†
HR 1495 EAS
(A) shall not be delayed while consideration
is being given to potential changes in policy or
priority for project consideration; and
(B) shall be submitted, on completion, to—
(i) the Committee on Environment and
Public Works of the Senate; and
(ii) the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives.
(f) COMPLETION REVIEW.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para-
graph (2), not later than 90 days after the date of
completion of a report of the Chief of Engineers that
recommends to Congress a water resource project, the
Secretary shall—
(A) review the report; and
(B) provide any recommendations of the
Secretary regarding the water resource project to
Congress.
(2) PRIOR REPORTS.—Not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, with respect
to any report of the Chief of Engineers recommending
a water resource project that is complete prior to the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall com-
plete review of, and provide recommendations to Con-
†
HR 1495 EAS
gress for, the report in accordance with paragraph
(1).
SEC. 2006. WATER RESOURCES PLANNING COORDINATING
COMMITTEE.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The President shall establish a
Water Resources Planning Coordinating Committee (re-
ferred to in this subsection as the ‘‘Coordinating Com-
mittee’’).
(b) MEMBERSHIP.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Coordinating Committee
shall be composed of the following members (or a des-
ignee of the member):
(A) The Secretary of the Interior.
(B) The Secretary of Agriculture.
(C) The Secretary of Health and Human
Services.
(D) The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development.
(E) The Secretary of Transportation.
(F) The Secretary of Energy.
(G) The Secretary of Homeland Security.
(H) The Secretary of Commerce.
(I) The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency.
†
HR 1495 EAS
(J) The Chairperson of the Council on En-
vironmental Quality.
(2) CHAIRPERSON AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.—
The President shall appoint—
(A) 1 member of the Coordinating Com-
mittee to serve as Chairperson of the Coordi-
nating Committee for a term of 2 years; and
(B) an Executive Director to supervise the
activities of the Coordinating Committee.
(3) FUNCTION.—The function of the Coordi-
nating Committee shall be to carry out the duties and
responsibilities set forth under this section.
(c) NATIONAL WATER RESOURCES PLANNING
AND
MODERNIZATION POLICY.—It is the policy of the United
States that all water resources projects carried out by the
Corps of Engineers shall—
(1) reflect national priorities;
(2) seek to avoid the unwise use of floodplains;
(3) minimize vulnerabilities in any case in
which a floodplain must be used;
(4) protect and restore the functions of natural
systems; and
(5) mitigate any unavoidable damage to natural
systems.
(d) WATER RESOURCE PRIORITIES REPORT.—
†
HR 1495 EAS
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Coordinating
Committee, in collaboration with the Secretary, shall
submit to the President and Congress a report de-
scribing the vulnerability of the United States to
damage from flooding and related storm damage,
including—
(A) the risk to human life;
(B) the risk to property; and
(C) the comparative risks faced by different
regions of the United States.
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The report under paragraph
(1) shall include—
(A) an assessment of the extent to which
programs in the United States relating to flood-
ing address flood risk reduction priorities;
(B) the extent to which those programs may
be unintentionally encouraging development and
economic activity in floodprone areas;
(C) recommendations for improving those
programs with respect to reducing and respond-
ing to flood risks; and
(D) proposals for implementing the rec-
ommendations.
†
HR 1495 EAS
(e) MODERNIZING
WATER
RESOURCES
PLANNING
GUIDELINES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act, and every 5 years
thereafter, the Secretary and the Coordinating Com-
mittee shall, in collaboration with each other, review
and propose updates and revisions to modernize the
planning principles and guidelines, regulations, and
circulars by which the Corps of Engineers analyzes
and evaluates water projects. In carrying out the re-
view, the Coordinating Committee and the Secretary
shall consult with the National Academy of Sciences
for recommendations regarding updating planning
documents.
(2) PROPOSED REVISIONS.—In conducting a re-
view under paragraph (1), the Coordinating Com-
mittee and the Secretary shall consider revisions to
improve water resources project planning through,
among other things—
(A) requiring the use of modern economic
principles and analytical techniques, credible
schedules for project construction, and current
discount rates as used by other Federal agencies;
(B) eliminating biases and disincentives to
providing projects to low-income communities,
†
HR 1495 EAS
including fully accounting for the prevention of
loss of life under section 904 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2281);
(C) eliminating biases and disincentives
that discourage the use of nonstructural ap-
proaches to water resources development and
management, and fully accounting for the flood
protection and other values of healthy natural
systems;
(D) promoting environmental restoration
projects that reestablish natural processes;
(E) assessing and evaluating the impacts of
a project in the context of other projects within
a region or watershed;
(F) analyzing and incorporating lessons
learned from recent studies of Corps of Engineers
programs and recent disasters such as Hurricane
Katrina and the Great Midwest Flood of 1993;
(G) encouraging wetlands conservation; and
(H) ensuring the effective implementation of
the policies of this Act.
(3) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—The Coordinating
Committee and the Secretary shall solicit public and
†
HR 1495 EAS
expert comments regarding any revision proposed
under paragraph (2).
(4) REVISION OF PLANNING GUIDANCE.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days
after the date on which a review under para-
graph (1) is completed, the Secretary, after pro-
viding notice and an opportunity for public
comment in accordance with subchapter II of
chapter 5, and chapter 7, of title 5, United
States Code (commonly known as the ‘‘Adminis-
trative Procedure Act’’), shall implement such
proposed updates and revisions to the planning
principles and guidelines, regulations, and circu-
lars of the Corps of Engineers under paragraph
(2) as the Secretary determines to be appro-
priate.
(B) EFFECT.—Effective beginning on the
date on which the Secretary implements the first
update or revision under paragraph (1), sub-
sections (a) and (b) of section 80 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.
1962d–17) shall not apply to the Corps of Engi-
neers.
(5) REPORT.—
†
HR 1495 EAS
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall sub-
mit to the Committees on Environment and Pub-
lic Works and Appropriations of the Senate, and
to the Committees on Transportation and Infra-
structure and Appropriations of the House of
Representatives, a report describing any revision
of planning guidance under paragraph (4).
(B) PUBLICATION.—The Secretary shall
publish the report under subparagraph (A) in
the Federal Register.
SEC. 2007. INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.—The term ‘‘con-
struction activities’’ means development of detailed
engineering and design specifications during the
preconstruction engineering and design phase and the
engineering and design phase of a water resources
project carried out by the Corps of Engineers, and
other activities carried out on a water resources
project prior to completion of the construction and to
turning the project over to the local cost-share part-
ner.
(2) PROJECT STUDY.—The term ‘‘project study’’
means a feasibility report, reevaluation report, or en-
†
HR 1495 EAS
vironmental impact statement prepared by the Corps
of Engineers.
(b) DIRECTOR OF INDEPENDENT REVIEW.—The Sec-
retary shall appoint in the Office of the Secretary a Direc-
tor of Independent Review. The Director shall be selected
from among individuals who are distinguished experts in
engineering, hydrology, biology, economics, or another dis-
cipline related to water resources management. The Sec-
retary shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that
the Director does not have a financial, professional, or other
conflict of interest with projects subject to review. The Di-
rector of Independent Review shall carry out the duties set
forth in this section and such other duties as the Secretary
deems appropriate.
(c) SOUND PROJECT PLANNING.—
(1) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO PLANNING REVIEW.—
The Secretary shall ensure that each project study for
a water resources project shall be reviewed by an
independent panel of experts established under this
subsection if—
(A) the project has an estimated total cost
of more than $40,000,000, including mitigation
costs;
(B) the Governor of a State in which the
water resources project is located in whole or in
†
HR 1495 EAS
part, or the Governor of a State within the
drainage basin in which a water resources
project is located and that would be directly af-
fected economically or environmentally as a re-
sult of the project, requests in writing to the Sec-
retary the establishment of an independent panel
of experts for the project;
(C) the head of a Federal agency with au-
thority to review the project determines that the
project is likely to have a significant adverse im-
pact on public safety, or on environmental, fish
and wildlife, historical, cultural, or other re-
sources under the jurisdiction of the agency, and
requests in writing to the Secretary the establish-
ment of an independent panel of experts for the
project; or
(D) the Secretary determines on his or her
own initiative, or shall determine within 30
days of receipt of a written request for a con-
troversy determination by any party, that the
project is controversial because—
(i) there is a significant dispute re-
garding the size, nature, potential safety
risks, or effects of the project; or
†
HR 1495 EAS
(ii) there is a significant dispute re-
garding the economic, or environmental
costs or benefits of the project.
(2) PROJECT PLANNING REVIEW PANELS.—
(A) PROJECT
PLANNING
REVIEW
PANEL
MEMBERSHIP.—For each water resources project
subject to review under this subsection, the Direc-
tor of Independent Review shall establish a panel
of independent experts that shall be composed of
not less than 5 nor more than 9 independent ex-
perts (including at least 1 engineer, 1 hydrolo-
gist, 1 biologist, and 1 economist) who represent
a range of areas of expertise. The Director of
Independent Review shall apply the National
Academy of Science’s policy for selecting com-
mittee members to ensure that members have no
conflict with the project being reviewed, and
shall consult with the National Academy of
Sciences in developing lists of individuals to
serve on panels of experts under this subsection.
An individual serving on a panel under this sub-
section shall be compensated at a rate of pay to
be determined by the Secretary, and shall be al-
lowed travel expenses.
†
HR 1495 EAS
(B) DUTIES OF PROJECT PLANNING REVIEW
PANELS.—An independent panel of experts estab-
lished under this subsection shall review the
project study, receive from the public written
and oral comments concerning the project study,
and submit a written report to the Secretary
that shall contain the panel’s conclusions and
recommendations regarding project study issues
identified as significant by the panel, including
issues such as—
(i) economic and environmental as-
sumptions and projections;
(ii) project evaluation data;
(iii) economic or environmental anal-
yses;
(iv) engineering analyses;
(v) formulation of alternative plans;
(vi) methods for integrating risk and
uncertainty;
(vii) models used in evaluation of eco-
nomic or environmental impacts of pro-
posed projects; and
(viii) any related biological opinions.
(C) PROJECT PLANNING REVIEW RECORD.—
†
HR 1495 EAS
(i) IN GENERAL.—After receiving a re-
port from an independent panel of experts
established under this subsection, the Sec-
retary shall take into consideration any rec-
ommendations contained in the report and
shall immediately make the report available
to the public on the internet.
(ii) 
RECOMMENDATIONS.—The 
Sec-
retary shall prepare a written explanation
of any recommendations of the independent
panel of experts established under this sub-
section not adopted by the Secretary. Rec-
ommendations and findings of the inde-
pendent panel of experts rejected without
good cause shown, as determined by judicial
review, shall be given equal deference as the
recommendations and findings of the Sec-
retary during a judicial proceeding relating
to the water resources project.
(iii) SUBMISSION
TO
CONGRESS
AND
PUBLIC
AVAILABILITY.—The report of the
independent panel of experts established
under this subsection and the written expla-
nation of the Secretary required by clause
(ii) shall be included with the report of the
†
HR 1495 EAS
Chief of Engineers to Congress, shall be
published in the Federal Register, and shall
be made available to the public on the
Internet.
(D) DEADLINES
FOR
PROJECT
PLANNING
REVIEWS.—
(i) IN GENERAL.—Independent review
of a project study shall be completed prior
to the completion of any Chief of Engineers
report for a specific water resources project.
(ii) DEADLINE FOR PROJECT PLANNING
REVIEW PANEL STUDIES.—An independent
panel of experts established under this sub-
section shall complete its review of the
project study and submit to the Secretary a
report not later than 180 days after the
date of establishment of the panel, or not
later than 90 days after the close of the pub-
lic comment period on a draft project study
that includes a preferred alternative, which-
ever is later. The Secretary may extend
these deadlines for good cause.
(iii) FAILURE TO COMPLETE REVIEW
AND REPORT.—If an independent panel of
experts established under this subsection
†
HR 1495 EAS
does not submit to the Secretary a report by
the deadline established by clause (ii), the
Chief of Engineers may continue project
planning without delay.
(iv) DURATION OF PANELS.—An inde-
pendent panel of experts established under
this subsection shall terminate on the date
of submission of the report by the panel.
Panels may be established as early in the
planning process as deemed appropriate by
the Director of Independent Review, but
shall be appointed no later than 90 days be-
fore the release for public comment of a
draft study subject to review under sub-
section (c)(1)(A), and not later than 30
days after a determination that review is
necessary 
under 
subsection 
(c)(1)(B),
(c)(1)(C), or (c)(1)(D).
(E) EFFECT ON EXISTING GUIDANCE.—The
project planning review required by this sub-
section shall be deemed to satisfy any external
review required by Engineering Circular 1105–
2–408 (31 May 2005) on Peer Review of Deci-
sion Documents.
(d) SAFETY ASSURANCE.—
†
100
HR 1495 EAS
(1) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO SAFETY ASSURANCE
REVIEW.—The Secretary shall ensure that the con-
struction activities for any flood damage reduction
project shall be reviewed by an independent panel of
experts established under this subsection if the Direc-
tor of Independent Review makes a determination
that an independent review is necessary to ensure
public health, safety, and welfare on any project—
(A) for which the reliability of performance
under emergency conditions is critical;
(B) that uses innovative materials or tech-
niques;
(C) for which the project design is lacking
in redundancy, or that has a unique construc-
tion sequencing or a short or overlapping design
construction schedule; or
(D) other than a project described in sub-
paragraphs (A) through (C), as the Director of
Independent Review determines to be appro-
priate.
(2) SAFETY
ASSURANCE
REVIEW
PANELS.—At
the appropriate point in the development of detailed
engineering and design specifications for each water
resources project subject to review under this sub-
section, the Director of Independent Review shall es-
†
101
HR 1495 EAS
tablish an independent panel of experts to review and
report to the Secretary on the adequacy of construc-
tion activities for the project. An independent panel
of experts under this subsection shall be composed of
not less than 5 nor more than 9 independent experts
selected from among individuals who are distin-
guished experts in engineering, hydrology, or other
pertinent disciplines. The Director of Independent Re-
view shall apply the National Academy of Science’s
policy for selecting committee members to ensure that
panel members have no conflict with the project being
reviewed. An individual serving on a panel of experts
under this subsection shall be compensated at a rate
of pay to be determined by the Secretary, and shall
be allowed travel expenses.
(3) DEADLINES
FOR
SAFETY
ASSURANCE
RE-
VIEWS.—An independent panel of experts established
under this subsection shall submit a written report to
the Secretary on the adequacy of the construction ac-
tivities prior to the initiation of physical construction
and periodically thereafter until construction activi-
ties are completed on a publicly available schedule de-
termined by the Director of Independent Review for
the purposes of assuring the public safety. The Direc-
tor of Independent Review shall ensure that these re-
†
102
HR 1495 EAS
views be carried out in a way to protect the public
health, safety, and welfare, while not causing unneces-
sary delays in construction activities.
(4) SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEW RECORD.—After
receiving a written report from an independent panel
of experts established under this subsection, the Sec-
retary shall—
(A) take into consideration recommenda-
tions contained in the report, provide a written
explanation of recommendations not adopted,
and immediately make the report and expla-
nation available to the public on the Internet;
and
(B) submit the report to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works of the Senate
and the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives.
(e) EXPENSES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The costs of an independent
panel of experts established under subsection (c) or (d)
shall be a Federal expense and shall not exceed—
(A) $250,000, if the total cost of the project
in current year dollars is less than $50,000,000;
and
†
103
HR 1495 EAS
(B) 0.5 percent of the total cost of the
project in current year dollars, if the total cost
is $50,000,000 or more.
(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary, at the written re-
quest of the Director of Independent Review, may
waive the cost limitations under paragraph (1) if the
Secretary determines appropriate.
(f) REPORT.—Not later than 5 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Con-
gress a report describing the implementation of this section.
(g) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section shall
be construed to affect any authority of the Secretary to
cause or conduct a peer review of the engineering, scientific,
or technical basis of any water resources project in existence
on the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 2008. MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE LOSSES.
(a) COMPLETION OF MITIGATION.—Section 906(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2283(a)) is amended by adding at the following:
‘‘(3) COMPLETION OF MITIGATION.—In any case
in which it is not technically practicable to complete
mitigation by the last day of construction of the
project or separable element of the project because of
the nature of the mitigation to be undertaken, the
Secretary shall complete the required mitigation as
†
104
HR 1495 EAS
expeditiously as practicable, but in no case later than
the last day of the first fiscal year beginning after the
last day of construction of the project or separable ele-
ment of the project.’’.
(b) USE
OF CONSOLIDATED MITIGATION.—Section
906(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33
U.S.C. 2283(b)) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(3) USE OF CONSOLIDATED MITIGATION.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary deter-
mines that other forms of compensatory mitiga-
tion are not practicable or are less environ-
mentally desirable, the Secretary may purchase
available credits from a mitigation bank or con-
servation bank that is approved in accordance
with the Federal Guidance for the Establishment,
Use and Operation of Mitigations Banks (60
Fed. Reg. 58605) or other applicable Federal
laws (including regulations).
‘‘(B) SERVICE AREA.—To the maximum ex-
tent practicable, the service area of the mitiga-
tion bank or conservation bank shall be in the
same watershed as the affected habitat.
‘‘(C) 
RESPONSIBILITY
RELIEVED.—Pur-
chase of credits from a mitigation bank or con-
†
105
HR 1495 EAS
servation bank for a water resources project re-
lieves the Secretary and the non-Federal interest
from responsibility for monitoring or dem-
onstrating mitigation success.’’.
(c) MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.—Section 906(d) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2283(d)) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1)—
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘to the
Congress unless such report contains’’ and in-
serting ‘‘to Congress, and shall not select a
project alternative in any final record of deci-
sion, environmental impact statement, or envi-
ronmental assessment, unless the proposal, record
of decision, environmental impact statement, or
environmental assessment contains’’; and
(B) in the second sentence, by inserting ‘‘,
and other habitat types are mitigated to not less
than in-kind conditions’’ after ‘‘mitigated in-
kind’’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(3) MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—To mitigate losses to
flood damage reduction capabilities and fish and
wildlife resulting from a water resources project,
†
106
HR 1495 EAS
the Secretary shall ensure that the mitigation
plan for each water resources project complies
fully with the mitigation standards and policies
established pursuant to section 404 of the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1344).
‘‘(B) INCLUSIONS.—A specific mitigation
plan for a water resources project under para-
graph (1) shall include, at a minimum—
‘‘(i) a plan for monitoring the imple-
mentation and ecological success of each
mitigation measure, including a designa-
tion of the entities that will be responsible
for the monitoring;
‘‘(ii) the criteria for ecological success
by which the mitigation will be evaluated
and determined to be successful;
‘‘(iii) land and interests in land to be
acquired for the mitigation plan and the
basis for a determination that the land and
interests are available for acquisition;
‘‘(iv) a description of—
‘‘(I) the types and amount of res-
toration activities to be conducted; and
†
107
HR 1495 EAS
‘‘(II) the resource functions and
values that will result from the mitiga-
tion plan; and
‘‘(v) a contingency plan for taking cor-
rective actions in cases in which monitoring
demonstrates that mitigation measures are
not achieving ecological success in accord-
ance with criteria under clause (ii).
‘‘(4) DETERMINATION OF SUCCESS.—
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—A mitigation plan
under this subsection shall be considered to be
successful at the time at which the criteria under
paragraph (3)(B)(ii) are achieved under the
plan, as determined by monitoring under para-
graph (3)(B)(i).
‘‘(B) 
CONSULTATION.—In 
determining
whether a mitigation plan is successful under
subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall consult
annually with appropriate Federal agencies and
each State in which the applicable project is lo-
cated on at least the following:
‘‘(i) The ecological success of the miti-
gation as of the date on which the report is
submitted.
†
108
HR 1495 EAS
‘‘(ii) The likelihood that the mitigation
will achieve ecological success, as defined in
the mitigation plan.
‘‘(iii) The projected timeline for achiev-
ing that success.
‘‘(iv) Any recommendations for im-
proving the likelihood of success.
‘‘(C) REPORTING.—Not later than 60 days
after the date of completion of the annual con-
sultation, the Federal agencies consulted shall,
and each State in which the project is located
may, submit to the Secretary a report that de-
scribes the results of the consultation described in
(B).
‘‘(D) ACTION
BY
SECRETARY.—The Sec-
retary shall respond in writing to the substance
and recommendations contained in each report
under subparagraph (C) by not later than 30
days after the date of receipt of the report.
‘‘(5) MONITORING.—Mitigation monitoring shall
continue until it has been demonstrated that the miti-
gation has met the ecological success criteria.’’.
(d) STATUS REPORT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Concurrent with the submis-
sion of the President to Congress of the request of the
†
109
HR 1495 EAS
President for appropriations for the Civil Works Pro-
gram for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to
the Committee on the Environment and Public Works
of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a
report describing the status of construction of projects
that require mitigation under section 906 of Water
Resources Development Act 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283)
and the status of that mitigation.
(2) PROJECTS
INCLUDED.—The status report
shall include the status of—
(A) all projects that are under construction
as of the date of the report;
(B) all projects for which the President re-
quests funding for the next fiscal year; and
(C) all projects that have completed con-
struction, but have not completed the mitigation
required under section 906 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2283).
(e) MITIGATION TRACKING SYSTEM.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
establish a recordkeeping system to track, for each
water resources project undertaken by the Secretary
†
110
HR 1495 EAS
and for each permit issued under section 404 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1344)—
(A) the quantity and type of wetland and
any other habitat type affected by the project,
project operation, or permitted activity;
(B) the quantity and type of mitigation
measures required with respect to the project,
project operation, or permitted activity;
(C) the quantity and type of mitigation
measures that have been completed with respect
to the project, project operation, or permitted ac-
tivity; and
(D) the status of monitoring of the mitiga-
tion measures carried out with respect to the
project, project operation, or permitted activity.
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The recordkeeping system
under paragraph (1) shall—
(A) include information relating to the im-
pacts and mitigation measures relating to
projects described in paragraph (1) that occur
after November 17, 1986; and
(B) be organized by watershed, project, per-
mit application, and zip code.
†
111
HR 1495 EAS
(3) AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION.—The Sec-
retary shall make information contained in the rec-
ordkeeping system available to the public on the
Internet.
SEC. 2009. STATE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
Section 22 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1974 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–16) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘SEC. 22. (a) The Secretary’’ and
inserting the following:
‘‘SEC. 22. PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.
‘‘(a) FEDERAL-STATE COOPERATION.—
‘‘(1) COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.—The Secretary’’;
(2) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the
following:
‘‘(2) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—At the request of a gov-
ernmental agency or non-Federal interest, the
Secretary may provide, at Federal expense, tech-
nical assistance to the agency or non-Federal in-
terest in managing water resources.
‘‘(B) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Technical as-
sistance under this paragraph may include pro-
vision and integration of hydrologic, economic,
and environmental data and analyses.’’;