Sec. 6010. Regional engineering model for environmental restoration. 
TITLE VII—LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA 
Sec. 7001. Definitions. 
Sec. 7002. Comprehensive plan. 
Sec. 7003. Louisiana coastal area. 
Sec. 7004. Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task Force. 
Sec. 7005. Project modifications. 
Sec. 7006. Construction. 
Sec. 7007. Non-Federal cost share. 
Sec. 7008. Project justification. 
Sec. 7009. Independent review. 
Sec. 7010. Expedited reports. 
Sec. 7011. Reporting. 
Sec. 7012. New Orleans and vicinity. 
Sec. 7013. Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. 
TITLE VIII—UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY 
SYSTEM 
Sec. 8001. Definitions. 
Sec. 8002. Navigation improvements and restoration. 
Sec. 8003. Authorization of construction of navigation improvements. 
Sec. 8004. Ecosystem restoration authorization. 
Sec. 8005. Comparable progress. 
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY. 
In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary 
of the Army. 
TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES 
PROJECTS 
SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. 
Except as otherwise provided in this section, the fol-
lowing projects for water resources development and con-
servation and other purposes are authorized to be carried 
out by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the 
plans, and subject to the conditions, described in the respec-
tive reports designated in this section: 
(1) HAINES, ALASKA.—The project for naviga-
tion, Haines, Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
dated December 20, 2004, at a total cost of 
$14,040,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$11,232,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$2,808,000. 
(2) PORT LIONS, ALASKA.—The project for navi-
gation, Port Lions, Alaska: Report of the Chief of En-
gineers dated June 14, 2006, at a total cost of 
$9,530,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$7,624,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$1,906,000. 
(3) RIO SALADO OESTE, ARIZONA.—The project 
for environmental restoration, Rio Salado Oeste, Ari-
zona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Decem-
ber 19, 2006, at a total cost of $166,650,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $106,629,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $60,021,000. 
(4) SANTA CRUZ RIVER, PASEO DE LAS IGLESIAS, 
ARIZONA.—The project for environmental restoration, 
Santa Cruz River, Pima County, Arizona: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated March 28, 2006, at a 
total cost of $97,700,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $63,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $34,400,000. 
(5) TANQUE VERDE CREEK, PIMA COUNTY, ARI-
ZONA.—The project for environmental restoration, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Tanque Verde Creek, Pima County, Arizona: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated July 22, 2003, at a 
total cost of $5,906,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $3,836,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $2,070,000. 
(6) SALT RIVER (VA SHLYAY’ AKIMEL), MARICOPA 
COUNTY, ARIZONA.—The project for environmental 
restoration, Salt River (Va Shlyay’ Akimel), Arizona: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 3, 
2005, at a total cost of $162,100,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $105,200,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $56,900,000. 
(7) MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS.—The 
project for flood damage reduction, May Branch, Fort 
Smith, Arkansas, Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of 
$30,850,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$15,010,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$15,840,000. 
(8) HAMILTON CITY, CALIFORNIA.—The project 
for flood damage reduction and environmental res-
toration, Hamilton City, California: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a 
total cost of $52,400,000, with an estimated Federal 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
cost of $34,100,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of 
$18,300,000. 
(9) IMPERIAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA.—The project 
for storm damage reduction, Imperial Beach, Cali-
fornia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Decem-
ber 30, 2003, at a total cost of $13,700,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $8,521,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $5,179,000, and at an estimated 
total cost of $42,500,000 for periodic beach nourish-
ment over the 50-year life of the project, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $21,250,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $21,250,000. 
(10) MATILIJA
DAM, VENTURA
COUNTY, CALI-
FORNIA.—The project for environmental restoration, 
Matilija Dam, Ventura County, California: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated December 20, 2004, at 
a total cost of $144,500,000, with an estimated Fed-
eral cost of $89,700,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $54,800,000. 
(11) MIDDLE
CREEK, 
LAKE
COUNTY, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—The project for flood damage reduction and 
environmental restoration, Middle Creek, Lake Coun-
ty, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
November 29, 2004, at a total cost of $45,200,000, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
with an estimated Federal cost of $29,500,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $15,700,000. 
(12) NAPA
RIVER
SALT
MARSH
RESTORATION, 
CALIFORNIA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environ-
mental restoration, Napa River Salt Marsh Res-
toration, Napa, California: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total 
cost of $134,500,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $87,500,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $47,000,000. 
(B) ADMINISTRATION.—In carrying out the 
project authorized by this paragraph, the Sec-
retary shall— 
(i) construct a recycled water pipeline 
extending from the Sonoma Valley County 
Sanitation District Waste Water Treatment 
Plant and the Napa Sanitation District 
Waste Water Treatment Plant to the 
project; and 
(ii) restore or enhance Salt Ponds 1, 
1A, 2, and 3. 
(13) DENVER
COUNTY
REACH, SOUTH
PLATTE 
RIVER, DENVER, COLORADO.—The project for environ-
mental restoration, Denver County Reach, South 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Platte River, Denver, Colorado: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers dated May 16, 2003, at a total cost of 
$21,050,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$13,680,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$7,370,000. 
(14) MIAMI
HARBOR, 
MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, 
FLORIDA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for naviga-
tion, Miami Harbor, Miami-Dade County, Flor-
ida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 
25, 2005, at a total cost of $125,270,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $75,140,000 and an es-
timated non-Federal cost of $50,130,000. 
(B) GENERAL
REEVALUATION
REPORT.— 
The non-Federal share of the cost of the general 
reevaluation report that resulted in the report of 
the Chief of Engineers referred to in subpara-
graph (A) shall be the same percentage as the 
non-Federal share of cost of construction of the 
project. 
(C) 
AGREEMENT.—The 
Secretary 
shall 
enter into a new partnership with the non-Fed-
eral interest to reflect the cost sharing required 
by subparagraph (B). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
(15) EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS.— 
The project for environmental restoration and recre-
ation, East St. Louis and Vicinity, Illinois: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at 
a total cost of $208,260,000, with an estimated Fed-
eral cost of $134,910,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $73,350,000. 
(16) PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, ILLI-
NOIS.—The project for environmental restoration, Pe-
oria Riverfront Development, Illinois: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated July 28, 2003, at a total 
cost of $18,220,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$11,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$6,380,000. 
(17) WOOD RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM RECONSTRUC-
TION, MADISON COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—The project for 
flood damage reduction, Wood River Levee System 
Reconstruction, Madison County, Illinois: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated July 18, 2006, at a total 
cost of $17,220,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$11,193,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$6,027,000. 
(18) DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, DES 
MOINES, IOWA.—The project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers, Des Moines, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Iowa: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated March 
28, 2006, at a total cost of $10,780,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $6,967,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $3,813,000. 
(19) LICKING
RIVER
BASIN, CYNTHIANA, KEN-
TUCKY.—The project for flood damage reduction, 
Licking River Basin, Cynthiana, Kentucky: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at a 
total cost of $18,200,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $11,830,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $6,370,000. 
(20) BAYOU
SORREL
LOCK, LOUISIANA.—The 
project for navigation, Bayou Sorrel Lock, Louisiana: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 3, 
2005, at a total cost of $9,680,000. The costs of con-
struction 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. 
(21) MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOU-
ISIANA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for hurricane 
and storm damage reduction, Morganza to the 
Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana: Reports of the Chief 
of Engineers dated August 23, 2002, and July 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
22, 2003, at a total cost of $886,700,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $576,355,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $310,345,000. 
(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to-
ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project the cost of design and construction work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project 
if the Secretary determines that the work is inte-
gral to the project. 
(22) PORT OF IBERIA, LOUISIANA.—The project 
for navigation, Port of Iberia, Louisiana, Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at 
a total cost of $131,250,000, with an estimated Fed-
eral cost of $105,315,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $25,935,000. 
(23) SMITH ISLAND, SOMERSET COUNTY, MARY-
LAND.—The project for environmental restoration, 
Smith Island, Somerset County, Maryland: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated October 29, 2001, at a 
total cost of $15,580,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $10,127,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $5,453,000. 
(24) ROSEAU RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA.—The 
project for flood damage reduction, Roseau River, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Roseau, Minnesota, Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of 
$25,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$13,820,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$11,280,000. 
(25) MISSISSIPPI
COASTAL, MISSISSIPPI.—The 
project for hurricane and storm damage reduction 
and environmental restoration, Mississippi Coastal, 
Mississippi, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 31, 2006, at a total cost of $107,690,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $70,000,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $37,690,000. 
(26) KANSAS CITYS LEVEES, MISSOURI AND KAN-
SAS.—The project for flood damage reduction, Kansas 
Citys levees, Missouri and Kansas, Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost 
of $65,430,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$42,530,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$22,900,000. 
(27) SWOPE
PARK
INDUSTRIAL
AREA, BLUE 
RIVER, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.—The project for flood 
damage reduction, Swope Park Industrial Area, Blue 
River, Kansas City, Missouri: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of 
$16,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
$11,037,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$5,943,000. 
(28) GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS 
INLET, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and 
storm damage reduction, Great Egg Harbor Inlet to 
Townsends Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at a total cost of 
$54,360,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$35,069,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$19,291,000, and at an estimated total cost of 
$202,500,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50- 
year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $101,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$101,250,000. 
(29) HUDSON RARITAN ESTUARY, LIBERTY STATE 
PARK, NEW JERSEY.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environ-
mental restoration, Hudson Raritan Estuary, 
Liberty State Park, New Jersey: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated August 25, 2006, at a 
total cost of $34,100,000, with an estimated Fed-
eral cost of $22,200,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $11,900,000. 
(B) RESTORATION TEAMS.—In carrying out 
the project, the Secretary shall establish and uti-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
lize watershed restoration teams composed of es-
tuary restoration experts from the Corps of En-
gineers, the New Jersey department of environ-
mental protection, and the Port Authority of 
New York and New Jersey and other experts des-
ignated by the Secretary for the purpose of devel-
oping habitat restoration and water quality en-
hancement. 
(30) MANASQUAN
INLET
TO
BARNEGAT
INLET, 
NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm 
damage reduction, Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat 
Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of 
$71,900,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$46,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$25,165,000, and at an estimated total cost of 
$119,680,000 for periodic beach nourishment over the 
50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $59,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $59,840,000. 
(31) RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION 
BEACH, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and 
storm damage reduction, Raritan Bay and Sandy 
Hook Bay, Union Beach, New Jersey: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated January 4, 2006, at a total 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
cost of $115,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $74,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$40,200,000, and at an estimated total cost of 
$6,500,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year 
life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$3,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$3,250,000. 
(32) SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NEW 
JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm dam-
age reduction and environmental restoration, South 
River, Raritan River Basin, New Jersey: Report of 
the Chief of Engineers dated July 22, 2003, at a total 
cost of $122,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $79,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$42,800,000. 
(33) SOUTHWEST VALLEY, BERNALILLO COUNTY, 
NEW MEXICO.—The project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Southwest Valley, Bernalillo County, New Mex-
ico: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated November 
29, 2004, at a total cost of $24,840,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $16,150,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $8,690,000. 
(34) MONTAUK POINT, NEW YORK.—The project 
for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Montauk 
Point, New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
dated March 31, 2006, at a total cost of $14,600,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $7,300,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $7,300,000. 
(35) HOCKING
RIVER, MONDAY
CREEK
SUB- 
BASIN, OHIO.—The project for environmental restora-
tion, Hocking River, Monday Creek Sub-basin, Ohio: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 24, 
2006, at a total cost of $20,980,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $13,440,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $7,540,000. 
(36) TOWN OF BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, 
PENNSYLVANIA.—The project for flood damage reduc-
tion, town of Bloomsburg, Columbia County, Pennsyl-
vania: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Janu-
ary 25, 2006, at a total cost of $44,500,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $28,925,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $15,575,000. 
(37) PAWLEY’S ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA.—The 
project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
Pawley’s Island, South Carolina, Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost 
of $8,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$5,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$3,140,000, and at an estimated total cost of 
$21,200,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$10,600,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$10,600,000. 
(38) CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, CORPUS 
CHRISTI, TEXAS.—The project for navigation and eco-
system restoration, Corpus Christi Ship Channel, 
Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated June 2, 
2003, at a total cost of $188,110,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $87,810,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $100,300,000. 
(39) 
GULF
INTRACOASTAL
WATERWAY, 
MATAGORDA BAY RE-ROUTE, TEXAS.—The project for 
navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Matagorda 
Bay Re-Route, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engi-
neers dated December 24, 2002, at a total cost of 
$17,280,000. 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. 
(40) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, HIGH IS-
LAND
TO
BRAZOS
RIVER, TEXAS.—The project for 
navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, High Island 
to Brazos River, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engi-
neers dated April 16, 2004, at a total cost of 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
$14,450,000. 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. 
(41) LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN PHASE I, 
TEXAS.—The project for flood damage reduction and 
environmental restoration, Lower Colorado River 
Basin Phase I, Texas, Report of the Chief of Engi-
neers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost of 
$110,730,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$69,640,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$41,090,000. 
(42) 
ATLANTIC
INTRACOASTAL
WATERWAY 
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, 
VIRGINIA.—The project for Atlantic Intracoastal Wa-
terway Bridge Replacement, Deep Creek, Chesapeake, 
Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
March 3, 2003, at a total cost of $37,200,000. 
(43) CRANEY
ISLAND
EASTWARD
EXPANSION, 
NORFOLK
HARBOR
AND
CHANNELS, VIRGINIA.—The 
project for navigation, Craney Island Eastward Ex-
pansion, Norfolk Harbor and Channels, Virginia: Re-
port of Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at 
a total cost of $712,103,000, with an estimated Fed-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
eral cost of $31,229,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $680,874,000. 
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 Secretary 
determines that a project is feasible, may carry out the 
project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
(33 U.S.C. 701s): 
(1) HALEYVILLE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Haleyville, Alabama. 
(2) WEISS
LAKE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Weiss Lake, Alabama. 
(3) LITTLE COLORADO RIVER LEVEE, ARIZONA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Little Colorado 
River Levee, Arizona. 
(4) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Cache River 
Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas. 
(5) BARREL SPRINGS WASH, PALMDALE, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Barrel 
Springs Wash, Palmdale, California. 
(6) BORREGO SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Borrego Springs, California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
(7) COLTON, 
CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Colton, California. 
(8) DUNLAP STREAM, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Dunlap Stream, 
Yucaipa, California. 
(9) HUNTS
CANYON
WASH, PALMDALE, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Hunts 
Canyon Wash, Palmdale, California. 
(10) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Ontario and Chino, Cali-
fornia. 
(11) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Santa Venetia, California. 
(12) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Whittier, California. 
(13) WILDWOOD CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Wildwood Creek, 
Yucaipa, California. 
(14) ST. FRANCISVILLE, LOUSIANA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, St. Francisville, Louisiana. 
(15) SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Salem, Massachusetts. 
(16) CASS RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Cass River, Vassar and vicinity, 
Michigan. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
(17) CROW
RIVER, ROCKFORD, MINNESOTA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Crow River, Rock-
ford, Minnesota. 
(18) MARSH
CREEK, MINNESOTA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Marsh Creek, Minnesota. 
(19) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, 
BORUP, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, South Branch of the Wild Rice River, Borup, 
Minnesota. 
(20) BLACKSNAKE
CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MIS-
SOURI.—Project for flood damage reduction, Black-
snake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri. 
(21) ACID BROOK, POMPTON LAKES, NEW JER-
SEY.—Project for flood damage reduction, Acid Brook, 
Pompton Lakes, New Jersey. 
(22) CANNISTEO RIVER, ADDISON, NEW YORK.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Cannisteo River, 
Addison, New York. 
(23) COHOCTON RIVER, CAMPBELL, NEW YORK.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Cohocton River, 
Campbell, New York. 
(24) DRY AND OTTER CREEKS, CORTLAND, NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, Dry and 
Otter Creeks, Cortland, New York. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
(25) EAST
RIVER, SILVER
BEACH, NEW
YORK 
CITY, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, 
East River, Silver Beach, New York City, New York. 
(26) EAST
VALLEY
CREEK, 
ANDOVER, 
NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, East Val-
ley Creek, Andover, New York. 
(27) SUNNYSIDE BROOK, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, 
NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, Sun-
nyside Brook, Westchester County, New York. 
(28) LITTLE
YANKEE
RUN, OHIO.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Little Yankee Run, Ohio. 
(29) LITTLE
NESHAMINY
CREEK, WARRENTON, 
PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, 
Little Neshaminy Creek, Warrenton, Pennsylvania. 
(30) SOUTHAMPTON CREEK WATERSHED, SOUTH-
AMPTON, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Southampton Creek watershed, South-
ampton, Pennsylvania. 
(31) SPRING CREEK, LOWER MACUNGIE TOWN-
SHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage re-
duction, Spring Creek, Lower Macungie Township, 
Pennsylvania. 
(32) YARDLEY AQUEDUCT, SILVER AND BROCK 
CREEKS, YARDLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
23:01 Apr 05, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H1495.RH
H1495
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS