(2) WEISS LAKE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Weiss Lake, Alabama. 
(3) CHINO
VALLEY
WASH, ARIZONA.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Chino Valley Wash, Ari-
zona. 
(4) LITTLE
COLORADO
RIVER
LEVEE, ARI-
ZONA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Little 
Colorado River Levee, Arizona. 
(5) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Cache River 
Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas. 
(6) BARREL SPRINGS WASH, PALMDALE, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Barrel 
Springs Wash, Palmdale, California. 
(7) BORREGO SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Borrego Springs, Cali-
fornia. 
(8) COLTON, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Colton, California. 
(9) DUNLAP STREAM, SAN BERNARDINO, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Dunlap Stream, San Bernardino, California. 
(10) HUNTS CANYON WASH, PALMDALE, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Hunts 
Canyon Wash, Palmdale, California.
(11) 
WILDWOOD
CREEK, 
YUCAIPA, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Wild-
wood Creek, Yucaipa, California. 
(12) UTICA AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Utica and vicinity, Illi-
nois. 
(13) DES
MOINES
AND
RACCOON
RIVERS, 
IOWA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Des 
Moines and Raccoon Rivers, Iowa. 
(14) PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Peabody, Massachusetts. 
(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. 
(17) CROW RIVER, ROCKFORD, MINNESOTA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Crow River, 
Rockford, Minnesota. 
(18) ITASCA COUNTY, MINNESOTA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Trout Lake and Canisteo 
Pit, Itasca County, Minnesota. 
(19) MARSH CREEK, MINNESOTA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Marsh Creek, Minnesota.
(20) ROSEAU
RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Roseau River, 
Roseau, Minnesota. 
(21) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, 
BORUP, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage re-
duction, South Branch of the Wild Rice River, 
Borup, Minnesota. 
(22) BLACKSNAKE
CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MIS-
SOURI.—Project for flood damage reduction, Black-
snake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri. 
(23) 
CANNISTEO
RIVER, 
ADDISON, 
NEW 
YORK.—Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Cannisteo River, Addison, New York. 
(24) 
COHOCTON
RIVER, 
CAMPBELL, 
NEW 
YORK.—Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Cohocton River, Campbell, New York. 
(25) EAST RIVER, SILVER BEACH, NEW YORK 
CITY, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, East River, Silver Beach, New York City, New 
York. 
(26) EAST
VALLEY
CREEK, ANDOVER, NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, East 
Valley Creek, Andover, New York.
(27) SUNNYSIDE BROOK, WESTCHESTER COUN-
TY, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, 
Sunnyside 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 reduc-
tion, Little Neshaminy Creek, Warrenton, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(30) 
SOUTHAMPTON
CREEK
WATERSHED, 
SOUTHAMPTON, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Southampton Creek watershed, 
Southampton, 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 damage reduction, Yardley Aqueduct, Silver 
and Brock Creeks, Yardley, Pennsylvania. 
(33) SURFSIDE
BEACH, SOUTH
CAROLINA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Surfside Beach 
and vicinity, South Carolina.
(34) 
CONGELOSI
DITCH, 
MISSOURI
CITY, 
TEXAS.—Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Congelosi Ditch, Missouri City, Texas. 
(35) DILLEY, TEXAS.—Project for flood dam-
age reduction, Dilley, Texas. 
(b) SPECIAL RULES.— 
(1) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.— 
The Secretary may proceed with the project for the 
Cache River Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas, referred to in 
subsection (a)(5), notwithstanding that the project is 
located within the boundaries of the flood control 
project, Cache River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri, 
authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1950, (64 Stat. 172) and modified by section 99 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 
(88 Stat. 41). 
(2) 
WILDWOOD
CREEK, 
YUCAIPA, 
CALI-
FORNIA.—The Secretary shall review the locally pre-
pared plan for the project for flood damage, Wild-
wood Creek, California, referred to in subsection 
(a)(11) and, if the Secretary determines that the 
plan meets the evaluation and design standards of 
the Corps of Engineers and that the plan is feasible, 
the Secretary may use the plan to carry out the 
project and shall provide credit toward the non-Fed-
eral share of the cost of the project for the cost of 
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 
integral to the project. 
(3) BORUP, MINNESOTA.—In carrying out the 
project for flood damage reduction, South Branch of 
the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota, referred to 
in subsection (a)(21) the Secretary may consider na-
tional ecosystem restoration benefits in determining 
the Federal interest in the project and shall allow 
the non-Federal interest to participate in the financ-
ing 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 
evaluation indicates that applying such section is 
necessary to implement the project. 
(4) ITASCA COUNTY, MINNESOTA.—In carrying 
out the project for flood damage reduction, Itasca 
County, Minnesota, referred to in subsection (a)(18) 
the Secretary may consider national ecosystem res-
toration benefits in determining the Federal interest 
in the project. 
(5) DILLEY, TEXAS.—The Secretary shall carry 
out the project for flood damage reduction, Dilley,
Texas, referred to in subsection (a)(35) if the Sec-
retary determines that the project is feasible. 
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, ARKANSAS 
AND
LOUISIANA.—Projects 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Ouachita and Black Rivers, 
Arkansas and Louisiana. 
(2) FRANKLIN
POINT
PARK, ANNE
ARUNDEL 
COUNTY, 
MARYLAND.—Project 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Franklin Point Park, Anne 
Arundel County, Maryland. 
(3) MAYO BEACH PARK, ANNE ARUNDEL COUN-
TY, MARYLAND.—Project for emergency streambank 
protection, Mayo Beach Park, Anne Arundel County, 
Maryland. 
(4) PINEY
POINT
LIGHTHOUSE, ST. MARY’S 
COUNTY, 
MARYLAND.—Project 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Piney Point Lighthouse, St. 
Mary’s County, Maryland.
(5) ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICHIGAN.—Project 
for emergency streambank protection, St. Joseph 
Harbor, Michigan. 
(6) PUG HOLE LAKE, MINNESOTA.—Project for 
emergency streambank protection, Pug Hole Lake, 
Minnesota. 
(7) MIDDLE
FORK
GRAND
RIVER, GENTRY 
COUNTY, 
MISSOURI.—Project 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Middle Fork Grand River, 
Gentry County, Missouri. 
(8) PLATTE RIVER, PLATTE CITY, MISSOURI.— 
Project for emergency streambank protection, Platte 
River, Platte City, Missouri. 
(9) 
KEUKA
LAKE, 
HAMMONDSPORT, 
NEW 
YORK.—Project for emergency streambank protec-
tion, Keuka Lake, Hammondsport, New York. 
(10) 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. 
(11) HOWARD ROAD OUTFALL, SHELBY COUN-
TY, 
TENNESSEE.—Project 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Howard Road outfall, Shelby 
County, Tennessee.
(12) MITCH
FARM
DITCH
AND
LATERAL
D, 
SHELBY
COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—Project for emer-
gency streambank protection, Mitch Farm Ditch and 
Lateral D, Shelby County, Tennessee. 
(13) WOLF RIVER TRIBUTARIES, SHELBY COUN-
TY, 
TENNESSEE.—Project 
for 
emergency 
streambank protection, Wolf River tributaries, Shel-
by County, Tennessee. 
(14) WELLS
RIVER, NEWBURY, VERMONT.— 
Project for emergency streambank protection, Wells 
River, Newbury, Vermont. 
SEC. 1004. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION. 
(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 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) MAHUKONA BEACH PARK, HAWAII.—Project 
for navigation, Mahukona Beach Park, Hawaii. 
(3) NORTH KOHALA HARBOR, HAWAII.—Project 
for navigation, North Kohala Harbor in the vicinity 
of Kailua Kona, Hawaii.
(4) WAILOA SMALL BOAT HARBOR, HAWAII.— 
Project for navigation, Wailoa Small Boat Harbor, 
Hawaii. 
(5) MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
SHIP
CHANNEL, LOU-
ISIANA.—Project for navigation, Mississippi River 
Ship Channel, Louisiana. 
(6) PORT TOBACCO RIVER AND GOOSE CREEK, 
MARYLAND.—Project for navigation, Port Tobacco 
River and Goose Creek, Maryland. 
(7) ST. JEROME CREEK, ST. MARY’S COUNTY, 
MARYLAND.—Project for navigation, St. Jerome 
Creek, St. Mary’s County, Maryland. 
(8) EAST BASIN, CAPE COD CANAL, SANDWICH, 
MASSACHUSETTS.—Project 
for 
navigation, 
East 
Basin, Cape Cod Canal, Sandwich, Massachusetts. 
(9) LYNN HARBOR, LYNN, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for navigation, Lynn Harbor, Lynn, Massa-
chusetts. 
(10) MERRIMACK RIVER, HAVERHILL, MASSA-
CHUSETTS.—Project 
for 
navigation, 
Merrimack 
River, Haverhill, Massachusetts. 
(11) OAK BLUFFS HARBOR, OAK BLUFFS, MAS-
SACHUSETTS.—Project for navigation, Oak Bluffs 
Harbor, Oak Bluffs, Massachusetts.