‘‘(1) FEDERAL
AND
STATE
COOPERATION.—
There is’’; 
(5) in subsection (c) strike ‘‘the provisions of 
this section’’ and insert ‘‘subsection (a)(1);’’; and 
(6) by inserting at the end of subsection (c) the 
following: 
‘‘(2) TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE.—There is au-
thorized to be appropriated $2,000,000 annually to 
carry out subsection (a)(2).’’.
SEC. 2026. CENTERS OF SPECIALIZED PLANNING EXPER-
TISE. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary is authorized 
to establish centers to provide specialized planning exper-
tise for water resources projects to be carried out by the 
Secretary to enhance and supplement the capabilities of 
the districts of the Army Corps of Engineers. 
(b) DUTIES.—A center of expertise shall have the fol-
lowing duties: 
(1) Providing technical and managerial assist-
ance to district engineers for project planning, devel-
opment, and implementation. 
(2) Providing peer reviews of new major sci-
entific, engineering, or economic methods, models or 
analyses that will be used to support decisions of the 
Secretary with respect to feasibility studies.
(3) Providing support for external peer review 
panels convened by the Secretary. 
(4) Performing such other duties as prescribed 
by the Secretary.
SEC. 2027. COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING OF FEDERAL, 
STATE, AND LOCAL ACTIONS. 
(a) NOTICE OF INTENT.—Upon request of the non-
Federal interest in the form of a written notice of intent 
to construct or modify a non-Federal water supply, waste-
water infrastructure, flood damage reduction, environ-
mental restoration, or navigation project that requires the 
approval of the Secretary, the Secretary shall initiate, sub-
ject to subsection (h)(1), procedures to establish a sched-
ule for consolidating Federal, State, and local agency envi-
ronmental assessments, project reviews, and issuance of 
all permits for the construction or modification of the 
project. The non-Federal interest shall submit to the Sec-
retary, with the notice of intent, studies and documenta-
tion, including environmental reviews, that may be re-
quired by Federal law for decisionmaking on the proposed 
project. All States having jurisdiction over the proposed 
project shall be invited by the Secretary, but shall not be 
required, to participate in carrying out this section with 
respect to the project.
(b) PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS.—Within 15 days 
after receipt of notice under subsection (a), the Secretary 
shall publish such notice in the Federal Register. The Sec-
retary also shall provide written notification of the receipt 
of a notice under subsection (a) to all State and local 
agencies that may be required to issue permits for the con-
struction of the project or related activities. The Secretary 
shall solicit the cooperation of those agencies and request 
their entry into a memorandum of agreement described 
in subsection (c) with respect to the project. Within 30 
days after publication of the notice in the Federal Reg-
ister, State and local agencies that intend to enter into 
the memorandum of agreement with respect to the project 
shall notify the Secretary of their intent in writing. 
(c) SCHEDULING
AGREEMENT.—Within 90 days 
after the date of receipt of notice under subsection (a) 
with respect to a project, the Secretary of the Interior, 
the Secretary of Commerce, and the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency, as necessary, and any 
State or local agencies that have notified the Secretary 
under subsection (b) shall enter into an agreement with 
the Secretary establishing a schedule of decisionmaking 
for approval of the project and permits associated with 
the project and with related activities. Such schedule may
not extent beyond the last day of the 18-month period be-
ginning on the date of the agreement. 
(d) CONTENTS OF AGREEMENT.—An agreement en-
tered into under subsection (c) with respect to a project, 
to the extent practicable, shall consolidate hearing and 
comment periods, procedures for data collection and re-
port preparation, and the environmental review and per-
mitting processes associated with the project and related 
activities. The agreement shall detail, to the extent pos-
sible, the non-Federal interest’s responsibilities for data 
development and information that may be necessary to 
process each permit required for the project, including a 
schedule when the information and data will be provided 
to the appropriate Federal, State, or local agency. 
(e) PRELIMINARY DECISION.—An agreement entered 
into under subsection (c) with respect to a project shall 
include a date by which the Secretary of the Army, taking 
into consideration the views of all affected Federal agen-
cies, shall provide to the project sponsor, in writing, a pre-
liminary determination whether the project and Federal 
permits associated with it are reasonably likely to receive 
approval. 
(f) REVISION OF AGREEMENT.—The Secretary of the 
Army may revise an agreement entered into under sub-
section (c) with respect to a project once to extend the
schedule to allow the non-Federal interest the minimum 
amount of additional time necessary to revise its original 
application to meet the objections of a Federal, State, or 
local agency that is a party to the agreement. 
(g) FINAL DECISION.—Not later than the final day 
of a schedule established by an agreement entered into 
under subsection (c) with respect to a project, the Sec-
retary of the Army shall notify the non-Federal interest 
of the final decision on the project and whether the permit 
or permits have been issued. 
(h) REIMBURSEMENT.—
(1) COSTS OF COORDINATION.—The costs in-
curred by the Secretary of the Army to establish and 
carry out a schedule to consolidate Federal, State, 
and local agency environmental assessments, project 
reviews, and permit issuance for a project under this 
section shall be paid by the non-Federal interest. 
(2) COSTS INCURRED TO EXPEDITE PERMITS 
AND REVIEWS.—
(A) 
ACCEPTANCE
OF
NON-FEDERAL 
FUNDS.—The Secretary may accept funds from 
the non-Federal interest to hire additional staff 
or obtain the services of consultants, or to pro-
vide financial, technical, and administrative 
support to agencies that have entered into an
agreement with the Secretary under subsection 
(c) with respect to a project in order to facili-
tate the timely processing, review, and comple-
tion of applicable Federal, State, and local 
agency environmental assessments, project re-
views, and permits for the project. 
(B) USE
OF
FUNDS.—Funds accepted 
under this paragraph shall be used to supple-
ment existing resources of the Secretary or a 
participating agency. 
(C) ASSURANCE
OF
LEVEL
OF
SERVICE 
AND
IMPARTIALITY.—The Secretary shall en-
sure that the Department of the Army and any 
participating agency that accepts funds under 
this paragraph shall continue to provide the 
same level of service to other projects and other 
responsibilities not covered by this section as it 
would provide notwithstanding any activities 
carried out under this section and that accept-
ance of such funds will not impact impartial de-
cisionmaking either substantively or proce-
durally. 
(i) REPORT ON TIMESAVINGS METHODS.—Not later 
than 3 years after the date of enactment of this section, 
the Secretary of the Army shall prepare and transmit to
Congress a report estimating the time required for the 
issuance of all Federal, State, and local permits for the 
construction of non-Federal projects for water supply, 
wastewater infrastructure, flood damage reduction, envi-
ronmental restoration, and navigation. The Secretary shall 
include in that report recommendations for further reduc-
ing the amount of time required for the issuance of those 
permits, including any proposed changes in existing law.
SEC. 2028. PROJECT STREAMLINING. 
(a) SCOPE.—This subsection shall apply to each 
study initiated after the date of enactment of this Act to 
develop a feasibility report under section 905 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282), or 
a general reevaluation report, for a water resources project 
if the Secretary determines that such study requires an 
environmental impact statement under the National Envi-
ronmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 
(b) POLICY.—The benefits of water resources 
projects are important to the nation’s economy and rec-
ommendations to Congress regarding such projects should 
not be delayed due to uncoordinated and sequential envi-
ronmental reviews or the failure to timely resolve disputes 
during the development of water resources projects. 
(c) DUTY OF THE SECRETARY.—To carry out the 
policy in subsection (b), the Secretary shall use all authori-
ties available under law to coordinate and expedite the en-
vironmental reviews of a project that is subject to a study 
to which this subsection applies and to ensure timely reso-
lution of disputes. 
(d) AUTHORITIES.—The authorities referred to in 
subsection (c) include all authorities available to the Army 
Corps of Engineers as the lead Federal agency responsible 
for preparing an environmental impact statement under 
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for a pro-
posed water resources project, including authorities that 
provide for—
(1) identifying Federal, State, and local agen-
cies and Indian tribes with jurisdiction over the 
project by law; 
(2) inviting jurisdictional agencies and Indian 
tribes to be cooperating agencies; 
(3) establishing and implementing a schedule 
for completing all reviews, analyses, and opinions, 
and any permits, licenses or approvals; 
(4) entering into a memorandum of under-
standing with cooperating agencies; 
(5) specifying the purpose of and need for the 
project;
(6) determining which alternatives are reason-
able and should be carried forward for detailed anal-
ysis; 
(7) eliminating duplication with other Federal, 
State, local, and Tribal requirements; and 
(8) ensuring early resolution of disputes. 
(e) IDENTIFICATION
OF
JURISDICTIONAL
AGEN-
CIES.— The Secretary shall determine, as soon as prac-
ticable, which Federal, State, and local agencies and In-
dian tribes may reasonably be expected to have jurisdic-
tion over environmental-related matters that may be af-
fected by a proposed water resources project that is sub-
ject to a study to which this section applies or may be 
required by law to conduct an environmental-related re-
view or analysis of, or opinion on, the project or determine 
whether to issue an environmental-related permit, license, 
or approval for the project. 
(f) COOPERATING AGENCIES.—The Secretary shall 
request all agencies identified under subsection (e) with 
respect to a study to be cooperating agencies in the NEPA 
process for the study. Upon receipt of a request from the 
Secretary, a Federal agency shall be a cooperating agency. 
Upon acceptance of a request from the Secretary, a State 
or local agency or an Indian tribe may be a cooperating
agency in the NEPA process for the study to the extent 
permitted by State, local, or Tribal law. 
(g) SCHEDULE.—In consultation with cooperating 
agencies in the NEPA process for a study, the Secretary 
shall establish a schedule for completing the study and its 
associated NEPA process, including any related permits, 
approvals, opinions, reviews, or studies required for the 
proposed water resources project under other Federal, 
State, local, and Tribal laws. The study schedule shall in-
clude opportunities for comment and deadlines for cooper-
ating agencies and shall not reduce any period of time or 
opportunity for comment established by law. 
(h) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINES.—
(1) NOTICE.—If the Secretary determines that 
a cooperating agency has not met a deadline estab-
lished under subsection (i) or is not otherwise meet-
ing its responsibility as a cooperating agency, the 
Secretary shall notify, within 30 days of the date of 
such determination, the head of the Federal or Trib-
al agency or, in any case in which the cooperating 
agency is a State agency or local agency of a State, 
the Governor of the State. 
(2) AGENCY REPORT.—Not later than 30 days 
after date of receipt of a notice under paragraph (1), 
the cooperating agency shall submit a report to the
Secretary explaining the reasons for delay or lack of 
cooperation and what remedial actions the agency 
intends to take with respect to the delay or lack of 
cooperation. 
(3) NOTIFICATION OF CEQ AND COMMITTEES.— 
If the Secretary determines that a cooperating agen-
cy has not satisfactorily addressed the problems that 
are the subject of a notification under paragraph (1) 
within a reasonable period of time following the date 
of the notification, the Secretary shall notify the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee on En-
vironment and Public Works of the Senate, and the 
Council on Environmental Quality. 
(4) RECORD CLOSURE.—At the completion of 
all comment periods established by law and under 
subsection (g) with respect to a study and its associ-
ated NEPA process, the Secretary shall close the 
record for the study. Information submitted, after 
the record has closed, by a cooperating agency that 
does not provide comment during any comment pe-
riod and that otherwise fails to meet its responsibil-
ities as a cooperating agency shall not be considered 
significant new information for purposes of the 
study and NEPA process.
(i) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The Sec-
retary and cooperating agencies with respect to a study 
and its associated NEPA process shall enter into a memo-
randum of understanding incorporating the responsibil-
ities of all parties under this subsection with respect to 
the study. 
(j) 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 subsection applies and its asso-
ciated NEPA process and as the Federal agency 
with expertise in water resources development, the 
Secretary 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 subsection applies and its associ-
ated NEPA process, the Secretary may eliminate 
from consideration any alternatives the Secretary de-
termines are not reasonable or are not reasonably 
anticipated to meet project purposes and needs.
(B) LIMITATION
ON
STATUTORY
CON-
STRUCTION.—This paragraph shall not be con-
strued as affecting a cooperating agency’s abil-
ity to submit comments in the NEPA process 
referred to in paragraph (1). 
(l) LIMITATIONS ON ACTIONS AND VENUE.—A claim 
arising under Federal law seeking judicial review of a final 
feasibility report, general reevaluation report, or record of 
decision for a water resources project to be carried out 
by the Secretary shall be barred unless it is filed in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colum-
bia Circuit or in the court of appeals of the United States 
for the circuit in which the project is located, within 90 
days after the report or record of decision is final. Nothing 
in this subsection shall create a right to judicial review. 
(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 NEPA 
process. Benchmarks may be established for activities 
based on size, cost, and complexity. The Chief of Engi-
neers shall use such benchmarks as a management tool 
to make the feasibility study process more efficient at all 
districts of the Army Corps of Engineers.
(n) NEPA PROCESS DEFINED.—In this section, the 
term ‘‘NEPA process’’ means the process for meeting the 
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 
TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED 
PROVISIONS 
SEC. 3001. COOK INLET, ANCHORAGE HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The project for navigation improvements, Cook Inlet, 
Alaska (Anchorage Harbor, Alaska), authorized by section 
101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 299) 
and modified by section 199 of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2944), is further modi-
fied to authorize the Secretary to establish a harbor depth 
of 45 feet for a length of 5,000 feet at the Port of Anchor-
age marine facility, at a total cost of $14,500,000. Federal 
maintenance shall be in accordance with such section 101; 
except that the project shall be maintained at a depth of 
45 feet for such 5,000 feet. 
SEC. 3002. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 
expended for the project for navigation, King Cove Har-
bor, Alaska, being carried out under section 107 of the 
River Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be 
$8,000,000.
SEC. 3003. ST. PAUL HARBOR, ALASKA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, St. 
Paul Harbor, Alaska, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
3667) and modified by section 303 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 298–299), is further 
modified to direct the Secretary to construct the project, 
at a total cost of $65,000,000. 
(b) LIMITATION
ON NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The 
non-Federal share for the project shall not exceed 
$14,400,000. 
SEC. 3004. SITKA, ALASKA. 
The Thompson Harbor, Sitka, Alaska, element of the 
project for navigation Southeast Alaska Harbors of Ref-
uge, Alaska, authorized by section 101 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4801), is 
modified to direct the Secretary to take such action as 
may be necessary to correct design deficiencies in such ele-
ment, at a Federal expense of $6,300,000. 
SEC. 3005. TATILEK, ALASKA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 
expended for the project for navigation, Tatilek, Alaska, 
being carried out under section 107 of the River and Har-
bor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be $10,000,000.
SEC. 3006. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, American 
and Sacramento Rivers, California, authorized by section 
101(a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 (110 Stat. 3662–3663) and modified by section 366 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 
Stat. 319–320), is further modified to direct the Secretary 
to carry out the project, at a total cost of $205,000,000. 
SEC. 3007. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Cache Creek Basin, 
California, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Re-
sources 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 city of Woodland’s storm drainage system, includ-
ing all appurtenant features, erosion control measures, 
and environmental protection features. Such mitigation 
shall restore the city’s preproject capacity (1,360 cubic 
feet per second) to release water to the Yolo Bypass, in-
cluding channel improvements, an outlet work through the 
west levee of the Yolo Bypass, and a new low-flow cross 
channel to handle city and county storm drainage and set-
tling basin flows (1,760 cubic feet per second) when the 
Yolo Bypass is in a low flow condition.
SEC. 3008. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER’S CREEK, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Gray-
son 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 to direct the 
Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project 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 and to authorize the 
Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration bene-
fits in determining the Federal interest in the project.
SEC. 3009. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCK-
TON SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, San Francisco to Stock-
ton, California, 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 ma-
terials; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit 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 before the date of an agreement 
for such planning and design if the Secretary deter-
mines that such work is integral to such element. 
SEC. 3010. LOS ANGELES HARBOR, LOS ANGELES, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Los Angeles Harbor, Los 
Angeles, California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 
2577), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost 
of the planning, design, and construction work carried out 
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partner-
ship agreement for the project if the Secretary determines 
the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3011. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALI-
FORNIA. 
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 prepare a 
limited reevaluation report to determine whether mainte-
nance of the project is feasible. If the Secretary deter-
mines that maintenance of the project is feasible, the Sec-
retary shall carry out the maintenance.
SEC. 3012. NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, NAPA 
RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
In carrying out the feasibility study for the project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Napa River Salt Marsh 
Restoration, Napa and Sonoma Counties, California, the 
Secretary shall determine whether work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest is integral to the project. In any case 
in which the work is determined to be integral to the 
project before completion of the final report of the Chief 
of Engineers on the project, such work shall be included 
as part of the project, and the cost of such work shall 
be recommended in the final report for credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project. Work carried 
out after submission of the final report and before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project that is deter-
mined to be integral to the project shall be considered as 
part of the project, and the cost of such work shall be 
credited toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project. 
SEC. 3013. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALI-
FORNIA. 
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 $1,000,000 to enhance public ac-
cess to the project. 
SEC. 3014. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the en-
vironment, Pinole Creek Phase I, California, being carried 
out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project 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.
SEC. 3015. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA. 
Upon completion of the modifications to the Prado 
Dam element of the project for flood control, Santa Ana 
River Mainstem, California, authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
Stat. 4113), the Memorandum of Agreement for the Oper-
ation for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Water Con-
servation between the Department of the Army and the 
Orange County Water District (including all the condi-
tions and stipulations in the memorandum) shall remain 
in effect for volumes of water made available prior to such 
modifications.
SEC. 3016. 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 toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost 
of planning and design work carried out by the non-Fed-
eral interest before the date of the partnership agreement 
for the project if the Secretary determines that the work 
is integral to the project.
SEC. 3017. SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Sacramento River, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act 
to provide for the control of the floods of the Mississippi 
River and of the Sacramento River, California, and for 
other purposes’’, approved March 1, 1917 (39 Stat. 949), 
and modified by section 102 of the Energy and Water De-
velopment Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 649), sec-
tion 301(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3110), title I of the Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations Act, 1999 (112 Stat. 1841), 
and section 305 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 299), is further modified to direct the 
Secretary to credit the non-Federal interest up to
$4,000,000 toward the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the project for costs incurred by the non-Federal interest 
in carrying out activities (including the provision of lands, 
easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged mate-
rial disposal areas) associated with environmental compli-
ance for the project if the Secretary determines that the 
activities are integral to the project. 
SEC. 3018. SAN LORENZO RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, San Lorenzo River, 
California, authorized by section 101(a)(5) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3663), is 
modified to direct the Secretary to credit not more than 
$2,000,000 toward the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the project for the cost of the work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines the 
work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3019. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction and recre-
ation, Upper Guadalupe River, California, described as the 
Bypass Channel Plan of the Chief of Engineers dated Au-
gust 19, 1998, authorized by section 101(a)(9) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
275), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 
the project, at a total cost of $140,328,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $70,164,000, and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $70,164,000. The non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project shall be subject to section 103(a)(3) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2213(a)(3)). 
SEC. 3020. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wal-
nut Creek Channel, 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 toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project 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 and to authorize the Secretary to 
consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in deter-
mining the Federal interest in the project. 
SEC. 3021. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the en-
vironment, Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, 
being carried out under section 1135 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is 
modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project 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.
SEC. 3022. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wild-
cat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California, being carried 
out under section 206 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project 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 and to authorize the 
Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration bene-
fits in determining the Federal interest in the project. 
SEC. 3023. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. 
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 shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of nourishment and renourish-
ment associated with the shore protection project 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. 3024. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA. 
The project for shore protection, Gasparilla and 
Estero Island segments, Lee County, Florida, authorized 
under 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 De-
velopment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2602), is further modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Fed-
eral share of the cost of the project the cost of work car-
ried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary de-
termines that the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3025. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA. 
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 Develop-
ment 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 Sec-
retary to construct the project, at a total cost of
$12,926,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$6,547,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$6,379,000, and at an estimated average annual cost of 
$925,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life 
of the project, with an estimated annual Federal cost of 
$468,500 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of 
$456,500. 
SEC. 3026. MANATEE HARBOR, FLORIDA. 
The project for navigation, Manatee Harbor, Florida, 
authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4093) and modified by 
section 102(j) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1990 (104 Stat. 4612), is further modified—
(1) to include the construction of an extension 
of the south channel a distance of approximately 
1584 feet consistent with the general reevaluation 
report, dated April 2002, prepared by the Jackson-
ville District Corps of Engineers, at a total cost of 
$11,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$8,475,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$2,825,000; 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost 
of in-kind services and materials provided for the 
project by the non-Federal interest;
SEC. 3030. MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND BIG MUDDY RIVER, ILLI-
NOIS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Mis-
sissippi River and Big Muddy River, Illinois, authorized 
by the Flood Control Act of 1938, is modified to authorize 
the Secretary to carry out repair and rehabilitation of the 
project at a total cost of $22,600,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $16,950,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $5,650,000, and to perform operation and 
maintenance of the project thereafter. 
(b) OTHER ASSISTANCE.—Federal assistance made 
available through the Department of Agriculture may be 
used toward payment of the non-Federal share of the costs 
of the repair and rehabilitation under this section. 
(c) UNITED STATES LANDS.—Costs under this sec-
tion for the repair and rehabilitation allocable to the pro-
tection of lands owned by the United States shall be a 
Federal responsibility. The Secretary shall seek reimburse-
ment from the Secretary of Agriculture for the costs allo-
cated to protecting lands owned by the Department of Ag-
riculture. 
(d) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NON-FED-
ERAL LANDS.—The cost of operation and maintenance 
under this section allocated to protecting non-Federal 
lands shall be a non-Federal responsibility.
SEC. 3031. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, INDIANA. 
The project for flood control, Little Calumet River, 
Indiana, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4115), is 
modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the 
project in accordance with the post authorization change 
report dated August 2000, at a total cost of 
$186,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$136,600,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$49,700,000. 
SEC. 3032. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA. 
The project for flood control, Indianapolis on West 
Fork of White River, Indiana, authorized by section 5 of 
the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of 
certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood con-
trol, and other purposes’’, approved June 22, 1936 (49 
Stat. 1586), and modified by section 323 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3716) and 
section 322 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 303–304), is further modified to author-
ize the Secretary to undertake the riverfront alterations 
described in the Central Indianapolis Waterfront Concept 
Plan, dated February 1994, for the Fall Creek Reach fea-
ture, at a total cost of $28,545,000.
SEC. 3033. WOLF LAKE, INDIANA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wolf 
Lake, Indiana, 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 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 before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that 
the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3034. HARLAN COUNTY, KENTUCKY. 
The Harlan County, Kentucky, element of the project 
for flood control, Levisa and Tug Fork of the Big Sandy 
and Cumberland Rivers, West Virginia, Virginia, and Ken-
tucky, authorized by section 202(a) of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 
1339), is modified to direct the Secretary to take measures 
to provide a 100-year level of flood protection. 
SEC. 3035. PRESTONSBURG, KENTUCKY. 
The Prestonsburg, Kentucky, element of the project 
for flood control, Levisa and Tug Fork of the Big Sandy 
and Cumberland Rivers, West Virginia, Virginia, and Ken-
tucky, authorized by section 202(a) of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 
1339), is modified to direct the Secretary to take measures 
to provide a 100-year level of flood protection.
SEC. 3036. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 315(a)(1) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2603–
2604) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(1) is authorized to study, design, construct, 
operate, and maintain, at Federal expense, a Type 
A Regional Visitor Center in the vicinity of Morgan 
City, Louisiana, in consultation with the State of 
Louisiana, to provide information to the public on 
the Atchafalaya River system and other associated 
waterways that have influenced surrounding commu-
nities, and national and local water resources devel-
opment of the Army Corps of Engineers in South 
Central Louisiana; and’’. 
(b) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 315(b) of 
such Act is amended by striking ‘‘(a)’’ and inserting 
‘‘(a)(2)’’. 
(c) DONATIONS.—Section 315 of such Act is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(c) DONATIONS.—In carrying out subsection (a)(1), 
the Mississippi River Commission is authorized to accept 
the donation of cash, funds, lands, materials, and services 
from non-Federal governmental entities and non-profit 
corporations.’’.
SEC. 
3037. 
PUBLIC 
ACCESS, 
ATCHAFALAYA 
BASIN 
FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LOUISIANA. 
The public access feature of the Atchafalaya Basin 
Floodway System, Louisiana, project, authorized by the 
Water Resources Development Act 1986 (100 Stat. 4142), 
is modified to authorize the Secretary to acquire from will-
ing sellers the fee interest, exclusive of oil, gas, and min-
erals, of an additional 20,000 acres of land within the 
Lower Atchafalaya Basin Floodway for the public access 
feature of the Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, to en-
hance fish and wildlife resources, at a total cost of 
$4,000,000. 
SEC. 3038. J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, MISSISSIPPI 
RIVER TO SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA. 
The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, 
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to 
Shreveport, Louisiana, authorized by section 601(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
4142) and modified by section 4(h) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4016), sec-
tion 102(p) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1990 (104 Stat. 4613), section 301(b)(7) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3710), and 
section 316 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2572), is further modified to authorize
the purchase and reforesting of lands which have been 
cleared or converted to agricultural uses. 
SEC. 3039. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOUISIANA. 
The Mississippi Delta Region project, Louisiana, au-
thorized as part of the project for hurricane-flood protec-
tion on Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, by section 204 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077) and modi-
fied by section 365 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3739), is further modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the costs of relocating oyster beds 
in the Davis Pond project area if the Secretary determines 
that the work is integral to the Mississippi Delta Region 
project. 
SEC. 3040. NEW ORLEANS TO VENICE, LOUISIANA. 
The New Orleans to Venice, Louisiana, project for 
hurricane protection, authorized by section 203 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1184), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to carry out the work on the 
St. Jude to City Price, Upper Reach A back levee. The 
Federal share of the cost of such work shall be 70 percent. 
SEC. 3041. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (EAST 
OF HARVEY CANAL), LOUISIANA. 
Section 328 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 304–305) is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) by striking ‘‘operation and mainte-
nance’’ and inserting ‘‘operation, maintenance, 
rehabilitation, repair, and replacement’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘Algiers Channel’’ and in-
serting ‘‘Algiers Canal Levees’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project shall be 35 percent.’’.
SEC. 3042. UNION RIVER, MAINE. 
The project for navigation, Union River, Maine, au-
thorized by the first section of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act 
making appropriations for the construction, repair, and 
preservation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, 
and for other purposes’’, approved June 3, 1896 (29 Stat. 
215), is modified by redesignating as an anchorage area 
that portion of the project consisting of a 6-foot turning 
basin and lying northerly of a line commencing at a point 
N315,975.13, E1,004,424.86 thence running north 61 de-
grees 27 minutes 20.71 seconds west about 132.34 feet 
to a point N316,038.37, E1,004,308.61.
SEC. 3043. CASS RIVER, SPAULDING TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage re-
duction, Cass River, Spaulding Township, Saginaw Coun-
ty, Michigan, being carried out under section 205 of the
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified 
to incorporate flood control works constructed by the non-
Federal interests between Sheridan Road and East Street 
(M–13) if the Secretary determines that the inclusion of 
such flood control works is feasible. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project 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. 
SEC. 3043. DETROIT RIVER SHORELINE, DETROIT, MICHI-
GAN. 
(a) IN
GENERAL.—The project for emergency 
streambank and shoreline protection, Detroit River Shore-
line, Detroit, Michigan, being carried out under section 14 
of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), is 
modified to include measures to enhance public access. 
(b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The max-
imum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for 
the project shall be $3,000,000. 
SEC. 3044. WATER RESOURCES INSTITUTE, MUSKEGON, 
MICHIGAN. 
(a) IN
GENERAL.—The project for emergency 
streambank and shoreline protection, Water Resources In-
stitute, Muskegon, Michigan, being carried out under sec-
tion 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 
701r), is modified to provide for completion of shoreline 
protection measures in accordance with the approved 
plans and specifications for Grand Valley State University, 
Lake Michigan Center, dated August 6, 2001. 
(b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The max-
imum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for 
the project shall be $2,000,000. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of 
design and implementation of shoreline protection meas-
ures 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. 
SEC. 3045. SAGINAW RIVER, BAY CITY, MICHIGAN. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 
expended for the project for emergency streambank pro-
tection, Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan, being carried 
out under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 
(33 U.S.C. 701r), shall be $2,000,000. 
SEC. 3046. ADA, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage re-
duction, Wild Rice River, Ada, Minnesota, being carried
out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
(33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in de-
termining the Federal interest in the project. 
(b) EVALUATION
OF BENEFITS
AND COSTS.—In 
evaluating the economic benefits and costs for the project, 
the Secretary shall not consider the emergency levee adja-
cent to Judicial Ditch No. 51 in the determination of con-
ditions existing prior to construction of the project. 
(c) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and implementing 
the project, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal in-
terest to participate in the financing of the project in ac-
cordance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources De-
velopment 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. 
SEC. 3047. DULUTH HARBOR, MCQUADE ROAD, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Du-
luth Harbor, McQuade Road, Minnesota, being carried out 
under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 
(33 U.S.C. 577) and modified by section 321 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2605), is 
further modified to authorize the Secretary to provide 
public access and recreational facilities as generally de-
scribed in the Detailed Project Report and Environmental
Assessment, McQuade Road Harbor of Refuge, Duluth, 
Minnesota, dated August 1999. 
(b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The max-
imum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for 
the project shall be $5,000,000. 
SEC. 3048. GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is directed to im-
plement under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 
1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) the locally preferred plan for flood 
damage reduction, Granite Falls, Minnesota, substantially 
in accordance with the detailed project report dated 2002, 
at a total cost of $12,000,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $8,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$4,000,000. 
(b) PROJECT FINANCING.—In evaluating and imple-
menting the project under this section, the Secretary shall 
allow the non-Federal interests to participate in the fi-
nancing 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 detailed project report 
evaluation indicates that applying such section is nec-
essary to implement the project. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the project the cost of design and 
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest
before date of execution of a partnership agreement for 
the project if the Secretary determines that the work is 
integral to the project. 
(d) MAXIMUM FUNDING.—The maximum amount of 
Federal funds that may be expended for the flood damage 
reduction shall be $8,000,000. 
SEC. 3049. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA. 
Section 527 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2657) is amended—
(1) in subsection (a) by inserting after ‘‘June 
30, 1999’’ the following ‘‘, and including Hennepin 
Island and adjacent areas on the east side of the 
Mississippi River’’; and 
(2) in subsection (c) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$25,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3050. RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA. 
The project for flood control, Red Lake River at 
Crookston, Minnesota, authorized by section 101(a)(23) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
278), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 
the project, at a total cost of $25,000,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $16,250,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $8,750,000.
SEC. 3051. SILVER BAY, MINNESOTA. 
The project for navigation, Silver Bay, Minnesota, 
authorized by section 2 of the Rivers and Harbors Act 
of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 19), is modified to include 
operation and maintenance of the general navigation fa-
cilities as a Federal responsibility. 
SEC. 3052. TACONITE HARBOR, MINNESOTA. 
The project for navigation, Taconite Harbor, Min-
nesota, carried out under section 107 of the River and 
Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to in-
clude operation and maintenance of the general navigation 
facilities as a Federal responsibility. 
SEC. 3053. TWO HARBORS, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Two 
Harbors, Minnesota, being carried out under section 107 
of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), 
is modified to include construction of a dredged material 
disposal facility, including actions required to clear the 
site. 
(b) LANDS, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY.—
Non-Federal interests shall be responsible for providing all 
lands, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations necessary 
for the construction of the dredged material disposal facil-
ity.
(c) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The max-
imum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for 
the project shall be $5,000,000.
SEC. 3054. DEER ISLAND, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. 
The project for ecosystem restoration, Deer Island, 
Harrison County, Mississippi, being carried out under sec-
tion 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(33 U.S.C. 2326) is modified to authorize the non-Federal 
interest to provide any portion of the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project in the form of services, materials, 
supplies, or other in-kind contributions. 
SEC. 3055. BOIS BRULE DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, 
MISSOURI. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 
expended for the project for flood damage reduction, Bois 
Brule Drainage and Levee District, Missouri, being car-
ried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 
1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), shall be $25,000,000. 
SEC. 3056. SAND CREEK WATERSHED, WAHOO, NEBRASKA. 
The project for ecosystem restoration and flood dam-
age reduction, Sand Creek watershed, Wahoo, Nebraska, 
authorized by section 101(b)(20) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried
out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the part-
nership agreement for the project if the Secretary deter-
mines that the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3057. ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NEW YORK. 
The project for shoreline protection, Orchard Beach, 
Bronx, New York, authorized by section 554 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781), is 
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the 
project, at a total cost of $18,000,000.
SEC. 3058. TIMES BEACH, BUFFALO, NEW YORK. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the en-
vironment, Times Beach, Buffalo, New York, being car-
ried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4251), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit not more than $750,000 toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for the 
cost of planning, design, and construction work carried out 
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partner-
ship agreement for the project if the Secretary determines 
the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3059. PORT OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, NEW 
YORK AND NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary may not require as an item of local 
cooperation in the construction of the project for naviga-
tion, Port of New York and New Jersey, New York and
New Jersey, authorized by section 101(a)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), 
that the non-Federal interest agree that the container fa-
cilities at the former Military Ocean Terminal at the Ba-
yonne, New Jersey, site along the Port Jersey Channel 
be operational prior to construction of the 50-foot deep 
Port Jersey Channel. Such container facilities may be 
made operational concurrent with the navigation project.
SEC. 3060. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM. 
Section 553(c) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781) is amended to read as fol-
lows: 
‘‘(c) NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM DEFINED.—
In this section, the term ‘New York State Canal System’ 
means the 524 miles of navigable canal that comprise the 
New York State Canal System, including the Erie, Ca-
yuga-Seneca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals and the his-
toric alignments of these canals, including the cities of Al-
bany and Buffalo.’’. 
SEC. 3061. WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE CONTROL, 
MCKENZIE SUBBASIN, OREGON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for environmental 
restoration, Willamette River Temperature Control, 
McKenzie Subbasin, Oregon, authorized by section 
101(a)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3665) and modified by section 344 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
308), is further modified to direct the Secretary to pay, 
subject to the availability of appropriations, compensation 
for losses to small business attributable to the implemen-
tation of the draw down conducted as a part of project 
implementation in 2002. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—Not later than 
120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary shall establish, and provide public notice of, a pro-
gram—
(1) to receive claims for compensation for losses 
to small business attributable to the implementation 
of the draw down conducted as a part of project im-
plementation in 2002; 
(2) to evaluate claims for such losses; and 
(3) to pay claims for such losses. 
(c) IMPLEMENTATION
OF PROGRAM.—In carrying 
out the program established under subsection (b), the Sec-
retary shall provide—
(1) public notice of the existence of the pro-
gram sufficient to reach those in the area that may 
have suffered losses to small businesses; 
(2) a period for the submission of claims of not 
fewer than 45 days and not greater than 75 days
from the date of the first public notice of the exist-
ence of the program; 
(3) for the evaluation of each claim submitted 
to the Secretary under the program and a deter-
mination of whether the claim constitutes a loss to 
a small business on or before the last day of the 30-
day period beginning on the date of submission of 
the claim; and 
(4) for the payment of each claim that the Sec-
retary determines constitutes a loss to a small busi-
ness on or before the last day of the 30-day period 
beginning on the date of the Secretary’s determina-
tion.
(d) LOSS TO A SMALL BUSINESS DEFINED.—In this 
section, the term ‘‘loss to a small business’’ means docu-
mented financial losses associated with commercial activ-
ity of a small business that can be attributed to the tur-
bidity levels in the McKenzie River being higher than 
those anticipated in the original planning documents and 
public announcements existing before the initiation of the 
draw down in 2002. Commercial losses include decline in 
sales, loss of revenue (including loss of revenue from can-
celed or delayed reservations at lodging establishments), 
and any other financial losses that can be shown to be
associated with the elevated turbidity levels in the 
McKenzie River in 2002. 
(e) PAYMENT OF CLAIMS.—The payment of claims 
for losses to small businesses shall be a Federal responsi-
bility. 
SEC. 3062. LACKAWANNA RIVER AT OLYPHANT, PENNSYL-
VANIA. 
The project for flood control, Lackawanna River at 
Olyphant, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 101(16) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 
4803), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 
the project, at a total cost of $20,000,000. 
SEC. 3063. LACKAWANNA RIVER AT SCRANTON, PENNSYL-
VANIA. 
The project for flood control, Lackawanna River at 
Scranton, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 101(17) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 
4803), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 
the project, at a total cost of $23,000,000.
SEC. 3064. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary may take such action as may be nec-
essary, including construction of a breakwater, to prevent 
shoreline erosion between .07 and 2.7 miles south of Penn-
sylvania State Route 994 on the east shore of Raystown 
Lake, Pennsylvania.
SEC. 3065. SHERADEN PARK STREAM AND CHARTIERS 
CREEK, 
ALLEGHENY 
COUNTY, 
PENNSYL-
VANIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, 
Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny 
County, Pennsylvania, 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 
up to $400,000 toward the non-Federal share of the cost 
of the project for planning and design work carried out 
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partner-
ship agreement for the project if the Secretary determines 
that the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3066. SOLOMON’S CREEK, WILKES-BARRE, PENNSYL-
VANIA. 
The project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, Penn-
sylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), is 
modified to include as a project element the project for 
flood control for Solomon’s Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsyl-
vania. 
SEC. 3067. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 313(h)(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4847; 107 Stat. 407; 117 
Stat. 142) is amended by striking ‘‘Allegheny, Armstrong, 
Beford, Blair, Cambria, Clearfield, Fayette, Franklin,
Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Mifflin, 
Somerset, Snyder, Washington, and Westmoreland Coun-
ties’’ and inserting ‘‘Allegheny, Armstrong, Bedford, 
Blair, Cambria, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, Greene, Hun-
tingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Somerset, Washington, and 
Westmoreland Counties’’. 
SEC. 3068. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
In carrying out the project for flood control, Wyo-
ming Valley, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
Stat. 4124), the Secretary shall coordinate with non-Fed-
eral interests to review opportunities for increased public 
access. 
SEC. 3069. LITTLE LIMESTONE CREEK, JONESBOROUGH, 
TENNESSEE. 
In evaluating and implementing the project for flood 
damage reduction, Little Limestone Creek, Jonesborough, 
Tennessee, under section 205 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), 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 Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184), to the 
extent that the Secretary’s evaluation indicates that apply-
ing such section is necessary to implement the project.
SEC. 3070. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TEXAS. 
The project for flood control, Lower Rio Grande 
Basin, Texas, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4125), is 
modified—
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit 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 before the date of 
the partnership agreement for the project if the Sec-
retary determines that the work is integral to the 
project; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary, in calculating the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project, to make 
a determination under section 103(m) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2213(m)) on the non-Federal interest’s ability to 
pay .
SEC. 3071. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, 
TEXAS. 
The project for ecosystem restoration and storm dam-
age reduction, North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, 
Texas, authorized by section 556 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 353), is modified to 
include recreation as a project purpose.
SEC. 3072. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. 
The project for flood control, San Antonio Channel, 
Texas, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1954 (68 Stat. 1259) as part of the comprehensive plan 
for flood protection on the Guadalupe and San Antonio 
Rivers in Texas and modified by section 103 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2921) and 
section 335 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2611), is further modified to authorize 
the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the cost of construction work car-
ried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary de-
termines that the work is integral to the project. 
SEC. 3073. ELIZABETH RIVER, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA. 
Section 358 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 312) is amended by striking ‘‘Sep-
tember 30, 1999’’ and inserting ‘‘May 4, 1997’’. 
SEC. 3074. ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, VIRGINIA. 
The project for flood control, Roanoke River Upper 
Basin, Virginia, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4126) and 
modified by section 110 of the Energy and Water Develop-
ment Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 650), is further 
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the 
project, at a total cost of $64,300,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $42,100,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $22,200,000.
SEC. 3075. LAKE KEMP, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may not take any 
legal or administrative action seeking to remove a Lake 
Kemp improvement before the earlier of January 1, 2020, 
or the date of any transfer of ownership of the improve-
ment occurring after the date of enactment of this Act. 
(b) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.—The United States, 
or any of its officers, agents, or assignees, shall not be 
liable for any injury, loss, or damage accruing to the own-
ers of a Lake Kemp improvement, their lessees, or occu-
pants as a result of any flooding or inundation of such 
improvements by the waters of the Lake Kemp reservoir, 
or for such injury, loss, or damage as may occur through 
the operation and maintenance of the Lake Kemp dam 
and reservoir in any manner. 
(c) LAKE KEMP IMPROVEMENT DEFINED.—In this 
section, the term ‘‘Lake Kemp improvement’’ means an 
improvement (including dwellings) located within the flow-
age easement of Lake Kemp, Texas, below elevation 1159 
feet mean sea level.
SEC. 3076. BLAIR AND SITCUM WATERWAYS, TACOMA HAR-
BOR, WASHINGTON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Blair 
and Sitcum Waterways, Tacoma Harbor, Washington, au-
thorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4096), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to review the locally prepared plan for the 
Blair and Sitcum Waterways, Washington, and, if the Sec-
retary determines that the plan meets the evaluation and 
design standards of the Corps of Engineers and that the 
plan is feasible, to authorize the Secretary to carry out 
the plan, at a Federal cost of $4,240,000. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project 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. 
SEC. 3077. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 579(c) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790; 113 Stat. 312) is amended 
by striking ‘‘$47,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$89,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3078. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN. 
The project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor, Wis-
consin, authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 
30, 1852, is modified to direct the Secretary to deepen
the upstream reach of the navigation channel from 12 feet 
to 18 feet, at a total cost of $300,000. 
SEC. 3079. CONTINUATION OF PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. 
(a) 
IN
GENERAL.—Notwithstanding 
section 
1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)), the following projects shall 
remain authorized to be carried out by the Secretary: 
(1) The project for navigation, Fall River Har-
bor, Massachusetts, authorized by section 101 of the 
River and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731). 
(2) The project for flood control, Agana River, 
Guam, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
4127). 
(b) LIMITATION.—A project described in subsection 
(a) shall not be authorized for construction after the last 
day of the 7-year period beginning on the date of enact-
ment of this Act, unless, during such period, funds have 
been obligated for the construction (including planning 
and design) of the project. 
SEC. 3080. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATION. 
That portion of the project for navigation, Manitowoc 
Harbor, Wisconsin, consisting of the channel in the south 
part of the outer harbor, deauthorized by section 101 of 
the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1176), may
be carried out by the Secretary if the Secretary determines 
that it is feasible. 
SEC. 3081. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The following projects are not au-
thorized after the date of enactment of this Act: 
(1) BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The 
portion of the project for navigation, Bridgeport 
Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the River and 
Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 919), con-
sisting of an 18-foot channel in Yellow Mill River 
and described as follows: Beginning at a point along 
the 
eastern 
limit 
of 
the 
existing 
project, 
N123,649.75, E481,920.54, thence running north-
westerly about 52.64 feet to a point N123,683.03, 
E481,879.75, thence running northeasterly about 
1,442.21 feet to a point N125,030.08, E482,394.96, 
thence running northeasterly about 139.52 feet to a 
point along the east limit of the existing channel, 
N125,133.87, E482,488.19, thence running south-
westerly about 1,588.98 feet to the point of origin. 
(2) NORWALK
HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The 
following portions a 10-foot channel of the project 
for navigation, Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut, au-
thorized by the first section of the Rivers and Har-
bors Appropriations Act of March 2, 1919 (40 Stat. 
1276): 
(A) An approximate rectangular shaped 
section along the northwesterly terminus of the 
channel. The section is 35-feet wide and about 
460-feet long and is further described as fol-
lows: Commencing at a point N104,165.85, 
E417,662.71, thence running south 24 degrees 
06 minutes 55 seconds east 395.00 feet to a 
point N103,805.32, E417,824.10, thence run-
ning south 00 degrees 38 minutes 06 seconds 
east 87.84 feet to a point N103,717.49, 
E417,825.07, thence running north 24 degrees 
06 minutes 55 seconds west 480.00 feet, to a 
point N104,155.59, E417.628.96, thence run-
ning north 73 degrees 05 minutes 25 seconds 
east 35.28 feet to the point of origin. 
(B) An area having the approximate shape 
of a parallelogram along the northeasterly por-
tion of the channel, southeast of the area de-
scribed in subparagraph (A). This area is 20-
feet wide and about 260-feet long and is further 
described as follows: Commencing at a point 
N103,855.48, E417,849.99, thence running 
south 33 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds east
(b) NORWALK HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The 10-
foot channel portion of the Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut, 
navigation project described in subsection (a)(2) is modi-
fied to authorize the Secretary to realign the channel to 
include a new section immediately north of the area de-
scribed in subsection (a)(2)(B). The new triangular 
shaped section is described as follows: Commencing at a 
point N103,968.35, E417,815.29, thence running south 
17 degrees 05 minutes 15 seconds east 118.09 feet to a 
point N103,855.48, E417,849.99, thence running north 
33 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds west 36.76 feet to a 
point N103,886.27, E417.829.90, thence running north 
10 degrees 05 minutes 26 seconds west 83.37 feet to the 
point of origin. 
(c) CHICAGO RIVER AND HARBOR, CHICAGO, ILLI-
NOIS.—The projects for navigation, Chicago River and 
Chicago Harbor referred to in subsection (a)(3) are modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to redefine the Federal naviga-
tion channel for the North Branch Canal portion extend-
ing from 100 feet downstream of the Halsted Street 
Bridge to 100 feet upstream of the Division Street Bridge 
to be no wider than 66 feet. 
(d) ADDITIONAL
DEAUTHORIZATIONS.—The fol-
lowing projects, with a total estimated authorized cost of 
$2,017,000,000, are not authorized after the date of en-
100
actment of this Act, except with respect to any portion 
of such a project which portion has been completed before 
such date or is under construction on such date: 
(1) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Cache Creek Basin, Clear Lake Outlet Channel, 
California, authorized by the Water Resources De-
velopment Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(2) The project for flood control, Colusa 
Trough Drainage Canal, Sacramento River and 
Tributaries, California, authorized by the Flood 
Control Acts of 1917, 1928, and 1941 and the River 
and Harbor Act of 1937. 
(3) The project for flood control, Goleta and Vi-
cinity, California, authorized by the Flood Control 
Act of 1970. 
(4) The project to modify the Central and 
Southern Florida project to improve water supply to 
the Everglades National Park, Florida, authorized 
by the Flood Control Act of 1954 (Public Law 83–
780) and the Flood Control Act of 1968 (Public 
Law 90–483). 
(5) The project for flood control, Central and 
Southern Florida Project, Shingle Creek Basin, 
Florida, authorized by the Flood Control Act of 
1962.
101
(6) The project for hydroelectric power, Wailua 
Falls, Wailua River, Kauai, Hawaii, authorized by 
section 601 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 Public Law 99–662). 
(7) The project for navigation, Illinois Water-
way Cal-Sag Part III, Illinois, authorized by the 
River and Harbor Act of 1946. 
(8) The project for flood control, Middle Wa-
bash, Greenfield Bayou, Indiana, authorized by sec-
tion 10 of the Flood Control Act of 1946. 
(9) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Lake George, Hobart, Indiana, authorized by section 
602 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(10) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Green Bay Levee and Drainage District No. 2, 
Iowa, authorized by the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986, deauthorized in fiscal year 1991, 
and reauthorized by the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–580). 
(11) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Hazard, Kentucky, authorized by section 3 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (Public 
Law 100–676) and section 108 of the Water Re-
102
sources Development Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–
640). 
(12) The recreation portion of the project for 
flood control, Taylorsville Lake, Kentucky, author-
ized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 
1966. 
(13) The project for flood control, West Ken-
tucky Tributaries, Kentucky, authorized by the 
Flood Control Acts of 1965 and 1970 and the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986. 
(14) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Bayou Cocodrie and Tributaries, Louisiana, author-
ized by the Flood Control Act of 1941 and the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1974. 
(15) The project for flood control, Eastern 
Rapides and South-Central Avoyelles Parishes, Lou-
isiana, authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(Public Law–611). 
(16) The project for Red River Waterway, 
Shreveport, Louisiana to Daingerfield, Texas, au-
thorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (Pub-
lic Law 90–483). 
(17) The project for flood damage reduction 
Brockton, Massachusetts, authorized by section
103
401(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(18) The project for navigation, Grand Haven 
Harbor, Michigan, authorized by section 202 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public 
Law 99–662). 
(19) The project for navigation, Greenville Har-
bor, Mississippi, authorized by section 601 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public 
Law 99–662). 
(20) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Platte River Flood and Related Streambank Erosion 
Control, Nebraska, authorized by section 603 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public 
Law 99–662). 
(21) The project for navigation, Eisenhower 
and Snell Locks, New York, authorized by section 
1163 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(22) The project for navigation, Outer Habor, 
Buffalo, New York, authorized by section 110 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992. 
(23) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Sugar Creek Basin, North Carolina and South Caro-
lina, authorized by section 401 of the Water Re-
104
sources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–
662). 
(24) The project for hydropower, Libby Dam, 
Montana, (Units 6–8), authorized by section 549 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(Public Law 104–303). 
(25) The project for flood control and recre-
ation, Fairfield, Ohio, authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(Public Law 99–662). 
(26) The project for shoreline protection, 
Maumee Bay, Lake Erie, Ohio, authorized by sec-
tion 501(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986. 
(27) The project for flood control and water 
supply, Parker Lake, Muddy Boggy Creek, Okla-
homa, authorized by the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(28) The project for the Columbia River, Sea-
farers Memorial, Hammond, Oregon, authorized by 
the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
Act of 1991. 
(29) The project for bulkhead repairs, Quonset 
Point-Davisville, Rhode Island, authorized by section
105
571 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996. 
(30) The project for hydroelectric pumped stor-
age facility, South Dakota, authorized by section 
601 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99–662). 
(31) The project for wildlife habitat compensa-
tion, Oahe Dam, Lake Oahe (Wildlife Restoration, 
South Dakota and North Dakota, authorized by the 
Flood Control Act of 1970. 
(32) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Harris Fork Creek, Tennessee and Kentucky, au-
thorized by section 102 of the Water Resources De-
velopment Acts of 1976 and 1986. 
(33) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Arroyo Colorado, Texas, authorized by the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 
99–662). 
(34) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Cypress Creek-Structural, Texas, authorized by the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1988. 
(35) The project for flood damage reduction, 
East Fork channel Improvement, Increment 2, East 
Fork of the Trinity River, Texas, authorized by the 
Flood Control Act of 1962.
106
(36) The project for flood damage reduction, 
Falfurrias, Texas, authorized by the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1988. 
(37) The project for bank erosion, Kanawha 
River, Charleston, West Virginia, authorized by sec-
tion 603(f)(13) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–662).
SEC. 3083. LAND CONVEYANCES. 
(a) MILFORD, KANSAS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the provisions of 
this section, the Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
deed without consideration to the Geary County Fire 
Department, Milford, Kansas, all right, title, and in-
terest of the United States in and to a parcel of land 
consisting of approximately 7.4 acres located in 
Geary County, Kansas, for construction, operation, 
and maintenance of a fire station. 
(2) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—
The exact acreage and the description of the real 
property referred to in paragraph (1) shall be deter-
mined by a survey that is satisfactory to the Sec-
retary. 
(3) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines 
that the property conveyed under paragraph (1) 
ceases to be held in public ownership or to be used
107
for any purpose other than a fire station, all right, 
title, and interest in and to the property shall revert 
to the United States, at the option of the United 
States. 
(b) BOARDMAN, OREGON.—Section 501(g)(1) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
3751) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘city of Boardman,’’ and insert-
ing ‘‘the Boardman Park and Recreation District, 
Boardman,’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘such city’’ and inserting ‘‘the 
city of Boardman’’. 
(c) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.—
(1) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING 
PROVISIONS.—Section 2696 of title 10, United 
States Code, shall not apply to any conveyance 
under this section. 
(2) ADDITIONAL
TERMS
AND
CONDITIONS.—
The Secretary may require that any conveyance 
under this section be subject to such additional 
terms and conditions as the Secretary considers ap-
propriate and necessary to protect the interests of 
the United States. 
(3) COSTS
OF
CONVEYANCE.—An entity to 
which a conveyance is made under this section shall
108
be responsible for all reasonable and necessary costs, 
including real estate transaction and environmental 
compliance costs, associated with the conveyance. 
(4) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a convey-
ance is made under this section shall hold the 
United States harmless from any liability with re-
spect to activities carried out, on or after the date 
of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed. 
The United States shall remain responsible for any 
liability with respect to activities carried out, before 
such date, on the real property conveyed. 
SEC. 3084. EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY INTER-
ESTS AND USE RESTRICTIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to each deed listed 
in subsection (b), the reversionary interests and use re-
strictions relating to industrial use purposes are extin-
guished. 
(b) AFFECTED DEEDS.—The deeds with the fol-
lowing county auditor’s file numbers are referred to in 
subsection (a): 
(1) Auditor’s Instrument No. 399218 of Nez 
Perce County, Idaho—2.07 acres. 
(2) Auditor’s Instrument No. 487437 of Nez 
Perce County, Idaho—7.32 acres.
109
(c) NO EFFECT OF OTHER RIGHTS.—Nothing in this 
section affects the remaining rights and interests of the 
Corps of Engineers for authorized project purposes. 
TITLE IV—STUDIES 
SEC. 4001. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM. 
Section 455 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 330–332) is amended by adding at 
the end the following: 
‘‘(g) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS
FOR STUDY.—The 
non-Federal interest may provide up to 100 percent of the 
non-Federal share required under subsection (f) in the 
form of services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind con-
tributions.’’. 
SEC. 4002. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal expense, a 
study to determine the feasibility of providing navigation 
improvements at St. George, Alaska. 
SEC. 4003. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WA-
TERWAY, ILLINOIS, IOWA, MINNESOTA, MIS-
SOURI, AND WISCONSIN. 
The Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on 
the results of the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Wa-
terway Restructured System Navigation Feasibility Study, 
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, no 
later than July 1, 2004.
110
SEC. 4004. HAMILTON, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary is directed to continue planning, 
preconstruction, engineering, and design efforts on the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins Comprehensive 
Study-Hamilton City Flood Damage Reduction and Eco-
system Restoration Initial Project and shall include in the 
study an area 2 miles north and 4 miles south of State 
Highway 32.
SEC. 4005. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2636) is amended by striking ‘‘32 
months’’ and inserting ‘‘44 months’’. 
SEC. 4006. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study 
to determine the feasibility of, and alternatives for, meas-
ures to protect water diversion facilities and fish protective 
screen facilities in the vicinity of river mile 178 on the 
Sacramento River, California.
SEC. 4007. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOA-
QUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a 
study to determine the feasibility of the beneficial use of 
dredged material from the San Francisco Bay in the Sac-
ramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, including the ben-
efits and impacts of salinity in the Delta and the benefits 
to navigation, flood damage reduction, ecosystem restora-
111
tion, water quality, salinity control, water supply reli-
ability, and recreation. 
(b) COOPERATION.—In conducting the study, the 
Secretary shall cooperate with the California Department 
of Water Resources and appropriate Federal and State en-
tities in developing options for the beneficial use of 
dredged material from San Francisco Bay for the Sac-
ramento-San Joaquin Delta area. 
(c) REVIEW.—The study shall include a review of the 
feasibility of using Sherman Island as a rehandling site 
for levee maintenance material, as well as for ecosystem 
restoration. The review may include monitoring a pilot 
project using up to 150,000 cubic yards of dredged mate-
rial and being carried out at the Sherman Island site, ex-
amining larger-scale use of dredged materials from the 
San Francisco Bay and Suisun Bay Channel, and ana-
lyzing the feasibility of the potential use of saline mate-
rials from the San Francisco Bay for both rehandling and 
ecosystem restoration purposes.
SEC. 4008. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of including the northern end of Tybee Island 
extending from the north terminal groin to the mouth of 
Lazaretto Creek as a part of the project for beach erosion 
control, Tybee Island, Georgia, carried out under section
113
SEC. 4013. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. 
Section 425(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2638) is amended by inserting 
‘‘Lake Michigan and’’ before ‘‘the Chicago River’’. 
SEC. 4014. SOUTH BRANCH, CHICAGO RIVER, CHICAGO, IL-
LINOIS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of carrying out a project for ecosystem restora-
tion at the South Fork of the South Branch of the Chicago 
River, Chicago, Illinois.
SEC. 4015. ARTHUR KILL CHANNEL AND MORSES CREEK TO 
PERTH AMBOY, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall reevaluate the results of the 
study for the project for navigation, Arthur Kill Channel 
and Morses Creek to Perth Amboy, New Jersey, to deter-
mine whether the benefits of the project have increased 
as a result of a change in circumstances. In conducting 
the reevaluation, the Secretary shall review the locally pre-
pared study entitled ‘‘Pre-Feasibility Study for Channel 
Improvements—Arthur Kill from Morses Creek to Perth 
Amboy and Raritan Bay Approaches’’. 
SEC. 4017. PUEBLO OF ZUNI, NEW MEXICO. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of carrying out projects for water resources de-
velopment, environmental restoration, and natural re-
sources protection for the Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico,
114
under section 203 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2269). 
SEC. 4018. HUDSON-RARITAN ESTUARY, NEW YORK AND 
NEW JERSEY. 
In carrying out the study for environmental restora-
tion, Hudson-Raritan Estuary, New York and New Jer-
sey, the Secretary shall establish and utilize watershed res-
toration teams composed of estuary restoration experts 
from the Corps of Engineers, the New Jersey Department 
of Environmental Protection, and the Port Authority of 
New York and New Jersey and other experts designated 
by the Secretary for the purpose of developing habitat res-
toration and water quality enhancement. 
SEC. 4019. SAC AND FOX NATION, OKLAHOMA. 
The Secretary shall complete a water and related 
land resource conservation and management plan for the 
Sac and Fox Nation, Oklahoma, under section 203 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 
2269). 
SEC. 4020. SUTHERLIN, OREGON. 
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study of 
water resources along Sutherlin Creek in the vicinity of 
Sutherlin, Oregon, to determine the feasibility of carrying 
out a project to restore and enhance aquatic resources 
using a combination of structural and bioengineering tech-
115
niques and, if the Secretary determines that the project 
is feasible, may carry out the project.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$2,500,000. 
SEC. 4021. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND FISH PASSAGE 
IMPROVEMENTS, OREGON. 
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
determine the feasibility of undertaking ecosystem restora-
tion and fish passage improvements on rivers throughout 
the State of Oregon. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out the study, the 
Secretary shall—
(1) work in coordination with the State of Or-
egon, local governments, and other Federal agencies; 
and 
(2) place emphasis on—
(A) fish passage and conservation and res-
toration strategies to benefit species that are 
listed or proposed for listing as threatened or 
endangered species under the Endangered Spe-
cies Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and 
(B) other watershed restoration objectives. 
(c) PILOT PROGRAM.—
116
(1) IN
GENERAL.—In conjunction with con-
ducting the study under subsection (a), the Sec-
retary may carry out pilot projects to demonstrate 
the effectiveness of ecosystem restoration and fish 
passages. 
(2) AUTHORIZATION
OF
APPROPRIATIONS.—
There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 
to carry out this subsection. 
SEC. 4022. NORTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA AQUATIC ECO-
SYSTEM RESTORATION AND PROTECTION. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration 
and protection projects in the counties of Lackawanna, 
Lycoming, Susquehanna, Wyoming, Pike, Wayne, Sul-
livan, Bradford, Northumberland, Union, Snyder, and 
Montour, Pennsylvania, particularly as related to aban-
doned mine drainage abatement and reestablishment of 
stream and river channels. 
SEC. 4023. SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TEXAS. 
In conducting a feasibility study for shore protection 
and related improvements between Sabine Pass and the 
entrance to Galveston Bay, Texas, the Secretary may in-
clude any benefits related to the use of State Highway 
87 as an emergency evacuation route in the determination 
of national economic development benefits of the project.
117
SEC. 4024 CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary shall conduct a river basin study for 
the Chehalis River basin, Washington, including a study 
of the uses of the basin’s water resources to assist users 
in developing a fair and equitable distribution of such re-
sources. 
SEC. 4025. SPRAGUE, LINCOLN COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary may accept from the non-Federal in-
terest to pay all or a part of the non-Federal share of 
the cost of feasibility study for the project for flood control 
in the vicinity of Sprague, Lincoln County, Washington, 
funds made available under any other Federal program 
if such use of the funds is permitted under the Federal 
program.
SEC. 4026. MONONGAHELA RIVER BASIN, NORTHERN WEST 
VIRGINIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration 
and protection projects in the watersheds of the 
Monongahela River basin lying within the counties of 
Hancock, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, 
Doddridge, 
Monongalia, 
Marion, 
Harrison, 
Taylor, 
Barbour, Preston, Tucker, Mineral, Grant, Gilmer, 
Brooke, and Rithchie, West Virginia, particularly as re-
lated to abandoned mine drainage abatement.
118
SEC. 4027 WAUWATOSA, WISCONSIN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage re-
duction and environmental restoration, Menomonee River 
and Underwood Creek, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. 
TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS 
PROVISIONS 
SEC. 5001. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Federal in-
terest, the Secretary shall be responsible for maintenance 
of the following navigation channels and breakwaters con-
structed or improved by the non-Federal interest if the 
Secretary determines that such maintenance is economi-
cally justified and environmentally acceptable and that the 
channel or breakwater was constructed in accordance with 
applicable permits and appropriate engineering and design 
standards: 
(1) Pix Bayou navigation channel, Chambers 
County, Texas. 
(2) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, Pidgeon Indus-
trial Park, Memphis Harbor, Tennessee. 
(3) Racine Harbor, Wisconsin. 
(b) COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 
6 months after the date of receipt of a request from a 
non-Federal interest for Federal assumption of mainte-
nance of a channel listed in subsection (a), the Secretary
119
shall make a determination as provided in subsection (a) 
and advise the non-Federal interest of the Secretary’s de-
termination.
(c) SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TEXAS.—The Sec-
retary shall remove sunken vessels and debris between 
miles 35 and 43 of the Channel to Orange, Sabine-Neches 
Waterway, Texas, for the purpose of improving navigation 
safety and reducing the risk to the public. 
SEC. 5002. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide tech-
nical, planning, and design assistance to non-Federal in-
terests for carrying out watershed management, restora-
tion, and development projects at the locations described 
in subsection (d). 
(b) 
SPECIFIC
MEASURES.—Assistance 
provided 
under subsection (a) may be in support of non-Federal 
projects for the following purposes: 
(1) Management and restoration of water qual-
ity. 
(2) Control and remediation of toxic sediments. 
(3) Restoration of degraded streams, rivers, 
wetlands, and other waterbodies to their natural 
condition as a means to control flooding, excessive 
erosion, and sedimentation.
120
(4) Protection and restoration of watersheds, 
including urban watersheds. 
(5) Demonstration of technologies for non-
structural measures to reduce destructive impacts of 
flooding. 
(c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal share 
of the cost of assistance provided under subsection (a) 
shall be 50 percent. 
(d) PROJECT LOCATIONS.—The locations referred to 
in subsection (a) are the following: 
(1) Spring Branch watershed, Huntsville, Ala-
bama. 
(2) Tuolumne County, California. 
(3) Cucamonga basin, Upland, California. 
(4) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois. 
(5) Those portions of the watersheds of the 
Concord, Charles, Blackstone, Neponset, Taunton, 
Nashua, Shawsheen, and Merrimack Rivers, Massa-
chusetts, lying within the Interstate Route 495 cor-
ridor. 
(6) Jackson Brook watershed, New Jersey. 
(7) Those portions of the watersheds of the 
Beaver, Upper Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower Alle-
gheny, 
Kiskiminetas, 
Lower 
Monongahela, 
Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Rivers
121
lying within the counties of Beaver, Butler, Law-
rence, and Mercer, Pennsylvania. 
(8) Southampton Creek watershed, South-
ampton, Pennsylvania. 
(9) Unami Creek watershed, Milford Township, 
Pennsylvania. 
(10) Amite River basin, Louisiana. 
(11) Iberville Parish, East Atchafalaya River 
basin, Louisiana. 
(12) Genesee River watershed, New York. 
(13) Tonawanda Creek watershed, New York. 
(14) Buffalo River watershed, New York. 
(15) Eighteenmile Creek watershed, Niagara 
County, New York. 
(16) Cattaragus Creek watershed, New York. 
(17) Oswego River basin, New York. 
(18) Red River watershed, Louisiana. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$15,000,000. 
SEC. 5003. DAM SAFETY. 
(a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide assist-
ance to enhance dam safety at the following locations: 
(1) Mountain Park Dam, Mountain Park, Geor-
gia.
122
(2) Barber Dam, Ada County, Idaho. 
(3) Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho. 
(4) Lost Valley Dam, Adams County, Idaho. 
(5) Salmon Falls Dam, Twin Falls County, 
Idaho. 
(6) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York. 
(7) Lake Carl Blackwell Dam, Stillwater, Okla-
homa. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$6,000,000. 
SEC. 5004. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Federal in-
terest, the Secretary shall evaluate the structural integrity 
and effectiveness of a project for flood damage reduction 
and, if the Secretary determines that the project does not 
meet such minimum standards as the Secretary may es-
tablish and, absent action by the Secretary, the project 
will fail, the Secretary may take such action as may be 
necessary to restore the integrity and effectiveness of the 
project. 
(b) PRIORITY.—The Secretary shall evaluate under 
subsection (a) the following projects:
123
(1) Project for flood damage reduction, Arkan-
sas River Levees, river mile 205 to river mile 308.4, 
Arkansas. 
(2) 
Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Marianna Borough, Pennsylvania. 
(3) 
Project 
for 
flood 
damage 
reduction, 
Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee.
SEC. 5005. FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS. 
Section 212(e) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332(e); 114 Stat. 2599) is 
amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 
(27); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of para-
graph (28) and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(29) La Crosse County, Wisconsin; 
‘‘(30) Crawford County, Wisconsin; 
‘‘(31) Buffalo County, Wisconsin; 
‘‘(32) Calhoun County, Illinois; 
‘‘(33) Saint Charles County, Missouri; 
‘‘(34) Saint Louis County, Missouri; 
‘‘(35) Dubuque County, Iowa; 
‘‘(36) Scott County, Iowa; 
‘‘(37) Rock Island County, Illinois;
124
‘‘(38) Ascension Parish, Louisiana; 
‘‘(39) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana; 
‘‘(40) Iberville Parish, Louisiana; and 
‘‘(41) Livingston Parish, Louisiana.’’. 
SEC. 5006. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AUTHORIZED 
PROJECTS. 
Section 219(e) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 
334) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 
(7); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of para-
graph (8) and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(9) $20,000,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(20); 
‘‘(10) $20,000,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(25); 
‘‘(11) $15,000,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(26); 
‘‘(12) $7,800,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(27); 
‘‘(13) $18,000,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(31); and
125
‘‘(14) $30,000,000 for the project described in 
subsection (c)(40).’’. 
SEC. 5007. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS AND 
CONSTRUCTION FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS. 
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the re-
ports and, if the Secretary determines the project is fea-
sible, shall expedite completion of construction for the fol-
lowing projects: 
(1) Welch Point, Elk River, Cecil County, 
Maryland, and Chesapeake, Maryland, being carried 
out under section 535 of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 348–349). 
(2) West View Shores, Cecil County, Maryland, 
being carried out under section 521 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114. Stat. 
2655). 
(3) Sylvan Beach Breakwater, Verona, Oneida 
County, New York, being carried out under section 
3 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal 
participation in the cost of protecting the shores of 
publicly owned property’’, approved August 13, 1946 
(33 U.S.C. 426g).
(4) Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk, New 
York, being carried out under section 205 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).
126
(5) Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New 
York, being carried out under section 205 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). 
(6) Steele Creek, Village of Ilion, New York, 
being carried out under section 205 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). 
SEC. 5008. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CER-
TAIN PROJECTS. 
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the re-
ports for the following projects and, if the Secretary deter-
mines that a project is justified in the completed report, 
proceed directly to project preconstruction, engineering, 
and design: 
(1) Project for flood damage reduction and eco-
system restoration, Sacramento and San Joaquin 
River basins, Hamilton, California. 
(2) Project for ecosystem restoration, Univer-
sity Lake, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 
(3) Project for shoreline protection, Detroit 
River Greenway Corridor, Detroit, Michigan. 
SEC. 5009. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES ASSESS-
MENT. 
The Secretary may provide assistance to a coordi-
nated effort by Federal, State, and local agencies, non-
Federal and nonprofit entities, regional researchers, and
127
other interested parties to assess the water resources and 
water resources needs of river basins and watersheds of 
the southeastern United States. 
SEC. 5010. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL 
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. 
Section 1103(e)(7)(A) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(7)(A)) is amended 
by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The non-Federal in-
terest may provide the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the project in the form of services, materials, supplies, or 
other in-kind contributions.’’.
SEC. 5011. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS EN-
HANCEMENT PROJECT. 
Section 514(g) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 343; 117 Stat. 142) is amended 
by striking ‘‘and 2004’’ and inserting ‘‘through 2015’’. 
SEC. 5012. MEMBERSHIP OF MISSOURI RIVER TRUST. 
Section 904(b)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2708) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (vii); 
(2) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (ix); 
and 
(3) by inserting after clause (vii) the following: 
‘‘(viii) rural water systems; and’’.
128
SEC. 5014. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RES-
TORATION. 
Section 506(f)(3)(B) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 1962d; 114 Stat. 2646) 
is amended by striking ‘‘50 percent’’ and inserting ‘‘100 
percent’’. 
SEC. 5015. SUSQUEHANNA, DELAWARE, AND POTOMAC 
RIVER BASINS. 
(a) EX OFFICIO MEMBER.—Notwithstanding section 
3001(a) of the 1997 Emergency Supplemental Appropria-
tions Act for Recovery From Natural Disasters, and for 
Overseas Peacekeeping Efforts, Including Those in Bosnia 
(111 Stat. 176) and section 2.2 of both the Susquehanna 
River Basin Compact (Public Law 91–575) and the Dela-
ware River Basin Compact (Public Law 87–328), begin-
ning in fiscal year 2002 and thereafter, the Division Engi-
neer, North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers, shall 
be the ex officio United States member under the Susque-
hanna River Basin Compact and the Delaware River 
Basin Compact, who shall serve without additional com-
pensation and who may designate an alternate member or 
members in accordance with the terms of those respective 
compacts. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION TO ALLOCATE.—The Secretary 
may allocate funds to the Susquehanna River Basin Com-
mission, Delaware River Basin Commission, and the
129
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (Poto-
mac River Basin Compact (Public Law 91–407)) to fulfill 
the equitable funding requirements of their respective 
interstate compacts. 
(c) WATER SUPPLY
AND CONSERVATION STOR-
AGE.—The Secretary shall enter into an agreement with 
the Delaware River Basin Commission to provide tem-
porary water supply and conservation storage at the 
Francis E. Walter Dam, Pennsylvania, during any period 
in which the Commission has determined that a drought 
warning or drought emergency exists. The agreement shall 
provide that the cost for any such water supply and con-
servation storage shall not exceed the incremental oper-
ating costs associated with providing the storage. 
SEC. 5016. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORA-
TION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM. 
Section 510(i) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3761) is amended by striking 
‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$30,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5018. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. 
The Secretary shall review the navigation and aquatic 
ecosystem restoration components of the Montgomery 
Riverfront and Downtown Master Plan, Montgomery, Ala-
bama, dated May 2001, and prepared by the non-Federal 
interest and, if the Secretary determines that those com-
130
ponents meet the evaluation and design standards of the 
Corps of Engineers and that the components are feasible, 
may carry out the components at a Federal cost not to 
exceed $5,000,000.
SEC. 5019. ALASKA. 
Section 570 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 369) is amended—
(1) in subsection (e)(3)(B) by striking the last 
sentence; 
(2) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$40,000,000’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding sec-
tion 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–5b(b)), for any project undertaken under this sec-
tion, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit enti-
ty, with the consent of the affected local government. 
‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may 
be used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to ad-
minister projects under this section at 100 percent Fed-
eral expense.’’.
SEC. 5020. AKUTAN SMALL BOAT HARBOR, ALASKA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall expedite the 
study for the Akutan Small Boat Harbor, Alaska, and
131
upon completion of the feasibility study, shall design and 
construct the project, if the Secretary determines that the 
project is feasible. 
(b) TREATMENT
OF
CERTAIN
DREDGING.—The 
headlands dredging for the mooring basin shall be consid-
ered general navigation feature for purposes of estimating 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project. 
SEC. 5021. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, ALASKA. 
(a) LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.—The 
Secretary shall assume responsibility for the long-term 
maintenance and repair of the Lowell Creek Tunnel. 
(b) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
determine whether alternative methods of flood diversion 
in Lowell Canyon are feasible. 
SEC. 5022. ST. HERMAN HARBOR, KODIAK, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall carry out, on an emergency basis, 
necessary removal of rubble, sediment, and rock that are 
impeding the entrance to the St. Herman Harbor, Kodiak, 
Alaska, at a Federal cost of $2,000,000.
SEC. 5023. AUGUSTA AND CLARENDON, ARKANSAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to 
perform operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of au-
thorized and completed levees on the White River between 
Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas.
132
(b) REIMBURSEMENT.—After performing the oper-
ation, maintenance, and rehabilitation under subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the Sec-
retary of the Interior of an amount equal to the costs allo-
cated to benefits to a Federal wildlife refuge of such oper-
ation, maintenance, and rehabilitation. 
SEC. 5024. LOOMIS LANDING, ARKANSAS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of shore damage 
in the vicinity of Loomis Landing, Arkansas, to determine 
if the damage is the result of a Federal navigation project, 
and, if the Secretary determines that the damage is the 
result of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary shall 
carry out a project to mitigate the damage under section 
111 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 
426i). 
SEC. 5025. MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGA-
TION PROJECT, ARKANSAS. 
The McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation and 
comprehensive development project, Arkansas, authorized 
by the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction 
of certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood con-
trol, and for other purposes’’, approved June 28, 1938 (52 
Stat. 1215), and the first section of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 364) and modified by section 108 
of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations
133
Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–112), is further modified to 
authorize a project depth of 12 feet in the State of Arkan-
sas. 
SEC. 5025. ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MIS-
SOURI. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of increased sil-
tation and streambank erosion in the St. Francis River 
basin, Arkansas and Missouri, to determine if the siltation 
or erosion, or both, are the result of a Federal flood con-
trol project and, if the Secretary determines that the silta-
tion or erosion, or both, are the result of a Federal flood 
control project, the Secretary shall carry out a project to 
mitigate the siltation or erosion, or both.
SEC. 5026. CAMBRIA, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(48) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–220) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘$10,300,000’’ and inserting the 
following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$10,300,000’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project not to exceed $3,000,000 for the cost of 
planning and design work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest before the date of the
134
partnership agreement for the project if the 
Secretary determines that the work is integral 
to the project.’’; and 
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of 
subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph (1) 
of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as added by 
paragraph (2) of this section). 
SEC. 5027. EAST SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(22) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835–4836; 113 Stat. 336) 
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting the 
following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$25,000,000’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
project (i) 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 integral to the project; and (ii) the 
cost of in-kind services and materials provided 
for the project by the non-Federal interest.
135
‘‘(C) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The non-
Federal interest may provide any portion of the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project in 
the form of services, materials, supplies, or 
other in-kind contributions.’’; and 
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of 
subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph (1) 
of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as added by 
paragraph (2) of this section).
SEC. 5028. SACRAMENTO AREA, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(23) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835–4836; 113 Stat. 336) 
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$35,000,000’’; and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘water supply and’’ before ‘‘re-
gional’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘$llllllll for wastewater and water sup-
ply infrastructure in the counties of Modoc, Lassen, 
Plumas, Butte, Sierra, Nevada, El Dorado, and 
Placer, California.’’. 
SEC. 5029. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) PIER 70 WHARF 5 REMOVAL AND DREDGING 
PROJECT.—The Secretary, in cooperation with the Port
136
of San Francisco, shall carry out the project for removal 
of Wharf 5 and associated pilings and dredgings at Pier 
70 in San Francisco, California, substantially in accord-
ance with the Port’s redevelopment plans. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated $1,600,000 to carry out this 
section. 
SEC. 5030. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, WATERFRONT 
AREA. 
(a) AREA TO BE DECLARED NONNAVIGABLE; PUB-
LIC INTEREST.—Unless the Secretary finds, after con-
sultation with local and regional public officials (including 
local and regional public planning organizations), that the 
proposed projects to be undertaken within the boundaries 
of the portion of the San Francisco, California, waterfront 
area described in subsection (b) are not in the public inter-
est, such portion is declared to be nonnavigable waters of 
the United States. 
(b) NORTHERN EMBARCADERO SOUTH OF BRYANT 
STREET.—The portion of the San Francisco, California, 
waterfront area referred to in subsection (a) is as follows: 
Beginning at the intersection of the northwesterly line of 
Bryant Street with the southwesterly line of Spear Street, 
which intersection lies on the line of jurisdiction of the 
San Francisco Port Authority; following thence westerly
137
and southerly along said line of jurisdiction as described 
in the State of California Harbor and Navigable Code Sec-
tion 1770, as amended in 1961, to its intersection with 
the easterly line of Townsend Street produced southerly; 
thence northerly along said easterly line of Townsend 
Street produced to its intersection with the United States 
Government pier-head line; thence following said pier-head 
line westerly and northerly to its intersection with the ex-
isting boundary line of Piers 30/32, then northerly and 
easterly along the existing boundary of Piers 30/32 until 
its intersection with the United States Government pier-
head line, thence following said pier-head line westerly and 
northerly to the northwesterly line of Bryant Street pro-
duced northwesterly; thence southwesterly along said 
northwesterly line of Bryant Street produced to the point 
of beginning. 
(c) REQUIREMENT THAT AREA BE IMPROVED.—The 
declaration of nonnavigability under subsection (a) applies 
only to those parts of the area described in subsection (b) 
that are or will be bulkheaded, filled, or otherwise occupied 
by permanent structures and does not affect the applica-
bility of any Federal statute or regulation applicable to 
such parts the day before the date of enactment of this 
Act, including sections 9 and 10 of the Act of March 3, 
1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 and 403; 30 Stat. 1151), commonly
138
known as the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 
1899, section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 
(d) EXPIRATION DATE.—If, 20 years from the date 
of enactment of this Act, any area or part thereof de-
scribed in subsection (b) is not bulkheaded or filled or oc-
cupied by permanent structures, including marina facili-
ties, in accordance with the requirements set out in sub-
section (c), or if work in connection with any activity per-
mitted in subsection (c) is not commenced within 5 years 
after issuance of such permits, then the declaration of 
nonnavigability for such area or part thereof shall expire. 
SEC. 5031. STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) REEVALUATION.—The Secretary shall reevaluate 
the feasibility of the Lower Mosher Slough element and 
the levee extensions on the Upper Calaveras River element 
of the project for flood control, Stockton Metropolitan 
Area, California, carried out under section 211(f)(3) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
3683), to determine the eligibility of such elements for re-
imbursement under section 211 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 
701b–13). 
(b) SPECIAL RULES FOR REEVALUATION.—In con-
ducting the reevaluation under subsection (a), the Sec-
139
retary shall not reject a feasibility determination based on 
policies of the Corps of Engineers concerning the fre-
quency of flooding, the drainage area, and the amount of 
runoff. 
(c) REIMBURSEMENT.—If the Secretary determines 
that the elements referred to subsection (a) are feasible, 
the Secretary shall reimburse, subject to appropriations, 
the non-Federal interest under section 211 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 for the Federal share 
of the cost of such elements. 
SEC. 5032. EVERGLADES RESTORATION, FLORIDA. 
(a) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—
(1) HILLSBORO AND OKEECHOBEE AQUIFER.—
Section 601(b)(2)(A) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2681) is amended—
(A) in clause (i) by adding at the end the 
following: ‘‘The project for aquifer storage and 
recovery, Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, 
Florida, authorized by section 101(a)(16) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 276), shall be treated for purposes 
of this section as being in the Plan.’’; and 
(B) in clause (iii) by inserting after ‘‘sub-
paragraph (B)’’ the following: ‘‘and the project
140
for aquifer storage and recovery, Hillsboro and 
Okeechobee Aquifer’’. 
(2) 
OUTREACH
AND
ASSISTANCE.—Section 
601(k) of such Act (114 Stat. 2691–2692) is 
amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) MAXIMUM
EXPENDITURES.—The Sec-
retary may expend up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year 
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2002, 
to carry out this subsection.’’. 
(b) CRITICAL
RESTORATION
PROJECTS.—Section 
528(b)(3)(C) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 (110 Stat. 3769; 113 Stat. 286) is amended—
(1) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘$75,000,000’’ and 
all that follows through ‘‘2003’’ and inserting 
‘‘$95,000,000’’; and 
(2) in clause (ii) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$30,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5033. LAKE LANIER, GEORGIA 
The Secretary may assist local interests with plan-
ning, design, and construction of facilities at the Lake La-
nier Olympic Center, Georgia, in support of the 2003 
World Kayaking Championships, at a total cost of 
$5,300,000.
141
SEC. 5034. RILEY CREEK RECREATION AREA, IDAHO. 
The Secretary is authorized to carry out the Riley 
Creek Recreation Area Operation Plan of the Albeni Falls 
Management Plan, dated October 2001, for the Riley 
Creek Recreation Area, Albeni Falls Dam, Bonner Coun-
ty, Idaho. 
SEC. 5035. GRAND TOWER DRAINAGE AND LEVEES, GRAND 
TOWER TOWNSHIP, ILLINOIS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to 
perform operation and maintenance of authorized and 
completed levees on the Mississippi River in Grand Tower 
Township, Illinois. 
(b) ALLOCATION OF COSTS.—The Secretary shall al-
locate the cost of operation and maintenance performed 
under subsection (a) on the basis of whether the lands pro-
tected by the levees are owned by the United States. 
(c) NON-FEDERAL COSTS.—If the lands protected by 
the levees are not owned by the United States, the cost 
of operation and maintenance allocated to protecting such 
lands under subsection (b) shall be a non-Federal cost. 
(d) FEDERAL COSTS.—If the lands protected by the 
levees are owned by the United States, the cost of oper-
ation and maintenance allocated to protecting such lands 
under subsection (b) shall be a Federal cost. After per-
forming the operation and maintenance under subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall seek reimbursement from the Sec-
142
retary of the Agriculture of an amount equal to the costs 
allocated to protecting lands owned by the Department of 
Agriculture. 
SEC. 5036. KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, ILLINOIS, RESTORA-
TION. 
(a) KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN DEFINED.—In this sec-
tion, the term ‘‘Kaskaskia River basin’’ means the 
Kaskaskia River, Illinois, its backwaters, its side channels, 
and all tributaries, including their watersheds, draining 
into the Kaskaskia River. 
(b) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—
(1) DEVELOPMENT.—The Secretary shall de-
velop, as expeditiously as practicable, a comprehen-
sive plan for the purpose of restoring, preserving, 
and protecting the Kaskaskia River basin. 
(2) TECHNOLOGIES
AND
INNOVATIVE
AP-
PROACHES.—The comprehensive plan shall provide 
for the development of new technologies and innova-
tive approaches—
(A) to enhance the Kaskaskia River as a 
transportation corridor; 
(B) to improve water quality within the en-
tire Kaskaskia River basin; 
(C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habi-
tat for plants and wildlife;
143
(D) to increase economic opportunity for 
agriculture and business communities; and 
(E) to reduce the impacts of flooding to 
communities and landowners.
(3) SPECIFIC COMPONENTS.—The comprehen-
sive plan shall include such features as are necessary 
to provide for—
(A) the development and implementation of 
a program for sediment removal technology, 
sediment characterization, sediment transport, 
and beneficial uses of sediment; 
(B) the development and implementation 
of a program for the planning, conservation, 
evaluation, and construction of measures for 
fish and wildlife habitat conservation and reha-
bilitation, and stabilization and enhancement of 
land and water resources in the basin; 
(C) the development and implementation of 
a long-term resource monitoring program; 
(D) the development and implementation 
of a computerized inventory and analysis sys-
tem; and 
(E) the development and implementation 
of a systemic plan to reduce flood impacts by 
means of ecosystem restoration projects.
144
(4) CONSULTATION.—The comprehensive plan 
shall be developed by the Secretary in consultation 
with appropriate Federal agencies, the State of Illi-
nois, and the Kaskaskia River Coordinating Council. 
(5) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 2 
years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report con-
taining the comprehensive plan. 
(6) ADDITIONAL
STUDIES
AND
ANALYSES.—
After transmission of a report under paragraph (5), 
the Secretary shall conduct studies and analyses of 
projects related to the comprehensive plan that are 
appropriate and consistent with this subsection. 
(c) GENERAL PROVISIONS.—
(1) WATER QUALITY.—In carrying out activi-
ties under this section, the Secretary’s recommenda-
tions shall be consistent with applicable State water 
quality standards. 
(2) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—In developing the 
comprehensive plan under subsection (b), the Sec-
retary shall implement procedures to facilitate public 
participation, including providing advance notice of 
meetings, providing adequate opportunity for public 
input 
and 
comment, 
maintaining 
appropriate
145
records, and making a record of the proceedings of 
meetings available for public inspection. 
(d) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall integrate 
activities carried out under this section with ongoing Fed-
eral and State programs, projects, and activities, including 
the following: 
(1) Farm programs of the Department of Agri-
culture. 
(2) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Pro-
gram (State of Illinois) and Conservation 2000 Eco-
system Program of the Illinois Department of Nat-
ural Resources. 
(3) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices 
Program and the Livestock Management Facilities 
Act administered by the Illinois Department of Agri-
culture. 
(4) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural 
Resources Conservation Service. 
(5) Nonpoint source grant program adminis-
tered by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agen-
cy. 
(e) COST SHARING.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of 
the cost of activities carried out under this section 
shall be 35 percent.
146
(2) IN-KIND
SERVICES.—The Secretary may 
credit the cost of in-kind services provided by the 
non-Federal interest for an activity carried out 
under this section toward not more than 80 percent 
of the non-Federal share of the cost of the activity. 
In-kind services shall include all State funds ex-
pended on programs that accomplish the goals of 
this section, as determined by the Secretary. The 
programs may include the Kaskaskia River Con-
servation Reserve Program, the Illinois Conservation 
2000 Program, the Open Lands Trust Fund, and 
other appropriate programs carried out in the 
Kaskaskia River basin. 
SEC. 5037. NATALIE CREEK, MIDLOTHIAN AND OAK FOR-
EST, ILLINOIS. 
The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood dam-
age reduction under section 205 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) Natalie Creek, Midlothian and 
Oak Forest, Illinois, if the Secretary determines that the 
project is feasible. 
SEC. 5038. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION. 
Section 519(c)(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2654) is amended by striking 
‘‘2004’’ and inserting ‘‘2010’’.
147
SEC. 5039. CALUMET REGION, INDIANA. 
Section 219(f)(12) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$30,000,000’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘Lake and Porter’’ and insert-
ing ‘‘Benton, Jasper, Lake, Newton, and Porter’’.
SEC. 5040. RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA. 
(a) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary shall convey the 
remaining water supply storage allocation in Rathbun 
Lake, Iowa, to the Rathbun Regional Water Association 
(in this section referred to as the ‘‘Water Association’’). 
(b) COST SHARING.—Notwithstanding the Water 
Supply Act of 1958 (43 U.S.C. 390b), the Water Associa-
tion shall pay 100 percent of the cost of the water supply 
storage allocation to be conveyed under subsection (a). 
The Secretary shall credit toward such non-Federal share 
the cost of any structures and facilities constructed by the 
Water Association at the project. 
(c) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Before conveying the 
water supply storage allocation under subsection (a), the 
Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the Water 
Association under which the Water Association shall agree 
to—
(1) in accordance with designs approved by the 
Chief of Engineers, construct structures and facili-
148
ties referred to in subsection (b) that have a value 
equal to or greater than the amount that otherwise 
would be paid to the Federal Government for the 
costs of the water supply storage under the Water 
Supply Act of 1958 (43 U.S.C. 390b); 
(2) be responsible for operating and maintain-
ing the structures and facilities; 
(3) pay all operation and maintenance costs al-
located to the water supply storage space; 
(4) use any revenues generated at the struc-
tures and facilities that are above those required to 
operate and maintain or improve the complex to un-
dertake, subject to the approval of the Chief of En-
gineers, activities that will improve the quality of the 
environment in the Rathbun Lake watershed area; 
and 
(5) such other terms and conditions as the Sec-
retary considers necessary to protect the interests of 
the United States. 
SEC. 5041. MAYFIELD CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, KEN-
TUCKY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of flood damage 
along Mayfield Creek and tributaries between Wickliffe 
and Mayfield, Kentucky, to determine if the damage is the 
result of a Federal flood damage reduction project, and,
149
if the Secretary determines that the damage is the result 
of a Federal flood damage reduction project, the Secretary 
shall carry out a project to mitigate the damage at Federal 
expense. 
SEC. 5042. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY. 
(a) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Section 531 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
Stat. 3774; 113 Stat. 348; 117 Stat. 142) is amended by 
adding the following: 
‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section for 
fiscal years 2004 and thereafter may be used by the Corps 
of Engineers district offices to administer projects under 
this section at 100 percent Federal expense.’’. 
SEC. 5043. COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION 
AND RESTORATION. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following defi-
nitions apply: 
(1) COASTAL
LOUISIANA
ECOSYSTEM.—The 
term ‘‘Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem’’ means the 
coastal area of Louisiana from the Sabine River on 
the west to the Pearl River on the east and includes 
tidal waters, barrier islands, marshes, coastal wet-
lands, rivers and streams, and adjacent areas.
150
(2) GOVERNOR.—The term ‘‘Governor’’ means 
the Governor of Louisiana. 
(3) TASK
FORCE.—The term ‘‘Task Force’’ 
means the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection 
and Restoration Task Force established by sub-
section (e). 
(b) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop 
a comprehensive plan for the purpose of protecting, 
preserving, and restoring the Coastal Louisiana Eco-
system. The comprehensive plan shall provide for the 
protection, conservation and restoration of the wet-
lands, barrier islands, shorelines, and related lands 
and features that protect critical resources, habitat, 
and infrastructure from the impacts of coastal 
storms, hurricanes, erosion, and subsidence. 
(2) DEADLINE.—Not later than July 1, 2004, 
the Secretary shall transmit the plan to Congress. 
(3) CONTENTS.—The plan shall include a com-
prehensive report and a programmatic environmental 
impact statement covering the proposed Federal ac-
tion set forth in the plan. 
(4) ADDITIONAL
STUDIES
AND
ANALYSES.—
After transmission of a report under this subsection, 
the Secretary may conduct studies and analyses of
151
projects related to the comprehensive plan that are 
appropriate and consistent with this subsection. 
(c) INTEGRATION OF OTHER ACTIVITIES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—In developing the plan under 
subsection (b), the Secretary shall integrate ongoing 
Federal and State projects and activities, including 
projects implemented under the Coastal Wetlands 
Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (16 
U.S.C. 3951 et seq.), the Louisiana Coastal Wet-
lands Conservation Plan, the Louisiana Coastal 
Zone Management Plan, and the plan of the State 
of Louisiana entitled ‘‘Coast 2050: Toward a Sus-
tainable Coastal Louisiana’’. 
(2) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—
(A) EXISTING
AUTHORITY.—Except as 
otherwise expressly provided for in this section, 
nothing in the section affects any authority in 
effect on the date of enactment of this Act, or 
any requirement relating to the participation in 
protection or restoration activities in the Coast-
al Louisiana Ecosystem, including projects and 
activities specified in paragraph (1) of—
(i) the Department of the Army; 
(ii) the Department of the Interior; 
(iii) the Department of Commerce;
152
(iv) the Environmental Protection 
Agency; 
(v) the Department of Agriculture; 
(vi) the Department of Transpor-
tation; 
(vii) the Department of Energy; and 
(viii) the State of Louisiana. 
(B) NEW
AUTHORITY.—Nothing in this 
section confers any new regulatory authority on 
any Federal or non-Federal entity that carries 
out any activity authorized by this section. 
(d) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the 
cost of developing the plan under subsection (b) shall be 
50 percent. 
(e) COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION 
AND RESTORATION TASK FORCE.—
(1) 
ESTABLISHMENT
AND
MEMBERSHIP.—
There is established the Coastal Louisiana Eco-
system Protection and Restoration Task Force, 
which shall consist of the following members (or, in 
the case of the head of a Federal Agency, a designee 
at the level of Assistant Secretary or an equivalent 
level): 
(A) The Secretary. 
(B) The Secretary of the Interior.
153
(C) The Secretary of Commerce. 
(D) The Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency. 
(E) The Secretary of Agriculture. 
(F) The Secretary of Transportation. 
(G) The Secretary of Energy. 
(H) The Coastal Advisor to the Governor. 
(I) The Secretary of the Louisiana Depart-
ment of Natural Resources. 
(J) A representative of the Governor’s Ad-
visory Commission on Coastal Restoration and 
Conservation, Louisiana. 
(2) DUTIES
OF
TASK
FORCE.—The Task 
Force—
(A) shall consult with, and provide rec-
ommendations to, the Secretary during develop-
ment of the comprehensive plan under sub-
section (b)(1); 
(B) shall coordinate the development of 
consistent policies, strategies, plans, programs, 
projects, activities, and priorities for addressing 
the protection, conservation, and restoration of 
the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem; 
(C) shall exchange information regarding 
programs, projects, and activities of the agen-
154
cies and entities represented on the Task Force 
to promote ecosystem protection, restoration, 
and maintenance; 
(D) shall establish a regional working 
group which shall include representatives of the 
agencies and entities represented on the Task 
Force as well as other governmental entities as 
appropriate for the purpose of formulating, rec-
ommending, coordinating, and implementing 
policies, strategies, plans, programs, projects, 
activities, and priorities of the Task Force; 
(E) may allow the working group described 
in subparagraph (D) to—
(i) establish such advisory bodies as 
are necessary to assist the Task Force in 
its duties; and 
(ii) select as an advisory body any en-
tity that represents a broad variety of pri-
vate and public interests; 
(F) shall facilitate the resolution of inter-
agency and intergovernmental conflicts associ-
ated with the protection, conservation, and res-
toration of the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem;
155
(G) shall coordinate scientific research as-
sociated with the protection and restoration of 
the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem; 
(H) shall provide assistance and support to 
agencies and entities represented on the Task 
Force in their protection and restoration activi-
ties; 
(I) shall prepare an integrated financial 
plan and recommendations for coordinated 
budget requests for the funds proposed to be 
expended by agencies and entities represented 
on the Task Force for the protection, conserva-
tion, and restoration of the Coastal Louisiana 
Ecosystem; and 
(J) shall transmit to the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Envi-
ronment and Public Works of the Senate a re-
port that summarizes the activities of the Task 
Force. 
(3) PROCEDURES AND ADVICE.—
(A) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—
(i) IN
GENERAL.—The Task Force 
shall implement procedures to facilitate 
public participation in the advisory proc-
156
ess, including providing advance notice of 
meetings, providing adequate opportunity 
for public input and comment, maintaining 
appropriate records, and making a record 
of proceedings of meetings available for 
public inspection. 
(ii) OVERSIGHT.—The Secretary shall 
ensure that the procedures described in 
clause (i) are adopted and implemented 
and that the records described in clause (i) 
are accurately maintained and available for 
public inspection. 
(B) ADVISORS TO THE TASK FORCE AND 
WORKING
GROUPS.—The Task Force or the 
working group described in paragraph (2)(D) 
may seek such advice and input from any inter-
ested, knowledgeable, or affected party as the 
Task Force or working group determines to be 
necessary to perform the duties described in 
paragraph (2). 
(C) APPLICATION OF THE FEDERAL ADVI-
SORY COMMITTEE ACT.—The Task Force, advi-
sors to the Task Force, and any associated 
workgroups shall not be considered advisory
157
committees under the Federal Advisory Com-
mittee Act (5 U.S.C. App). 
(4) COMPENSATION.—A member of the Task 
Force shall receive no additional compensation for 
the services provided as a member of the Task 
Force. 
(5) TRAVEL
EXPENSES.—Travel expenses in-
curred by a member of the Task Force in the per-
formance of services for the Task Force shall be 
paid by the agency or entity that the member rep-
resents. 
SEC. 5044. BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA. 
Section 219(f)(21) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A–220) 
is amended by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$35,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5045. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOUISIANA. 
Section 517(5) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 345) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(5) Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge Par-
ish, Louisiana, project for waterfront and riverine 
preservation, restoration, enhancement modifica-
tions, and interpretive center development.’’.
158
SEC. 5046. CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND, VIR-
GINIA, PENNSYLVANIA, AND DELAWARE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out comprehensive 
study of the feasibility of a project to address shoreline 
erosion and related sediment management measures to 
protect water and land resources of the Chesapeake Bay, 
the Secretary may carry out pilot projects to demonstrate 
the feasibility of alternative measures to address sediment 
loads to the Chesapeake Bay from sediment behind dams 
on the lower Susquehanna River. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this 
section.
SEC. 5047. DELMARVA CONSERVATION CORRIDOR, MARY-
LAND. 
(a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide tech-
nical assistance to the Secretary of Agriculture in carrying 
out the Conservation Corridor Demonstration Program 
authorized under subtitle G of title II of Public Law 107–
171 (116 Stat. 275–278). 
(b) COORDINATION AND INTEGRATION.—In carrying 
out water resources projects in the State of Maryland on 
land located on the east side of the Chesapeake Bay, the 
Secretary shall coordinate and integrate, to the extent 
practicable, such projects with any activities undertaken 
to implement a conservation corridor plan approved by the
159
Secretary of Agriculture under section 2602 of Public Law 
107–171 (116 Stat. 275–276). 
SEC. 5048. DETROIT RIVER, MICHIGAN. 
Section 568(c)(2) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368) is amended by striking 
‘‘$1,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$25,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5049. OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN. 
Section 219(f)(29) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 336) is amended by inserting 
‘‘sanitary sewer overflows and’’ before ‘‘combined sewer 
overflows’’. 
SEC. 5050. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHI-
GAN. 
The Secretary shall carry out feasible aquatic eco-
system restoration projects identified in the comprehensive 
management plan for St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, 
Michigan, developed under section 426 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 326), at a 
total Federal cost of not to exceed $5,000,000. 
SEC. 5051. GARRISON AND KATHIO TOWNSHIP, MINNESOTA. 
(a) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—Section 219(f)(61) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 
2763A–221) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: ‘‘Such assistance shall be provided directly to the
160
Garrison-Kathio-West Mille Lacs Lake Sanitary District, 
Minnesota.’’. 
(b) PROCEDURE.—In carrying out the project for 
Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota, authorized by 
such section 219(f)(61), the Secretary may use the cost 
sharing and contracting procedure available to the Sec-
retary under section 569 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368). 
SEC. 5052. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 569 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368) is 
amended—
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘Benton, 
Sherburne,’’ and inserting ‘‘Beltrami, Hubbard, 
Wadena,’’; 
(2) by striking the last sentence of subsection 
(e)(3)(B); 
(3) by striking subsection (g) and inserting the 
following: 
‘‘(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding sec-
tion 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–5b(b)), for any project undertaken under this sec-
tion, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit enti-
ty.’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following:
161
‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may 
be used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to ad-
minister projects under this section at 100 percent Fed-
eral expense.’’. 
(b) BIWABIK, MINNESOTA.—The Secretary shall re-
imburse the non-Federal interest for the project for envi-
ronmental infrastructure, Biwabik, Minnesota, carried out 
under section 569 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368–369), for planning, design, 
and construction costs incurred by the non-Federal inter-
est with respect to the project before the date of the part-
nership agreement for the project and were in excess of 
the non-Federal share of the project costs if the Secretary 
determines that the costs are appropriate. 
SEC. 5053. MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSOURI, AND ILLINOIS. 
As a part of the operation and maintenance of the 
project for the Mississippi River (Regulating Works), be-
tween the Ohio and Missouri Rivers, Missouri and Illinois, 
authorized by the first section of an Act entitled ‘‘Making 
appropriations for the construction, repair, and preserva-
tion of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and 
for other purposes’’, approved June 25, 1910, the Sec-
retary may carry out activities necessary to restore and 
protect fish and wildlife habitat in the middle Mississippi
162
River system. Such activities may include modification of 
navigation training structures, modification and creation 
of side channels, modification and creation of islands, and 
studies and analysis necessary to apply adaptive manage-
ment principles in design of future work.
SEC. 5054. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. 
Section 219(f)(32) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835–4836; 113 Stat. 337) 
is amended by striking ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$35,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5055. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JER-
SEY. 
Section 324 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (106 Stat. 4849; 110 Stat. 3779) is amended—
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘Hackensack 
Meadowlands Development’’ and all that follows 
through ‘‘Plan for’’ and inserting ‘‘New Jersey 
Meadowlands Commission for the development of an 
environmental improvement program for’’; 
(2) in subsection (b)—
(A) in the subsection heading by striking 
‘‘REQUIRED’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘shall’’ and inserting 
‘‘may’’; and
163
(C) by striking paragraph (1) and insert-
ing the following: 
‘‘(1) Enhancement and acquisition of signifi-
cant wetlands that contribute to the Meadowlands 
ecosystem.’’; 
(3) in subsection (c) by inserting before the last 
sentence the following: ‘‘The non-Federal sponsor 
may also provide in-kind services, not to exceed 25 
percent of the total project cost, and may also re-
ceive credit for reasonable cost of design work com-
pleted prior to entering into the partnership agree-
ment with the Secretary for a project to be carried 
out under the program developed under subsection 
(a).’’; and 
(4) in subsection (d) by striking ‘‘$5,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5056. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK. 
(a) DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM.—Section 404(a) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 
4863) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘processes’’ and inserting ‘‘and 
related environmental processes’’;
(2) by inserting after ‘‘Atlantic Coast’’ the fol-
lowing: ‘‘(and associated back bays)’’;
164
(3) by inserting after ‘‘actions’’ the following: ‘‘, 
environmental restoration or conservation measures 
for coastal and back bays,’’; and 
(4) by inserting at the end the following: ‘‘The 
plan for collecting data and monitoring information 
included in such annual report shall be fully coordi-
nated with and agreed to by appropriate agencies of 
the State of New York.’’. 
(b) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Section 404(b) of such Act 
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘INITIAL PLAN.—Not later than 
12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the’’ and inserting ‘‘ANNUAL REPORTS.—The’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘initial plan for data collection 
and monitoring’’ and inserting ‘‘annual report of 
data collection and monitoring activities’’; and 
(3) by striking the last sentence. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 
404(c) of such Act (113 Stat. 341) is amended by striking 
‘‘and an additional total of $2,500,000 for fiscal years 
thereafter’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,500,000 for fiscal years 
2000 through 2002, and $17,000,000 for fiscal years be-
ginning after September 30, 2002,’’.
165
SEC. 5057. COLLEGE POINT, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK. 
In carrying out section 312 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639–4640), the Sec-
retary shall give priority to work in College Point, New 
York City, New York. 
SEC. 5058. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NEW YORK CITY, 
NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project for ecosystem restoration, 
Flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New York, 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 integral to the project. 
SEC. 5059. LITTLE NECK BAY, VILLAGE OF KINGS POINT, 
NEW YORK. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a 
navigation project at Little Neck Bay (Hague Basin), Vil-
lage of Kings Point, New York, sufficient to permit the 
safe operation of the vessel T/V Kings Pointer at all tide 
levels. 
(b) REIMBURSEMENT.—The Secretary shall seek re-
imbursement from the United States Merchant Marine 
Academy for the cost of the project carried out under this 
section.
166
SEC. 5060. STANLEY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. 
Section 219(f)(64) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is amended by 
inserting ‘‘water and’’ before ‘‘wastewater’’.
SEC. 5061. PIEDMONT LAKE DAM, OHIO. 
In reconstructing the road on the Piedmont Lake 
Dam as part of the project for dam safety assurance, Pied-
mont Lake Dam, Ohio, being carried out under section 
4 of the Flood Control Act of August 11, 1939 (53 Stat. 
1414–1415), the Secretary shall upgrade the condition of 
the road to meet standards applicable to public use roads 
in the State of Ohio. The incremental cost of upgrading 
the road to meet such standards shall be a non-Federal 
expense. 
SEC. 5062. WAURIKA LAKE, OKLAHOMA. 
The remaining obligation of the Waurika Project 
Master Conservancy District payable to the United States 
Government in the amounts, rates of interest, and pay-
ment schedules is set at the amounts, rates of interest, 
and payment schedules that existed, and that both parties 
agreed to, on June 3, 1986, and may not be adjusted, 
altered, or changed without a specific, separate, and writ-
ten agreement between the District and the United States 
Government.
167
SEC. 5063. COLUMBIA RIVER, OREGON. 
Section 401(b)(3) of Public Law 100–581 (102 Stat. 
2944), is amended by inserting ‘‘and Celilo Village, Or-
egon’’ after ‘‘existing sites’’. 
SEC. 5064. EUGENE, OREGON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a 
study to determine the feasibility of restoring the millrace 
in Eugene, Oregon, and, if the Secretary determines that 
the restoration is feasible, shall carry out the restoration. 
(b) CONSIDERATION
OF
NON-ECONOMIC
BENE-
FITS.—In determining the feasibility of restoring the mill-
race, the Secretary shall include non-economic benefits as-
sociated with the historical significance of the millrace and 
associated with preservation and enhancement of re-
sources. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$20,000,000. 
SEC. 5065. JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, LAKE UMATILLA, OR-
EGON AND WASHINGTON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pay up to 
$2,500,000 to the provider of research and curation sup-
port previously provided to the Federal Government as a 
result of the multi-purpose project, John Day Lock and 
Dam, Lake Umatilla, Oregon and Washington, authorized 
by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1950 (64
168
Stat. 167), and the several navigation and flood damage 
reduction projects constructed on the Columbia River and 
Lower Willamette River, Oregon and Washington. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$2,500,000.
SEC. 5066. LOWELL, OREGON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may convey with-
out consideration to Lowell School District, by quitclaim 
deed, all right, title and interest of the United States in 
and to approximately 3.32 acres of land and buildings 
thereon, known as Tract A–82, located in Lowell, Oregon, 
and described in subsection (b). 
(b) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The parcel of land 
authorized to be conveyed under subsection (a) is as fol-
lows: Commencing at the point of intersection of the west 
line of Pioneer Street with the westerly extension of the 
north line of Summit Street, in Meadows Addition to Low-
ell, as platted and recorded at page 56 of Volume 4, Lane 
County Oregon Plat Records; thence north on the west 
line of Pioneer Street a distance of 176.0 feet to the true 
point of beginning of this description; thence north on the 
west line of Pioneer Street a distance of 170.0 feet; thence 
west at right angles to the west line of Pioneer Street a 
distance of 250.0 feet; thence south and parallel to the
169
west line of Pioneer Street a distance of 170.0 feet; thence 
east 250.0 feet to the true point of beginning of this de-
scription in Section 14, Township 19 South, Range 1 West 
of the Willamette Meridian, Lane County, Oregon. 
(c) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Before conveying the 
parcel to the school district, the Secretary shall ensure 
that the conditions of buildings and facilities meet the re-
quirements of applicable Federal law. 
(d) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.—
(1) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING 
PROVISIONS.—Section 2696 of title 10, United 
States Code, shall not apply to any conveyance 
under this section. 
(2) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a convey-
ance is made under this section shall hold the 
United States harmless from any liability with re-
spect to activities carried out, on or after the date 
of the conveyance, on the real property conveyed. 
The United States shall remain responsible for any 
liability with respect to activities carried out, before 
such date, on the real property conveyed.
SEC. 5067. HAGERMAN’S RUN, WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYL-
VANIA. 
The Secretary may rehabilitate the pumps at the 
project for flood damage reduction, Hagerman’s Run, Wil-
170
liamsport, Pennsylvania, at a total Federal cost of 
$225,000. 
SEC. 5068. NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 219(f)(11) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is amended by striking 
‘‘and Monroe’’ and inserting ‘‘Northumberland, Union, 
Snyder, and Montour’’. 
SEC. 5069. SUSQUEHANNOCK CAMPGROUND ACCESS ROAD, 
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. 
(a) IMPROVEMENT
OF ACCESS ROAD.—The Sec-
retary may make improvements to the Susquehannock 
Campground access road at Raystown Lake, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$500,000. 
SEC. 5070. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYL-
VANIA AND NEW YORK. 
Section 567 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (114 Stat. 2662–2663; 110 Stat. 3787–3788) is 
amended—
(1) 
in 
subsection 
(a)(2) 
by 
striking 
‘‘$10,000,000.’’ 
and 
inserting 
the 
following: 
‘‘$20,000,000, of which the Secretary may utilize 
not more than $5,000,000 to design and construct
171
feasible pilot projects during the development of the 
strategy to demonstrate alternative approaches for 
the strategy. The total cost for any single pilot 
project may not exceed $500,000. The Secretary 
shall evaluate the results of the pilot projects and 
consider the results in the development of the strat-
egy.’’. 
(2) in subsection (c)—
(A) in the subsection heading by striking 
‘‘COOPERATION’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘COOPERA-
TIVE’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘cooperation’’ and insert-
ing ‘‘cooperative’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(e) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project (i) the cost 
of design and construction work carried out by the non-
Federal interest before the date of the partnership agree-
ment for the project if the Secretary determines that the 
work is integral to the project; and (ii) the cost of in-kind 
services and materials provided for the project by the non-
Federal interest.’’.
172
SEC. 5071. WASHINGTON, GREENE, WESTMORELAND, AND 
FAYETTE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 219(f)(70) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is amended by 
striking ‘‘$8,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$13,300,000’’. 
SEC. 5072. CANO MARTIN PENA, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO. 
The Secretary shall review a report prepared by the 
non-Federal interest concerning flood protection and envi-
ronmental restoration for Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, 
Puerto Rico, and, if the Secretary determines that the re-
port meets the evaluation and design standards of the 
Corps of Engineers and that the project is feasible, may 
carry out the project, at a total cost of $130,000,000, with 
an estimated Federal cost of $85,000,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $45,000,000. 
SEC. 5073. LAKES MARION AND MOULTRIE, SOUTH CARO-
LINA. 
Section 219(f)(25) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A–220) 
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$35,000,0000’’; and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘wastewater treatment and’’ 
before ‘‘water supply’’.
173
SEC. 5074. UPPER BIG SIOUX RIVER, WATERTOWN, SOUTH 
DAKOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall review the 
project for flood damage reduction, Upper Big Sioux River 
basin, Watertown, South Dakota, as described in the re-
port of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 31, 1994, 
and entitled ‘‘Watertown and Vicinity, South Dakota’’ 
and, if the Secretary determines that the project is fea-
sible, may carry out the project, at a total cost of 
$25,000,000. 
(b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of 
the cost of the review may be provided in the form 
of in-kind services and materials. 
(2) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the review the 
cost of planning and design work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest before the date of an agreement 
for the review if the Secretary determines that such 
work is integral to the review. 
SEC. 5075. FRITZ LANDING, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall—
(1) conduct a study of the Fritz Landing Agri-
cultural Spur Levee, Tennessee, to determine the ex-
tent of levee modifications that would be required to
174
make the levee and associated drainage structures 
consistent with Federal standards; 
(2) design and construct such modifications; 
and 
(3) after completion of such modifications, in-
corporate the levee into the project for flood control, 
Mississippi River and Tributaries, authorized by the 
Act entitled ‘‘An Act for the control of floods on the 
Mississippi River and its tributaries, and for other 
purposes’’, approved May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534–
539), commonly known as the ‘‘Flood Control Act of 
1928’’. 
SEC. 5076. MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall review the aquatic ecosystem res-
toration component of the Memphis Riverfront Develop-
ment Master Plan, Memphis, Tennessee, prepared by the 
non-Federal interest and, if the Secretary determines that 
the component meets the evaluation and design standards 
of the Corps of Engineers and that the component is fea-
sible, may carry out the component at a total Federal cost 
not to exceed $5,000,000. 
SEC. 5077. TOWN CREEK, LENOIR CITY, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall design and construct the project 
for flood damage reduction designated as Alternative 4 in 
the Town Creek, Lenoir City, Loudon City, Tennessee,
175
feasibility report of the Nashville district engineer, dated 
November 2000, under the authority of section 205 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), notwith-
standing section 1 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, 
1936 (33 U.S.C. 701a; 49 Stat. 1570). The non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project shall be subject to section 
103(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2213(a)). 
SEC. 5078. TENNESSEE RIVER PARTNERSHIP. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—As part of the operation and 
maintenance of the project for navigation, Tennessee 
River, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky, 
authorized by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors 
Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 927), the Secretary may 
enter into a partnership with a nonprofit entity to remove 
debris from the Tennessee River in the vicinity of Knox-
ville, Tennessee, by providing a vessel to such entity, at 
Federal expense, for such debris removal purposes. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
$500,000. 
SEC. 5079. CLEAR CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, HARRIS AND 
GALVESTON COUNTIES, TEXAS. 
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the report 
for the project for flood damage reduction, ecosystem res-
176
toration, and recreation, Clear Creek and tributaries, Har-
ris and Galveston Counties, Texas. 
SEC. 5080. HARRIS GULLY, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. 
(a) STUDY.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct 
a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out 
a project for flood damage reduction in the Harris 
Gully watershed, Harris County, Texas, to provide 
flood protection for the Texas Medical Center, Hous-
ton, Texas. 
(2) USE OF LOCAL STUDIES AND PLANS.—In 
conducting the study, the Secretary shall use, to the 
extent practicable, studies and plans developed by 
the non-Federal interest if the Secretary determines 
that such studies and plans meet the evaluation and 
design standards of the Corps of Engineers. 
(3) COMPLETION DATE.—The Secretary shall 
complete the study by July 1, 2004. 
(b) CRITICAL FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION MEAS-
URES.—The Secretary may carry out critical flood damage 
reduction measures that the Secretary determines are fea-
sible and that will provide immediate and substantial flood 
damage reduction benefits in the Harris Gully watershed, 
at a Federal cost of $7,000,000.
177
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit 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 before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that 
such work is integral to the project. 
(d) NONPROFIT ENTITY.—Notwithstanding section 
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–
5b), a nonprofit entity may, with the consent of the local 
government, serve as a non-Federal interest for the project 
undertaken under this section. 
SEC. 5081. ONION CREEK, TEXAS. 
In carrying out the study for the project for flood 
damage, reduction, recreation, and ecosystem restoration, 
Onion Creek, Texas, the Secretary shall include the costs 
and benefits associated with the relocation of flood-prone 
residences in the study area for the project during the 2-
year period before the initiation of the feasibility study to 
the extent the Secretary determines such relocations are 
compatible with the project. The Secretary shall credit to-
ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of relocation of such flood-prone residences incurred 
by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partner-
ship agreement for the project if the Secretary determines
178
that the relocation of such residences is integral to the 
project.
SEC. 5082. PELICAN ISLAND, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 108(a) of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1994 (33 U.S.C. 
59hh(a)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(1) AUTHORITY TO CONVEY.—The Secretary’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) LETTER OF INTENT.—
‘‘(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary may 
provide a letter of intent to the city of Gal-
veston for conveyance of less than 100 acres of 
the parcel described in subsection (a) for pri-
vate development purposes if the Secretary re-
ceives and approves a proposal by the city des-
ignating the land which would be subject to 
such development. 
‘‘(B) DISPOSITION OF SPOIL.—If the Sec-
retary issues a letter of intent under subpara-
graph (A), no additional spoil material may be 
placed on the land designated for private devel-
opment for a period of at least 5 years from the 
date of issuance of the letter to provide the city
179
of Galveston with an opportunity to secure pri-
vate developers, perform appraisals, conduct en-
vironmental studies, and provide the compensa-
tion to the United States required for the con-
veyance.’’; and 
(3) by aligning the remainder of the text of 
paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1) of 
this subsection) with paragraph (2) (as added by 
paragraph (2) of this subsection). 
(b) EXPIRATION DATE.—Section 108(e)(3) of such 
Act (33 U.S.C. 59hh(e)(3)) is amended by striking ‘‘date 
of the enactment of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘date of enact-
ment of the Water Resources Development Act of 2002’’. 
SEC. 5083. FRONT ROYAL, VIRGINIA. 
Section 591(a)(2)(C) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 378) is amended by strik-
ing ‘‘$12,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$22,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5084. RICHMOND NATIONAL BATTLEFIELD PARK, 
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to 
carry out bluff stabilization measures on the James River 
in the vicinity of Drewry’s Bluff, Richmond National Bat-
tlefield Park, Richmond, Virginia. 
(b) REIMBURSEMENT.—The Secretary shall seek re-
imbursement from the Secretary of the Interior of any
180
costs incurred by the Secretary in carrying out subsection 
(a). 
SEC. 5085. BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, WASH-
INGTON. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of increased sil-
tation in Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington, to 
determine if the siltation is the result of a Federal naviga-
tion project (including diverted flows from the Columbia 
River) and, if the Secretary determines that the siltation 
is the result of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary 
shall carry out a project to mitigate the siltation as part 
of maintenance of the Federal navigation project.
SEC. 5086. CHEHALIS RIVER, CENTRALIA, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project for flood damage reduction, 
Chehalis River, Centralia, Washington, the cost of plan-
ning, 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 integral to the project.
SEC. 
5087. 
HAMILTON 
ISLAND 
CAMPGROUND, 
WASH-
INGTON. 
The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, and con-
struct a campground for Bonneville Lock and Dam at
181
Hamilton Island (also know as ‘‘Strawberry Island’’) in 
Skamania County, Washington.
SEC. 5088. PUGET ISLAND, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary is directed to place dredged and other 
suitable material along portions of the Columbia River 
shoreline of Puget Island, Washington, between river miles 
38 to 47 in order to protect economic and environmental 
resources in the area from further erosion, at a Federal 
cost of $1,000,000. This action shall be coordinated with 
appropriate resource agencies and comply with applicable 
Federal laws. 
SEC. 5089. BLUESTONE, WEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 547 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2676–2678) is amended—
(1) in subsection (b)(1)(A) by striking ‘‘4 
years’’ and inserting ‘‘5 years’’; 
(2) in subsection (b)(1)(B)(iii) by striking ‘‘if 
all’’ and all that follows through ‘‘facility’’ and in-
serting ‘‘assurance project’’; 
(3) in subsection (b)(1)(C) by striking ‘‘and 
construction’’ and inserting ‘‘, construction, and op-
eration and maintenance’’; 
(4) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the 
following:
182
‘‘(3) OPERATION AND OWNERSHIP.—The Tri-
Cities Power Authority shall be the owner and oper-
ator of the hydropower facilities referred to in sub-
section (a).’’; 
(5) in subsection (c)(1)—
(A) by striking ‘‘No’’ and inserting ‘‘Un-
less otherwise provided, no’’; 
(B) by inserting ‘‘planning,’’ before ‘‘de-
sign’’; and 
(C) by striking ‘‘prior to’’ and all that fol-
lows through ‘‘subsection (d)’’; 
(6) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ‘‘design’’ 
and inserting ‘‘planning, design,’’; 
(7) in subsection (d)—
(A) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and 
inserting the following: 
‘‘(1) APPROVAL.—The Secretary shall review 
the design and construction activities for all features 
of the hydroelectric project that pertain to and affect 
stability of the dam and control the release of water 
from Bluestone Dam to ensure that the quality of 
construction of those features meets all standards 
established for similar facilities constructed by the 
Secretary.’’;
183
(B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as 
paragraph (2); 
(C) by striking the period at the end of 
paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) and insert-
ing ‘‘, except that hydroelectric power is no 
longer a project purpose of the facility. Water 
flow releases from the hydropower facilities 
shall be determined and directed by the Corps 
of Engineers.’’; and 
(D) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) COORDINATION .—Construction of the hy-
droelectric generating facilities shall be coordinated 
with the dam safety assurance project currently in 
the design and construction phases.’’; 
(8) in subsection (e) by striking ‘‘in accord-
ance’’ and all that follows through ‘‘58 Stat. 890)’’; 
(9) in subsection (f)—
(A) by striking ‘‘facility of the inter-
connected systems of reservoirs operated by the 
Secretary’’ each place it appears and inserting 
‘‘facilities under construction under such agree-
ments’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘design’’ and inserting 
‘‘planning, design’’; 
(10) in subsection (f)(2)—
184
(A) by ‘‘Secretary’’ each place it appears 
and inserting ‘‘Tri-Cities Power Authority’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘facilities referred to in 
subsection (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘such facilities’’; 
(11) by striking paragraph (1) of subsection (g) 
and inserting the following: 
‘‘(1) to arrange for the transmission of power 
to the market or to construct such transmission fa-
cilities as necessary to market the power produced at 
the facilities referred to in subsection (a) with funds 
contributed by the Tri-Cities Power Authority; and’’; 
(12) in subsection (g)(2) by striking ‘‘such fa-
cilities’’ and all that follows through ‘‘the Secretary’’ 
and inserting ‘‘the generating facility’’; and 
(13) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) TRI-CITIES POWER AUTHORITY DEFINED.—In 
this section, the ‘‘Tri-Cities Power Authority’’ refers to the 
entity established by the City of Hinton, West Virginia, 
the City of White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, and the 
City of Philippi, West Virginia, pursuant to a document 
entitled ‘‘Second Amended and Restated Intergovern-
mental Agreement’’ approved by the Attorney General of 
West Virginia on February 14, 2002.’’.
185
SEC. 5090. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD 
CONTROL. 
(a) CHEAT AND TYGART RIVER BASINS, WEST VIR-
GINIA.—Section 581(a)(1) of the Water Resources Devel-
opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790; 113 Stat. 313) is 
amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘flood control measures’’ and in-
serting ‘‘structural and nonstructural flood control, 
streambank protection, stormwater management, 
and channel clearing and modification measures’’; 
and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘with respect to measures that 
incorporate levees or floodwalls’’ before the semi-
colon. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 
581(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3791) is amended by striking ‘‘$12,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$90,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5091. LOWER KANAWHA RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a watershed and river 
basin assessment under section 729 of the Water Re-
sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2267a) for 
the Lower Kanawha River Basin, in the counties of 
Mason, Putnam, Kanawha, Jackson, and Roane, West 
Virginia.
186
SEC. 5092. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 571 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 371) is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) by striking ‘‘Nicholas,’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘Gilmer,’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding sec-
tion 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–5b(b)), for any project undertaken under this sec-
tion, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit entity 
with the consent of the affected local government. 
‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may 
be used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to ad-
minister projects under this section at 100 percent Fed-
eral expense.’’. 
SEC. 5093. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA. 
(a) CORPS
OF ENGINEERS.—Section 340 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 
4856; 113 Stat. 320) is amended by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS.—Ten percent of the 
amounts appropriated to carry out this section for fiscal 
years 2003 and thereafter may be used by the Corps of
187
Engineers district offices to administer projects under this 
section at 100 percent Federal expense.’’. 
(b) SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA DEFINED.—Section 
340(f) of such Act is amended by inserting ‘‘Nicholas,’’ 
after ‘‘Greenbrier,’’. 
(c) NONPROFIT
ENTITIES.—Section 340 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 
4856) is further amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding sec-
tion 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–5b(b)), for any project undertaken under this sec-
tion, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit entity 
with the consent of the affected local government.’’. 
SEC. 5094. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 
BY NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS. 
Section 211(f) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 701b–13) is amended—
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (7) and (8) as 
paragraphs (8) and (9), respectively; 
(2) by inserting after paragraph (6) the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(7) HALLS BAYOU, TEXAS.—The project for 
flood control, Halls Bayou, Texas.’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following:
188
‘‘(10) ST. PAUL DOWNTOWN AIRPORT (HOLMAN 
FIELD), ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA.—The project for 
flood damage reduction, St. Paul Downtown Airport 
(Holman Field), St. Paul, Minnesota.’’.
SEC. 5095. BRIDGE AUTHORIZATION. 
There is authorized to be appropriated $20,000,000 
for the construction of the bridge referred to in section 
1001(a)(1).
Æ