); and
``(14) $30,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(40).''.
SEC. 507. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS AND CONSTRUCTION FOR CERTAIN
PROJECTS.
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports and, if the
Secretary determines the project is feasible, shall expedite completion
of construction for the following projects:
(1) Welch Point, Elk River, Cecil County, Maryland, and
Chesapeake, Maryland, being carried out under section 535 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 348-
349).
(2) West View Shores, Cecil County, Maryland, being carried
out under section 521 of the Water Resources Development Act of
2000 (114. Stat. 2655).
(3) Sylvan Beach Breakwater, Verona, Oneida County, New York,
being carried out under section 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the
shores of publicly owned property'', approved August 13, 1946
(33 U.S.C. 426g).
(4) Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk, New York, being carried
out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33
U.S.C. 701s).
(5) Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New York, being
carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948
(33 U.S.C. 701s).
(6) Steele Creek, Village of Ilion, New York, being carried
out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33
U.S.C. 701s).
SEC. 508. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports for the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is
justified in the completed report, proceed directly to project
preconstruction, engineering, and design:
(1) Project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem
restoration, Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins, Hamilton,
California.
(2) Project for shoreline protection, Detroit River Greenway
Corridor, Detroit, Michigan.
SEC. 509. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT.
The Secretary may provide assistance to a coordinated effort by
Federal, State, and local agencies, non-Federal and nonprofit entities,
regional researchers, and other interested parties to assess the water
resources and water resources needs of river basins and watersheds of
the southeastern United States.
SEC. 510. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
Section 1103(e)(7)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 652(e)(7)(A)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``The non-Federal interest may provide the non-Federal share of the
cost of the project in the form of services, materials, supplies, or
other in-kind contributions.''.
SEC. 511. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.
Section 514(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113
Stat. 343) is amended by striking ``and 2001'' and inserting ``through
2015''.
SEC. 512. MEMBERSHIP OF MISSOURI RIVER TRUST.
Section 904(b)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(114 Stat. 2708) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (vii);
(2) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vii) the following:
``(viii) rural water systems; and''.
SEC. 513. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION, AND DEVELOPMENT.
Section 503(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110
Stat. 3757) is amended by striking ``$15,000,000'' and inserting
``$25,000,000''.
SEC. 514. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
Section 506(f)(3)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(42 U.S.C. 1962d; 114 Stat. 2646) is amended by striking ``50 percent''
and inserting ``100 percent''.
SEC. 515. SUSQUEHANNA, DELAWARE, AND POTOMAC RIVER BASINS.
(a) Ex Officio Member.--Notwithstanding section 3001(a) of the 1997
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery From Natural
Disasters, and for Overseas Peacekeeping Efforts, Including Those in
Bosnia (111 Stat. 176) and section 2.2 of both the Susquehanna River
Basin Compact (Public Law 91-575) and the Delaware River Basin Compact
(Public Law 87-328), beginning in fiscal year 2002 and thereafter, the
Division Engineer, North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers, shall
be the ex officio United States member under the Susquehanna River
Basin Compact and the Delaware River Basin Compact, who shall serve
without additional compensation and who may designate an alternate
member or members in accordance with the terms of those respective
compacts.
(b) Authorization To Allocate.--The Secretary may allocate funds to
the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, Delaware River Basin
Commission, and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
(Potomac River Basin Compact (Public Law 91-407)) to fulfill the
equitable funding requirements of their respective interstate compacts.
(c) Water Supply and Conservation Storage.--The Secretary shall enter
into an agreement with the Delaware River Basin Commission to provide
temporary water supply and conservation storage at the Francis E.
Walter Dam, Pennsylvania, during any period in which the Commission has
determined that a drought warning or drought emergency exists. The
agreement shall provide that the cost for any such water supply and
conservation storage shall not exceed the incremental operating costs
associated with providing the storage.
SEC. 516. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION
PROGRAM.
Section 510(i) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110
Stat. 3761) is amended by striking ``$10,000,000'' and inserting
``$30,000,000''.
SEC. 517. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA.
The Secretary shall review the navigation and aquatic ecosystem
restoration components of the Montgomery Riverfront and Downtown Master
Plan, Montgomery, Alabama, dated May 2001, and prepared by the non-
Federal interest and, if the Secretary determines that those components
meet the evaluation and design standards of the Corps of Engineers and
that the components are feasible, may carry out the components at a
Federal cost not to exceed $5,000,000.
SEC. 518. ALASKA.
Section 570 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
369) is amended--
(1) in subsection (e)(3)(B) by striking the last sentence;
(2) in subsection (h) by striking ``$25,000,000'' and
inserting ``$40,000,000''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project
undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a
nonprofit entity, with the consent of the affected local government.
``(j) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps of
Engineers district offices to administer projects under this section at
100 percent Federal expense.''.
SEC. 519. AKUTAN SMALL BOAT HARBOR, ALASKA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall expedite the study for the
Akutan Small Boat Harbor, Alaska, and upon completion of the
feasibility study, shall design and construct the project, if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible.
(b) Treatment of Certain Dredging.--The headlands dredging for the
mooring basin shall be considered general navigation feature for
purposes of estimating the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project.
SEC. 520. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, ALASKA.
(a) Long-Term Maintenance and Repair.--The Secretary shall assume
responsibility for the long-term maintenance and repair of the Lowell
Creek Tunnel.
(b) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine whether
alternative methods of flood diversion in Lowell Canyon are feasible.
SEC. 521. ST. HERMAN HARBOR, KODIAK, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall carry out, on an emergency basis, necessary
removal of rubble, sediment, and rock that are impeding the entrance to
the St. Herman Harbor, Kodiak, Alaska, at a Federal cost of $2,000,000.
SEC. 522. AUGUSTA AND CLARENDON, ARKANSAS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to perform operation,
maintenance, and rehabilitation of authorized and completed levees on
the White River between Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas.
(b) Reimbursement.--After performing the operation, maintenance, and
rehabilitation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek
reimbursement from the Secretary of the Interior of an amount equal to
the costs allocated to benefits to a Federal wildlife refuge of such
operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
SEC. 523. LOOMIS LANDING, ARKANSAS.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of shore damage in the vicinity
of Loomis Landing, Arkansas, to determine if the damage is the result
of a Federal navigation project, and, if the Secretary determines that
the damage is the result of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary
shall carry out a project to mitigate the damage under section 111 of
the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i).
SEC. 524. ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of increased siltation and
streambank erosion in the St. Francis River basin, Arkansas and
Missouri, to determine if the siltation or erosion, or both, are the
result of a Federal flood control project and, if the Secretary
determines that the siltation or erosion, or both, are the result of a
Federal flood control project, the Secretary shall carry out a project
to mitigate the siltation or erosion, or both.
SEC. 525. CAMBRIA, CALIFORNIA.
Section 219(f)(48) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(114 Stat. 2763A-220) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$10,300,000'' and inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--$10,300,000'';
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the
non-Federal share of the cost of the project not to
exceed $3,000,000 for the cost of planning and design
work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the
date of the cooperation agreement for the project if
the Secretary determines that the work is integral to
the project.''; and
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of subparagraph (A)
(as designated by paragraph (1) of this section) with
subparagraph (B) (as added by paragraph (2) of this section).
SEC. 526. EAST SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Section 219(f)(22) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4835-4836; 113 Stat. 336) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$25,000,000'' and inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--$25,000,000'';
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the
non-Federal share of the cost of the project (i) the
cost of design and construction work carried out by the
non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines
that the work is integral to the project; and (ii) the
cost of in-kind services and materials provided for the
project by the non-Federal interest.''; and
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of subparagraph (A)
(as designated by paragraph (1) of this section) with
subparagraph (B) (as added by paragraph (2) of this section).
SEC. 527. HARBOR/SOUTH BAY, CALIFORNIA.
Section 219(f)(43) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 337; 114 Stat. 2763A-220) is amended by striking
``California.'' and inserting ``California, and for the Southern Los
Angeles County Groundwater Pipeline Project, Pico Rivera, Downey,
Bellflower, Paramount Lakewood, and Long Beach, California.''.
SEC. 528. SACRAMENTO AREA, CALIFORNIA.
Section 219(f)(23) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4835-4836; 113 Stat. 336) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$25,000,000'' and inserting
``$35,000,000''; and
(2) by inserting ``water supply and'' before ``regional''.
SEC. 529. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.
(a) Pier 70 Wharf 5 Removal and Dredging Project.--The Secretary, in
cooperation with the Port of San Francisco, shall carry out the project
for removal of Wharf 5 and associated pilings and dredgings at Pier 70
in San Francisco, California, substantially in accordance with the
Port's redevelopment plans.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated $1,600,000 to carry out this section.
SEC. 530. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, WATERFRONT AREA.
(a) Area To Be Declared Nonnavigable; Public Interest.--Unless the
Secretary finds, after consultation with local and regional public
officials (including local and regional public planning organizations),
that the proposed projects to be undertaken within the boundaries of
the portion of the San Francisco, California, waterfront area described
in subsection (b) are not in the public interest, such portion is
declared to be nonnavigable waters of the United States.
(b) Northern Embarcadero South of Bryant Street.--The portion of the
San Francisco, California, waterfront area referred to in subsection
(a) is as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the northwesterly
line of Bryant Street with the southwesterly line of Spear Street,
which intersection lies on the line of jurisdiction of the San
Francisco Port Authority; following thence westerly and southerly along
said line of jurisdiction as described in the State of California
Harbor and Navigable Code Section 1770, as amended in 1961, to its
intersection with the easterly line of Townsend Street produced
southerly; thence northerly along said easterly line of Townsend Street
produced to its intersection with the United States Government pier-
head line; thence following said pier-head line westerly and northerly
to its intersection with the existing boundary line of Piers 30/32,
then northerly and easterly along the existing boundary of Piers 30/32
until its intersection with the United States Government pier-head
line, thence following said pier-head line westerly and northerly to
the northwesterly line of Bryant Street produced northwesterly; thence
southwesterly along said northwesterly line of Bryant Street produced
to the point of beginning.
(c) Requirement That Area Be Improved.--The declaration of
nonnavigability under subsection (a) applies only to those parts of the
area described in subsection (b) that are or will be bulkheaded,
filled, or otherwise occupied by permanent structures. All such work is
subject to all applicable Federal statutes and regulations, including
sections 9 and 10 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 and 403;
30 Stat. 1151), commonly known as the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation
Act of 1899, section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1344), and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(d) Expiration Date.--If, 20 years from the date of enactment of this
Act, any area or part thereof described in subsection (b) is not
bulkheaded or filled or occupied by permanent structures, including
marina facilities, in accordance with the requirements set out in
subsection (c), or if work in connection with any activity permitted in
subsection (c) is not commenced within 5 years after issuance of such
permits, then the declaration of nonnavigability for such area or part
thereof shall expire.
SEC. 531. STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall reevaluate the feasibility of the Lower Mosher
Slough element and the levee extensions on the Upper Calaveras River
element of the project for flood control, Stockton Metropolitan Area,
California, carried out under section 211(f)(3) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3683), to determine the eligibility
of such elements for reimbursement under section 211 of such Act (33
U.S.C. 701b-13). If the Secretary determines that such elements are
feasible, the Secretary shall reimburse, subject to appropriations, the
non-Federal interest under section 211 of such Act for the Federal
share of the cost of such elements.
SEC. 532. EVERGLADES RESTORATION, FLORIDA.
(a) Comprehensive Plan.--
(1) Hillsboro and okeechobee aquifer.--Section 601(b)(2)(A)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2681)
is amended--
(A) in clause (i) by adding at the end the following:
``The project for aquifer storage and recovery,
Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, Florida, authorized
by section 101(a)(16) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276), shall be
treated for purposes of this section as being in the
Plan.''; and
(B) in clause (iii) by inserting after ``subparagraph
(B)'' the following: ``and the project for aquifer
storage and recovery, Hillsboro and Okeechobee
Aquifer''.
(2) Outreach and assistance.--Section 601(k) of such Act (114
Stat. 2691-2692) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Maximum expenditures.--The Secretary may expend up to
$3,000,000 per fiscal year for fiscal years beginning after
September 30, 2002, to carry out this subsection.''.
(b) Critical Restoration Projects.--Section 528(b)(3)(C) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769; 113 Stat. 286) is
amended--
(1) in clause (i) by striking ``$75,000,000'' and all that
follows through ``2003'' and inserting ``$95,000,000''; and
(2) in clause (ii) by striking ``$25,000,000'' and inserting
``$30,000,000''.
SEC. 533. MAYO'S BAR LOCK AND DAM, COOSA RIVER, ROME, GEORGIA.
The Secretary may provide assistance for the reconstruction of the
Mayo's Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa River, Rome, Georgia.
SEC. 534. RILEY CREEK RECREATION AREA, IDAHO.
The Secretary is authorized to carry out the Riley Creek Recreation
Area Operation Plan of the Albeni Falls Management Plan, dated October
2001, for the Riley Creek Recreation Area, Albeni Falls Dam, Bonner
County, Idaho.
SEC. 535. GRAND TOWER DRAINAGE AND LEVEES, GRAND TOWER TOWNSHIP,
ILLINOIS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to perform operation and
maintenance of authorized and completed levees on the Mississippi River
in Grand Tower Township, Illinois.
(b) Allocation of Costs.--The Secretary shall allocate the cost of
operation and maintenance performed under subsection (a) on the basis
of whether the lands protected by the levees are owned by the United
States.
(c) Non-Federal Costs.--If the lands protected by the levees are not
owned by the United States, the cost of operation and maintenance
allocated to protecting such lands under subsection (b) shall be a non-
Federal cost.
(d) Federal Costs.--If the lands protected by the levees are owned by
the United States, the cost of operation and maintenance allocated to
protecting such lands under subsection (b) shall be a Federal cost.
After performing the operation and maintenance under subsection (a),
the Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the Secretary of the
Agriculture of an amount equal to the costs allocated to protecting
lands owned by the Department of Agriculture.
SEC. 536. KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, ILLINOIS, RESTORATION.
(a) Kaskaskia River Basin Defined.--In this section, the term
``Kaskaskia River basin'' means the Kaskaskia River, Illinois, its
backwaters, its side channels, and all tributaries, including their
watersheds, draining into the Kaskaskia River.
(b) Comprehensive Plan.--
(1) Development.--The Secretary shall develop, as
expeditiously as practicable, a comprehensive plan for the
purpose of restoring, preserving, and protecting the Kaskaskia
River basin.
(2) Technologies and innovative approaches.--The
comprehensive plan shall provide for the development of new
technologies and innovative approaches--
(A) to enhance the Kaskaskia River as a
transportation corridor;
(B) to improve water quality within the entire
Kaskaskia River basin;
(C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habitat for
plants and wildlife;
(D) to increase economic opportunity for agriculture
and business communities; and
(E) to reduce the impacts of flooding to communities
and landowners.
(3) Specific components.--The comprehensive plan shall
include such features as are necessary to provide for--
(A) the development and implementation of a program
for sediment removal technology, sediment
characterization, sediment transport, and beneficial
uses of sediment;
(B) the development and implementation of a program
for the planning, conservation, evaluation, and
construction of measures for fish and wildlife habitat
conservation and rehabilitation, and stabilization and
enhancement of land and water resources in the basin;
(C) the development and implementation of a long-term
resource monitoring program;
(D) the development and implementation of a
computerized inventory and analysis system; and
(E) the development and implementation of a systemic
plan to reduce flood impacts by means of ecosystem
restoration projects.
(4) Consultation.--The comprehensive plan shall be developed
by the Secretary in consultation with appropriate Federal
agencies, the State of Illinois, and the Kaskaskia River
Coordinating Council.
(5) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report containing the comprehensive plan.
(6) Additional studies and analyses.--After transmission of a
report under paragraph (5), the Secretary shall conduct studies
and analyses of projects related to the comprehensive plan that
are appropriate and consistent with this subsection.
(c) General Provisions.--
(1) Water quality.--In carrying out activities under this
section, the Secretary's recommendations shall be consistent
with applicable State water quality standards.
(2) Public participation.--In developing the comprehensive
plan under subsection (b), the Secretary shall implement
procedures to facilitate public participation, including
providing advance notice of meetings, providing adequate
opportunity for public input and comment, maintaining
appropriate records, and making a record of the proceedings of
meetings available for public inspection.
(d) Coordination.--The Secretary shall integrate activities carried
out under this section with ongoing Federal and State programs,
projects, and activities, including the following:
(1) Farm programs of the Department of Agriculture.
(2) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (State of
Illinois) and Conservation 2000 Ecosystem Program of the
Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
(3) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices Program and the
Livestock Management Facilities Act administered by the
Illinois Department of Agriculture.
(4) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
(5) Nonpoint source grant program administered by the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
(e) Cost Sharing.--
(1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of
activities carried out under this section shall be 35 percent.
(2) In-kind services.--The Secretary may credit the cost of
in-kind services provided by the non-Federal interest for an
activity carried out under this section toward not more than 80
percent of the non-Federal share of the cost of the activity.
In-kind services shall include all State funds expended on
programs that accomplish the goals of this section, as
determined by the Secretary. The programs may include the
Kaskaskia River Conservation Reserve Program, the Illinois
Conservation 2000 Program, the Open Lands Trust Fund, and other
appropriate programs carried out in the Kaskaskia River basin.
SEC. 537. NATALIE CREEK, MIDLOTHIAN AND OAK FOREST, ILLINOIS.
The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood damage reduction
under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s)
Natalie Creek, Midlothian and Oak Forest, Illinois, if the Secretary
determines that the project is feasible.
SEC. 538. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.
Section 519(c)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114
Stat. 2654) is amended by striking ``2004'' and inserting ``2010''.
SEC. 539. CALUMET REGION, INDIANA.
Section 219(f)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 335) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$10,000,000'' and inserting
``$30,000,000''; and
(2) by striking ``Lake and Porter'' and inserting ``Benton,
Jasper, Lake, Newton, and Porter''.
SEC. 540. RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA.
(a) Conveyance.--The Secretary shall convey the remaining water
supply storage allocation in Rathbun Lake, Iowa, to the Rathbun
Regional Water Association (in this section referred to as the ``Water
Association'').
(b) Cost Sharing.--Notwithstanding the Water Supply Act of 1958 (43
U.S.C. 390b), the Water Association shall pay 100 percent of the cost
of the water supply storage allocation to be conveyed under subsection
(a). The Secretary shall credit toward such non-Federal share the cost
of any structures and facilities constructed by the Water Association
at the project.
(c) Terms and Conditions.--Before conveying the water supply storage
allocation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall enter into an
agreement with the Water Association under which the Water Association
shall agree to--
(1) in accordance with designs approved by the Chief of
Engineers, construct structures and facilities referred to in
subsection (b) that have a value equal to or greater than the
amount that otherwise would be paid to the Federal Government
for the costs of the water supply storage under the Water
Supply Act of 1958 (43 U.S.C. 390b);
(2) be responsible for operating and maintaining the
structures and facilities;
(3) pay all operation and maintenance costs allocated to the
water supply storage space;
(4) use any revenues generated at the structures and
facilities that are above those required to operate and
maintain or improve the complex to undertake, subject to the
approval of the Chief of Engineers, activities that will
improve the quality of the environment in the Rathbun Lake
watershed area; and
(5) such other terms and conditions as the Secretary
considers necessary to protect the interests of the United
States.
SEC. 541. MAYFIELD CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, KENTUCKY.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of flood damage along Mayfield
Creek and tributaries between Wickliffe and Mayfield, Kentucky, to
determine if the damage is the result of a Federal flood damage
reduction project, and, if the Secretary determines that the damage is
the result of a Federal flood damage reduction project, the Secretary
shall carry out a project to mitigate the damage at Federal expense.
SEC. 542. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY.
(a) Project Purposes.--Section 531(b) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3773) is amended by inserting before
``and resource'' the following: ``, environmental restoration,''.
(b) Definition.--Section 531(g) of such Act (110 Stat. 3774) is
amended by inserting after ``Lee,'' the following: ``Bath, Rowan,''.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 531(h) of such Act (110
Stat. 3774; 113 Stat. 348) is amended by striking ``$25,000,000'' and
inserting ``$40,000,000''.
(d) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Section 531 of such Act (110 Stat.
3774; 113 Stat. 348) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps of
Engineers district offices to administer projects under this section at
100 percent Federal expense.''.
SEC. 543. COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND RESTORATION.
(a) Definitions.--In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Coastal louisiana ecosystem.--The term ``Coastal
Louisiana Ecosystem'' means the coastal area of Louisiana from
the Sabine River on the west to the Pearl River on the east and
includes tidal waters, barrier islands, marshes, coastal
wetlands, rivers and streams, and adjacent areas.
(2) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor of
Louisiana.
(3) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the Coastal
Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task Force
established by subsection (e).
(b) Comprehensive Plan.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a comprehensive
plan for the purpose of protecting, preserving, and restoring
the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem. The comprehensive plan shall
provide for the protection, conservation and restoration of the
wetlands, barrier islands, shorelines, and related lands and
features that protect critical resources, habitat, and
infrastructure from the impacts of coastal storms, hurricanes,
erosion, and subsidence.
(2) Deadline.--Not later than July 1, 2004, the Secretary
shall transmit the plan to Congress.
(3) Contents.--The plan shall include a comprehensive report
and a programmatic environmental impact statement covering the
proposed Federal action set forth in the plan.
(4) Additional studies and analyses.--After transmission of a
report under this subsection, the Secretary may conduct studies
and analyses of projects related to the comprehensive plan that
are appropriate and consistent with this subsection.
(c) Integration of Other Activities.--
(1) In general.--In developing the plan under subsection (b),
the Secretary shall integrate ongoing Federal and State
projects and activities, including projects implemented under
the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act
(16 U.S.C. 3951 et seq.), the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Plan, the Louisiana Coastal Zone Management Plan,
and the plan of the State of Louisiana entitled ``Coast 2050:
Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana''.
(2) Statutory construction.--
(A) Existing authority.--Except as otherwise
expressly provided for in this section, nothing in the
section affects any authority in effect on the date of
enactment of this Act, or any requirement relating to
the participation in protection or restoration
activities in the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem,
including projects and activities specified in
paragraph (1) of--
(i) the Department of the Army;
(ii) the Department of the Interior;
(iii) the Department of Commerce;
(iv) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(v) the Department of Agriculture;
(vi) the Department of Transportation;
(vii) the Department of Energy; and
(viii) the State of Louisiana.
(B) New authority.--Nothing in this section confers
any new regulatory authority on any Federal or non-
Federal entity that carries out any activity authorized
by this section.
(d) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of developing
the plan under subsection (b) shall be 50 percent.
(e) Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task
Force.--
(1) Establishment and membership.--There is established the
Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task
Force, which shall consist of the following members (or, in the
case of the head of a Federal Agency, a designee at the level
of Assistant Secretary or an equivalent level):
(A) The Secretary.
(B) The Secretary of the Interior.
(C) The Secretary of Commerce.
(D) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency.
(E) The Secretary of Agriculture.
(F) The Secretary of Transportation.
(G) The Secretary of Energy.
(H) The Coastal Advisor to the Governor.
(I) The Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Natural Resources.
(J) A representative of the Governor's Advisory
Commission on Coastal Restoration and Conservation,
Louisiana.
(2) Duties of task force.--The Task Force--
(A) shall consult with, and provide recommendations
to, the Secretary during development of the
comprehensive plan under subsection (b)(1);
(B) shall coordinate the development of consistent
policies, strategies, plans, programs, projects,
activities, and priorities for addressing the
protection, conservation, and restoration of the
Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem;
(C) shall exchange information regarding programs,
projects, and activities of the agencies and entities
represented on the Task Force to promote ecosystem
protection, restoration, and maintenance;
(D) shall establish a regional working group which
shall include representatives of the agencies and
entities represented on the Task Force as well as other
governmental entities as appropriate for the purpose of
formulating, recommending, coordinating, and
implementing policies, strategies, plans, programs,
projects, activities, and priorities of the Task Force;
(E) may allow the working group described in
subparagraph (D) to--
(i) establish such advisory bodies as are
necessary to assist the Task Force in its
duties; and
(ii) select as an advisory body any entity
that represents a broad variety of private and
public interests;
(F) shall facilitate the resolution of interagency
and intergovernmental conflicts associated with the
protection, conservation, and restoration of the
Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem;
(G) shall coordinate scientific research associated
with the protection and restoration of the Coastal
Louisiana Ecosystem;
(H) shall provide assistance and support to agencies
and entities represented on the Task Force in their
protection and restoration activities;
(I) shall prepare an integrated financial plan and
recommendations for coordinated budget requests for the
funds proposed to be expended by agencies and entities
represented on the Task Force for the protection,
conservation, and restoration of the Coastal Louisiana
Ecosystem; and
(J) shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and
the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate a report that summarizes the activities of the
Task Force.
(3) Procedures and advice.--
(A) Public participation.--
(i) In general.--The Task Force shall
implement procedures to facilitate public
participation in the advisory process,
including providing advance notice of meetings,
providing adequate opportunity for public input
and comment, maintaining appropriate records,
and making a record of proceedings of meetings
available for public inspection.
(ii) Oversight.--The Secretary shall ensure
that the procedures described in clause (i) are
adopted and implemented and that the records
described in clause (i) are accurately
maintained and available for public inspection.
(B) Advisors to the task force and working groups.--
The Task Force or the working group described in
paragraph (2)(D) may seek such advice and input from
any interested, knowledgeable, or affected party as the
Task Force or working group determines to be necessary
to perform the duties described in paragraph (2).
(C) Application of the federal advisory committee
act.--The Task Force, advisors to the Task Force, and
any associated workgroups shall not be considered
advisory committees under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App).
(4) Compensation.--A member of the Task Force shall receive
no additional compensation for the services provided as a
member of the Task Force.
(5) Travel expenses.--Travel expenses incurred by a member of
the Task Force in the performance of services for the Task
Force shall be paid by the agency or entity that the member
represents.
SEC. 544. BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA.
Section 219(f)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A-220) is amended by striking
``$20,000,000'' and inserting ``$35,000,000''.
SEC. 545. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOUISIANA.
Section 517(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113
Stat. 345) is amended to read as follows:
``(5) Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana,
project for waterfront and riverine preservation, restoration,
enhancement modifications, and interpretive center
development.''.
SEC. 546. CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, PENNSYLVANIA,
AND DELAWARE.
(a) In General.--In carrying out comprehensive study of the
feasibility of a project to address shoreline erosion and related
sediment management measures to protect water and land resources of the
Chesapeake Bay, the Secretary may carry out pilot projects to
demonstrate the feasibility of alternative measures to address sediment
loads to the Chesapeake Bay from sediment behind dams on the lower
Susquehanna River.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this section.
SEC. 547. DELMARVA CONSERVATION CORRIDOR, MARYLAND.
(a) Assistance.--The Secretary may provide technical assistance to
the Secretary of Agriculture in carrying out the Conservation Corridor
Demonstration Program authorized under subtitle G of title II of Public
Law 107-171 (116 Stat. 275-278).
(b) Coordination and Integration.--In carrying out water resources
projects in the State of Maryland on land located on the east side of
the Chesapeake Bay, the Secretary shall coordinate and integrate, to
the extent practicable, such projects with any activities undertaken to
implement a conservation corridor plan approved by the Secretary of
Agriculture under section 2602 of Public Law 107-171 (116 Stat. 275-
276).
SEC. 548. DETROIT RIVER, MICHIGAN.
Section 568(c)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113
Stat. 368) is amended by striking ``$1,000,000'' and inserting
``$25,000,000''.
SEC. 549. OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN.
Section 219(f)(29) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 336) is amended by inserting ``sanitary sewer overflows
and'' before ``combined sewer overflows''.
SEC. 550. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary shall carry out feasible aquatic ecosystem restoration
projects identified in the comprehensive management plan for St. Clair
River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan, developed under section 426 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 326), at a total
Federal cost of not to exceed $10,000,000.
SEC. 551. GARRISON AND KATHIO TOWNSHIP, MINNESOTA.
Section 219(f)(61) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(114 Stat. 2763A-221) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Such assistance shall be provided directly to the Garrison-Kathio-
West Mille Lacs Lake Sanitary District, Minnesota.''.
SEC. 552. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA.
(a) In General.--Section 569 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 (113 Stat. 368) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``Benton, Sherburne,'' and
inserting ``Beltrami, Hubbard, Wadena,'';
(2) by striking the last sentence of subsection (e)(3)(B);
(3) by striking subsection (g) and inserting the following:
``(g) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project
undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a
nonprofit entity.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps of
Engineers district offices to administer projects under this section at
100 percent Federal expense.''.
(b) Biwabik, Minnesota.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
Federal interest for the project for environmental infrastructure,
Biwabik, Minnesota, carried out under section 569 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368-369), for planning,
design, and construction costs incurred by the non-Federal interest
with respect to the project before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project and were in excess of the non-Federal share
of the project costs if the Secretary determines that the costs are
appropriate.
SEC. 553. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.
Section 219(f)(32) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4835-4836; 113 Stat. 337) is amended by striking
``$15,000,000'' and inserting ``$35,000,000''.
SEC. 554. RURAL NEVADA.
Section 595(h)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999
(113. Stat. 384) is amended by striking ``$25,000,000'' and inserting
``$40,000,000''.
SEC. 555. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JERSEY.
Section 324 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat.
4849; 110 Stat. 3779) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``Hackensack Meadowlands
Development'' and all that follows through ``Plan for'' and
inserting ``New Jersey Meadowlands Commission for the
development of an environmental improvement program for'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading by striking
``Required'';
(B) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
(C) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the
following:
``(1) Enhancement and acquisition of significant wetlands
that contribute to the Meadowlands ecosystem.'';
(3) in subsection (c) by inserting before the last sentence
the following: ``The non-Federal sponsor may also provide in-
kind services, not to exceed 25 percent of the total project
cost, and may also receive credit for reasonable cost of design
work completed prior to entering into the cooperation agreement
with the Secretary for a project to be carried out under the
program developed under subsection (a).''; and
(4) in subsection (d) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and
inserting ``$35,000,000''.
SEC. 556. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK.
(a) Development of Program.--Section 404(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4863) is amended--
(1) by striking ``processes'' and inserting ``and related
environmental processes'';
(2) by inserting after ``Atlantic Coast'' the following:
``(and associated back bays)'';
(3) by inserting after ``actions'' the following: ``,
environmental restoration or conservation measures for coastal
and back bays,''; and
(4) by inserting at the end the following: ``The plan for
collecting data and monitoring information included in such
annual report shall be fully coordinated with and agreed to by
appropriate agencies of the State of New York.''.
(b) Annual Reports.--Section 404(b) of such Act is amended--
(1) by striking ``Initial Plan.--Not later than 12 months
after the date of enactment of this Act, the'' and inserting
``Annual Reports.--The'';
(2) by striking ``initial plan for data collection and
monitoring'' and inserting ``annual report of data collection
and monitoring activities''; and
(3) by striking the last sentence.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 404(c) of such Act (113
Stat. 341) is amended by striking ``and an additional total of
$2,500,000 for fiscal years thereafter'' and inserting ``$2,500,000 for
fiscal years 2000 through 2002, and $17,000,000 for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2002,''.
SEC. 557. COLLEGE POINT, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK.
In carrying out section 312 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1990 (104 Stat. 4639-4640), the Secretary shall give priority to work
in College Point, New York City, New York.
SEC. 558. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK.
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project for ecosystem restoration, Flushing Bay and Creek, New
York City, New York, the cost of design and construction work carried
out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 559. LITTLE NECK BAY, VILLAGE OF KINGS POINT, NEW YORK.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may carry out a navigation project at
Little Neck Bay (Hague Basin), Village of Kings Point, New York,
sufficient to permit the safe operation of the vessel T/V Kings Pointer
at all tide levels.
(b) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the
United States Merchant Marine Academy for the cost of the project
carried out under this section.
SEC. 560. STANLEY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
Section 219(f)(64) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(114 Stat. 2763A-221) is amended by inserting ``water and'' before
``wastewater''.
SEC. 561. PIEDMONT LAKE DAM, OHIO.
In reconstructing the road on the Piedmont Lake Dam as part of the
project for dam safety assurance, Piedmont Lake Dam, Ohio, being
carried out under section 4 of the Flood Control Act of August 11, 1939
(53 Stat. 1414-1415), the Secretary shall upgrade the condition of the
road to meet standards applicable to public use roads in the State of
Ohio. The incremental cost of upgrading the road to meet such standards
shall be a non-Federal expense.
SEC. 562. WAURIKA LAKE, OKLAHOMA.
The remaining obligation of the Waurika Project Master Conservancy
District payable to the United States Government in the amounts, rates
of interest, and payment schedules is set at the amounts, rates of
interest, and payment schedules that existed, and that both parties
agreed to, on June 3, 1986, and may not be adjusted, altered, or
changed without a specific, separate, and written agreement between the
District and the United States Government.
SEC. 563. COLUMBIA RIVER, OREGON.
Section 401(b)(3) of Public Law 100-581 (102 Stat. 2944), is amended
by inserting ``and Celilo Village, Oregon'' after ``existing sites''.
SEC. 564. EUGENE, OREGON.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of restoring the millrace in Eugene, Oregon, and, if the
Secretary determines that the restoration is feasible, shall carry out
the restoration.
(b) Consideration of Non-Economic Benefits.--In determining the
feasibility of restoring the millrace, the Secretary shall include non-
economic benefits associated with the historical significance of the
millrace and associated with preservation and enhancement of resources.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000.
SEC. 565. JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, LAKE UMATILLA, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall pay up to $2,500,000 to the
provider of research and curation support previously provided to the
Federal Government as a result of the multi-purpose project, John Day
Lock and Dam, Lake Umatilla, Oregon and Washington, authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 167), and the
several navigation and flood damage reduction projects constructed on
the Columbia River and Lower Willamette River, Oregon and Washington.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $2,500,000.
SEC. 566. LOWELL, OREGON.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may convey without consideration to
Lowell School District, by quitclaim deed, all right, title and
interest of the United States in and to approximately 3.32 acres of
land and buildings thereon, known as Tract A-82, located in Lowell,
Oregon, and described in subsection (b).
(b) Description of Property.--The parcel of land authorized to be
conveyed under subsection (a) is as follows: Commencing at the point of
intersection of the west line of Pioneer Street with the westerly
extension of the north line of Summit Street, in Meadows Addition to
Lowell, as platted and recorded at page 56 of Volume 4, Lane County
Oregon Plat Records; thence north on the west line of Pioneer Street a
distance of 176.0 feet to the true point of beginning of this
description; thence north on the west line of Pioneer Street a distance
of 170.0 feet; thence west at right angles to the west line of Pioneer
Street a distance of 250.0 feet; thence south and parallel to the west
line of Pioneer Street a distance of 170.0 feet; thence east 250.0 feet
to the true point of beginning of this description in Section 14,
Township 19 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Lane
County, Oregon.
(c) Terms and Conditions.--Before conveying the parcel to the school
district, the Secretary shall ensure that the conditions of buildings
and facilities meet the requirements of applicable Federal law.
(d) Generally Applicable Provisions.--
(1) Applicability of property screening provisions.--Section
2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to any
conveyance under this section.
(2) Liability.--An entity to which a conveyance is made under
this section shall hold the United States harmless from any
liability with respect to activities carried out, on or after
the date of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed. The
United States shall remain responsible for any liability with
respect to activities carried out, before such date, on the
real property conveyed.
SEC. 567. HAGERMAN'S RUN, WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYLVANIA.
The Secretary may rehabilitate the pumps at the project for flood
damage reduction, Hagerman's Run, Williamsport, Pennsylvania, at a
total Federal cost of $225,000.
SEC. 568. NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA.
Section 219(f)(11) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 335) is amended by striking ``and Monroe'' and inserting
``Northumberland, Union, Snyder, and Montour''.
SEC. 569. SUSQUEHANNOCK CAMPGROUND ACCESS ROAD, RAYSTOWN LAKE,
PENNSYLVANIA.
(a) Improvement of Access Road.--The Secretary may make improvements
to the Susquehannock Campground access road at Raystown Lake,
Pennsylvania.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $500,000.
SEC. 570. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW YORK.
Section 567 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (114 Stat.
2662-2663; 110 Stat. 3787-3788) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2) by striking ``$10,000,000.'' and
inserting the following: ``$20,000,000, of which the Secretary
may utilize not more than $5,000,000 to design and construct
feasible pilot projects during the development of the strategy
to demonstrate alternative approaches for the strategy. The
total cost for any single pilot project may not exceed
$500,000. The Secretary shall evaluate the results of the pilot
projects and consider the results in the development of the
strategy.''.
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in the subsection heading by striking
``Cooperation'' and inserting ``Cooperative''; and
(B) by striking ``cooperation'' and inserting
``cooperative''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project (i) the cost of design and
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the
date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary
determines that the work is integral to the project; and (ii) the cost
of in-kind services and materials provided for the project by the non-
Federal interest.''.
SEC. 571. WASHINGTON, GREENE, WESTMORELAND, AND FAYETTE COUNTIES,
PENNSYLVANIA.
Section 219(f)(70) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(114 Stat. 2763A-221) is amended by striking ``$8,000,000'' and
inserting ``$13,300,000''.
SEC. 572. CANO MARTIN PENA, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO.
The Secretary shall review a report prepared by the non-Federal
interest concerning flood protection and environmental restoration for
Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico, and, if the Secretary
determines that the report meets the evaluation and design standards of
the Corps of Engineers and that the project is feasible, may carry out
the project, at a total cost of $130,000,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $85,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $45,000,000.
SEC. 573. LAKES MARION AND MOULTRIE, SOUTH CAROLINA.
Section 219(f)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A-220) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$15,000,000'' and inserting
``$35,000,0000''; and
(2) by inserting ``wastewater treatment and'' before ``water
supply''.
SEC. 574. UPPER BIG SIOUX RIVER, WATERTOWN, SOUTH DAKOTA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall review the project for flood
damage reduction, Upper Big Sioux River basin, Watertown, South Dakota,
as described in the report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 31,
1994, and entitled ``Watertown and Vicinity, South Dakota'' and, if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible, may carry out the
project, at a total cost of $25,000,000.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--
(1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the
review may be provided in the form of in-kind services and
materials.
(2) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the review the cost of planning
and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before
the date of an agreement for the review if the Secretary
determines that such work is integral to the review.
SEC. 575. FRITZ LANDING, TENNESSEE.
The Secretary shall--
(1) conduct a study of the Fritz Landing Agricultural Spur
Levee, Tennessee, to determine the extent of levee
modifications that would be required to make the levee and
associated drainage structures consistent with Federal
standards;
(2) design and construct such modifications; and
(3) after completion of such modifications, incorporate the
levee into the project for flood control, Mississippi River and
Tributaries, authorized by the Act entitled ``An Act for the
control of floods on the Mississippi River and its tributaries,
and for other purposes'', approved May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534-
539), commonly known as the ``Flood Control Act of 1928''.
SEC. 576. MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE.
The Secretary shall review the aquatic ecosystem restoration
component of the Memphis Riverfront Development Master Plan, Memphis,
Tennessee, prepared by the non-Federal interest and, if the Secretary
determines that the component meets the evaluation and design standards
of the Corps of Engineers and that the component is feasible, may carry
out the component at a total Federal cost not to exceed $5,000,000.
SEC. 577. TOWN CREEK, LENOIR CITY, TENNESSEE.
The Secretary shall construct the project for flood damage reduction
designated as Alternative 4 in the Town Creek, Lenoir City, Loudon
City, Tennessee, feasibility report of the Nashville district engineer,
dated November 2000, at a total cost of $1,250,000.
SEC. 578. TENNESSEE RIVER PARTNERSHIP.
(a) In General.--As part of the operation and maintenance of the
project for navigation, Tennessee River, Tennessee, Alabama,
Mississippi, and Kentucky, authorized by the first section of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 927), the Secretary
may enter into a partnership with a nonprofit entity to remove debris
from the Tennessee River in the vicinity of Knoxville, Tennessee, by
providing a vessel to such entity, at Federal expense, for such debris
removal purposes.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $500,000.
SEC. 579. CLEAR CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, HARRIS AND GALVESTON COUNTIES,
TEXAS.
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the report for the project
for flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, and recreation,
Clear Creek and tributaries, Harris and Galveston Counties, Texas.
SEC. 580. HALLS BAYOU, TEXAS.
Section 211(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33
U.S.C. 701b-13) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (7) and (8) as paragraphs (8)
and (9), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
``(7) Halls bayou, texas.--The project for flood control,
Halls Bayou, Texas.''.
SEC. 581. HARRIS GULLY, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.
(a) Study.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood
damage reduction in the Harris Gully watershed, Harris County,
Texas, to provide flood protection for the Texas Medical
Center, Houston, Texas.
(2) Use of local studies and plans.--In conducting the study,
the Secretary shall use, to the extent practicable, studies and
plans developed by the non-Federal interest if the Secretary
determines that such studies and plans meet the evaluation and
design standards of the Corps of Engineers.
(3) Completion date.--The Secretary shall complete the study
by July 1, 2004.
(b) Critical Flood Damage Reduction Measures.--The Secretary may
carry out critical flood damage reduction measures that the Secretary
determines are feasible and that will provide immediate and substantial
flood damage reduction benefits in the Harris Gully watershed, at a
Federal cost of $7,000,000.
(c) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share
of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design, and
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the
date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the Secretary
determines that such work is integral to the project.
(d) Nonprofit Entity.--Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), a nonprofit entity may, with
the consent of the local government, serve as a non-Federal interest
for the project undertaken under this section.
SEC. 582. ONION CREEK, TEXAS.
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration,
Onion Creek, Texas, the cost of relocation of flood prone residences in
the study area for the project incurred by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if the
Secretary determines that the relocation of such residences is integral
to the project.
SEC. 583. PELICAN ISLAND, TEXAS.
(a) In General.--Section 108(a) of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act, 1994 (33 U.S.C. 59hh(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) Authority to convey.--The Secretary'';
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Letter of intent.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary may provide a letter
of intent to the city of Galveston for conveyance of
less than 100 acres of the parcel described in
subsection (a) for private development purposes if the
Secretary receives and approves a proposal by the city
designating the land which would be subject to such
development.
``(B) Disposition of spoil.--If the Secretary issues
a letter of intent under subparagraph (A), no
additional spoil material may be placed on the land
designated for private development for a period of at
least 5 years from the date of issuance of the letter
to provide the city of Galveston with an opportunity to
secure private developers, perform appraisals, conduct
environmental studies, and provide the compensation to
the United States required for the conveyance.''; and
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of paragraph (1)
(as designated by paragraph (1) of this subsection) with
paragraph (2) (as added by paragraph (2) of this subsection).
(b) Expiration Date.--Section 108(e)(3) of such Act (33 U.S.C.
59hh(e)(3)) is amended by striking ``date of the enactment of this
Act'' and inserting ``date of enactment of the Water Resources
Development Act of 2002''.
SEC. 584. RIVERSIDE OXBOW, FORT WORTH, TEXAS.
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project for ecosystem restoration and recreation, Riverside
Oxbow, Fort Worth, Texas, the cost of design and construction work
carried out on the Beach Street Dam and associated features by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the cooperation agreement for the
project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project.
SEC. 585. RICHMOND NATIONAL BATTLEFIELD PARK, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to carry out bluff
stabilization measures on the James River in the vicinity of Drewry's
Bluff, Richmond National Battlefield Park, Richmond, Virginia.
(b) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the
Secretary of the Interior of any costs incurred by the Secretary in
carrying out subsection (a).
SEC. 586. BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of increased siltation in Baker
Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington, to determine if the siltation is the
result of a Federal navigation project (including diverted flows from
the Columbia River) and, if the Secretary determines that the siltation
is the result of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary shall
carry out a project to mitigate the siltation as part of maintenance of
the Federal navigation project.
SEC. 587. CHEHALIS RIVER, CENTRALIA, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost
of the project for flood damage reduction, Chehalis River, Centralia,
Washington, the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried
out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the cooperation
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project.
SEC. 588. HAMILTON ISLAND CAMPGROUND, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, and construct a
campground for Bonneville Lock and Dam at Hamilton Island (also know as
``Strawberry Island'') in Skamania County, Washington.
SEC. 589. PUGET ISLAND, WASHINGTON.
The Secretary is directed to place dredged and other suitable
material along portions of the Columbia River shoreline of Puget
Island, Washington, between river miles 38 to 47 in order to protect
economic and environmental resources in the area from further erosion,
at a Federal cost of $1,000,000. This action shall be coordinated with
appropriate resource agencies and comply with applicable Federal laws.
SEC. 590. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD CONTROL.
(a) Cheat and Tygart River Basins, West Virginia.--Section 581(a)(1)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790; 113
Stat. 313) is amended--
(1) by striking ``flood control measures'' and inserting
``structural and nonstructural flood control, streambank
protection, stormwater management, and channel clearing and
modification measures''; and
(2) by inserting ``with respect to measures that incorporate
levees or floodwalls'' before the semicolon.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 581(c) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3791) is amended by
striking ``$12,000,000'' and inserting ``$90,000,000''.
SEC. 591. LOWER KANAWHA RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a watershed and river basin assessment
under section 729 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33
U.S.C. 2267a) for the Lower Kanawha River Basin, in the counties of
Mason, Putnam, Kanawha, Jackson, and Roane, West Virginia.
SEC. 592. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA.
Section 571 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat.
371) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``Nicholas,''; and
(B) by striking ``Gilmer,''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project
undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a
nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local government.
``(j) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps of
Engineers district offices to administer projects under this section at
100 percent Federal expense.''.
SEC. 593. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.
(a) Corps of Engineers.--Section 340 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856; 113 Stat. 320) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(h) Corps of Engineers.--Ten percent of the amounts appropriated to
carry out this section for fiscal years 2003 and thereafter may be used
by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects under
this section at 100 percent Federal expense.''.
(b) Southern West Virginia Defined.--Section 340(f) of such Act is
amended by inserting ``Nicholas,'' after ``Greenbrier,''.
(c) Nonprofit Entities.--Section 340 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856) is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project
undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a
nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local government.''.
SEC. 594. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CRITICAL PROJECTS.
Section 219(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106
Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335-337; 114 Stat. 2763A-220-221) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(71) Plaquemine, louisiana.--$7,000,000 for sanitary sewer
and wastewater infrastructure, Plaquemine, Louisiana.
``(72) Charleston, south carolina.--$20,000,000 for
wastewater infrastructure, including wastewater collection
systems, Charleston, South Carolina.
``(73) Cross, south carolina.--$2,000,000 for water-related
environmental infrastructure, Cross, South Carolina.
``(74) Surfside, south carolina.--$8,000,000 for
environmental infrastructure, including stormwater system
improvements and ocean outfalls, Surfside, South Carolina.
``(75) North myrtle beach, south carolina.--$3,000,000 for
environmental infrastructure, including ocean outfalls, North
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
``(76) Tia juana valley, california.--$1,400,000 for water-
related environmental infrastructure, Tia Juana Valley,
California.
``(77) Cabarrus county, north carolina.--$4,500,000 for
water-related infrastructure, Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
``(78) Richmond county, north carolina.--$8,000,000 for
water-related infrastructure, Richmond County, North Carolina.
``(79) Union county, north carolina.--$9,000,000 for
wastewater infrastructure, Union County, North Carolina.
``(80) Washington, district of columbia.--$35,000,000 for
implementation of a combined sewer overflow long term control
plan, Washington, District of Columbia.
``(81) Greenleaf, idaho.--$500,000 for water and wastewater
infrastructure, Greenleaf, Idaho.
``(82) Weiser, idaho.--$330,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Weiser, Idaho.
``(83) Coolin, idaho.--$2,200,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Coolin, Idaho.
``(84) Jerome, idaho.--$5,000,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Jerome, Idaho.
``(85) Ledyard and montville, connecticut.--$7,113,000 for
water infrastructure, Ledyard and Montville, Connecticut.
``(86) Awendaw, south carolina.--$2,000,000 for water-related
infrastructure, Awendaw, South Carolina.
``(87) St. clair county, alabama.--$5,000,000 for water-
related infrastructure, St. Clair County, Alabama.
``(88) East bay, san francisco and santa clara areas,
california.--$4,000,000 for a desalination project to serve the
East Bay, San Francisco, and Santa Clara areas, California.
``(89) Athens, tennessee.--$16,000,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Athens, Tennessee.''.
Purpose of Legislation
The Water Resources Development Act of 2002 (WRDA 02)
includes project authorizations, modifications,
deauthorizations, studies and policy initiatives for the Army
Corps of Engineers' Civil Works Program--the nation's largest
water resources program. Throughout its five titles, the bill
authorizes and directs the Corps to carry out various studies,
projects, and programs relating to navigation, flood damage
reduction, shoreline protection, dam safety, water supply,
recreation, environmental restoration and protection.
Background and Need for Legislation
WRDA 02 demonstrates the continuing commitment of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to the Nation's
water resources infrastructure, and a regular biennial
authorization schedule for the Civil Works Program of the Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps), which was instituted by WRDA 86.
The Committee believes that passage of WRDA 02 is vitally
important to fulfill commitments to non-Federal sponsors, to be
responsive to new and emerging water resources needs, and to
fine-tune the Corps' missions and responsibilities.
The Committee recognizes the value of the Corps and the
Corps' Civil Works missions to the Nation and the critical
importance of maintaining these vital contributions. Over the
years, the Corps has maintained flexibility in its Civil Works
missions to meet the changing needs of the Nation. The Corps
has an impressive history of helping to meet the Nation's water
resources needs. For over 175 years, the Corps has supported
navigation needs by maintaining and improving the Nation's
waterways in 41 states. The Corps also maintains 300 commercial
harbors, through which pass 2 billion tons of cargo a year, and
with more than 13 million American jobs dependent on our import
and export trade, these ports are vital to our economic
security. The ports and waterways maintained by the Corps also
play a vital role in national defense.
Corps flood damage reduction efforts range from small,
local protection projects (levees or non-structural flood
damage reduction measures) to major dams. Today, most Corps
constructed flood protection projects are owned by sponsoring
cities, towns, and agricultural districts, but the Corps
continues to maintain and operate 383 dams and reservoirs for
flood damage reduction. During the 10 years from 1991 through
2000 the United States suffered $45 billion in property damage
from floods. During that same period, however, Corps flood
damage reduction measures prevented more than $208 billion in
damage--82% of the damage that would have occurred if the
protection were absent.
Legislation passed in 1990 established environmental
protection as one of the primary missions of the Corps--along
with navigation and flood damage reduction. Since that time,
ecosystem restoration projects have grown increasingly popular
throughout the country, resulting in over $1.3 billion in
appropriations for environmental activities. The Corps has
provided the necessary leadership on large-scale ecosystem
restoration projects, including restoring the hydrologic regime
for the Everglades in Florida and addressing wetland losses of
catastrophic proportion in Coastal Louisiana. In addition, the
Corps carries out environmental and natural resource management
programs at its projects, managing thousands of square miles as
forest and wildlife habitat, monitoring water quality at its
dams, and in some cases restoring the environment at projects
built in earlier days.
As the Corps program continues to evolve in service to the
Nation, the Committee notes with interest the efforts of the
Chief of Engineers to encourage a more holistic approach to
water resources management. An increased emphasis on watershed
and basin-wide planning, conducted in conjunction with state
and local governments and non-public stakeholders, can lead to
a more sustainable use of water resources that integrates water
development, protection, and restoration. The Corps can play a
particularly important role in facilitating planning when the
issues affecting water resources concern multiple
jurisdictions. The Corps is encouraged to pursue efforts to
improve coordination and cooperation in the development of
recommended approaches to address water resources problems and
formulating plans to solve these problems.
Discussion of Committee Bill and Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title; table of contents
(a) Short Title.--Establishes the short title of this Act
as the ``water Resources Development Act of 2002''.
(b) Table of Contents.
Section 2. Definition of Secretary
Defines the term ``Secretary,'' which is used throughout
the bill, as the Secretary of the Army.
TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS
Section 101. Project authorization
This section authorizes projects for water resources
development and conservation to be carried out substantially in
accordance with the reports of the Chief of Engineers cited for
each project, except as otherwise provided.
(1) Pine Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration,
Fresno County, California
Location of Study Area: The project area is located at Pine
Flat Dam on the Kings River in central California, 25 miles
east of Fresno.
Problems and Opportunities Identified in Study: The
construction of Pine Flat dam on the Kings river has altered
the natural hydraulics and temperatures of the river, affected
the vegetation, restricted native coldwater fish movements,
which resulted in the decline of the fishery, affected fish and
wildlife resources and aquatic wetland habitats, and further
accelerated the decline of the riverine ecosystem habitat.
Due to the design and operation of Pine Flat Dam, the
reservoir can experience a significant increase in water
temperature at certain times of the year. When there is
adequate water, water temperatures are well within the optimal
range for the survival of both coldwater and warm water fish.
In lower-water years, however, the availability of coldwater
habitat for native fisheries in the reservoir and lower King
River can decrease dramatically.
Water releases from Pine Flat Lake influence the fishery
downstream in the lower Kings River. During dry and below
average precipitation years, with below average carryover
storage, the coldwater reserves may be depleted from the
reservoir by late summer and early fall, causing water
temperatures in the reservoir and lower Kings River to exceed
levels acceptable for coldwater fish growth and survival. In
addition, low instream flows can adversely affect food supply,
spatial habitat, and access to shaded riverine aquatic (SRA)
habitat, and provide favorable habitat for nonnative warn water
fishery growth, which further declines the native cold water
survival rate. Finally, various land use activities have
resulted in some loss of riparian, SRBA, and oak-woodland
habitat, which has depleted the food source to the associated
wildlife and special-status species along the river.
Alternative Plans Considered: The four alternative plans
considered include: (1) no action; (2) constructing a
multilevel intake structure on the upstream face of the face of
the dam to manage the temperature of downstream water releases
to preserve the cold water in the reservoir and promote
downstream water temperature suitable to sustain the native
coldwater fishery throughout the year; (3) reestablishing
historic floodplain riparian, SRA, and wildlife habitat at Byrd
Slough along the Kings River immediately south of the Fiant-
Kern Canal Siphon; and (4) a combination of alternatives 2 and
3.
Description of Recommended Plan: The recommended plan,
alternative 4, provides for construction of a multilevel intake
structure on the upstream face of Pine Flat Dam to allow for
temperature-controlled releases through the power of the base
of the dam. The plan also includes the restoration of about
143.5 acres of historic flood plain, shaded riverine acquatic
habitat, and wildlife habitat at Byrd Slough along the Kings
River.
Physical Data on Project Features:
(a) Multilevel Intake Structure: A multilevel intake
structure would be constructed on the upstream face of Pine
Flat Dam. This multilevel intake structures would consist of
three separate steel (space frame) structures which extend from
elevation 953.46 feet, mean sea level (msl), downward to
elevation 616.5 feet, msl. The three separate steel structures
would fit over the three existing power penstock intakes. Each
of the three structures would have three port openings and
gates. There would be a hoist and cable unit (including a
motor) for each of the nine openings. The three port openings
would be 25 feet high and 42 feet wide and will be staggered at
seven different elevations that would permit selective
withdrawal of water from a wide range of levels in the
reservoir.
Steel gates measuring 27 feet high by 44 feet wide would be
constructed to close off each of the new port openings. One
gate on all three of the structures would be at the same
elevation, and two gates on each of the structures would be at
different elevations. The gates would open in the downward
direction and would sit in a structural channel when completely
open. This design would take the gate loadings off the hoist
cable. Cladding would be placed on the space frame to enclose
each of the structures. Steel plates would be put on the bottom
of each of the space frame structures to prevent water from
leaking into each structure. A trash rack would be placed on
the front face of each of the structures to prevent any large
debris from entering the port openings and to protect the
structure.
(b) Byrd Slough Habitat Restoration: About 143.5 acres of
Fresno County land downstream of the dam and immediately south
of the Friant-Kern Canada siphon would be acquired by
conservation easement to reestablish riparian and SRA habitat
for fish and wildlife along the Kings River. The restoration
work would involve repairing perimeter forces to exclude cattle
from the restoration area, installing revegetation signs at the
fishing access parking area, planting restoration species (250
plants per acre), designing an irrigation system to the planted
areas, and installing wildlife habitat enhancement structures.
In order of priority, these structures could include brush
piles, bluebird boxes, bat boxes, raptor perches, wood duck
boxes, and/or songbird perches.
Views of States, Non-Federal Interests and Other Countries:
The sponsor, Kings River Conservation District, has continued
to express support for the project, understands the cost
sharing requirements during preconstruction engineering and
design and is prepared to execute a cost sharing agreement upon
completion of the feasibility study.
Views of Federal and Regional Agencies: The Department of
the Interior generally concurs in the recommended plan. The
Environmental Protection Agency supports the project. The Kings
River Conservation District strongly supports the recommended
multi-level intake structure and the Byrd Slough Habitat
Restoration plan. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service supports
the recommended plan as indicated in their finding in the
Coordination Act Report.
Estimated Implementation Costs
[October 2001 price levels]
Cost-sharing
Federal: Corps of Engineers............................. $24,020,000
Non-Federal: Kings River conservation District.......... 13,080,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 37,100,000
Description of Non-Federal Implementation Costs: Non-
Federal implementation costs include $335,000 for land
acquisition and the rest will be cash.
Estimated annual O&M costs
[October 2001 price levels]
Cost-sharing
Federal: Corps of Engineers............................. 0
Non-Federal: Kings River Conservation District.......... $56,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 56,000
Description of Non-Federal O&M Costs: The operation and
maintenance costs for the multilevel intake structure consist
of routine maintenance and replacement of parts over the life
of the project. The operation and maintenance costs for the
Byrd Slough Habitat area include monitoring and periodic
maintenance of fencing.
Direct Beneficiaries: The long-term benefit is an increase
in the survival of coldwater species in the lower Kings River
downstream from Pine Flat Dam and reestablishment of about
143.5 acres of historic floodplain habitat.
(2) Morganza, Louisiana to the gulf of Mexico, Louisiana
Location of Study Area: The study is located in south
Louisiana between the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers. Bayou
Lafourche forms the western study boundary and Bayou du Large
and Louisiana Highway 311 from the eastern boundary. The
eastern and western boundaries form an apex at Thibodaux,
Louisiana, with the southern boundary being the Gulf of Mexico.
Problems and Opportunities Identified in Study: Hurricanes
and tropical storms cause widespread flooding of residential
and commercial property in the study area. In the summer and
fall of 1998, three tropical storms and two hurricanes posed
threats to the Louisiana coast and some degree of flooding was
experienced. The study basin consists of saline and fresh
marshes, cypress and tupelogum swamps, bottomland hardwood
forests, farmlands, industry (both heavy and light),
residential, and other developed areas. Development in the area
occurred along alluvial ridges that support numerous
communities, agricultural developments , and industries,
approximately half of the structures in the study area are
adjacent to one of many bayous and waterways that intersect the
study area. Significant developments located in the study area
include the cities of Thibodaux and Houma. The elevations along
bayou ridges just south of Houma are 4-5 feet National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD) and less than 1 foot NGVD near the gulf
of Mexico. The Terrebonne Levee and Conservation District
currently maintains approximately 20 miles of forced drainage
levees in various communities, including flood damage reduction
structures and drainage pumping stations. The existing levees
have a maximum elevation of +7.0 feet NGVD. The levees protect
against weak tidal and rainfall events, but not hurricanes.
Following Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Terrebonne Parish residents
qualified for more than $23 million FEMA claim settlements.
However, it is estimated that Hurricane Andrew caused $55
million in losses in Terrebonne Parish alone because of damage
to crops and other uninsured property. Hurricane Andrew
destroyed over 360 homes and damaged approximately 2,900 homes
in Terrebonne Parish. Over 90 percent of the damage occurred in
Terrebonne Parish south of Houma, where up to 6 feet of water
was reported in residential and commercial structures.
Alternative Plans Considered: Eight alternative plans were
evaluated during the feasibility study. A preliminary screening
was performed to reduce the scope and focus detailed
engineering efforts on the plans that provided the most
benefit. Two structural alternatives and various non-structural
alternatives were evaluated in detail throughout feasibility.
The structural alternatives were known as the Reconnaissance
Alignment and the Highway 57 Alignment. Both alternatives
involved raising existing levees and constructing new levees to
provide reliable protection against a
50-, 85-, 100- and 500-year flood frequency event. The
structural plans included earthen levees, sector-gated
floodgate structures and environmental water control structures
in the levees that would maintain tidal ebb and flow. The non-
structural plans involved relocation and buy-out and elevation
of structures within the study area.
Description of Recommended Plan: The Recommended Plan (the
National Economic Development Plan) is the 100-year Highway 57
Alignment. Project features include approximately 72 miles of
earthen levees with 12 sector-gated floodgate structures, 12
environmental water control structures road closure structures,
numerous pipeline relocations, several minor pump station
discharge realignments and other minor features.
Physical Data on Project Features: Each project feature
listed above is a critical component of the levee system, which
will provide Terrebonne Parish with a reliable 100-year level
of flood protection. In general, many existing levees will be
raised approximately three to seven feet and widened with an
impervious earthen material excavated from nearby borrow sites.
All floodgates and road closure structures will provide a
reliable and efficient means to close off vulnerable gaps in
the levee system. A total of six pump station discharge pipes
will be relocated through the levee protection to maintain
interior drainage. Numerous oilfield pipelines will either be
relocated over the levee or buried to a sufficient depth below
the levee.
Views of States, Non-Federal Interests and Other Counties:
The project is strongly supported by the State of Louisiana,
Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development (Local
Sponsor), Terrebonne Parish, City of Houma, Terrebonne Levee
and Conservation District, and Congressional representatives.
There is a strong desire from the local sponsor to cost-share
in the design and construction of this project.
Views of Federal and Regional Agencies: The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and Environmental Protection Agency have
raised concerns regarding induced floodplain development
resulting from the Federal project that may have cumulative
environmental effects on aquatic and terrestrial resources.
However, there are no significant concerns to prevent this
project from proceeding into the next phase. Development is
still regulated by NEPA and the existing permitting process.
The National Marine Fisheries Service has raised concerns
regarding increased mitigation for the project. The project
will mitigate for any direct adverse impacts resulting from
construction. The Corps continue coordinate with NMFS, USFWS
and EPA to ensure that adequate compensatory mitigation is
provided.
Estimated Implementation Costs: $680,000,000
Cost-sharing
Federal: (65%):
Corps of Engineers.................................. $442,000,000
Non-Federal Sponsor: (35%)
Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development....................................... 238,000,000
LERRDs.............................................. 53,000,000
Work-in-Kind and Cash............................... 185,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 238,000,000
Description of Non-Federal Implementation Costs:
LERRDS: The Local Sponsor will be responsible for acquiring
all necessary lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations and
disposal sites for the project.
Work-in-Kind: The Terrebonne Levee and Conservation
District has indicated a willingness to design and construct
various features of the proposed levee alignment for credit. A
complete list of the features proposed is included in the
feasibility report. The Corps would coordinate with the Levee
District to ensure that the features meet or exceed Federal
standards for hurricane protection levees.
Estimated Annual O&M Costs
[October 2000 price level]
Cost-sharing
Federal: Corps of Engineers............................. $920,000
Non-Federal Sponsor: Monarch-Chesterfield Levee District 406,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 1,326,000
Description of Federal O&M Cost: The Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway and Houma Navigation Canal are Federally maintained,
navigable waterways. The Corps would assume operation of the
floodgates along the GIWW and the local to be located in the
Houma Navigation Canal as part of its O&M budget.
Description of Non-Federal O&M Cost: This cost includes
general operation and maintenance of floodgate structures,
environmental water control structures and levees including
levee inspections, mowing and erosion control.
Direct Beneficiaries: This project will directly benefit
the residents and businesses of Terrebonne Parish, and help
preserve the Louisiana ecosystem.
The Secretary also is directed to credit toward the non-
Federal share the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal
interest for interim flood protection after March 31, 1989, if
integral to the project.
(3) Smith Island, Maryland
Location of the Study Area: The project is located in
Chesapeake Bay on Smith Island, Somerset County, Maryland,
which is 12 miles west of Crisfield, Maryland, 95 miles south
of Baltimore. The island straddles the Maryland-Virginia state
line, but all of the population and all of the project features
are in Maryland. The Non-Federal sponsors are Somerset County
and the State of Maryland Departments of the Environment and
Natural Resources.
Problems and Opportunities Identified in Study: Smith
Island is part of a chain of islands that form the border
between Chesapeake Bay and Tangier Sound, and is comprised of
97-percent emergent wetlands. The study area is within the
largest contiguous submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) bed in
the Bay. Although SAV coverages have been rebounding in the
last decade throughout the Bay, the Tangier Sound area has seen
continual decreases in coverage. There are many factors that
determine whether or not SAV flourishes, some factors are local
and some are larger-scale. SAV experts have determined that the
likely over-riding factor in the study area is the effect of
erosion. As the landmasses that make up Smith Island erode, it
allows increased wave and current action into shallow-water
areas that were previously protected, quiescent, and suitable
for SAV growth. The eroded material also adds turbidity and
nutrients to the water column that further inhibit SAV
colonization and growth. Additionally, the landmasses
themselves are extremely high quality emergent wetlands. These
wetlands are even more valuable than most since they are part
of a remote island with little human disruption. In its
entirety, Smith Island has lost over 3,300 acres of wetlands in
the last 150 years, and, in the identified project areas alone,
it lost almost 2,400 acres of SAV between 1992 and 1998.
Alternative Plans Considered: Investigations during this
study involved understanding and quantifying the impact of the
ongoing process of erosion on habitat degradation. It was
determined that the tremendous loss of SAV around parts of
Smith Island could be stopped and, to an extent, reversed by
protecting and restoring lost wetlands in the Martin National
Wildlife Refuge. A number of structural means were investigated
including stone revetment, groins, non-traditional bulkheads
and walls, proprietary erosion control measures, artificial
beach nourishment, breakwaters/sills, and geotextile
breakwaters. The study team concluded that the most cost-
effective and reliable way to accomplish this was to construct
offshore, segmented breakwaters to protect or recreate
strategic areas along the coastline of the Refuge. In many
areas, the breakwaters would be back-filled using borrow
material from the Chesapeake Bay bottom west of the Island.
This back-fill would create additional wetland habitat and
greatly increase the effectiveness of the structures.
Four main areas of analysis were identified in the
reconnaissance effort and were carried through the feasibility
process, the Western Shoreline, Fog Point Cove, Back Cove and
Terrapin Sand Cove. Each of these areas has been seriously
degraded over time due to erosion. Of the four, no plan at
Terrapin Sand Cove was recommended for implementation due to
the exorbitant cost. Plans at the other three areas that form
the recommended project are estimated to protect 216 acres of
wetlands and 504 acres of SAV over a 50-year life span, while
at the same time creating 24 acres of wetlands and 1,440 acres
of SAV habitat over the same time. Minimal adverse impacts are
anticipated as a result of construction including temporary and
localized turbidity and impacts related to offshore borrow
sites, if utilized. The project will require 68,000 cubic yards
of material for back-fill.
Recommended Plan. The selected plan includes construction
of segmented offshore breakwaters located from 30 to 100 feet
offshore, depending upon water depth and shoreline
configuration. The breakwaters would have a top elevation of
+3.5 feet Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW). Areas behind the
breakwaters would be backfilled and wetlands enhanced through
plantings. The following four components are included in the
plan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project area Location Structure Length Height Backfill Plants
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western shoreline.................... Off-shore from Swan Off shore Breakwaters.. 9,420 ft +3.5 MLLW 15,000 CY/ Spartina alternaflora.
Island to Fog Point 7.5 acres
Cove.
Fog Point Cove....................... Off-shore, 600 ft. Off shore Breakwaters 1,950 ft +3.5 MLLW 15,000 CY/ Spartina alternaflora.
extension from western and sill. 7.5 acres
shore, 1,200 ft. from
eastern shore.
Back Cove NW Shoreline............... Off-shore, along NW Off shore Breakwaters.. 5,950 ft +3.5 MLLW 15, 000 CY/ Spartina alternaflora.
shoreline of Back Cove 7.5 acres
with extension into
cove shore.
Back Cove SE Shoreline............... Off-shore, along SE Off shore Breakwaters.. 1,950 ft +3.5 MLLW 15,000 CY/ Spartina alternaflora.
shoreline of Back Cove 7.5 acres
with extension into
cove shore.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Views of States, Non-Federal Interests and Other Counties:
This project is highly supported at the State and local level
by Somerset County, the State of Maryland, and the Chesapeake
Bay community.
Views of Federal and Regional Agencies: The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service has provided a letter of support for the
project.
Estimated Implementation Costs: Baseline costs for the
recommended plan in November 2000 dollars are shown below:
Federal Cost............................................ $4,800,000
Non-Federal Cost........................................ 2,600,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total Project Estimated Cost...................... 7,400,000
Description of Non-Federal Implementation Costs:
The State of Maryland and Somerset County will be
responsible to acquire all real estate necessary for project
construction, which is estimated at $2,000.
Estimated Annual O&M Costs: Pre-construction monitoring
will cost $7,000, and there will be 5 years of monitoring at a
total of 440,000 (estimated).
Description of Non-Federal O&M Costs: The state of Maryland
Department of Natural Resources will assume responsibility for
O&M at an estimated annual cost of $16,000.
Preconstruction Planning Costs: The cost of PED is
currently estimated to be $800,000.
(4) Chickamauga Lock and Dam, Tennessee
Location of Study Area: Chickamauga Lock and Dam is located
on the Tennessee River (river mile 471.0) at Chattanooga, TN
(13 miles upstream of the Port of Chattanooga, TN).
Problems and Opportunities Identified in Study: The entire
Chickamauga project is plagued with ``concrete growth''
resulting from an alkali-aggregate reaction (AAR). This
reaction creates a gel that absorbs moisture, swells, and
expands the concrete. When the concrete is restrained, the
growth increases internal stresses, which causes cracking and
movement of the concrete monoliths. This movement causes
equipment misalignment as well as structural instability. The
growth is continuing; therefore, non-standard, major
maintenance is increasing, raising both expenses and lock
outages. In addition to the concrete growth problems,
Chickamauga Lock has only one chamber, measuring 60 feet wide
and 360 feet long. The lock, completed in 1940, can accommodate
four standard barges (26,x175,), which have virtually
disappeared from the Tennessee River System. Growth in traffic,
barge sizes (jumbo barges 35,x195, are now preferred), and the
size and configuration of tows have increased delays and
processing times. The small lock at Chickamauga currently
passes only one jumbo barge per lockage. Witb an average
processing time of 8 hours per tow, Chickamauga Lock has the
highest average locking time in the entire Ohio River System.
This represents a significant economic loss to the shipping
industry and, ultimately, to the consumer.
Alternative Plans Considered: Replacement of the existing
lock (60,x360,) was determined to be the without-project
condition for the Chickamauga Lock feasibility study.
Nonstructural plans were evaluated in the without-project
condition analysis, but did not resolve the AAR problems
associated with the lock. Several alternative improvements
plans were then considered to address problems and needs. These
alternatives included structural measures involving the
construction of new locks (75,x400,, 110,x800,) and the use of
a congestion fee without project condition (new 60,x360, lock).
Helper boats are included as components of the alternative
structural plans. After the initial screening process, the
study focused on the feasibility of two replacement lock sizes
and a replacement-in-kind combined with a congestion fee. A
replacement lock would be located riverward of the existing
lock and immediately downstream of the dam. The existing lock
would continue in use during construction of the new lock, but
would be closed upon project completion. The old lock would be
plugged with concrete to insure its integrity as a water
barrier.
a. The 75,x400, lock will accommodate four jumbo barges
(35,x195,) in a single lockage. In the Tennessee River system
only Melton Hill Lock and Dam on the Clinch River has these
dimensions. Helper boat operations would be implemented when
justified. In addition, lockage efficiency can be increased
with a policy to restrict tows to a 2-wide barge configuration
and 1 3-cut limit.
b. The 110,x600, lock will accommodate nine jumbo barges.
The size matches most of the main Tennessee River locks. Helper
boats operations are not required at Chickamauga with this lock
size.
c. The replacement-in-kind (60,x360,) would be combined
with a congestion fee. Congestion fees call for the management
of traffic demand at a lock through the imposition of lockage
fees. The fee is designed to influence the shipper with very
marginal waterway savings to shift their traffic to an
alternative overland mode, thereby reducing the amount of lock
congestion and increasing the rate savings of the remaining
shippers. The congestion fee alternative includes the use of
helper boats at a lock, when justified.
Description of Authorized Plan: The plan being authorized
provides a replacement lock, 100 feet wide by 600 feet long, at
the Chickamauga Project.
The 110,x600, lock was not recommended by the Chief of
Engineers as the National Economic Development plan, but has
significant non-economic advantages. The 100,x600, lock is
superior in reducing lockage-transit time and facilitating safe
movement of traffic. The shorter processing time associated
with the 110,x600, lock also relates to improve efficiency for
the towing industry and reduces transportation cost. The
110,x600, lock provides an additional $0.7 million per year in
transportation cost savings. The difference in initial
construction costs between the recommended plan consisting of a
75,x400, lock and the plan being authorized consisting of a
110,x600, lock is $26 million, only a 10.7 percent increase in
costs. The 110,x600, lock is economically justified, with
annual net benefits of $2.9 million and a benefit/cost ratio of
2.1. The 110,x600, lock is compatible with all the downstream
Tennessee River main chamber locks (with the exception of the
1,000 foot chamber at Pickwick Landing). The 110,x600, lock
size is also compatible with lock chambers on the Ohio River to
Pittsburgh, PA and on the Upper Mississippi River. In the long
term, the 110,x600, is considered to provide greater
environmental benefits, and is the environmentally preferred
plan. The 110,x600, lock will provide the greatest benefits to
water and air quality, noise, and aquatic resources, as well as
to socioeconomic factors such as shipper costs, river traffic,
infrastructure, and intemodal shifts.
Physical Data on Project Features: In general, the plan
being authorized includes the following major features (the
details of which may change during preconstruction engineering
and design):
a. To provide a downstream water barrier during
construction, a sheet pile cofferdam connecting the dam and
existing lock will be constructed. A temporary bascule-type
drawbridge will be constructed across the lower approach to the
existing lock to provide access to the new lock construction
site within the cofferdam. After the cofferdam is removed, the
bascule bridge would be relocated to provide a permanent access
bridge to the new lock.
b. Upstream and downstream lock approach walls will be
built on the spillway side, with the downstream approach wall
extending under the Norfolk Southern Railway Bridge.
Approximately 3,200 feet of the navigation channel will be
excavated immediately downstream of the existing lock. Two new
30 foot diameter mooring cells will be built downstream of the
new lock.
c. The State Road (SR) 153 bridge across the lock will
remain open during construction, and Lake Resort Drive would be
relocated. As part of the relocation of Lake Resort Drive, two
new bridges will be built, one over North Chickamauga Creek and
one for grade separation between Lake Resort Drive and the
permanent access road to the North Chickamauga Creek Cgeenway.
Improvements will be made to the intersection of Access Road
and Lake Resort Drive.
d. The existing lock operation building will be demolished.
The new lock operation building will be a three-level structure
with the top level serving as the operation center, the middle
level as a visitor area and assembly room, and the lowest level
as an electrical equipment and transformation room. The new
lock operation building will be located on the land wall of the
new lock.
e. Primary vehicle access to the facility will be across
the existing bridge over North Chickamauga Creek. The existing
visitor parking lot adjacent to the earthen dam will be used as
part of the construction laydown area. The existing visitor
overlook will be removed and replaced by a new overlook
adjacent tot he existing lock's lower miter gates.
f. A new 80-car parking area will be constructed on earth
fill adjacent to the overlook. The fill will bring the parking
facility up in elevation to allow better access for the
physically disabled and will facilitate better access to the
area. The parking lot will be curbed and sidewalks will be
provided.
g. A two-lane road will connect the Hixso Greenway area to
the lock access road. It will pass under relocated Lake Resort
Drive using the same bridge provided for construction access to
the spoil disposal area. This arrangement will separate the
through traffic from the site. It will allow for temporary
closure during construction of the existing bridge over North
Chickamauga Creek to the public.
h. Once the new lock is constructed, a portion of the
existing lock chamber and the associated wall culverts will be
plugged with concrete. The upper and lower miter gates will be
removed. Walls will be strengthened by post-tensioning, and
wider slots will be cut in the approach walls to prevent
problems from continued concrete growth. Miscellaneous
equipment and buildings will be removed.
i. Environmental Considerations. Terrestrial areas
distributed by construction activities will be replanted or
reforested by minimize long-term losses. Mussels will be
collected and relocated to unaffected areas. Eleven acres of
aquatic habitat will be created. The new filing and emptying
system will be designed to facilitate the migration of certain
fish species though the lock. No compensatory mitigation will
be necessary.
Views of States, Non-Federal Interests and Other Counties:
The 35 letters received from industry and local government
representatives in response to the draft report express strong
support for a 110,x600, lock. Many feel that the larger lock
has advantages that are not captured in the economic analyses.
They note that the efficiencies in processing tows through the
larger lock and the growth potential it would provide would
more than justify the additional initial $26 million
investment.
The Tennessee River Valley Association and The Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway Development Authority represent regional
waterway interests. They point to the 110,x600, lock as the
``standard'' size for the Tennessee River. Also mentioned are
the reduced costs to shippers, greater lock capacity, improved
environmental benefits, and marginal additional cost.
The Governor of Tennessee, noted in his letter of January
20, 2002, ``The State supports the 110,x600, lock as the more
prudent choice because it provides more capability at only a
slightly higher cost, results in a lock which is compatible
with navigation usage in the Tennessee and Ohio River systems
and provides the greatest flexibility in the future development
and maintenance of the economy of the Upper Tennessee River
Basin.''
The Governor of Tennessee and his staff, reiterate in their
letter of April 8, 2002 in response to the final report, ``the
State of Tennessee has consistently urged the Corps replace the
existing lock with a 100,x600, lock.'' They maintain ``the
additional cost will be a prudent investment that will
alleviate the need to build a larger lock to accommodate
traffic in the future.''
Views of Federal and Regional Agencies: The U.S. Department
of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Cookeville,
Tennessee, state in their Coordination Act Report, dated
February 11, 2002 that:
``The preferred alternative [their preferred alternative is
the 110,x600, lock], with protective measures incorporated,
should avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to fish
and wildlife resources in the Chickamauga Dam tailwater and
downstream areas. Additionally, protective measures will avoid
adverse impacts to terrestrial resources in areas adjacent to
the construction site that will be used as disposal and
equipment staging areas. We would support implementation of the
preferred alternative provided that the protective measures are
implemented and strictly enforced.''
Letters of coordination were also received from the U.S.
Department of the Interior and the U.S. Coast Guard in response
to the final report.
Estimated Implementation Cost
[October 2001 price levels]
Federal (Corps of Engineers)............................ $133,583,500
Non-Federal (Inland Waterways Trust Fund)............... 133,583,500
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 267,167,000
Description of Non-Federal Implementation Costs: In
accordance with the cost sharing and financial concepts
reflected in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, fifty
percent of the total cost of construction will be derived from
the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
Estimated Annual O&M Costs
[October 2001 price levels]
Federal (Corps of Engineers)............................ $4,153,000
Description of Federal O&M Cost: The Federal O&M costs
encompass the normal annual expenses for operation and routine
maintenance of the replacement lock. The total annual O&M cost
is $4.1 million. This represents a savings of $0.9 million over
the without project condition (60,x360, lock). These costs
include cyclical maintenance, i.e. repair and replacement of
lock equipment, but not major rehabilitation or major component
replacement.
Direct Beneficiaries: The Chickamauga Lock Improvement
Project will reduce commercial navigation processing times and
associated costs by the installation of a larger lock chamber.
Project beneficiaries include the marine towing industry
(reduced operating costs) and the industries and consumers of
the commodities transported (reduced delivery costs). The major
industries benefiting from the project include asphalt,
aggregates, coal, grains, chemicals, ores and minerals, iron
and steel, forest products, and construction.
Section 102. Small projects for flood damage reduction
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out projects for
flood damage reduction under the authority of section 205 of
the Flood Control Act of 1948. Authorizes projects at: (1)
Cache River Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas; (2) Santa Ana River Basin
and Orange County Streams, California; (3) Nashua River,
Fitchburg, Massachusetts; (4) Saginaw River, Hamilton Dam,
Flint, Michigan; (5) South Branch of the Wild Rice River,
Borup, Minnesota; (6) Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri;
(7) James River, Greene County, Missouri; (8) McKeel Brook, New
Jersey; (9) East River, Silver Beach, New York City, New York;
(10) Little Mill Creek, Southampton, Pennsylvania; (11) Little
Neshaminy Creek, Warrenton, Pennsylvania; and (12) Surfside
Beach, South Carolina.
Section 103. Small projects for emergency streambank protection
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out a project for
streambank erosion control, under section 14 of the Flood
Control Act of 1946 for the Middle Fork Grand River, Gentry
County, Missouri.
Section 104. Small projects for navigation
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out projects for
navigation, under the authority of section 107 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1960. Authorizes projects at: (1) Blytheville
County Harbor, Arkansas; (2) Evanston, Illinois; (3) Niagara
Frontier Transportation Authority Boat Harbor, Buffalo, New
York; and (4) Woodlawn Marina, Lackawanna, New York.
Section 105. Small projects for improvement of the quality of the
environment
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out a project for
improvement of the environment under the authority of section
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 for
Smithville Lake, Missouri.
Section 106. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem restoration
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out projects for
aquatic ecosystem restoration under the authority of section
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. Authorizes
projects at: (a) Colorado River, Yuma, Arizona; (2) Chino
Valley, California; (3) Stockton deep Water Ship Cannel and
Lower San Joaquin River, California; (4) Sweetwater Reservoir,
San Diego County, California; (5) Biscayne Bay, Florida; (6)
Chattahoochee River, Columbus, Georgia and Phenix City,
Alabama; (7) Chattahoochee River and Ocmulgee River Basins,
Georgia; and (8) Snake River, Jerome, Idaho.
Section 107. Small projects for shoreline protection
Directs the Secretary to study and carry out a project
under section 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the
Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores of
publicly owned property'', approved August 13, 1946, at Nelson
Lagoon, Alaska.
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 201. Annual passes for recreation
Amends section 208(c)(4) of the Water Resources Development
act of 1996 to extend the authority for alternative annual
passes to December 31, 2004.
Section 202. Non-Federal contributions
Amends section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 by placing a prohibition on the solicitation of excess
contributions from the non-Federal sponsor for water resources
development projects. This provision does not affect the
ability of non-Federal interest to make additional
contributions in order to implement a project as provided in
section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986.
Section 203. Harbor cost sharing
Amends sections 101 and 214 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 by striking ``45 feet'' each place it
appears and inserting ``53 feet.'' Under this amendment, a 35%
non-Federal cost-share shall apply to deep draft navigation
projects of up to 53 feet in depth. This change only applies to
projects, or separable elements of projects, on which a
contract for physical construction has not been awarded before
the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 204. Funding to process permits
Amends section 214 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 2000 to extend the period of funding to process permits to
2005 and the clarify the original intent that the acceptance
and expenditure of funds under this section shall not affect
the order in which permits are considered or approved by the
Secretary.
Section 205. National Shoreline Erosion Control Development and
Demonstration Program
Amends sections 5(a) and 5(b)(1)(A) of the Act entitled
``An Act authorizing Federal participation in the cost of
protecting the shores of publicly owned property'', to extend
the program to 10 years and to continue the planning, design,
and construction phase to 6 years, provide for cost-sharing,
allow removal of some projects, and to increase the
authorization level from $21,000,000 to $31,000,000.
Section 206. Written agreement for water resources projects
Amends section 221(a) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 to
allow project cooperation agreements to include a provision for
liquidated damages. Amends section 912(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 to eliminate civil penalties
in project cooperation agreements and allow the use of
liquidated damages instead.
Section 207. Assistance for remediation, restoration, and reuse
Authorizes the Secretary to provide assessment, planning,
and design assistance to State and local governments for
remediation, environmental restoration, and reuse of areas that
will contribute to improvement in water quality or to
conservation of water and related resources. The non-Federal
share is 50%. Authorizes $30,000,000 a year for fiscal years
2003-2007. Under the authority provided by this section, the
Secretary may help the City of Norwich carry out an
environmental assessment of the Seders Property at Norwich
Harbor, Connecticut.
Section 208. Compilation of laws
Directs the Secretary to produce a compilation of water
resources development laws enacted after November 8, 1966, and
before January 1, 2003.
Section 209. Dredged material disposal
Amends section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 to ensure that the Secretary has the authority to
address dredged material disposal on a regional, as well as
project-by-project basis, and may combine funding from separate
projects to do so.
Section 210. Wetlands mitigation
Requires the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable
and where appropriate, to give preference for use of wetlands
mitigation banks that meet certain criteria, when carrying out
wetlands mitigation for a water resources project.
Section 211. Remote and subsistence harbors
Allows the Secretary to recommend a project for harbor and
navigation improvements without the need to demonstrate that
the project is justified solely by national economic
development benefits if (1) the community served by the project
is at least 70 miles from the nearest surface accessible
commercial port with no direct rail or highway link to another
serviceable community or located in the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, or
American Samoa; (2) the harbor is economically critical such
that over 80 percent of the goods transported would be consumed
within the community served by the harbor and navigation
improvement; and (3) the long term viability of the community
is dependent on the harbor, including access to resources and
facilities design to protect public health and safety.
Section 212. Beneficial uses of dredged material
Amends section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992 to allow cost-sharing of the use of dredged material at
any water resources project (not just aquatic ecosystem
restoration projects), to allow nonprofit entities to serve as
the non-Federal interest for a project under specified
conditions, to increase the authorization of appropriations of
$30,000,000 annually, and to allow the Secretary to develop
regional sediment management plans at full Federal expense.
Directs the Secretary to give priority to a beneficial use
project in the vicinity of Morehead City, North Carolina.
Section 213. Cost sharing provisions for certain areas
Amends section 1156 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 to raise the exemption from cost-sharing from $250,000
to $500,000 for the costs of studies and projects in the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, United States
Virgin Islands and on land in the State of Alaska conveyed to
an Alaska Native Village Corporation under the Alaskan Native
Claims Settlement Act.
Section 214. Revision of project cooperation agreement
Directs the Secretary to revise the cooperation agreement
for a project to take into account the change in Federal
participation in the project, when Congress increases the
authorization ceiling for a project.
Section 215. Cost sharing
Provides that in any case in which Congress increases the
maximum amount of Federal funds that may be allocated for a
project or increases the total cost of a project, such increase
shall not affect any cost-sharing requirement applicable to the
project.
Section 216. Credit for work performed before cooperation agreement
Requires the Secretary to enter into an agreement with a
non-Federal sponsor for the performance of work eligible for
credit against the non-Federal sponsor's costs.
Section 217. Recreation user fee revenues
Amends section 225 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to make permanent the provision of law that allows the
Secretary to retain recreation user fee revenues for use at
Corps recreation facilities.
Section 218. Expedited actions for emergency flood damage reduction
Directs the Secretary to expedite planning, design, and
construction of a project for flood damage reduction for an
area that, within the preceding 5 years, has been subject to
flooding that resulted in the loss of life and caused damage
sufficient to warrant a declaration of a major disaster by the
President under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act.
Section 219. Watershed and river basin assessments
Amends section 729(f)(1) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 to provide a 75% Federal share for watershed and
river basin assessments carried out under that section. To
encourage states and local governments to engage in regional
planning, the Committee has reduced the non-Federal cost share
20 25% for basin-wide water assessments prepared by the Corps
of Engineers in cooperation with state and local agencies.
Section 220. Tribal Partnership Program
Amends section 203 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 2000 to enable Oklahoma tribes to participate in the Tribal
Partnership Program.
Section 221. Treatment of certain separable elements
Authorizes the Secretary, during construction of a project,
to identify opportunities to achieve benefits relating to a
primary mission of the Corps as a separable project element,
and carry out that separable element at full Federal expense,
up to the lesser of $1 million or 3% of project costs, if that
element would be carried out more cost-effectively in
conjunction with the ongoing project.
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
Section 301. Cook Inlet, Anchorage Harbor, Alaska
Modifies the project for navigation, Cook Inlet, Anchorage
Harbor, Alaska, to authorize the Secretary to deepen the harbor
at a total cost of $14,500,000.
Section 302. Galena, Alaska
Modifies the project for emergency bank stabilization,
Galena, Alaska, to direct the Secretary to construct the
project at a total cost of $6,000,000.
Section 303. King Cove Harbor, Alaska
Provides that the maximum Federal expenditure for the King
Cove Harbor navigation project shall be $8,000,000.
Section 304. St. Paul Harbor, Alaska
Modifies the project for navigation, St. Paul Harbor,
Alaska, to direct the Secretary to construct the project at a
total cost of $65,000,000 with the non-Federal share not to
exceed $14,400,000.
Section 305. Sitka, Alaska
Modifies the Thompson Harbor, Sitka, Alaska, element of the
project for navigation, Southeast Alaska Harbors of Refuge, to
direct the Secretary to correct design deficiencies, at a total
Federal cost of $6,300,000.
Section 306. Tatilek, Alaska
Provides that the maximum Federal expenditure for the
Tatilek navigation project shall be $10,000,000.
Section 307. American and Sacramento Rivers, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, American
and Sacramento Rivers, California, to increase the
authorization to $205,000,000.
Section 308. Cache Creek Basin, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Cache
Creek Basin, California, to direct the Secretary to mitigate
the impacts of the new south levee of the settling basin on the
city of Woodland's storm drainage system and to restore the
city's pre-project capacity to release water to the Yolo
Bypass, when the Bypass is in a low flow condition.
Section 309. Grayson Creek/Murderer's Creek, California
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Grayson Creek/Murderer's Creek, California, to direct the
Secretary to provide credit for the cost of work performed by
the non-Federal interest before the project cooperation
agreement is signed, if an integral part of the project. Also
allows the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration
benefits when determining whether the project is justified.
Section 310. John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel,
California
Modifies the project for navigation, John F. Baldwin Ship
Channel and Stockton Ship Channel, California, to allow the
non-Federal share of the cost of the project to be provided in
the form of in-kind services and to direct the Secretary to
provide credit for the cost of planning and design work
performed by the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of
the project.
Section 311. Los Angeles Harbor, Los Angeles, California
Modifies the project for navigation, Los Angeles Harbor,
Los Angeles, California, to direct the Secretary to provide
credit for the cost of planning and design work performed by
the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of the project.
Section 312. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California
Modifies the project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry
Channel, California, to direct the Secretary to prepare a
reevaluation report to determine whether or not maintenance of
the project is justified, and carry out such maintenance, if
justified.
Section 313. Napa River Salt marsh Restoration, Napa River, California
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa and Sonoma Counties, to
direct the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of worked
performed by the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of
the project.
Section 314. Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California, to authorize the
Secretary to expend $1,000,000 to enhance public access to the
project.
Section 315. Pinole Creek, California
Modifies the project for improvement of the quality of the
environment, Pinole Creek Phase I, California, to direct the
Secretary to provide credit for work performed by the non-
Federal interests, if an integral part of the project.
Section 316. Prado Dam, California
Ensures that the agreement between the Corps of Engineers
and the Orange County Water District, which requires the
District to pay specific costs associated with operating and
maintaining Prado Dam for seasonal water conservation, shall
remain in effect after reconfiguration of the Dam for volumes
of water up to the maximum amount provided for water
conservation prior to the reconfiguration of the Dam.
Section 317. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California
Modifies the project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water
Ship Channel, California, to direct the Secretary to provide
credit for work performed by the non-Federal interests before
the project cooperation agreement, if an integral part of the
project.
Section 318. Sacramento River, Glenn-Colusa, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Sacramento
River, Glenn-Colusa, California, to direct the Secretary to
provide the non-Federal interest a credit of up to $4,000,000
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for
costs incurred by the non-Federal interest, if integral to the
project.
Section 319. San Lorenzo River, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, San
Lorenzo River, California, to direct the Secretary to provide
the non-Federal interest a credit not more than $2,000,000
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for
costs incurred by the non-Federal interest if an integral part
of the project.
Section 320. Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction and water
supply, Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, California, to direct the
Secretary to construct the project at a total cost of
$50,000,000.
Section 321. Upper Guadalupe River, California
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction and
recreation, Upper Guadalupe River, California, to ensure that
the project is carried out as authorized by Congress.
Section 322. Walnut Creek Channel, California
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Walnut Creek Channel, California, to direct the Secretary to
provide credit for the cost of work performed by the non-
Federal interest, if an integral part of the project and to
authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem
restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest.
Section 323. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California
Modifies the project for improvement of the quality of the
environment, Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, to
direct the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of work
performed by the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of
the project.
Section 324. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California, to direct the
Secretary to provide credit for the cost of work performed by
the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of the project,
and to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem
restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest.
Section 325. Brevard, County, Florida
Amends section 310 of the Water Resources Act of 1999,
authorizing mitigation of damage to a project for shore
protection, to authorize credit for costs incurred by the non-
Federal interest to respond to damages to Brevard County
beaches that are the result of a Federal navigation project, as
determined in a final report of a study of such damages.
Section 326. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Florida
Amends the project for shore protection, Gasparilla and
Estero Islands, Florida, to authorize credit for the cost of
work performed by the non-Federal interest that is integral to
the project.
Section 327, Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida
Amends the project for shore protection, Lido Key Beach,
Sarasota, Florida, to increase the authorization to
$12,926,000.
Section 328. Manatee Harbor, Florida
Amends the project for navigation, Manatee Harbor, Florida,
to authorize extension of the south channel at a total cost of
$9,8000,000, and to authorize in-kind and other credit for
costs incurred by the non-Federal interest for work that is
integral to the project.
Section 329. Rose Bay, Volusia County, Florida
Amends the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Rose
Bay, Volusia County, Florida, to provide credit for costs
incurred by the Florida Department of Transportation, if
required for the proper functioning of the project.
Section 330. Tampa Harbor, Florida
Modifies the project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, Florida,
to direct the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of work
performed by the non-Federal interest, if an integral part of
the project.
Section 331. Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida
Modifies the project for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big Bend
Channel, Florida, to direct the Secretary to provide credit for
the cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest, if an
integral part of the project.
Section 332. Little Wood River, Gooding, Idaho
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Little
Wood River, Gooding, Idaho, to authorize in-kind contributions,
use of funds from other Federal programs to be used toward the
non-Federal share if a permissible use of the funds under the
other program, and to direct the secretary to make a
determination of the non-Federal interest's ability to pay the
non-Federal costs.
Section 333. Indiana Harbor, Indiana
Modifies the project for environmental dredging, Indiana
Harbor, Indiana. to direct the Secretary to provide credit for
the cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest, if an
integral part of the project.
Section 334. Little Calumet River, Indiana
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Little
Calumet River, Indiana, to authorize the Secretary to complete
the project in accordance with the post authorization change
report dated August 2000, at a total cost of $186,300,000.
Section 335. Little Calumet River Basin (Cady Marsh Ditch), Indiana
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Little
Calumet River Basin (Cady Marsh Ditch), Indiana, to increase
the project authorization to $23,146,000.
Section 336. Long Lake, Indiana
Modifies the project for ecosystem restoration, Long Lake,
Indiana, to direct the Secretary to carry out components of the
project located on Federal land at full Federal expense and to
direct the Secretary to seek reimbursement from the Secretary
of the Interior the amount equal to the cost of the project
allocated to benefit the Indian Dunes National Lakeshore.
Section 337. White River, Indiana
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction,
Indianapolis, Fall Creek Section, on West Fork of White River,
Indiana, to authorize the Secretary to carry out the Fall Creek
Reach feature, at a total cost of $28,545,000.
Section 338. Wolf Lake, Indiana
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Wolf Lake, Indiana, to direct the Secretary to provide credit
for the cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest, if
an integral part of the project.
Section 339. Harlan County, Kentucky
Directs the Secretary to take measures to provide 100-year
level of flood protection at the project for flood damage
reduction, Harlan County, Kentucky.
Section 340. Amite River and Tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge
Parish Watershed
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction and
recreation, Amite River and Tributaries, East Baton Rouge
Parrish, Louisiana, to provide that cost sharing for the
project shall be determined in accordance with section 103(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, as in effect on
October 11, 1996.
Section 341. J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to
Shreveport, Louisiana
Modifies the project for mitigation of fish and wildlife
losses, J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to
Shreveport, Louisiana, to authorize the purchase and
reforesting of lands that have been cleared or converted to
agricultural uses.
Section 342. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana
Modifies the project for hurricane-flood protection on Lake
Pontchartrain, Louisiana, to direct the Secretary to provide
credit for costs incurred in relocating oyster beds in the
Davis Pond project area, if integral to the project.
Section 343. West Bank of the Mississippi River (East of Harvey Canal),
Louisiana
Makes technical corrections to the WRDA 1999 modification
of the project to prevent flood damage-hurricane damage
reduction, West Bank of the Mississippi River (East of Harvey
Canal), Louisiana.
Section 344. Union River, Maine
Modifies the project for navigation, Union River, Maine, by
deauthorizing a portion of the navigation channel to allow it
to be used for anchorage.
Section 345. Cass River, Spaulding Township, Michigan
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Cass
River, Spaulding Township, Michigan, to incorporate flood
damage reduction works constructed by the non-Federal interests
and to direct the Secretary to provide credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project for work the Secretary
determines is integral to the project.
Section 346. Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan
Modifies the project for emergency streambank and shoreline
protection, Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan, to
include measures to enhance public access and increase the
Federal amount to $3,000,000.
Section 347. Water Resources Institute, Muskegon, Michigan
Modifies the project for emergency streambank and shoreline
protection, Water Resources Institute, Muskegon, Michigan, to
provide for completion in accordance with the approved plans
and specifications for Grand Valley State University, Lake
Michigan Center and directs the Secretary to provide credit
towards the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for
work the Secretary determines is integral to the project.
Section 348. Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan
Modifies the project for emergency streambank protection,
Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan, to increase the maximum
Federal expenditure to $2,000,000.
Section 349. Ada, Minnesota
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Wild Rice
River, Minnesota, to authorize the Secretary to consider
national ecosystem restoration benefits, to exclude
consideration of an emergency levee as a pre-project condition
and to allow the local sponsor to contribute a larger non-
Federal share, if necessary to implement the project.
Section 350. Duluth Harbor, McQuade Road, Minnesota
Modifies the project for navigation, Duluth Harbor, McQuade
Road, Minnesota, to authorize the Secretary to provide access
and recreational facilities as described in the Detailed
Project Report and Environmental Assessment dated August 1999,
at a maximum Federal cost of $5,000,000.
Section 351. Granite Falls, Minnesota
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Granite
Falls, Minnesota, to increase the maximum Federal expenditure
to $12,00,000.
Section 352. Red Lake River, Minnesota
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Red Lake
River, Minnesota, to increase the project authorization to
$25,000,000.
Section 353. Silver Bay, Minnesota
Modifies the project for navigation, Silver Bay, Minnesota,
to include operation and maintenance of the general navigation
facilities as a Federal responsibility.
Section 354. Taconite Harbor, Minnesota
Modifies the project for navigation, Taconite Harbor,
Minnesota, to include operation and maintenance of the general
navigation facilities as a Federal responsibility.
Section 355. Two Harbors, Minnesota
Modifies the project for navigation, Two Harbors,
Minnesota, to include construction of a dredged material
disposal facility at a Federal cost not to exceed $5,000,000.
Section 356. Bois Brule Drainage and Levee District, Missouri
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Bois Brule
Drainage and Levee District, Missouri, to increase the maximum
Federal expenditure to $25,000,000.
Section 357. Turkey Creek Basin, Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas
City, Kansas
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Turkey
Creek Basin, Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas City, Kansas, to
direct the Secretary to provide credit toward the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project for work that is integral to
the project.
Section 358. Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York
Modifies the project for shoreline protection, Orchard
Beach, Bronx, New York, to increase the project authorization
to $18,000,000.
Section 359. Times Beach, Buffalo, New York
Modifies the project for improvement of the quality of the
environment, Times Beach, Buffalo, New York, to direct the
Secretary to credit not more than $750,000 toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project for the cost of work
by the non-Federal interest, if integral to the project.
Section 360. Port of New York and New Jersey, New York and New Jersey
Modifies the project for navigation, Port of New York and
New Jersey, New York and New Jersey, to prohibit the Secretary
from including in the project cooperation agreement a
requirement that the non-Federal sponsor make certain
facilities operational prior to deepening of the channel.
Section 361. New York State Canal System
Modifies section 553 of WRDA 1996 to change the definition
of the New York State Canal System.
Section 362. Ashtabula River, Ohio
Modifies the project for environmental dredging, Ashtabula
River, Ohio, to direct the Secretary to provide credit toward
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for work the
Secretary determines is integral to the project.
Section 363. Willamette River Temperature Control, McKenzie Subbasin,
Oregon
Modifies the project for environmental restoration,
Willamette River Temperature Control, McKenzie Subbasin,
Oregon, to direct the Secretary to compensate small businesses
for losses attributable to unanticipated sedimentation
resulting from project implementation.
Section 364. Lackawanna River at Olyphant, Pennsylvania
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Lackawanna
River at Olyphant, Pennsylvania, to increase the project
authorization to $20,000,000.
Section 365. Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Lackawanna
River at Scranton, Pennsylvania, to increase the project
authorization to $23,000,000.
Section 366. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania
Authorizes the Secretary to take such action as may be
necessary to prevent shoreline erosion to protect recreational
facilities located south of Pennsylvania Route 994 on the east
shore of Raystown Lake.
Section 367. Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania
Modifies the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania, to direct the Secretary to credit $400,000 for
the cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest
determined by the Secretary to be an integral part of the
project.
Section 368. Solomon's Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Wyoming
Valley, Pennsylvania, to include the project for flood damage
reduction, Solomon's Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Section 369. South Central Pennsylvania
Modifies the geographic scope of section 313 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992.
Section 370. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Wyoming
Valley, Pennsylvania, to direct the Secretary to coordinate
with non-Federal interests to review options for increased
public access.
Section 371. Little Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, Tennessee
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Little
Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, Tennessee, to direct the
Secretary to allow the non-Federal interest to participate in
the financing of evaluating and implementing the project for
flood damage reduction in accordance with section 903(c) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986, if necessary to
implement the project.
Section 372. Bowie County Levee, Texas
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Red River
Below Denison Dam, Texas and Oklahoma, to direct the Secretary
to implement the Bowie County Levee feature of the project in
accordance with a specific plan.
Section 373. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Lower Rio
Grande Basin, Texas, to direct the Secretary to provide credit
for the cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest
determined by the Secretary to be an integral part of the
project and, in calculating the non-Federal share, to make a
determination on the non-Federal interest's ability to pay.
Section 374. North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas
Modifies the project for ecosystem restoration and storm
damage reduction, North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay,
Texas, to include recreation as a project purpose.
Section 375. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, San
Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas, to direct the Secretary to
provide credit for the cost of work performed by the non-
Federal interest determined by the Secretary to be an integral
part of the project.
Section 376. Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia
Amends section 358 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to change the date of termination of a cooperation
agreement for a navigation project.
Section 377. Great Bridge, Chesapeake, Virginia
Amends the project for navigation, Great Bridge,
Chesapeake, Virginia, to increase the authorization to
$48,000,000.
Section 378. Roanoke River Upper Basin, Virginia
Modifies the project for flood damage reduction, Roanoke
River Upper Basin, Virginia, to increase the project
authorization to $64,300,000.
Section 379. Blair and Sitcum Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington
Modifies the project for navigation, Blair and Sitcum
Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington, to direct the Secretary
to review the locally prepared plan and determine whether the
plan meets the evaluation and design standards of the Corps of
Engineers, and to authorize the Secretary to carry out the
plan, if properly designed and feasible, at a Federal cost not
to exceed $4,240,000. Also directs the Secretary to credit the
cost of work performed by the non-Federal interest determined
by the Secretary to be an integral part of the project.
Section 380. Greenbrier River Basin, West Virginia
Amends section 579(c) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 to increase the authorization for a flood
protection program for the Greenbrier River Basin, West
Virginia, to $89,000,000.
Section 381. Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin
Modifies the project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor,
Wisconsin, to direct the Secretary to deepen the upstream reach
of the navigation channel from 12 feet to 18 feet, at a total
cost of $300,000.
Section 382. Continuation of project authorizations
Continues the authorization for an additional 7 years the
following projects: (1) the project for navigation, Fall River
Harbor, Massachusetts and (2) the project for flood damage
reduction, Agana River, Guam.
Section 383. Project reauthorizations
Renews the authorization for the portion of the project for
navigation in the south part of the outer harbor, Manitowoc
Harbor, Wisconsin, that was deauthorized by section 101 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1962.
Section 384. Project deauthorizations
Deauthorizes a portion of each of the following projects
for navigation: Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut, Island End
River, Massachusetts, and City Waterway, Tacoma, Washington.
Section 385. Land conveyances
Authorizes the conveyance of Federal property at: (a)
Milford Kansas, (b) Hickory Point, Lake Eufaula, Oklahoma; and
(c) Boardman, Oregon.
Section 386. Extinguishment of reversionary interests and use
restrictions
Extinguishes reversionary interests and use restrictions in
deeds conveying two properties in Nez Perce County, Idaho.
TITLE IV--STUDIES
Section 401. Great Lakes Navigation System
Amends section 456 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to authorize the Secretary to accept the financial
participation of the Government of Canada in the study of Great
Lakes Navigation authorized in that section.
Section 402. John Glenn Great Lakes Basin Program
Amends section 455 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to authorize payment of the non-Federal share in the
form of services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind
contributions.
Section 403. St. George Harbor, Alaska
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of providing navigation improvements at St. George,
Alaska.
Section 404. Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway, Illinois,
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin
Directs the Secretary to transmit to Congress no later than
July 1, 2004, a report on the results of the Upper Mississippi
River and Illinois Waterways Restructured System Navigation
Feasibility Study. The Committee believes that this project is
vitally important to the economies of farming communities in
the Midwest. Accordingly, the Committee encourages the
Secretary to expedite completion of this study. In keeping with
existing authorization, the Committee urges the Secretary to
proceed with modernized lock and other navigation improvements
while simultaneously evaluating an enhanced environmental
restoration program for the basin. The Committee appreciates
the collaborative effort made to complete the Interim Report
and endorses this approach among federal agencies, state
agencies and private stakeholder groups as a means of forging a
basin-wide approach to managing this resource for multiple
uses.
Section 405. Hamilton, California
Directs the Secretary to continue planning,
preconstruction, engineering, and design efforts on the
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins Comprehensive Study-
Hamilton City Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration
Initial Project and modifies the study to include an area 2
miles north and 4 miles south of State Highway 32.
Section 406. Oceanside, California
Amends section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 2000 to provide the Secretary with an additional 12 months
to complete a study of plans to mitigate damages to beaches
resulting from military measures.
Section 407. Sacramento River, California
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of and alternatives for measures to protect water
diversion facilities and fish protective screen facilities on
the Sacramento River, California.
Section 408. San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,
California
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of the beneficial use of dredged material from the
San Francisco Bay in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,
California, including a review of using Sherman Island as a re-
handling site.
Section 409. Tybee Island, Georgia
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of including the northern end of Tybee Island
extending from the north terminal groin to the mouth of
Lazaretto Creek as part of the project for beach erosion
control, Tybee Island, Georgia.
Section 410. Calument Harbor, Illinois
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for navigation at Calumet
Harbor, Illinois.
Section 411. Paducah, Kentucky
Authorizes the Secretary to complete the rehabilitation
evaluation report the project for flood damage reduction,
Paducah, Kentucky, and to proceed to preconstruction
engineering and design, if feasible.
Section 412. West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for riverfront
development, including enhanced public access, recreation, and
environmental restoration, on the Mississippi River in West
Feliciana Parish.
Section 413. City of Mackinac Island, Michigan
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for navigation at the
city of Mackinac Island, Michigan.
Section 414. Chicago, Illinois
Amends section 425(a) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 2000 to clarify that some of the specified shoreline
protection study sites are on Lake Michigan.
Section 415. Mississippi River, Missouri and Illinois
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of modifying the project for the Mississippi River
(Regulating Works), between the Ohio and Missouri Rivers,
Missouri and Illinois, for navigation and environmental
restoration enhancements.
Section 416. Arthur Kill Channel and Morses Creek to Perth Amboy, New
Jersey
Directs the Secretary to reevaluate the results of the
study for the project for navigation, Arthur Kill Channel and
Morses Creek to Perth Amboy, New Jersey, to determine whether
the benefits of the project have increased as a result of a
change in circumstances.
Section 417. Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico
Directs the Corps to conduct a feasibility study of water
resources projects for the Pueblo of Zuni, Mexico, authorized
under the authority of section 203 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 2000.
Section 418. Hudson-Raritan Estuary, New York and New Jersey
Directs the Secretary, in carrying out a study for
environmental restoration, Hudson-Raritan Estuary, New York and
New Jersey, to establish and utilize the watershed restoration
teams composed of certain estuary restoration experts.
Section 419. Lake Carl Blackwell, Stillwater, Oklahoma
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage
reduction and ecosystem restoration at Lake Carl Blackwell,
Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Section 420. Sac and Fox Nation, Oklahoma
Directs the Secretary to develop a water and related land
resource conservation and management plan for the Sac and Fox
Nation, authorized under the authority of section 203 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 2000.
Section 421. Sutherlin, Oregon
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study of water resources
along Sutherlin Creek in the vicinity of Sutherlin, Oregon, to
determine the feasibility of carrying out a project to restore
and enhance aquatic resources using structural and
bioengineering techniques.
Section 422. Ecosystem restoration and fish passage improvements,
Oregon
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of undertaking ecosystem restoration and fish
passage improvements on rivers in Oregon, and authorizes up to
$5,000,000 for pilot projects.
Section 423. Northeastern Pennsylvania aquatic ecosystem restoration
and protection
Directs the secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration and
protection in the counties of Lackawanna, Lycoming,
Susquehanna, Wyoming, Pike, Wayne, Sullivan, Bradford,
Northumberland, Union, Snyder, and Montour, Pennsylvania,
relating to abandoned mine drainage abatement and
reestablishment of stream and river channels.
Section 424. Brownsville Ship Channel, Texas
Directs the Secretary to examine the feasibility of using
the Bahia Grande for project mitigation in carrying out the
feasibility study of the project for navigation, Brownsville
Ship Channel, Texas. Also authorizes credit for wetlands
restoration work performed by the non-Federal sponsor at Bahia
Grande, if integral to the project.
Section 425. Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay, Texas
Authorizes the secretary, in conducting the study for shore
protection and related improvements between Sabine Pass and the
entrance to Galveston Bay, to include any benefits related to
the use of State Highway 87 as an emergency evacuation route.
Section 426. Chehalis River Basin, Washington
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study for the Chehalis
River basin, including a study of the use of the basin's water
resources, to assist users in developing a fair and equitable
distribution of such resources.
Section 427. Sprague, Lincoln County, Washington
Authorizes the Secretary to accept from the non-Federal
interest funds provided under another Federal program to pay
all or part of the non-Federal share of the cost of a
feasibility study for flood damage reduction in the vicinity of
Sprague, Lincoln County, Washington, it is a permissible use of
funds under the other Federal program.
Section 428. Monongahela River Basin, Northern West Virginia
Directs the secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration and
protection projects in the watersheds of the Monongahela River
basin within the counties of Hancock, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel,
Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, Doddridge, Monongalia, Marion,
Harrison, Taylor, Barbour, Preston, Tucker, Mineral, Grant,
Gilmer, Brooke, and Ritchie, West Virginia, relating to
abandoned mine drainage abatement.
Section 429. Wauwatosa, Wisconsin
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage
reduction and environmental restoration, Menomonee River and
Underwood Creek.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Section 501. Maintenance of navigation channels
Authorizes the Secretary to maintain the following
navigation channels, if feasible: (1) Pix Bayou Navigation
Channel, Chambers County, Texas; (2) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor,
Pidgeon Industrial Park, Memphis Harbor, Tennessee; and (3)
Racine Harbor, Wisconsin. Also directs the Secretary to remove
sunken vessels and debris between miles 35 and 43 of the
Channel to Orange, Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas, for the
purpose of improving navigation safety and reducing the risk to
the public.
Section 502. Watershed management
Authorizes the Secretary to provide technical planning and
design assistance to a non-Federal interest for carrying out
watershed management, restoration and development projects in
the following watersheds: (1) Choctawhatchee, Pea, and Yellow
Rivers in Barbour, Bullock, Coffee, Covington, Crenshaw, Dale,
Geneva, Henry Houston, and Pike Counties, Alabama; (2) Spring
Branch, Huntsville, Alabama; (3) Cucamonga Basin, Upland,
California; (4) Tuolumne County, California; (5) Kinkaid Lake,
Jackson County, Illinois; (6) portions of the watersheds of
Concord, Charles, Blackstone, Neponset, Taunton, Nashua,
Shawsheen, and Merrimack Rivers, Massachusetts; (7) Jackson
Brook, New Jersey; (8) portions of the watersheds of Beaver,
Upper Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower Allegheny, Kiskiminetas,
Lower Monongahela, Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Rivers
in Beaver, Butler, Lawrence and Mercer, Pennsylvania; (9)
Southampton Creek, Southampton, Pennsylvania; (10) Unami Creek,
Milford Township, Pennsylvania; (11) Amite River basin,
Louisiana; (12) Iberville Parish, East Atchafalaya River basin,
Louisiana; (13) Genesee River watershed, New York; (14)
Tonawanda Creek watershed, New York; (15) Buffalo River
watershed, New York; (16) Eighteenmile Creek watershed, Niagara
County, New York; (17) Cattaragus Creek watershed, New York;
and (18) Oswego River basin, New York.
Section 503. Dam safety
Authorizes the Secretary to provide assistance to enhance
dam safety at the following locations: (1) Mountain Park Dam,
Mountain Park, Georgia; (2) Barber Dam, Ada County, Idaho; (3)
Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho; (4) Lost Valley Dam,
Adams County, Idaho; (5) Salmon Falls Dam, Twins Falls County,
Idaho; (6) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York; and (7) Lake
Carl Blackwell Dam, Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Section 504. Structural integrity evaluations
Authorizes the Secretary to evaluate the structural
integrity and effectiveness of a project for flood damage
reduction and to prevent project failure at the following
locations: (1) Arkansas River Levees, Arkansas; (2) Marianna
Borough, Pennsylvania; and, (3) Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee.
Section 505. Flood mitigation priority areas
Amends the flood mitigation and riverine restoration
program in section 212 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to add the following to the list of priority areas for
review by the Secretary: LaCrosse County, Wisconsin; Crawford
County, Wisconsin; buffalo County, Wisconsin; Calhoun County,
Illinois; Saint Charles County, Missouri; Saint Louis County,
Missouri; Dubuque County, Iowa; Scott County, Iowa; Rock Island
County, Illinois; Ascension Parish, Louisiana; East Baton Rouge
Parish, Louisiana; Iberville Parish, Louisiana; and Livingston
Parish, Louisiana.
Section 506. Additional assistance for authorized projects
Amends Section 219(e) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1992 to increase the authorization for specific projects
to allow ongoing work to continue.
Section 507. Expedited completion of reports and construction for
certain projects
Directs the Secretary to expedite completion of reports and
construction for the following projects being carried out under
continuing authorities for shoreline protection and flood
damage reduction: (1) Welch Point, Elk River, Mayland, and
Chesapeake, Maryland; (2) West View Shores, Cecil County,
Maryland; (3) Sylvan Beach, Breakwater, Verona, Oneida County,
New York; (4) Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk New York; (5)
Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New York; and (6) Steele
Creek, Village of Ilion, New York.
Section 508. Expedited completion of reports for certain projects
Directs the Secretary to expedite completion of the reports
and, if it is determined that a project is justified proceed to
project pre-construction, engineering, and design for the
following: (1) project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem
restoration, Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins, Hamilton,
California; and (2) project for shoreline protection, Detroit
River Greenway Corridor, Detroit, Michigan.
Section 509. Southeastern water resources assessment
Authorizes the Secretary to provide assistance to a
coordinated effort by Federal, State, and local agencies, non-
Federal and nonprofit entities, regional researchers, and other
interested parties to assess the water resources and water
resources needs of river basins and watersheds of the
southeastern United States. This assistance may be used to
support the Southeast Water Supply Institute.
Section 510. Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management Program
Amends the Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management
Program to allow the non-Federal interest to provide the non-
Federal share of the project in the form of services,
materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
Section 511. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers enhancement Project
Amends the Missouri and Middle Mississippi River
Enhancement Project to extend the authorization period.
Section 512. Membership of Missouri River Trust
Amends the membership of the Missouri River Trust to
include rural water systems.
Section 513. Watershed management, restoration, and development
Increases the authorization for technical assistance for
watershed management, restoration, and development to
$25,000,000.
Section 514. Great Lakes Fishery and Ecosystem Restoration
Amends the Great Lakes Fishery and Ecosystem Restoration
program to allow the non-Federal share to be provided in the
form of in-kind contributions.
Section 515. Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River Basins
Makes the Division Engineer, North Atlantic Division, an ex
officio member of the Susquehanna River Basin Compact and the
Delaware River Basin Compact, authorizes the Secretary to
provide funding to interstate compacts, and authorizes the
Secretary to enter into an agreement with the Delaware River
Basin Commission to provide water from a Corps dam during a
drought warning or drought emergency, at a cost not to exceed
incremental operating costs.
Section 516. Chesapeake Bay Environmental Restoration and Protection
Program
Amends section 510 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 to increase the authorization of $30,000,000.
Section 517. Montgomery, Alabama
Directs the Secretary to review the navigation and
ecosystem restoration components of the Montgomery Riverfront
and Downtown master Plan, and authorizes the Secretary to
extend up to $5,000,000 to carry out these components, if
feasible.
Section 518. Alaska
Amends section 570 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to increase the authorization level, allow non-profits
to serve as non-Federal interests, and allow 10% of
appropriated funds to be used for administration expenses.
Section 519. Akutan Small Boat Harbor, Alaska
Directs the Secretary to expedite the study for the Akutan
Small Boat Harbor, Alaska, and upon completion, design and
construct the project if feasible.
Section 520. Lowell Creek Tunnel, Seward, Alaska
Directs the Secretary to assume responsibility for the
long-term maintenance and repair of the Lowell Creek Tunnel and
also authorizes a study to determine whether alternative
methods of flood diversion in Lowell Canyon are feasible.
Section 521. St. Herman Harbor, Alaska
Directs the Secretary, on an emergency basis, to remove
rubble, sediment, and rock impeding at the St. Herman Harbor
entrance in Kodiak, Alaska, at a Federal cost not to exceed
$2,000,000.
Section 522. Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas
Authorizes the Secretary to perform operation, maintenance
and rehabilitation of authorized and completed levees on the
White River between Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas. Requires
the Secretary to seek reimbursement from the Secretary of the
Interior for the share of the cost of performing such
maintenance and repair allocated to benefits to a Federal
wildlife refuge.
Section 523. Loomis Landing, Arkansas
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine if
shore damage in the vicinity of Loomis Landing, Arkansas is the
result of a Federal navigation project, and to mitigate any
such damage that has occurred.
Section 524. St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine if
increased siltation and streambank erosion are the results of a
Federal flood damage reduction project, and to mitigate such
siltation and erosion in the St. Francis River basin.
Section 525. Cambria, California
Amends section 219(f)(48) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to direct the Secretary to provide
credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the work
performed by the non-Federal interest, not to exceed $3,000,00,
if an integral part of the project.
Section 526. East San Joaquin County, California
Amends section 219(f)(22) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to direct the Secretary to provide
credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the work
preformed by the non-Federal interest, if determined by the
Secretary to be an integral part of the project.
Section 527. Harbor/South Bay, California
Amends section 219(f)(43) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to broaden the scope of the authority.
Section 528. Sacramento Area, California
Amends section 219(f)(23) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to increase the authorization and
broaden the scope of the authority.
Section 529. San Francisco, California
Authorizes the Secretary to remove a wharf and associated
pilings and dredged material at Pier 70 in San Francisco, at a
cost not to exceed $1,600,000.
Section 530. San Francisco, California, Waterfront Area
Declares a portion of the San Francisco, California,
waterfront to be nonnavigable.
Section 531. Stockton, California
Directs the Secretary to evaluate the feasibility of the
Lower Mosher Slough element and the levee extensions on the
Upper Calaveras River element of the project for flood damage
reduction, Stockton Metropolitan Area, California, to determine
the eligibility of such elements for reimbursement. Directs the
Secretary to provide reimbursement if such elements of the
project are technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and
economically justified.
Section 532. Everglades Restoration, Florida
Amends the authorization of the Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan to incorporate certain pre-existing projects
into the Plan , to provide an authorization amount for outreach
and assistance, and to increase the authorization for certain
critical restoration projects.
Section 533. Mayo's Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa River, Rome, Georgia
Authorizes the Secretary to provide assistance for the
reconstruction of the Mayo's Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa River,
Rome, Georgia.
Section 534. Riley Creek Recreation Area, Idaho
Authorizes the Secretary to carry out the Riley Creek
Recreation Area Master Plan for the Corps of Engineers project
at Albeni Falls Dam, Bonner County, Idaho.
Section 535. Grand Tower Drainage and Levees, Grand Tower Township,
Illinois
Authorizes the Secretary to perform operation and
maintenance of levees on the Mississippi River in Grand Tower
Township, Illinois, and directs the Secretary to allocate the
costs of such work between the Federal government and non-
Federal interests based on whether lands protected by the
levees are owned by the United States or are private property.
Section 536. Kaskaskia River Basin, Illinois, restoration
Authorizes the Secretary to develop a comprehensive plan
for the purpose of restoring the Kaskaskia River Basin.
Section 537. Natalie Creek, Midlothian and Oak Forest, Illinois
Directs the Secretary to carry out a small project for
flood damage reduction under section 205 of the Flood Control
Act of 1948 at Natalie Creek, Midlothian and Oak Forest,
Illinois, if feasible.
Section 538. Illinois River Basin restoration
Extends the authorization for restoration of the Illinois
River Basin until 2010. In developing and implementing the
computerized inventory and analysis system, the Secretary is
directed to consider the Illinois River Decision Support
System.
Section 539. Calumet Region, Indiana
Amends section 219(f)(1) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1992 to increase the authorization and change the
geographic scope of the authorization.
Section 540. Rathbun Lake, Iowa
Directs the Secretary to provide water supply storage at
100 percent local cost to a regional water association, and to
provide credit towards these costs for certain in-kind
contributions.
Section 541. Mayfield Creek and tributaries, Kentucky
Directs the Secretary to conducts a study of flood damage
along Mayfield Creek and tributaries between Wickliffe and
Mayfield, Kentucky, to determine if the damage is the result of
a Federal navigation project and to mitigate any such damage.
Section 542. Southern and Eastern Kentucky
Amends section 531(b) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 to expand the project purposes, change the
geographic scope of the authorization, and increase the
authorization.
Section 543. Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem protection and restoration
Directs the Corps to develop a comprehensive plan for
protecting, preserving and restoring the Coastal Louisiana
Ecosystem.
Section 544. Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Amends section 219(f)(21) of the Water Resources and
Development act of 1992 of 1992 to increase the authorization
level.
Section 545. West Baton rouge Parish, Louisiana
Amends section 517 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to make a technical correction to the description of a
project.
Section 546. Chesapeake Bay Shoreline, Maryland, Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and Delaware
Authorizes the Secretary to undertake pilot projects during
the feasibility study on shoreline erosion and related sediment
management issues to protect land and water resources of the
Chesapeake Bay.
Section 547. Delmarva Conservation Corridor, Maryland
Authorizes the Secretary to provide technical assistance to
the Secretary of Agriculture in carrying out projects under the
Conservation Corridor Demonstration Program, and to coordinate
and integrate activities of the Secretary of the Army with
activities of the Secretary of Agriculture in such conservation
corridor.
Section 548. Detroit River, Michigan
Amends the shoreline protection project authorized under
section 568(c)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1999 to increase the authorization level.
Section 549. Oakland County, Michigan
Amends section 219(f)(29) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to expand the scope of authority.
Section 550. St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan
Authorizes the Secretary to carry out feasible aquatic
ecosystem restoration projects identified in the comprehensive
management plan for St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair,
Michigan, at a federal cost not to exceed $10,000,000.
Section 551. Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota
Amends section 219(f)(61) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to specify the entity to receive
assistance.
Section 552. Northeastern Minnesota
Amends section 569 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1999 to change the geographic scope of the authorization, to
authorize non-profit entities to serve as non-Federal sponsors,
and to allow 10% of amounts appropriated to be used for
administrative expenses. Directs the Secretary to reimburse the
non-Federal sponsor of the environmental infrastructure project
in Biwabik, Minnesota, for project costs that exceed the non-
Federal share of project costs.
Section 553. St. Louis, Missouri
Amends section 219(f)(32) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to increase the authorization.
Section 544. Rural Nevada
Amends section 595(h)(1) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1999, to increase the authorization to $40,000,000.
Section 555. Hackensack Meadowlands Area, New Jersey
Amends the ecosystem management program authorized under
section 324 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 to
change the non-Federal sponsor, expand the scope of the
authorization, allow credit for in-kind services, and increase
the authorization of appropriations.
Section 556. Atlantic Coast of New York
Amends the monitoring program authorized under section
404(a) of the Water Resources development Act of 1992 to
clarify the scope of the program, require annual reports, and
extend the authorization.
Section 557. College Point, New York City, New York
Authorizes the Secretary to give priority to environmental
dredging in College Point, Queens, New York.
Section 558. flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New York
Directs the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of
work performed by the non-Federal interest for ecosystem
restoration for Flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New
York, if an integral part of the project.
Section 559. Little Neck Bay, Village of Kings Point, New York
Authorizes the Secretary to carry out a navigation project
at Little Neck Bay, Village of Kings Point, New York, to allow
safe operation of the vessel T/V Kings Pointer and directs the
Secretary to seek reimbursement from the United States Merchant
Marine Academy.
Section 560. Stanley County, North Carolina
Amends section 219(f)(64) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to expand the scope of the authority.
Section 561. Piedmont Lake Dam, Ohio
Directs the Secretary to upgrade the road on Piedmont Lake
Dam, Ohio, to public use standards when reconstructing the road
as part of a project for dam safety. Provides that any increase
in cost, between the cost of a road the Secretary would
otherwise build as part of the project, and the cost of a road
that meets public use standards, shall be a local cost.
Section 562. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma
Provides that the remaining obligation of the Waurika
Project Master Conservancy District agreed to on June 3, 1986,
payable to the U.S. Government, may not be adjusted, altered,
or changed without a specific, separate, and written agreement
between the District and the United States Government.
Section 563. Columbia River, Oregon
Amends section 401(b)(3) of Public Law 100-581 to include
Celilo Village, Oregon.
Section 564. Eugene, Oregon
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study of the feasibility
of restoring the millrace in Eugene, Oregon and, if feasible,
carry out the restoration. Also directs the Secretary to
include non-economic benefits when determining feasibility.
Section 565. John Day Lock and Dam, Lake Umatilla, Oregon and
Washington
Directs the Secretary to pay $2,500,000 for research and
curation support provided to the Federal Government as a result
of the multi-purpose project and the several navigation and
flood damage reduction projects constructed on the Columbia
River and Lower Willamette River, Oregon and Washington.
Section 566. Lowell, Oregon
Authorizes the Secretary to convey land in Lowell, Oregon.
Section 567. Hagerman's Run, Williamsport, Pennsylvania
Authorizes the Secretary to rehabilitate pumps at a project
for flood damage reduction, Hagerman's Run, Williamsport,
Pennsylvania, at a total cost of $225,000.
Section 568. Northeast Pennsylvania
Amends section 219(f)(11) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to modify the geographic scope of the
authorization.
Section 569. Susquehannock Campground Access Road, Raystown Lake,
Pennsylvania
Authorizes the Secretary to provide up to $500,000 for
improvements to the Susquehannock Campground access road at the
Corps of Engineers project at Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Section 570. Upper Susquehanna River Basin, Pennsylvania and New York
Amends the authorization for flood damage reduction and
environmental restoration under section 567 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992 to increase the authorization
and to authorize pilot projects not to exceed $500,000. The
amendment also substitutes the word ``cooperative'' for the
word ``cooperation'' in describing the agreements under which
the Corps is able to obtain the assistance of non-Federal
interests in carrying out the project. This will clarify that
the Corps may work directly with public and non-profit
organizations with expertise in wetland and stream restoration,
including organizations such as Ducks Unlimited and local soil
and water conservation districts. Finally, the amendment
provides for credit against the non-Federal share of work done
by local sponsors where such work is integral to the project
and acceptance of in-kind services and materials provided by
non-Federal interests.
Section 571. Washington, Greene, Westmoreland, and Fayette Counties,
Pennsylvania
Amends section 219(f)(70) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to increase the authorization.
Section 572. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico
Directs the Secretary to review a report prepared for the
non-Federal interest concerning flood protection and
environment restoration for Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto
Rico, and, if feasible, authorizes the Secretary to carry out
the project at a total cost of $130,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $85,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $45,000,000.
Section 573. Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Carolina
Amends section 219(f)(25) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 to increase the authorization and
broaden the scope of the authorization.
Section 574. Upper Big Sioux River, Watertown, South Dakota
Directs the Secretary to review the August 1994 report of
the Chief of Engineers for the project for flood damage
reduction, Upper Big Sioux River, Watertown, South Dakota, and
authorizes the Secretary to construct the project, if it
remains feasible. Also authorizes credit toward planning and
design work performed by the non-Federal sponsor, if integral
to the project.
Section 575. Fritz Landing, Tennessee
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study of the Fritz
Landing Agricultural Spur Leveel, Tennessee, to determine the
extent of levee modifications that would be required to bring
the levee and associated drainage structures up to Federal
standards, to design and construct such modifications, and to
incorporate the levees into the project for flood damage
reduction, Mississippi River and Tributaries.
Section 576. Memphis, Tennessee
Authorizes the Secretary to review the aquatic ecosystem
restoration component of the Memphis Riverfront Development
Master Plan prepared by the non-Federal interest and, if the
Secretary determines that the component meets the evaluation
and design standards of the Corps of Engineers, authorizes the
Secretary to carry out that component at a total Federal cost
not to exceed $5,000,000.
Section 577. Town Creek, Lenoir City, Tennessee
Directs the Secretary to construct the project for flood
damage reduction designated as Alternative 4 in the Town Creek,
Lenoir City, Loudon City, Tennessee, in accordance with the
feasibility report of the Nashville district engineer dated
November 2000, at a total cost not to exceed $1,250,000.
Section 578. Tennessee River Partnership
Authorizes the Secretary to enter into a partnership with a
nonprofit entity to remove debris from the Tennessee River in
the vicinity of Knoxville, Tennessee.
Section 579. Clear Creek and Tributaries, Harris and Galveston
Counties, Texas
Directs the Secretary to expedite completion of the report
for the project for flood damage reduction, ecosystem
restoration, and recreation, Clear Creek and tributaries,
Harris and Galveston Counties, Texas.
Section 580. Halls Bayou, Texas
Amends section 211 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 to add the project for flood damage reduction, Halls
Bayou, Texas
Section 581. Harris Gully, Harris County, Texas
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage
reduction to protect the Texas Medical Center, Houston, Texas,
using studies and plans developed by the non-Federal sponsor,
to the maximum extent practicable. Also authorizes the
Secretary to carry out critical flood damage reduction
projects, at a Federal cost not to exceed $7,000,000,
authorizes credit for work performed by the non-Federal
interest if integral to the project, and authorizes a non-
profit entity to serve as the non-federal interest.
Section 582. Onion Creek, Texas
Directs the Secretary to provide credit toward the non-
Federal share the cost of relocations carried out before the
date of the cooperation agreement, if integral to the project.
Section 583. Pelican Island, Texas
Amends 33 U.S.C. 59hh to authorize the Secretary to provide
a letter of intent to the city of Galveston, Texas, to convey
property currently being used for management of dredged
material, under certain terms and conditions.
Section 584. Riverside Oxbow, Fort Worth, Texas
Directs the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of
work performed by the non-Federal interest on the Beach Street
Dam and associated features, if determined by the Secretary to
be an integral part of the project.
Section 585. Richmond National Battlefield Park, Richmond, Virginia
Authorizes the Secretary to carry out bluff stabilization
measures on the James River to protect a Civil War battlefield
known as Drewry's Bluff. Directs the Secretary to seek
reimbursement from the Secretary of the Interior.
Section 586. Baker Bay and Illwaco Harbor, Washington
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to determine if
increased siltation is the result of a Federal navigation
project and, if so, to mitigate the siltation in the Baker Bay
and Illwaco Harbor, Washington.
Section 587. Chehalis River, Centralia, Washington
Directs the Secretary to provide credit for the cost of
work performed by the non-Federal interest for flood damage
reduction if determined by the Secretary to be an integral part
of the project.
Section 588. Hamilton Island Campground, Washington
Authorizes the Secretary to plan, design and construct a
campground for Bonneville Lock and Dam at Hamilton Island in
Skamania County, Washington.
Section 589. Puget Island, Washington
Directs the Secretary to place dredged and other suitable
material along portions of the Columbia River shoreline of
Puget Island, at a Federal cost not to exceed $1,000,000.
Section 590. West Virginia and Pennsylvania Flood control
Amends section 581 of WRDA 1996 to expand the scope of the
authority and to increase the authorization.
Section 591. Lower Kanawha River Basin, West Virginia
Directs the Secretary to conduct a watershed and river
basin assessment for the Lower Kanawha River Basin, in certain
counties in West Virginia.
Section 592. Central West Virginia.
Amends sections 571 of WRDA 1999 to modify the geographic
scope of the authorization, to allow nonprofit entities to
serve as non-Federal interests, and to allow 10% of
appropriated amounts to be used for administrative expenses.
Section 593. Southern West Virginia
Amends section 340 of WRDA 1992 to modify the geographic
scope of the authorization, to allow nonprofit entities to
serve as non-Federal interests, and to allow 10% of
appropriated amounts to be used for administration expenses.
Section 594. Additional assistance for critical projects
Amends section 219 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992 to add assistance for critical projects.
Additional Matters
The water levels of the Great Lakes are cyclical, rising
and falling as temperature and precipitation patterns naturally
change over the years. Currently, the level of the Lake Huron
is in a low period, exposing muck and weeds that can be both
unhealthy and unsightly. This exposed lake bottom also can
serve as a breeding ground for mosquitoes. The Committee is
aware that some owners of property on Lake Huron, in Saginaw
Bay, have tried to clean up this muck and weeds. As a result of
these beach maintenance activities, the Corps of Engineers has
issued cease and desist orders and threatened some landowners
with penalties under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and
section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. In fact, the Detroit
District has informed us. ``[I]n an effort to keep such
unauthorized work from spreading across the entire Saginaw Bay,
we secured assistance from the US Attorneys Office to take
action against three, randomly chosen parties,'' threatening
criminal penalties.
The Committee is concerned about how the Detroit District
chose to address this situation. The Committee directs the
Corps of Engineers to examine its enforcement measures, and
instead emphasize education and compliance assistance to carry
out its regulatory authorities.
The Committee directs the Secretary to have the Secretary's
Counsel review section 404 of the Clean Water Act, section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and the beach maintenance
activities of landowners along Lake Huron, to determine if
these activities actually constitute an activity that requires
a permit under federal or state law.
If, after the review, Counsel for the Army determines that
the beach maintenance activities of these landowners are
regulated activities, the Committee directs the Corps of
Engineers to work with the property owners the effects of the
beach maintenance activities and bring them within the scope of
a general permit.
The Committee also is aware of problems with an invasive
aquatic species known as tamarisk, or salt cedar, that is using
2 to 4.5 million acre-feet of water in reservoirs on the West
Coast. The Corps of Engineers' has a great deal of expertise in
aquatic plant control through its Aquatic Plant Control
Research Program. The Committee encourages the Corps to look
for opportunities to use this program to assist with the
control of tamarisk.
Legislative History and Committee Consideration
The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment held
three days of hearings on projects, programs and policies
considered during the development of H.R. 5428: on March 7,
2002; April 10, 2002; and April 17, 2002. During these
hearings, testimony was received from 30 witnesses, including
Members of Congress, the Administration, project sponsors,
national water resources development and environmental
organizations, and state and local officials. On February 27,
2002, the Subcommittee also held a hearing on the Corps of
Engineers' Budget and Priorities for FY 2003, receiving
testimony from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works.
On September 24, 2002, the Subcommittee on Water Resources
and Environment marked up H.R. 5428, and reported the bill
favorably to the Full Committee by voice vote. The
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee met in open session
on September 25, 2002 and adopted by voice a manager's
amendment, offered by Mr. Duncan. The amendment made technical
and clarifying changes, revised several project authorizations,
and added various provisions related to studies and projects.
The Committee ordered the bill H.R. 5428, as amended, reported
to the House by voice vote.
ROLLCALL VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report to include the total number of
votes cast for and against on each rollcall vote on a motion to
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter,
and the names of those members voting for and against. There
were no recorded votes taken in connection with ordering H.R.
5428 reported. A motion to order H.R. 5428 reported to the
House, with an amendment, was agreed to by voice vote.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
COST OF LEGISLATION
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is
included in this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee
references the report of the Congressional Budget Office
included below.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goals and objectives of this legislation are the
improvement of navigation, flood damage reduction, shoreline
protection, dam safety, water supply, recreation, and
environmental restoration and protection.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R.
5428 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 30, 2002.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5428, the Water
Resources Development Act of 2002.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie
Middleton.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 5428--Water Resources Development Act of 2002
Summary: H.R. 5428 would authorize the Secretary of Army,
acting through the Army Corps of Engineers, to conduct water
resource studies and undertake specified projects and programs
for flood control, inland navigation, shoreline protection, and
environmental restoration. The bill would authorize the
Secretary to conduct studies on water resources needs and
feasibility studies for specified projects and convey ownership
of certain federal properties. Finally, the bill would extend,
terminate, or modify existing authorizations for certain water
projects and would authorize new programs to develop water
resources and protect the environment.
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, including
adjustments for increases in anticipated inflation, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 5428 would cost about $2.1
billion over the 2003-2007 period and an additional $2 billion
over the 10 years after 2007. (Some construction costs and
operations and maintenance would continue or occur after those
15 years.) In addition, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 5428
would increase direct spending by $17 million over the 2003-
2007 period and by $32 million over the 2003-2012 period.
H.R. 5428 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Federal participation in water resources projects and programs
authorized by this bill would benefit state, local, and tribal
governments, and any costs incurred by those governments to
comply with the conditions of this federal assistance would be
voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 5428 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and the environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
------------------------------------------------------
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level............................ 736 536 403 356 319
Estimated Outlays........................................ 368 525 500 399 345
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority............................... 5 3 3 3 3
Estimated Outlays........................................ 5 3 3 3 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate
For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 5428 will be
enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2003 and that all
amounts authorized by the bill will be appropriated for each
fiscal year.
Spending subject to appropriation
For projects specified in the bill, the Corps provided CBO
with estimates of annual budget authority needed to meet design
and construction schedules. CBO adjusted those estimates to
reflect the impact of anticipated inflation during the time
between project authorization and appropriation of construction
costs. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending rates
for past Corps projects.
H.R. 5428 would authorize new projects related to
environmental restoration, shoreline protection, and
navigation. Two of the larger projects that would be authorized
by the bill include a project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction in Louisiana with a federal cost of $442 million and
a replacement lock for the Chickamauga Lock and Dam in
Tennessee with an estimated federal cost of $267 million. In
addition, this bill would modify many existing projects and
programs by increasing the amounts authorized to be
appropriated to construct or maintain them or by increasing the
federal share of project costs.
Direct spending
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 5428 would increase direct
spending by $17 million over the 2003-2007 period and by $3
million each year after 2007. Components of this total cost are
described below.
Spending of Recreation Fees.--Section 217 would permanently
authorize the Corps to retain and spend annual recreation fees
collected in excess of $34 million a year. The Corps' authority
to retain and spend those fees expired at the end of fiscal
year 2002. CBO estimates that this extension would cost about
$3 million a year.
Rathbun Lake Project.--Section 540 would authorize the
Secretary to convey a certain portion of the water supply
storage capacity of Rathbun Lake to the Rathbun Regional Water
Association. In exchange, the Water Association would fund,
construct, operate, and maintain a regional visitor center
complex on federal land at Rathbun Lake. CBO estimates that
enacting this section would cost about $2 million in 2003
because the Corps would forgo receipts that the Rathbun
Regional Water Association would have otherwise paid for the
unallocated water supply storage.
Waurika Lake Project.--Section 562 would eliminate the
obligation of the Waurika Project Master Conservancy District
in Oklahoma to pay its outstanding debt related to the
construction of a water conveyance project. Due to an
accounting error, the Corps inadvertently undercharged the
district for costs associated with a land purchase related to
the water project in the early 1980s. Under the terms of the
construction contract, the district is required to pay all
costs associated with building the project, including the full
cost of the land purchases. CBO estimates that enacting this
section would cost less than $200,000 a year over the 2003-2027
period.
Annual Passes for Recreation.--Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Section 201 would extend the pilot project that allows the
Corps to charge lower fees at its Raystown Lake recreation
facility in Pennsylvania by one year. CBO estimates that
extending the program until December 31, 2004, would cost less
than $100,000 over the next two years.
Funding to Process Permits.--Section 204 would extend the
Corps' current authority for two more years to accept and spend
funds contributed by private firms to expedite the evaluation
of permit applications submitted to the Corps. CBO estimates
that the Corps would accept and spend less than $500,000 during
each year of this extension and that the net budgetary impact
of this provision would be negligible.
Elizabeth River Project.--Section 376 would eliminate the
obligation of the city of Chesapeake, Virginia, to pay its
outstanding debt to the federal government related to the
construction of a navigation channel. Section 358 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 waived the city's obligation
to repay its share of the cost of construction of the channel
that remained unpaid as of September 30, 1999. That act,
however, did not eliminate the city's responsibility to pay
those amounts in arrears prior to September 30, 1999. CBO
estimates that the cost of this additional debt forgiveness
would be less than $500,000 in 2003
Various Land Conveyances.--H.R. 5428 would authorize the
Corps to convey certain lands in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Oregon.
The bill would authorize the Corps to convey 7.4 acres to Geary
County, Kansas, for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of a fire station and 265 acres at Eufaula Lake in
Oklahoma to the Choctaw Nation. In addition, section 566 would
authorize the Corps and the U.S. Forest Service to convey
approximately three acres of land and buildings in Lowell,
Oregon, to the Lowell School District. CBO estimates that those
conveyances would have no significant impact on the federal
budget.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 5428
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. Federal participation in water resources
projects and programs authorized by this bill would benefit
state, local, and tribal governments. Governments that choose
to participate in those projects would incur costs to comply
with the conditions of the federal assistance, including cost-
sharing requirements, but such costs would be voluntary. In
addition, some state and local governments participating in
ongoing water resources projects would benefit from provisions
in the bill that would alter existing cost-sharing obligations.
Many of those provisions would make it easier for nonfederal
participants to meet their obligations by giving them credit
for expense they have already incurred or by expanding the
types of expenditures counted as part of the nonfederal share.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Julie Middleton;
Impact on state, local, and tribal governments: Marjorie
Miller; and Impact on the private sector: Lauren Marks.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or
joint resolution of a public character shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in
the Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act, (Public Law 104-4).
Preemption Clarification
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1994
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local or
tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 5428 does not
preempt any state, local, or tribal law.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this
legislation.
Applicability to the Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. (Public Law
104-1).
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1996
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 208. RECREATION POLICY AND USER FEES.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Alternative to Annual Passes.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Expiration of authority.--The authority to
establish an annual pass under paragraph (2) shall
expire on [the December 31, 2003] December 31, 2004.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 211. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL
INTERESTS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Specific Projects.--For the purpose of demonstrating the
potential advantages and effectiveness of non-Federal
implementation of flood control projects, the Secretary shall
enter into agreements pursuant to this section with non-Federal
interests for development of the following flood control
projects by such interests:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(7) Halls bayou, texas.--The project for flood
control, Halls Bayou, Texas.
[(7)] (8) Hunting bayou, texas.--The Hunting Bayou
element of the project for flood control, Buffalo Bayou
and tributaries, Texas, authorized by such section;
except that, subject to the approval of the Secretary
as provided by this section, the non-Federal interest
may design and construct an alternative to such
element.
[(8)] (9) White oak bayou, texas.--The project for
flood control, White Oak Bayou watershed, Texas.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 217. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITY PARTNERSHIPS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Governmental Partnerships.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may enter into cost-
sharing agreements with 1 or more non-Federal public
interests with respect to a project, or group of
projects within a geographic region if appropriate, for
the acquisition, design, construction, management, or
operation of a dredged material processing, treatment,
or disposal facility (including any facility used to
demonstrate potential beneficial uses of dredged
material) using funds provided in whole or in part by
the Federal Government. One or more of the parties of
the agreement may perform the acquisition, design,
construction, management, or operation of a dredged
material processing, treatment, or disposal facility.
If appropriate, the Secretary may combine portions of
separate construction or maintenance appropriations
from separate Federal projects with the appropriate
combined cost-sharing between the various projects when
the facility serves to manage dredged material from
multiple Federal projects located in the geographic
region of the facility.
(2) Public financing.--
(A) Agreements.--The agreement used shall
clearly specify the Federal funding sources and
combined cost-sharing when applicable to
multiple Federal navigation projects and the
responsibilities and risks of each of the
parties related to present and future dredged
material managed by the facility.
(B) Credit.--Nothing in this subsection
supersedes or modifies existing agreements
between the Federal Government and any non-
Federal sponsors for the cost-sharing,
construction, and operation and maintenance of
Federal navigation projects. Subject to the
approval of the Secretary and in accordance
with existing laws, regulations, and policies,
a non-Federal public sponsor of a Federal
navigation project may seek credit for funds
provided in the acquisition, design,
construction, management, or operation of a
dredged material processing, treatment, or
disposal facility to the extent the facility is
used to manage dredged material from the
Federal navigation project. The non-Federal
sponsor shall be responsible for providing all
necessary lands, easements, rights-of-way, or
relocations associated with the facility and
shall receive credit for these items.
[(c)] (d) Public-Private Partnerships.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may carry out a
program to evaluate and implement opportunities for
public-private partnerships in the design,
construction, management, or operation of dredged
material processing, treatment, or disposal facilities
in connection with construction or maintenance of
Federal navigation projects. If a non-Federal interest
is a sponsor of the project, the Secretary shall
consult with the non-Federal interest in carrying out
the program with respect to the project.
(2) Private financing.--
(A) Agreements.--In carrying out this
subsection, the Secretary may enter into an
agreement with a non-Federal interest with
respect to a project, a private entity, or both
for the acquisition, design, construction,
management, or operation of a dredged material
processing, treatment, or disposal facility
(including any facility used to demonstrate
potential beneficial uses of dredged material)
using funds provided in whole or in part by the
private entity.
(B) Reimbursement.--If any funds provided by
a private entity are used to carry out a
project under this subsection, the Secretary
may reimburse the private entity over a period
of time agreed to by the parties to the
agreement through the payment of subsequent
user fees. Such fees may include the payment of
a disposal or tipping fee for placement of
suitable dredged material at the facility.
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 501. LAND CONVEYANCES.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Boardman, Oregon.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the
[city of Boardman,] the Boardman Park and Recreation
District, Boardman, Oregon, all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to a parcel of
land consisting of approximately 141 acres acquired as
part of the John Day Lock and Dam project in the
vicinity of [such city] the city of Boardman currently
under lease to the Boardman Park and Recreation
District.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 503. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION, AND DEVELOPMENT.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$15,000,000]
$25,000,000.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 510. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION
PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$10,000,000]
$30,000,000.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 528. EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
(a) * * *
(b) Restoration Activities.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Critical restoration projects.--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) Authorization of appropriations.--
(i) In general.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Department of
the Army to pay the Federal share of
the cost of carrying out projects under
subparagraph (A) [$75,000,000 for the
period consisting of fiscal years 1997
through 2003] $95,000,000.
(ii) Federal share.--The Federal
share of the cost of carrying out any 1
project under subparagraph (A) shall be
not more than [$25,000,000]
$30,000,000.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 531. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY.
(a) * * *
(b) Form of Assistance.--Assistance under this section may be
in the form of design and construction assistance for water-
related environmental infrastructure, environmental
restoration, and resource protection and development projects
in southern and eastern Kentucky, including projects for
wastewater treatment and related facilities, water supply and
related facilities, surface water resource protection and
development, and small stream flooding, local storm water
drainage, and related problems.
* * * * * * *
(g) Southern and Eastern Kentucky Defined.--In this section,
the term ``southern and eastern Kentucky'' means Morgan, Floyd,
Pulaski, Wayne, Laurel, Knox, Pike, Menifee, Perry, Harlan,
Breathitt, Martin, Jackson, Wolfe, Clay, Magoffin, Owsley,
Johnson, Leslie, Lawrence, Knott, Bell, McCreary, Rockcastle,
Whitley, Lee, Bath, Rowan, and Letcher Counties, Kentucky.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$25,000,000]
$40,000,000.
(i) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps
of Engineers district offices to administer projects under this
section at 100 percent Federal expense.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 553. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) New York State Canal System Defined.--In this section,
the term ``New York State Canal System'' means the Erie,
Oswego, Champlain, and Cayuga-Seneca Canals.]
(c) New York State Canal System Defined.--In this section,
the term ``New York State Canal System'' means the 524 miles of
navigable canal that comprise the New York State Canal System,
including the Erie, Cayuga-Seneca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals
and the historic alignments of these canals, including the
cities of Albany and Buffalo.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 567. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW YORK.
(a) Study and Strategy Development.--The Secretary, in
cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, the State of
Pennsylvania, and the State of New York, shall conduct a study,
and develop a strategy, for using wetland restoration, soil and
water conservation practices, and nonstructural measures to
reduce flood damage, improve water quality, and create wildlife
habitat in the following portions of the Upper Susquehanna
River basin:
(1) * * *
(2) The Susquehanna River watershed upstream of the
Chemung River, New York, at an estimated Federal cost
of [$10,000,000.] $20,000,000, of which the Secretary
may utilize not more than $5,000,000 to design and
construct feasible pilot projects during the
development of the strategy to demonstrate alternative
approaches for the strategy. The total cost for any
single pilot project may not exceed $500,000. The
Secretary shall evaluate the results of the pilot
projects and consider the results in the development of
the strategy.
* * * * * * *
(c) [Cooperation] Cooperative Agreements.--In conducting the
study and developing the strategy under this section, the
Secretary shall enter into [cooperation] cooperative agreements
to provide financial assistance to appropriate Federal, State,
and local government agencies and appropriate nonprofit,
nongovernmental organizations with expertise in wetland
restoration, with the consent of the affected local government.
Financial assistance provided may include activities for the
implementation of wetlands restoration projects and soil and
water conservation measures.
* * * * * * *
(e) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project (i) the cost of design
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement for the project if
the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the
project; and (ii) the cost of in-kind services and materials
provided for the project by the non-Federal interest.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 579. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA, FLOOD PROTECTION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$47,000,000]
$89,000,000.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 581. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD CONTROL.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may design and construct--
(1) [flood control measures] structural and
nonstructural flood control, streambank protection,
stormwater management, and channel clearing and
modification measures in the Cheat and Tygart River
basins, West Virginia, at a level of protection that is
sufficient to prevent any future losses to communities
in the basins from flooding such as occurred in January
1996, but not less than a 100-year level of protection
with respect to measures that incorporate levees or
floodwalls; and
* * * * * * *
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$12,000,000]
$90,000,000.
* * * * * * *
----------
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1986
* * * * * * *
TITLE I--COST SHARING
SEC. 101. HARBORS.
(a) Constructon.--
(1) Payments during construction.--The non-Federal
interests for a navigation project for a harbor or
inland harbor, or any separable element thereof, on
which a contract for physical construction has not been
awarded before the date of enactment of this Act shall
pay, during the period of construction of the project,
the following costs associated with general navigation
features:
(A) * * *
(B) 25 percent of the cost of construction of
the portion of the project which has a depth is
excess of 20 feet but not in excess of [45] 53
feet; plus
(C) 50 percent of the cost of construction of
the portion of the project which has a depth in
excess of [45] 53 feet.
* * * * * * *
(b) Operation and Maintenance.--
(1) In general.--The Federal share of the cost of
operation and maintenance of each navigation project
for a harbor or inland harbor constructed by the
Secretary pursuant to this Act or any other law
approved after the date of the enactment of this Act
shall be 100 percent, except that in the case of a
deep-draft harbor, the non-Federal interests shall be
responsible for an amount equal to 50 percent of the
excess of the cost of the operation and maintenance of
such project over the cost which the Secertary
determines would be incurred for operation and
maintenance of such project if such project had a depth
of [45] 53 feet.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 103. FLOOD CONTROL AND OTHER PURPOSES.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(n) Non-Federal Contributions.--
(1) Prohibition on solicitation of excess
contributions.--The Secretary may not solicit
contributions from non-Federal interests for costs of
constructing authorized water resources development
projects or measures in excess of the non-Federal share
assigned to the appropriate project purposes listed in
subsections (a), (b), and (c) or condition Federal
participation in such projects or measures on the
receipt of such contributions.
(2) Limitation on statutory construction.--Nothing in
this subsection shall be construed to affect the
Secretary's authority under section 903(c) of this Act.
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--HARBOR DEVELOPMENT
* * * * * * *
SEC. 214. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this title--
(1) Deep-draft harbor.--The term ``deep-draft
harbor'' means a harbor which is authorized to be
constructed to a depth of more than [45] 53 feet (other
than a project which is authorized by section 202 of
this title).
* * * * * * *
(3) General cargo harbor.--The term ``general cargo
harbor'' means a harbor for which a project is
authorized by section 202 of this title and any other
harbor which is authorized to be constructed to a depth
of more than 20 feet but not more than [45] 53 feet;
* * * * * * *
TITLE VII--WATER RESOURCES STUDIES
* * * * * * *
SEC. 729. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Cost-Sharing Requirements.--
[(1) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the
costs of an assessment carried out under this section
shall be 50 percent.]
(1) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the
costs of an assessment carried out under this section
on or after December 11, 2000, shall be 25 percent.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IX--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SECTION 912. SECTION 221 AGREEMENTS.
(a) * * *
(b)(1) * * *
(2) Whenever on the basis of any information available to
the Secretary, the Secretary finds that any non-Federal
interest is not providing cooperation required under subsection
(a), the Secretary [shall] may issue an order requiring such
non-Federal interest to provide such cooperation. [After notice
and opportunity for a hearing, if the Secretary finds that any
person is violating an order issued under this section, such
person shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed
$10,000 per day of such violation, except that the total amount
of civil penalties for any violation shall not exceed $50,000.]
* * * * * * *
(4) The Secretary may request the Attorney General to
bring a civil action for appropriate relief, including
permanent or temporary injunction, for payment of liquidated
damages or, for any violation of an order issued under this
section, [to collect a civil penalty imposed under this
section,] to recover any cost incurred by the Secretary in
undertaking performance of any item of cooperation under
section 221(d) of the Flood Control Act of 1970, or to collect
interest for which a non-Federal interest is liable under
paragraph (3). Any action under this subsection may be brought
in the district court of the United States for the district in
which the defendant is located or resides, or is doing
businesss, and such court shall have jurisdiction to restrain
such violation, to require compliance, to require payment of
[any civil penalty imposed under this section,] any liquidated
damages, and to require payment of any costs incurred by the
Secretary in undertaking performance of any such item.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XI--MISCELLANEOUS PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1103. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER PLAN.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Program Authority.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(7)(A) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(2) of
this section, the costs of each project carried out pursuant to
paragraph (1)(A)(i) of this subsection shall be allocated
between the Secretary and the appropriate non-Federal sponsor
in accordance with the provisions of section 906(e) of this
Act; except that the costs of operation and maintenance of
projects located on Federal lands or lands owned or operated by
a State or local government shall be borne by the Federal,
State, or local agency that is responsible for management
activities for fish and wildlife on such lands and, in the case
of any project requiring non-Federal cost sharing, the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project shall be 35 percent.
The non-Federal interest may provide the non-Federal share of
the cost of the project in the form of services, materials,
supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 1156. COST SHARING PROVISIONS FOR THE TERRITORIES.
[The Secretary shall waive local cost-sharing requirements up
to $200,000 for all studies and projects in American Samoa,
Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, and the
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.]
SEC. 1156. COST SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN AREAS.
The Secretary shall waive local cost-sharing requirements up
to $500,000 for all studies and projects in the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands,
in Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18,
United States Code, and including lands that are within the
jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe, as determined
by the Secretary of the Interior, and are recognized by the
Secretary of the Interior as eligible for trust land status
under part 151 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations) or on
land in the State of Alaska conveyed to an Alaska Native
Village Corporation under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).
* * * * * * *
----------
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2000
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 203. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
(b) Program.--
(1) In general.--In cooperation with Indian tribes
and the heads of other Federal agencies, the Secretary
may study and determine the feasibility of carrying out
water resources development projects that--
(A) * * *
(B) are located primarily within Indian
country (as defined in section 1151 of title
18, United States Code, and including lands
that are within the jurisdictional area of an
Oklahoma Indian tribe, as determined by the
Secretary of the Interior, and are recognized
by the Secretary of the Interior as eligible
for trust land status under part 151 of title
25, Code of Federal Regulations) or in
proximity to Alaska Native villages.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 214. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.
(a) In General.--In fiscal years 2001 through [2003] 2005,
the Secretary, after public notice, may accept and expend funds
contributed by non-Federal public entities to expedite the
evaluation of permits under the jurisdiction of the Department
of the Army.
(b) Effect on Permitting.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary shall ensure that the use of funds accepted under
subsection (a) will not impact impartial decisionmaking with
respect to permits, either substantively or procedurally. The
acceptance and expenditure of funds under subsection (a) shall
not affect the order in which permits are considered or
approved by the Secretary.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--STUDIES
* * * * * * *
SEC. 414. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA.
Not later than [32] 44 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall conduct a study, at Federal
expense, of plans--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
SEC. 425. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for
shoreline protection along Lake Michigan and the Chicago River,
Chicago, Illinois.
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 506. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Cost Sharing.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Non-federal share.--
(A) * * *
(B) Form.--The non-Federal interest may
provide up to [50] 100 percent of the non-
Federal share required under paragraphs (1) and
(2) in the form of services, materials,
supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 519. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Critical Restoration Projects.--
(1) * * *
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is
authorized to be appropriated to carry out projects
under this subsection $100,000,000 for fiscal years
2001 through [2004] 2010.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VI--COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION
SEC. 601. COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN.
(a) * * *
(b) Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.--
(1) * * *
(2) Specific authorizations.--
(A) In general.--
(i) Projects.--The Secretary shall
carry out the projects included in the
Plan in accordance with subparagraphs
(B), (C), (D), and (E). The project for
aquifer storage and recovery, Hillsboro
and Okeechobee Aquifer, Florida,
authorized by section 101(a)(16) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1999
(113 Stat. 276), shall be treated for
purposes of this section as being in
the Plan.
* * * * * * *
(iii) Review and comment.--In
developing the projects authorized
under subparagraph (B) and the project
for aquifer storage and recovery,
Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, the
Secretary shall provide for public
review and comment in accordance with
applicable Federal law.
* * * * * * *
(k) Outreach and Assistance.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Maximum expenditures.--The Secretary may expend
up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2002, to carry out this
subsection.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IX--MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, SOUTH DAKOTA
* * * * * * *
SEC. 904. MISSOURI RIVER TRUST.
(a) * * *
(b) Membership.--The Trust shall be composed of 25 members to
be appointed by the Secretary, including--
(1) 15 members recommended by the Governor of South
Dakota that--
(A) represent equally the various interests
of the public; and
(B) include representatives of--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(vii) agricultural groups; [and]
(viii) rural water systems; and
[(viii)] (ix) other appropriate
interests;
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 5 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 13, 1946
AN ACT authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the
shores of publicly owned property.
SEC. 5. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment of Erosion Control Program.--The Secretary
shall establish and conduct a national shoreline erosion
control development and demonstration program for a period of
[6] 10 years beginning on the date that funds are made
available to carry out this section.
(b) Requirements.--
(1) In general.--The erosion control program shall
include provisions for--
(A) projects consisting of planning,
designing, and constructing prototype
engineered and vegetative shoreline erosion
control devices and methods during the first
[3] 6 years of the erosion control program;
* * * * * * *
(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary may enter into a
cost-sharing agreement with a non-Federal interest to
carry out a project, or a phase of a project, under the
erosion control program in cooperation with the non-
Federal interest.
(4) Removal of projects.--The Secretary may pay all
or a portion of the costs of removing a project, or an
element of a project, constructed under the erosion
control program if the Secretary determines during the
term of the program that the project or element is
detrimental to the environment, private property, or
public safety.
[(3)] (5) Sites.--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(4)] (6) Determination of feasibility.--
Implementation of a project under this section is
contingent upon a determination by the Secretary that
such project is feasible.
* * * * * * *
(e) Funding.--
(1) * * *
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is
authorized to be appropriated [$21,000,000] $31,000,000
to carry out this section.
----------
SECTION 221 OF THE FLOOD CONTROL ACT OF 1970
Sec. 221. (a) After the date of enactment of this Act, the
construction of any water resources project, or an acceptable
separable element thereof, by the Secretary of the Army, acting
through the Chief of Engineers, or by a non-Federal interest
where such interest will be reimbursed for such construction
under the provisions of section 215 of the Flood Control Act of
1968 or under any other provision of law, shall not be
commenced until each non-Federal interest has entered into a
written agreement with the Secretary of the Army to furnish its
required cooperation for the project or the appropriate element
of the project, as the case may be; except that no such
agreement shall be required if the Secretary determines that
the administrative costs associated with negotiating,
executing, or administering the agreement would exceed the
amount of the contribution required from the non-Federal
interest and are less than $25,000. Such agreement may include
a provision for liquidated damages in the event of a failure of
one or more parties to perform. In any such agreement entered
into by a State, or a body politic of the State which derives
its powers from the State constitution, or a governmental
entity created by the State legislature, the agreement may
reflect that it does not obligate future appropriations for
such performance and payment when obligating future
appropriations would be inconsistent with constitutional or
statutory limitations of the State or a political subdivision
of the State.
* * * * * * *
----------
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1992
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 204. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) Cooperative Agreement.--Any project undertaken pursuant
to this section shall be initiated only after non-Federal
interests have entered into a binding agreement with the
Secretary in which the non-Federal interests agree to--
[(1) provide 25 percent of the cost associated with
construction of the project for the protection,
restoration, and creation of aquatic and ecologically
related habitats, including provision of all lands,
easements, rights-of-way, and necessary relocations;
and
[(2) pay 100 percent of the operation, maintenance,
replacement, and rehabilitation costs associated with
the project for the protection, restoration, and
creation of aquatic and ecologically related habitats.
[(d) Determination of Construction Costs.--Costs associated
with construction of a project for the protection, restoration,
and creation of aquatic and ecologically related habitats shall
be limited solely to construction costs which are in excess of
those costs necessary to carry out the dredging for
construction, operation, or maintenance of the authorized
navigation project in the most cost effective way, consistent
with economic, engineering, and environmental criteria.
[(e) Selection of Dredged Material Disposal Method.--In
developing and carrying out a project for navigation involving
the disposal of dredged material, the Secretary may select,
with the consent of the non-Federal interest, a disposal method
that is not the least-cost option if the Secretary determines
that the incremental costs of such disposal method are
reasonable in relation to the environmental benefits, including
the benefits to the aquatic environment to be derived from the
creation of wetlands and control of shoreline erosion. The
Federal share of such incremental costs shall be determined in
accordance with subsection (c).
[(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated not to exceed $15,000,000 annually to carry out
this section. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
[(g) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), for any project
carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may
include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the affected
local government.]
(c) In General.--The Secretary may carry out projects to
transport and place suitable material dredged in connection
with the construction, operation, or maintenance of an
authorized navigation project at locations selected by a non-
Federal public entity for use in the construction, repair, or
rehabilitation of public projects associated with navigation,
flood damage reduction, hydroelectric power, municipal and
industrial water supply, agricultural water supply, recreation,
hurricane and storm damage reduction, aquatic plant control,
and environmental protection and restoration.
(d) Cooperative Agreement.--Any project undertaken pursuant
to this section shall be initiated only after non-Federal
interests have entered into an agreement with the Secretary in
which the non-Federal interests agree to pay the non-Federal
share of the cost of construction of the project and 100
percent of the cost of operation, maintenance, replacement, and
rehabilitation of the project in accordance with section 103 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213).
(e) Determination of Construction Costs.--Costs associated
with construction of a project under this section shall be
limited solely to construction costs that are in excess of
those costs necessary to carry out the dredging for
construction, operation, or maintenance of the authorized
navigation project in the most cost effective way, consistent
with economic, engineering, and environmental criteria.
(f) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), for any project
carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may
include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the affected
local government.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated $30,000,000 annually for projects under this
section. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
(h) Regional Sediment Management Planning.--In consultation
with appropriate State and Federal agencies, the Secretary may
develop, at Federal expense, plans for regional management of
material dredged in conjunction with the construction,
operation, or maintenance of navigation projects, including
potential beneficial uses of dredged material for construction,
repair, or rehabilitation of public projects for navigation,
flood damage reduction, hydroelectric power, municipal and
industrial water supply, agricultural water supply, recreation,
hurricane and storm damage reduction, aquatic plant control,
and environmental protection and restoration.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 219. ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Authorization of Appropriations for Construction
Assistance.--There are authorized to be appropriated for
providing construction assistance under this section--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(7) $30,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(16); [and]
(8) $30,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(17)[.];
(9) $20,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(20);
(10) $20,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(25);
(11) $15,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(26);
(12) $7,800,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(27);
(13) $18,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(31); and
(14) $30,000,000 for the project described in
subsection (c)(40).
(f) Additional Assistance.--The Secretary may provide
assistance under subsection (a) and assistance for construction
for the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(11) Northeast pennsylvania.--$20,000,000 for water
related infrastructure in the counties of Lackawanna,
Lycoming, Susquehanna, Wyoming, Pike, Wayne, Sullivan,
Bradford, [and Monroe] Northumberland, Union, Snyder,
and Montour, Pennsylvania, including assistance for the
Mountoursville Regional Sewer Authority, Lycoming
County, Pennsylvania.
(12) Calumet region, indiana.--[$10,000,000]
$30,000,000 for water related infrastructure projects
in the counties of [Lake and Porter] Benton, Jasper,
Lake, Newton, and Porter, Indiana.
* * * * * * *
(21) Baton rouge, louisiana.--[$20,000,000]
$35,000,000 for water related infrastructure for the
parishes of East Baton Rouge, Ascension, and
Livingston, Louisiana.
(22) East san joaquin county, california.--
[$25,000,000]
(A) In general.--$25,000,000 for ground water
recharge and conjunctive use projects in
Stockton East Water District, California.
(B) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project (i) the cost of design and construction
work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before the date of the cooperation agreement
for the project if the Secretary determines
that the work is integral to the project; and
(ii) the cost of in-kind services and materials
provided for the project by the non-Federal
interest.
(23) Sacramento area, california.--[$25,000,000]
$35,000,000 for water supply and regional water
conservation and recycling projects in Placer and El
Dorado Counties and the San Juan Suburban Water
District, California.
* * * * * * *
(25) Lakes marion and moultrie, south carolina.--
[$15,000,000] $35,000,0000 for wastewater treatment and
water supply treatment and distribution projects in the
counties of Calhoun, Clarendon, Colleton, Dorchester,
Orangeberg, and Sumter, South Carolina.
* * * * * * *
(29) Oakland county, michigan.--$20,000,000 for a
project to eliminate or control sanitary sewer
overflows and combined sewer overflows in the cities of
Berkley, Ferndale, Madison Heights, Royal Oak,
Birmingham, Hazel Park, Oak Park, Southfield, Clawson,
Huntington Woods, Pleasant Ridge, and Troy, and the
village of Beverly Hills, and the Charter Township of
Royal Oak, Michigan.
* * * * * * *
(32) St. louis, missouri.--[$15,000,000] $35,000,000
for a project to eliminate or control combined sewer
overflows in the city of St. Louis, Missouri.
* * * * * * *
(43) Harbor/south bay, california.--$35,000,000 for
an industrial water reuse project for the Harbor/South
Bay area, [California.] California, and for the
Southern Los Angeles County Groundwater Pipeline
Project, Pico Rivera, Downey, Bellflower, Paramount
Lakewood, and Long Beach, California.
* * * * * * *
(48) Cambria, california.--[$10,300,000]
(A) In general.--$10,300,000 for desalination
infrastructure, Cambria, California.
(B) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project not to exceed $3,000,000 for the cost
of planning and design work carried out by the
non-Federal interest before the date of the
cooperation agreement for the project if the
Secretary determines that the work is integral
to the project.
* * * * * * *
(61) Garrison and kathio township, minnesota.--
$11,000,000 for a wastewater infrastructure project for
the city of Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota.
Such assistance shall be provided directly to the
Garrison-Kathio-West Mille Lacs Lake Sanitary District,
Minnesota.
* * * * * * *
(64) Stanly county, north carolina.--$8,900,000 for
water and wastewater infrastructure, Stanly County,
North Carolina.
* * * * * * *
(70) Washington, greene, westmoreland, and fayette
counties, pennsylvania.--[$8,000,000] $13,300,000 for
water and wastewater infrastructure, Washington,
Greene, Westmoreland, and Fayette Counties,
Pennsylvania.
(71) Plaquemine, louisiana.--$7,000,000 for sanitary
sewer and wastewater infrastructure, Plaquemine,
Louisiana.
(72) Charleston, south carolina.--$20,000,000 for
wastewater infrastructure, including wastewater
collection systems, Charleston, South Carolina.
(73) Cross, south carolina.--$2,000,000 for water-
related environmental infrastructure, Cross, South
Carolina.
(74) Surfside, south carolina.--$8,000,000 for
environmental infrastructure, including stormwater
system improvements and ocean outfalls, Surfside, South
Carolina.
(75) North myrtle beach, south carolina.--$3,000,000
for environmental infrastructure, including ocean
outfalls, North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
(76) Tia juana valley, california.--$1,400,000 for
water-related environmental infrastructure, Tia Juana
Valley, California.
(77) Cabarrus county, north carolina.--$4,500,000 for
water-related infrastructure, Cabarrus County, North
Carolina.
(78) Richmond county, north carolina.--$8,000,000 for
water-related infrastructure, Richmond County, North
Carolina.
(79) Union county, north carolina.--$9,000,000 for
wastewater infrastructure, Union County, North
Carolina.
(80) Washington, district of columbia.--$35,000,000
for implementation of a combined sewer overflow long
term control plan, Washington, District of Columbia.
(81) Greenleaf, idaho.--$500,000 for water and
wastewater infrastructure, Greenleaf, Idaho.
(82) Weiser, idaho.--$330,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Weiser, Idaho.
(83) Coolin, idaho.--$2,200,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Coolin, Idaho.
(84) Jerome, idaho.--$5,000,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Jerome, Idaho.
(85) Ledyard and montville, connecticut.--$7,113,000
for water infrastructure, Ledyard and Montville,
Connecticut.
(86) Awendaw, south carolina.--$2,000,000 for water-
related infrastructure, Awendaw, South Carolina.
(87) St. clair county, alabama.--$5,000,000 for
water-related infrastructure, St. Clair County,
Alabama.
(88) East bay, san francisco and santa clara areas,
california.--$4,000,000 for a desalination project to
serve the East Bay, San Francisco, and Santa Clara
areas, California.
(89) Athens, tennessee.--$16,000,000 for wastewater
infrastructure, Athens, Tennessee.
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 313. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCE PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT
PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the following
definitions apply:
(1) * * *
(2) South central pennsylvania.--The term ``south
central Pennsylvania'' means [Armstrong, Bedford,
Blair, Cambria, Clearfield, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton,
Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Mifflin, Somerset,
Snyder, and Westmoreland Counties] Allegheny,
Armstrong, Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fayette, Franklin,
Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Somerset,
Washington, and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 324. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JERSEY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
design and construction assistance to the [Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Commission of the State of New Jersey
for the development of the Phase I Environmental Improvement
Program of the Special Area Management Plan for] New Jersey
Meadowlands Commission for the development of an environmental
improvement program for the Hackensack Meadowlands area, New
Jersey.
(b) [Required] Elements.--The program to be developed under
subsection (a) [shall] may include at a minimum the following
areas:
[(1) Mitigation and enhancement for significant
wetlands that contribute to the Meadowlands ecosystem.]
(1) Enhancement and acquisition of significant
wetlands that contribute to the Meadowlands ecosystem.
* * * * * * *
(c) Cost Sharing.--Total project costs under subsection (a)
shall be shared at 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-
Federal. The non-Federal sponsor shall receive credit for
lands, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward its
share of project costs, but not to exceed 25 percent of total
project costs. The non-Federal sponsor may also provide in-kind
services, not to exceed 25 percent of the total project cost,
and may also receive credit for reasonable cost of design work
completed prior to entering into the cooperation agreement with
the Secretary for a project to be carried out under the program
developed under subsection (a). Operation and maintenance cost
shall be 100 percent non-Federal.
(d) Authorization of Appropriation.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$5,000,000]
$35,000,000 for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
1992. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 340. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCE PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT
PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Southern West Virginia Defined.--For purposes of this
section, the term ``Southern West Virginia'' means Raleigh,
Wayne, Cabell, Fayette, Lincoln, Summers, Wyoming, Webster,
Mingo, McDowell, Logan, Boone, Mercer, Pocahontas, Greenbrier,
Nicholas, and Monroe Counties, West Virginia.
* * * * * * *
(h) Corps of Engineers.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section for fiscal years 2003
and thereafter may be used by the Corps of Engineers district
offices to administer projects under this section at 100
percent Federal expense.
(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any
project undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest
may include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected
local government.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--INFRASTRUCTURE TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
* * * * * * *
SEC. 404. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK.
(a) Development of Program.--The Secretary is authorized and
directed to develop a data collection and monitoring program of
coastal [processes] and related environmental processes for the
Atlantic Coast (and associated back bays) of New York, from
Coney Island to Montauk Point, with a view toward providing
information necessary to develop a program for addressing post
storm actions, environmental restoration or conservation
measures for coastal and back bays, and long-term shoreline
erosion control. The plan for collecting data and monitoring
information included in such annual report shall be fully
coordinated with and agreed to by appropriate agencies of the
State of New York.
(b) [Initial Plan.--Not later than 12 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the] Annual Reports.--The
Secretary shall provide an [initial plan for data collection
and monitoring] annual report of data collection and monitoring
activities to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of
the Senate and the Committee on Public Works and Transportation
of the House of Representatives. [Such initial plan shall be
fully coordinated with and agreed to by appropriate agencies of
the State of New York.]
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to
be appropriated $1,400,000 for each of fiscal years 1993, 1994,
1995, 1996, and 1997, [and an additional total of $2,500,000
for fiscal years thereafter] $2,500,000 for fiscal years 2000
through 2002, and $17,000,000 for fiscal years beginning after
September 30, 2002, to carry out this section. Such sums shall
remain available until expended.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 145 OF THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1976
[Sec. 145. The Secretary of the Army, acting through the
Chief of Engineers, is authorized upon request of the State, to
place on the beaches of such State beach-quality sand which has
been dredged in constructing and maintaining navagation inlets
and channels adjacent to such beaches, if the Secretary deems
such action to be in the public interest and upon payment by
such State of 35 percent of the increased cost thereof above
the cost required for alternative methods of disposing of such
sand. At the request of the State, the Secretary may enter into
an agreement with a political subdivision of the State to place
sand on the beaches of the political subdivision of the State
under the same terms and conditions required in the first
sentence of this section; except that the political subdivision
shall be responsible for providing any payments required under
such sentence in lieu of the State. In carrying out this
section, the Secretary shall give consideration to the schedule
of the State, or the schedule of the responsible political
subdivision of the requesting State, for providing its share of
funds for placing such sand on the beaches of the State or the
political subdivision and shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, accommodate such schedule.]
----------
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 212. FLOOD MITIGATION AND RIVERINE RESTORATION PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Priority Areas.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary shall examine appropriate locations, including--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(27) Susquehanna River watershed, Bradford County,
Pennsylvania; [and]
(28) Clear Creek, Harris, Galveston, and Brazoria
Counties, Texas[.];
(29) La Crosse County, Wisconsin;
(30) Crawford County, Wisconsin;
(31) Buffalo County, Wisconsin;
(32) Calhoun County, Illinois;
(33) Saint Charles County, Missouri;
(34) Saint Louis County, Missouri;
(35) Dubuque County, Iowa;
(36) Scott County, Iowa;
(37) Rock Island County, Illinois;
(38) Ascension Parish, Louisiana;
(39) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana;
(40) Iberville Parish, Louisiana; and
(41) Livingston Parish, Louisiana.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 225. RECREATION USER FEES.
(a) Withholding of Amounts.--
(1) In general.--[During fiscal years 1999 through
2002, the] The Secretary may withhold from the special
account established under section 4(i)(1)(A) of the
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C.
460l-6a(i)(1)(A)) 100 percent of the amount of receipts
above a baseline of $34,000,000 per each fiscal year
received from fees imposed at recreation sites under
the administrative jurisdiction of the Department of
the Army under section 4(b) of that Act (16 U.S.C.
460l-6a(b)).
* * * * * * *
(3) Availability.--The amounts withheld shall remain
available until [September 30, 2005] expended.
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 310. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Credit.--After completion of the study, the Secretary
shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of nourishment and renourishment associated
with the shore protection project incurred by the non-Federal
interest to respond to damages to Brevard County beaches that
are the result of a Federal navigation project, as determined
in the final report for the study.
SEC. 328. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (EAST OF HARVEY CANAL),
LOUISIANA.
(a) In General.--The project to prevent flood damage and for
hurricane damage reduction, west bank of the Mississippi River
(east of Harvey Canal), Louisiana, authorized by section 401(b)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4128)
and section 101(a)(17) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), is modified to direct the Secretary
to continue Federal [operation and maintenance] operation,
maintenance, rehabilitation, repair, and replacement of the
portion of the project included in the report of the Chief of
Engineers dated May 1, 1995, referred to as ``[Algiers Channel]
Algiers Canal Levees''.
* * * * * * *
(c) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the
project shall be 35 percent.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 358. ELIZABETH RIVER, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after [September
30, 1999] May 4, 1997, the city of Chesapeake, Virginia, shall
not be obligated to make the annual cash contribution required
under paragraph 1(9) of the Local Cooperation Agreement dated
December 12, 1978, between the Government and the city for the
project for navigation, southern branch of the Elizabeth River,
Chesapeake, Virginia.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--STUDIES
* * * * * * *
SEC. 455. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) In-Kind Contributions for Study.--The non-Federal
interest may provide up to 100 percent of the non-Federal share
required under subsection (f) in the form of services,
materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
SEC. 456. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATIONAL SYSTEM.
In consultation with the St. Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation, the Secretary shall review the Great Lakes
Connecting Channel and Harbors Report dated March 1985 to
determine the feasibility of undertaking any modification of
the recommendations made in the report to improve commercial
navigation on the Great Lakes navigation system, including
locks, dams, harbors, ports, channels, and other related
features. If the Government of Canada and the Government of the
United States have entered into a bilateral agreement that
provides for the financial participation of the Government of
Canada in the study, the Secretary may accept such
participation.
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 514. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to pay the Federal share of the cost of
carrying out this section $30,000,000 for the period of fiscal
years 2000 [and 2001] through 2015.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 517. EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN PROJECTS.
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports for
the following projects and, if justified, proceed directly to
project preconstruction, engineering, and design:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(5) Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge Parish,
Louisiana, project for waterfront and riverine
preservation, restoration, and enhancement
modifications.]
(5) Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge Parish,
Louisiana, project for waterfront and riverine
preservation, restoration, enhancement modifications,
and interpretive center development.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 568. DETROIT RIVER, MICHIGAN.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Repair and Rehabilitation.--
(1) * * *
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is
authorized to be appropriated to carry out paragraph
(1) [$1,000,000] $25,000,000 for the period beginning
with fiscal year 2000.
SEC. 569. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA.
(a) Definition of Northeastern Minnesota.--In this section,
the term ``northeastern Minnesota'' means the counties of Cook,
Lake, St. Louis, Koochiching, Itasca, Cass, Crow Wing, Aitkin,
Carlton, Pine, Kanabec, Mille Lacs, Morrison, [Benton,
Sherburne,] Beltrami, Hubbard, Wadena, Isanti, and Chisago,
Minnesota.
* * * * * * *
(e) Local Cooperation Agreement.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Cost sharing.--
(A) * * *
(B) Credit for design work.--The non-Federal
interest shall receive credit for the
reasonable costs of design work completed by
the non-Federal interest before entering into a
local cooperation agreement with the Secretary
for a project. [The credit for the design work
shall not exceed 6 percent of the total
construction costs of the project.]
* * * * * * *
[(g) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2001, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the pilot
program carried out under this section, including
recommendations concerning whether the program should be
implemented on a national basis.]
(g) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any
project undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest
may include a nonprofit entity.
* * * * * * *
(i) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps
of Engineers district offices to administer projects under this
section at 100 percent Federal expense.
SEC. 570. ALASKA.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Local Cooperation Agreements.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Cost sharing.--
(A) * * *
(B) Credit for design work.--The non-Federal
interest shall receive credit for the
reasonable costs of design work completed by
the non-Federal interest before entering into a
local cooperation agreement with the Secretary
for a project. [The credit for the design work
shall not exceed 6 percent of the total
construction costs of the project.]
* * * * * * *
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section [$25,000,000]
$40,000,000 for the period beginning with fiscal year 2000, to
remain available until expended.
(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any
project undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest
may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the
affected local government.
(j) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps
of Engineers district offices to administer projects under this
section at 100 percent Federal expense.
SEC. 571. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA.
(a) Definition of Central West Virginia.--In this section,
the term ``central West Virginia'' means the counties of Mason,
Jackson, Putnam, Kanawha, Roane, Wirt, Calhoun, Clay,
[Nicholas,] Braxton, [Gilmer,] Lewis, Upshur, Randolph,
Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, and Jefferson,
West Virginia.
* * * * * * *
(i) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b) of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any
project undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest
may include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected
local government.
(j) Corps of Engineers Expenses.--Ten percent of the amounts
appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps
of Engineers district offices to administer projects under this
section at 100 percent Federal expense.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 595. RURAL NEVADA AND MONTANA.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section for the period
beginning with fiscal year 2001--
(1) [$25,000,000] $40,000,000 for rural Nevada; and
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 401 OF THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 1, 1988
(Public Law 100-581)
AN ACT To establish procedures for review of tribal constitutions and
bylaws or amendments thereto pursuant to the Act of June 18, 1934 (48
Stat. 987).
Sec. 401. (a) * * *
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary
of the Army shall--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) make improvements at existing sites and Celilo
Village, Oregon, including but not limited to dredging
at the site at Wind River, Washington, and constructing
a boat ramp on or near the site at Cascade Locks,
Oregon.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 108 OF THE ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
1994
Sec. 108. (a) In General.--[The Secretary]
(1) Authority to convey.--The Secretary of the Army
is authorized to convey to the City of Galveston,
Texas, fee simple absolute title to all or any part of
a parcel of land containing approximately 605 acres
known as the San Jacinto Disposal Area located on the
east end of Galveston Island, Texas, in the W.A.A.
Wallace Survey, A-647 and A-648, City of Galveston,
Galveston County, Texas, being part of the old Fort San
Jacinto site, at the fair market value of such parcel
to be determined in accordance with the provisions of
subsection (d). Such conveyance shall only be made by
the Secretary of the Army upon the agreement of the
Secretary and the City as to all compensation due
herein.
(2) Letter of intent.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may provide a
letter of intent to the city of Galveston for
conveyance of less than 100 acres of the parcel
described in subsection (a) for private
development purposes if the Secretary receives
and approves a proposal by the city designating
the land which would be subject to such
development.
(B) Disposition of spoil.--If the Secretary
issues a letter of intent under subparagraph
(A), no additional spoil material may be placed
on the land designated for private development
for a period of at least 5 years from the date
of issuance of the letter to provide the city
of Galveston with an opportunity to secure
private developers, perform appraisals, conduct
environmental studies, and provide the
compensation to the United States required for
the conveyance.
* * * * * * *
(e) Navigational Servitude.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Expiration date.--If, 20 years after the [date of
the enactment of this Act] date of enactment of the
Water Resources Development Act of 2002, any area or
part thereof described in subsection (a) is not
bulkheaded or filled or occupied by permanent
structures, including marina facilities, in accordance
with the requirements set out in paragraph (2), or if
work in connection with any activity permitted in
paragraph (2) is not commenced within 5 years after
issuance of such permits, then the declaration of
nonnavigability for such area or part thereof shall
expire.
* * * * * * *