H. R. 1495—69 
(b) MODIFICATION.—Section 3 of the Flood Control Act of August 
18, 1941 (55 Stat. 642), is amended in the second sentence of 
subsection (a) in the matter under the heading ‘‘LOWER MISSISSIPPI 
RIVER’’ by inserting before the period at the end the following: 
‘‘; except that the Ouachita River Levees, Louisiana, authorized 
by the first section of the Mississippi River Flood Control Act 
of May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534), shall remain as a component 
of the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project and afforded oper-
ation and maintenance responsibilities as provided under section 
3 of that Act (45 Stat. 535)’’. 
SEC. 3014. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Cache Creek 
Basin, California, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4112), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to mitigate the impacts of the new south 
levee of the Cache Creek settling basin on the storm drainage 
system of the city of Woodland, including all appurtenant features, 
erosion control measures, and environmental protection features. 
(b) OBJECTIVES.—Mitigation under subsection (a) shall restore 
the preproject capacity of the city of Woodland to release 1,360 
cubic feet per second of water to the Yolo Bypass and shall include— 
(1) channel improvements; 
(2) an outlet work through the west levee of the Yolo 
Bypass; and 
(3) a new low flow cross channel to handle city and county 
storm drainage and settling basin flows (1,760 cubic feet per 
second) when the Yolo Bypass is in a low flow condition. 
SEC. 3015. CALFED STABILITY PROGRAM, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 103(f)(3) of the Water Supply, Reli-
ability, and Environmental Improvement Act (118 Stat. 1695–1696) 
is amended— 
(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘within the Delta (as 
defined in Cal. Water Code §12220)’’; 
(2) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(C) JUSTIFICATION.— 
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 209 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962–2), 
in carrying out levee stability programs and projects 
pursuant to this paragraph, the Secretary of the Army 
may determine that the programs and projects are 
justified by the benefits of the project purposes 
described in subparagraph (A), and the programs and 
projects shall require no additional economic justifica-
tion if the Secretary of the Army further determines 
that the programs and projects are cost effective. 
‘‘(ii) APPLICABILITY.—Clause (i) shall not apply to 
any separable element intended to produce benefits 
that are predominantly unrelated to the project pur-
poses described in subparagraph (A).’’; and 
(3) in subparagraph (D)(i) by inserting ‘‘as described in 
the Record of Decision’’ after ‘‘Public Law 84–99 standard)’’. 
(b) ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—In addi-
tion to funds made available pursuant to the Water Supply, Reli-
ability, and Environmental Improvement Act (Public Law 108– 
361) to carry out section 103(f)(3)(D) of that Act (118 Stat. 1696),
H. R. 1495—70 
there is authorized to be appropriated to carry out projects described 
in that section $106,000,000, to remain available until expended. 
SEC. 3016. COMPTON CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Los Angeles Drainage Area, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 101(b) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611), is modified to add environmental 
restoration and recreation as project purposes. 
SEC. 3017. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER’S CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Grayson Creek/ 
Murderer’s Creek, California, being carried out under section 206 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), 
is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national eco-
system restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest 
in the project. 
SEC. 3018. HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for environmental restoration, Hamilton Airfield, 
California, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 279), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to construct the project substantially in accordance 
with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 19, 2004, 
at a total cost of $228,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $171,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $57,000,000. 
SEC. 3019. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCKTON SHIP 
CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, San Francisco to Stockton, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091) is modified— 
(1) to provide that the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel 
element of the project may be provided in the form of in- 
kind services and materials; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of such element 
the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non- 
Federal interest for such element before the date of an agree-
ment for such planning and design. 
SEC. 3020. KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, 
California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3658), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project, or provide reimbursement not 
to exceed $800,000, for the costs of any work carried out by the
H. R. 1495—71 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the project 
partnership agreement. 
SEC. 3021. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, 
California, authorized by section 601(d) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to determine whether maintenance of the project 
is feasible, and if the Secretary determines that maintenance of 
the project is feasible, to carry out such maintenance. 
SEC. 3022. LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage reduction, 
Llagas Creek, California, authorized by section 501(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 333), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to carry out the project at a total cost 
of $105,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $65,000,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $40,000,000. 
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and implementing the project, 
the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate 
in the financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) 
if the detailed project report evaluation indicates that applying 
such section is necessary to implement the project. 
SEC. 3023. MAGPIE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for Magpie Creek, California, 
authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
(33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to direct the Secretary to apply the 
cost-sharing requirements of section 103(b) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4085) for the portion of the 
project consisting of land acquisition to preserve and enhance 
existing floodwater storage. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership agreement 
for the project. 
(c) COST.—The maximum amount of Federal funds that may 
be expended for the project referred to in subsection (a) shall 
be $10,000,000. 
SEC. 3024. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Pacific Flyway 
Center, Sacramento, California, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330), is modified to authorize the Secretary to expend $2,000,000 
to enhance public access to the project. 
SEC. 3025. PETALUMA RIVER, PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Petaluma River, 
Petaluma, California, authorized by section 112 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2587), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total cost 
of $41,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $26,975,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $14,525,000.
H. R. 1495—72 
SEC. 3026. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Pinole Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under section 
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3027. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA. 
Upon completion of the modifications to the Prado Dam element 
of the project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113), the Memorandum of Agreement 
for the Operation for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Water 
Conservation between the Department of the Army and the Orange 
County Water District (including all the conditions and stipulations 
in the memorandum) shall remain in effect for volumes of water 
made available prior to such modifications. 
SEC. 3028. REDWOOD CITY NAVIGATION CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary may dredge the Redwood City Navigation 
Channel, California, on an annual basis, to maintain the authorized 
depth of –30 feet mean lower low water. 
SEC. 3029. SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS FLOOD CONTROL, 
CALIFORNIA. 
(a) NATOMAS LEVEE FEATURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control and recre-
ation, Sacramento and American Rivers, California (Natomas 
Levee features), authorized by section 9159 of the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act, 1993 (106 Stat. 1944), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to credit $20,503,000 to the Sac-
ramento Area Flood Control Agency for the nonreimbursed 
Federal share of costs incurred by the Agency in connection 
with the project. 
(2) ALLOCATION OF CREDIT.—The Secretary shall allocate 
the amount to be credited pursuant to paragraph (1) toward 
the non-Federal share of such projects as are requested by 
the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. 
(b) JOINT FEDERAL PROJECT AT FOLSOM DAM.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, American 
and Sacramento Rivers, California, authorized by section 
101(a)(6)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 274) and modified by section 128 of the Energy 
and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 
2259), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the 
auxiliary spillway generally in accordance with the Post 
Authorization Change Report, American River Watershed 
Project (Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam Raise 
Projects), dated March 2007, at a total cost of $683,000,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $444,000,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $239,000,000. 
(2) DAM SAFETY.—Nothing in this subsection limits the 
authority of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out dam 
safety activities in connection with the auxiliary spillway in
H. R. 1495—73 
accordance with the Bureau of Reclamation safety of dams 
program. 
(3) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary and the Secretary of 
the Interior are authorized to transfer between the Depart-
ment of the Army and the Department of the Interior 
appropriated amounts and other available funds (including 
funds contributed by non-Federal interests) for the purpose 
of planning, design, and construction of the auxiliary spill-
way. 
(B) TERMS
AND
CONDITIONS.—Any transfer made 
pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to such terms 
and conditions as may be agreed on by the Secretary and 
the Secretary of the Interior. 
SEC. 3030. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water Ship 
Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning 
and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the 
project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3031. SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 202 of the River Basin Monetary Authorization Act 
of 1974 (88 Stat. 49) is amended by striking ‘‘and the monetary 
authorization’’ and all that follows through the period at the end 
and inserting ‘‘; except that the lineal feet in the second phase 
shall be increased from 405,000 lineal feet to 485,000 lineal feet.’’. 
SEC. 3032. SALTON SEA RESTORATION, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
(1) SALTON
SEA
AUTHORITY.—The term ‘‘Salton Sea 
Authority’’ means the joint powers authority established under 
the laws of the State by a joint power agreement signed on 
June 2, 1993. 
(2) SALTON SEA SCIENCE OFFICE.—The term ‘‘Salton Sea 
Science Office’’ means the office established by the United 
States Geological Survey and located on the date of enactment 
of this Act in La Quinta, California. 
(3) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of California. 
(b) PILOT PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.— 
(A) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall review the plan 
approved by the State, entitled the ‘‘Salton Sea Ecosystem 
Restoration Program Preferred Alternative Report and 
Funding Plan’’, and dated May 2007 to determine whether 
the pilot projects described in the plan are feasible. 
(B) IMPLEMENTATION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause (ii), if the Sec-
retary determines that the pilot projects referred to 
in subparagraph (A) meet the requirements described 
in that subparagraph, the Secretary may— 
(I) enter into an agreement with the State; 
and
H. R. 1495—74 
(II) in consultation with the Salton Sea 
Authority and the Salton Sea Science Office, carry 
out pilot projects for improvement of the environ-
ment in the area of the Salton Sea. 
(ii) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall be a party 
to each contract for construction entered into under 
this subparagraph. 
(2) LOCAL
PARTICIPATION.—In prioritizing pilot projects 
under this section, the Secretary shall— 
(A) consult with the State, the Salton Sea Authority, 
and the Salton Sea Science Office; and 
(B) take into consideration the priorities of the State 
and the Salton Sea Authority. 
(3) COST
SHARING.—Before carrying out a pilot project 
under this section, the Secretary shall enter into a written 
agreement with the State that requires the non-Federal interest 
for the pilot project to pay 35 percent of the total costs of 
the pilot project. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out subsection (b) $30,000,000, of which 
not more than $5,000,000 shall be used for any one pilot project 
under this section. 
SEC. 3033. SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem 
(including Santiago Creek, California), authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113) 
and modified by section 104 of the Energy and Water Development 
Appropriation Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–111) and section 309 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), 
is further modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the 
project at a total cost of $1,800,000,000 and to clarify that the 
Santa Ana River Interceptor Line is an element of the project. 
SEC. 3034. SANTA BARBARA STREAMS, LOWER MISSION CREEK, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Santa Barbara streams, 
Lower Mission Creek, California, authorized by section 101(b)(8) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2577), 
is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at 
a total cost of $30,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$15,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,000,000. 
SEC. 3035. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Santa Cruz Harbor, California, 
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 
(72 Stat. 300) and modified by section 809 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) and section 526 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 346), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary— 
(1) to renegotiate the memorandum of agreement with the 
non-Federal interest to increase the annual payment to reflect 
the updated cost of operation and maintenance that is the 
Federal and non-Federal share as provided by law based on 
the project purpose; and 
(2) to revise the memorandum of agreement to include 
terms that revise such payments for inflation.
H. R. 1495—75 
SEC. 3036. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Santa Ana Mainstem, authorized 
by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4113) and modified by section 104 of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–11), 
section 102(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
(104 Stat. 4611), and section 311 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), is modified to direct the Sec-
retary— 
(1) to include ecosystem restoration benefits in the calcula-
tion of benefits for the Seven Oaks Dam, California, portion 
of the project; and 
(2) to conduct a study of water conservation and water 
quality at the Seven Oaks Dam. 
SEC. 3037. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Upper 
Guadalupe River, California, authorized by section 101(a)(9) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modi-
fied to authorize the Secretary to construct the project generally 
in accordance with the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Damage 
Reduction, San Jose, California, Limited Reevaluation Report, dated 
March 2004, at a total cost of $256,000,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $136,700,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $119,300,000. 
SEC. 3038. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Walnut Creek 
Channel, California, being carried out under section 206 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is 
modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national eco-
system restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest 
in the project. 
SEC. 3039. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, being carried out 
under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to 
credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non- 
Federal interest for the project before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3040. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wildcat/San 
Pablo Creek Phase II, California, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–
H. R. 1495—76 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project and 
to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restora-
tion benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project. 
SEC. 3041. YUBA RIVER BASIN PROJECT, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Yuba River Basin, 
California, authorized by section 101(a)(10) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modified— 
(1) to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at 
a total cost of $107,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of 
$70,000,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$37,700,000; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project. 
SEC. 3042. SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO. 
Section 808 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4168) is amended by striking ‘‘agriculture,’’ and inserting 
‘‘agriculture, environmental restoration,’’. 
SEC. 3043. INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESA-
PEAKE BAY, DELAWARE AND MARYLAND. 
The project for navigation, Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware 
River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, authorized by 
the first section of the Rivers and Harbors Act of August 30, 
1935 (49 Stat. 1030), and section 101 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1249), is modified to add recreation as a 
project purpose. 
SEC. 3044. ST. GEORGE’S BRIDGE, DELAWARE. 
Section 102(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1990 (104 Stat. 4612) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘The Secretary shall assume ownership responsibility for the 
replacement bridge not later than the date on which the construc-
tion of the bridge is completed and the contractors are released 
of their responsibility by the State. In addition, the Secretary may 
not carry out any action to close or remove the St. George’s Bridge, 
Delaware, without specific congressional authorization.’’. 
SEC. 3045. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. 
(a) SHORELINE.—The project for shoreline protection, Brevard 
County, Florida, authorized by section 101(b)(7) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to include the mid-reach as an element 
of the project from the Florida department of environmental protec-
tion monuments 75.4 to 118.3, a distance of approximately 7.6 
miles. The restoration work shall only be undertaken upon a deter-
mination by the Secretary, following completion of the general 
reevaluation report authorized by section 418 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2637), that the 
shoreline protection is feasible.
H. R. 1495—77 
(b) CREDIT.—Section 310 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301) is amended by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(d) CREDIT.—After completion of the study, the Secretary may 
credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project for shore protection the cost of nourishment 
and renourishment associated with the project for shore protection 
incurred by the non-Federal interest to respond to damages to 
Brevard County beaches that are the result of a Federal navigation 
project, as determined in the final report for the study.’’. 
SEC. 3046. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO INLET, FLORIDA. 
The project for shore protection, Broward County and Hillsboro 
Inlet, Florida, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1090), and modified by section 311 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of mitigation 
construction and derelict erosion control structure removal carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3047. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA. 
In carrying out the project for navigation, Canaveral Harbor, 
Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1962 (76 Stat. 1174), the Secretary shall construct a sediment 
trap if the Secretary determines construction of the sediment trap 
is feasible. 
SEC. 3048. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA. 
The project for shore protection, Gasparilla and Estero Island 
segments, Lee County, Florida, authorized by section 201 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073), by Senate Resolution 
dated December 17, 1970, and by House Resolution dated December 
15, 1970, and modified by section 309 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2602), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by 
the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3049. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for shore protection, Lido Key 
Beach, Sarasota, Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1819), deauthorized under section 
1001(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
579a(b)), and reauthorized by section 364(2)(A) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 313), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to construct the project substantially in 
accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $15,190,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $9,320,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$5,870,000, and at an estimated total cost of $65,000,000 for periodic 
nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated
H. R. 1495—78 
Federal cost of $30,550,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $34,450,000. 
(b) CONSTRUCTION
OF SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECTS
BY 
NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—The Secretary shall enter into a partner-
ship agreement with the non-Federal interest in accordance with 
section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 
U.S.C. 426i–1) for the modified project. 
SEC. 3050. PEANUT ISLAND, FLORIDA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Peanut Island, Palm Beach County, Florida, being carried out under 
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2309a) shall be $9,750,000. 
SEC. 3051. PORT SUTTON, FLORIDA. 
The project for navigation, Port Sutton, Florida, authorized 
by section 101(b)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2577), is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
carry out the project at a total cost of $12,900,000. 
SEC. 3052. TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FLORIDA. 
The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, 
Florida, authorized by section 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276) is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design, and 
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the 
project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3053. TAMPA HARBOR CUT B, FLORIDA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, 
Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
to construct passing lanes in an area approximately 3.5 miles long 
and centered on Tampa Harbor Cut B if the Secretary determines 
that such improvements are necessary for navigation safety. 
(b) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT.—The non-Federal share 
of the cost of the general reevaluation report for Tampa Harbor, 
Florida, being conducted on June 1, 2005, shall be the same percent-
age as the non-Federal share of the cost of construction of the 
project. 
(c) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter into a new partner-
ship agreement with the non-Federal interest to reflect the cost 
sharing required by subsection (b). 
SEC. 3054. ALLATOONA LAKE, GEORGIA. 
(a) LAND EXCHANGE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may exchange land above 
863 feet in elevation at Allatoona Lake, Georgia, identified 
in the Real Estate Design Memorandum prepared by the Mobile 
district engineer, April 5, 1996, and approved October 8, 1996, 
for land on the north side of Allatoona Lake that is required 
for wildlife management and protection of the water quality 
and overall environment of Allatoona Lake.
H. R. 1495—79 
(2) TERMS
AND
CONDITIONS.—The basis for all land 
exchanges under this subsection shall be a fair market 
appraisal to ensure that land exchanged is of equal value. 
(b) DISPOSAL
AND ACQUISITION
OF LAND, ALLATOONA LAKE, 
GEORGIA.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may— 
(A) sell land above 863 feet in elevation at Allatoona 
Lake, Georgia, identified in the memorandum referred to 
in subsection (a)(1); and 
(B) use the proceeds of the sale, without further appro-
priation, to pay costs associated with the purchase of land 
required for wildlife management and protection of the 
water quality and overall environment of Allatoona Lake. 
(2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— 
(A) WILLING SELLERS.—Land acquired under this sub-
section shall be by negotiated purchase from willing sellers 
only. 
(B) BASIS.—The basis for all transactions under this 
subsection shall be a fair market value appraisal acceptable 
to the Secretary. 
(C) SHARING OF COSTS.—Each purchaser of land under 
this subsection shall share in the associated costs of the 
purchase, including surveys and associated fees in accord-
ance with the memorandum referred to in subsection (a)(1). 
(D) OTHER CONDITIONS.—The Secretary may impose 
on the sale and purchase of land under this subsection 
such other conditions as the Secretary determines to be 
appropriate. 
(c) REPEAL.—Section 325 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4849) is repealed. 
SEC. 3055. LATHAM RIVER, GLYNN COUNTY, GEORGIA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Latham River, Glynn County, Georgia, being carried out under 
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2309a) shall be $6,175,000. 
SEC. 3056. DWORSHAK RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS, IDAHO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out additional gen-
eral construction measures to allow for operation at lower pool 
levels to satisfy the recreation mission at Dworshak Dam, Idaho. 
(b) IMPROVEMENTS.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Sec-
retary shall provide for appropriate improvements to— 
(1) facilities that are operated by the Corps of Engineers; 
and 
(2) facilities that, as of the date of enactment of this Act, 
are leased, permitted, or licensed for use by others. 
(c) COST SHARING.—The Secretary shall carry out this section 
through a cost-sharing program with Idaho State parks and recre-
ation department at a total estimated project cost of $5,300,000. 
Notwithstanding section 103 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2313), the Federal share of such cost shall 
be 75 percent.
H. R. 1495—80 
SEC. 3057. LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, IDAHO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Gooding, Idaho, 
constructed under the emergency conservation work program estab-
lished under the Act of March 31, 1933 (16 U.S.C. 585 et seq.), 
is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to rehabilitate the Gooding 
Channel project for the purposes of flood control and ecosystem 
restoration if the Secretary determines that such rehabilitation 
is not required as a result of improper operation and mainte-
nance of the project by the non-Federal interest and that the 
rehabilitation and ecosystem restoration is feasible; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to plan, design, and construct 
the project at a total cost of $9,000,000. 
(b) COST SHARING.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Costs for reconstruction of a project under 
this section shall be shared by the Secretary and the non- 
Federal interest in the same percentages as the costs of 
construction of the original project were shared. 
(2) OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND
REPAIR
COSTS.—The 
costs of operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of 
a project carried out under this section shall be a non-Federal 
responsibility. 
(c) ECONOMIC
JUSTIFICATION.—Reconstruction efforts and 
activities carried out under this section shall not require economic 
justification. 
SEC. 3058. BEARDSTOWN COMMUNITY BOAT HARBOR, BEARDSTOWN, 
ILLINOIS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Muscooten Bay, 
Illinois River, Beardstown Community Boat Harbor, Beardstown, 
Illinois, constructed under section 107 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified— 
(1) to include the channel between the harbor and the 
Illinois River; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to enter into a partnership 
agreement with the city of Beardstown to replace the local 
cooperation agreement dated August 18, 1983, with the 
Beardstown Community Park District. 
(b) TERMS
OF
PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT.—The partnership 
agreement referred to in subsection (a) shall include the same 
rights and responsibilities as the local cooperation agreement dated 
August 18, 1983, changing only the identity of the non-Federal 
sponsor. 
(c) MAINTENANCE.—Following execution of the partnership 
agreement referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary may carry 
out maintenance of the project referred to in subsection (a) on 
an annual basis. 
SEC. 3059. CACHE RIVER LEVEE, ILLINOIS. 
The Cache River Levee constructed for flood control at the 
Cache River, Illinois, and authorized by the Act of June 28, 1938 
(52 Stat. 1217), is modified to add environmental restoration as 
a project purpose. 
SEC. 3060. CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS. 
The Federal navigation channel for the North Branch Channel 
portion of the Chicago River authorized by section 22 of the Act
H. R. 1495—81 
of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1156), extending from 100 feet down-
stream of the Halsted Street Bridge to 100 feet upstream of the 
Division Street Bridge, Chicago, Illinois, shall be no wider than 
66 feet. 
SEC. 3061. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIERS 
PROJECT, ILLINOIS. 
(a) TREATMENT
AS SINGLE PROJECT.—The Chicago Sanitary 
and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier Project (in this section referred 
to as ‘‘Barrier I’’), as in existence on the date of enactment of 
this Act and constructed as a demonstration project under section 
1202(i)(3) of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and 
Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4722(i)(3)), and the project relating 
to the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, author-
ized by section 345 of the District of Columbia Appropriations 
Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 1352) (in this section 
referred to as ‘‘Barrier II’’) shall be considered to constitute a 
single project. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary, at Federal expense, 
shall— 
(A) upgrade and make permanent Barrier I; 
(B) construct Barrier II, notwithstanding the project 
cooperation agreement with the State of Illinois dated June 
14, 2005; 
(C) operate and maintain Barrier I and Barrier II 
as a system to optimize effectiveness; 
(D) conduct, in consultation with appropriate Federal, 
State, local, and nongovernmental entities, a study of a 
range of options and technologies for reducing impacts 
of hazards that may reduce the efficacy of the Barriers; 
and 
(E) provide to each State a credit in an amount equal 
to the amount of funds contributed by the State toward 
Barrier II. 
(2) USE OF CREDIT.—A State may apply a credit provided 
to the State under paragraph (1)(E) to any cost sharing respon-
sibility for an existing or future Federal project carried out 
by the Secretary in the State. 
(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 345 of the District of 
Columbia Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 
1352) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 345. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, 
ILLINOIS. 
‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 
be necessary to carry out the Barrier II element of the project 
for the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, Illinois, 
initiated pursuant to section 1135 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2294 note; 100 Stat. 4251).’’. 
(d) FEASIBILITY STUDY.—The Secretary, in consultation with 
appropriate Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental entities, 
shall conduct, at Federal expense, a feasibility study of the range 
of options and technologies available to prevent the spread of 
aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi 
River Basins through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and 
other aquatic pathways.
H. R. 1495—82 
SEC. 3062. EMIQUON, ILLINOIS. 
(a) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum amount of Federal 
funds that may be expended for the project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Emiquon, Illinois, being carried out under section 206 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), 
shall be $7,500,000. 
(b) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall affect the eligi-
bility of the project for emergency repair assistance under section 
5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain 
public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
purposes’’, approved August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
SEC. 3063. LASALLE, ILLINOIS. 
In carrying out section 312 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639–4640), the Secretary shall give priority 
to work in the vicinity of LaSalle, Illinois, on the Illinois and 
Michigan Canal. 
SEC. 3064. SPUNKY BOTTOMS, ILLINOIS. 
(a) PROJECT PURPOSE.—The project for flood control, Spunky 
Bottoms, Illinois, authorized by section 5 of the Flood Control 
Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1583), is modified to add environ-
mental restoration as a project purpose. 
(b) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum amount of Federal 
funds that may be expended for the project for improvement of 
the quality of the environment, Spunky Bottoms, Illinois, being 
carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), shall be $7,500,000. 
(c) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall affect the eligi-
bility of the project for emergency repair assistance under section 
5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain 
public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
purposes’’, approved August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
(d) POST CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT.—Of 
the Federal funds expended under subsection (b), not less than 
$500,000 shall remain available for a period of 5 years after the 
date of completion of construction of the modifications for use in 
carrying out post construction monitoring and adaptive manage-
ment. 
SEC. 3065. CEDAR LAKE, INDIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, 
and construct an aquatic ecosystem restoration project at Cedar 
Lake, Indiana. 
(b) COMPLETE FEASIBILITY REPORT.—In planning the project 
authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall expedite completion 
of the feasibility report for the project for aquatic ecosystem restora-
tion and protection, Cedar Lake, Indiana, initiated pursuant to 
section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act 1996 (33 
U.S.C. 2330). 
(c) AUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated 
$11,050,000 to carry out the activities authorized by this sec-
tion. 
(2) OTHER.—The Secretary is authorized to use funds pre-
viously appropriated for the project for aquatic ecosystem res-
toration and protection, Cedar Lake, Indiana, under section