HR 2864 PCS 
vironmental Quality explaining why the agency, In-
dian tribe, or non-Federal interest did not meet the 
deadline and what actions it intends to take to com-
plete or issue the required review, analysis, opinion, 
permit, license, or approval. 
(i) PURPOSE AND NEED AND DETERMINATION OF 
REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—As an official of the lead 
Federal agency that is responsible for carrying out 
a study to which this section applies and its associ-
ated process for meeting the requirements of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and as the Federal agency with 
expertise in water resources development, the Sec-
retary, in carrying out such study and process, 
shall— 
(A) define the purpose and need for the 
proposed water resources project; and 
(B) determine which alternatives are rea-
sonable and may be reasonably anticipated to 
meet project purposes and needs. 
(2) STREAMLINING
STUDY.—To streamline a 
study to which this section applies and its associated 
process for meeting the requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
HR 2864 PCS 
et seq.), the Secretary may eliminate from consider-
ation any alternatives the Secretary determines are 
not reasonable or are not reasonably anticipated to 
meet project purposes and needs. 
(j) SOLICITATION
AND CONSIDERATION
OF COM-
MENTS.—In applying subsection (i), the Secretary shall 
solicit, consider, and respond to comments from interested 
persons and governmental entities. 
(k) CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS.—Not later than 120 
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall develop and publish a list of categorical exclusions 
from the requirement that an environmental assessment 
or an environmental impact statement be prepared under 
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.) for water resources projects. 
(l) LIMITATIONS.—Nothing in this section shall pre-
empt or interfere with— 
(1) any practice of seeking public comment; 
(2) any power, jurisdiction, or authority that a 
Federal, State, or local government agency, Indian 
tribe, or non-Federal interest has with respect to 
carrying out a water resources project; or 
(3) any obligation to comply with the provisions 
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.) and the regulations issued
HR 2864 PCS 
by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry 
out such Act. 
(m) BENCHMARKS.—Within 12 months of the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Chief of Engineers shall es-
tablish benchmarks for determining the length of time it 
should take to conduct a feasibility study for a water re-
sources development project and its associated review 
process under the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.). Benchmarks may be estab-
lished for activities based on project type, size, cost, and 
complexity. The Chief of Engineers shall use such bench-
marks as a management tool to make the feasibility study 
process more efficient in all districts of the Army Corps 
of Engineers. 
SEC. 2026. LAKES PROGRAM. 
Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148; 110 Stat. 3758; 113 Stat. 
295) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at end of paragraph (18); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of para-
graph (19) and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(20) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois, 
removal of silt and aquatic growth and measures to 
address excessive sedimentation;
HR 2864 PCS 
‘‘(21) McCarter Pond, Borough of Fairhaven, 
New Jersey, removal of silt and measures to address 
water quality; 
‘‘(22) Rogers Pond, Franklin Township, New 
Jersey, removal of silt and restoration of structural 
integrity; 
‘‘(23) Greenwood Lake, New York and New 
Jersey, removal of silt and aquatic growth; 
‘‘(24) Lake Rodgers, Creedmoor, North Caro-
lina, removal of silt and excessive nutrients and res-
toration of structural integrity; and 
‘‘(25) Lake Luxembourg, Pennsylvania.’’. 
SEC. 2027. MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE LOSSES. 
(a) MITIGATION PLAN CONTENTS.—Section 906(d) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2283(d)) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(3) CONTENTS.—A mitigation plan shall in-
clude— 
‘‘(A) a description of the physical action to 
be undertaken to achieve the mitigation objec-
tives within the watershed in which such losses 
occur and, in any case in which mitigation must 
take place outside the watershed, a justification
HR 2864 PCS 
detailing the rationale for undertaking the miti-
gation outside of the watershed; 
‘‘(B) a description of the lands or interests 
in lands to be acquired for mitigation and the 
basis for a determination that such lands are 
available for acquisition; 
‘‘(C) the type, amount, and characteristics 
of the habitat being restored; 
‘‘(D) success criteria for mitigation based 
on replacement of lost functions and values of 
the habitat, including hydrologic and vegetative 
characteristics; and 
‘‘(E) a plan for any necessary monitoring 
to determine the success of the mitigation, in-
cluding the cost and duration of any monitoring 
and, to the extent practicable, the entities re-
sponsible for any monitoring. 
‘‘(4) RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
MONITORING.—In 
any case in which it is not practicable to identify in 
a mitigation plan for a water resources project, the 
entity responsible for monitoring at the time of a 
final report of the Chief of Engineers or other final 
decision document for the project, such entity shall 
be identified in the partnership agreement entered 
into with the non-Federal interest.’’.