Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the
‘‘Water Resources Development Act of 2003’’.
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for
this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition of secretary.
TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS
Sec. 1001. Project authorizations.
Sec. 1002. Small projects for flood damage reduction.
Sec. 1003. Small projects for emergency streambank protection.
Sec. 1004. Small projects for navigation.
Sec. 1005. Small projects for improvement of the quality of the environment.
Sec. 1006. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 1007. Small projects for shoreline protection.
Sec. 1008. Small projects for snagging and sediment removal.
TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 2001. Annual passes for recreation.
Sec. 2002. Non-Federal contributions.
Sec. 2003. Harbor cost sharing.
Sec. 2004. Funding to process permits.
Sec. 2005. National shoreline erosion control development and demonstration
program.
Sec. 2006. Written agreement for water resources projects.
Sec. 2007. Assistance for remediation, restoration, and reuse.
Sec. 2008. Compilation of laws.
Sec. 2009. Dredged material disposal.
Sec. 2010. Wetlands mitigation.
Sec. 2011. Remote and subsistence harbors.
Sec. 2012. Beneficial uses of dredged material.
Sec. 2013. Cost sharing provisions for certain areas.
Sec. 2014. Revision of project partnership agreement.
Sec. 2015. Cost sharing.
Sec. 2016. Credit for work performed before partnership agreement.
Sec. 2017. Recreation user fee revenues.
Sec. 2018. Expedited actions for emergency flood damage reduction.
Sec. 2019. Watershed and river basin assessments.
Sec. 2020. Tribal partnership program.
Sec. 2021. Treatment of certain separable elements.
Sec. 2022. Prosecution of work.
Sec. 2023. Wildfire firefighting.
Sec. 2024. Credit for nonconstruction services.
Sec. 2025. Technical assistance.
Sec. 2026. Centers of specialized planning expertise.
Sec. 2027. Coordination and scheduling of Federal, State, and local actions.
Sec. 2028. Project streamlining.
Sec. 2029. Lakes program.
Sec. 2030. Mitigation for fish and wildlife losses.
Sec. 2031. Cooperative agreements.
Sec. 2032. Project planning.
Sec. 2033. Independent peer review.
Sec. 2034. Support of Army civil works program.
TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 3001. Cook Inlet, Alaska.
Sec. 3002. King Cove Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 3003. Sitka, Alaska.
Sec. 3004. Tatitlek, Alaska.
Sec. 3005. Nogales Wash and tributaries, Arizona.
Sec. 3006. Grand Prairie Region and Bayou Meto Basin, Arkansas.
Sec. 3007. Saint Francis Basin, Arkansas.
Sec. 3008. American and Sacramento Rivers, California.
Sec. 3009. Cache Creek Basin, California.
Sec. 3010. Grayson Creek/Murderer’s Creek, California.
Sec. 3011. John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel, Cali-
fornia.
Sec. 3012. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California.
Sec. 3013. Los Angeles Harbor, Los Angeles, California.
Sec. 3014. Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa River, California.
Sec. 3015. Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California.
Sec. 3016. Pinole Creek, California.
Sec. 3017. Prado Dam, California.
Sec. 3018. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California.
Sec. 3019. Sacramento River, Glenn-Colusa, California.
Sec. 3020. San Lorenzo River, California.
Sec. 3021. Upper Guadalupe River, California.
Sec. 3022. Walnut Creek Channel, California.
Sec. 3023. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California.
Sec. 3024. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California.
Sec. 3025. Brevard County, Florida.
Sec. 3026. Broward County and Hillsboro Inlet, Florida.
Sec. 3027. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Florida.
Sec. 3028. Jacksonville Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 3029. Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida.
Sec. 3030. Manatee Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 3031. Miami Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 3032. Tampa Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 3033. Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida.
Sec. 3034. Tampa Harbor-Cut B, Fflorida.
Sec. 3035. Little Wood River, Gooding, Idaho.
Sec. 3036. Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Illinois.
Sec. 3037. Hennepin-Hopper Lakes, Illinois.
Sec. 3038. Mississippi River and Big Muddy river, Illinois.
Sec. 3039. Spunky Bottoms, Illinois.
Sec. 3040. Emiquon, Illinois.
Sec. 3041. Little Calumet River, Indiana.
Sec. 3042. White River, Indiana.
Sec. 3043. Wolf Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 3044. Prestonsburg, Kentucky.
Sec. 3045. Amite River and tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge Parish
Watershed.
Sec. 3046. Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana.
Sec. 3047. Public access, Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana.
Sec. 3048. J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to Shreveport,
Louisiana.
Sec. 3049. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana.
Sec. 3050. New Orleans to Venice, Louisiana.
Sec. 3051. West Bank of the Mississippi River (East of Harvey Canal), Lou-
isiana.
Sec. 3052. Camp Ellis, Saco, Maine.
Sec. 3053. Union River, Maine.
Sec. 3054. Cass River, Spaulding Township, Michigan.
Sec. 3055. Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan.
Sec. 3056. Water Resources Institute, Muskegon, Michigan.
Sec. 3057. Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan.
Sec. 3058. Ada, Minnesota.
Sec. 3059. Duluth Harbor, Mcquade Road, Minnesota.
Sec. 3060. Grand Portage Harbor, Minnesota.
Sec. 3061. Granite Falls, Minnesota.
Sec. 3062. Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Sec. 3063. Red Lake River, Minnesota.
Sec. 3064. Silver Bay, Minnesota.
Sec. 3065. Taconite Harbor, Minnesota.
Sec. 3066. Two Harbors, Minnesota.
Sec. 3067. Deer Island, Harrison County, Mississippi.
Sec. 3068. Bois Brule Drainage and Levee District, Missouri.
Sec. 3069. Sand Creek Watershed, Wahoo, Nebraska.
Sec. 3070. Alamogordo, New Mexico.
Sec. 3071. Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York.
Sec. 3072. Times Beach, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 3073. Port of New York and New Jersey, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 3074. New York state Canal System.
Sec. 3075. Arcadia Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 3076. Willamette River Temperature Control, Mckenzie Subbasin, Oregon.
Sec. 3077. French Creek, Union City Dam, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3078. Lackawanna River at Olyphant, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3079. Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3080. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3081. Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3082. Solomon’s Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3083. South Central Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3084. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 3085. Little Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, Tennessee.
Sec. 3086. Cedar Bayou, Texas.
Sec. 3087. Lake Kemp, Texas.
Sec. 3088. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas.
Sec. 3089. North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas.
Sec. 3090. Proctor Lake, Texas.
Sec. 3091. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas.
Sec. 3092. Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia.
Sec. 3093. Roanoke River Upper Basin, Virginia.
Sec. 3094. Blair and Sitcum Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington.
Sec. 3095. Greenbrier River Basin, West Virginia.
Sec. 3096. Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin.
Sec. 3097. Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoirs.
Sec. 3098. Continuation of project authorizations.
Sec. 3099. Project reauthorizations.
Sec. 3100. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 3101. Land conveyances.
Sec. 3102. Extinguishment of reversionary interests and use restrictions.
Sec. 3103. Land exchange, disposal and acquisition of lands, Allatoona Lake,
Georgia.
TITLE IV—STUDIES
Sec. 4001. John Glenn Great Lakes basin program.
Sec. 4002. Choctawhatchee, Pea, and Yellow Rivers Watershed, Alabama.
Sec. 4003. St. George Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 4004. Susitna River, Alaska.
Sec. 4005. Searcy County, Arkansas.
Sec. 4006. Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway, Illinois, Iowa, Min-
nesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin.
Sec. 4007. Hamilton, California.
Sec. 4008. Napa River, St. Helena, California.
Sec. 4009. Oceanside, California.
Sec. 4010. Sacramento River, California.
Sec. 4011. San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California.
Sec. 4012. Tybee Island, Georgia.
Sec. 4013. Calumet Harbor, Illinois.
Sec. 4014. Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 4015. South Branch, Chicago River, Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 4016. Paducah, Kentucky.
Sec. 4017. Bastrop-Morehouse Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 4018. West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 4019. Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts.
Sec. 4020. City of Mackinac Island, Michigan.
Sec. 4021. Northeast Mississippi.
Sec. 4022. Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico.
Sec. 4023. Hudson-Raritan Estuary, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 4024. Sac and Fox Nation, Oklahoma.
Sec. 4025. Sutherlin, Oregon.
Sec. 4026. Tillamook Bay and Bar, Oregon.
Sec. 4027. Ecosystem restoration and fish passage improvements, Oregon.
Sec. 4028. Northeastern Pennsylvania aquatic ecosystem restoration and pro-
tection.
Sec. 4029. Georgetown and Williamsburg Counties, South Carolina.
Sec. 4030. Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay, Texas.
Sec. 4031. Grand County and Moab, Utah.
Sec. 4032. Chehalis River Basin, Washington.
Sec. 4033. Sprague, Lincoln County, Washington.
Sec. 4034. Monongahela River Basin, Northern West Virginia.
Sec. 4035. Wauwatosa, Wisconsin.
Sec. 4036. Lake Erie Dredged Material Disposal Sites.
TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Sec. 5001. Maintenance of navigation channels.
Sec. 5002. Watershed management.
Sec. 5003. Dam safety.
Sec. 5004. Structural integrity evaluations.
Sec. 5005. Flood mitigation priority areas.
Sec. 5006. Additional assistance for authorized projects.
Sec. 5007. Expedited completion of reports and construction for certain
projects.
Sec. 5008. Expedited completion of reports for certain projects.
Sec. 5009. Southeastern water resources assessment.
Sec. 5010. Upper Mississippi River environmental management program.
Sec. 5011. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers enhancement project.
Sec. 5012. Membership of Missouri River Trust.
Sec. 5013. Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 5014. Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River basins.
Sec. 5015. Chesapeake Bay environmental restoration and protection program.
Sec. 5016. Montgomery, Alabama.
Sec. 5017. Pinhook Creek, Huntsville, Alabama.
Sec. 5018. Alaska.
Sec. 5019. Akutan Small Boat Harbor, Alaska.
Sec. 5020. Fort Yukon, Alaska.
Sec. 5021. Lowell Creek Tunnel, Seward, Alaska.
Sec. 5022. St. Herman and St. Paul Harbors, Kodiak, Alaska.
Sec. 5023. Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas.
Sec. 5024. Helena and Vicinity, Arkansas.
Sec. 5025. Loomis Landing, Arkansas.
Sec. 5026. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation project, Arkansas and
Oklahoma.
Sec. 5027. St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri.
Sec. 5028. Cambria, California.
Sec. 5029. Contra Costa Canal, Oakley and Knightsen, California; Mallard
Slough, Pittsburg, California.
Sec. 5030. East San Joaquin County, California.
Sec. 5031. Placer and El Dorado Counties, California.
Sec. 5032. Sacramento Area, California.
Sec. 5033. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California.
Sec. 5034. San Francisco, California.
Sec. 5035. San Francisco, California, Waterfront Area.
Sec. 5036. San Pablo Bay Watershed and Suisun Marsh Ecosystem Restora-
tion.
Sec. 5037. Stockton, California.
Sec. 5038. Upper Klamath Basin, California.
Sec. 5039. Charles Hervey Townshend Breakwater, Connecticut.
Sec. 5040. Everglades restoration, Florida.
Sec. 5041. Florida Keys water quality improvements.
Sec. 5042. Lake Worth, Florida.
Sec. 5043. Lake Lanier, Georgia.
Sec. 5044. Riley Creek recreation area, Idaho.
Sec. 5045. Reconstruction of Illinois flood protection projects.
Sec. 5046. Cook County, Illinois.
Sec. 5047. Kaskaskia River basin, Illinois, restoration.
Sec. 5048. Natalie Creek, Midlothian and Oak Forest, Illinois.
Sec. 5049. Peoria riverfront development, Peoria, Illinois.
Sec. 5050. Illinois River basin restoration.
Sec. 5051. Southwest Illinois.
Sec. 5052. Calumet region, Indiana.
Sec. 5053. Rathbun Lake, Iowa.
Sec. 5054. Cumberland River Basin, Kentucky.
Sec. 5055. Mayfield Creek and tributaries, Kentucky.
Sec. 5056. North Fork, Kentucky River, Breathitt County, Kentucky.
Sec. 5057. Southern and Eastern Kentucky.
Sec. 5058. Coastal Louisiana ecosystem protection and restoration.
Sec. 5059. Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Sec. 5060. Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana.
Sec. 5061. West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 5062. Chesapeake Bay shoreline, Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and
Delaware.
Sec. 5063. Delmarva conservation corridor, Maryland.
Sec. 5064. Detroit River, Michigan.
Sec. 5065. Oakland County, Michigan.
Sec. 5066. St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan.
Sec. 5067. Crookston, Minnesota.
Sec. 5068. Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota.
Sec. 5069. Northeastern Minnesota.
Sec. 5070. Desoto County, Mississippi.
Sec. 5071. Harrison, Hancock, and Jackson Counties, Mississippi.
Sec. 5072. Mississippi River, Missouri, and Illinois.
Sec. 5073. St. Louis, Missouri.
Sec. 5074. Delaware River, Trenton, New Jersey.
Sec. 5075. Hackensack Meadowlands area, New Jersey.
Sec. 5076. Atlantic Coast of New York.
Sec. 5077. College Point, New York City, New York.
Sec. 5078. Flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New York.
Sec. 5079. Gateway Point, North Tonawanda, New York.
Sec. 5080. Little Neck Bay, Village of Kings Point, New York.
Sec. 5081. Onondaga Lake, New York.
Sec. 5082. Times Beach Dike, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 5083. John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir, North Carolina.
Sec. 5084. Stanly County, North Carolina.
Sec. 5085. Central Riverfront Park, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Sec. 5086. Piedmont Lake Dam, Ohio.
Sec. 5087. Ohio.
Sec. 5088. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 5089. Columbia River, Oregon.
Sec. 5090. Eugene, Oregon.
Sec. 5091. John Day Lock and Dam, Lake Umatilla, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 5092. Lowell, Oregon.
Sec. 5093. Hagerman’s Run, Williamsport, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 5094. Northeast Pennsylvania.
Sec. 5095. Susquehannock Campground access road, Raystown Lake, Pennsyl-
vania.
Sec. 5096. Upper Susquehanna River basin, Pennsylvania and New York.
Sec. 5097. Washington, Greene, Westmoreland, and Fayette Counties, Pennsyl-
vania.
Sec. 5098. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Sec. 5099. Beaufort and Jasper Counties, South Carolina.
Sec. 5100. Cooper River, South Carolina.
Sec. 5101. Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Carolina.
Sec. 5102. Upper Big Sioux River, Watertown, South Dakota.
Sec. 5103. Fritz Landing, Tennessee.
Sec. 5104. J. Percy Priest Dam and Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Tennessee.
Sec. 5105. Memphis, Tennessee.
Sec. 5106. Town Creek, Lenoir City, Tennessee.
Sec. 5107. East Tennessee.
Sec. 5108. Tennessee River partnership.
Sec. 5109. Clear Creek and tributaries, Harris, Galveston, and Brazoria Coun-
ties, Texas.
Sec. 5110. Harris County, Texas.
Sec. 5111. Harris Gully, Harris County, Texas.
Sec. 5112. Onion Creek, Texas.
Sec. 5113. Pelican Island, Texas.
Sec. 5114. Front Royal, Virginia.
Sec. 5115. Richmond National Battlefield Park, Richmond, Virginia.
Sec. 5116. Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington.
Sec. 5117. Chehalis River, Centralia, Washington.
Sec. 5118. Hamilton Island Campground, Washington.
Sec. 5119. Puget Island, Washington.
Sec. 5120. Bluestone, West Virginia.
Sec. 5121. West Virginia and Pennsylvania flood control.
Sec. 5122. Lower Kanawha River Basin, West Virginia.
Sec. 5123. Central West Virginia.
Sec. 5124. Southern West Virginia.
Sec. 5125. Construction of flood control projects by non-Federal interests.
Sec. 5126. Bridge authorization.
Sec. 5127. Additional assistance for critical projects.
Sec. 5128. Use of Federal hopper dredge fleet.
Sec. 5129. Wage surveys.
Sec. 5130. Purchase of American-made equipment and products.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Sec-
retary of the Army.
TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES
PROJECTS
SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.
(a) PROJECTS WITH CHIEF’S REPORTS.—Except as
otherwise provided in this section, the following projects
for water resources development and conservation and
other purposes are authorized to be carried out by the Sec-
retary substantially in accordance with the plans, and sub-
ject to the conditions, described in the respective reports
designated in this section:
(1) TANQUE
VERDE
CREEK, ARIZONA.—The
project for environmental restoration, Tanque Verde
Creek, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $4,878,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $3,170,700 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,707,300.
(2) 
AMERICAN
RIVER
WATERSHED, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood
damage reduction and environmental restora-
tion, American River Watershed, California: Re-
port of the Chief of Engineers, dated November
5, 2002, at a total cost of $257,300,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $201,200,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $56,100,000;
except that the Secretary is authorized to ac-
cept funds from State and local governments
and other Federal agencies for the purpose of
constructing a permanent bridge instead of the
temporary bridge described in the recommended
plan and may construct such permanent bridge
if all additional costs for such bridge, above the
$36,000,000 provided for in the recommended
plan for bridge construction, are provided by
such governments or agencies.
(B) EXPEDITING
BRIDGE
DESIGN
AND
CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary, in cooperation
with appropriate non-Federal interests, shall
immediately commence appropriate studies for,
and the design of, a permanent bridge (includ-
ing an evaluation of potential impacts of bridge
construction on traffic patterns and identifica-
tion of alternatives for mitigating such impacts)
and, upon execution of a cost-sharing agree-
ment with such non-Federal interests, shall pro-
ceed to construction of the bridge as soon as
practicable; except that such studies, design,
and construction shall not adversely affect the
schedule of design or construction of authorized
projects for flood damage reduction.
(3) PINE
FLAT
DAM
AND
RESERVOIR, CALI-
FORNIA.—The project for environmental restoration,
Pine Flat Dam and Reservoir, Fresno County, Cali-
fornia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July
19, 2002, at a total cost of $38,480,000, with an es-
timated Federal cost of $24,930,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $13,550,000.
(4) SOUTH
PLATTE
RIVER, DENVER, COLO-
RADO.—The project for environmental restoration
Denver County Reach, South Platte River, Denver,
Colorado: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated
May 16, 2003, at a total cost of $17,997,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $11,698,000 and an es-
timated non-Federal cost of $6,299,000.
(5) 
PEORIA
RIVERFRONT, 
ILLINOIS.—The
project for environmental restoration, Peoria River-
front, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated July 28, 2003, at a total cost of $15,182,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $9,868,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,314,000.
(6) MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOU-
ISIANA.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for hurri-
cane and storm damage reduction, Morganza to
the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana: Reports of the
Chief of Engineers, dated August 23, 2002, and
July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $719,000,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $467,000,000
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of
$252,000,000.
(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of work carried out by the non-
Federal interest for interim flood protection
after March 31, 1989, if the Secretary deter-
mines that the work is integral to the project.
(7) SMITH
ISLAND, MARYLAND.—The project
for environmental restoration and protection, Smith
Island, Maryland: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated October 29, 2001, at a total cost of
$8,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$5,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$2,800,000.
(8) SOUTH RIVER, NEW JERSEY.—The project
for hurricane and storm damage reduction and envi-
ronmental restoration, South River, New Jersey: Re-
port of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 22, 2003,
at a total cost of $103,268,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $67,124,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $36,144,000.
(9) CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, CORPUS
CHRISTI, TEXAS.—The project for navigation and
environmental restoration, Corpus Christi Ship
Channel, Texas, Channel Improvement Project: Re-
port of the Chief of Engineers dated June 2, 2003,
at a total cost of $153,808,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $73,554,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $80,254,000.
(10) MATAGORDA BAY, TEXAS.—The project for
navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Brazos
River to Port O’Connor, Matagorda Bay Re-Route,
Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated De-
cember 4, 2002, at a total cost of $14,515,000. The
costs of construction of the project are to be paid 1⁄2
from amounts appropriated from the general fund of
the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated
from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
(11) 
RIVERSIDE
OXBOW, 
FORT
WORTH,
TEXAS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for envi-
ronmental restoration, Riverside Oxbow, Fort
Worth, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers
dated May 29, 2003, at a total cost of
$22,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$9,180,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $13,020,000.
(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the
project the cost of design and construction work
carried out on the Beach Street Dam and asso-
ciated features by the non-Federal interest be-
fore the date of the partnership agreement for
the project if the Secretary determines that the
work is integral to the project.
(12) DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA.—
The project for the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Bridge Replacement, Deep Creek, Chesapeake, Vir-
ginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March
3, 2003, at a total cost of $22,178,000.
(b) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO FINAL REPORT.—The
following projects for water resources development and
conservation and other purposes are authorized to be car-
ried out by the Secretary substantially in accordance with
the plans, and subject to the conditions, recommended in
a final report of the Chief of Engineers if a favorable re-
port of the Chief is completed not later than December
31, 2003:
(1) BEL MARIN KEYS UNIT V, CALIFORNIA.—
The project for environmental restoration, Bel Marin
Keys Unit V, California, at a total cost of
$133,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$100,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$33,400,000.
(2) 
IMPERIAL
BEACH, 
CALIFORNIA.—The
project for storm damage reduction, Imperial Beach,
California, at a total cost of $11,922,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $7,630,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $4,292,000.
(3) GWYNNS FALLS, MARYLAND.—The project
for environmental restoration, Gwynns Falls, Mary-
land, at a total cost of $14,660,000.
(4) MANASQUAN TO BARNEGAT INLETS, NEW
JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm dam-
age reduction, Manasquan to Barnegat Inlets, New
Jersey, at a total cost of $60,649,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $39,422,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $21,227,000.
(5) CENTRALIA, 
CHEHALIAS
RIVER, 
WASH-
INGTON.—The project for flood damage reduction,
Centralia, Chehalias River, Washington, at a total
cost of $86,872,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $56,467,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $30,405,000.
SEC. 1002. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUC-
TION.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a
study for each of the following projects and, if the Sec-
retary determines that a project is feasible, may carry out
the project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act
of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s):
(1) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.—
Project for flood damage reduction, Cache River
basin, Grubbs, Arkansas.
(2) SANTA
ANA
RIVER
BASIN
AND
ORANGE
COUNTY STREAMS, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood
damage reduction, Santa Ana River basin and Or-
ange County streams, California.
(3) STONY
CREEK, OAK
LAWN, ILLINOIS.—
Project for flood damage reduction, Stony Creek,
Oak Lawn, Illinois.
(4) OLIVE HILL AND VICINITY, KENTUCKY.—
Project for flood damage reduction, Olive Hill and
vicinity, Kentucky.
(5) NASHUA
RIVER, FITCHBURG, MASSACHU-
SETTS.—Project for flood damage reduction, Nashua
River, Fitchburg, Massachusetts.
(6) SAGINAW RIVER, HAMILTON DAM, FLINT,
MICHIGAN.—Project for flood damage reduction,
Saginaw River, Hamilton Dam, Flint, Michigan.
(7) MARSH
CREEK, MINNESOTA.—Project for
flood damage reduction, Marsh Creek, Minnesota.
(8) ROSEAU
RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA.—
Project for flood damage reduction, Roseau River,
Roseau, Minnesota.
(9) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER,
BORUP, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage re-
duction, South Branch of the Wild Rice River,
Borup, Minnesota.
(10) TWIN VALLEY LAKE, WILD RICE RIVER,
MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage reduction,
Twin Valley Lake, Wild Rice River, Minnesota.
(11) BLACKSNAKE
CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MIS-
SOURI.—Project for flood damage reduction, Black-
snake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri.
(12) MCKEEL BROOK, NEW JERSEY.—Project
for flood damage reduction, McKeel Brook, New
Jersey.
(13) EAST RIVER, SILVER BEACH, NEW YORK
CITY, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, East River, Silver Beach, New York City, New
York.
(14) RAMAPO RIVER, TOWN OF MONROE AND
VILLAGES
OF
MONROE, KIRYAS
JOEL, AND
HAR-
RIMAN, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage re-
duction, Ramapo River, Town of Monroe and Vil-
lages of Monroe, Kiryas Joel, and Harriman, New
York.
(15) LITTLE
MILL
CREEK, 
SOUTHAMPTON,
PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Little Mill Creek, Southampton, Pennsylvania.
(16) LITTLE NESHAMINY CREEK, WARRENTON,
PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Little Neshaminy Creek, Warrenton, Pennsyl-
vania.
(17) SURFSIDE
BEACH, SOUTH
CAROLINA.—
Project for flood damage reduction, Surfside Beach
and vicinity, South Carolina.
(b) SPECIAL RULES.—In carrying out the project for
flood damage reduction, South Branch of the Wild Rice
River, Borup, Minnesota, referred to in subsection (a)(9)
the Secretary may consider national ecosystem restoration
benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project
and shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in
the financing of the project in accordance with section
903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the Secretary’s evalua-
tion indicates that applying such section is necessary to
implement the project.
SEC. 
1003. 
SMALL 
PROJECTS 
FOR 
EMERGENCY
STREAMBANK PROTECTION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that
a project is feasible, may carry out the project under sec-
tion 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C.
701r):
(1) OUACHITA
AND
BLACK
RIVERS, ARKAN-
SAS.—Project for emergency streambank protection,
Ouachita and Black Rivers, Arkansas.
(2) MELVINA
DITCH, CHICAGO
RIDGE, ILLI-
NOIS.—Project for emergency streambank protection
for the east side of Melvina Ditch in the vicinity of
96th Street and Nashville Avenue, Chicago Ridge,
Illinois.
(3) RED LAKE FALLS, MINNESOTA.—Project for
emergency streambank protection, Red Lake River,
Red Lake Falls, Minnesota.
(4) MIDDLE
FORK
GRAND
RIVER, GENTRY
COUNTY, 
MISSOURI.—Project 
for 
emergency
streambank protection, Middle Fork Grand River,
Gentry County, Missouri.
(5) SHREWSBURY RIVER, RUMSON, NEW JER-
SEY.—Project for emergency streambank protection,
Shrewsbury River, Rumson, New Jersey.
(6) KOWAWESE
UNIQUE
AREA
AND
HUDSON
RIVER, NEW
WINDSOR, NEW
YORK.—Project for
emergency streambank protection, Kowawese Unique
Area and Hudson River, New Windsor, New York.
SEC. 1004. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that
a project is feasible, may carry out the project under sec-
tion 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C.
577):
(1) BLYTHEVILLE
COUNTY
HARBOR, ARKAN-
SAS.—Project for navigation, Blytheville County
Harbor, Arkansas.
(2) PALM BEACH HARBOR, FLORIDA.—Project
for navigation, Palm Beach Harbor, Florida.
(3) EVANSTON, ILLINOIS.—Project for naviga-
tion, Evanston, Illinois.
(4) MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
SHIP
CHANNEL, LOU-
ISIANA.—Project for navigation, Mississippi River
Ship Channel, Louisiana.
(5) AU SABLE RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for
navigation, Au Sable River in the vicinity of Oscoda,
Michigan.
(6) NIAGARA FRONTIER TRANSPORTATION AU-
THORITY
BOAT
HARBOR, BUFFALO, NEW
YORK.—
Project for navigation, Niagara Frontier Transpor-
tation Authority Boat Harbor, Buffalo, New York.
(7) WOODLAWN
MARINA, LACKAWANNA, NEW
YORK.—Project for navigation, Woodlawn Marina,
Lackawanna, New York.
(8) BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, WASH-
INGTON.—Project for navigation, Baker Bay and
Ilwaco Harbor, Washington.
SEC. 1005. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE
QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following
project and, if the Secretary determines that the project
is appropriate, may carry out the project under section
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2309a): Project for improvement of the quality
of the environment, Smithville Lake, Missouri.
SEC. 1006. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that
a project is appropriate, may carry out the project under
section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330):
(1) COLORADO
RIVER, 
YUMA, 
ARIZONA.—
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Colorado
River, Yuma, Arizona.
(2) CHINO VALLEY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Chino Valley, Cali-
fornia.
(3) NEW AND ALAMO RIVERS, IMPERIAL COUN-
TY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem res-
toration, New and Alamo Rivers, Imperial County,
California, including efforts to address invasive
aquatic plant species.
(4) SAN
DIEGO
RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, San Diego River,
California, including efforts to address invasive
aquatic plant species.
(5) STOCKTON
DEEP
WATER
SHIP
CHANNEL
AND
LOWER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Stockton
Deep Water Ship Channel and lower San Joaquin
River, California.
(6) SWEETWATER
RESERVOIR, 
SAN
DIEGO
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic eco-
system restoration, Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego
County, California, including efforts to address
invasive aquatic plant species.
(7) BISCAYNE
BAY, 
FLORIDA.—Project for
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Biscayne Bay, Key
Biscayne, Florida.
(8) DESTIN
HARBOR, FLORIDA.—Project for
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Destin Harbor, Flor-
ida.
(9) CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER, COLUMBUS, GEOR-
GIA, AND
PHENIX
CITY, ALABAMA.—Project for
aquatic ecosystem restoration, City Mills Dam and
Eagle and Phenix Dam, Chattahoochee River, Co-
lumbus, Georgia, and Phenix City, Alabama.
(10) CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER AND OCMULGEE
RIVER BASINS, GEORGIA.—Project for aquatic eco-
system 
restoration, 
Chattahoochee 
River 
and
Ocmulgee River basins, Gwinnett County, Georgia.
(11) SNAKE RIVER, JEROME, IDAHO.—Project
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Snake River, Je-
rome, Idaho.
SEC. 1007. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SHORELINE PROTEC-
TION.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following
project and, if the Secretary determines that the project
is feasible, may carry out the project under section 3 of
the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation
in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned prop-
erty’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g):
Project for shoreline protection, Nelson Lagoon, Alaska.
SEC. 1008. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SNAGGING AND SEDI-
MENT REMOVAL.
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following
project and, if the Secretary determines that the project
is feasible, the Secretary may carry out the project under
section 2 of the Flood Control Act of August 28, 1937
(33 U.S.C. 701g): Project for removal of snags and clear-
ing and straightening of channels for flood control,
Kowawese Unique Area and Hudson River, New Windsor,
New York.
TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 2001. ANNUAL PASSES FOR RECREATION.
Section 208(c)(4) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 460d–3 note; 110 Stat.
3681; 113 Stat. 294) is amended by striking ‘‘the Decem-
ber 31, 2003’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2004’’.
SEC. 2002. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
‘‘(n) NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.—
‘‘(1) PROHIBITION
ON
SOLICITATION
OF
EX-
CESS CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary may not so-
licit contributions from non-Federal interests for
costs of constructing authorized water resources de-
velopment projects or measures in excess of the non-
Federal share assigned to the appropriate project
purposes listed in subsections (a), (b), and (c) or
SEC. 2004. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.
Section 214(a) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note; 114 Stat. 2594) is
amended by striking ‘‘2003’’ and inserting ‘‘2005’’.
SEC. 2005. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DE-
VELOPMENT 
AND 
DEMONSTRATION 
PRO-
GRAM.
(a) EXTENSION OF PROGRAM.—Section 5(a) of the
Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation in
the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned prop-
erty’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426h(a)), is
amended by striking ‘‘6 years’’ and inserting ‘‘10 years’’.
(b) EXTENSION OF PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CON-
STRUCTION PHASE.—Section 5(b)(1)(A) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 426h(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ‘‘3 years’’
and inserting ‘‘6 years’’.
(c) COST-SHARING; REMOVAL OF PROJECTS.—Sec-
tion 5(b) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)) is amended—
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as
paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(3) COST SHARING.—The Secretary may enter
into a cost-sharing agreement with a non-Federal in-
terest to carry out a project, or a phase of a project,
under the erosion control program in cooperation
with the non-Federal interest.
‘‘(4) REMOVAL OF PROJECTS.—The Secretary
may pay all or a portion of the costs of removing a
project, or an element of a project, constructed
under the erosion control program if the Secretary
determines during the term of the program that the
project or element is detrimental to the environment,
private property, or public safety.’’.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section
5(e)(2) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(e)(2)) is amended
by striking ‘‘$21,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$31,000,000’’.
SEC. 2006. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES
PROJECTS.
(a) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.—Section 221 of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) is
amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) by striking ‘‘under the provisions’’ and
all that follows through ‘‘under any other’’ and
inserting ‘‘under any’’;
(B) by striking ‘‘to furnish its required co-
operation for’’ and inserting ‘‘under which each
party agrees to carry out its responsibilities and
requirements for implementation or construc-
tion of’’; and
(C) by inserting after ‘‘$25,000.’’ the fol-
lowing: ‘‘Such agreement may include a provi-
sion for damages in the event of a failure of one
or more parties to perform.’’;
(2) by redesignating subsection (e) as sub-
section (f); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (d) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(e) LIMITATION.—Nothing in subsection (a) shall be
construed as limiting the authority of the Secretary to en-
sure that a agreement under this section meets all require-
ments of law and policies of the Secretary in effect on the
date of entry into the agreement.’’.
(b) LOCAL COOPERATION.—Section 912(b) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (101 Stat.
4190) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (2)—
(A) by striking ‘‘shall’’ the first place it
appears and inserting ‘‘may’’; and
(B) by striking the last sentence; and
(2) in paragraph (4)—
(A) by inserting after ‘‘injunction, for’’ the
following: ‘‘payment of damages or, for’’;
(B) by striking ‘‘to collect a civil penalty
imposed under this section,’’; and
(C) by striking ‘‘any civil penalty imposed
under this section,’’ and inserting ‘‘any liq-
uidated damages,’’.
(c) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by sub-
sections (a) and (b) only apply to partnership agreements
entered into after the date of enactment of this Act; except
that at the request of a non-Federal interest for a project
the district engineer for the district in which the project
is located may amend a project partnership agreement en-
tered into on or before such date and under which con-
struction on the project has not been initiated as of such
date of enactment for the purpose of incorporating such
amendments.
(d) PARTNERSHIP
AND COOPERATIVE ARRANGE-
MENTS.—
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Agreements entered into
under section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5(b)) shall further partnership
and cooperative arrangements with non-Federal in-
terests and shall be referred to as ‘‘partnership
agreements’’.
(2) REFERENCES
TO
COOPERATION
AGREE-
MENTS.—Any reference in a law, regulation, docu-
ment, or other paper of the United States to a co-
operation agreement or project cooperation agree-
ment shall be treated to be a reference to a partner-
ship agreement or a project partnership agreement,
respectively.
(3) REFERENCES
TO
PARTNERSHIP
AGREE-
MENTS.—Any reference to a partnership agreement
or project partnership agreement in this Act (other
than this section) shall be treated as a reference to
a cooperation agreement or a project cooperation
agreement, respectively.
(e) ENTRY OF AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT ENGI-
NEER.—After January 1, 2005, the agreement required
to be entered into under section 221(a) of the Flood Con-
trol Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(a)) shall be entered
into with the district engineer for the district in which the
project will be carried out, unless, before that date, the
Secretary issues policies and guidelines for partnership
agreements and delegates to the district engineers, at a
minimum—
(1) the authority to approve any policy in a
partnership agreement that has appeared in an
agreement previously approved by the Secretary;
(2) the authority to approve any policy in a
partnership agreement the specific terms of which
are dictated by law, or by a final feasibility study,
final environmental impact statement, or other final
decision document for a water resources development
project;
(3) the authority to approve any partnership
agreement that complies with the policies and guide-
lines issued by the Secretary; and
(4) the authority to sign any partnership agree-
ment for any water resources development project
unless, within 30 days of the date of authorization
of the project, the Secretary notifies the district en-
gineer in which the project will be carried out that
the Secretary wishes to retain the prerogative to
sign the partnership agreement for that project.
(f) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than the 120th
day following the date of enactment of this Act, the Chief
of Engineers shall ensure that each district engineer has
made available on the Internet all partnership agreements
entered into under section 221 of the Flood Control Act
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5(b)) within the preceding 10
years and all partnership agreements for water resources
development projects currently being carried out in that
district and shall make any partnership agreements en-
tered into after such date of enactment available on the
Internet within 7 days of the date on which such agree-
ment is entered into.
SEC. 2007. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RESTORATION,
AND REUSE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide to
State and local governments assessment, planning, and
design assistance for remediation, environmental restora-
tion, or reuse of areas located within the boundaries of
such State or local governments where such remediation,
environmental restoration, or reuse will contribute to the
improvement of water quality or the conservation of water
and related resources of drainage basins and watersheds
within the United States.
(b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal share
of the cost of assistance provided under subsection (a)
shall be 50 percent.
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008.
SEC. 2008. COMPILATION OF LAWS.
Within one year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the laws of the United States relating to the improve-
ment of rivers and harbors, flood control, beach erosion,
and other water resources development enacted after No-
vember 8, 1966, and before January 1, 2004, shall be
compiled under the direction of the Secretary and the
Chief of Engineers and printed for the use of the Depart-
ment of the Army, Congress, and the general public. The
Secretary shall reprint the volumes containing such laws
enacted before November 8, 1966. In addition, the Sec-
retary shall include an index in each volume so compiled
or reprinted. Not later than December 1, 2004, the Sec-
retary shall transmit at least 25 copies of each such vol-
ume to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate.
SEC. 2009. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL.
Section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326a; 110 Stat. 3694–3696) is
amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub-
section (d);
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(c) GOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIPS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter
into cost-sharing agreements with 1 or more non-
Federal public interests with respect to a project, or
group of projects within a geographic region if ap-
propriate, for the acquisition, design, construction,
management, or operation of a dredged material
processing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or
disposal facility (including any facility used to dem-
onstrate potential beneficial uses of dredged mate-
rial, which may include effective sediment contami-
nant reduction technologies) using funds provided in
whole or in part by the Federal Government. One or
more of the parties of the agreement may perform
the acquisition, design, construction, management,
or operation of a dredged material processing, treat-
ment, or disposal facility. If appropriate, the Sec-
retary may combine portions of separate construc-
tion or maintenance appropriations from separate
Federal projects with the appropriate combined cost-
sharing between the various projects when the facil-
ity serves to manage dredged material from multiple
Federal projects located in the geographic region of
the facility.
‘‘(2) PUBLIC FINANCING.—
‘‘(A) AGREEMENTS.—
‘‘(i) SPECIFIED
FEDERAL
FUNDING
SOURCES AND COST SHARING.—The cost-
sharing agreement used shall clearly speci-
fy the Federal funding sources and com-
bined cost-sharing when applicable to mul-
tiple Federal navigation projects and the
responsibilities and risks of each of the
parties related to present and future
dredged material managed by the facility.
‘‘(ii) MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENTS.—
The cost-sharing agreement may include
the management of sediments from the
maintenance dredging of Federal naviga-
tion projects that do not have partnership
agreements. The cost-sharing agreement
may allow the non-Federal sponsor to re-
ceive reimbursable payments from the Fed-
eral Government for commitments made by
the sponsor for disposal or placement ca-
pacity at dredged material treatment, proc-
essing, contaminant reduction, or disposal
facilities.
‘‘(iii) 
CREDIT.—The 
cost-sharing
agreement may allow costs incurred prior
to execution of a partnership agreement
for construction or the purchase of equip-
ment or capacity for the project to be cred-
ited according to existing cost-sharing
rules.
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—Nothing in this subsection
supersedes or modifies existing agreements be-
tween the Federal Government and any non-
Federal sponsors for the cost-sharing, construc-
tion, and operation and maintenance of Federal
navigation projects. Subject to the approval of
the Secretary and in accordance with existing
laws, regulations, and policies, a non-Federal
public sponsor of a Federal navigation project
may seek credit for funds provided in the acqui-
sition, design, construction, management, or op-
eration of a dredged material processing, treat-
ment, or disposal facility to the extent the facil-
ity is used to manage dredged material from
the Federal navigation project. The non-Federal
sponsor shall be responsible for providing all
necessary lands, easements, rights-of-way, or
relocations associated with the facility and shall
receive credit for these items.’’; and
(3) in each of subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2)(A),
as so redesignated—
(A) by inserting ‘‘and maintenance’’ after
‘‘operation’’; and
(B) by inserting ‘‘processing, treatment,
or’’ after ‘‘dredged material’’ the first place it
appears.
SEC. 2010. WETLANDS MITIGATION.
In carrying out a water resources project that in-
volves wetlands mitigation and that has impacts that occur
within the service area of a mitigation bank, the Secretary,
to the maximum extent practicable and where appropriate,
shall give preference to the use of the mitigation bank if
the bank contains sufficient available credits to offset the
impact and the bank is approved in accordance with the
Federal Guidance for the Establishment, Use and Oper-
ation of Mitigation Banks (60 Fed. Reg. 58605) or other
applicable Federal law (including regulations).
SEC. 2011. REMOTE AND SUBSISTENCE HARBORS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting a study of harbor
and navigation improvements, the Secretary may rec-
ommend a project without the need to demonstrate that
the project is justified solely by national economic develop-
ment benefits if the Secretary determines that—
(1)(A) the community to be served by the
project is at least 70 miles from the nearest surface
accessible commercial port and has no direct rail or
highway link to another community served by a sur-
face accessible port or harbor; or
(B) the project would be located in the Com-
monwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Common-
wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or Amer-
ican Samoa;
(2) the harbor is economically critical such that
over 80 percent of the goods transported through
the harbor would be consumed within the community
served by the harbor and navigation improvement;
and
(3) the long-term viability of the community
would be threatened without the harbor and naviga-
tion improvement.
(b) JUSTIFICATION.—In considering whether to rec-
ommend a project under subsection (a), the Secretary
shall consider the benefits of the project to—
(1) public health and safety of the local commu-
nity, including access to facilities designed to protect
public health and safety;
(2) access to natural resources for subsistence
purposes;
(3) local and regional economic opportunities;
(4) welfare of the local population; and
(5) social and cultural value to the community.