(2) by inserting after paragraph (15) the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(16) UNDERSERVED COMMUNITY.—The term 
‘underserved community’ means a community with a 
population of less than 50,000 that has a median 
household income of less than 80 percent of the 
statewide median household income.’’. 
(b) NATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS AND LOW-HEAD 
DAMS.—Section 6 of the National Dam Safety Program 
Act (33 U.S.C. 467d) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 6. NATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS AND LOW-HEAD 
DAMS. 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Army shall 
maintain and update information on the inventory of dams 
and low-head dams in the United States. 
‘‘(b) DAMS.—The inventory maintained under sub-
section (a) shall include any available information assess-
ing each dam based on inspections completed by a Federal 
agency, a State dam safety agency, or a Tribal govern-
ment. 
‘‘(c) LOW-HEAD DAMS.—The inventory maintained 
under subsection (a) shall include— 
‘‘(1) the location, ownership, description, cur-
rent use, condition, height, and length of each low- 
head dam;
‘‘(2) any information on public safety conditions 
at each low-head dam; and 
‘‘(3) any other relevant information concerning 
low-head dams. 
‘‘(d) DATA.—In carrying out this section, the Sec-
retary shall— 
‘‘(1) coordinate with Federal and State agen-
cies, Tribal governments, and other relevant entities; 
and 
‘‘(2) use data provided to the Secretary by 
those agencies and entities. 
‘‘(e) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary shall 
make the inventory maintained under subsection (a) pub-
licly available (including on a publicly available website), 
including— 
‘‘(1) public safety information on the dangers of 
low-head dams; and 
‘‘(2) a directory of financial and technical as-
sistance resources available to reduce safety hazards 
and fish passage barriers at low-head dams. 
‘‘(f) CLARIFICATION.—Nothing in this section pro-
vides authority to the Secretary to carry out an activity, 
with respect to a low-head dam, that is not explicitly au-
thorized under this section.
‘‘(g) LOW-HEAD DAM DEFINED.—In this section, the 
term ‘low-head dam’ means a river-wide artificial barrier 
that generally spans a stream channel, blocking the water-
way and creating a backup of water behind the barrier, 
with a drop off over the wall of not less than 6 inches 
and not more than 25 feet.’’. 
(c) REHABILITATION OF HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL 
DAMS.—Section 8A of the National Dam Safety Program 
Act (33 U.S.C. 467f–2) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking subpara-
graph (C) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(C) GRANT
ASSURANCE.—As part of a 
grant agreement under subparagraph (B), the 
Administrator shall require that each eligible 
subrecipient to which the State awards a grant 
under this section provides an assurance from 
the dam owner, with respect to the dam to be 
rehabilitated, that the dam owner will carry out 
a plan for maintenance of the dam during the 
expected life of the dam.’’; 
(2) in subsection (d)(2)(C), by striking ‘‘com-
mit’’ and inserting ‘‘for a project not including re-
moval, obtain a commitment from the dam owner’’; 
(3) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the 
following:
‘‘(e) FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLANS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—As a condition of receipt of 
assistance under this section, an eligible subrecipient 
shall demonstrate that a floodplain management 
plan to reduce the impacts of future flood events 
from a controlled or uncontrolled release from the 
dam or management of water levels in the area im-
pacted by the dam— 
‘‘(A) for a removal— 
‘‘(i) is in place; and 
‘‘(ii) identifies areas that would be im-
pacted by the removal of the dam and in-
cludes a communication and outreach plan 
for the project and the impact of the 
project on the affected communities; or 
‘‘(B) for a project not including removal— 
‘‘(i) is in place; or 
‘‘(ii) will be— 
‘‘(I) developed not later than 2 
years after the date of execution of a 
project 
agreement 
for 
assistance 
under this section; and 
‘‘(II) implemented not later than 
2 years after the date of completion of 
construction of the project.
‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT.—In the case of a plan for 
a removal, the Administrator may not impose any 
additional requirements or conditions other than the 
requirements in paragraph (1)(A). 
‘‘(3) INCLUSIONS.—A plan under paragraph 
(1)(B) shall address— 
‘‘(A) potential measures, practices, and 
policies to reduce loss of life, injuries, damage 
to property and facilities, public expenditures, 
and other adverse impacts of flooding in the 
area protected or impacted by the dam; 
‘‘(B) plans for flood fighting and evacu-
ation; and 
‘‘(C) public education and awareness of 
flood risks. 
‘‘(4) PLAN
CRITERIA
AND
TECHNICAL
SUP-
PORT.—The Administrator, in consultation with the 
Board, shall provide criteria, and may provide tech-
nical support, for the development and implementa-
tion of floodplain management plans prepared under 
this subsection.’’; 
(4) in subsection (g)(1)— 
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking 
‘‘Any’’ and inserting ‘‘Except as provided in 
subparagraph (C), any’’; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(C) UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.—Sub-
paragraph (A) shall not apply to a project car-
ried out by or for the benefit of an underserved 
community.’’. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 
14 of the National Dam Safety Program Act (33 U.S.C. 
467j) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a)— 
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘2023’’ 
and inserting ‘‘2028’’; and 
(B) in paragraph (2)— 
(i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting 
‘‘and low-head dams’’ after ‘‘inventory of 
dams’’ each place it appears; and 
(ii) by amending subparagraph (B) to 
read as follows: 
‘‘(B) MAXIMUM
AMOUNT
OF
ALLOCA-
TION.—The amount of funds allocated to a 
State under this paragraph for a fiscal year 
may not exceed the amount that is equal to 4 
times the amount of funds committed by the 
State to implement dam safety activities for 
that fiscal year.’’; 
(2) in subsection (b)—
(A) by striking the subsection heading and 
inserting ‘‘NATIONAL
INVENTORY
OF
DAMS 
AND LOW-HEAD DAMS’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting 
‘‘2028’’; 
(3) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2028’’; 
(4) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2028’’; 
(5) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2028’’; and 
(6) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2028’’. 
(e) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 15 of the 
National Dam Safety Program Act (33 U.S.C. 467o) is 
repealed. 
SEC. 129. REHABILITATION OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CON-
STRUCTED DAMS. 
Section 1177 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2016 (33 U.S.C. 467f–2 note) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (e)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and in-
serting the following: 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para-
graph (2), the Secretary’’; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) EXCEPTION.—For a project under this 
section for which the Federal share of the costs is 
expected to exceed $60,000,000, the Secretary may 
expend more than such amount only if— 
‘‘(A) the Secretary submits to Congress 
the determination made under subsection (a) 
with respect to the project; and 
‘‘(B) construction of the project substan-
tially in accordance with the plans, and subject 
to the conditions described in such determina-
tion is specifically authorized by Congress.’’; 
and 
(2) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘2017 through 
2026’’ and inserting ‘‘2025 through 2030’’. 
SEC. 130. TREATMENT OF PROJECTS IN COVERED COMMU-
NITIES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out a feasibility study 
for a project that serves a covered community, the Sec-
retary shall adjust the calculation of the benefit-cost ratio 
for the project in order to equitably compare such project 
to projects carried out in the contiguous States of the 
United States and the District of Columbia. 
(b) EVALUATION.—In carrying out this section, the 
Secretary shall—
(1) compute the benefit-cost ratio without ad-
justing the calculation as described in subsection (a); 
(2) compute an adjusted benefit-cost ratio by 
adjusting the construction costs for the project to re-
flect what construction costs would be if the project 
were carried out in a comparable community in the 
contiguous States that is nearest to the community 
in which the project will be carried out; 
(3) include in the documentation associated 
with the feasibility study for the project the ratios 
calculated under paragraph (1) and paragraph (2); 
and 
(4) consider the adjusted benefit-cost ratio cal-
culated under paragraph (2) in selecting the ten-
tatively selected plan for the project. 
(c) COVERED COMMUNITY DEFINED.—In this sec-
tion, the term ‘‘covered community’’ means a community 
located in the State of Hawaii, Alaska, the Commonwealth 
of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern 
Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, or 
American Samoa. 
SEC. 131. ABILITY TO PAY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 103(m) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) 
is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ‘‘an agricul-
tural’’ and inserting ‘‘a’’; 
(2) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3) and in-
serting the following: 
‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall determine 
the ability of a non-Federal interest to pay under 
this subsection by considering— 
‘‘(A) per capita income data for the county 
or counties in which the project is to be located; 
‘‘(B) the per capita non-Federal cost of 
construction of the project for the county or 
counties in which the project is to be located; 
‘‘(C) the financial capabilities of the non- 
Federal interest for the project; 
‘‘(D) the guidance issued under section 
160 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note); and 
‘‘(E) any additional criteria relating to the 
non-Federal interest’s financial ability to carry 
out its cost-sharing responsibilities determined 
appropriate by the Secretary. 
‘‘(3) PROCEDURES.—For purposes of carrying 
out paragraph (2), the Secretary shall develop proce-
dures—
‘‘(A) to allow a non-Federal interest to 
identify the amount such non-Federal interest 
would likely be able to pay; and 
‘‘(B) for a non-Federal interest to submit 
a request to the Secretary to reduce the re-
quired non-Federal share.’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(5) BENEFITS ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS.— 
In calculating the benefits and costs of project alter-
natives relating to the height of a flood risk reduc-
tion project for purposes of determining the national 
economic development benefits of the project, the 
Secretary— 
‘‘(A) shall include insurance costs incurred 
by homeowners; and 
‘‘(B) may consider additional costs in-
curred by households, as appropriate. 
‘‘(6) EXCEPTION.—This subsection shall not 
apply to project costs greater than the national eco-
nomic determination plan. 
‘‘(7) REPORT.— 
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—Not less frequently 
than annually, the Secretary shall submit to the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Environment and Public Works 
of the Senate a report describing all determina-
tions of the Secretary under this subsection re-
garding the ability of a non-Federal interest to 
pay. 
‘‘(B) CONTENTS.—The Secretary shall in-
clude in each report required under subpara-
graph (A) a description, for the applicable year, 
of— 
‘‘(i) requests by a non-Federal inter-
est to reduce the non-Federal share re-
quired in a cost-sharing agreement; 
‘‘(ii) the determination of the Sec-
retary with respect to each such request; 
and 
‘‘(iii) the basis for each such deter-
mination. 
‘‘(C) INCLUSION
IN
CHIEF’S
REPORT.— 
The Secretary shall include each determination 
to reduce the non-Federal share required in a 
cost-sharing agreement for construction of a 
project in the report of the Chief of Engineers 
for the project.’’. 
(b) UPDATE TO GUIDANCE.—Not later than 1 year 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (136 
Stat. 3746). 
(11) The project for flood control, Williamsport, 
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 5 of the Act of 
June 22, 1936 (chapter 688, 49 Stat. 1573). 
(12) The project for ecosystem restoration, 
Resacas, in the vicinity of the City of Brownsville, 
Texas, authorized by section 1401(5) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2018 (132 Stat. 
3839). 
(13) Construction of any critical restoration 
project in the Lake Champlain watershed, Vermont 
and New York, authorized by section 542 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 
Stat. 2671; 121 Stat. 1150; 134 Stat. 2680; 136 
Stat. 3822). 
(14) Any authorized flood control and storm 
damage reduction project in the United States Vir-
gin Islands that was impacted by Hurricanes Irma 
and Maria. 
(15) Construction of dredged material stabiliza-
tion and retaining structures related to the project 
for navigation, Lower Willamette and Columbia Riv-
ers, from Portland, Oregon, to the sea, authorized
by the first section of the Act of June 18, 1878 
(chapter 267, 20 Stat. 157, chapter 264). 
(16) Any water-related environmental infra-
structure project authorized by section 219 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public 
Law 102–580). 
SEC. 132. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM. 
Section 203 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2269) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘the term ‘In-
dian tribe’ has the meaning given the term’’ and in-
serting ‘‘the terms ‘Indian tribe’ and ‘Indian Tribe’ 
have the meanings given the terms’’; 
(2) in subsection (b)— 
(A) in paragraph (1)(B)— 
(i) by striking ‘‘or in proximity’’ and 
inserting ‘‘, in proximity’’; and 
(ii) by inserting ‘‘, or in proximity to 
a river system or other aquatic habitat 
with respect to which an Indian Tribe has 
Tribal treaty rights’’ after ‘‘Alaska Native 
villages’’; 
(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘flood 
hurricane and storm damage reduction, includ-
ing erosion control,’’ and inserting ‘‘flood or
100 
hurricane and storm damage reduction, includ-
ing erosion control and stormwater manage-
ment (including management of stormwater 
that flows at a rate of less than 800 cubic feet 
per second for the 10-percent flood),’’; and 
(C) 
in 
paragraph 
(4), 
by 
striking 
‘‘$26,000,000’’ each place it appears and in-
serting ‘‘$28,500,000’’; and 
(3) by striking subsection (e). 
SEC. 133. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS. 
Section 214(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2352(a)) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the 
following: 
‘‘(D) INDIAN
TRIBE.—The term ‘Indian 
Tribe’ means— 
‘‘(i) an Indian Tribe, as such term is 
defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-De-
termination and Education Assistance Act 
(25 U.S.C. 5304); and 
‘‘(ii) any entity formed under the au-
thority of one or more Indian Tribes, as so 
defined.’’; 
(2) in paragraph (2)—
101 
(A) by inserting ‘‘Indian Tribe,’’ after 
‘‘public-utility company,’’ each place it appears; 
and 
(B) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘, 
including an aquatic ecosystem restoration 
project’’ before the period at the end; and 
(3) by striking paragraph (4). 
SEC. 134. PROJECT STUDIES SUBJECT TO INDEPENDENT 
EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW. 
Section 2034 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2007 (33 U.S.C. 2343) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (d)(2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘assess the adequacy and 
acceptability of the economic’’ and insert the 
following: ‘‘assess the adequacy and accept-
ability of— 
‘‘(A) the economic’’; 
(B) in subparagraph (A), as so redesig-
nated, by adding ‘‘and’’ at the end; and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) the consideration of nonstructural al-
ternatives under section 73(a) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 
701b–11(a)) for projects for flood risk manage-
ment;’’;
102 
(2) by striking subsection (h); and 
(3) by redesignating subsections (i) through (l) 
as subsections (h) through (k), respectively. 
SEC. 135. CONTROL OF AQUATIC PLANT GROWTHS AND 
INVASIVE SPECIES. 
Section 104 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 
(33 U.S.C. 610) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (e)(3), by inserting ‘‘, and 
monitoring and contingency planning for,’’ after 
‘‘early detection of’’; and 
(2) in subsection (g)(2)(A), by inserting ‘‘the 
Connecticut River Basin,’’ after ‘‘the Ohio River 
Basin,’’. 
SEC. 136. REMOTE OPERATIONS AT CORPS DAMS. 
During the 10-year period beginning on the date of 
enactment of this Act, with respect to a water resources 
development project owned, operated, or managed by the 
Corps of Engineers, the Secretary may not use remote op-
eration activities at a navigation or hydroelectric power 
generating facility at such project as a replacement for 
activities performed, as of the date of enactment of this 
Act, by personnel under the direction of the Secretary at 
such project unless the Secretary provides to the Com-
mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
103 
of Representatives and the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate written notice that— 
(1) use of the remote operation activities— 
(A) does not affect activities described in 
section 314 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2321); 
(B) will address any cyber and physical se-
curity risks to such project in accordance with 
applicable Federal law and agency guidance; 
and 
(C) is necessary to increase the availability 
and capacity, as applicable, of such project, in-
cluding a project on a lower use waterway; and 
(2) the remote operation activities were devel-
oped under a public process that included engage-
ment with such personnel and other stakeholders 
who may be affected by the use of such activities. 
SEC. 137. HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM DEMONSTRATION PRO-
GRAM. 
Section 128 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 610 note) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘or affecting 
water bodies of regional, national, or international 
importance’’ after ‘‘projects’’;
104 
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ‘‘and State 
agencies’’ and inserting ‘‘, State, and local agencies, 
institutions of higher education, and private organi-
zations, including nonprofit organizations’’; 
(3) in subsection (c) in paragraph (6), insert 
‘‘Watershed’’ after ‘‘Okeechobee’’; 
(4) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’; and 
(5) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(f) PRIORITY.—In carrying out the demonstration 
program under subsection (a), the Secretary shall, to the 
maximum extent possible, prioritize carrying out program 
activities that— 
‘‘(1) reduce nutrient pollution; 
‘‘(2) utilize natural and nature-based ap-
proaches, including oysters; 
‘‘(3) protect, enhance, or restore wetlands or 
flood plains, including river and streambank sta-
bilization; 
‘‘(4) develop technologies for remote sensing, 
monitoring, or early detection of harmful algal 
blooms, or other emerging technologies; and 
‘‘(5) combine removal of harmful algal blooms 
with a beneficial use, including conversion of re-
105 
trieved algae biomass into biofuel, fertilizer, or other 
products. 
‘‘(g) AGREEMENTS.—In carrying out the demonstra-
tion program under subsection (a), the Secretary may 
enter into agreements with a non-Federal entity for the 
use or sale of successful technologies developed under this 
section.’’. 
SEC. 138. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS MISSIONS. 
Section 8159 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3740) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and 
inserting a semicolon; 
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at 
the end and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(5) Western Washington University, Bel-
lingham to conduct academic research on water 
quality, aquatic ecosystem restoration (including 
aquaculture), and the resiliency of water resources 
development projects in the Pacific Northwest to 
natural disasters; 
‘‘(6) the University of North Carolina Wil-
mington to conduct academic research on flood miti-
gation, coastal resiliency, water resource ecology, 
water quality, aquatic ecosystem restoration (includ-
106 
ing aquaculture), coastal restoration, and resource- 
related emergency management in North Carolina 
and Mid-Atlantic region; and 
‘‘(7) California State Polytechnic University, 
Pomona to conduct academic research on integrated 
design and management of water resources develop-
ment projects, including for the purposes of flood 
risk management, ecosystem restoration, water sup-
ply, water conservation, and sustainable aquifer 
management.’’. 
SEC. 139. NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to 
carry out a national coastal mapping program to provide 
recurring national coastal mapping along the coasts of the 
United States to support Corps of Engineers navigation, 
flood risk management, environmental restoration, and 
emergency operations missions. 
(b) SCOPE.—In carrying out the program under sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall— 
(1) disseminate coastal mapping data and new 
or advanced geospatial information and remote sens-
ing tools for coastal mapping derived from the anal-
ysis of such data to the Corps of Engineers, other 
Federal agencies, States, and other stakeholders;
107 
(2) implement coastal surveying based on find-
ings of the national coastal mapping study carried 
out under section 8110 of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3702); 
(3) conduct research and development on bathy-
metric liDAR and ancillary technologies necessary to 
advance coastal mapping capabilities in order to ex-
ploit data with increased efficiently and greater ac-
curacy; 
(4) with respect to any region affected by a 
hurricane rated category 3 or higher— 
(A) conduct coastal mapping of such re-
gion; 
(B) determine volume changes at Federal 
projects in such region; 
(C) quantify damage to navigation infra-
structure in such region; 
(D) assess environmental impacts to such 
region, measure any coastal impacts; and 
(E) make any data gathered under this 
paragraph publicly available not later than 2 
weeks after the acquisition of such data; 
(5) at the request of another Federal entity or 
a State or local government entity, provide subject
108 
matter expertise, mapping services, and technology 
evolution assistance; 
(6) enter into an agreement with another Fed-
eral agency or a State agency to accept funds from 
such agency to expand the coverage of the program 
to efficiently meet the needs of such agency; 
(7) coordinate with representatives of the Naval 
Meteorology and Oceanography Command, the Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
United States Geological Survey, and any other rep-
resentative of a Federal agency that the Secretary 
determines necessary, to support any relevant Fed-
eral, State, or local agency through participation in 
working groups, committees, and organizations; 
(8) maintain the panel of senior leaders estab-
lished under section 8110(e) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2022; 
(9) convene an annual coastal mapping commu-
nity of practice meeting to discuss and identify tech-
nical topics and challenges to inform such panel in 
carrying out the duties of such panel; and 
(10) to the maximum extent practicable, to pro-
cure any surveying or mapping services in accord-
ance with chapter 11 of title 40, United States 
Code.
109 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section for 
each fiscal year $15,000,000, to remain available until ex-
pended. 
SEC. 140. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS. 
Section 729 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2267a) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (d)— 
(A) in paragraph (12), by striking ‘‘; and’’ 
and inserting a semicolon; 
(B) in paragraph (13), by striking the pe-
riod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(14) Connecticut River Watershed, Con-
necticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and 
Vermont; 
‘‘(15) Lower Rouge River Watershed, Michigan; 
and 
‘‘(16) Grand River Watershed, Michigan.’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(g) FEASIBILITY REPORT ON PROJECT SPECIFIC 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ASSESSMENTS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—At the request of a non- 
Federal interest for an assessment completed under 
this section, the Secretary is authorized to prepare
110 
a feasibility report, in accordance with the require-
ments of section 905, recommending the construc-
tion or modification of a water resources develop-
ment project to address a water resources need of a 
river basin or watershed of the United States identi-
fied in the assessment. 
‘‘(2) PRIORITY WATERSHEDS.—In carrying out 
this subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to— 
‘‘(A) the watersheds of the island of Maui, 
Hawaii, including the Wahikuli, Honoko¯wai, 
Kahana, Honokahua, and Honolua watersheds, 
including the coral reef habitat north of 
Lahaina off the northwestern coast of the is-
land of Maui; and 
‘‘(B) the watersheds of the Northern Mar-
iana Islands, American Samoa, and Guam.’’. 
SEC. 141. REMOVAL OF ABANDONED VESSELS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 19 of the Act of March 
3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 414) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘SEC. 19. (a) That whenever’’ 
and inserting the following: 
‘‘SEC. 19. VESSEL REMOVAL BY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. 
‘‘(a) REMOVAL OF OBSTRUCTIVE VESSELS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—That whenever’’; 
(2) in subsection (b)—
111 
(A) by striking ‘‘described in this section’’ 
and inserting ‘‘described in this subsection’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘under subsection (a)’’ and 
inserting ‘‘under paragraph (1)’’; 
(3) by striking ‘‘(b) The owner’’ and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(2) LIABILITY OF OWNER, LESSEE, OR OPER-
ATOR.—The owner’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) REMOVAL OF ABANDONED VESSEL.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized 
to remove from the navigable waters of the United 
States a covered vessel that does not obstruct the 
navigation of such waters, if— 
‘‘(A) such removal is determined to be in 
the public interest by the Secretary, in con-
sultation with any State in which the vessel is 
located or any Indian Tribe with jurisdiction 
over the area in which the vessel is located, as 
applicable; and 
‘‘(B) in the case of a vessel that is not 
under the control of the United States by rea-
son of seizure or forfeiture, the Commandant of
112 
the Coast Guard determines that the vessel is 
abandoned. 
‘‘(2) INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS.—In remov-
ing a covered vessel under this subsection, the Sec-
retary— 
‘‘(A) shall enter into an interagency agree-
ment with the head of any Federal department, 
agency, or instrumentality that has control of 
such vessel; and 
‘‘(B) is authorized to accept funds from 
such department, agency, or instrumentality for 
the removal of such vessel. 
‘‘(3) LIABILITY.—The owner of a covered vessel 
shall be liable to the United States for the costs of 
removal, destruction, and disposal of such vessel 
under this subsection. 
‘‘(4) COVERED VESSEL DEFINED.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In this subsection, the 
term ‘covered vessel’ means a vessel— 
‘‘(i) determined to be abandoned by 
the Commandant of the Coast Guard; or 
‘‘(ii) under the control of the United 
States by reason of seizure or forfeiture 
pursuant to any law.
113 
‘‘(B) EXCLUSION.—The term ‘covered ves-
sel’ does not include— 
‘‘(i) any vessel for which the Secretary 
has removal authority under subsection (a) 
or section 20; 
‘‘(ii) an abandoned barge for which 
the Commandant of the Coast Guard has 
the authority to remove under chapter 47 
of title 46, United States Code; and 
‘‘(iii) a vessel— 
‘‘(I) for which the owner is not 
identified, unless determined to be 
abandoned by the Commandant of the 
Coast Guard; or 
‘‘(II) for which the owner has not 
agreed to pay the costs of removal, 
destruction, or disposal. 
‘‘(5) AUTHORIZATION
OF
APPROPRIATIONS.— 
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out 
this section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
2025 through 2029.’’. 
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 20 of the 
Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 416) is amended by 
striking ‘‘the preceding section of this Act’’ and inserting 
‘‘section 19(a)’’.
114 
SEC. 142. CORROSION PREVENTION. 
Section 1033(c) of the Water Resources Reform and 
Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2350(c)) is amend-
ed— 
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and 
inserting a semicolon; 
(2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para-
graph (4); and 
(3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(3) the carrying out of an activity described in 
paragraph (1) or (2) through a program in corrosion 
prevention that is— 
‘‘(A) offered or accredited by an organiza-
tion that sets industry standards for corrosion 
mitigation and prevention; or 
‘‘(B) an industrial coatings applicator pro-
gram that is— 
‘‘(i) an employment and training ac-
tivity (as defined in section 3 of the Work-
force Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 
U.S.C. 3102)); or 
‘‘(ii) registered under the Act of Au-
gust 16, 1937 (commonly known as the 
‘National Apprenticeship Act’; 50 Stat.
115 
664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.); 
and’’. 
SEC. 143. MISSOURI RIVER EXISTING FEATURES PROTEC-
TION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Before carrying out a covered ac-
tion with respect to a covered in-river feature, the Sec-
retary shall perform an analysis to identify whether such 
action will— 
(1) contribute to adverse effects of increased 
water levels during flood events adjacent to the cov-
ered in-river feature; 
(2) increase risk of flooding on commercial and 
residential structures and critical infrastructure ad-
jacent to the covered in-river feature; 
(3) decrease water levels during droughts adja-
cent to the covered in-river feature; 
(4) affect the navigation channel, including 
crossflows, velocity, channel depth, and channel 
width, adjacent to the covered in-river feature; 
(5) contribute to bank erosion on private lands 
adjacent to the covered in-river feature; 
(6) affect ports or harbors adjacent to the cov-
ered in-river feature; or 
(7) affect harvesting of sand adjacent to the 
covered in-river feature.
116 
(b) MITIGATION.—If the Secretary determines that 
a covered action will result in an outcome described in sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall mitigate such outcome. 
(c) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section may 
be construed to affect the requirements of section 906 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2283). 
(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) COVERED ACTION.—The term ‘‘covered ac-
tion’’ means the construction of, modification of, 
operational changes to, or implementation of a cov-
ered in-river feature. 
(2) COVERED IN-RIVER FEATURE.—The term 
‘‘covered in-river feature’’ means in-river features on 
the Missouri River used to create and maintain dike 
notches, chutes, and complexes for interception or 
rearing authorized pursuant to section 601(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
Stat. 4143; 113 Stat. 306; 121 Stat. 1155) and sec-
tion 334 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 306; 136 Stat. 3799). 
SEC. 144. FEDERAL BREAKWATERS AND JETTIES. 
Section 8101 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 (33 U.S.C. 2351b) is amended—
117 
(1) by inserting ‘‘, pile dike,’’ after ‘‘jetty’’ each 
place it appears; and 
(2) in subsection (b)(2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘if’’ and all that follows 
through ‘‘the Secretary’’ and inserting ‘‘if the 
Secretary’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘breakwater; and’’ and in-
serting ‘‘breakwater and—’’ 
(C) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as 
subparagraph (A); 
(D) in subparagraph (A) (as so redesig-
nated), by striking the period at the end and in-
serting ‘‘; or’’; and 
(E) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) the pile dike has disconnected from 
an authorized navigation project as a result of 
a lack of such regular and routine Federal 
maintenance activity.’’. 
SEC. 145. TEMPORARY RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PILOT 
PROGRAM. 
Section 8154(g)(1) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3734) is amended by adding 
at the end the following: 
‘‘(F) Project for hurricane and storm dam-
age risk reduction, Norfolk Coastal Storm Risk
118 
Management, Virginia, authorized by section 
401(3) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2020 (134 Stat. 2738).’’. 
SEC. 146. EASEMENTS FOR HURRICANE AND STORM DAM-
AGE REDUCTION PROJECTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to a project for hur-
ricane and storm damage reduction for which the Sec-
retary is requiring a perpetual easement, the Secretary 
shall, upon request by the non-Federal interest for the 
project, certify real estate availability and proceed to con-
struction of such project with a nonperpetual easement 
if— 
(1) such certification and construction are in 
compliance with the terms of the report of the Chief 
of Engineers for the project and the applicable 
project partnership agreement; and 
(2) the Secretary provides the non-Federal in-
terest with formal notice that, in the event in which 
the nonperpetual easement expires and is not ex-
tended, the Secretary will be unable to— 
(A) fulfill the Federal responsibility with 
respect to the project or carry out any required 
nourishment of the project under the existing 
project authorization;
119 
(B) carry out repair and rehabilitation of 
the project under section 5 of the Act of August 
18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n); and 
(C) provide any other relevant Federal as-
sistance with respect to the project. 
(b) DISCLOSURE.—For any project for hurricane 
storm damage risk reduction, or a proposal to modify such 
a project, that is authorized after the date of enactment 
of this Act for which a perpetual easement is required for 
Federal participation in the project, the Secretary shall 
include in the report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
project a disclosure of such requirement. 
(c) MANAGEMENT.—To the maximum extent prac-
ticable, the Secretary shall, at the request of the non-Fed-
eral interest for a project for hurricane storm damage risk 
reduction, identify and accept the minimum real estate in-
terests necessary to carry out the project, in accordance 
with section 103. 
(d) HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION 
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—During the 2-year period be-
ginning on the date of enactment of this Act, not-
withstanding any requirement of the Secretary for a 
covered project to comply with the memorandum of 
the Corps of Engineers entitled ‘‘Standard Estates
120 
– Perpetual Beach Nourishment and Perpetual Re-
strictive Dune Easement’’ and dated August 4, 
1995, the Secretary shall carry out each covered 
project in a manner consistent with the previously 
completed initial construction and periodic nourish-
ments of the project, including repair and restora-
tion work on the project under section 5(a) of the 
Act of August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n(a)). 
(2) COVERED PROJECT DEFINED.—In this sub-
section, the term ‘‘covered project’’ means an au-
thorized project for hurricane and storm damage re-
duction in any one of the following locations: 
(A) Brevard County, Canaveral Harbor, 
Florida – Mid Reach. 
(B) Brevard County, Canaveral Harbor, 
Florida – North Reach. 
(C) Brevard County, Canaveral Harbor, 
Florida – South Reach. 
(D) Broward County, Florida – Segment 
II. 
(E) Broward County, Florida – Segment 
III. 
(F) Dade County, Florida – Main Seg-
ment.
121 
(G) Dade County, Florida – Sunny Isles 
Segment. 
(H) Duval County, Florida. 
(I) Fort Pierce Beach, Florida. 
(J) Lee County, Florida – Captiva. 
(K) Lee County, Florida – Gasparilla. 
(L) Manatee County, Florida. 
(M) Martin County, Florida. 
(N) Nassau County, Florida. 
(O) Palm Beach County, Florida – Jupi-
ter/Carlin Segment. 
(P) Palm Beach County, Florida – Delray 
Segment. 
(Q) Palm Beach County, Florida – Mid 
Town. 
(R) Palm Beach County, Florida – North 
Boca. 
(S) Palm Beach County, Florida – Ocean 
Ridge. 
(T) Panama City Beaches, Florida. 
(U) Pinellas County, Florida – Long Key. 
(V) Pinellas County, Florida – Sand Key 
Segment. 
(W) Pinellas County, Florida –Treasure Is-
land.
122 
(X) Sarasota, Lido Key, Florida. 
(Y) Sarasota County, Florida – Venice 
Beach. 
(Z) St. Johns County, Florida – St. Au-
gustine Beach. 
(AA) St. Johns County, Florida – Vilano 
Segment. 
(BB) St. Lucie County, Florida – Hutch-
inson Island. 
(3) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of 
Congress that, for the purpose of constructing and 
maintaining a project for hurricane and storm dam-
age risk reduction, the minimum estate necessary for 
easements may not exceed the life of the project nor 
be less than 50 years. 
(e) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section may 
be construed to affect the requirements of section 103(d) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2213(d)). 
SEC. 147. SHORELINE AND RIVERINE PROTECTION AND 
RESTORATION. 
Section 212(e)(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332(e)(2)) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
124 
(5) integrate water data and tools through na-
tionwide approaches to data infrastructure, plat-
forms, models, and tool development; and 
(6) support the adoption of new technologies 
and the development of tools for water data collec-
tion, sharing, and standardization. 
SEC. 149. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO COMPREHEN-
SIVE BENEFITS. 
It is the sense of Congress that in carrying out any 
feasibility study, the Secretary should follow, to the max-
imum extent practicable— 
(1) the guidance described in the memoranda 
relating to ‘‘Comprehensive Documentation of Bene-
fits in Feasibility Studies’’, dated April 3, 2020, and 
April 13, 2020, and signed by the Assistant Sec-
retary for Civil Works and the Director of Civil 
Works, respectively; and 
(2) the policies described in the memorandum 
relating to ‘‘Policy Directive – Comprehensive Docu-
mentation of Benefits in Decision Document’’ dated 
January 5, 2021, and signed by the Assistant Sec-
retary for Civil Works. 
SEC. 150. REPORTING AND OVERSIGHT. 
(a) INITIAL REPORT.—
125 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit to the Committees on Transportation 
and Infrastructure and Appropriations of the House 
of Representatives and the Committees on Environ-
ment and Public Works and Appropriations of the 
Senate a report detailing the status of the reports 
described in paragraph (2). 
(2) REPORTS
DESCRIBED.—The reports de-
scribed in this paragraph are the following: 
(A) The comprehensive backlog and oper-
ation and maintenance report required under 
section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)). 
(B) The report on managed aquifer re-
charge required under section 8108(d) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (33 
U.S.C. 2357(d)). 
(C) The plan on beneficial use of dredged 
material required under section 8130(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3717). 
(D) The updated report on Corps of Engi-
neers Reservoirs required under section 8153 of
126 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3734). 
(E) The report on dredge capacity require 
under section 8205 of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3754). 
(F) The report on the assessment of the 
consequences of changing operation and mainte-
nance responsibilities required under section 
8206 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2022 (136 Stat. 3756). 
(G) The report on the western infrastruc-
ture study required under section 8208 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3756). 
(H) The report on excess lands for Whit-
tier Narrows Dam, California, required under 
section 8213 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3758). 
(I) The report on recreational boating in 
the Great Lakes basin required under section 
8218 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2022 (136 Stat. 3761). 
(J) The report on the disposition study on 
hydropower in the Willamette Valley, Oregon, 
required under section 8220 of the Water Re-
127 
sources Development Act of 2022 (136 Stat 
3762). 
(K) The report on corrosion prevention ac-
tivities required under section 8234 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3767). 
(3) ELEMENTS.—The Secretary shall include in 
the report required under paragraph (1) the fol-
lowing information with respect to each report de-
scribed in paragraph (2): 
(A) A summary of the status of each such 
report, including if the report has been initi-
ated. 
(B) The amount of funds that— 
(i) have been made available to carry 
out each such report; and 
(ii) the Secretary requires to complete 
each such report. 
(C) A detailed assessment of how the Sec-
retary intends to complete each such report, in-
cluding an anticipated timeline for completion. 
(D) Any available information that is rel-
evant to each such report that would inform the 
committees described in paragraph (1). 
(b) ANNUAL REPORTS.—
128 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 10 days after 
the date on which the budget of the President for 
each fiscal year is submitted to Congress pursuant 
to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the 
Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Trans-
portation and Infrastructure and Appropriations of 
the House of Representatives and the Committees 
on Environment and Public Works and Appropria-
tions of the Senate a report on the status of each 
covered report. 
(2) ELEMENTS.—The Secretary shall include in 
the report required under paragraph (1) the fol-
lowing information: 
(A) A summary of the status of each cov-
ered report, including if each such report has 
been initiated. 
(B) The amount of funds that— 
(i) have been made available to carry 
out each such report; and 
(ii) the Secretary requires to complete 
each such report. 
(C) A detailed assessment of how the Sec-
retary intends to complete each covered report, 
including an anticipated timeline for comple-
tion.
129 
(3) PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.—The Secretary shall 
make each report required under paragraph (1) pub-
licly available on the website of the Corps of Engi-
neers. 
(4) NOTIFICATION OF COMMITTEES.—The Sec-
retary shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on the Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate on an annual basis a 
draft of each covered report. 
(5) DEFINITION OF COVERED REPORT.—In this 
subsection, the term ‘‘covered report’’— 
(A) means any report or study required to 
be submitted by the Secretary under this Act or 
any Act providing authorizations for water re-
sources development projects enacted after the 
date of enactment of this Act to the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Sen-
ate that has not been so submitted; and 
(B) does not include a feasibility study (as 
such term is defined in section 105 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2215(d)).
130 
SEC. 151. SACRAMENTO RIVER WATERSHED NATIVE AMER-
ICAN SITE AND CULTURAL RESOURCE PRO-
TECTION PILOT PROGRAM. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 180 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall es-
tablish a pilot program in accordance with this section to 
protect Native American burial sites, village sites, and cul-
tural resources identified or discovered at civil works 
projects in the watershed of the Sacramento River and its 
tributaries, including the American, Bear, Yuba, and 
Feather Rivers, in the State of California. 
(b) REBURIAL.— 
(1) REBURIAL
AREAS.—In carrying out the 
pilot program, the Secretary shall, in consultation 
with and with the consent of each affected Indian 
Tribe, identify, and, as applicable, cooperate with 
appropriate Tribal, local, State, and Federal Govern-
ment property owners to set aside, areas that may 
be used for the reburial of Native American human 
remains and funerary objects that— 
(A) have been identified or discovered at 
the site of a covered civil works project; 
(B) have been rightfully claimed by any af-
fected Indian Tribe; and 
(C) can be reburied in such areas in a 
manner secure from future disturbances, with
131 
the consent of such property owner or owners, 
as applicable. 
(2) RECOVERY AND REBURIAL STANDARDS.— 
(A) TIMING OF RECOVERY.— 
(i) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out 
the pilot program, the Secretary shall work 
in good faith with each affected Indian 
Tribe, and each owner of property affected 
by the recovery process, to ensure that— 
(I) the recovery of a burial site, 
village site, or cultural resources from 
the site of a covered civil works 
project under the pilot program is 
completed, pursuant to a written plan 
or protocol, not later than 45 days 
after the initiation of such recovery; 
and 
(II) with respect to a burial site, 
village site, or cultural resources iden-
tified at the site of a covered civil 
works project before construction of 
the covered civil works project com-
mences, such recovery is completed 
before such construction commences 
on the portion of the covered civil
132 
works project affected by the recovery 
process. 
(ii) ALTERNATIVE TIMETABLE.—Not-
withstanding the deadlines established by 
clause (i), the Secretary, each relevant 
non-Federal interest for the covered civil 
works project, each affected Indian Tribe, 
and each owner of property affected by the 
recovery process may negotiate and agree 
to an alternative timetable for recovery 
other than that required by such clause, 
based on the circumstances of the applica-
ble covered civil works project. 
(B) GUIDANCE.—In carrying out sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall develop and 
issue written guidance for recovery and reburial 
under the pilot program that meets or exceeds 
the recovery and reburial standards in policy 
statements and guidance issued by the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation. 
(C) EMINENT DOMAIN PROHIBITION.—No 
Federal entity may exercise the power of emi-
nent domain to acquire any property to be used 
for reburial under the pilot program. 
(3) RECOVERY AND REBURIAL.—
133 
(A) RECOVERY
AND
REBURIAL
BY
SEC-
RETARY.—In carrying out the pilot program, 
the Secretary shall, at Federal expense, in con-
sultation with and with the consent of each af-
fected Indian Tribe, and with appropriate dig-
nity and in accordance with the guidance devel-
oped under paragraph (2)— 
(i) recover any cultural resources 
identified or discovered at the site of a cov-
ered civil works project and rightfully 
claimed by any affected Indian Tribe; 
(ii) rebury any human remains and 
funerary objects so recovered at the appli-
cable areas identified and set aside under 
paragraph (1); and 
(iii) repatriate any other cultural re-
sources so recovered to the affected Indian 
Tribe that has rightfully claimed such cul-
tural resources. 
(B) TRIBAL AUTHORIZATION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Upon the request 
of an affected Indian Tribe, the Secretary 
shall authorize, pursuant to a memo-
randum of agreement entered into under 
clause (ii), the Indian Tribe to assume re-
134 
covery and reburial responsibilities under 
the pilot program of cultural resources 
that have been rightfully claimed by the af-
fected Indian Tribe, and shall reimburse 
the affected Indian Tribe for reasonable 
costs directly related to such recovery and 
reburial. 
(ii) MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.— 
In carrying out clause (i)— 
(I) with respect to a burial site, 
village site, or cultural resources iden-
tified at a covered civil works project 
before construction of the project 
commences, the Secretary shall, upon 
request by the affected Indian Tribe, 
enter into a written memorandum of 
agreement with the affected Indian 
Tribe to authorize the necessary re-
covery and reburial activities before 
such construction commences; and 
(II) with respect to a burial site, 
village site, or cultural resources dis-
covered at a covered civil works 
project after construction of the 
project commences, the Secretary
135 
shall, upon request by the affected In-
dian Tribe, enter into a written 
memorandum of agreement with the 
affected Indian Tribe to authorize the 
necessary recovery and reburial activi-
ties not later than 45 days after such 
discovery. 
(iii) 
LIMITATION.—Reimbursement 
under clause (i) shall not exceed 1 percent 
of the total cost of construction of the ap-
plicable covered civil works project, pursu-
ant to the terms outlined in paragraph (6). 
(4) TRIBAL MONITORS.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—In carrying out the 
pilot program, the Secretary may hire a Tribal 
monitor or monitors, and shall allow any af-
fected Indian Tribe to hire a Tribal monitor or 
monitors, at Federal expense, during the con-
struction of any covered civil works project, for 
each area of construction, including for each 
burial site and village site with respect to which 
Native American cultural resources are being 
recovered for reburial. 
(B) QUALIFICATIONS.—The Secretary or 
affected Indian Tribe, as applicable, shall en-
136 
sure that preference in hiring Tribal monitors 
under this paragraph is provided to qualified 
Native Americans, including individuals who— 
(i) have a professional relationship 
with the affected Indian Tribe; or 
(ii) possess knowledge of, and exper-
tise in, the customs of the affected Indian 
Tribe. 
(C) LIMITATION.—The Federal expense of 
Tribal monitors hired under this paragraph 
shall not exceed 1 percent of the total cost of 
construction of the applicable covered civil 
works project, pursuant to the terms outlined in 
paragraph (6). 
(5) IDENTIFICATION AND INVENTORY.—In car-
rying out the pilot program, the Secretary shall ac-
cept identifications made by an affected Indian 
Tribe of Native American burial sites and village 
sites at the site of a covered civil works project, and 
include such identifications in any inventory docu-
ment for such project. 
(6) TIMING
OF
PAYMENTS.—The Secretary 
shall enter into a contract or other agreement to 
make a payment to an affected Indian Tribe for re-
imbursement of reasonable costs under paragraph
137 
(3)(B) or actual expenses under paragraph (4), sub-
ject to market-based pricing, which payment shall be 
made not later than 90 days after the affected In-
dian Tribe submits an invoice for such costs or ex-
penses to the Secretary. 
(c) CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec-
retary may convey to an affected Indian Tribe for 
use as a cemetery or reburial area any area that is 
located on land owned by the Department of the 
Army and is identified and set aside under sub-
section (b)(1). 
(2) RETENTION OF NECESSARY PROPERTY IN-
TERESTS.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Sec-
retary shall retain any necessary right-of-way, ease-
ment, or other property interest that the Secretary 
determines to be necessary to carry out the author-
ized purposes of any Corps of Engineers project re-
lated to the conveyed land. 
(d) CONFIDENTIALITY
OF
INFORMATION
PRO-
VIDED.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall develop and issue written 
guidance regarding the confidentiality of information
138 
provided to the Department of the Army by Indian 
Tribes in connection with any covered civil works 
project under the pilot program. 
(2) NONPUBLIC INFORMATION.—The following 
information provided to the Department of the Army 
by an Indian Tribe under the pilot program shall be 
treated as confidential and nonpublic information, to 
protect Native American burial sites, village sites, 
and cultural resources, and their locations, from un-
authorized excavation, desecration, or vandalism: 
(A) Information regarding the locations of 
burial sites, village sites, and cultural resources, 
including maps designating such locations. 
(B) Information regarding cultural or tra-
ditional practices related to such sites or re-
sources. 
(e) AVOIDANCE OF DUPLICATION.—In carrying out 
the pilot program, the Secretary shall avoid, to the max-
imum extent practicable, duplication of efforts relating to 
compliance with this section and any other applicable pro-
vision of law. 
(f) APPLICABILITY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 208 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 
2338) shall not apply to a covered civil works project
139 
during the period during which the Secretary is car-
rying out the pilot program. 
(2) EXISTING
CONTRACTS.—Nothing in this 
section shall affect any contract relating to a covered 
civil works project entered into by the Secretary of 
the Army before the date of enactment of this Act. 
(g) PERIOD.—The Secretary shall carry out the pilot 
program until the date that is 4 years after the date on 
which the pilot program is established. 
(h) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) AFFECTED INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘‘af-
fected Indian Tribe’’ means any Indian Tribe that 
attaches religious or other significance to any burial 
site, village site, or cultural resources identified or 
discovered at a covered civil works project. 
(2) BURIAL
SITE.—The term ‘‘burial site’’ 
means any natural or prepared physical location, 
whether originally below, on, or above the surface of 
the earth, where Native American cultural resources 
are present as a result of a death rite or ceremony 
of a culture. 
(3) COVERED
CIVIL
WORKS
PROJECT.—The 
term ‘‘covered civil works project’’ means a civil 
works project that is—
140 
(A) located in the watershed of the Sac-
ramento River and its tributaries, including the 
American, Bear, Yuba, and Feather Rivers, 
within the State of California; 
(B) being constructed, reconstructed, or 
repaired, or operated and maintained, using 
Federal funds; and 
(C) owned, authorized, permitted, carried 
out, or operated and maintained by the Depart-
ment of the Army, including a project carried 
out by a non-Federal interest under section 204 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2232) or section 1043 of the 
Water Resources Reform and Development Act 
of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note). 
(4) CULTURAL
RESOURCES.—The term ‘‘cul-
tural resources’’ means— 
(A) human remains; or 
(B) funerary objects or other ceremonial 
objects. 
(5) FUNERARY OBJECTS.—The term ‘‘funerary 
objects’’ means items that are associated with the 
death rite or ceremony of a culture. 
(6) HUMAN REMAINS.—The term ‘‘human re-
mains’’ means the physical remains of a human
141 
body, including such remains that have been cre-
mated and that may be in any state of decomposi-
tion or skeletal completeness (including ashes or 
small bone fragments). 
(7) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘‘Indian Tribe’’ 
has the meaning given that term in section 102 of 
the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 
1994 (25 U.S.C. 5130). 
(8) PILOT
PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘pilot pro-
gram’’ means the pilot program established under 
this section. 
(9) RIGHTFULLY CLAIMED.—The term ‘‘right-
fully claimed’’ means claimed by— 
(A) with respect to cultural resources iden-
tified or discovered on Federal or Tribal lands 
at the site of a covered civil works project— 
(i) the person or entity with owner-
ship or control of the cultural resources 
under section 3 of the Native American 
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 
(25 U.S.C. 3002); or 
(ii) with respect to cultural resources 
not subject to such Act, the appropriate 
person or entity determined in accordance
142 
with the priority order established by such 
section; and 
(B) with respect to cultural resources iden-
tified or discovered on other lands at the site of 
a covered civil works project— 
(i) in the case of Native American 
human remains and funerary objects asso-
ciated with such remains, the lineal de-
scendants of the Native American, as de-
termined in accordance with the laws of 
the State of California; or 
(ii) in any case in which such lineal 
descendants cannot be ascertained, and in 
the case of other funerary objects or other 
ceremonial objects— 
(I) the Indian Tribe that has the 
closest cultural affiliation with the 
cultural resources; or 
(II) if the cultural affiliation of 
the cultural resources cannot be rea-
sonably ascertained— 
(aa) the Indian Tribe that is 
recognized as aboriginally occu-
pying the area in which the cul-
143 
tural resources were identified or 
discovered; or 
(bb) if it can be shown by a 
preponderance of the evidence 
that a different Indian Tribe has 
a stronger cultural relationship 
with the cultural resources than 
the Indian Tribe specified in item 
(aa), the Indian Tribe that has 
the strongest demonstrated rela-
tionship with such cultural re-
sources. 
(10) VILLAGE SITE.—The term ‘‘village site’’ 
means any natural or prepared physical location, 
whether below, on, or above the surface of the earth, 
where a Native American village has been present. 
SEC. 152. EMERGENCY DROUGHT OPERATIONS PILOT PRO-
GRAM. 
(a) DEFINITION OF COVERED PROJECT.—In this sec-
tion, the term ‘‘covered project’’ means a project— 
(1) that is located in the State of California, 
the State of Nevada, or the State of Arizona; and 
(2)(A) of the Corps of Engineers for which 
water supply is an authorized purpose; or
144 
(B) for which the Secretary develops a 
water control manual under section 7 of the Act 
of December 22, 1944 (commonly known as the 
‘‘Flood Control Act of 1944’’) (58 Stat. 890, 
chapter 665; 33 U.S.C. 709). 
(b) EMERGENCY OPERATION DURING DROUGHT.— 
Consistent with other authorized project purposes and in 
coordination with the non-Federal interest, in operating 
a covered project during a drought emergency in the 
project area, the Secretary may carry out a pilot program 
to operate the covered project with water supply as the 
primary project purpose. 
(c) UPDATES.—In carrying out this section, the Sec-
retary may update the water control manual for a covered 
project to include drought operations and contingency 
plans. 
(d) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out subsection (b), 
the Secretary shall ensure that— 
(1) operations described in that subsection— 
(A) are consistent with water management 
deviations and drought contingency plans in the 
water control manual for the covered project; 
(B) impact only the flood pool managed by 
the Secretary; and
145 
(C) shall not be carried out in the event of 
a forecast or anticipated flood or weather event 
that would require flood risk management to 
take precedence; 
(2) to the maximum extent practicable, the Sec-
retary uses forecast-informed reservoir operations; 
and 
(3) the covered project returns to the operations 
that were in place prior to the use of the authority 
provided under that subsection at a time determined 
by the Secretary, in coordination with the non-Fed-
eral interest. 
(e) CONTRIBUTED FUNDS.—The Secretary may re-
ceive and expend funds contributed by a non-Federal in-
terest to carry out activities under this section. 
(f) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
Representatives a report on the pilot program car-
ried out under this section. 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The Secretary shall include 
in the report under paragraph (1) a description of
146 
the activities of the Secretary that were carried out 
for each covered project and any lessons learned 
from carrying out those activities. 
(g) LIMITATIONS.—Nothing in this section— 
(1) affects, modifies, or changes the authorized 
purposes of a covered project; 
(2) affects existing Corps of Engineers authori-
ties, including authorities with respect to navigation, 
hydropower, flood damage reduction, and environ-
mental protection and restoration; 
(3) affects the ability of the Corps of Engineers 
to provide for temporary deviations; 
(4) affects the application of a cost-share re-
quirement under section 101, 102, or 103 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2211, 2212, 2213); 
(5) supersedes or modifies any written agree-
ment between the Federal Government and a non- 
Federal interest that is in effect on the date of en-
actment of this Act; 
(6) supersedes or modifies any amendment to 
an existing multistate water control plan for the Col-
orado River Basin, if applicable; 
(7) affects any water right in existence on the 
date of enactment of this Act;
147 
(8) preempts or affects any State water law or 
interstate compact governing water; 
(9) affects existing water supply agreements be-
tween the Secretary and the non-Federal interest; or 
(10) affects any obligation to comply with the 
provisions of any Federal or State environmental 
law, including— 
(A) the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); 
(B) the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); and 
(C) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 
SEC. 153. REPORT ON MINIMUM REAL ESTATE INTEREST. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that through this Act, as well as through section 
1115 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2018, 
that Congress has provided the Secretary all of the author-
ity, and all of the direction, needed to acquire interests 
in real estate that are less than fee simple title. 
(b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the enact-
ment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Com-
mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Environment
148 
and Public Works of the Senate a report indicating wheth-
er they agree with the sense of Congress in subsection (a). 
(c) DISAGREEMENT.—Should the result of report re-
quired in subsection (b) be that the Secretary disagrees 
with the sense of Congress in subsection (a), not later than 
1 year after the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
a report specifying recommendations and technical draft-
ing assistance for statutory language that would provide 
the Secretary the intended authority and expressed in sub-
section (a). 
SEC. 154. LEVEE OWNERS BOARD. 
Section 9003 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2007 (33 U.S.C. 3302) is amended to read as fol-
lows: 
‘‘SEC. 9003. LEVEE OWNERS BOARD. 
‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF OWNERS BOARD.—There 
is hereby established a Levee Owners Board (hereinafter 
in this section referred to as the ‘Owners Board’) com-
posed of the eleven members appointed by the Secretary. 
The members shall be appointed so as to represent various 
regions of the country, including at least one Federal levee 
system owner-operator from each of the eight civil works
149 
divisions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Sec-
retary of the Army shall designate, and the Administrator 
of FEMA may designate, a representative to act as an 
observer of the Owners Board. 
‘‘(1) TERMS OF MEMBERS.— 
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—A member of the 
Owners Board shall be appointed for a period 
of 3 years. 
‘‘(B) REAPPOINTMENT.—A member of the 
Owners Board may be reappointed to the Own-
ers Board, as the Secretary determines to be 
appropriate. 
‘‘(C) VACANCIES.—A vacancy on the Own-
ers Board shall be filled in the same manner as 
the original appointment was made. 
‘‘(2) CHAIRPERSON.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The members of the 
Owners Board shall appoint a chairperson from 
among the members of the Owners Board. 
‘‘(b) DUTIES OF THE OWNERS BOARD.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.— The Owners Board shall 
meet not less frequently than semiannually to de-
velop and make recommendations to the Secretary 
and Congress regarding levee system reliability 
throughout the United States.
150 
‘‘(2) ADVICE
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS.—The 
Owners Board shall provide— 
‘‘(A) prior to the development of the budg-
et proposal of the President for a given fiscal 
year, advice and recommendations to the Sec-
retary regarding overall levee system reliability; 
‘‘(B) advice and recommendations to Con-
gress regarding any feasibility report for a flood 
risk management project that has been sub-
mitted to Congress; 
‘‘(C) not later than 60 days after the date 
of the submission of the budget proposal of the 
President to Congress, advice and recommenda-
tions to Congress regarding flood risk manage-
ment project construction and rehabilitation 
priorities and corresponding spending levels; 
‘‘(D) advice and recommendations to the 
Secretary and the Congress regarding effective-
ness of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers levee 
safety program, including comments and rec-
ommendations on the budgets and expenditures 
as described in subsection (c)(2); and 
‘‘(E) advice and recommendations to the 
Secretary, the Congress, and the Administrator 
regarding effectiveness of the levee safety initia-
151 
tive established by section 9005, including com-
ments and recommendations on the budgets 
and expenditures described in subsection (c)(2). 
‘‘(3) INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT.—Any advice or 
recommendations made by the Owners Board shall 
reflect the independent judgment of the Owners 
Board. 
‘‘(c) DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.—The Secretary 
shall— 
‘‘(1) designate an Executive Secretary who shall 
assist the Chairman in administering the Owners 
Board and ensuring that the Owners Board operates 
in accordance with chapter 10 of title 5, United 
States Code; 
‘‘(2) provide to the Owners Board such detailed 
reports of Corps activities and expenditures related 
to flood risk management and levees, including for 
the Corps levee safety program and the levee safety 
initiative, not less frequently than semiannually; and 
‘‘(3) submit to the Owners Board a courtesy 
copy of any completed feasibility report for a flood 
risk management project submitted to Congress. 
‘‘(d) ADMINISTRATION.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Owners Board shall be 
subject to chapter 10 of title 5, other than section
152 
1013, and with the consent of the appropriate agen-
cy head, the Owners Board may use the facilities 
and services of any Federal agency. 
‘‘(2) MEMBERS NOT CONSIDERED SPECIAL GOV-
ERNMENT EMPLOYEES.—For the purposes of com-
plying with chapter 10 of title 5, United States 
Code, the members of the Owners Board shall not 
be considered special Government employees (as de-
fined in section 202 of title 18, United States Code). 
‘‘(3) TRAVEL
EXPENSE.—Non-Federal mem-
bers of the Owners Board while engaged in the per-
formance of their duties away from their homes or 
regular places of business, may be allowed travel ex-
penses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as 
authorized by section 5703 of title 5, United States 
Code.’’. 
SEC. 155. DEFINITION. 
For the purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘State’’ shall 
have the meaning given to such term in the Act of October 
15, 1940 (33 U.S.C. 701h-1).
153 
TITLE II—STUDIES AND 
REPORTS 
SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF PROPOSED FEASIBILITY 
STUDIES. 
(a) NEW PROJECTS.—The Secretary is authorized to 
conduct a feasibility study for the following projects for 
water resources development and conservation and other 
purposes, as identified in the reports titled ‘‘Report to 
Congress on Future Water Resources Development’’ sub-
mitted to Congress pursuant to section 7001 of the Water 
Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (33 
U.S.C. 2282d) or otherwise reviewed by Congress: 
(1) LUXAPALLILA
CREEK, 
MILLPORT, 
ALA-
BAMA.—Project for flood risk management, Town of 
Millport and vicinity, Alabama. 
(2) YAVAPAI
COUNTY, ARIZONA.—Project for 
flood risk management, Yavapai County, in the vi-
cinity of the City of Cottonwood, Arizona. 
(3) CLEAR
LAKE, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood risk management and ecosystem restoration, 
Clear Lake, Lake County, California. 
(4) COSUMNES
RIVER
WATERSHED, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood risk management, eco-
system restoration, water supply, and related pur-
poses, Cosumnes River watershed, California.
154 
(5) HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood 
risk management, city of Hesperia, California. 
(6) PILLAR
POINT
HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for flood risk management and storm dam-
age risk reduction, Pillar Point Harbor, California. 
(7) RIALTO
CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood risk management, Rialto Channel, city of 
Rialto and vicinity, California. 
(8) SALINAS RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood risk management and ecosystem restoration, 
Salinas River, California. 
(9) SAN
BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood risk management, city of San Bernardino, 
California. 
(10) SAN DIEGO BAY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood risk management, San Diego Bay, California. 
(11) SAN DIEGO AND ORANGE COUNTIES, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood and coastal storm risk 
management and ecosystem restoration, San Diego 
and Orange Counties, California. 
(12) SAN
FELIPE
LAKE
AND
PAJARO
RIVER, 
SAN
BENITO
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood risk management, San Felipe Lake and Pajaro 
River, San Benito County, California.
155 
(13) CITY
OF
SAN
MATEO, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for flood risk management, including 
stormwater runoff reduction, City of San Mateo, 
California. 
(14) SANTA
ANA
RIVER, 
ANAHEIM, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood risk management, water 
supply, and recreation, Santa Ana River, Anaheim, 
California. 
(15) SANTA ANA RIVER, JURUPA VALLEY, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for ecosystem restoration and 
recreation, Santa Ana River, Jurupa Valley, Cali-
fornia. 
(16) SWEETWATER RESERVOIR, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for ecosystem restoration and water supply, 
Sweetwater Reservoir, California. 
(17) FOUNTAIN CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, COL-
ORADO.—Project for flood risk management and 
ecosystem restoration, Fountain Creek, Colorado 
Springs and Pueblo, Colorado. 
(18) CITY
OF
NORWALK, 
CONNECTICUT.— 
Project for flood risk management, City of Norwalk, 
Connecticut, in the vicinity of the Norwalk waste-
water treatment plant. 
(19) 
CONNECTICUT
SHORELINE, 
CON-
NECTICUT.—Project for hurricane and storm dam-
156 
age risk reduction, Connecticut shoreline, Con-
necticut. 
(20) PARK
RIVER
CONDUIT, CITY
OF
HART-
FORD, CONNECTICUT.—Project for flood risk man-
agement, including stormwater management, City of 
Hartford, Connecticut and vicinity. 
(21) WESTPORT
BEACHES, CONNECTICUT.— 
Project for hurricane and storm damage risk reduc-
tion and ecosystem restoration, Westport, Con-
necticut. 
(22) DELAWARE
INLAND
BAYS
WATERSHED, 
DELAWARE.—Project for flood risk management, 
hurricane and storm risk reduction, and ecosystem 
restoration, including shoreline stabilization, Dela-
ware Inland Bays watershed, Delaware. 
(23) TOWN OF MILTON, DELAWARE.—Project 
for flood risk management, Town of Milton, Dela-
ware. 
(24) CITY
OF
WILMINGTON, 
DELAWARE.— 
Project for flood risk management and hurricane 
and storm risk reduction, City of Wilmington, Dela-
ware. 
(25) ANACOSTIA RIVER BANK AND SEAWALLS, 
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MARYLAND.—Project 
for navigation, ecosystem restoration, and recre-
157 
ation, including dredging and sediment management, 
Anacostia River bank and seawalls, Washington, 
District of Columbia, and Prince George’s County, 
Maryland. 
(26) FLETCHERS COVE, DISTRICT OF COLUM-
BIA.—Project for recreation, including dredging, 
Fletchers Cove, District of Columbia. 
(27) EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA, FLORIDA.— 
Project for flood risk management and ecosystem 
restoration, including sediment and debris manage-
ment, East Lake Tohopekaliga, Florida. 
(28) FLORIDA
SPACEPORT
SYSTEM
MARINE 
INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION WHARF, FLORIDA.— 
Project for navigation, Florida Spaceport System 
Marine Intermodal Transportation Wharf, in the vi-
cinity of Cape Canaveral, Florida. 
(29) FORT
GEORGE
INLET, JACKSONVILLE, 
FLORIDA.—Project for coastal storm risk manage-
ment, including shoreline damage prevention and 
mitigation, Fort George Inlet, city of Jacksonville, 
Florida. 
(30) LAKE
CONWAY, FLORIDA.—Project for 
flood risk management, navigation, and ecosystem 
restoration, including sediment and debris manage-
ment, Lake Conway, Florida.
158 
(31) MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE, TAMPA, FLOR-
IDA.—Project for hurricane and storm damage risk 
reduction and ecosystem restoration in the vicinity 
of MacDill Air Force Base, City of Tampa, Florida. 
(32) PALATKA BARGE PORT, PUTNAM COUNTY, 
FLORIDA.—Project for navigation, Palatka Barge 
Port, Putnam County, Florida. 
(33) CAMP
CREEK
TRIBUTARY, GEORGIA.— 
Project for flood risk management and ecosystem 
restoration, including stream restoration, along the 
Camp Creek Tributary in Fulton County, Georgia. 
(34) COLLEGE
PARK, GEORGIA.—Project for 
flood risk management, City of College Park, Geor-
gia. 
(35) PROCTOR
CREEK, SMYRNA, GEORGIA.— 
Project for flood risk management, Proctor Creek, 
Smyrna, 
Georgia, 
including 
Jonquil 
Driver 
Stormwater Park. 
(36) TYBEE
ISLAND, GEORGIA.—Project for 
ecosystem restoration and hurricane and storm dam-
age risk reduction, Tybee Island, Georgia, including 
by incorporating other Federal studies conducted on 
the effect of the construction of Savannah Harbor 
Channel on the shoreline of Tybee Island.
159 
(37) GUAM.—Project for flood risk manage-
ment and coastal storm risk management, Guam. 
(38) KAUA‘I, HAWAII.—Project for flood and 
coastal storm risk management, county of Kaua‘i, 
Hawaii. 
(39) KAIAKA-WAIALUA WATERSHED, HAWAII.— 
Project for flood risk management, Kaiaka-Waialua 
watershed, O‘ahu, Hawaii. 
(40) BERWYN, ILLINOIS.—Project for com-
prehensive flood risk management, City of Berwyn, 
Illinois. 
(41) BUTTERFIELD CREEK, ILLINOIS.—Project 
for flood risk management and ecosystem restora-
tion, Butterfield Creek, Illinois. 
(42) FRANKLIN PARK, ILLINOIS.—Project for 
flood risk management, ecosystem restoration, and 
water supply, Village of Franklin Park, Illinois. 
(43) ROCKY
RIPPLE, INDIANA.—Project for 
flood risk management, Town of Rocky Ripple, Indi-
ana. 
(44) BAYOU RIGAUD TO CAMINADA PASS, LOU-
ISIANA.—Project for navigation, Bayou Rigaud to 
Caminada Pass, Louisiana.
160 
(45) HAGAMAN
CHUTE, LAKE
PROVIDENCE, 
LOUISIANA.—Project for navigation, including wid-
ening, Hagaman Chute, Lake Providence, Louisiana. 
(46) LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN STORM SURGE RE-
DUCTION PROJECT, LOUISIANA.—Project for hurri-
cane and storm damage risk reduction, Lake Pont-
chartrain, Orleans, St. Tammany, Tangipahoa, Liv-
ingston, St. James, St. John, St. Charles, Jefferson, 
and St. Bernard Parishes, Louisiana. 
(47) LIVINGSTON PARISH FLOOD PROTECTION, 
LOUISIANA.—Project for flood risk management, 
Livingston Parish, Louisiana. 
(48) NATCHITOCHES, LOUISIANA.—Project for 
flood risk management, City of Natchitoches, Lou-
isiana. 
(49) NEW
ORLEANS
METRO
AREA, 
LOU-
ISIANA.—Project for ecosystem restoration and 
water supply, including mitigation of saltwater 
wedges, for the City of New Orleans and metro area, 
Louisiana. 
(50) 
PILOTTOWN, 
LOUISIANA.—Project 
for 
navigation and flood risk management, including 
dredging, in the vicinity of Pilottown, Plaquemines 
Parish, Louisiana.
161 
(51) BALTIMORE
INLAND
FLOODING, MARY-
LAND.—Project for inland flood risk management, 
City of Baltimore and Baltimore County, Maryland. 
(52) BEAVERDAM
CREEK, PRINCE
GEORGE’S 
COUNTY, MARYLAND.—Project for flood risk man-
agement, Beaverdam Creek, Prince George’s County, 
Maryland, in the vicinity of United States Route 50 
and railroads. 
(53) 
MARYLAND
BEACHES, 
MARYLAND.— 
Project for hurricane and storm damage risk reduc-
tion and flood risk management in the vicinity of 
United States Route 1, Maryland. 
(54) CAPE
COD
CANAL, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for recreation, Cape Cod Canal, in the vicin-
ity of Tidal Flats Recreation Area, Massachusetts. 
(55) LEOMINSTER, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project 
for flood risk management, City of Leominster, Mas-
sachusetts. 
(56) LOWER COBB BROOK, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for flood risk management, Lower Cobb 
Brook, City of Taunton, Massachusetts. 
(57) SUNSET BAY, CHARLES RIVER, MASSACHU-
SETTS.—Project for navigation, flood risk manage-
ment, recreation, and ecosystem restoration, includ-
ing dredging, in the vicinity of Sunset Bay, Charles
162 
River, cities of Boston, Watertown, and Newton, 
Massachusetts. 
(58) 
SQUANTUM
CAUSEWAY, 
MASSACHU-
SETTS.—Project for flood and coastal storm risk 
management, Squantum, in the vicinity of East 
Squantum Street and Dorchester Street Causeway, 
Quincy, Massachusetts. 
(59) TOWN NECK BEACH, SANDWICH, MASSA-
CHUSETTS.—Project for flood risk management and 
coastal storm risk management, including shoreline 
damage prevention and mitigation, Town Neck 
Beach, town of Sandwich, Massachusetts. 
(60) WESTPORT HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for flood risk management, hurricane and 
storm damage risk reduction, and navigation, includ-
ing improvements to the breakwater at Westport 
Harbor, Town of Westport, Massachusetts. 
(61) ANN
ARBOR, 
MICHIGAN.—Project for 
water supply, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 
(62) KALAMAZOO
RIVER
WATERSHED, MICHI-
GAN.—Project for flood risk management and eco-
system restoration, Kalamazoo River Watershed and 
tributaries, Michigan. 
(63) MCCOMB, MISSISSIPPI.—Project for flood 
risk management, city of McComb, Mississippi.
163 
(64) MILES CITY, MONTANA.—Project for flood 
risk management, Miles City, Montana. 
(65) BERKELEY HEIGHTS, NEW PROVIDENCE, 
AND SUMMIT, NEW JERSEY.—Project for flood risk 
management, Township of Berkeley Heights, Bor-
ough of New Providence, and City of Summit, New 
Jersey. 
(66) BERRY’S CREEK, NEW JERSEY.—Project 
for flood risk management, Berry’s Creek, New Jer-
sey. 
(67) FLEISCHER
BROOK, 
NEW
JERSEY.— 
Project for flood risk management, Fleischer Brook, 
New Jersey. 
(68) GUTTENBERG, NEW JERSEY.—Project for 
flood risk management, Guttenberg, New Jersey, in 
the vicinity of John F. Kennedy Boulevard East. 
(69) PASSAIC
RIVER
BASIN, NEW
JERSEY.— 
Project for flood risk management and ecosystem 
restoration, Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Morris, and 
Passaic Counties, New Jersey. 
(70) PASSAIC
RIVER, PATERSON, NEW
JER-
SEY.—Project for navigation and flood risk manage-
ment, Passaic River, Paterson, New Jersey.
164 
(71) GREAT FALLS RACEWAYS, PATERSON, NEW 
JERSEY.—Project for flood risk management and 
hydropower, Paterson, New Jersey. 
(72) PAULSBORO, NEW
JERSEY.—Project for 
navigation, Borough of Paulsboro, New Jersey. 
(73) VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY.— 
Project for flood risk management along the Ho-Ho- 
Kus Brook and Saddle River, Village of Ridgewood, 
New Jersey. 
(74) WOLF CREEK, NEW JERSEY.—Project for 
flood risk management, Wolf Creek, Ridgefield, New 
Jersey. 
(75) DON˜A
ANA
COUNTY, NEW
MEXICO.— 
Project for water supply, Don˜a Ana County, New 
Mexico. 
(76) HATCH, NEW MEXICO.—Project for flood 
risk management, including the Hatch Dam Project, 
Village of Hatch, New Mexico. 
(77) NAMBE
RIVER
WATERSHED, NEW
MEX-
ICO.—Project for flood risk management and eco-
system restoration, including sediment and debris 
management, Nambe River Watershed, New Mexico. 
(78) OTERO
COUNTY, NEW
MEXICO.—Project 
for flood risk management, Otero County, New Mex-
ico.
165 
(79) BABYLON, NEW YORK.—Project for flood 
risk management, hurricane and storm damage risk 
reduction, navigation, and ecosystem restoration, 
Town of Babylon, New York. 
(80) BRONX RIVER, NEW YORK.—Project for 
flood risk management and hurricane and storm 
damage risk reduction, Bronxville, Tuckahoe, and 
Yonkers, New York. 
(81) BROOKHAVEN, NEW
YORK.—Project for 
flood risk management, hurricane and storm damage 
risk reduction, and ecosystem restoration, Town of 
Brookhaven, New York. 
(82) HIGHLANDS, NEW
YORK.—Project for 
flood risk management and ecosystem restoration, 
Highland Brook (also known as ‘‘Buttermilk Falls 
Brook’’) and tributaries, Town of Highlands, Orange 
County, New York. 
(83) INWOOD HILL PARK, NEW YORK.—Project 
for ecosystem restoration, Inwood Hill Park, 
Spuyten Duyvil Creek, Manhattan, New York. 
(84) ISLIP, NEW YORK.—Project for flood risk 
management, Town of Islip, New York. 
(85) OYSTER
BAY, NEW
YORK.—Project for 
coastal storm risk management and flood risk man-
166 
agement in the vicinity of Tobay Beach, Town of 
Oyster Bay, New York. 
(86) PASCACK
BROOK, ROCKLAND
COUNTY, 
NEW
YORK.—Project for flood risk management, 
Pascack Brook, Rockland County, New York, includ-
ing the Village of Spring Valley. 
(87) SPARKILL
CREEK, ORANGETOWN, NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood risk management and ero-
sion, Sparkill Creek, Orangetown, New York. 
(88) TURTLE COVE, NEW YORK.—Project for 
ecosystem 
restoration, 
Pelham 
Bay 
Park, 
Eastchester Bay, in the vicinity of Turtle Cove, 
Bronx, New York. 
(89) SOMERS, NEW
YORK.—Project for eco-
system restoration and water supply, Town of 
Somers, New York. 
(90) CAPE
FEAR
RIVER
AND
TRIBUTARIES, 
NORTH CAROLINA.—Project for flood risk manage-
ment, in the vicinity of Northeast Cape Fear River 
and Black River, North Carolina. 
(91) LELAND, NORTH CAROLINA.—Project for 
flood risk management, navigation, ecosystem res-
toration, and recreation, including bank stabiliza-
tion, for Jackeys Creek in the Town of Leland, 
North Carolina.
167 
(92) MARION, NORTH CAROLINA.—Project for 
flood risk management, including riverbank sta-
bilization, along the Catawba River, City of Marion, 
North Carolina. 
(93) PENDER
COUNTY, NORTH
CAROLINA.— 
Project for flood risk management in the vicinity of 
North Carolina Highway 53, Pender County, North 
Carolina. 
(94) PIGEON
RIVER, 
NORTH
CAROLINA.— 
Project for flood risk management, Pigeon River, in 
the vicinity of the towns of Clyde and Canton, Hay-
wood County, North Carolina. 
(95) UNION
COUNTY, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.— 
Project for flood risk management, water supply, 
and recreation, Union County, South Carolina. 
(96) OGALLALA
AQUIFER.—Project for flood 
risk management and water supply, including aqui-
fer recharge, for the Ogallala Aquifer, Colorado, 
Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. 
(97) COE CREEK, OHIO.—Project for flood risk 
management, Coe Creek, City of Fairview Park, 
Ohio. 
(98) GREAT MIAMI RIVER, OHIO.—Project for 
flood risk management, ecosystem restoration, and
168 
recreation, including incorporation of existing levee 
systems, for the Great Miami River, Ohio. 
(99) LAKE TEXOMA, OKLAHOMA AND TEXAS.— 
Project for water supply, including increased needs 
in southern Oklahoma, Lake Texoma, Oklahoma and 
Texas. 
(100) SARDIS LAKE, OKLAHOMA.—Project for 
water supply, Sardis Lake, Oklahoma. 
(101) SIUSLAW RIVER, FLORENCE, OREGON.— 
Project for flood risk management and streambank 
erosion, Siuslaw River, Florence, Oregon. 
(102) WILLAMETTE RIVER, LANE COUNTY, OR-
EGON.—Project for flood risk management and eco-
system restoration, Willamette River, Lane County, 
Oregon. 
(103) ALLEGHENY
RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA.— 
Project for navigation and ecosystem restoration, Al-
legheny River, Pennsylvania. 
(104) BOROUGH
OF
POTTSTOWN, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for alternate water supply, Borough 
of Pottstown, Pennsylvania. 
(105) BOROUGH
OF
NORRISTOWN, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for flood risk management, includ-
ing dredging along the Schuylkill River, in the Bor-
ough of Norristown and vicinity, Pennsylvania.
169 
(106) WEST NORRITON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for flood risk management and 
streambank erosion, Stony Creek, in the vicinity of 
Whitehall Road, West Norriton Township, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(107) GUAYAMA, PUERTO
RICO.—Project for 
flood risk management, Rı´o Guamanı´, Guayama, 
Puerto Rico. 
(108) NARANJITO, PUERTO RICO.—Project for 
flood risk management, Rı´o Guadiana, Naranjito, 
Puerto Rico. 
(109) OROCOVIS, PUERTO
RICO.—Project for 
flood risk management, Rı´o Orocovis, Orocovis, 
Puerto Rico. 
(110) PONCE, PUERTO RICO.—Project for flood 
risk management, Rı´o Inabo´n, Ponce, Puerto Rico. 
(111) SANTA ISABEL, PUERTO RICO.—Project 
for flood risk management, Rı´o Descalabrado, Santa 
Isabel, Puerto Rico. 
(112) YAUCO, PUERTO RICO.—Project for flood 
risk management, Rı´o Yauco, Yauco, Puerto Rico. 
(113) GREENE COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—Project 
for water supply, including evaluation of Nolichucky 
River capabilities, Greene County, Tennessee.
170 
(114) 
DAVIDSON
COUNTY, 
TENNESSEE.— 
Project for flood risk management, City of Nashville, 
Davidson County, Tennessee. 
(115) GUADALUPE
COUNTY, TEXAS.—Project 
for flood risk management, Guadalupe County, in-
cluding City of Santa Clara, Texas. 
(116) HARRIS
COUNTY, TEXAS.—Project for 
flood risk management and ecosystem restoration, 
Halls Bayou, Harris County, Texas. 
(117) WINOOSKI
RIVER
BASIN, VERMONT.— 
Project for flood risk management and ecosystem 
restoration, Winooski River basin, Vermont. 
(118) CEDARBUSH CREEK, GLOUCESTER COUN-
TY, VIRGINIA.—Project for navigation, Cedarbush 
Creek, Gloucester County, Virginia. 
(119) CHICKAHOMINY
RIVER, 
JAMES
CITY 
COUNTY, VIRGINIA.—Project for flood and coastal 
storm risk management, Chickahominy River, James 
City County, Virginia. 
(120) JAMES CITY COUNTY, VIRGINIA.—Project 
for flood risk management and navigation, James 
City County, Virginia. 
(121) 
TIMBERNECK
CREEK, 
GLOUCESTER 
COUNTY, 
VIRGINIA.—Project 
for 
navigation, 
Timberneck Creek, Gloucester County, Virginia.
171 
(122) YORK RIVER, YORK COUNTY, VIRGINIA.— 
Project for flood risk management and coastal storm 
risk management, York River, York County, Vir-
ginia. 
(123) WAHKIAKUM
COUNTY, WASHINGTON.— 
Project for flood risk management and sediment 
management, Grays River, in the vicinity of 
Rosburg, Wahkiakum County, Washington. 
(124) ARCADIA, WISCONSIN.—Project for flood 
risk management, city of Arcadia, Wisconsin. 
(125) CITY
OF
LA
CROSSE, 
WISCONSIN.— 
Project for flood risk management, City of La 
Crosse, Wisconsin. 
(126) RIVER FALLS, WISCONSIN.—Project for 
ecosystem restoration, city of River Falls, Wisconsin. 
(b) PROJECT MODIFICATIONS.—The Secretary is au-
thorized to conduct a feasibility study for the following 
project modifications: 
(1) BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, 
ALABAMA.—Modifications to the project for naviga-
tion, Coffeeville Lock and Dam, authorized pursuant 
to section 4 of the Act of July 5, 1884 (chapter 229, 
23 Stat. 148; 35 Stat. 818), and portion of the 
project for navigation, Warrior and Tombigbee Riv-
ers, Alabama and Mississippi, consisting of the
172 
Demopolis 
Lock 
and 
Dam 
on 
the 
Warrior- 
Tombigbee Waterway, Alabama, authorized by sec-
tion 2 of the Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 17), 
for construction of new locks to maintain naviga-
bility. 
(2) FARMINGTON DAM, CALIFORNIA.—Modifica-
tions to the project for flood control and other pur-
poses, the Calaveras River and Littlejohn Creek and 
tributaries, California, authorized by section 10 of 
the Act of December 22, 1944 (chapter 665, 58 
Stat. 902), for improved flood risk management and 
to support water supply recharge and storage. 
(3) HUMBOLDT
HARBOR
AND
BAY, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—Modifications to the project for naviga-
tion, Humboldt Harbor and Bay, California, author-
ized by the first section of the Act of July 3, 1930 
(chapter 847, 46 Stat. 932; 82 Stat. 732; 110 Stat. 
3663), for additional deepening and widening. 
(4) SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, CALIFORNIA.— 
Modifications to the project for flood control, Sac-
ramento-San Joaquin Basin Streams, California, au-
thorized pursuant to the resolution of the Committee 
on Public Works of the House of Representatives 
adopted on May 8, 1964 (docket number 1371), for
173 
improved flood risk management, including dredg-
ing. 
(5) MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—Modifica-
tions to the project for flood risk management, 
water supply, and ecosystem restoration, Chowchilla 
River, Ash Slough, and Berenda Slough, Madera 
County, California, authorized pursuant to section 6 
of the Act of June 22, 1936 (chapter 688, 49 Stat. 
1595; 52 Stat. 1225). 
(6) SACRAMENTO RIVER INTEGRATED FLOOD-
PLAIN
MANAGEMENT, 
CALIFORNIA.—Modifications 
to the project for flood control, Sacramento River, 
California, authorized by section 2 of the Act of 
March 1, 1917 (chapter 144, 39 Stat. 949; 76 Stat. 
1197), to enhance flood risk reduction, to incor-
porate natural and nature-based features, and to in-
corporate modifications to the portion of such 
project north of the Freemont Weir for the purposes 
of integrating management of such system with the 
adjacent floodplain. 
(7) THAMES RIVER, CONNECTICUT.—Modifica-
tions to the project for navigation, Thames River, 
Connecticut, authorized by the first section of the 
Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 13), to increase au-
thorized depth.
174 
(8) HANAPE¯PE¯ RIVER, HAWAII.—Modifications 
to the project for local flood protection, Hanape¯pe¯ 
River, island of Kaua‘i, Hawaii, authorized by sec-
tion 10 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (chapter 
665, 58 Stat. 903), to improve protection provided 
by levees and flood control features. 
(9) LAUPA¯HOEHOE
HARBOR, HAWAII.—Modi-
fications to the project for navigation, Laupa¯hoehoe 
Harbor, Hawaii, authorized pursuant to section 107 
of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 486), 
for seawall repair and mitigation. 
(10) WAIMEA RIVER, KAUA‘I, HAWAII.—Modi-
fications to the project for coastal storm risk man-
agement and ecosystem restoration, Waimea River, 
Kaua‘i, Hawaii, authorized pursuant to section 205 
of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), 
to improve protection provided by levees and flood 
control features. 
(11) CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DIS-
PERSAL
BARRIER, ILLINOIS.—Modifications to the 
project for Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and 
Dispersal Barrier, Illinois, initiated under section 
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2294 note; 100 Stat. 4251; 118 
Stat. 1352), for the construction of an emergency
175 
access boat ramp in the vicinity of Romeoville, Illi-
nois. 
(12) EAST SAINT LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLI-
NOIS.—Modifications to the project for ecosystem 
restoration and recreation, authorized by section 
1001(18) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2007 (121 Stat. 1052), to reevaluate levels of 
flood risk management and integrate the Spring 
Lake Project, as recommended in the report of the 
Chief of Engineers issued on December 22, 2004. 
(13) LOUISVILLE METROPOLITAN FLOOD PRO-
TECTION
SYSTEM
RECONSTRUCTION, 
JEFFERSON 
AND BULLITT COUNTIES, KENTUCKY.—Modifications 
to the project for flood risk management, Louisville 
Metropolitan Flood Protection System Reconstruc-
tion, Jefferson and Bullitt Counties, Kentucky, au-
thorized by section 401(2) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2020 (134 Stat. 2735), to ex-
pand project scope and incorporate features identi-
fied in the document prepared for the non-Federal 
sponsor of the project, issued in June 2017, and ti-
tled ‘‘20-Year Comprehensive Facility Plan, Critical 
Repair and Reinvestment Plan, Volume 4: Ohio 
River Flood Protection’’.
176 
(14) CALCASIEU
RIVER
AND
PASS, 
LOU-
ISIANA.—Modifications to the project for navigation, 
Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana, authorized by 
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 
(74 Stat. 481), to include channel deepening and 
jetty extension. 
(15) MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
AND
TRIBUTARIES, 
OUACHITA RIVER, LOUISIANA.—Modifications to the 
project for flood control of the Mississippi River in 
it alluvial valley and for its improvement from the 
Head of Passes to Cape Girardeau, Missouri, au-
thorized by the first section of the Act of May 15, 
1928 (chapter 569, 45 Stat. 534), to include bank 
stabilization on the portion of the project consisting 
of the Ouachita River from Monroe to Caldwell Par-
ishes, Louisiana. 
(16) MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
AND
TRIBUTARIES, 
OUACHITA RIVER, LOUISIANA.—Modifications to the 
project for flood control of the Mississippi River in 
it alluvial valley and for its improvement from the 
Head of Passes to Cape Girardeau, Missouri, au-
thorized by the first section of the Act of May 15, 
1928 (45 Stat. 534, chapter 569), to study the fea-
sibility of adding 62 miles of the east bank of the
177 
Ouachita River Levee System at and below Monroe 
Parish to Caldwell Parish, Louisiana. 
(17) HODGES VILLAGE DAM, OXFORD, MASSA-
CHUSETTS.—Modifications to the project for flood 
risk management, Hodges Village Dam, Oxford, 
Massachusetts, authorized pursuant to section 205 
of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), 
to add recreation and ecosystem restoration as a 
project purpose, including in the vicinity of 
Greenbriar Park. 
(18) 
NEW
BEDFORD, 
FAIRHAVEN, 
AND 
ACUSHNET, MASSACHUSETTS.—Modifications to the 
project for hurricane-flood protection at New Bed-
ford, Fairhaven, and Acushnet, Massachusetts, au-
thorized by section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 
1958 (72 Stat. 305), for navigation improvements 
and evaluation of the current barrier function. 
(19) HOLLAND HARBOR, MICHIGAN.—Modifica-
tions to the portion of the project for navigation 
Holland (Black Lake), Michigan, authorized by the 
first section of the Act of June 14, 1880 (chapter 
211, 21 Stat. 183; 30 Stat. 1130; 46 Stat. 929; 49 
Stat. 1036; 68 Stat. 1252), consisting of the Federal 
Channel of Holland Harbor, for additional deep-
ening.
178 
(20) MONROE HARBOR, MICHIGAN.—Modifica-
tions to the project for navigation, Monroe Harbor, 
Michigan, authorized by the first section of the Act 
of July 3, 1930 (chapter 847, 46 Stat. 930), for ad-
ditional deepening. 
(21) PORT
HURON, MICHIGAN.—Modifications 
to the project for navigation, Channels in Lake 
Saint Clair Michigan, authorized by the first section 
of the Act of August 30, 1935 (chapter 831, 49 
Stat. 1036), for additional deepening at the mouth 
of the Black River, Port Huron, Michigan. 
(22) SAINT
JOSEPH
HARBOR, 
MICHIGAN.— 
Modifications to the portion of the project for navi-
gation, Saint Joseph, Michigan, authorized by the 
first section of the Act of June 14, 1880 (chapter 
211, 21 Stat. 183; 30 Stat. 1130; 49 Stat. 1036; 72 
Stat. 299), consisting of the Federal Channel of 
Saint Joseph Harbor, for additional deepening. 
(23) SAINT
MARYS
RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Modi-
fications to the project for navigation Middle and 
West Neebish channels, Saint Marys River, Michi-
gan, authorized by the first section of the Act of 
June 13, 1902 (chapter 1079, 32 Stat. 361; 70 
Stat. 54), to bring the channels to a consistent 
depth.
179 
(24) SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE DAM, NEW HAMP-
SHIRE.—Modifications to the project for flood pro-
tection and recreation, Surry Mountain Lake dam, 
authorized pursuant to section 5 of the Act of June 
22, 1936 (chapter 688, 49 Stat. 1572; 52 Stat. 
1216; 58 Stat. 892), to add ecosystem restoration as 
a project purpose, and to install the proper gates 
and related equipment at Surry Mountain Lake to 
support stream flow augmentation releases. 
(25) BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY.—Modifications to 
the project for navigation, Jersey Flats and Ba-
yonne, New Jersey, authorized by the first section of 
the Act of September 22, 1922 (chapter 427, 42 
Stat. 1038), for improvements to the navigation 
channel, including channel extension, widening, and 
deepening, in the vicinity of Bayonne Dry Dock, 
New Jersey. 
(26) LONG BEACH, NEW YORK.—Modifications 
to the project for storm damage reduction, Atlantic 
Coast of Long Island from Jones Inlet to East 
Rockaway Inlet, Long Beach Island, New York, au-
thorized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), 
to include additional replacement of beach groins to
180 
offer storm protection, erosion prevention, and re-
duce the need for future renourishment. 
(27) BALD HEAD ISLAND, NORTH CAROLINA.— 
Modifications to the project for hurricane-flood con-
trol protection, Cape Fear to the North Carolina- 
South Carolina State line, North Carolina, author-
ized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1966 
(80 Stat. 1419), to add coastal storm risk manage-
ment and hurricane and storm damage risk reduc-
tion, including shoreline stabilization, as an author-
ized purpose of the project for the village of Bald 
Head Island, North Carolina. 
(28) RENO
BEACH-HOWARD
FARMS, OHIO.— 
Modifications to the project for flood control, Reno 
Beach-Howard Farms, Ohio, authorized by section 
203 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (62 Stat. 
1178), to improve project levees and to provide flood 
damage risk reduction to the portions of Jerusalem 
Township, Ohio, not currently benefited by the 
project. 
(29) DELAWARE RIVER MAINSTEM AND CHAN-
NEL
DEEPENING, DELAWARE, NEW
JERSEY, AND 
PENNSYLVANIA.—Modifications to the project for 
navigation, Delaware River Mainstem and Channel 
Deepening, Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsyl-
181 
vania, authorized by section 101(6) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4802; 
113 Stat. 300; 114 Stat. 2602), to increase the au-
thorized depth. 
(30) DELAWARE RIVER, MANTUA CREEK (FORT 
MIFFLIN)
AND
MARCUS
HOOK, PENNSYLVANIA.— 
Modifications to the project for navigation, Delaware 
River, Philadelphia to the sea, authorized by the 
first section of the Act of June 25, 1910 (chapter 
382, 36 Stat. 637; 46 Stat. 921; 49 Stat. 1030; 52 
Stat. 803; 59 Stat. 14; 68 Stat. 1249; 72 Stat. 
297), to deepen the anchorage areas at Mantua 
Creek (Fort Mifflin) and Marcus Hook. 
(31) CHARLESTON, SOUTH
CAROLINA.—Modi-
fications to the project for navigation, Charleston 
Harbor, South Carolina, authorized by section 
1401(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2016 (130 Stat. 1708), including improvements to 
the portion of the project that serves the North 
Charleston Terminal. 
(32) GALVESTON BAY AREA, TEXAS.—Modifica-
tions to the following projects for deepening and as-
sociated dredged material placement, disposal, and 
environmental mitigation navigation:
182 
(A) The project for navigation, Galveston 
Bay Area, Texas City Channel, Texas, author-
ized by section 201 of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4090). 
(B) The project for navigation and envi-
ronmental restoration, Houston-Galveston Navi-
gation Channels, Texas, authorized by section 
101(a)(30) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3666). 
(C) The project for navigation, Galveston 
Harbor Channel Extension Project, Houston- 
Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas, author-
ized by section 1401(1) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2018 (132 Stat. 3836). 
(D) The project for navigation, Houston 
Ship Channel Expansion Channel Improvement 
Project, Harris, Chambers, and Galveston 
Counties, Texas, authorized by section 401(1) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2020 (134 Stat. 2734). 
(33) GALVESTON
HARBOR
CHANNEL
EXTEN-
SION
PROJECT, HOUSTON-GALVESTON
NAVIGATION 
CHANNELS, TEXAS.—Modifications to the project for 
navigation, Galveston Harbor Channel Extension 
Project, Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels,
183 
Texas, authorized by section 1401(1) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2018 (132 Stat. 
3836), to include further deepening and extension of 
the Federal channel and Turning Basin 2. 
(34) GATHRIGHT
RESERVOIR
AND
FALLING 
SPRING
DAM, 
VIRGINIA.—Modifications 
to 
the 
project for navigation and flood control, Gathright 
Reservoir and Falling Spring dam, Virginia, author-
ized by section 10 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 
(60 Stat. 645), to include recreation as an author-
ized project purpose. 
(35) MOUNT ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, 
WASHINGTON.—Modifications to the project for sedi-
ment control and navigation, Mount St. Helens, 
Washington, authorized by chapter IV of title I of 
the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1985 (99 
Stat. 318; 114 Stat. 2612), to include dredging to 
address flood risk management and navigation for 
federally authorized channels on the Cowlitz River 
and at the confluence of the Cowlitz and Columbia 
Rivers. 
(c) SPECIAL RULE.—Each study authorized by sub-
section (b) shall be considered a new phase investigation 
and afforded the same treatment as a general reevalua-
tion.
184 
SEC. 202. EXPEDITED COMPLETION. 
(a) FEASIBILITY STUDIES.—The Secretary shall ex-
pedite the completion of a feasibility study for each of the 
following projects, and if the Secretary determines that 
the project is justified in a completed report, may proceed 
directly to preconstruction planning, engineering, and de-
sign of the project: 
(1) Project for ecosystem restoration, Claiborne 
and Millers Ferry Locks and Dams Fish Passage, 
Lower Alabama River, Alabama, authorized pursu-
ant to section 216 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(84 Stat. 1830). 
(2) Project for navigation, Akutan Harbor 
Navigational Improvements, Alaska, authorized pur-
suant to section 203 of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2269). 
(3) Project for ecosystem restoration, Central 
and South Florida, Comprehensive Everglades Res-
toration Program, Lake Okeechobee Watershed Res-
toration, Florida, authorized by section 601(b)(1) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 
Stat. 2680). 
(4) Project for coastal storm risk management, 
Miami-Dade Back Bay, Florida, authorized pursu-
ant to the Act of June 15, 1955 (chapter 140, 69 
Stat. 132).
185 
(5) Project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, 
Pinellas and Hillsborough Counties, Florida, Deep 
Draft Navigation, authorized by the resolution of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
the House of Representatives, dated July 23, 1997. 
(6) Project for ecosystem restoration, Central 
and South Florida, Comprehensive Everglades Res-
toration Program, Western Everglades Restoration 
Project, Florida, authorized by section 601(b)(1) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 
Stat. 2680). 
(7) Project for flood risk management, Ala Wai 
Canal General Reevaluation, Hawaii, authorized by 
section 1401(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2018 (132 Stat. 3837). 
(8) Project for flood risk management, Amite 
River and Tributaries, East of the Mississippi, Lou-
isiana, authorized by the resolution of the Com-
mittee on Public Works of the United States Senate, 
adopted April 14, 1967. 
(9) Project for coastal storm risk management, 
Baltimore Metropolitan, Baltimore City, Maryland, 
authorized by the resolution of the Committee on 
Public Works and Transportation of the House of 
Representatives, dated April 30, 1992.
186 
(10) Project for coastal storm risk manage-
ment, Nassau County Back Bays, New York, au-
thorized pursuant to the Act of June 15, 1955 
(chapter 140, 69 Stat. 132). 
(11) Project for coastal storm risk manage-
ment, Surf City, North Carolina, authorized by sec-
tion 7002(3) of the Water Resources Reform and 
Development Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1367). 
(12) Project for flood risk management, Tar- 
Pamlico River Basin, North Carolina, authorized by 
the resolutions adopted by the Committee on Trans-
portation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives dated April 11, 2000, and May 21, 
2003. 
(13) Project for coastal storm risk manage-
ment, Puerto Rico, authorized by section 204 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1828). 
(14) Project for ecosystem restoration, Hatchie- 
Loosahatchie, Mississippi River Miles 775–736, Ten-
nessee and Arkansas, authorized by section 1202(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2018 
(132 Stat. 3803). 
(b) POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORTS.—The 
Secretary shall expedite completion of a post-authorization 
change report for the following projects:
187 
(1) Project for ecosystem restoration, Central 
and South Florida, Comprehensive Everglades Res-
toration Program, Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands, 
Florida, authorized by section 601(b)(1) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 
Stat. 2680). 
(2) Project for water reallocation, Stockton 
Lake Reallocation Study, Missouri, at the project for 
flood control, hydropower, water supply, and recre-
ation, Stockton Lake, Missouri, authorized by the 
Flood Control Act of 1954 (Public Law 83–780). 
(3) Project for ecosystem restoration and recre-
ation, Los Angeles River, California, authorized by 
section 1407(7) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1714). 
SEC. 203. EXPEDITED MODIFICATION OF EXISTING FEASI-
BILITY STUDIES. 
The Secretary shall expedite the completion of the 
following feasibility studies, as modified by this section, 
and if the Secretary determines that a project that is the 
subject of the feasibility study is justified in the completed 
report, may proceed directly to preconstruction planning, 
engineering, and design of the project: 
(1) MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CALIFORNIA.—The 
study for navigation, Mare Island Straight channel,
188 
authorized by section 406 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 323; 136 Stat. 
3753), is modified to authorize the Secretary to con-
sider the benefits of deepening the channel to sup-
port activities of the Secretary of the department in 
which the Coast Guard is operating. 
(2) SAVANNAH
HARBOR, 
GEORGIA.—Section 
8201(b)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2022 (136 Stat. 3750) is amended by striking ‘‘, 
without evaluation of additional deepening’’ and in-
serting ‘‘, including evaluation of additional deep-
ening’’. 
(3) HONOLULU HARBOR, HAWAII.—The study 
to modify the project for navigation, Honolulu, Ha-
waii, authorized by the first section of the Act of 
March 3, 1905 (chapter 1482, 33 Stat. 1146; 136 
Stat. 3750), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
to consider the benefits of the project modification 
on disaster resilience and enhanced national security 
from utilization of the harbor by the Department of 
Defense. 
(4) ALEXANDRIA
TO
THE
GULF
OF
MEXICO, 
LOUISIANA.—The study for flood control, navigation, 
wetland conservation and restoration, wildlife habi-
tat, commercial and recreational fishing, saltwater
189 
intrusion, freshwater and sediment diversion, and 
other purposes, in the area drained by the inter-
cepted drainage system of the West Atchafalaya 
Basin Protection Levee, from Alexandria, Louisiana 
to the Gulf of Mexico, being carried out under Com-
mittee Resolution 2535 of the Committee on Trans-
portation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives, adopted July 23, 1997, is modified to 
include the parishes of Pointe Coupee, Allen, 
Calcasieu, Jefferson Davis, Acadia, Iberville, and 
Cameron within the scope of the study. 
(5) SAW MILL RIVER, NEW YORK.—The study 
for flood risk management and ecosystem restoration 
to address areas in the City of Yonkers and the Vil-
lage of Hastings-on-the-Hudson within the 100-year 
flood zone, Saw Mill River, New York, authorized by 
section 8201(a)(70) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3748), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to include within the 
scope of the study areas surrounding the City of 
Yonkers and the Village of Hastings-on-the-Hudson 
and the Village of Elmsford and the Village of 
Ardsley.
190 
SEC. 204. CORPS OF ENGINEERS REPORTS. 
(a) REPORT ON RECREATIONAL ACCESS FOR INDI-
VIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 on access for individ-
uals with disabilities to covered recreational areas. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall in-
clude in the report submitted under paragraph (1)— 
(A) existing policies or guidance for com-
plying with the requirements of the Americans 
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 
et seq.) at covered recreational areas; 
(B) a complete list of covered recreational 
areas, and the status of each covered rec-
reational area with respect to compliance with 
the requirements of such Act; 
(C) identification of policy changes, inter-
nal guidance changes, or changes to shoreline 
management plans that may result in increased 
access for individuals with disabilities to cov-
ered recreational areas, including access to fish-
191 
ing-related recreational activities at covered rec-
reational areas; 
(D) an analysis of barriers that exist for 
covered recreational areas to fully comply with 
the requirements of such Act; and 
(E) identification of specific covered rec-
reational areas that could be improved or modi-
fied to better accommodate visitors with disabil-
ities, including to increase recreational fishing 
access for individuals with disabilities. 
(3) 
COVERED
RECREATIONAL
AREA
DE-
FINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘covered rec-
reational area’’ means all sites constructed, owned, 
operated, or maintained by the Secretary that are 
used for recreational purposes. 
(b) REPORT ON TURBIDITY IN THE WILLAMETTE 
VALLEY, OREGON.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 on instances of high 
turbidity in a reservoir in the Willamette Valley re-
sulting from a drawdown in the reservoir.
192 
(2) SCOPE.—In carrying out subsection (a), the 
Secretary shall— 
(A) collaborate with any relevant Federal, 
State, and non-Federal entities; 
(B) identify and report instances during 
the 10-year period preceding the date of enact-
ment of this Act in which turbidity concerns 
have arisen following a drawdown at a reservoir 
in the Willamette Valley, including Foster Lake 
and Green Peter Lake; 
(C) report on turbidity monitoring that the 
Secretary performs during drawdowns to iden-
tify, and if necessary correct, turbidity issues; 
(D) provide a summary of turbidity moni-
toring records collected during drawdowns with 
respect to which turbidity concerns have been 
raised by the public, including a comparison be-
tween turbidity prior to a drawdown, during a 
drawdown, and following refilling; 
(E) identify lessons learned associated with 
turbidity resulting from drawdowns and indi-
cate how changes based on those lessons 
learned are being implemented; and
193 
(F) identify opportunities to minimize 
monetary strains on non-Federal entities caused 
by increased turbidity levels. 
(c) REPORT ON SECURITY AT SOO LOCKS, MICHI-
GAN.— 
(1) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
submit to the Committee on Transportation and In-
frastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
Senate a report that— 
(A) highlights any security deficiencies 
that exist with respect to the Soo Locks; 
(B) highlights any supply chain, logistical, 
and economic effects that would result from a 
malfunction or failure of the Soo Locks; 
(C) highlights any effects on the Great 
Lakes Navigation System that would result 
from such a malfunction or failure; 
(D) highlights any potential threats to the 
integrity of the Soo Locks; 
(E) details the Corps of Engineers security 
measures in place to protect the Soo Locks; and
194 
(F) contains recommendations, as nec-
essary, and cost estimates for such rec-
ommendations, for— 
(i) strengthening security measures 
for the Soo Locks; and 
(ii) reducing the effects on the supply 
chain that would result from a malfunction 
or failure of the Soo Locks. 
(2) SOO LOCKS DEFINED.—In this subsection, 
the term ‘‘Soo Locks’’ means the locks at Sault 
Sainte Marie, Michigan, authorized by section 1149 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4254; 121 Stat. 1131; 136 Stat. 3844). 
(d) REPORT ON FLORIDA SEAGRASS REHABILITA-
TION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, and each year 
thereafter for 4 years, the Secretary shall submit 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 on any planned or ongoing efforts to promote, 
rehabilitate, and enhance the growth of seagrasses in 
Florida stormwater treatment areas.
195 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall coordinate with rel-
evant Federal, State, and local agencies and other 
regional stakeholders. 
(3) FLORIDA STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA 
DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘Florida 
stormwater treatment area’’ means a stormwater 
treatment area in the State of Florida authorized by 
or pursuant to section 601 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680; 121 
Stat. 1268; 132 Stat. 3786). 
(e) REPORT ON SHORELINE USE PERMITS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 describing the use of 
the authority under part 327 of title 36, Code of 
Federal Regulations, with respect to the issuance of 
new, or modifications to existing, shoreline use per-
mits at the Table Rock Lake project of the Corps 
of Engineers, located in Missouri and Arkansas, au-
thorized as one of the multipurpose reservoir
196 
projects in the White River Basin by section 4 of the 
Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1218). 
(2) CONTENTS.—The Secretary shall include in 
the report required under paragraph (1)— 
(A) a review of existing regulatory and ad-
ministrative requirements related to the lease, 
rent, sublease, or other usage agreement by a 
permittee for permitted facilities under a shore-
line use permit, including a floating, non-
floating, or fixed-floating structure; 
(B) a description of the authority and pub-
lic-interest rationale for such requirements, in-
cluding impacts on local businesses, property 
owners, and prospective lessors, renters, or 
other contractual users of such facilities; and 
(C) a description of the authority for the 
transfer of shoreline use permits upon transfer 
of the permitted facility by sale or other means. 
(f) REPORT ON RELOCATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 on the policies of the
197 
Corps of Engineers relating to using property 
buyouts as part of coastal storm risk management 
projects. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—In developing the report 
under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider 
ways in which current policies on mandatory prop-
erty buyouts may— 
(A) diminish the incentives for local com-
munities to work with the Corps of Engineers; 
and 
(B) increase vulnerabilities of communities 
to flood risk, including communities described 
in the guidance issued by the Secretary under 
section 160 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note). 
(g) REPORT ON FUEL EFFICIENCY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 on fuel efficiency of 
each vessel within the fleet of vessels owned by the 
Corps of Engineers.
198 
(2) CONTENTS.—In the report submitted under 
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include the fol-
lowing: 
(A) A list of vessels that are commercially 
available and may be used to carry out the mis-
sions of the Corps of Engineers that can be in-
corporated into the fleet of vessels owned by the 
Corps of Engineers to increase fuel efficiency of 
such fleet. 
(B) A list of modifications that can be 
made to increase fuel efficiency of such fleet 
and the associated cost of such modifications. 
(C) A life cycle cost analysis of replacing 
vessels owned by the Corps of Engineers with 
vessels that are more fuel efficient. 
(D) A description of technologies used or 
available to the Secretary to evaluate fuel effi-
ciency of each vessel owned by the Corps of En-
gineers. 
(E) A description of other opportunities to 
increase fuel efficiency of each such vessel. 
(F) A description of potential cost savings 
by increasing fuel efficiency of such vessels. 
(G) A description of State or local policies 
or requirements regarding efficiencies or emis-
199 
sions of vessels, or related technology, that the 
Secretary must comply with at water resources 
development projects, and any impact such poli-
cies and requirements have on project costs. 
(h) REPORT ON BOAT RAMPS.—Not later than 1 year 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
a report detailing— 
(1) the number of boat ramps constructed by 
the Secretary that are located at a site constructed, 
owned, operated, or maintained by the Secretary; 
(2) the number of such boat ramps that are 
operational; and 
(3) the number of such boat ramps that require 
maintenance in order to be made operational. 
SEC. 205. GAO STUDIES. 
(a) STUDY ON DONOR PORTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate a review 
of the treatment of donor ports under section 2106 
of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2238c) that includes—
200 
(A) a description of the funding available 
to donor ports under such section, including a 
description of how eligibility for such donor 
ports has been modified; 
(B) a summary of all funds that have been 
provided to donor ports under such section; 
(C) an assessment of how the Secretary 
provides funding under such section to donor 
ports, including— 
(i) a complete description of the proc-
ess and data used to determine eligibility; 
and 
(ii) the impact construction and main-
tenance projects, including maintenance 
dredging and deep draft navigation con-
struction projects, have on donor port eligi-
bility; 
(D) an assessment of other major con-
tainer ports that are not currently eligible as a 
donor port under such section and a description 
of the criteria that exclude such container ports 
from eligibility; and 
(E) recommendations to improve the provi-
sion of funds under such section.
201 
(2) REPORT.—Upon completion of the review 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report containing the re-
sults of such review. 
(b) STUDY ON DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall complete an anal-
ysis of— 
(A) the extent to which the Corps of Engi-
neers utilizes digital infrastructure technologies 
for delivery of authorized water resources devel-
opment projects, including 3D modeling; 
(B) the digital technology systems utilized 
by the Corps of Engineers; 
(C) the digital technology systems utilized 
by non-Federal entities working with the Sec-
retary on authorized water resources develop-
ment projects; 
(D) the cost to the Government of sup-
porting multiple digital technology systems uti-
lized by the Corps of Engineers;
202 
(E) available digital technology systems 
that may be used to for the delivery of author-
ized water resources development projects; 
(F) any security concerns related to the 
use of digital technology systems and how such 
concerns may be addressed; 
(G) the benefits of expanding the adoption 
of digital technology systems for use by the 
Corps of Engineers, including for delivery of 
authorized 
water 
resources 
development 
projects, in order to— 
(i) maximize interoperability with 
other systems, products, tools, or applica-
tions; 
(ii) boost productivity; 
(iii) manage complexity; 
(iv) reduce project delays and cost 
overruns; 
(v) enhance safety and quality; 
(vi) reduce total costs for the entire 
lifecycle of authorized water resources de-
velopment projects; 
(vii) reduce emissions and quantify 
other sustainable and resilient impacts;
203 
(viii) promote more timely and pro-
ductive information sharing; and 
(ix) increase transparency as the re-
sult of the real-time sharing of informa-
tion; and 
(H) how the Corps of Engineers could bet-
ter leverage digital technology systems to enable 
3D model delivery and digital project delivery 
for— 
(i) seamless application integration; 
(ii) workflow and State-based access 
control capabilities; 
(iii) audit trails; and 
(iv) 
automation 
capabilities 
sup-
porting a closed-loop process. 
(2) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral of the United States shall submit to the Com-
mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on En-
vironment and Public Works of the Senate a report 
on the findings of such analysis. 
(c) STUDY ON CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISASTER PRE-
PAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RELATED INFORMATION 
COLLECTION.—
204 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate an anal-
ysis of Corps of Engineers disaster preparedness and 
response activities, including— 
(A) an accounting of postdisaster expendi-
tures from the ‘‘Corp of Engineers–Civil–Flood 
Control and Coastal Emergencies’’ account for 
each fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 2004, 
including— 
(i) the amounts transferred to such 
account from other accounts of the Corps 
of Engineers to cover postdisaster activities 
in each fiscal year; 
(ii) the name and location of the au-
thorized 
water 
resources 
development 
projects impacted by the transfer of funds 
described in clause (i); 
(iii) a summary of the activities and 
actions carried out with amounts available 
in such account, including the amount pro-
vided for salaries and expenses; and 
(iv) trends in the provision of post- 
disaster assistance that may impact future 
spending through such account;
205 
(B) an evaluation of— 
(i) the publicly available information 
on disaster response and preparedness re-
lated to authorized water resources devel-
opment projects, such as levees; 
(ii) the impacts of natural disasters 
on authorized water resources development 
projects, including how such disasters af-
fect the performance of such projects and 
resiliency of such projects to such disas-
ters; and 
(iii) whether the Corps of Engineers 
utilizes, or shares with non-Federal inter-
ests, information regarding such impacts 
in assessing whether modifications to such 
projects would reduce the likelihood of re-
petitive impacts or be in the public inter-
est; and 
(C) recommendations to improve the provi-
sion of assistance for response to natural disas-
ters under section 5 of the Act of August 18, 
1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
(2) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
206 
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such analysis. 
(d) STUDY ON HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS ON CORPS 
OF ENGINEERS PROPERTY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate an anal-
ysis of— 
(A) unauthorized homeless encampments 
on water resources development projects con-
structed by the Corps of Engineers and lands 
owned or under the control of the Corps of En-
gineers; 
(B) any actual or potential impacts of such 
encampments on the construction, operation 
and maintenance, or management of such 
projects and lands, including potential impacts 
on flood risk reduction or ecosystem restoration 
efforts, water quality, or public safety; 
(C) efforts to remove or deter such en-
campments from such projects and lands, or re-
move any materials associated with such en-
campments that are unauthorized to be present
207 
and pose a potential threat to public safety, in-
cluding manmade, flammable materials in 
urban and arid regions; and 
(D) constraints on the ability of the Corps 
of Engineers to remove or deter such encamp-
ments due to Federal, State, or local laws, reg-
ulations, or ordinances. 
(2) CONSULTATION.—In carrying out the anal-
ysis required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller 
General shall consult with the Secretary, the Admin-
istrator of the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency, the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency, and other relevant Federal, 
State, and local government officials and interested 
parties. 
(3) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such analysis. 
(e) STUDY ON FEDERAL-STATE DATA SHARING EF-
FORTS.—
208 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate an anal-
ysis of the coordination of the Secretary with other 
Federal and State agencies and academic institu-
tions in carrying out the development, update, mod-
ernization, and utilization of scientific, peer-reviewed 
data on the predictability of future resiliency, sea- 
level rise, and flood impacts. 
(2) SCOPE.—In conducting the analysis re-
quired under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall— 
(A) consult with the Secretary, the heads 
of other relevant Federal and State agencies, 
and academic institutions that collect, analyze, 
synthesize, and utilize scientific, peer-reviewed 
data on the predictability of future resiliency, 
sea-level rise, and flooding events; 
(B) examine the methodologies and mecha-
nisms for collecting, analyzing, synthesizing, 
and verifying such data; and 
(C) review and report on the opportunities 
for, and appropriateness of, the Secretary and 
relevant non-Federal interests to utilize such 
data in the planning, design, construction, and
209 
operation and maintenance of authorized water 
resources development projects. 
(3) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such analysis. 
(f) STUDY ON INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS TO NA-
TURE-BASED FEATURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate an anal-
ysis of— 
(A) nature-based features that are incor-
porated into authorized water resources devel-
opment projects by the Corps of Engineers and 
the type of such projects; 
(B) any limitation on the authority of the 
Secretary to incorporate nature-based features 
into authorized water resources development 
projects;
210 
(C) regulatory processes necessary for the 
use of nature-based features, including permit-
ting timelines; 
(D) the level of efficacy and effectiveness 
of nature-based features at authorized water re-
sources development projects that have— 
(i) utilized such nature-based features; 
and 
(ii) 
undergone 
extreme 
weather 
events, including hurricanes; and 
(E) institutional barriers within the Corps 
of Engineers preventing broader consideration 
and integration of nature-based features, in-
cluding— 
(i) staff experience with, and expertise 
on, nature-based features; 
(ii) official Corps of Engineers guid-
ance on nature-based features; 
(iii) time constraints or other expedi-
ency expectations; or 
(iv) life cycle costs associated with in-
corporating nature-based features into 
water resources development projects. 
(2) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
211 
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such analysis. 
(3) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection, the term 
‘‘nature-based feature’’ has the meaning given the 
terms ‘‘natural feature’’ and ‘‘nature-based feature’’ 
in section 1184 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2016 (32 U.S.C. 2289a). 
(g) STUDY ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate an anal-
ysis of the use of ecosystem restoration by the Corps 
of Engineers for flood control or flood risk manage-
ment projects. 
(2) SCOPE.—In conducting the analysis under 
paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall as-
sess— 
(A) how the Corps of Engineers complies, 
integrates, and prioritizes ecosystem restoration 
in benefit-cost analysis and generation of 
project alternatives;
212 
(B) the geographic distribution and fre-
quency of ecosystem restoration for flood con-
trol or flood risk management projects; 
(C) the rationale and benefit-cost analyses 
that drive decisions to incorporate ecosystem 
restoration into flood control or flood risk man-
agement projects; 
(D) the additional long-term comprehen-
sive benefits to local communities related to 
ecosystem restoration for flood control or flood 
risk management projects; 
(E) recommendations for prioritizing eco-
system restoration as a tool for flood control 
and flood risk management projects; and 
(F) the percentage of the annual construc-
tion budget utilized for ecosystem restoration 
projects over the past 5 years at flood control 
or flood risk management projects. 
(3) REPORT.—Upon completion of the analysis 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such analysis.
213 
(h) STUDY ON TRIBAL COORDINATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate a review 
of the Corps of Engineers procedures to address the 
discovery of Tribal historic or cultural resources, in-
cluding village sites, burial sites, and human re-
mains, at authorized water resources development 
projects. 
(2) SCOPE.—In conducting the review required 
under paragraph (1), the Comptroller General 
shall— 
(A) evaluate the implementation of the 
Tribal Liaison requirements under section 8112 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2022 (33 U.S.C. 2281a); 
(B) describe the procedures used by the 
Corps of Engineers when Tribal historic or cul-
tural resources are identified at authorized 
water resources development projects, includ-
ing— 
(i) coordination with relevant Tribes, 
Federal, State, and local agencies; 
(ii) the role and effectiveness of the 
Tribal Liaison;
214 
(iii) recovery and reburial standards; 
(iv) any differences in procedures used 
by each Corps of Engineers district; and 
(v) as applicable, the implementation 
of the requirements of section 306108 of 
title 54, United States Code (formerly 
known as section 106 of the National His-
toric Preservation Act) or the Native 
American Graves Protection and Repatri-
ation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq); and 
(C) provide recommendations to improve 
the coordination between the Corps of Engi-
neers and Tribes for the identification and re-
covery of Tribal historic and cultural resources 
discovered at authorized water resources devel-
opment projects. 
(3) PRIORITIZATION.—In conducting the review 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall prioritize reviewing procedures used by the 
Sacramento District in the South Pacific Division of 
the Corps of Engineers. 
(4) REPORT.—Upon completion of the review 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
215 
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such review. 
(i) STUDY ON RISK RATING 2.0.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General of the United States shall initiate a review 
on the Risk Rating 2.0 initiative. 
(2) CONTENTS.—The Comptroller General shall 
include in the review required under paragraph (1) 
the following: 
(A) A description of— 
(i) the Corps of Engineers processes 
for communicating changes to floodplain 
maps made as a result of Risk Rating 2.0 
to affected communities and property own-
ers; and 
(ii) any measures the Corps of Engi-
neers has put in place to assist owners of 
property that has been included in flood-
plain maps as a result of Risk Rating 2.0, 
including any options for mitigating flood 
risk and financial support programs. 
(B) An evaluation of the transparency and 
clarity of information provided to property own-
216 
ers about such changes, including an assess-
ment of the adequacy of outreach and education 
efforts to inform such property owners about 
available resources for flood risk mitigation. 
(C) An assessment of— 
(i) the broader effects of changes to 
floodplain maps as a result of Risk Rating 
2.0 on communities, including potential 
economic and social effects of increased 
floodplain designations; 
(ii) the role of local governments and 
community organizations in responding to 
and managing such changes; 
(iii) how such changes may affect the 
benefit-cost analysis used by the Corps of 
Engineers; and 
(iv) whether such changes affect the 
prioritization and justification of flood risk 
management projects. 
(3) REPORT.—Upon completion of the review 
required under paragraph (1), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Represent-
atives and the Committee on Environment and Pub-
217 
lic Works of the Senate a report on the findings of 
such review. 
SEC. 206. ANNUAL REPORT ON HARBOR MAINTENANCE 
NEEDS AND TRUST FUND EXPENDITURES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—On the date on which the budget 
of the President is submitted to Congress pursuant to sec-
tion 1105 of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 
2026, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary 
shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and In-
frastructure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
a report describing— 
(1) with respect to the fiscal year for which the 
budget is submitted, the operation and maintenance 
costs associated with harbors and inland harbors de-
scribed in section 210(a)(2) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238(a)(2)), 
including a description of the costs required to 
achieve and maintain the constructed width and 
depth for such harbors and inland harbors and the 
costs for expanded uses at eligible harbors and in-
land harbors (as defined in section 210(d)(2) of such 
Act), on a project-by-project basis; 
(2) as of the date on which the report is sub-
mitted, expenditures and deposits into the Harbor
218 
Maintenance Trust Fund established under section 
9505 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; 
(3) an identification of the amount of funding 
requested in the budget of the President for the op-
eration and maintenance costs associated with such 
harbors and inland harbors, on a project-by-project 
basis; 
(4) an explanation of how the amount of fund-
ing described in paragraph (2) complies with the re-
quirements of section 102 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 2238 note); 
(5) an identification of the unmet operation and 
maintenance needs associated with such harbors and 
inland harbors, on a project-by-project basis, that 
remains after accounting for the amount identified 
under paragraph (3); and 
(6) a description of deposits made into the Har-
bor Maintenance Trust Fund in the fiscal year pre-
ceding the fiscal year of the applicable budget sub-
mission and the sources of such deposits. 
(b) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT.—In the first report 
required to be submitted under subsection (a), the Sec-
retary shall identify, to the maximum extent practicable, 
transportation cost savings realized by achieving and 
maintaining the constructed width and depth for the har-
219 
bors and inland harbors described in section 210(a)(2) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, on a 
project-by-project basis. 
(c) PUBLIC
AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary shall 
make the report submitted under subsection (a) available 
to the public, including on the internet. 
(d) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 
(1) ASSESSMENT
OF
HARBORS
AND
INLAND 
HARBORS.—Section 210(e)(3) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2238(e)(3)) is repealed. 
(2) HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND DE-
POSITS
AND
EXPENDITURES.—Section 330 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (26 
U.S.C. 9505 note) and the item related to such sec-
tion in the table of contents for such Act, are re-
pealed. 
SEC. 207. EXAMINATION OF REDUCTION OF MICROPLAS-
TICS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of ap-
propriations, the Secretary, acting through the Director 
of the Engineer Research and Development Center and, 
where appropriate, in consultation with other Federal 
agencies, shall carry out research and development activi-
ties relating to measures that may be implemented to re-
220 
duce the release of microplastics into the environment as-
sociated with carrying out the civil works missions of the 
Corps of Engineers. 
(b) FOCUS AREAS.—In carrying out subsection (a), 
the Secretary shall, at a minimum— 
(1) review efforts to reduce the release of 
microplastics associated with sandblasting or hydro- 
blasting vessels owned or operated by the Corps of 
Engineers; 
(2) research whether natural features or na-
ture-based features can be used effectively to reduce 
the release of microplastics into the environment; 
and 
(3) describe the potential costs and benefits, 
and the effects on the timeline for carrying out 
water resources development projects, of imple-
menting measures to reduce the release of micro-
plastics into the environment. 
SEC. 208. POST-DISASTER WATERSHED ASSESSMENT FOR 
IMPACTED AREAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a 
post-disaster watershed assessment under section 3025 of 
the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 
2014 (33 U.S.C. 2267b) for the following areas:
221 
(1) Areas of Maui, Hawaii, impacted by the Au-
gust 2023 wildfires. 
(2) Areas near Belen, New Mexico, impacted by 
the April 2022 wildfires. 
(b) REPORT
TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 18 
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure of the House of Representative and the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Sen-
ate a report on the status of the post-disaster watershed 
assessments carried out under subsection (a). 
SEC. 209. UPPER BARATARIA BASIN AND MORGANZA TO 
THE GULF OF MEXICO CONNECTION, LOU-
ISIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall evaluate con-
structing a connection between the Upper Barataria Basin 
Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction project, 
Louisiana, authorized by section 8401(3) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 2022 (136 U.S.C. 3839), and 
the project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana, authorized by 
section 1001(24) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2007 (121 Stat. 1053). 
(b) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 
year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
222 
shall complete the evaluation described in subsection (a) 
and submit to the Committee on Transportation and In-
frastructure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
any recommendations related to constructing a connection 
between the projects described in such subsection. 
SEC. 210. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM FLOOD RISK 
AND RESILIENCY STUDY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a 
study to evaluate and recommend local and systemic meas-
ures to improve flood resiliency and reduce flood risk in 
the floodplain, including the floodway, of the Upper Mis-
sissippi River System. 
(b) COMPONENTS.—In carrying out the study re-
quired under subsection (a), the Secretary shall— 
(1) develop recommendations to reduce costs 
and damages associated with flooding and enable 
people located in areas adjacent to, and economies 
dependent on, the Upper Mississippi River System 
to be more resilient to flood events; 
(2) identify opportunities to support navigation, 
environmental sustainability, and environmental res-
toration goals for the Upper Mississippi River Sys-
tem, including recommending measures that are in-
223 
cidental flood risk measures that may achieve such 
goals; 
(3) describe the existing flood risk conditions of 
the Upper Mississippi River System; 
(4) develop and recommend integrated, com-
prehensive, and systems-based approaches for flood 
risk reduction and floodplain management to mini-
mize the threat to life, health, safety, and property 
resulting from flooding by using structural and non-
structural measures in the Upper Mississippi River 
System; 
(5) investigate and provide recommendations 
for modifications to authorized water resources de-
velopment projects in Upper Mississippi River States 
within the floodplain of the Upper Mississippi River 
System, including modifications to the authorized 
purposes of such projects to further flood risk man-
agement and resiliency; 
(6) perform a systemic analysis of flood resil-
iency and flood risk to determine the feasibility of 
protecting authorized water resources development 
projects for flood control and navigation in the 
Upper Mississippi River System; 
(7) develop management plans and actions, to 
be carried out by the responsible Federal agency or
224 
State government, to reduce flood risk and improve 
resiliency in the Upper Mississippi River System; 
(8) identify and provide recommendations for 
any necessary changes to Federal or State law to 
carry out recommendations provided pursuant to 
this section; 
(9) recommend followup studies of problem 
areas in the Upper Mississippi River System for 
which data or technology does not allow immediate 
solutions; and 
(10) recommend additional monitoring of, or 
systemic adaptive management measures for, au-
thorized water resources development projects to re-
spond to changing conditions in the Upper Mis-
sissippi River System. 
(c) COORDINATION
AND CONSULTATION.—In car-
rying out the study required under subsection (a), the Sec-
retary shall— 
(1) coordinate with the Upper Mississippi River 
States, including collectively through the Upper Mis-
sissippi River Basin Association; 
(2) consult with the appropriate Federal agen-
cies, levee and drainage districts, and units of local 
government, and the Mississippi River Commission; 
and
225 
(3) seek and consider input from the Upper 
Mississippi navigation industry, agriculture and con-
servation organizations, and other interested parties 
in such States. 
(d) CONTINUATION OF STUDY.—The following stud-
ies shall be considered a continuation of the study carried 
out under subsection (a): 
(1) Any study recommended to be carried out 
in a report that the Chief of Engineers prepares for 
the study conducted under this section. 
(2) Any study spun off from the study con-
ducted under this section before completion of such 
study. 
(e) CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT.—The Secretary 
shall carry out the study required under subsection (a) 
through the St. Louis District in the Mississippi Valley 
Division of the Corps of Engineers. 
(f) COST SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of 
the study carried out under subsection (a) and any study 
carried out pursuant to subsection (d) shall be 75 percent. 
(g) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) UPPER
MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
STATE.—The 
term ‘‘Upper Mississippi River State’’ means any of 
the States of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, or 
Wisconsin.
226 
(2) UPPER
MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
SYSTEM.—The 
term ‘‘Upper Mississippi River System’’ has the 
meaning given the term in section 1103(b) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 652(b)). 
SEC. 211. NEW JERSEY HOT SPOT EROSION MITIGATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct one 
or more studies on the effects of hot spot erosion on au-
thorized coastal storm risk management projects in the 
State of New Jersey, which shall include, with respect to 
each affected project included in a study— 
(1) the specific area of the project that is af-
fected by hot spot erosion; and 
(2) the impact of hot spot erosion on the effec-
tiveness of the project in meeting the purpose of 
coastal storm risk management. 
(b) FORM.—A study conducted under subsection (a) 
may be in the form of a general reevaluation report, an 
engineering documentation report, or any other method of 
assessment that the Secretary determines appropriate. 
(c) RECOMMENDATIONS.—Based on the study or 
studies carried out under subsection (a), the Secretary 
shall develop recommendations for mitigating the effects 
of hot spot erosion on authorized coastal storm risk man-
227 
agement projects in the State of New Jersey, which may 
include recommendations relating to— 
(1) the design and construction of seawalls, jet-
ties, berms, groins, breakwaters, or other physical 
structures; 
(2) the use of natural features and nature- 
based features, including living shorelines; and 
(3) modifications to authorized project designs 
or renourishment schedules. 
(d) HOT SPOT EROSION DEFINED.—In this section, 
the term ‘‘hot spot erosion’’ means the loss of sediment 
in a specific, concentrated area, significantly faster than 
in immediately surrounding areas, due to natural proc-
esses. 
SEC. 212. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary— 
(1) shall— 
(A) expedite the completion of the study of 
plans for mitigation and beach restoration au-
thorized by section 414 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2636); 
and 
(B) produce a report of the Chief of Engi-
neers with a recommended plan for mitigation
228 
and beach restoration based on updated sedi-
ment sampling and analysis; and 
(2) may, if the Secretary determines that the 
mitigation and beach restoration plans described in 
such study are technically feasible and environ-
mentally 
acceptable, 
proceed 
directly 
to 
preconstruction planning, engineering, and design of 
the mitigation and beach restoration work. 
SEC. 213. COASTAL WASHINGTON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to 
carry out comprehensive studies for riverine and coastal 
flooding of coastal areas in the State of Washington. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out a study under 
subsection (a), the Secretary shall— 
(1) conduct a comprehensive analysis of current 
riverine and coastal flooding and corresponding risk 
reduction measures with an emphasis on resiliency 
to maintain or enhance current levels of risk man-
agement in response to changing conditions; 
(2) establish a method of projecting sea level 
rise with limited tide gage information and develop 
applicable tools to address the unique coastal flood-
ing process in the Pacific Northwest region; 
(3) conduct research and development to under-
stand the atmospheric, oceanic, geologic, and coastal
229 
forcing and response conditions necessary to develop 
a numerical modeling system that may be used for 
developing coastal hazard data, and how to best in-
clude that information in such a modeling system; 
(4) identify coastal vulnerabilities and risks in 
riverine and coastal areas due to sea level change, 
extreme weather, and increased coastal storm risk; 
(5) identify Tribal and economically disadvan-
taged communities (as defined by the Secretary 
under section 160 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note) with 
riverine and coastal flooding vulnerabilities and 
risks; and 
(6) recommend actions necessary to protect 
critical public infrastructure, communities, and crit-
ical natural or cultural resources. 
(c) DATA NEEDS.—In carrying out this section, the 
Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable and 
where appropriate, use existing data provided to the Sec-
retary by Federal and State agencies, Indian Tribes, and 
other stakeholders, including data obtained through other 
Federal programs.
230 
SEC. 214. CHERRYFIELD DAM, NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, 
MAINE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a 
disposition study under section 216 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a) for the deauthorization and 
potential removal of the Cherryfield Local Protection 
Project, Narraguagus River, Maine, constructed pursuant 
to section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 
U.S.C. 701s). 
(b) REPORT
TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 18 
months after the date of enactment of this section, the 
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 
the Senate a report on the status of the disposition study 
required under subsection (a). 
SEC. 215. POOR FARM POND DAM, WORCESTER, MASSACHU-
SETTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a 
disposition study under section 216 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a) for the deauthorization and 
potential removal of the Poor Farm Pond Dam, Worces-
ter, Massachusetts. 
(b) REPORT
TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 18 
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation
231 
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
Senate a report on the status of the disposition study re-
quired under subsection (a). 
SEC. 216. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY ON 
UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall seek to enter 
into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences 
to prepare a report containing— 
(1) the results of a study on the management 
and operations of the dams and reservoirs in the 
Upper Rio Grande Basin, including the Heron, El 
Vado, Abiquiu, Cochiti, Jemez Canyon, and Ele-
phant Butte dams and reservoirs; and 
(2) recommendations for future management 
and operation strategies for such dams and res-
ervoirs with a goal of optimizing currently author-
ized project purposes and enhancing resiliency, in-
cluding to drought and weather variations. 
(b) CONSULTATION.—In preparing the report under 
subsection (a), the National Academy of Sciences shall 
consult with relevant Federal agencies. 
(c) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date 
of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
232 
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works of the Senate the report 
prepared under subsection (a). 
SEC. 217. CHAMBERS, GALVESTON, AND HARRIS COUNTIES, 
TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a 
disposition study under section 216 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a) for the release, transfer, 
conveyance, or exchange of excess easements, or the ex-
change of land, held for placement of dredged material 
for the project for navigation, Houston Ship Channel Ex-
pansion Channel Improvement Project, Harris, Chambers, 
and Galveston Counties, Texas, authorized by section 
401(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 
(134 Stat. 2734). 
(b) ACTIONS.—In carrying out the study required 
under subsection (a) the Secretary shall— 
(1) ensure that the relevant non-Federal inter-
est is provided right of first refusal for any potential 
release, transfer, conveyance, or exchange of excess 
easements; and 
(2) work alongside the non-Federal interest in 
identifying opportunities for land exchanges, where 
possible.
233 
SEC. 218. SEA SPARROW ACCOUNTING. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall share data 
and coordinate with relevant Federal, State, and local 
agencies to obtain an accurate count of Cape Sable Sea-
side Sparrows in Florida during each year and, to the 
maximum extent practicable, during the 5-year period pre-
ceding each such year. 
(b) SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION TO CONGRESS.— 
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act, and annually thereafter during the 10-year period be-
ginning on such date of enactment, the Secretary shall 
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
the information obtained under subsection (a). 
SEC. 219. WILSON LOCK FLOATING GUIDE WALL, ALABAMA. 
On the request of the relevant Federal entity, the 
Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, use 
all relevant authorities to expeditiously provide technical 
assistance, including engineering and design assistance, 
and cost estimation assistance to the relevant Federal en-
tity in order to address the impacts to navigation along 
the Tennessee River at the Wilson Lock and Dam, Ala-
bama.
234 
SEC. 220. ALGIERS CANAL LEVEES, LOUISIANA. 
The Secretary shall issue a report to the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate within 60 days of the passage 
of this Act detailing the Corps plan to assume responsibil-
ities for the Algiers Canal Levee as outlined in section 
8340(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3795). 
TITLE III—DEAUTHORIZATIONS 
AND MODIFICATIONS 
SEC. 301. DEAUTHORIZATION OF INACTIVE PROJECTS. 
Section 301 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 579d–2) is amended by striking sub-
sections (a) through (c) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are— 
‘‘(1) to identify water resources development 
projects, and separable elements of projects, author-
ized by Congress that are no longer viable for con-
struction due to— 
‘‘(A) a lack of local support; 
‘‘(B) a lack of available Federal or non- 
Federal resources; or 
‘‘(C) an authorizing purpose that is no 
longer relevant or feasible;
235 
‘‘(2) to create an expedited and definitive proc-
ess for Congress to deauthorize water resources de-
velopment projects and separable elements that are 
no longer viable for construction; and 
‘‘(3) to allow the continued authorization of 
water resources development projects and separable 
elements that are viable for construction. 
‘‘(b) PROPOSED DEAUTHORIZATION LIST.— 
‘‘(1) PRELIMINARY LIST OF PROJECTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall 
develop a preliminary list of each water re-
sources development project, or separable ele-
ment of a project, authorized for construction 
before June 10, 2014, for which— 
‘‘(i) planning, design, or construction 
was not initiated before the date of enact-
ment of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2024; or 
‘‘(ii) planning, design, or construction 
was initiated before the date of enactment 
of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2024, but for which no funds, Federal 
or non-Federal, were obligated for plan-
ning, design, or construction of the project 
or separable element of the project during
236 
the current fiscal year or any of the 10 
preceding fiscal years. 
‘‘(B) USE OF COMPREHENSIVE CONSTRUC-
TION BACKLOG AND OPERATION AND MAINTE-
NANCE
REPORT.—The Secretary may develop 
the preliminary list from the comprehensive 
construction backlog and operation and mainte-
nance reports developed pursuant to section 
1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a). 
‘‘(2) PREPARATION OF PROPOSED DEAUTHOR-
IZATION LIST.— 
‘‘(A) PROPOSED LIST AND ESTIMATED DE-
AUTHORIZATION
AMOUNT.—The 
Secretary 
shall— 
‘‘(i) prepare a proposed list of projects 
for deauthorization comprised of a subset 
of projects and separable elements identi-
fied on the preliminary list developed 
under paragraph (1) that are projects or 
separable elements described in subsection 
(a)(1), as determined by the Secretary; 
and
237 
‘‘(ii) include with such proposed list 
an estimate, in the aggregate, of the Fed-
eral cost to complete such projects. 
‘‘(B) DETERMINATION OF FEDERAL COST 
TO COMPLETE.—For purposes of subparagraph 
(A), the Federal cost to complete shall take into 
account any allowances authorized by section 
902 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2280), as applied to the 
most recent project schedule and cost estimate. 
‘‘(3) PUBLIC COMMENT AND CONSULTATION.— 
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall 
solicit comments from the public and the Gov-
ernors of each applicable State on the proposed 
deauthorization list prepared under paragraph 
(2)(A). 
‘‘(B) COMMENT PERIOD.—The public com-
ment period shall be 90 days. 
‘‘(4) PREPARATION
OF
FINAL
DEAUTHORIZA-
TION LIST.— 
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall 
prepare a final deauthorization list by— 
‘‘(i) considering any comments re-
ceived under paragraph (3); and
238 
‘‘(ii) revising the proposed deauthor-
ization list prepared under paragraph 
(2)(A) as the Secretary determines nec-
essary to respond to such comments. 
‘‘(B) APPENDIX.—The Secretary shall in-
clude as part of the final deauthorization list an 
appendix that— 
‘‘(i) identifies each project or sepa-
rable element on the proposed deauthoriza-
tion list that is not included on the final 
deauthorization list; and 
‘‘(ii) describes the reasons why the 
project or separable element is not in-
cluded on the final deauthorization list. 
‘‘(c) SUBMISSION OF FINAL DEAUTHORIZATION LIST 
TO CONGRESS FOR CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW; PUBLICA-
TION.— 
‘‘(1) IN
GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days 
after the date of the close of the comment period 
under subsection (b)(3), the Secretary shall— 
‘‘(A) submit the final deauthorization list 
and appendix prepared under subsection (b)(4) 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and
239 
the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works of the Senate; and 
‘‘(B) publish the final deauthorization list 
and appendix in the Federal Register. 
‘‘(2) EXCLUSIONS.—The Secretary shall not in-
clude in the final deauthorization list submitted 
under paragraph (1) any project or separable ele-
ment with respect to which Federal funds for plan-
ning, design, or construction are obligated after the 
development of the preliminary list under subsection 
(b)(1)(A) but prior to the submission of the final de-
authorization list under paragraph (1)(A) of this 
subsection.’’. 
SEC. 302. GENERAL REAUTHORIZATIONS. 
(a) LAS VEGAS, NEVADA.—Section 529(b)(3) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 
2658; 119 Stat. 2255; 125 Stat. 865; 136 Stat. 4631) 
is amended by striking ‘‘$40,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$60,000,000’’. 
(b) INVASIVE SPECIES IN ALPINE LAKES PILOT PRO-
GRAM.—Section 507(c) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2020 (16 U.S.C. 4701 note) is amended by 
striking ‘‘2028’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’. 
(c) ENVIRONMENTAL BANKS.—Section 309(e) of the 
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration
240 
Act (16 U.S.C. 3957(e)) is amended by striking ‘‘12’’ and 
inserting ‘‘14’’. 
(d) 
LEVEE
SAFETY
INITIATIVE.—Section 
9005(g)(2)(E)(i) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2007 (33 U.S.C. 3303a(g)(2)(E)(i)) is amended by 
striking ‘‘2028’’ and inserting ‘‘2033’’. 
(e) NON-FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION PILOT PRO-
GRAM.—Section 1043(b) of the Water Resources Reform 
and Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note) is 
amended by striking ‘‘2026’’ each place it appears and 
inserting ‘‘2030’’. 
(f) ASIAN CARP PREVENTION AND CONTROL PILOT 
PROGRAM.—Section 509(a) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 610 note) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (2)(C)(ii), by striking ‘‘2024’’ 
and inserting ‘‘2030’’; and 
(2) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘‘2 years 
thereafter’’ and inserting ‘‘2 years after the date of 
enactment of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2024’’. 
(g) TRANSFER OF EXCESS CREDIT.—Section 1020 
of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 
2014 (33 U.S.C. 2223) is amended by striking ‘‘2028’’ 
and inserting ‘‘2033’’ each place it appears.
241 
(h) PILOT PROGRAMS ON THE FORMULATION OF 
CORPS
OF ENGINEERS PROJECTS
IN RURAL COMMU-
NITIES
AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED COMMU-
NITIES.—Section 118 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2020 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘5 years and 
10 years’’ and inserting ‘‘5 years, 10 years, and 15 
years’’; 
(2) in subsection (g), by striking ‘‘10 years’’ 
and inserting ‘‘15 years’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(h) PRIORITY PROJECTS.—In carrying out this sec-
tion, the Secretary shall prioritize the following projects: 
‘‘(1) The project for flood risk management, 
city of Rialto, California, authorized by section 201 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024. 
‘‘(2) The project for ecosystem restoration and 
recreation, Santa Ana River, Jurupa Valley, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 201 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 2024. 
‘‘(3) The project for flood control and other 
purposes, Kentucky River and its tributaries, Ken-
tucky, authorized by section 6 of the Act of August 
11, 1939 (chapter 699, 53 Stat. 1416).
242 
‘‘(4) The project for flood risk management, 
Kentucky River, Kentucky, authorized by section 
8201(a)(31) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 (136 Stat. 3746). 
‘‘(5) The project for navigation, Hagaman 
Chute, Lake Providence, Louisiana, authorized by 
section 201 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2024. 
‘‘(6) The project for flood risk management, 
Otero County, New Mexico, authorized by section 
201 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2024. 
‘‘(7) The project for flood control and other 
purposes, Susquehanna River Basin, Williamsport, 
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 5 of the Act of 
June 22, 1936 (chapter 688, 49 Stat. 1573). 
‘‘(8) The project for flood risk management and 
ecosystem 
restoration, 
Winooski 
River 
basin, 
Vermont, authorized by section 201 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2024. 
‘‘(9) The project for flood risk management and 
sediment management, Grays River, Wahkiakum 
County, Washington, authorized by section 201 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2024.’’.
243 
(i) REHABILITATION OF EXISTING LEVEES.—Section 
3017(e) of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 3303a note) is amended by strik-
ing ‘‘2028’’ and inserting ‘‘2033’’. 
SEC. 303. CONVEYANCES. 
(a) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.— 
(1) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.— 
The exact acreage and the legal description of any 
real property to be conveyed under this section shall 
be determined by a survey that is satisfactory to the 
Secretary. 
(2) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING 
PROVISIONS.—Section 2696 of title 10, United 
States Code, shall not apply to any conveyance 
under this section. 
(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 
documentation costs, associated with the conveyance. 
(4) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a convey-
ance is made under this section shall hold the 
United States harmless from any liability with re-
spect to activities carried out, on or after the date 
of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed.
244 
The United States shall remain responsible for any 
liability with respect to activities carried out, before 
such date, on the real property conveyed. 
(5) 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 nec-
essary and appropriate to protect the interests of the 
United States. 
(b) CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.— 
(1) CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—Upon receipt 
from the City of Los Angeles, California, of an 
amount that is not less than fair market value, as 
determined by the Secretary, the Secretary shall 
convey to the City of Los Angeles, California, all 
right, title, and interest of the United States in and 
to the real property described in paragraph (2), for 
the purpose of housing a fire station, swiftwater res-
cue facility, and firefighter training facility. 
(2) PROPERTY.—The property to be conveyed 
under this subsection is the approximately 11.25 
acres of land, including improvements on that land, 
located at 5101 Sepulveda Boulevard, Sherman 
Oaks, California. 
(c) SALINAS DAM AND RESERVOIR, CALIFORNIA.—
245 
(1) CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—Upon receipt 
from the County of San Luis Obispo, California, of 
an amount that is not less than fair market value, 
as determined by the Secretary, the Secretary shall 
convey to the County of San Luis Obispo, California, 
all right, title, and interest of the United States in 
and to the real property described in paragraph (2). 
(2) PROPERTY.—The property to be conveyed 
under this subsection is Salinas Dam and Reservoir 
(Santa Margarita Lake), California. 
(3) SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary 
shall, in consultation with appropriate Federal and 
non-Federal entities, ensure the property described 
in paragraph (2) meets applicable State and Federal 
dam safety requirements before conveying such 
property under this subsection. 
(d) PORT OF SKAMANIA COUNTY, WASHINGTON.— 
(1) CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—Upon receipt 
from the Port of Skamania County, Washington, of 
an amount that is not less than fair market value, 
as determined by the Secretary, the Secretary shall 
convey to the Port of Skamania County, Wash-
ington, all right, title, and interest of the United 
States in and to the real property described in para-
graph (2).
246 
(2) PROPERTY.—The property to be conveyed 
under this subsection is the approximately 1.6 acres 
of land, including improvements on that land, con-
sisting of the following: Lot I–2 in the Fifth Addi-
tion to the Plats of Relocated North Bonneville re-
corded in Volume B of Plat Records, Pages 51 and 
52, Skamania County Auditor’s File No. 94016. 
(3) WAIVER OF PROPERTY SCREENING PROVI-
SION.—Section 401(e) of Public Law 100–581 (102 
Stat. 2944) shall not apply to the conveyance under 
this subsection. 
(e) 
TECHNICAL
CORRECTION.—Section 
8377(e)(3)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2022 (136 Stat. 3825) is amended by striking ‘‘reserved 
an retained’’ and inserting ‘‘reserved and retained’’. 
SEC. 304. LAKES PROGRAM. 
Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148; 104 Stat. 4646; 110 Stat. 
3758; 118 Stat. 295; 121 Stat. 1076; 134 Stat. 2703; 136 
Stat. 3778) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (33), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 
end; 
(2) in paragraph (34) by striking the period at 
the end and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following:
247 
‘‘(35) East Lake Tohopekaliga, Florida; 
‘‘(36) Dillon Lake, Ohio; 
‘‘(37) Hillcrest Pond, Pennsylvania; 
‘‘(38) Falcon Lake, Zapata County, Texas; and 
‘‘(39) Lake Casa Blanca, Webb County, 
Texas.’’. 
SEC. 305. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS. 
Section 509(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3759; 113 Stat. 339; 114 Stat. 
2679; 136 Stat. 3779) is amended by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(23) West Dundalk Branch Channel and Dun-
dalk-Seagirt Connecting Channel, Baltimore Harbor 
Anchorages and Channels, Maryland. 
‘‘(24) Crown Bay Marina Channel, United 
States Virgin Islands. 
‘‘(25) Pidgeon Industrial Area Harbor, Mem-
phis, Tennessee. 
‘‘(26) McGriff Pass Channel, Florida. 
‘‘(27) Oak Harbor Channel and Breakwater, 
Washington. 
‘‘(28) Ediz Hook, Port Angeles, Washington.’’. 
SEC. 306. ASSET DIVESTITURE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 109 of the River and Har-
bor Act of 1950 (33 U.S.C. 534) is amended—
248 
(1) by striking ‘‘That the Secretary of the 
Army’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Army’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘with or without consideration’’ 
and all that follows through the period at the end 
and inserting the following: ‘‘with or without consid-
eration if, prior to any transfer or conveyance of a 
bridge, the Secretary and the State authority, or po-
litical subdivision thereof, execute an agreement con-
taining the following terms and conditions: 
‘‘(1) The State authority, or political subdivi-
sion thereof, shall assume responsibility for the oper-
ation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and reha-
bilitation of the bridge, including the preservation, 
protection, inspection and evaluation of, and future 
construction on, the bridge. 
‘‘(2) Operation of the bridge shall be consistent 
with the purposes of, and may not constrain or 
change, the operation and maintenance of the water 
resources development project in connection to which 
the bridge was constructed or acquired. 
‘‘(3) The State authority, or political subdivi-
sion thereof, shall hold the United States harmless 
from any liability with respect to the operation, 
maintenance, repair, replacement, and rehabilitation
249 
of the bridge, including preservation, protection, in-
spection and evaluation of, and future construction 
on, the bridge. 
‘‘(4) Any additional terms or conditions that 
the Secretary considers appropriate to protect the 
interests of the United States.’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) FUNDS.—The Secretary may transfer to the 
State authority, or political subdivision thereof, to which 
a bridge is transferred or conveyed under this section any 
funds made available to the Secretary for necessary re-
placement or rehabilitation of the bridge.’’. 
(b) REPORT ON BRIDGE INVENTORY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit 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 on bridges owned, op-
erated, and maintained by the Corps of Engineers. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall in-
clude in the report required under paragraph (1)— 
(A) a list of bridges carrying passengers 
that are—
250 
(i) not located in recreational areas; 
and 
(ii) not required to be owned, oper-
ated, and maintained by the Corps of En-
gineers for the proper functioning of water 
resources development projects; 
(B) a description of the location of such 
bridges and applicable State authority or polit-
ical subdivision to which such bridges may be 
transferred or conveyed under section 109 of 
the River and Harbor Act of 1950 (33 U.S.C. 
534) (as amended by this section); and 
(C) a description of measures taken by the 
Corps of Engineers to reduce the number of 
bridges owned, operated, and maintained by the 
Corps of Engineers. 
SEC. 307. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION PRO-
GRAM. 
Section 1103(e)(4) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(4)) is amended by 
striking ‘‘$15,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal 
year thereafter’’ and inserting ‘‘$15,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2024 and $20,000,000 for each fiscal year there-
after’’.
251 
SEC. 308. COASTAL COMMUNITY FLOOD CONTROL AND 
OTHER PURPOSES. 
Section 103(k)(4) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(k)(4)) is amended— 
(1) in subparagraph (A)— 
(A) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘makes’’ and 
inserting ‘‘made’’; and 
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘repays an 
amount equal to 2⁄3 of the remaining principal 
by’’ and inserting ‘‘made a payment of an addi-
tional $200,000,000 for that eligible deferred 
payment agreement on or before’’; 
(2) in subparagraph (B) by inserting ‘‘inter-
est’s’’ after ‘‘non-Federal’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(C) REFUND
OF
CREDIT.—Any agree-
ment made that applied credits to satisfy the 
terms of a pre-payment made under subsection 
(k)(4)(A) that resulted in total payment in ex-
cess of the amount now required under sub-
section (k)(4)(A) shall be modified to indicate 
that the excess credits continue to apply toward 
any remaining principal of the respective 
project, or at the request of the non-Federal in-
terest, the agreement shall be modified to retro-
actively transfer back those excess credits to the
252 
non-Federal interest such that those credits 
may be applied by the non-Federal interest to 
any cost-shared project identified by the non- 
Federal interest.’’. 
SEC. 309. SHORE PROTECTION AND RESTORATION. 
Section 8327 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 (136 Sat. 3788) is amended— 
(1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘DELA-
WARE’’; and 
(2) in subsection (b)— 
(A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘DELA-
WARE’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘the State of Delaware’’ 
and inserting ‘‘the covered geographic area’’ 
each place it appears; and 
(C) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(C) COVERED
GEOGRAPHIC
AREA.—The 
term ‘covered geographic area’ means— 
‘‘(i) the State of Delaware; 
‘‘(ii) Fire Island National Seashore, 
New York; and 
‘‘(iii) the hamlets of Massapequa 
Park, Massapequa, Amityville, Copiague, 
Lindenhurst, West Babylon, Babylon, West
253 
Islip, West Bay Shore, Brightwaters, Bay 
Shore, Islip, East Islip, Great River, 
Oakdale, West Sayville, Saville, Bayport, 
Blue Point, Patchogue, East Patchogue, 
Bellport, 
Brookhaven, 
Shirley, 
Mastic 
Beach, Mastic, Moriches, Center Moriches, 
East Moriches, and Eastport, New York.’’. 
SEC. 310. HOPPER DREDGE MCFARLAND REPLACEMENT. 
If the Secretary replaces the Federal hopper dredge 
McFarland referred to in section 563 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3784; 121 
Stat. 1105) with another Federal hopper dredge, the Sec-
retary shall— 
(1) place the replacement Federal hopper 
dredge in a ready reserve status; 
(2) periodically perform routine underway 
dredging tests of the equipment (not to exceed 70 
days per year) of the replacement Federal hopper 
dredge in a ready reserve status to ensure the ability 
of the replacement Federal hopper dredge to per-
form urgent and emergency work; and 
(3) in consultation with affected stakeholders, 
place the replacement Federal hopper dredge in ac-
tive status in order to perform dredging work if the
254 
Secretary determines that private industry has 
failed— 
(A) to submit a responsive and responsible 
bid for work advertised by the Secretary; or 
(B) to carry out a project as required pur-
suant to a contract between the industry and 
the Secretary. 
SEC. 311. ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEMS. 
Section 1113 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4232; 110 Stat. 3719, 136 Stat. 
3781) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (d)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘The non-Federal’’ and in-
serting the following: 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal’’; and 
(B) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) 
RECONNAISSANCE
STUDY.—Notwith-
standing paragraph (1), the Federal share of a re-
connaissance study carried out by the Secretary 
under this section shall be 100 percent.’’; and 
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘$80,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$90,000,000’’.
255 
SEC. 312. PACIFIC REGION. 
Section 444 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3747; 113 Stat. 286) is amended by 
inserting ‘‘Hawaii,’’ after ‘‘Guam,’’. 
SEC. 313. SELMA, ALABAMA. 
The Federal share of the cost of the project for flood 
risk management, Selma Flood Risk Management and 
Bank Stabilization, Alabama, authorized by section 
8401(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 
(136 Stat. 3838), shall be 100 percent. 
SEC. 314. BARROW, ALASKA. 
For purposes of implementing the coastal erosion 
project, Barrow, Alaska, authorized pursuant to section 
116 of the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (123 Stat. 2851) the 
Secretary may consider the North Slope Borough to be 
in compliance with section 402(a) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 701b–12(a)) on 
adoption by the North Slope Borough Assembly of a flood-
plain management plan to reduce the impacts of flood 
events in the immediate floodplain area of the project, if 
the plan— 
(1) was developed in consultation with the Sec-
retary and the Administrator of the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency in accordance with the
256 
guidelines developed under section 402(c) of such 
Act; and 
(2) is approved by the Secretary. 
SEC. 315. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 142 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1976 (90 Stat. 2930; 100 Stat. 4158) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting 
‘‘(a) The Secretary’’; 
(2) by inserting ‘‘, Contra Costa,’’ before ‘‘and 
Solano’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL PURPOSES.—In carrying out sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall— 
‘‘(1) include the ocean shorelines of each coun-
ty; 
‘‘(2) with respect to the bay and ocean shore-
lines of each county— 
‘‘(A) investigate measures to adapt to ris-
ing sea levels; 
‘‘(B) consider the needs of economically 
disadvantaged communities within the study 
area, including identification of areas in which 
infrastructure for transportation, wastewater, 
housing, and other economic assets of such
257 
communities are most vulnerable to flood or 
shoreline risks; and 
‘‘(C) to the maximum extent practicable, 
consider the use of natural features or nature- 
based features and the beneficial use of dredged 
materials; and 
‘‘(3) with respect to the bay and ocean shore-
lines, and streams running to the bay and ocean 
shorelines, of each county, investigate the effects of 
proposed flood or shoreline protection, coastal storm 
risk reduction, environmental infrastructure, and 
other measures or improvements on— 
‘‘(A) the local economy, including recre-
ation; 
‘‘(B) aquatic ecosystem restoration, en-
hancement, or expansion efforts or opportuni-
ties; 
‘‘(C) public infrastructure protection and 
improvement; 
‘‘(D) stormwater runoff capacity and con-
trol measures, including those that may miti-
gate flooding; 
‘‘(E) erosion of beaches and coasts; and 
‘‘(F) any other measures or improvements 
relevant to adapting to rising sea levels.’’.
258 
SEC. 316. SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) SANTA
ANA
CREEK, INCLUDING
SANTIAGO 
CREEK.— 
(1) MODIFICATION.—The project for flood con-
trol, Santa Ana River Mainstem Project, including 
Santiago Creek, California, authorized by section 
401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (100 Stat. 4113; 101 Stat. 1329–111; 104 
Stat. 4611; 110 Stat. 3713; 121 Stat. 1115), is 
modified to require the Secretary to treat construc-
tion of the Santiago Creek Channel as a separable 
element of the project. 
(2) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary may not con-
struct the Santiago Creek Channel unless such con-
struction minimizes the impacts to existing trees in, 
or adjacent to, the Santiago Creek Channel. 
(3) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
subsection shall affect the authorization for other 
portions of the project described in paragraph (1). 
(4) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection: 
(A) SANTIAGO
CREEK
CHANNEL.—The 
term ‘‘Santiago Creek Channel’’ means the por-
tion of the project for flood control, Santa Ana 
River Mainstem Project, including Santiago 
Creek, California, authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of
259 
1986 (100 Stat. 4113; 101 Stat. 1329–111; 
104 Stat. 4611; 110 Stat. 3713; 121 Stat. 
1115), consisting of Santiago Creek down-
stream of the I–5 Interstate Highway to the 
confluence with the Santa Ana River. 
(B) SEPARABLE
ELEMENT.—The term 
‘‘separable element’’ has the meaning given 
such term in section 103 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2213). 
(b) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall provide the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 
the Senate with an update on implementation of the 
project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, 
including Santiago Creek, California, authorized by 
section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113; 101 Stat. 1329–111; 
104 Stat. 4611; 110 Stat. 3713; 121 Stat. 1115). 
(2) SPECIFICATIONS.—In providing the update 
required under paragraph (1), the Secretary is di-
rected to provide specific information on—
260 
(A) efforts by the Secretary and the non- 
Federal interest for the project to acquire the 
lands or interests in lands necessary to imple-
ment the project; 
(B) the status of potential reimbursement 
requests by the non-Federal interest for such 
lands or interests; and 
(C) the status of ongoing requests by the 
non-Federal interest for approval by the Sec-
retary of pending land (or interest in land) ap-
praisals and litigation settlements associated 
with such lands or interests in lands. 
SEC. 317. FAULKNER ISLAND, CONNECTICUT. 
Section 527 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3767) is amended by striking 
‘‘$4,500,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$8,000,000’’. 
SEC. 318. BROADKILL BEACH, DELAWARE. 
The project for hurricane and storm damage risk re-
duction, Delaware Beneficial Use of Dredged Material for 
the Delaware River, Delaware, authorized by section 
401(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 
(134 Stat. 2736; 136 Stat. 3788) is modified to include 
the project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
Delaware Bay coastline, Delaware and New Jersey– 
Broadkill Beach, Delaware, authorized by section
261 
101(a)(11) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 275). 
SEC. 319. FEDERAL TRIANGLE AREA, WASHINGTON, DIS-
TRICT OF COLUMBIA. 
In carrying out the feasibility study for the project 
for flood risk management, Federal Triangle Area, Wash-
ington, District of Columbia, authorized by section 
8201(a)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2022 (136 Stat. 3745), the Secretary may accept and ex-
pend funds contributed by other Federal agencies within 
the study area. 
SEC. 320. WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT. 
Section 8146(d) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 (40 U.S.C. 9501 note; 136 Stat. 3729) is 
amended— 
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘Water and 
Sewer Authority’’ after ‘‘District of Columbia’’; and 
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘Fairfax 
County’’ and inserting ‘‘the Fairfax County Water 
Authority’’. 
SEC. 321. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA, WASH-
INGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MARY-
LAND, AND VIRGINIA. 
The Federal share of the cost of the feasibility study 
for the project for water supply, Washington, District of
262 
Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia, authorized by section 
8201(a)(14) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2022 (136 Stat. 3745) shall be 100 percent. 
SEC. 322. NORTHERN ESTUARIES ECOSYSTEM RESTORA-
TION, FLORIDA. 
Section 8215(b) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2022 is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(6) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of 
the cost of carrying out paragraph (1) shall be 100 
percent.’’. 
SEC. 323. NEW SAVANNAH BLUFF LOCK AND DAM, GEORGIA 
AND SOUTH CAROLINA. 
Section 1319(c) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1703; 136 Stat. 3792) is amend-
ed— 
(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as fol-
lows: 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Project is modified to include— 
‘‘(A) full repair of the New Savannah 
Bluff Lock and Dam structure; 
‘‘(B) modification of the structure such 
that the structure is able to maintain a stable 
pool with the same daily average elevation as is
263 
achieved by the existing structure, as measured 
at both the United States Geological Survey 
Gage 02196999, located at the New Savannah 
Bluff Lock and Dam, and the United States 
Geological Survey Gage 02196670, located in 
the vicinity of the Fifth Street Bridge, Augusta, 
Georgia, which at the New Savannah Bluff 
Lock and Dam is between 114.5 and 115 feet 
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 
(NGVD29); 
‘‘(C) construction of a fish passage struc-
ture as recommended in the report of the Chief 
of Engineers for the Project, dated August 17, 
2012, or such other Project feature that appro-
priately mitigates impacts to fish habitat caused 
by the Project without removing the dam; and 
‘‘(D) conveyance by the Secretary to Au-
gusta-Richmond County, Georgia, of the park 
and recreation area adjacent to the New Savan-
nah Bluff Lock and Dam, without consider-
ation.’’; 
(2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the 
following: 
‘‘(C) CEILING.—The costs of construction 
to be paid by the Georgia Ports Authority as a
264 
non-Federal interest for the Project for the 
modifications authorized under paragraph (1) 
shall not exceed the costs that would be paid by 
such non-Federal interest for construction of 
the fish passage structure recommended in the 
report of the Chief of Engineers for the Project, 
dated August 17, 2012.’’; and 
(3) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘the cost 
sharing of the Project as provided by law’’ and in-
serting ‘‘the cost sharing of the fish passage struc-
ture as recommended in the report of the Chief of 
Engineers for the Project, dated August 17, 2012’’. 
SEC. 324. DILLARD ROAD, PATOKA LAKE, INDIANA. 
(a) TRANSFER AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary is au-
thorized to transfer, without consideration, to the State 
of Indiana, all right, title, and interest of the United 
States in and to the real property interests described in 
subsection (b). 
(b) PROPERTY.—The real property interests to be 
transferred under this section are any easements on the 
approximately 11.85 acres of land associated with Dillard 
Road, located in Patoka Township, Crawford County, In-
diana, that is subject to the Department of the Army li-
cense granted to the State of Indiana numbered
265 
DACW27–3–22–690, as described in Exhibit A of such 
license, including improvements on that land. 
(c) DISPOSAL.—The Secretary may, under sub-
chapter III of chapter 5 of subtitle I of title 40, United 
States Code, dispose of any portion of the real property 
interests described in subsection (b) of which the State 
of Indiana does not accept transfer. 
(d) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines that 
the land described in subsection (b) ceases to be used as 
a road, all right, title, and interest in and to the real prop-
erty interests shall revert, at the discretion of the Sec-
retary, to the United States. 
(e) COSTS OF TRANSFER.—The State of Indiana 
shall be responsible for all reasonable and necessary costs, 
including real estate transaction and environmental docu-
mentation costs, associated with the transfer under this 
section. 
(f) LIABILITY.—The State of Indiana shall hold the 
United States harmless from any liability with respect to 
activities carried out, on or after the date of the convey-
ance, on the land described in subsection (b). 
(g) ADDITIONAL TERMS
AND CONDITIONS.—The 
Secretary may require that the transfer under this section 
be subject to such additional terms and conditions as the
266 
Secretary considers necessary and appropriate to protect 
the interests of the United States. 
SEC. 325. LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LOUISIANA. 
(a) SCOPING OF EVALUATION.— 
(1) STUDY.—Not later than June 30, 2025, the 
Secretary shall complete a study of the following re-
lating to the covered project: 
(A) Any project modifications undertaken 
by the non-Federal interest for the covered 
project since 2005 not constructed in accord-
ance with section 14 of the Act of March 3, 
1899 (33 U.S.C. 408). 
(B) Current elevations required for the 
covered project to meet the 100-year level of 
risk reduction. 
(C) Whether project modifications under-
taken by the non-Federal interest for the cov-
ered project since 2005 were injurious to the 
covered project or the public. 
(D) Any deviations from design guidelines 
acceptable for the covered project. 
(E) Improvements needed for the covered 
project to address any deficiencies according to 
current design guidelines of the Corps of Engi-
267 
neers district in which the covered project is lo-
cated. 
(F) A re-evaluation of project economics. 
(2) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after 
completing the study under paragraph (1), the Sec-
retary shall submit to Congress a report that in-
cludes— 
(A) the results of the study; 
(B) a recommendation for a pathway into 
a systemwide improvement plan created pursu-
ant to section 5(c)(2) of the Act of August 18, 
1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n(c)) (as amended by this 
Act); and 
(C) recommendations for improvement to 
the covered project to address any deficiencies. 
(b) COVERED PROJECT DEFINED.—In this section, 
the term ‘‘covered project’’ means the Larose to Golden 
Meadow project, Louisiana, authorized by the Flood Con-
trol Act of 1965 as the Grand Isle and vicinity project. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$3,000,000.
268 
SEC. 326. MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOUISIANA. 
Section 1001(24) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1053) is amended by adding 
at the end the following: 
‘‘(C) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project described in subparagraph (A) 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— 
‘‘(i) is integral to the project; 
‘‘(ii) complies with all applicable Fed-
eral laws, regulations, and policies that 
were in place at the time the work was 
completed; and 
‘‘(iii) notwithstanding the date de-
scribed in this subparagraph, is otherwise 
in compliance with the requirements of sec-
tion 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b).’’. 
SEC. 327. PORT FOURCHON BELLE PASS CHANNEL, LOU-
ISIANA. 
(a) STUDY REQUEST.—If the non-Federal interest 
for the Port Fourchon project requests to undertake a fea-
sibility study for a modification to the project under sec-
269 
tion 203(a)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (as amended by this Act), the Secretary shall 
provide to the non-Federal interest, not later than 30 days 
after the date on which the Secretary receives such re-
quest, a determination in accordance with section 
203(a)(1)(3) of such Act (as amended by this Act). 
(b) NOTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL ANALYSES AND 
REVIEWS.—Not later than 30 days after receiving a feasi-
bility study for modification to the Port Fourchon project 
submitted by the non-Federal interest for the project 
under section 203(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231(a)), the Secretary shall— 
(1) review the study and determine, in accord-
ance with section 203(b)(3)(C) such Act (as amend-
ed by this Act), whether additional information is 
needed for the Secretary to perform the required 
analyses, reviews, and compliance processes; 
(2) provide the non-Federal interest with a 
comprehensive list of additional information needs, 
as applicable; and 
(3) if additional information is not needed, in-
form the non-Federal interest that the study submis-
sion is complete. 
(c) ANALYSIS, REVIEW, AND COMPLIANCE.—
270 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraphs (2) 
and (3), not later than 180 days after the Secretary 
receives the study for the Port Fourchon project de-
scribed in subsection (b), the Secretary shall com-
plete the analyses, review, and compliance processes 
for the project required under section 203(b) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986, issue a 
finding of no significant impact or a record of deci-
sion, and submit such finding or decision to the non- 
Federal interest. 
(2) EXCEPTION.—The Secretary may delay the 
issuance of the finding or record of decision required 
under paragraph (1) if— 
(A) the Secretary has not received nec-
essary information or approvals from another 
entity, including the non-Federal interest, in a 
manner that affects the ability of the Secretary 
to meet any requirements under State, local, or 
Federal law; or 
(B) significant new information or cir-
cumstances, including a major modification to 
an aspect of the Port Fourchon project, re-
quires additional analysis by the Secretary. 
(3) NOTIFICATION
OF
ADDITIONAL
TIME.—If 
the Secretary determines that more than 180 days
271 
will be required to carry out paragraph (1), the Sec-
retary shall notify the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 
the Senate, and the non-Federal interest and de-
scribe the basis for requiring additional time. 
(d) PORT FOURCHON PROJECT DEFINED.—In this 
section, the term ‘‘Port Fourchon project’’ means the 
project for navigation, Port Fourchon Belle Pass Channel, 
Louisiana, authorized by section 403(a)(4) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2020 (134 Stat. 2743). 
SEC. 328. UPPER ST. ANTHONY FALLS LOCK AND DAM, MIN-
NESOTA. 
The Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam (as such 
term is defined in section 2010 of the Water Resources 
Reform and Development Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1270; 
136 Stat. 3795)) is modified to remove navigation as an 
authorized purpose. 
SEC. 329. MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, MISSOURI. 
Section 111 of the Energy and Water Development 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 (123 Stat. 
607) is amended by striking ‘‘$7,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$65,000,000’’.
272 
SEC. 330. TABLE ROCK LAKE, MISSOURI AND ARKANSAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall permit the 
ongoing presence of an eligible structure at the Table 
Rock Lake project. 
(b) PRIVATELY OWNED SEWER AND SEPTIC SYS-
TEM.—The Secretary shall permit the ongoing presence 
of an eligible structure that is a privately owned sewer 
and septic system at the Table Rock Lake project until— 
(1) the abandonment of such system by the 
holder of a license for right-of-way for such system; 
or 
(2) the failure of such system. 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) ELIGIBLE STRUCTURE.—The term ‘‘eligible 
structure’’ means a privately owned sewer and septic 
system for which a license for right-of-way has been 
provided by the Secretary and is in effect on the 
date of enactment of this Act, dwelling unit, shed, 
retaining wall, deck, patio, gazebo, driveway, or 
fence— 
(A) that is located on fee land or land sub-
ject to a flowage easement; and 
(B) that does not impact the reservoir level 
or pose a failure risk to the dam of the Table 
Rock Lake project.
273 
(2) FEE LAND.—The term ‘‘fee land’’ means 
the land acquired in fee title by the United States 
for the Table Rock Lake project. 
(3) TABLE ROCK LAKE PROJECT.—The term 
‘‘Table Rock Lake project’’ means the Table Rock 
Lake project of the Corps of Engineers, located in 
Missouri and Arkansas, authorized as one of the 
multipurpose reservoir projects in the White River 
Basin by section 4 of the Act of June 28, 1938 (52 
Stat. 1218). 
SEC. 331. MISSOURI RIVER MITIGATION, MISSOURI, KAN-
SAS, IOWA, AND NEBRASKA. 
(a) ACQUISITION OF LANDS.—In acquiring any land, 
or interests in land, to satisfy the total number of acres 
required for the covered project, the Secretary— 
(1) may only acquire land, or an interest in 
land, that— 
(A) is on the riverward side of levees; or 
(B) will contribute to future flood risk re-
siliency projects; 
(2) may only acquire land, or an interest in 
land, with the approval of the Governor of the State 
in which the land is located; and 
(3) may not acquire land, or an interest in land, 
by eminent domain.
274 
(b) APPLICATION OF LANDS.—The Secretary shall 
apply all covered land toward the number of acres required 
for the covered project in accordance with section 334 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
306; 136 Stat. 3799). 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) COVERED LAND.—The term ‘‘covered land’’ 
means any land or interests in land that— 
(A) is acquired by a Federal agency other 
than the Corps of Engineers; 
(B) is located within the meander belt of 
the lower Missouri River; and 
(C) the Secretary, in consultation with the 
head of any Federal agency that has acquired 
the land or interest in land, determines meets 
the purposes of the covered project. 
(2) COVERED
PROJECT.—The term ‘‘covered 
project’’ means the project for mitigation of fish and 
wildlife losses, Missouri River Bank Stabilization 
and Navigation Project, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and 
Nebraska, authorized by section 601(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
4143; 113 Stat. 306; 121 Stat. 1155; 136 Stat. 
2395).
275 
SEC. 332. NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR AND TRIB-
UTARIES, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The study for flood and storm 
damage reduction for the New York and New Jersey Har-
bor and Tributaries project, authorized by the Act of June 
15, 1955 (chapter 140, 69 Stat. 132, 134 Stat. 2676) and 
being carried out pursuant to the Disaster Relief Appro-
priations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113–2), is modified to 
require the Secretary, upon the request of the non-Federal 
interest for the project, to include within the scope of such 
study an investigation of, and recommendations relating 
to, projects and activities to maximize the net public bene-
fits, including ecological benefits and societal benefits, 
from the reduction of the comprehensive flood risk within 
the geographic scope of the project from the isolated and 
compound effects of factors described in section 8106(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (33 
U.S.C. 2282g). 
(b) ASSOCIATED PROJECTS.—The Secretary is au-
thorized to carry out projects and activities recommended 
pursuant to subsection (a) if such projects and activities 
otherwise meet the criteria for projects carried out under 
a continuing authority program (as defined in section 
7001(c)) of the Water Resources Reform and Develop-
ment Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2282d(c)).