H. R. 3080—173 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
5. FL 
Canaveral 
Harbor 
(Sect 203 
Sponsor Re-
port) 
Feb. 25, 
2013 
Federal: $29,240,000 
Non-Federal: 
$11,830,000 
Total: $41,070,000 
6. MA 
Boston Harbor 
Sept. 30, 
2013 
Federal: $216,470,000 
Non-Federal: 
$94,510,000 
Total: $310,980,000 
7. FL 
Lake Worth 
Inlet 
Apr. 16, 
2014 
Federal: $57,556,000 
Non-Federal: 
$30,975,000 
Total: $88,531,000 
8. FL 
Jacksonville 
Harbor 
Apr. 16, 
2014 
Federal: $362,000,000 
Non-Federal: 
$238,900,000 
Total: $600,900,000 
(2) FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT.— 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
1. KS 
Topeka 
Aug. 24, 
2009 
Federal: $17,360,000 
Non-Federal: $9,350,000 
Total: $26,710,000
H. R. 3080—174 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
2. CA 
American 
River Water-
shed, Com-
mon Fea-
tures 
Project, 
Natomas 
Basin 
Dec. 30, 
2010 
Federal: $760,630,000 
Non-Federal: 
$386,650,000 
Total: $1,147,280,000 
3. IA 
Cedar River, 
Cedar Rap-
ids 
Jan. 27, 
2011 
Federal: $73,130,000 
Non-Federal: 
$39,380,000 
Total: $112,510,000 
4. MN, 
ND 
Fargo-Moor-
head Metro 
Dec. 19, 
2011 
Federal: $846,700,000 
Non-Federal: 
$1,077,600,000 
Total: $1,924,300,000 
5. KY 
Ohio River 
Shoreline, 
Paducah 
May 16, 
2012 
Federal: $13,170,000 
Non-Federal: $7,090,000 
Total: $20,260,000 
6. MO 
Jordan Creek, 
Springfield 
Aug. 26, 
2013 
Federal: $13,560,000 
Non-Federal: $7,300,000 
Total: $20,860,000 
7. CA 
Orestimba 
Creek, San 
Joaquin 
River Basin 
Sept. 25, 
2013 
Federal: $23,680,000 
Non-Federal: 
$21,650,000 
Total: $45,330,000 
8. CA 
Sutter Basin 
Mar. 12, 
2014 
Federal: $255,270,000 
Non-Federal: 
$433,660,000 
Total: $688,930,000 
9. NV 
Truckee Mead-
ows 
Apr. 11, 
2014 
Federal: $181,652,000 
Non-Federal: 
$99,168,000 
Total: $280,820,000
H. R. 3080—175 
(3) HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE RISK REDUCTION.— 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated Initial 
Costs and 
Estimated 
Renourishment 
Costs 
1. NC 
West Onslow 
Beach and 
New River 
Inlet (Top-
sail Beach) 
Sept. 28, 
2009 
Initial Federal: 
$29,900,000 
Initial Non-Federal: 
$16,450,000 
Initial Total: 
$46,350,000 
Renourishment Federal: 
$69,410,000 
Renourishment Non- 
Federal: $69,410,000 
Renourishment Total: 
$138,820,000 
2. NC 
Surf City and 
North Top-
sail Beach 
Dec. 30, 
2010 
Initial Federal: 
$84,770,000 
Initial Non-Federal: 
$45,650,000 
Initial Total: 
$130,420,000 
Renourishment Federal: 
$122,220,000 
Renourishment Non- 
Federal: $122,220,000 
Renourishment Total: 
$244,440,000 
3. CA 
San Clemente 
Shoreline 
Apr. 15, 
2012 
Initial Federal: 
$7,420,000 
Initial Non-Federal: 
$3,990,000 
Initial Total: 
$11,410,000 
Renourishment Federal: 
$43,835,000 
Renourishment Non- 
Federal: $43,835,000 
Renourishment Total: 
$87,670,000
H. R. 3080—176 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated Initial 
Costs and 
Estimated 
Renourishment 
Costs 
4. FL 
Walton County 
July 16, 
2013 
Initial Federal: 
$17,945,000 
Initial Non-Federal: 
$46,145,000 
Initial Total: 
$64,090,000 
Renourishment Federal: 
$24,740,000 
Renourishment Non- 
Federal: $82,820,000 
Renourishment Total: 
$107,560,000 
5. LA 
Morganza to 
the Gulf 
July 8, 
2013 
Federal: $6,695,400,000 
Non-Federal: 
$3,604,600,000 
Total: $10,300,000,000 
(4) HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE RISK REDUCTION AND 
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION.— 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
1. MS 
Mississippi 
Coastal Im-
provement 
Program 
(MSCIP) 
Hancock, 
Harrison, 
and Jackson 
Counties 
Sept. 15, 
2009 
Federal: $693,300,000 
Non-Federal: 
$373,320,000 
Total: $1,066,620,000 
(5) ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION.—
H. R. 3080—177 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
1. MD 
Mid-Chesa-
peake Bay 
Island 
Aug. 24, 
2009 
Federal: $1,240,750,000 
Non-Federal: 
$668,100,000 
Total: $1,908,850,000 
2. FL 
Central and 
Southern 
Florida 
Project, 
Comprehen-
sive Ever-
glades Res-
toration 
Plan, 
Caloosahatc-
hee River 
(C–43) West 
Basin Stor-
age Project, 
Hendry 
County 
Mar. 11, 
2010 
and Jan. 
6, 2011 
Federal: $313,300,000 
Non-Federal: 
$313,300,000 
Total: $626,600,000 
3. LA 
Louisiana 
Coastal Area 
Dec. 30, 
2010 
Federal: $1,026,000,000 
Non-Federal: 
$601,000,000 
Total: $1,627,000,000 
4. MN 
Marsh Lake 
Dec. 30, 
2011 
Federal: $6,760,000 
Non-Federal: $3,640,000 
Total: $10,400,000
H. R. 3080—178 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
5. FL 
Central and 
Southern 
Florida 
Project, 
Comprehen-
sive Ever-
glades Res-
toration 
Plan, C–111 
Spreader 
Canal West-
ern Project 
Jan. 30, 
2012 
Federal: $87,280,000 
Non-Federal: 
$87,280,000 
Total: $174,560,000 
6. FL 
CERP Bis-
cayne Bay 
Coastal Wet-
land, Florida 
May 2, 
2012 
Federal: $98,510,000 
Non-Federal: 
$98,510,000 
Total: $197,020,000 
7. FL 
Central and 
Southern 
Florida 
Project, 
Broward 
County 
Water Pre-
serve Area 
May 21, 
2012 
Federal: $448,070,000 
Non-Federal: 
$448,070,000 
Total: $896,140,000 
8. LA 
Louisiana 
Coastal 
Area- 
Barataria 
Basin Bar-
rier 
June 22, 
2012 
Federal: $321,750,000 
Non-Federal: 
$173,250,000 
Total: $495,000,000 
9. NC 
Neuse River 
Basin 
Apr. 23, 
2013 
Federal: $23,830,000 
Non-Federal: 
$12,830,000 
Total: $36,660,000
H. R. 3080—179 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Report of 
Chief of 
Engi-
neers 
D. 
Estimated 
Costs 
10. VA 
Lynnhaven 
River 
Mar. 27, 
2014 
Federal: $22,821,500 
Non-Federal: 
$12,288,500 
Total: $35,110,000 
11. OR 
Willamette 
River Flood-
plain Res-
toration 
Jan. 6, 
2014 
Federal: $27,401,000 
Non-Federal: 
$14,754,000 
Total: $42,155,000 
SEC. 7003. AUTHORIZATION OF PROJECT MODIFICATIONS REC-
OMMENDED BY THE SECRETARY. 
The following project modifications for water resources develop-
ment and conservation and other purposes are authorized to be 
carried out by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the 
recommendations of the Secretary, as specified in the letters 
referred to in this section: 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Sec-
retary’s 
Rec-
ommen-
dation 
Letter 
D. 
Updated Authoriza-
tion 
Project Costs 
1. MN 
Roseau River 
Jan. 24, 
2013 
Estimated Federal: 
$25,455,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$18,362,000 
Total: $43,817,000 
2. IL 
Wood River 
Levee Sys-
tem Recon-
struction 
May 7, 
2013 
Estimated Federal: 
$16,678,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$8,980,000 
Total: $25,658,000
H. R. 3080—180 
A. 
State 
B. 
Name 
C. 
Date of 
Sec-
retary’s 
Rec-
ommen-
dation 
Letter 
D. 
Updated Authoriza-
tion 
Project Costs 
3. TX 
Corpus Christi 
Ship Chan-
nel 
Aug. 8, 
2013 
Estimated Federal: 
$182,582,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$170,649,000 
Total: $353,231,000 
4. IA 
Des Moines 
River and 
Raccoon 
River Project 
Feb. 12, 
2014 
Estimated Federal: 
$14,990,300 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$8,254,700 
Total: $23,245,000 
5. MD 
Poplar Island 
Feb. 26, 
2014 
Estimated Federal: 
$868,272,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$365,639,000 
Total: $1,233,911,000 
6. IL 
Lake Michigan 
(Chicago 
Shoreline) 
Mar. 18, 
2014 
Estimated Federal: 
$185,441,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$355,105,000 
Total: $540,546,000 
7. NE 
Western Sarpy 
and Clear 
Creek 
Mar. 20, 
2014 
Estimated Federal: 
$28,128,800 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$15,146,300 
Total: $43,275,100 
8. MO 
Cape 
Girardeau 
Apr. 14, 
2014 
Estimated Federal: 
$17,687,000 
Estimated non-Federal: 
$746,000 
Total: $18,433,000 
SEC. 7004. EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE. 
(a) CONSIDERATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.— 
(1) DEFINITION OF INTERIM AUTHORIZATION BILL.—In this 
subsection, the term ‘‘interim authorization bill’’ means a bill
H. R. 3080—181 
of the 113th Congress introduced after the date of enactment 
of this Act in the House of Representatives by the chair of 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure which— 
(A) has the following title: ‘‘A bill to provide for the 
authorization of certain water resources development or 
conservation projects outside the regular authorization 
cycle.’’; and 
(B) only contains— 
(i) authorization for 1 or more water resources 
development or conservation projects for which a final 
report of the Chief of Engineers has been completed; 
or 
(ii) deauthorization for 1 or more water resources 
development or conservation projects. 
(2) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—If an interim authorization 
bill is not reported by a committee to which it is referred 
within 30 calendar days, the committee shall be discharged 
from its further consideration and the bill shall be referred 
to the appropriate calendar. 
(b) CONSIDERATION IN THE SENATE.— 
(1) POLICY.—The benefits of water resource projects 
designed and carried out in an economically justifiable, environ-
mentally acceptable, and technically sound manner are impor-
tant to the economy and environment of the United States 
and recommendations to Congress regarding those projects 
should be expedited for approval in a timely manner. 
(2) APPLICABILITY.—The procedures under this subsection 
apply to projects for water resources development, conservation, 
and other purposes, subject to the conditions that— 
(A) each project is carried out— 
(i) substantially in accordance with the plan identi-
fied in the report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
project; and 
(ii) subject to any conditions described in the report 
for the project; and 
(B)(i) a report of the Chief of Engineers has been 
completed; and 
(ii) after the date of enactment of this Act, the Assist-
ant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works has submitted 
to Congress a recommendation to authorize construction 
of the project. 
(3) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—A bill shall be eligible for expedited 
consideration in accordance with this subsection if the bill— 
(i) authorizes a project that meets the require-
ments described in paragraph (2); and 
(ii) is referred to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate. 
(B) COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 31st of 
the second session of each Congress, the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
shall— 
(I) report all bills that meet the requirements 
of subparagraph (A); or
H. R. 3080—182 
(II) introduce and report a measure to 
authorize any project that meets the requirements 
described in paragraph (2). 
(ii) FAILURE TO ACT.—Subject to clause (iii), if the 
committee fails to act on a bill that meets the require-
ments of subparagraph (A) by the date specified in 
clause (i), the bill shall be discharged from the com-
mittee and placed on the calendar of the Senate. 
(iii) EXCEPTIONS.—Clause (ii) shall not apply if— 
(I) in the 180-day period immediately pre-
ceding the date specified in clause (i), the full 
committee holds a legislative hearing on a bill 
to authorize all projects that meet the require-
ments described in paragraph (2); 
(II)(aa) the committee favorably reports a bill 
to authorize all projects that meet the require-
ments described in paragraph (2); and 
(bb) the bill described in item (aa) is placed 
on the calendar of the Senate; or 
(III) a bill that meets the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) is referred to the committee not 
earlier than 30 days before the date specified in 
clause (i). 
(4) TERMINATION.—The procedures for expedited consider-
ation under this subsection terminate on December 31, 2018. 
(c) RULES OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.— 
This section is enacted by Congress— 
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate 
and House of Representatives, respectively, and as such it 
is deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, 
but applicable only with respect to the procedure to be followed 
in that House in the case of a bill addressed by this section, 
and it supersedes other rules only to the extent that it is 
inconsistent with such rules; and 
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of either 
House to change the rules (so far as relating to the procedure 
of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the 
same extent as in the case of any other rule of that House. 
Speaker of the House of Representatives. 
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.