363 
HR 2864 PCS 
‘‘(13) LAROSE
TO
GOLDEN
MEADOW, LOU-
ISIANA.—The project for flood control, Larose to 
Golden Meadow, Louisiana. 
‘‘(14) PERRIS, CALIFORNIA.—The project for 
flood control, Perris, California.’’. 
SEC. 5152. USE OF FEDERAL HOPPER DREDGE FLEET. 
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study on 
the appropriate use of the Federal hopper dredge fleet. 
(b) CONTENTS.—In conducting the study, the Sec-
retary shall— 
(1) obtain and analyze baseline data to deter-
mine the appropriate use of the Federal hopper 
dredge fleet; 
(2) prepare a comprehensive analysis of the 
costs and benefits of existing and proposed restric-
tions on the use of the Federal hopper dredge fleet; 
and 
(3) assess the data and procedure used by the 
Secretary to prepare the Government cost estimate 
for worked performed by the Federal hopper dredge 
fleet. 
(c) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall conduct 
the study in consultation with ports, pilots, and represent-
atives of the private dredge industry.
364 
HR 2864 PCS 
(d) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to 
Congress a report on the results of the study. 
SEC. 
5153. 
ADDITIONAL 
ASSISTANCE 
FOR 
CRITICAL 
PROJECTS. 
Section 219(f) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335–337; 114 
Stat. 2763A–220–221) is amended— 
(1) by striking the undesignated paragraph re-
lating to Charleston, South Carolina, and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(72) 
CHARLESTON, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.— 
$20,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure, including 
wastewater collection systems, and stormwater sys-
tem improvements, Charleston, South Carolina.’’; 
(2) by redesignating the paragraph (71) relat-
ing to Placer and El Dorado Counties, California, as 
paragraph (73); 
(3) by redesignating the paragraph (72) relat-
ing to Lassen, Plumas, Butte, Sierra, and Nevada 
Counties, California, as paragraph (74); 
(4) by striking the paragraph (71) relating to 
Indianapolis, Indiana, and inserting the following:
365 
HR 2864 PCS 
‘‘(75) INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA.—$6,430,000 for 
environmental infrastructure for Indianapolis, Indi-
ana.’’; 
(5) by redesignating the paragraph (73) relat-
ing to St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin, as paragraph (76); 
and 
(6) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(77) 
ST. 
CLAIR
COUNTY, 
ALABAMA.— 
$5,000,000 for water related infrastructure, St. 
Clair County, Alabama. 
‘‘(78) 
CRAWFORD
COUNTY, 
ARKANSAS.— 
$35,000,000 
for 
water 
supply 
infrastructure, 
Crawford County, Arkansas. 
‘‘(79) BRAWLEY COLONIA, IMPERIAL COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.—$1,400,000 for water infrastructure 
to improve water quality in the Brawley Colonia 
Water District, Imperial County, California. 
‘‘(80) CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT, CALI-
FORNIA.—$23,000,000 for water and wastewater in-
frastructure for the Contra Costa Water District, 
California. 
‘‘(81) EAST BAY, SAN FRANCISCO, AND SANTA 
CLARA AREAS, CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for a de-
salination project to serve the East Bay, San Fran-
cisco, and Santa Clara areas, California.
366 
HR 2864 PCS 
‘‘(82) 
IMPERIAL
COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.— 
$10,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure, including 
a wastewater disinfection facility and polishing sys-
tem, to improve water quality in the vicinity of 
Calexico, California, on the southern New River, Im-
perial County, California. 
‘‘(83) RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA.—$25,000,000 
for a recycled water treatment facility, Richmond, 
California. 
‘‘(84) SANTA
CLARA
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— 
$5,500,000 for an advanced recycling water treat-
ment plant in Santa Clara County, California. 
‘‘(85) SOUTHERN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALI-
FORNIA.—$15,000,000 for environmental infrastruc-
ture for the groundwater basin optimization pipeline, 
Southern Los Angeles County, California. 
‘‘(86) SWEETWATER
RESERVOIR, SAN
DIEGO 
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$375,000 to improve water 
quality, and remove nonnative aquatic species from 
the Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego County, Cali-
fornia. 
‘‘(87) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—$8,000,000 for 
water, wastewater, and water related infrastructure, 
Whittier, California.
367 
HR 2864 PCS 
‘‘(88) MONTEZUMA AND LA PLATA COUNTIES, 
COLORADO.—$1,000,000 for water and wastewater 
related infrastructure for the Ute Mountain project, 
Montezuma and La Plata Counties, Colorado. 
‘‘(89) PUEBLO AND OTERO COUNTIES, COLO-
RADO.—$34,000,000 for water transmission infra-
structure, Pueblo and Otero Counties, Colorado. 
‘‘(90) 
LEDYARD
AND
MONTVILLE, 
CON-
NECTICUT.—$7,113,000 for water infrastructure, 
Ledyard and Montville, Connecticut. 
‘‘(91) ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF COLUM-
BIA
AND
MARYLAND.—$20,000,000 for environ-
mental infrastructure and resource protection and 
development to enhance water quality and living re-
sources in the Anacostia River watershed, District of 
Columbia and Maryland. 
‘‘(92) WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.— 
$35,000,000 for implementation of a combined 
sewer overflow long-term control plan, Washington, 
District of Columbia. 
‘‘(93) 
CHARLOTTE
COUNTY, 
FLORIDA.— 
$3,000,000 for water supply infrastructure, Char-
lotte County, Florida. 
‘‘(94) CHARLOTTE, LEE, AND COLLIER COUN-
TIES, 
FLORIDA.—$20,000,000 for water supply