Water Resources Development Act of 2007
PL 110-114 (H.R.1495), enacted 11/09/2007

121 STAT. 1041 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Public Law 110–114 
110th Congress 
An Act 
To provide for the conservation and development of water and related resources, 
to authorize the Secretary of the Army to construct various projects for improve-
ments to rivers and harbors of the United States, and for other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Water 
Resources Development Act of 2007’’. 
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act 
is as follows: 
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 
Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary. 
TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS 
Sec. 1001. Project authorizations. 
Sec. 1002. Small projects for flood damage reduction. 
Sec. 1003. Small projects for emergency streambank protection. 
Sec. 1004. Small projects for navigation. 
Sec. 1005. Small projects for improvement of the quality of the environment. 
Sec. 1006. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem restoration. 
Sec. 1007. Small projects for shoreline protection. 
Sec. 1008. Small projects for snagging and sediment removal. 
Sec. 1009. Small projects to prevent or mitigate damage caused by navigation 
projects. 
Sec. 1010. Small projects for aquatic plant control. 
TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS 
Sec. 2001. Non-Federal contributions. 
Sec. 2002. Funding to process permits. 
Sec. 2003. Written agreement for water resources projects. 
Sec. 2004. Compilation of laws. 
Sec. 2005. Dredged material disposal. 
Sec. 2006. Remote and subsistence harbors. 
Sec. 2007. Use of other Federal funds. 
Sec. 2008. Revision of project partnership agreement; cost sharing. 
Sec. 2009. Expedited actions for emergency flood damage reduction. 
Sec. 2010. Watershed and river basin assessments. 
Sec. 2011. Tribal partnership program. 
Sec. 2012. Wildfire firefighting. 
Sec. 2013. Technical assistance. 
Sec. 2014. Lakes program. 
Sec. 2015. Cooperative agreements. 
Sec. 2016. Training funds. 
Sec. 2017. Access to water resource data. 
Sec. 2018. Shore protection projects. 
Sec. 2019. Ability to pay. 
Sec. 2020. Aquatic ecosystem and estuary restoration. 
Sec. 2021. Small flood damage reduction projects. 
Sec. 2022. Small river and harbor improvement projects. 
Sec. 2023. Protection of highways, bridge approaches, public works, and nonprofit 
public services. 
Water Resources 
Development Act 
of 2007. 
Inter- 
governmental 
relations. 
33 USC 2201 
note. 
Nov. 8, 2007 
[H.R. 1495] 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01039
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1042 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 2024. Modification of projects for improvement of the quality of the environ-
ment. 
Sec. 2025. Remediation of abandoned mine sites. 
Sec. 2026. Leasing authority. 
Sec. 2027. Fiscal transparency report. 
Sec. 2028. Support of Army civil works program. 
Sec. 2029. Sense of Congress on criteria for operation and maintenance of harbor 
dredging projects. 
Sec. 2030. Interagency and international support authority. 
Sec. 2031. Water resources principles and guidelines. 
Sec. 2032. Water resource priorities report. 
Sec. 2033. Planning. 
Sec. 2034. Independent peer review. 
Sec. 2035. Safety assurance review. 
Sec. 2036. Mitigation for fish and wildlife and wetlands losses. 
Sec. 2037. Regional sediment management. 
Sec. 2038. National shoreline erosion control development program. 
Sec. 2039. Monitoring ecosystem restoration. 
Sec. 2040. Electronic submission of permit applications. 
Sec. 2041. Project administration. 
Sec. 2042. Program administration. 
Sec. 2043. Studies and reports for water resources projects. 
Sec. 2044. Coordination and scheduling of Federal, State, and local actions. 
Sec. 2045. Project streamlining. 
Sec. 2046. Project deauthorization. 
Sec. 2047. Federal hopper dredges. 
TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS 
Sec. 3001. Black Warrior-Tombigbee Rivers, Alabama. 
Sec. 3002. Cook Inlet, Alaska. 
Sec. 3003. King Cove Harbor, Alaska. 
Sec. 3004. Seward Harbor, Alaska. 
Sec. 3005. Sitka, Alaska. 
Sec. 3006. Tatitlek, Alaska. 
Sec. 3007. Rio De Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona. 
Sec. 3008. Nogales Wash and tributaries flood control project, Arizona. 
Sec. 3009. Tucson drainage area, Arizona. 
Sec. 3010. Osceola Harbor, Arkansas. 
Sec. 3011. St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri. 
Sec. 3012. Pine Mountain Dam, Arkansas. 
Sec. 3013. Red-Ouachita River Basin Levees, Arkansas and Louisiana. 
Sec. 3014. Cache Creek Basin, California. 
Sec. 3015. CALFED stability program, California. 
Sec. 3016. Compton Creek, California. 
Sec. 3017. Grayson Creek/Murderer’s Creek, California. 
Sec. 3018. Hamilton Airfield, California. 
Sec. 3019. John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel, California. 
Sec. 3020. Kaweah River, California. 
Sec. 3021. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California. 
Sec. 3022. Llagas Creek, California. 
Sec. 3023. Magpie Creek, California. 
Sec. 3024. Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California. 
Sec. 3025. Petaluma River, Petaluma, California. 
Sec. 3026. Pinole Creek, California. 
Sec. 3027. Prado Dam, California. 
Sec. 3028. Redwood City Navigation Channel, California. 
Sec. 3029. Sacramento and American Rivers flood control, California. 
Sec. 3030. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California. 
Sec. 3031. Sacramento River bank protection, California. 
Sec. 3032. Salton Sea restoration, California. 
Sec. 3033. Santa Ana River Mainstem, California. 
Sec. 3034. Santa Barbara Streams, Lower Mission Creek, California. 
Sec. 3035. Santa Cruz Harbor, California. 
Sec. 3036. Seven Oaks Dam, California. 
Sec. 3037. Upper Guadalupe River, California. 
Sec. 3038. Walnut Creek Channel, California. 
Sec. 3039. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California. 
Sec. 3040. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California. 
Sec. 3041. Yuba River Basin project, California. 
Sec. 3042. South Platte River basin, Colorado. 
Sec. 3043. Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware 
and Maryland. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01040
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1043 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 3044. St. George’s Bridge, Delaware. 
Sec. 3045. Brevard County, Florida. 
Sec. 3046. Broward County and Hillsboro Inlet, Florida. 
Sec. 3047. Canaveral Harbor, Florida. 
Sec. 3048. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Florida. 
Sec. 3049. Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida. 
Sec. 3050. Peanut Island, Florida. 
Sec. 3051. Port Sutton, Florida. 
Sec. 3052. Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida. 
Sec. 3053. Tampa Harbor Cut B, Florida. 
Sec. 3054. Allatoona Lake, Georgia. 
Sec. 3055. Latham River, Glynn County, Georgia. 
Sec. 3056. Dworshak Reservoir improvements, Idaho. 
Sec. 3057. Little Wood River, Gooding, Idaho. 
Sec. 3058. Beardstown Community Boat Harbor, Beardstown, Illinois. 
Sec. 3059. Cache River Levee, Illinois. 
Sec. 3060. Chicago River, Illinois. 
Sec. 3061. Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal dispersal barriers project, Illinois. 
Sec. 3062. Emiquon, Illinois. 
Sec. 3063. Lasalle, Illinois. 
Sec. 3064. Spunky Bottoms, Illinois. 
Sec. 3065. Cedar Lake, Indiana. 
Sec. 3066. Koontz Lake, Indiana. 
Sec. 3067. White River, Indiana. 
Sec. 3068. Des Moines River and Greenbelt, Iowa. 
Sec. 3069. Perry Creek, Iowa. 
Sec. 3070. Rathbun Lake, Iowa. 
Sec. 3071. Hickman Bluff stabilization, Kentucky. 
Sec. 3072. Mcalpine Lock and Dam, Kentucky and Indiana. 
Sec. 3073. Prestonsburg, Kentucky. 
Sec. 3074. Amite River and tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Water-
shed. 
Sec. 3075. Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3076. Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, regional visitor center, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3077. Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and Black, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3078. Bayou Plaquemine, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3079. Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3080. Red River (J. Bennett Johnston) Waterway, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3081. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3082. Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet relocation assistance, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3083. Violet, Louisiana. 
Sec. 3084. West bank of the Mississippi River (East of Harvey Canal), Louisiana. 
Sec. 3085. Camp Ellis, Saco, Maine. 
Sec. 3086. Cumberland, Maryland. 
Sec. 3087. Poplar Island, Maryland. 
Sec. 3088. Detroit River shoreline, Detroit, Michigan. 
Sec. 3089. St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan. 
Sec. 3090. St. Joseph Harbor, Michigan. 
Sec. 3091. Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan. 
Sec. 3092. Ada, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3093. Duluth Harbor, McQuade Road, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3094. Grand Marais, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3095. Grand Portage Harbor, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3096. Granite Falls, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3097. Knife River Harbor, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3098. Red Lake River, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3099. Silver Bay, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3100. Taconite Harbor, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3101. Two Harbors, Minnesota. 
Sec. 3102. Deer Island, Harrison County, Mississippi. 
Sec. 3103. Jackson County, Mississippi. 
Sec. 3104. Pearl River Basin, Mississippi. 
Sec. 3105. Festus and Crystal City, Missouri. 
Sec. 3106. L–15 levee, Missouri. 
Sec. 3107. Monarch-Chesterfield, Missouri. 
Sec. 3108. River Des Peres, Missouri. 
Sec. 3109. Lower Yellowstone project, Montana. 
Sec. 3110. Yellowstone River and tributaries, Montana and North Dakota. 
Sec. 3111. Antelope Creek, Lincoln, Nebraska. 
Sec. 3112. Sand Creek watershed, Wahoo, Nebraska. 
Sec. 3113. Western Sarpy and Clear Creek, Nebraska. 
Sec. 3114. Lower Truckee River, McCarran Ranch, Nevada. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01041
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1044 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 3115. Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape May Point, New Jersey. 
Sec. 3116. Passaic River basin flood management, New Jersey. 
Sec. 3117. Cooperative agreements, New Mexico. 
Sec. 3118. Middle Rio Grande restoration, New Mexico. 
Sec. 3119. Buffalo Harbor, New York. 
Sec. 3120. Long Island Sound oyster restoration, New York and Connecticut. 
Sec. 3121. Mamaroneck and Sheldrake Rivers watershed management, New York. 
Sec. 3122. Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York. 
Sec. 3123. Port of New York and New Jersey, New York and New Jersey. 
Sec. 3124. New York State Canal System. 
Sec. 3125. Susquehanna River and Upper Delaware River watershed management, 
New York. 
Sec. 3126. Missouri River restoration, North Dakota. 
Sec. 3127. Wahpeton, North Dakota. 
Sec. 3128. Ohio. 
Sec. 3129. Lower Girard Lake Dam, Girard, Ohio. 
Sec. 3130. Mahoning River, Ohio. 
Sec. 3131. Arcadia Lake, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3132. Arkansas River Corridor, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3133. Lake Eufaula, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3134. Oklahoma lakes demonstration program, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3135. Ottawa County, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3136. Red River chloride control, Oklahoma and Texas. 
Sec. 3137. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 3138. Upper Willamette River watershed ecosystem restoration, Oregon. 
Sec. 3139. Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. 
Sec. 3140. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 3141. Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Allegheny County, Pennsyl-
vania. 
Sec. 3142. Solomon’s Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 3143. South Central Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 3144. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 3145. Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island. 
Sec. 3146. Missouri River Restoration, South Dakota. 
Sec. 3147. Cedar Bayou, Texas. 
Sec. 3148. Freeport Harbor, Texas. 
Sec. 3149. Lake Kemp, Texas. 
Sec. 3150. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas. 
Sec. 3151. North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Bay, Texas. 
Sec. 3152. Pat Mayse Lake, Texas. 
Sec. 3153. Proctor Lake, Texas. 
Sec. 3154. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas. 
Sec. 3155. Connecticut River restoration, Vermont. 
Sec. 3156. Dam remediation, Vermont. 
Sec. 3157. Lake Champlain Eurasian milfoil, water chestnut, and other nonnative 
plant control, Vermont. 
Sec. 3158. Upper Connecticut River Basin wetland restoration, Vermont and New 
Hampshire. 
Sec. 3159. Upper Connecticut River basin ecosystem restoration, Vermont and New 
Hampshire. 
Sec. 3160. Lake Champlain watershed, Vermont and New York. 
Sec. 3161. Sandbridge Beach, Virginia Beach, Virginia. 
Sec. 3162. Tangier Island Seawall, Virginia. 
Sec. 3163. Duwamish/Green, Washington. 
Sec. 3164. McNary Lock and Dam, McNary National Wildlife Refuge, Washington 
and Idaho. 
Sec. 3165. Snake River project, Washington and Idaho. 
Sec. 3166. Yakima River, Port of Sunnyside, Washington. 
Sec. 3167. Bluestone Lake, Ohio River Basin, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3168. Greenbrier River basin, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3169. Lesage/Greenbottom Swamp, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3170. Lower Mud River, Milton, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3171. Mcdowell County, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3172. Parkersburg, West Virginia. 
Sec. 3173. Green Bay Harbor, Green Bay, Wisconsin. 
Sec. 3174. Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin. 
Sec. 3175. Mississippi River headwaters reservoirs. 
Sec. 3176. Upper basin of Missouri River. 
Sec. 3177. Upper Mississippi River System environmental management program. 
Sec. 3178. Upper Ohio River and Tributaries navigation system new technology 
pilot program. 
Sec. 3179. Continuation of project authorizations. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01042
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1045 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 3180. Project reauthorizations. 
Sec. 3181. Project deauthorizations. 
Sec. 3182. Land conveyances. 
Sec. 3183. Extinguishment of reversionary interests and use restrictions. 
TITLE IV—STUDIES 
Sec. 4001. John Glenn Great Lakes Basin Program. 
Sec. 4002. Lake Erie dredged material disposal sites. 
Sec. 4003. Southwestern United States drought study. 
Sec. 4004. Delaware River. 
Sec. 4005. Eurasian milfoil. 
Sec. 4006. Fire Island, Alaska. 
Sec. 4007. Knik Arm, Cook Inlet, Alaska. 
Sec. 4008. Kuskokwim River, Alaska. 
Sec. 4009. Nome Harbor, Alaska. 
Sec. 4010. St. George Harbor, Alaska. 
Sec. 4011. Susitna River, Alaska. 
Sec. 4012. Valdez, Alaska. 
Sec. 4013. Gila Bend, Maricopa, Arizona. 
Sec. 4014. Searcy County, Arkansas. 
Sec. 4015. Aliso Creek, California. 
Sec. 4016. Fresno, Kings, and Kern counties, California. 
Sec. 4017. Fruitvale Avenue Railroad Bridge, Alameda, California. 
Sec. 4018. Los Angeles River revitalization study, California. 
Sec. 4019. Lytle Creek, Rialto, California. 
Sec. 4020. Mokelumne River, San Joaquin County, California. 
Sec. 4021. Orick, California. 
Sec. 4022. Shoreline study, Oceanside, California. 
Sec. 4023. Rialto, Fontana, and Colton, California. 
Sec. 4024. Sacramento River, California. 
Sec. 4025. San Diego County, California. 
Sec. 4026. San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. 
Sec. 4027. South San Francisco Bay Shoreline, California. 
Sec. 4028. Twentynine Palms, California. 
Sec. 4029. Yucca Valley, California. 
Sec. 4030. Selenium studies, Colorado. 
Sec. 4031. Delaware and Christina Rivers and Shellpot Creek, Wilmington, Dela-
ware. 
Sec. 4032. Delaware inland bays and tributaries and Atlantic coast, Delaware. 
Sec. 4033. Collier County Beaches, Florida. 
Sec. 4034. Lower St. Johns River, Florida. 
Sec. 4035. Herbert Hoover Dike supplemental major rehabilitation report, Florida. 
Sec. 4036. Vanderbilt Beach Lagoon, Florida. 
Sec. 4037. Meriwether County, Georgia. 
Sec. 4038. Boise River, Idaho. 
Sec. 4039. Ballard’s Island Side Channel, Illinois. 
Sec. 4040. Chicago, Illinois. 
Sec. 4041. Salem, Indiana. 
Sec. 4042. Buckhorn Lake, Kentucky. 
Sec. 4043. Dewey Lake, Kentucky. 
Sec. 4044. Louisville, Kentucky. 
Sec. 4045. Vidalia Port, Louisiana. 
Sec. 4046. Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. 
Sec. 4047. Clinton River, Michigan. 
Sec. 4048. Hamburg and Green Oak Townships, Michigan. 
Sec. 4049. Lake Erie at Luna Pier, Michigan. 
Sec. 4050. Duluth-Superior Harbor, Minnesota and Wisconsin. 
Sec. 4051. Northeast Mississippi. 
Sec. 4052. Dredged material disposal, New Jersey. 
Sec. 4053. Bayonne, New Jersey. 
Sec. 4054. Carteret, New Jersey. 
Sec. 4055. Gloucester County, New Jersey. 
Sec. 4056. Perth Amboy, New Jersey. 
Sec. 4057. Batavia, New York. 
Sec. 4058. Big Sister Creek, Evans, New York. 
Sec. 4059. Finger Lakes, New York. 
Sec. 4060. Lake Erie Shoreline, Buffalo, New York. 
Sec. 4061. Newtown Creek, New York. 
Sec. 4062. Niagara River, New York. 
Sec. 4063. Shore Parkway Greenway, Brooklyn, New York. 
Sec. 4064. Upper Delaware River watershed, New York. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01043
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1046 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 4065. Lincoln County, North Carolina. 
Sec. 4066. Wilkes County, North Carolina. 
Sec. 4067. Yadkinville, North Carolina. 
Sec. 4068. Flood damage reduction, Ohio. 
Sec. 4069. Lake Erie, Ohio. 
Sec. 4070. Ohio River, Ohio. 
Sec. 4071. Toledo Harbor dredged material placement, Toledo, Ohio. 
Sec. 4072. Toledo Harbor, Maumee River, and Lake Channel project, Toledo, Ohio. 
Sec. 4073. Ecosystem restoration and fish passage improvements, Oregon. 
Sec. 4074. Walla Walla River basin, Oregon. 
Sec. 4075. Chartiers Creek watershed, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 4076. Kinzua Dam and Allegheny Reservoir, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 4077. Western Pennsylvania flood damage reduction. 
Sec. 4078. Williamsport, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 4079. Yardley Borough, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 4080. Rio Valenciano, Juncos, Puerto Rico. 
Sec. 4081. Woonsocket local protection project, Blackstone River basin, Rhode Is-
land. 
Sec. 4082. Crooked Creek, Bennettsville, South Carolina. 
Sec. 4083. Broad River, York County, South Carolina. 
Sec. 4084. Savannah River, South Carolina and Georgia. 
Sec. 4085. Chattanooga, Tennessee. 
Sec. 4086. Cleveland, Tennessee. 
Sec. 4087. Cumberland River, Nashville, Tennessee. 
Sec. 4088. Lewis, Lawrence, and Wayne Counties, Tennessee. 
Sec. 4089. Wolf River and Nonconnah Creek, Memphis, Tennessee. 
Sec. 4090. Abilene, Texas. 
Sec. 4091. Coastal Texas ecosystem protection and restoration, Texas. 
Sec. 4092. Port of Galveston, Texas. 
Sec. 4093. Grand County and Moab, Utah. 
Sec. 4094. Southwestern Utah. 
Sec. 4095. Ecosystem and hydropower generation dams, Vermont. 
Sec. 4096. Elliott Bay Seawall, Seattle, Washington. 
Sec. 4097. Monongahela River Basin, Northern West Virginia. 
Sec. 4098. Kenosha Harbor, Wisconsin. 
Sec. 4099. Johnsonville Dam, Johnsonville, Wisconsin. 
Sec. 4100. Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. 
Sec. 4101. Debris removal. 
TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS 
Sec. 5001. Maintenance of navigation channels. 
Sec. 5002. Watershed management. 
Sec. 5003. Dam safety. 
Sec. 5004. Structural integrity evaluations. 
Sec. 5005. Flood mitigation priority areas. 
Sec. 5006. Additional assistance for authorized projects. 
Sec. 5007. Expedited completion of reports and construction for certain projects. 
Sec. 5008. Expedited completion of reports for certain projects. 
Sec. 5009. Southeastern water resources assessment. 
Sec. 5010. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers enhancement project. 
Sec. 5011. Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem restoration program. 
Sec. 5012. Great Lakes remedial action plans and sediment remediation. 
Sec. 5013. Great Lakes tributary models. 
Sec. 5014. Great Lakes navigation and protection. 
Sec. 5015. Saint Lawrence Seaway. 
Sec. 5016. Upper Mississippi River dispersal barrier project. 
Sec. 5017. Estuary restoration. 
Sec. 5018. Missouri River and tributaries, mitigation, recovery, and restoration, 
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Da-
kota, and Wyoming. 
Sec. 5019. Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River basins, Delaware, Mary-
land, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. 
Sec. 5020. Chesapeake Bay environmental restoration and protection program. 
Sec. 5021. Chesapeake Bay oyster restoration, Virginia and Maryland. 
Sec. 5022. Hypoxia assessment. 
Sec. 5023. Potomac River watershed assessment and tributary strategy evaluation 
and monitoring program. 
Sec. 5024. Lock and dam security. 
Sec. 5025. Research and development program for Columbia and Snake River salm-
on survival. 
Sec. 5026. Wage surveys. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01044
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1047 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 5027. Rehabilitation. 
Sec. 5028. Auburn, Alabama. 
Sec. 5029. Pinhook Creek, Huntsville, Alabama. 
Sec. 5030. Alaska. 
Sec. 5031. Barrow, Alaska. 
Sec. 5032. Lowell Creek Tunnel, Seward, Alaska. 
Sec. 5033. St. Herman and St. Paul Harbors, Kodiak, Alaska. 
Sec. 5034. Tanana River, Alaska. 
Sec. 5035. Wrangell Harbor, Alaska. 
Sec. 5036. Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas. 
Sec. 5037. Des Arc levee protection, Arkansas. 
Sec. 5038. Loomis Landing, Arkansas. 
Sec. 5039. California. 
Sec. 5040. Calaveras River and Littlejohn Creek and tributaries, Stockton, Cali-
fornia. 
Sec. 5041. Cambria, California. 
Sec. 5042. Contra Costa Canal, Oakley and Knightsen, California; Mallard Slough, 
Pittsburg, California. 
Sec. 5043. Dana Point Harbor, California. 
Sec. 5044. East San Joaquin County, California. 
Sec. 5045. Eastern Santa Clara basin, California. 
Sec. 5046. LA–3 dredged material ocean disposal site designation, California. 
Sec. 5047. Lancaster, California. 
Sec. 5048. Los Osos, California. 
Sec. 5049. Pine Flat Dam fish and wildlife habitat, California. 
Sec. 5050. Raymond Basin, Six Basins, Chino Basin, and San Gabriel Basin, Cali-
fornia. 
Sec. 5051. San Francisco, California. 
Sec. 5052. San Francisco, California, waterfront area. 
Sec. 5053. San Pablo Bay, California, watershed and Suisun Marsh ecosystem res-
toration. 
Sec. 5054. St. Helena, California. 
Sec. 5055. Upper Calaveras River, Stockton, California. 
Sec. 5056. Rio Grande environmental management program, Colorado, New Mex-
ico, and Texas. 
Sec. 5057. Charles Hervey Townshend Breakwater, New Haven Harbor, Con-
necticut. 
Sec. 5058. Stamford, Connecticut. 
Sec. 5059. Delmarva conservation corridor, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. 
Sec. 5060. Anacostia River, District of Columbia and Maryland. 
Sec. 5061. East Central and Northeast Florida. 
Sec. 5062. Florida Keys water quality improvements. 
Sec. 5063. Lake Worth, Florida. 
Sec. 5064. Big Creek, Georgia, watershed management and restoration program. 
Sec. 5065. Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District. 
Sec. 5066. Savannah, Georgia. 
Sec. 5067. Idaho, Montana, rural Nevada, New Mexico, rural Utah, and Wyoming. 
Sec. 5068. Riley Creek Recreation Area, Idaho. 
Sec. 5069. Floodplain mapping, Little Calumet River, Chicago, Illinois. 
Sec. 5070. Reconstruction of Illinois and Missouri flood protection projects. 
Sec. 5071. Illinois River basin restoration. 
Sec. 5072. Promontory Point third-party review, Chicago shoreline, Chicago, Illi-
nois. 
Sec. 5073. Kaskaskia River basin, Illinois, restoration. 
Sec. 5074. Southwest Illinois. 
Sec. 5075. Calumet region, Indiana. 
Sec. 5076. Floodplain mapping, Missouri River, Iowa. 
Sec. 5077. Paducah, Kentucky. 
Sec. 5078. Southern and eastern Kentucky. 
Sec. 5079. Winchester, Kentucky. 
Sec. 5080. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5081. Calcasieu Ship Channel, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5082. East Atchafalaya basin and Amite River basin region, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5083. Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock project, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5084. Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5085. Southeast Louisiana region, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5086. West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. 
Sec. 5087. Charlestown, Maryland. 
Sec. 5088. St. Mary’s River, Maryland. 
Sec. 5089. Massachusetts dredged material disposal sites. 
Sec. 5090. Ontonagon Harbor, Michigan. 
Sec. 5091. Crookston, Minnesota. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01045
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1048 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 5092. Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota. 
Sec. 5093. Itasca County, Minnesota. 
Sec. 5094. Minneapolis, Minnesota. 
Sec. 5095. Northeastern Minnesota. 
Sec. 5096. Wild Rice River, Minnesota. 
Sec. 5097. Mississippi. 
Sec. 5098. Harrison, Hancock, and Jackson Counties, Mississippi. 
Sec. 5099. Mississippi River, Missouri and Illinois. 
Sec. 5100. St. Louis, Missouri. 
Sec. 5101. St. Louis Regional Greenways, St. Louis, Missouri. 
Sec. 5102. Missoula, Montana. 
Sec. 5103. St. Mary project, Glacier County, Montana. 
Sec. 5104. Lower Platte River watershed restoration, Nebraska. 
Sec. 5105. Hackensack Meadowlands area, New Jersey. 
Sec. 5106. Atlantic Coast of New York. 
Sec. 5107. College Point, New York City, New York. 
Sec. 5108. Flushing Bay and Creek, New York City, New York. 
Sec. 5109. Hudson River, New York. 
Sec. 5110. Mount Morris Dam, New York. 
Sec. 5111. North Hempstead and Glen Cove North Shore watershed restoration, 
New York. 
Sec. 5112. Rochester, New York. 
Sec. 5113. North Carolina. 
Sec. 5114. Stanly County, North Carolina. 
Sec. 5115. John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir, North Carolina. 
Sec. 5116. Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Sec. 5117. Ohio River basin environmental management. 
Sec. 5118. Toussaint River navigation project, Carroll Township, Ohio. 
Sec. 5119. Statewide comprehensive water planning, Oklahoma. 
Sec. 5120. Fern Ridge Dam, Oregon. 
Sec. 5121. Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 5122. Clinton County, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 5123. Kehly Run Dams, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 5124. Lehigh River, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 5125. Northeast Pennsylvania. 
Sec. 5126. Upper Susquehanna River basin, Pennsylvania and New York. 
Sec. 5127. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 
Sec. 5128. Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Carolina. 
Sec. 5129. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and terrestrial 
wildlife habitat restoration, South Dakota. 
Sec. 5130. East Tennessee. 
Sec. 5131. Fritz Landing, Tennessee. 
Sec. 5132. J. Percy Priest Dam and Reservoir, Tennessee. 
Sec. 5133. Nashville, Tennessee. 
Sec. 5134. Nonconnah Weir, Memphis, Tennessee. 
Sec. 5135. Tennessee River partnership. 
Sec. 5136. Town Creek, Lenoir City, Tennessee. 
Sec. 5137. Upper Mississippi embayment, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi. 
Sec. 5138. Texas. 
Sec. 5139. Bosque River watershed, Texas. 
Sec. 5140. Dallas County region, Texas. 
Sec. 5141. Dallas Floodway, Dallas, Texas. 
Sec. 5142. Harris County, Texas. 
Sec. 5143. Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas. 
Sec. 5144. Onion Creek, Texas. 
Sec. 5145. Connecticut River dams, Vermont. 
Sec. 5146. Lake Champlain Canal, Vermont and New York. 
Sec. 5147. Dyke Marsh, Fairfax County, Virginia. 
Sec. 5148. Eastern Shore and Southwest Virginia. 
Sec. 5149. James River, Virginia. 
Sec. 5150. Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington. 
Sec. 5151. Hamilton Island campground, Washington. 
Sec. 5152. Erosion control, Puget Island, Wahkiakum County, Washington. 
Sec. 5153. Willapa Bay, Washington. 
Sec. 5154. West Virginia and Pennsylvania flood control. 
Sec. 5155. Central West Virginia. 
Sec. 5156. Southern West Virginia. 
Sec. 5157. Construction of flood control projects by non-Federal interests. 
Sec. 5158. Additional assistance for critical projects. 
TITLE VI—FLORIDA EVERGLADES 
Sec. 6001. Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, Florida. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01046
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6582
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1049 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sec. 6002. Pilot projects. 
Sec. 6003. Maximum costs. 
Sec. 6004. Credit. 
Sec. 6005. Outreach and assistance. 
Sec. 6006. Critical restoration projects. 
Sec. 6007. Regional engineering model for environmental restoration. 
TITLE VII—LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA 
Sec. 7001. Definitions. 
Sec. 7002. Comprehensive plan. 
Sec. 7003. Louisiana coastal area. 
Sec. 7004. Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task Force. 
Sec. 7005. Project modifications. 
Sec. 7006. Construction. 
Sec. 7007. Non-Federal cost share. 
Sec. 7008. Project justification. 
Sec. 7009. Independent review. 
Sec. 7010. Expedited reports. 
Sec. 7011. Reporting. 
Sec. 7012. New Orleans and vicinity. 
Sec. 7013. Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet. 
Sec. 7014. Hurricane and storm damage reduction. 
Sec. 7015. Larose to Golden Meadow. 
Sec. 7016. Lower Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. 
TITLE VIII—UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY SYSTEM 
Sec. 8001. Definitions. 
Sec. 8002. Navigation improvements and restoration. 
Sec. 8003. Authorization of construction of navigation improvements. 
Sec. 8004. Ecosystem restoration authorization. 
Sec. 8005. Comparable progress. 
TITLE IX—NATIONAL LEVEE SAFETY PROGRAM 
Sec. 9001. Short title. 
Sec. 9002. Definitions. 
Sec. 9003. Committee on Levee Safety. 
Sec. 9004. Inventory and inspection of levees. 
Sec. 9005. Limitations on statutory construction. 
Sec. 9006. Authorization of appropriations. 
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY. 
In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the 
Army. 
TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES 
PROJECTS 
SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. 
Except as otherwise provided in this section, the following 
projects for water resources development and conservation and other 
purposes are authorized to be carried out by the Secretary substan-
tially in accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions, 
described in the respective reports designated in this section: 
(1) HAINES, ALASKA.—The project for navigation, Haines, 
Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 20, 
2004, at a total cost of $14,040,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $11,232,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$2,808,000. 
(2) PORT LIONS, ALASKA.—The project for navigation, Port 
Lions, Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated June 
14, 2006, at a total cost of $9,530,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $7,624,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $1,906,000. 
Studies. 
33 USC 2201 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01047
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1050 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(3) SANTA CRUZ RIVER, PASEO DE LAS IGLESIAS, ARIZONA.— 
The project for environmental restoration, Santa Cruz River, 
Pima County, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
March 28, 2006, at a total cost of $97,700,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $63,300,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $34,400,000. 
(4) TANQUE VERDE CREEK, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA.—The 
project for environmental restoration, Tanque Verde Creek, 
Pima County, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $5,906,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $3,836,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $2,070,000. 
(5) SALT
RIVER
(RIO
SALADO
OESTE), MARICOPA
COUNTY, 
ARIZONA.—The project for environmental restoration, Salt River 
(Rio Salado Oeste), Maricopa County, Arizona: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost 
of $166,650,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $106,629,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $60,021,000. 
(6) SALT RIVER (VA SHLY’AY AKIMEL), MARICOPA COUNTY, 
ARIZONA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environmental res-
toration, Salt River (Va Shly’ay Akimel), Arizona: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated January 3, 2005, at a 
total cost of $162,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $105,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$56,900,000. 
(B) 
COORDINATION
WITH
FEDERAL
RECLAMATION 
PROJECTS.—The Secretary, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable, shall coordinate the design and construction of 
the project described in subparagraph (A) with the Bureau 
of Reclamation and any operating agent for any Federal 
reclamation project in the Salt River Basin to avoid impacts 
to existing Federal reclamation facilities and operations 
in the Salt River Basin. 
(7) MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS.—The project for 
flood damage reduction, May Branch, Fort Smith, Arkansas: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, 
at a total cost of $30,850,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of 
$15,010,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$15,840,000. 
(8) HAMILTON
CITY, GLENN
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—The 
project for flood damage reduction and environmental restora-
tion, Hamilton City, Glenn County, California: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total cost 
of $52,400,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $34,100,000 
and estimated non-Federal cost of $18,300,000. 
(9) SILVER
STRAND
SHORELINE, IMPERIAL
BEACH, CALI-
FORNIA.—The project for storm damage reduction, Silver Strand 
Shoreline, Imperial Beach, California: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of 
$13,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $8,521,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,179,000, and at an esti-
mated total cost of $42,500,000 for periodic beach nourishment 
over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $21,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$21,250,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01048
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1051 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(10) MATILIJA
DAM, VENTURA
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—The 
project for environmental restoration, Matilija Dam, Ventura 
County, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 20, 2004, at a total cost of $144,500,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $89,700,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $54,800,000. 
(11) MIDDLE
CREEK, 
LAKE
COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.—The 
project for flood damage reduction and environmental restora-
tion, Middle Creek, Lake County, California: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated November 29, 2004, at a total cost 
of $45,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $29,500,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,700,000. 
(12) NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CALIFORNIA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environmental res-
toration, Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa, Cali-
fornia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 
22, 2004, at a total cost of $134,500,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $87,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal 
cost of $47,000,000. 
(B) ADMINISTRATION.—In carrying out the project 
authorized by this paragraph, the Secretary shall— 
(i) construct a recycled water pipeline extending 
from the Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District 
Waste Water Treatment Plant and the Napa Sanitation 
District Waste Water Treatment Plant to the project; 
and 
(ii) restore or enhance Salt Ponds 1, 1A, 2, and 
3. 
(13) DENVER COUNTY REACH, SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, DENVER, 
COLORADO.—The project for environmental restoration, Denver 
County Reach, South Platte River, Denver, Colorado: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated May 16, 2003, at a total cost 
of $20,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $13,065,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,035,000. 
(14) CENTRAL
AND
SOUTHERN
FLORIDA, INDIAN
RIVER 
LAGOON, FLORIDA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out the 
project for ecosystem restoration, water supply, flood con-
trol, and protection of water quality, Central and Southern 
Florida, Indian River Lagoon, Florida, at a total cost of 
$1,365,000,000, 
with 
an 
estimated 
Federal 
cost 
of 
$682,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$682,500,000, in accordance with section 601 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680) and 
the recommendations of the report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated August 6, 2004. 
(B) DEAUTHORIZATIONS.—The following projects are not 
authorized after the date of enactment of this Act: 
(i) The uncompleted portions of the project for 
the C–44 Basin Storage Reservoir of the Comprehen-
sive Everglades Restoration Plan, authorized by section 
601(b)(2)(C)(i) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2682), at a total cost of $147,800,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $73,900,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $73,900,000. 
(ii) The uncompleted portions of the Martin 
County, Florida, modifications to the project for Central 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01049
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1052 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
and Southern Florida, authorized by section 203 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 740), at a 
total cost of $15,471,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $8,073,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $7,398,000. 
(iii) The uncompleted portions of the East Coast 
Backpumping, St. Lucie–Martin County, Spillway 
Structure S–311 modifications to the project for Central 
and Southern Florida, authorized by section 203 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 740), at a 
total cost of $77,118,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $55,124,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $21,994,000. 
(15) COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN, CEN-
TRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, PICAYUNE STRAND RESTORATION 
PROJECT, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.—The project for ecosystem 
restoration, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, Cen-
tral and Southern Florida, Picayune Strand Restoration Project, 
Collier County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
September 15, 2005, at a total cost of $375,330,000 with an 
estimated Federal cost of $187,665,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $187,665,000. 
(16) COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN, CEN-
TRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, SITE 1 IMPOUNDMENT PROJECT, 
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA.—The project for ecosystem res-
toration, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, Central 
and Southern Florida, Site 1 Impoundment Project, Palm Beach 
County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $80,840,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $40,420,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $40,420,000. 
(17) MIAMI HARBOR, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Miami 
Harbor, Miami-Dade County, Florida: Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated April 25, 2005, at a total cost of 
$125,270,000, 
with 
an 
estimated 
Federal 
cost 
of 
$75,140,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$50,130,000. 
(B) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT.—The non-Federal 
share of the cost of the general reevaluation report that 
resulted in the report of the Chief of Engineers referred 
to in subparagraph (A) shall be the same percentage as 
the non-Federal share of cost of construction of the project. 
(C) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter into a new 
partnership with the non-Federal interest to reflect the 
cost sharing required by subparagraph (B). 
(18) EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS.—The project 
for environmental restoration and recreation, East St. Louis 
and Vicinity, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $208,260,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $134,910,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $73,350,000. 
(19) PEORIA
RIVERFRONT
DEVELOPMENT, ILLINOIS.—The 
project 
for 
environmental 
restoration, 
Peoria 
Riverfront 
Development, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
July 28, 2003, at a total cost of $18,220,000, with an estimated 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01050
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1053 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Federal cost of $11,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $6,380,000. 
(20) WOOD RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM RECONSTRUCTION, MADISON 
COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—The project for flood damage reduction, 
Wood River Levee System Reconstruction, Madison County, 
Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 18, 2006, 
at a total cost of $17,220,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $11,193,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,027,000. 
(21) DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, DES MOINES, IOWA.— 
The project for flood damage reduction, Des Moines and Raccoon 
Rivers, Des Moines, Iowa: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated March 28, 2006, at a total cost of $10,780,000, with 
an estimated Federal cost of $6,967,000 and an estimated non- 
Federal cost of $3,813,000. 
(22) LICKING
RIVER
BASIN, CYNTHIANA, KENTUCKY.—The 
project for flood damage reduction, Licking River Basin, 
Cynthiana, Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
October 24, 2006, at a total cost of $18,200,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $11,830,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $6,370,000. 
(23) BAYOU
SORREL
LOCK, LOUISIANA.—The project for 
navigation, Bayou Sorrel Lock, Louisiana: Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated January 3, 2005, at a total cost of 
$9,600,000. The costs of construction of the project are to be 
paid 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the general fund of 
the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the 
Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 
(24) MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOUISIANA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for hurricane and storm 
damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Lou-
isiana: Reports of the Chief of Engineers dated August 
23, 2002, and July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $886,700,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $576,355,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $310,345,000. 
(B) OPERATION
AND
MAINTENANCE.—The operation, 
maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of the 
Houma Navigation Canal lock complex and the Gulf Intra-
coastal Waterway floodgate features of the project described 
in subparagraph (A) that provide for inland waterway 
transportation shall be a Federal responsibility in accord-
ance with section 102 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2212). 
(25) PORT OF IBERIA, LOUISIANA.—The project for naviga-
tion, Port of Iberia, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost of $131,250,000, with 
an estimated Federal cost of $105,315,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $25,935,000; except that the Secretary, 
in consultation with Vermillion and Iberia Parishes, Louisiana, 
and consistent with the mitigation plan in the report, shall 
use available dredged material and rock placement on the 
south bank of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway and the west 
bank of the Freshwater Bayou Channel to provide incidental 
storm surge protection that does not adversely affect the mitiga-
tion plan. 
(26) SMITH
ISLAND, SOMERSET
COUNTY, MARYLAND.—The 
project for environmental restoration, Smith Island, Somerset 
County, Maryland: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01051
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1054 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
October 29, 2001, at a total cost of $15,580,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $10,127,000 and an estimated non-Fed-
eral cost of $5,453,000. 
(27) ROSEAU RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA.—The project for 
flood damage reduction, Roseau River, Roseau, Minnesota: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, 
at a total cost of $25,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of 
$13,820,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$11,280,000. 
(28) ARGENTINE, EAST
BOTTOMS, FAIRFAX-JERSEY
CREEK, 
AND NORTH KANSAS LEVEES UNITS, MISSOURI RIVER AND TRIBU-
TARIES AT KANSAS CITIES, MISSOURI AND KANSAS.—The project 
for flood damage reduction, Argentine, East Bottoms, Fairfax- 
Jersey Creek, and North Kansas Levees units, Missouri River 
and tributaries at Kansas Cities, Missouri and Kansas: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total 
cost of $65,430,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$42,530,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $22,900,000. 
(29) SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, BLUE RIVER, KANSAS 
CITY, MISSOURI.—The project for flood damage reduction, Swope 
Park Industrial Area, Blue River, Kansas City, Missouri: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total 
cost of $16,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$11,037,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,943,000. 
(30) GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NEW 
JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm damage reduc-
tion, Great Egg Harbor Inlet to Townsends Inlet, New Jersey: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at 
a total cost of $54,360,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of 
$35,069,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$19,291,000, and at an estimated total cost of $202,500,000 
for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $101,250,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $101,250,000. 
(31) HUDSON RARITAN ESTUARY, LIBERTY STATE PARK, NEW 
JERSEY.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environmental res-
toration, Hudson Raritan Estuary, Liberty State Park, New 
Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 
25, 2006, at a total cost of $34,100,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $22,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal 
cost of $11,900,000. 
(B) RESTORATION TEAMS.—In carrying out the project, 
the Secretary shall establish and utilize watershed restora-
tion 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 restora-
tion and water quality enhancement. 
(32) NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION STUDY, MANASQUAN 
INLET TO BARNEGAT INLET, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurri-
cane and storm damage reduction, New Jersey Shore Protection 
Study, Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total 
cost of $71,900,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$46,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,165,000, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01052
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1055 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
and at an estimated total cost of $119,680,000 for periodic 
beach nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with 
an estimated Federal cost of $59,840,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $59,840,000. 
(33) RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, 
NEW
JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm damage 
reduction, Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Union Beach, 
New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 
4, 2006, at a total cost of $115,000,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $74,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $40,200,000, and at an estimated total cost of $6,500,000 
for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $3,250,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $3,250,000. 
(34) SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NEW JERSEY.— 
The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction and 
environmental restoration, South River, Raritan River Basin, 
New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 22, 
2003, at a total cost of $122,300,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $79,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$42,800,000. 
(35) 
SOUTHWEST
VALLEY, 
BERNALILLO
COUNTY, 
NEW 
MEXICO.—The project for flood damage reduction, Southwest 
Valley, Bernalillo County, New Mexico: Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated November 29, 2004, at a total cost of 
$24,840,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $16,150,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,690,000. 
(36) MONTAUK POINT, NEW YORK.—The project for hurricane 
and storm damage reduction, Montauk Point, New York: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated March 31, 2006, at a total 
cost of $14,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$7,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,300,000. 
(37) HOCKING RIVER BASIN, MONDAY CREEK, OHIO.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for ecosystem restoration, 
Hocking River Basin, Monday Creek, Ohio: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated August 24, 2006, at a total cost 
of $20,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$13,440,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$7,540,000. 
(B) WAYNE NATIONAL FOREST.— 
(i) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary, in cooperation 
with the Secretary of Agriculture, may construct other 
project features on property that is located in the 
Wayne National Forest, Ohio, owned by the United 
States and managed by the Forest Service as described 
in the report of the Corps of Engineers entitled 
‘‘Hocking River Basin, Ohio, Monday Creek Sub-Basin 
Ecosystem Restoration Project Feasibility Report and 
Environmental Assessment’’. 
(ii) COST.—Each project feature carried out on Fed-
eral land shall be designed, constructed, operated, and 
maintained at Federal expense. 
(iii) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Agri-
culture to carry out this subparagraph $1,270,000. 
(38) TOWN OF BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—The project for flood damage reduction, town of 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01053
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1056 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Bloomsburg, Columbia County, Pennsylvania: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated January 25, 2006, at a total cost 
of $44,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $28,925,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,575,000. 
(39) PAWLEYS ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA.—The project for 
hurricane and storm damage reduction, Pawleys Island, South 
Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 
19, 2006, at a total cost of $8,980,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $5,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $3,140,000, and at an estimated total cost of $21,200,000 
for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $10,600,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $10,600,000. 
(40) CORPUS
CHRISTI
SHIP
CHANNEL, CORPUS
CHRISTI, 
TEXAS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation and eco-
system restoration, Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Texas: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated June 2, 2003, at 
a total cost of $188,110,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $87,810,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$100,300,000. 
(B) NAVIGATIONAL
SERVITUDE.—In carrying out the 
project under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall enforce 
the navigational servitude in the Corpus Christi Ship 
Channel (including the removal or relocation of any facility 
obstructing the project) consistent with the cost sharing 
requirements of section 101 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211). 
(41) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, BRAZOS RIVER TO PORT 
O’CONNOR, MATAGORDA BAY RE-ROUTE, TEXAS.—The project for 
navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Brazos River to Port 
O’Connor, Matagorda Bay Re-Route, Texas: Report of the Chief 
of Engineers dated December 24, 2002, at a total cost of 
$17,280,000. The costs of construction of the project are to 
be paid 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the general fund 
of the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the 
Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 
(42) GULF
INTRACOASTAL
WATERWAY, HIGH
ISLAND
TO 
BRAZOS RIVER, TEXAS.—The project for navigation, Gulf Intra-
coastal Waterway, High Island to Brazos River, Texas: Report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated April 16, 2004, at a total 
cost of $14,450,000. The costs of construction of the project 
are to be paid 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the general 
fund of the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from 
the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 
(43) LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN PHASE I, TEXAS.—The 
project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration, 
Lower Colorado River Basin Phase I, Texas: Report of the 
Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost 
of $110,730,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $69,640,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $41,090,000. 
(44) ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE REPLACE-
MENT, DEEP
CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA.—The project for 
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Bridge Replacement, Deep 
Creek, Chesapeake, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated March 3, 2003, at a total cost of $37,200,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01054
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1057 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(45) CRANEY
ISLAND
EASTWARD
EXPANSION, 
NORFOLK 
HARBOR AND CHANNELS, HAMPTON ROADS, VIRGINIA.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Craney 
Island Eastward Expansion, Norfolk Harbor and Channels, 
Hampton Roads, Virginia: Report of Chief of Engineers 
dated October 24, 2006, at a total cost of $712,103,000. 
(B) NON-FEDERAL
SHARE.—Notwithstanding sections 
101 and 103 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 and 2213), the Federal share 
of the cost of the project shall be 50 percent. 
(46) CENTRALIA, CHEHALIS
RIVER, LEWIS
COUNTY, WASH-
INGTON.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Centralia, Chehalis River, Lewis County, Washington: 
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated September 27, 2004, 
at a total cost of $123,770,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $74,740,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$49,030,000. 
(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall— 
(i) credit, in accordance with section 221 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project up 
to $6,500,000 for the cost of planning and design work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest in accordance 
with the project study plan dated November 28, 1999; 
and 
(ii) credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project 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. 1002. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study for each 
of the following projects and, if the Secretary determines that 
a project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 205 
of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s): 
(1) HALEYVILLE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Haleyville, Alabama. 
(2) WEISS LAKE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Weiss Lake, Alabama. 
(3) FORT YUKON, ALASKA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Fort Yukon, Alaska. 
(4) LITTLE COLORADO RIVER LEVEE, ARIZONA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Little Colorado River Levee, Arizona. 
(5) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Cache River Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas. 
(6) BARREL SPRINGS WASH, PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Barrel Springs Wash, Palmdale, 
California. 
(7) BORREGO SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood dam-
age reduction, Borrego Springs, California. 
(8) COLTON, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Colton, California. 
(9) DUNLAP
STREAM, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Dunlap Stream, Yucaipa, California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01055
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1058 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(10) HUNTS CANYON WASH, PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Hunts Canyon Wash, Palmdale, 
California. 
(11) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Ontario and Chino, California. 
(12) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Santa Venetia, California. 
(13) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Whittier, California. 
(14) WILDWOOD CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Wildwood Creek, Yucaipa, California. 
(15) BIBB COUNTY AND CITY OF MACON LEVEE, GEORGIA.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Bibb County and City of 
Macon Levee, Georgia. 
(16) FORT WAYNE AND VICINITY, INDIANA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, St. Mary’s and Maumee Rivers, Fort Wayne 
and vicinity, Indiana. 
(17) ST. FRANCISVILLE, LOUSIANA.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, St. Francisville, Louisiana. 
(18) SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Salem, Massachusetts. 
(19) CASS
RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Cass River, Vassar and vicinity, Michigan. 
(20) CROW RIVER, ROCKFORD, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Crow River, Rockford, Minnesota. 
(21) MARSH CREEK, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage 
reduction, Marsh Creek, Minnesota. 
(22) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, BORUP, MIN-
NESOTA.—Project for flood damage reduction, South Branch 
of the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota. 
(23) BLACKSNAKE CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MISSOURI.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, Mis-
souri. 
(24) ACID BROOK, POMPTON LAKES, NEW JERSEY.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, Acid Brook, Pompton Lakes, New 
Jersey. 
(25) CANISTEO RIVER, ADDISON, NEW YORK.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Canisteo River, Addison, New York. 
(26) COHOCTON RIVER, CAMPBELL, NEW YORK.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Cohocton River, Campbell, New York. 
(27) DRY
AND
OTTER
CREEKS, CORTLAND, NEW
YORK.— 
Project for flood damage reduction, Dry and Otter Creeks, 
Cortland, New York. 
(28) EAST
RIVER, SILVER
BEACH, NEW
YORK
CITY, NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, East River, Silver 
Beach, New York City, New York. 
(29) EAST VALLEY CREEK, ANDOVER, NEW YORK.—Project 
for flood damage reduction, East Valley Creek, Andover, New 
York. 
(30) SUNNYSIDE
BROOK, 
WESTCHESTER
COUNTY, 
NEW 
YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, Sunnyside Brook, 
Westchester County, New York. 
(31) LITTLE
YANKEE
AND
MUD
RUN, TRUMBULL
COUNTY, 
OHIO.—Project for flood damage reduction, Little Yankee and 
Mud Run, Trumbull County, Ohio. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01056
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1059 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(32) LITTLE
NESHAMINY
CREEK, WARRINGTON, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Little Neshaminy 
Creek, Warrington, Pennsylvania. 
(33) SOUTHAMPTON
CREEK
WATERSHED, 
SOUTHAMPTON, 
PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, South-
ampton Creek watershed, Southampton, Pennsylvania. 
(34) SPRING CREEK, LOWER MACUNGIE TOWNSHIP, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Spring Creek, 
Lower Macungie Township, Pennsylvania. 
(35) YARDLEY
AQUEDUCT, SILVER
AND
BROCK
CREEKS, 
YARDLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, 
Yardley Aqueduct, Silver and Brock Creeks, Yardley, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(36) SURFSIDE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA.—Project for flood 
damage reduction, Surfside Beach and vicinity, South Carolina. 
(37) SANDY
CREEK, 
JACKSON
COUNTY, 
TENNESSEE.—A 
project for flood damage reduction, Sandy Creek, Jackson 
County, Tennessee. 
(38) CONGELOSI DITCH, MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS.—Project for 
flood damage reduction, Congelosi Ditch, Missouri City, Texas. 
(39) DILLEY, TEXAS.—Project for flood damage reduction, 
Dilley, Texas. 
(40) CHEYENNE, WYOMING.—Project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 
(b) SPECIAL RULES.— 
(1) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.—The Secretary 
may proceed with the project for the Cache River Basin, Grubbs, 
Arkansas, referred to in subsection (a)(5), notwithstanding that 
the project is located within the boundaries of the flood control 
project, Cache River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri, authorized 
by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950, (64 Stat. 
172) and modified by section 99 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 41). 
(2) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA.—The Secretary shall 
carry out the project for flood damage reduction, Ontario and 
Chino, California, referred to in subsection (a)(11) if the Sec-
retary determines that the project is feasible. 
(3) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA.—The Secretary shall carry 
out the project for flood damage reduction, Santa Venetia, 
California, referred to in subsection (a)(12) if the Secretary 
determines that the project is feasible and shall allow the 
non-Federal interest to participate in the financing of the 
project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that 
the Secretary’s evaluation indicates that applying such section 
is necessary to implement the project. 
(4) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—The Secretary shall carry out 
the project for flood damage reduction, Whittier, California, 
referred to in subsection (a)(13) if the Secretary determines 
that the project is feasible. 
(5) WILDWOOD
CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.—The Sec-
retary shall review the locally prepared plan for the project 
for flood damage, Wildwood Creek, California, referred to in 
subsection (a)(14) and, if the Secretary determines that the 
plan meets the evaluation and design standards of the Corps 
of Engineers and that the plan is feasible, the Secretary may 
use the plan to carry out the project and shall provide credit 
Review. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01057
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1060 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before 
the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the 
Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project. 
(6) FORT WAYNE AND VICINITY, INDIANA.—In carrying out 
the project for flood damage reduction, St. Mary’s and Maumee 
Rivers, Fort Wayne and vicinity, Indiana, referred to in sub-
section (a)(16) the Secretary shall— 
(A) provide a 100-year level of flood protection at the 
Berry Thieme, Park-Thompson, Woodhurst, and Tillman 
sites along the St. Mary’s River; and 
(B) allow the non-Federal interest to participate in 
the financing of the project in accordance with section 
903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the Secretary’s evalua-
tion indicates that applying such section is necessary to 
implement the project. 
(7) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, BORUP, MIN-
NESOTA.—In carrying out the project for flood damage reduction, 
South Branch of the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota, 
referred to in subsection (a)(22) the Secretary may consider 
national ecosystem restoration benefits in determining the Fed-
eral interest in the project and shall allow the non-Federal 
interest to participate in the financing of the project in accord-
ance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the Secretary’s 
evaluation indicates that applying such section is necessary 
to implement the project. 
(8) ACID BROOK, POMPTON LAKES, NEW JERSEY.—The Sec-
retary shall carry out the project for flood damage reduction, 
Acid Brook, Pompton Lakes, New Jersey, referred to in sub-
section (a)(24) if the Secretary determines that the project 
is feasible. 
(9) SANDY CREEK, TENNESSEE.—Consistent with the report 
of the Chief of Engineers dated March 24, 1948, on the West 
Tennessee Tributaries project, in carrying out the project for 
flood damage reduction, Sandy Creek, Tennessee, referred to 
in section (a)(37)— 
(A) Sandy Creek shall not be considered to be an 
authorized channel of the West Tennessee Tributaries 
project; and 
(B) the project shall not be considered to be part of 
the West Tennessee Tributaries project. 
(10) DILLEY, TEXAS.—The Secretary shall carry out the 
project for flood damage reduction, Dilley, Texas, referred to 
in subsection (a)(39) if the Secretary determines that the project 
is feasible. 
SEC. 1003. SMALL PROJECTS FOR EMERGENCY STREAMBANK PROTEC-
TION. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following 
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is feasible, 
may carry out the project under section 14 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r): 
(1) ALISO
CREEK, CALIFORNIA.—Projects for emergency 
streambank protection, Aliso Creek, California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01058
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1061 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) ST. JOHNS
BLUFF
TRAINING
WALL, DUVAL
COUNTY, 
FLORIDA.—Project for emergency streambank protection, St. 
Johns Bluff Training Wall, Duval County, Florida. 
(3) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, IBERVILLE PARISH, LOU-
ISIANA.—Projects for emergency streambank protection, Gulf 
Intracoastal Waterway, Iberville Parish, Louisiana. 
(4) OUACHITA
AND
BLACK
RIVERS, ARKANSAS
AND
LOU-
ISIANA.—Projects 
for 
emergency 
streambank 
protection, 
Ouachita and Black Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana. 
(5) PINEY POINT LIGHTHOUSE, ST. MARY’S COUNTY, MARY-
LAND.—Project for emergency streambank protection, Piney 
Point Lighthouse, St. Mary’s County, Maryland. 
(6) PUG HOLE LAKE, MINNESOTA.—Project for emergency 
streambank protection, Pug Hole Lake, Minnesota. 
(7) MIDDLE
FORK
GRAND
RIVER, GENTRY
COUNTY, MIS-
SOURI.—Project for emergency streambank protection, Middle 
Fork Grand River, Gentry County, Missouri. 
(8) PLATTE RIVER, PLATTE CITY, MISSOURI.—Project for emer-
gency streambank protection, Platte River, Platte City, Mis-
souri. 
(9) RUSH CREEK, PARKVILLE, MISSOURI.—Project for emer-
gency streambank protection, Rush Creek, Parkville, Missouri, 
including measures to address degradation of the creek bed. 
(10) DRY
AND
OTTER
CREEKS, CORTLAND
COUNTY, NEW 
YORK.—Project for emergency streambank protection, Dry and 
Otter Creeks, Cortland County, New York. 
(11) KEUKA LAKE, HAMMONDSPORT, NEW YORK.—Project for 
emergency 
streambank 
protection, 
Keuka 
Lake, 
Hammondsport, New York. 
(12) KOWAWESE
UNIQUE
AREA
AND
HUDSON
RIVER, NEW 
WINDSOR, 
NEW
YORK.—Project for emergency streambank 
protection, Kowawese Unique Area and Hudson River, New 
Windsor, New York. 
(13) OWEGO
CREEK, TIOGA
COUNTY, NEW
YORK.—Project 
for emergency streambank protection, Owego Creek, Tioga 
County, New York. 
(14) HOWARD
ROAD
OUTFALL, 
SHELBY
COUNTY, 
TEN-
NESSEE.—Project for emergency streambank protection, Howard 
Road outfall, Shelby County, Tennessee. 
(15) MITCH FARM DITCH AND LATERAL D, SHELBY COUNTY, 
TENNESSEE.—Project for emergency streambank protection, 
Mitch Farm Ditch and Lateral D, Shelby County, Tennessee. 
(16) WOLF
RIVER
TRIBUTARIES, SHELBY
COUNTY, TEN-
NESSEE.—Project for emergency streambank protection, Wolf 
River tributaries, Shelby County, Tennessee. 
(17) JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.—Project for emer-
gency streambank protection, Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas. 
(18) WELLS RIVER, NEWBURY, VERMONT.—Project for emer-
gency streambank protection, Wells River, Newbury, Vermont. 
SEC. 1004. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study for each 
of the following projects and, if the Secretary determines that 
a project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 107 
of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577): 
(1) BARROW HARBOR, ALASKA.—Project for navigation, Bar-
row Harbor, Alaska. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01059
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1062 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) COFFMAN
COVE, 
ALASKA.—Project for navigation, 
Coffman Cove, Alaska. 
(3) KOTZEBUE
HARBOR, ALASKA.—Project for navigation, 
Kotzebue Harbor, Alaska. 
(4) NOME HARBOR, ALASKA.—Project for navigation, Nome 
Harbor, Alaska. 
(5) OLD
HARBOR, ALASKA.—Project for navigation, Old 
Harbor, Alaska. 
(6) LITTLE ROCK PORT, ARKANSAS.—Project for navigation, 
Little Rock Port, Arkansas River, Arkansas. 
(7) MISSISSIPPI RIVER SHIP CHANNEL, LOUISIANA.—Project 
for navigation, Mississippi River Ship Channel, Louisiana. 
(8) EAST BASIN, CAPE COD CANAL, SANDWICH, MASSACHU-
SETTS.—Project for navigation, East Basin, Cape Cod Canal, 
Sandwich, Massachusetts. 
(9) LYNN
HARBOR, LYNN, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for 
navigation, Lynn Harbor, Lynn, Massachusetts. 
(10) MERRIMACK
RIVER, HAVERHILL, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for navigation, Merrimack River, Haverhill, Massachu-
setts. 
(11) OAK BLUFFS HARBOR, OAK BLUFFS, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
Project for navigation, Oak Bluffs Harbor, Oak Bluffs, 
Massachusetts. 
(12) WOODS HOLE GREAT HARBOR, FALMOUTH, MASSACHU-
SETTS.—Project for navigation, Woods Hole Great Harbor, Fal-
mouth, Massachusetts. 
(13) AU SABLE RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for navigation, 
Au Sable River in the vicinity of Oscoda, Michigan. 
(14) CLINTON
RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for navigation, 
Clinton River, Michigan. 
(15) ONTONAGON RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for navigation, 
Ontonagon River, Ontonagon, Michigan. 
(16) OUTER
CHANNEL
AND
INNER
HARBOR, MENOMINEE 
HARBOR, MICHIGAN
AND
WISCONSIN.—Project for navigation, 
Outer Channel and Inner Harbor, Menominee Harbor, Michigan 
and Wisconsin. 
(17) SEBEWAING RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for navigation, 
Sebewaing River, Michigan. 
(18) TRAVERSE CITY HARBOR, TRAVERSE CITY, MICHIGAN.— 
Project for navigation, Traverse City Harbor, Traverse City, 
Michigan. 
(19) TOWER
HARBOR, 
TOWER, 
MINNESOTA.—Project for 
navigation, Tower Harbor, Tower, Minnesota. 
(20) OLCOTT
HARBOR, OLCOTT, NEW
YORK.—Project for 
navigation, Olcott Harbor, Olcott, New York. 
(21) MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WISCONSIN.—Project for naviga-
tion, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 
(b) SPECIAL RULES.— 
(1) TRAVERSE CITY HARBOR, TRAVERSE CITY, MICHIGAN.— 
The Secretary shall review the locally prepared plan for the 
project for navigation, Traverse City Harbor, Michigan, referred 
to in subsection (a)(18), and, if the Secretary determines that 
the plan meets the evaluation and design standards of the 
Corps of Engineers and that the plan is feasible, the Secretary 
may use the plan to carry out the project and shall provide 
credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
for the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
Review. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01060
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1063 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project 
if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the 
project. 
(2) TOWER
HARBOR, TOWER
MINNESOTA.—The Secretary 
shall carry out the project for navigation, Tower Harbor, Tower, 
Minnesota, referred to in subsection (a)(19) if the Secretary 
determines that the project is feasible. 
SEC. 1005. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY 
OF THE ENVIRONMENT. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following 
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is appro-
priate, may carry out the project under section 1135 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a): 
(1) BALLONA CREEK, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— 
Project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Ballona Creek, Los Angeles County, California. 
(2) BALLONA LAGOON TIDE GATES, MARINA DEL REY, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for improvement of the quality of the environ-
ment, Ballona Lagoon Tide Gates, Marina Del Rey, California. 
(3) FT. GEORGE INLET, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA.—Project 
for improvement of the quality of the environment, Ft. George 
Inlet, Duval County, Florida. 
(4) RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA.—Project for improvement of the 
quality of the environment, Rathbun Lake, Iowa. 
(5) SMITHVILLE LAKE, MISSOURI.—Project for improvement 
of the quality of the environment, Smithville Lake, Missouri. 
(6) DELAWARE BAY, NEW JERSEY AND DELAWARE.—Project 
for improvement of the quality of the environment, Delaware 
Bay, New Jersey and Delaware, for the purpose of oyster res-
toration. 
(7) TIOGA-HAMMOND
LAKES, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for 
improvement of the quality of the environment, Tioga-Ham-
mond Lakes, Pennsylvania. 
SEC. 1006. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study for each 
of the following projects and, if the Secretary determines that 
a project is appropriate, may carry out the project under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330): 
(1) CYPRESS CREEK, MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Cypress Creek, Montgomery, 
Alabama. 
(2) BLACK LAKE, ALASKA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Black Lake, Alaska, at the head of the Chignik 
watershed. 
(3) BEN LOMOND DAM, SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Ben Lomond Dam, Santa 
Cruz, California. 
(4) DOCKWEILER
BLUFFS, LOS
ANGELES
COUNTY, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Dockweiler 
Bluffs, Los Angeles County, California. 
(5) SALT RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Salt River, California. 
(6) SAN DIEGO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic eco-
system restoration, San Diego River, California, including 
efforts to address aquatic nuisance species. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01061
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1064 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(7) SANTA ROSA CREEK, SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Santa Rosa Creek in the 
vicinity of the Prince Memorial Greenway, Santa Rosa, Cali-
fornia. 
(8) STOCKTON DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL AND LOWER SAN 
JOAQUIN RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem res-
toration, Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel and lower San 
Joaquin River, California. 
(9) SUISUN MARSH, SAN PABLO BAY, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Suisun Marsh, San Pablo 
Bay, California. 
(10) SWEETWATER
RESERVOIR, SAN
DIEGO
COUNTY, CALI-
FORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Sweetwater 
Reservoir, San Diego County, California, including efforts to 
address aquatic nuisance species. 
(11) BISCAYNE BAY, FLORIDA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Biscayne Bay, Key Biscayne, Florida. 
(12) CLAM BAYOU AND DINKINS BAYOU, SANIBEL ISLAND, 
FLORIDA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Clam 
Bayou and Dinkins Bayou, Sanibel Island, Florida. 
(13) MOUNTAIN PARK, GEORGIA.—Project for aquatic eco-
system restoration, Mountain Park, Georgia. 
(14) CHATTAHOOCHEE FALL LINE, GEORGIA AND ALABAMA.— 
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Chattahoochee Fall 
Line, Georgia and Alabama. 
(15) LONGWOOD COVE, GAINESVILLE, GEORGIA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Longwood Cove, Gainesville, 
Georgia. 
(16) CITY PARK, UNIVERSITY LAKES, LOUISIANA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, City Park, University Lakes, 
Louisiana. 
(17) LAWRENCE
GATEWAY, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration at the Lawrence Gateway quad-
rant project along the Merrimack and Spicket Rivers in Law-
rence, Massachusetts, in accordance with the general conditions 
established by the project approval of the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region I, including filling abandoned drain-
age facilities and making improvements to the drainage system 
on the Lawrence Gateway to prevent continued migration of 
contaminated sediments into the river systems. 
(18) MILFORD POND, MILFORD, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for 
aquatic 
ecosystem 
restoration, 
Milford 
Pond, 
Milford, 
Massachusetts. 
(19) MILL POND, LITTLETON, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Mill Pond, Littleton, Massachu-
setts. 
(20) PINE TREE BROOK, MILTON, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Pine Tree Brook, Milton, 
Massachusetts. 
(21) CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for aquatic eco-
system restoration, Clinton River, Michigan. 
(22) 
KALAMAZOO
RIVER
WATERSHED, 
BATTLE
CREEK, 
MICHIGAN.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Kala-
mazoo River watershed, Battle Creek, Michigan. 
(23) RUSH LAKE, MINNESOTA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Rush Lake, Minnesota. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01062
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1065 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(24) SOUTH FORK OF THE CROW RIVER, HUTCHINSON, MIN-
NESOTA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, South Fork 
of the Crow River, Hutchinson, Minnesota. 
(25) ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.—Project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, St. Louis, Missouri. 
(26) MOBLEY DAM, TONGUE RIVER, MONTANA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Mobley Dam, Tongue River, 
Montana. 
(27) S AND H DAM, TONGUE RIVER, MONTANA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, S and H Dam, Tongue River, 
Montana. 
(28) VANDALIA
DAM, MILK
RIVER, MONTANA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Vandalia Dam, Milk River, Mon-
tana. 
(29) TRUCKEE RIVER, RENO, NEVADA.—Project for aquatic 
ecosystem restoration, Truckee River, Reno, Nevada, including 
features for fish passage in Washoe County. 
(30) GROVER’S MILL POND, NEW JERSEY.—Project for aquatic 
ecosystem restoration, Grover’s Mill Pond, New Jersey. 
(31) CALDWELL
COUNTY, NORTH
CAROLINA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Caldwell County, North Caro-
lina. 
(32) MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Mecklenburg County, North 
Carolina. 
(33) DUGWAY CREEK, BRATENAHL, OHIO.—Project for aquatic 
ecosystem restoration, Dugway Creek, Bratenahl, Ohio. 
(34) JOHNSON
CREEK, GRESHAM, OREGON.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Johnson Creek, Gresham, 
Oregon. 
(35) BEAVER CREEK, BEAVER AND SALEM, PENNSYLVANIA.— 
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Beaver Creek, Beaver 
and Salem, Pennsylvania. 
(36) CEMENTON
DAM, LEHIGH
RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA.— 
Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Cementon Dam, 
Lehigh River, Pennsylvania. 
(37) INGHAM SPRING DAM, SOLEBURY TOWNSHIP, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Ingham 
Spring Dam, Solebury Township, Pennsylvania. 
(38) SAUCON
CREEK, NORTHAMPTON
COUNTY, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Saucon 
Creek, Northampton County, Pennsylvania. 
(39) STILLWATER
LAKE
DAM, MONROE
COUNTY, PENNSYL-
VANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Stillwater 
Lake Dam, Monroe County, Pennsylvania. 
(40) BLACKSTONE RIVER, RHODE ISLAND.—Project for aquatic 
ecosystem restoration, Blackstone River, Rhode Island. 
(41) WILSON BRANCH, CHERAW, SOUTH CAROLINA.—Project 
for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wilson Branch, Cheraw, 
South Carolina. 
(42) WHITE RIVER, BETHEL, VERMONT.—Project for aquatic 
ecosystem restoration, White River, Bethel, Vermont. 
(43) COLLEGE
LAKE, LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA.—Project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, College Lake, Lynchburg, Vir-
ginia. 
(b) SPECIAL RULES.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01063
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1066 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) BLACK LAKE, ALASKA.—The Secretary shall carry out 
the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Black Lake, 
Alaska referred to in subsection (a)(2) if the Secretary deter-
mines that the project is appropriate. 
(2) TRUCKEE RIVER, RENO, NEVADA.—The maximum amount 
of Federal funds that may be expended for the project for 
aquatic ecosystem restoration, Truckee River, Reno, Nevada, 
referred to in subsection (a)(29) shall be $6,000,000 and the 
Secretary shall carry out the project if the Secretary determines 
that the project is appropriate. 
(3) BLACKSTONE RIVER, RHODE ISLAND.—The Secretary shall 
carry out the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Black-
stone River, Rhode Island, referred to in subsection (a)(40) 
if the Secretary determines that the project is appropriate. 
(4) COLLEGE LAKE, LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA.—The Secretary 
shall carry out the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, 
College Lake, Lynchburg, Virginia, referred to in subsection 
(a)(43) if the Secretary determines that the project is appro-
priate. 
SEC. 1007. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SHORELINE PROTECTION. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following 
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is feasible, 
may carry out the project under 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): 
(1) NELSON LAGOON, ALASKA.—Project for shoreline protec-
tion, Nelson Lagoon, Alaska. 
(2) NICHOLAS CANYON, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.—Project 
for shoreline protection, Nicholas Canyon, Los Angeles, Cali-
fornia. 
(3) SANIBEL ISLAND, FLORIDA.—Project for shoreline protec-
tion, Sanibel Island, Florida. 
(4) APRA HARBOR, GUAM.—Project for shoreline protection, 
Apra Harbor, Guam. 
(5) PITI, CABRAS
ISLAND, GUAM.—Project for shoreline 
protection, Piti, Cabras Island, Guam. 
(6) NARROWS AND GRAVESEND BAY, UPPER NEW YORK BAY, 
BROOKLYN, NEW YORK.—Project for shoreline protection in the 
vicinity of the confluence of the Narrows and Gravesend Bay, 
Upper New York Bay, Shore Parkway Greenway, Brooklyn, 
New York. 
(7) DELAWARE
RIVER, 
PHILADELPHIA
NAVAL
SHIPYARD, 
PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for shoreline protection, Delaware 
River in the vicinity of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, 
Pennsylvania. 
(8) PORT ARANSAS, TEXAS.—Project for shoreline protection, 
Port Aransas, Texas. 
SEC. 
1008. 
SMALL 
PROJECTS 
FOR 
SNAGGING 
AND 
SEDIMENT 
REMOVAL. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for the following project 
and, if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, the 
Secretary may carry out the project under section 2 of the Flood 
Control Act of August 28, 1937 (33 U.S.C. 701g): Project for removal 
of snags and clearing and straightening of channels for flood control, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01064
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1067 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Kowawese Unique Area and Hudson River, New Windsor, New 
York. 
SEC. 1009. SMALL PROJECTS TO PREVENT OR MITIGATE DAMAGE 
CAUSED BY NAVIGATION PROJECTS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following 
projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is feasible, 
may carry out the project under section 111 of the River and 
Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i): 
(1) Tybee Island, Georgia. 
(2) Burns Waterway Harbor, Indiana. 
SEC. 1010. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
a project for aquatic nuisance plant control in the Republican River 
Basin, Nebraska, under section 104 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610). 
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—In carrying out the project under subsection 
(a), the Secretary may control and eradicate riverine nuisance 
plants. 
TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS 
SEC. 2001. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS. 
Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2213) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(n) NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.— 
‘‘(1) PROHIBITION ON SOLICITATION OF EXCESS CONTRIBU-
TIONS.—The Secretary may not— 
‘‘(A) solicit contributions from non-Federal interests 
for costs of constructing authorized water resources projects 
or measures in excess of the non-Federal share assigned 
to the appropriate project purposes listed in subsections 
(a), (b), and (c); or 
‘‘(B) condition Federal participation in such projects 
or measures on the receipt of such contributions. 
‘‘(2) LIMITATION
ON
STATUTORY
CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing 
in this subsection shall be construed to affect the Secretary’s 
authority under section 903(c).’’. 
SEC. 2002. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS. 
Section 214(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(33 U.S.C. 2201 note; 114 Stat. 2594; 119 Stat. 2169; 120 Stat. 
318; 120 Stat. 3197) is amended by striking ‘‘2008’’ and inserting 
‘‘2009’’. 
SEC. 2003. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘SEC. 221.’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘SEC. 
221. 
WRITTEN 
AGREEMENT 
REQUIREMENT 
FOR 
WATER 
RESOURCES PROJECTS.’’; 
(2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) COOPERATION OF NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—After December 31, 1970, the construc-
tion of any water resources project, or an acceptable separable 
Effective date. 
Nebraska. 
Georgia. 
Indiana. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01065
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1068 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
element thereof, by the Secretary of the Army, acting through 
the Chief of Engineers, or by a non-Federal interest where 
such interest will be reimbursed for such construction under 
any provision of law, shall not be commenced until each non- 
Federal interest has entered into a written partnership agree-
ment with the Secretary (or, where appropriate, the district 
engineer for the district in which the project will be carried 
out) under which each party agrees to carry out its responsibil-
ities and requirements for implementation or construction of 
the project or the appropriate element of the project, as the 
case may be; except that no such agreement shall be required 
if the Secretary determines that the administrative costs associ-
ated with negotiating, executing, or administering the agree-
ment would exceed the amount of the contribution required 
from the non-Federal interest and are less than $25,000. 
‘‘(2) LIQUIDATED
DAMAGES.—A partnership agreement 
described in paragraph (1) may include a provision for liq-
uidated damages in the event of a failure of one or more 
parties to perform. 
‘‘(3) OBLIGATION OF FUTURE APPROPRIATIONS.—In any part-
nership agreement described in paragraph (1) and entered into 
by a State, or a body politic of the State which derives its 
powers from the State constitution, or a governmental entity 
created by the State legislature, the agreement may reflect 
that it does not obligate future appropriations for such perform-
ance and payment when obligating future appropriations would 
be inconsistent with constitutional or statutory limitations of 
the State or a political subdivision of the State. 
‘‘(4) CREDIT FOR IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A partnership agreement described 
in paragraph (1) may provide with respect to a project 
that the Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project, including a project imple-
mented without specific authorization in law, the value 
of in-kind contributions made by the non-Federal interest, 
including— 
‘‘(i) the costs of planning (including data collection), 
design, management, mitigation, construction, and 
construction services that are provided by the non- 
Federal interest for implementation of the project; 
‘‘(ii) the value of materials or services provided 
before 
execution 
of 
the 
partnership 
agreement, 
including efforts on constructed elements incorporated 
into the project; and 
‘‘(iii) the value of materials and services provided 
after execution of the partnership agreement. 
‘‘(B) CONDITION.—The Secretary may credit an in-kind 
contribution under subparagraph (A) only if the Secretary 
determines that the material or service provided as an 
in-kind contribution is integral to the project. 
‘‘(C) WORK PERFORMED BEFORE PARTNERSHIP AGREE-
MENT.—In any case in which the non-Federal interest is 
to receive credit under subparagraph (A)(ii) for the cost 
of work carried out by the non-Federal interest and such 
work has not been carried out as of the date of enactment 
of this subparagraph, the Secretary and the non-Federal 
interest shall enter into an agreement under which the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01066
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1069 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
non-Federal interest shall carry out such work, and only 
work carried out following the execution of the agreement 
shall be eligible for credit. 
‘‘(D) LIMITATIONS.—Credit authorized under this para-
graph for a project— 
‘‘(i) shall not exceed the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project; 
‘‘(ii) shall not alter any other requirement that 
a non-Federal interest provide lands, easements, 
relocations, rights-of-way, or areas for disposal of 
dredged material for the project; 
‘‘(iii) shall not alter any requirement that a non- 
Federal interest pay a portion of the costs of construc-
tion of the project under sections 101 and 103 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2211; 33 U.S.C. 2213); and 
‘‘(iv) shall not exceed the actual and reasonable 
costs of the materials, services, or other things provided 
by the non-Federal interest, as determined by the Sec-
retary. 
‘‘(E) APPLICABILITY.— 
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—This paragraph shall apply to 
water resources projects authorized after November 
16, 1986, including projects initiated after November 
16, 1986, without specific authorization in law. 
‘‘(ii) LIMITATION.—In any case in which a specific 
provision of law provides for a non-Federal interest 
to receive credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of a study for, or construction or operation and 
maintenance of, a water resources project, the specific 
provision of law shall apply instead of this paragraph.’’. 
(b) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.—Section 221(b) of such Act is 
amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(b) DEFINITION OF NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.—The term ‘non- 
Federal interest’ means— 
‘‘(1) a legally constituted public body (including a federally 
recognized Indian tribe); or 
‘‘(2) a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected 
local government, 
that has full authority and capability to perform the terms of 
its agreement and to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of 
failure to perform.’’. 
(c) PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION.—Section 221 of such Act is fur-
ther amended— 
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (h); and 
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following: 
‘‘(e) DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.—Not later than June 30, 2008, 
the Secretary shall issue policies and guidelines for partnership 
agreements that delegate to the district engineers, at a minimum— 
‘‘(1) the authority to approve any policy in a partnership 
agreement that has appeared in an agreement previously 
approved by the Secretary; 
‘‘(2) the authority to approve any policy in a partnership 
agreement the specific terms of which are dictated by law 
or by a final feasibility study, final environmental impact state-
ment, or other final decision document for a water resources 
project; 
Deadlines. 
Guidelines. 
Effective date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01067
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1070 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(3) the authority to approve any partnership agreement 
that complies with the policies and guidelines issued by the 
Secretary; and 
‘‘(4) the authority to sign any partnership agreement for 
any water resources project unless, within 30 days of the date 
of authorization of the project, the Secretary notifies the district 
engineer in which the project will be carried out that the 
Secretary wishes to retain the prerogative to sign the partner-
ship agreement for that project. 
‘‘(f) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 2 years after the 
date of enactment of this subsection, and every year thereafter, 
the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report detailing the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(1) The number of partnership agreements signed by dis-
trict engineers and the number of partnership agreements 
signed by the Secretary. 
‘‘(2) For any partnership agreement signed by the Sec-
retary, an explanation of why delegation to the district engineer 
was not appropriate. 
‘‘(g) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than 120 days after the 
date of enactment of this subsection, the Chief of Engineers shall— 
‘‘(1) ensure that each district engineer has made available 
to the public, including on the Internet, all partnership agree-
ments entered into under this section within the preceding 
10 years and all partnership agreements for water resources 
projects currently being carried out in that district; and 
‘‘(2) make each partnership agreement entered into after 
such date of enactment available to the public, including on 
the Internet, not later than 7 days after the date on which 
such agreement is entered into.’’. 
(d) LOCAL
COOPERATION.—Section 912(b) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (101 Stat. 4190) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘shall’’ the first place it appears and 
inserting ‘‘may’’; and 
(B) by striking the last sentence; and 
(2) in paragraph (4)— 
(A) by inserting after ‘‘injunction, for’’ the following: 
‘‘payment of damages or, for’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘to collect a civil penalty imposed under 
this section,’’; and 
(C) by striking ‘‘any civil penalty imposed under this 
section,’’ and inserting ‘‘any damages,’’. 
(e) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by subsections (a), 
(b), and (d) only apply to partnership agreements entered into 
after the date of enactment of this Act; except that, at the request 
of a non-Federal interest for a project, the district engineer for 
the district in which the project is located may amend a project 
partnership agreement entered into on or before such date and 
under which construction on the project has not been initiated 
as of such date of enactment for the purpose of incorporating 
such amendments. 
(f) AGREEMENTS AND REFERENCES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—A goal of agreements entered into under 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b) shall be to further partnership and cooperation, and the 
agreements shall be referred to as ‘‘partnership agreements’’. 
42 USC 
1962d–5b note. 
42 USC 
1962d–5b note. 
42 USC 
1962d–5b note. 
Deadlines. 
Internet. 
Notification. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01068
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1071 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) REFERENCES TO COOPERATION AGREEMENTS.—Any ref-
erence in a law, regulation, document, or other paper of the 
United States to a ‘‘cooperation agreement’’ or ‘‘project coopera-
tion agreement’’ shall be deemed to be a reference to a ‘‘partner-
ship agreement’’ or a ‘‘project partnership agreement’’, respec-
tively. 
(3) REFERENCES TO PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.—Any ref-
erence to a ‘‘partnership agreement’’ or ‘‘project partnership 
agreement’’ in this Act (other than this section) shall be deemed 
to be a reference to a ‘‘cooperation agreement’’ or a ‘‘project 
cooperation agreement’’, respectively. 
SEC. 2004. COMPILATION OF LAWS. 
(a) COMPILATION
OF LAWS ENACTED AFTER NOVEMBER 8, 
1966.—The Secretary and the Chief of Engineers shall prepare 
a compilation of the laws of the United States relating to the 
improvement of rivers and harbors, flood damage reduction, beach 
and shoreline erosion, hurricane and storm damage reduction, eco-
system and environmental restoration, and other water resources 
development enacted after November 8, 1966, and before January 
1, 2008, and have such compilation printed for the use of the 
Department of the Army, Congress, and the general public. 
(b) REPRINT OF LAWS ENACTED BEFORE NOVEMBER 8, 1966.— 
The Secretary shall have the volumes containing the laws referred 
to in subsection (a) enacted before November 8, 1966, reprinted. 
(c) INDEX.—The Secretary shall include an index in each volume 
compiled, and each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section. 
(d) CONGRESSIONAL COPIES.—Not later than April 1, 2008, the 
Secretary shall transmit at least 25 copies of each volume compiled, 
and of each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section to each 
of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works of the Senate. 
(e) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary shall ensure that each volume 
compiled, and each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section are 
available through electronic means, including on the Internet. 
SEC. 2005. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL. 
Section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(33 U.S.C. 2326a) is amended— 
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); 
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: 
‘‘(c) DREDGED MATERIAL FACILITY.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter into a partner-
ship agreement under section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) with one or more non-Federal 
interests with respect to a water resources project, or group 
of water resources projects within a geographic region, if appro-
priate, for the acquisition, design, construction, management, 
or operation of a dredged material processing, treatment, 
contaminant reduction, or disposal facility (including any 
facility used to demonstrate potential beneficial uses of dredged 
material, which may include effective sediment contaminant 
reduction technologies) using funds provided in whole or in 
part by the Federal Government. 
‘‘(2) PERFORMANCE.—One or more of the parties to a part-
nership agreement under this subsection may perform the 
acquisition, design, construction, management, or operation of 
Internet. 
Deadline. 
Publication. 
33 USC 2295 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01069
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1072 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
a dredged material processing, treatment, contaminant reduc-
tion, or disposal facility. 
‘‘(3) MULTIPLE
PROJECTS.—If appropriate, the Secretary 
may combine portions of separate water resources projects with 
appropriate combined cost-sharing among the various water 
resources projects in a partnership agreement for a facility 
under this subsection if the facility serves to manage dredged 
material from multiple water resources projects located in the 
geographic region of the facility. 
‘‘(4) SPECIFIED
FEDERAL
FUNDING
SOURCES
AND
COST 
SHARING.— 
‘‘(A) SPECIFIED
FEDERAL
FUNDING.—A partnership 
agreement with respect to a facility under this subsection 
shall specify— 
‘‘(i) the Federal funding sources and combined cost- 
sharing when applicable to multiple water resources 
projects; and 
‘‘(ii) the responsibilities and risks of each of the 
parties relating to present and future dredged material 
managed by the facility. 
‘‘(B) MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENTS.— 
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—A partnership agreement under 
this subsection may include the management of sedi-
ments from the maintenance dredging of Federal water 
resources projects that do not have partnership agree-
ments. 
‘‘(ii) PAYMENTS.—A partnership agreement under 
this subsection may allow the non-Federal interest to 
receive reimbursable payments from the Federal 
Government for commitments made by the non-Federal 
interest for disposal or placement capacity at dredged 
material processing, treatment, contaminant reduction, 
or disposal facilities. 
‘‘(C) CREDIT.—A partnership agreement under this sub-
section may allow costs incurred by the non-Federal 
interest before execution of the partnership agreement to 
be credited in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b). 
‘‘(5) CREDIT.— 
‘‘(A) EFFECT
ON
EXISTING
AGREEMENTS.—Nothing in 
this subsection supersedes or modifies an agreement in 
effect on the date of enactment of this paragraph between 
the Federal Government and any non-Federal interest for 
the cost-sharing, construction, and operation and mainte-
nance of a water resources project. 
‘‘(B) CREDIT FOR FUNDS.—Subject to the approval of 
the Secretary and in accordance with law (including regula-
tions and policies) in effect on the date of enactment of 
this paragraph, a non-Federal interest for a water resources 
project may receive credit for funds provided for the acquisi-
tion, design, construction, management, or operation of 
a dredged material processing, treatment, contaminant 
reduction, or disposal facility to the extent the facility 
is used to manage dredged material from the project. 
‘‘(C) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES.—A non- 
Federal interest entering into a partnership agreement 
under this subsection for a facility shall— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01070
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1073 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(i) be responsible for providing all necessary lands, 
easements, relocations, and rights-of-way associated 
with the facility; and 
‘‘(ii) receive credit toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project with respect to which the 
agreement is being entered into for those items.’’; and 
(3) in paragraphs (1) and (2)(A) of subsection (d) (as redesig-
nated by paragraph (1))— 
(A) by inserting ‘‘and maintenance’’ after ‘‘operation’’ 
each place it appears; and 
(B) by inserting ‘‘processing, treatment, contaminant 
reduction, or’’ after ‘‘dredged material’’ the first place it 
appears in each of those paragraphs. 
SEC. 2006. REMOTE AND SUBSISTENCE HARBORS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting a study of harbor and naviga-
tion improvements, the Secretary may recommend a project without 
the need to demonstrate that the project is justified solely by 
national economic development benefits if the Secretary determines 
that— 
(1)(A) the community to be served by the project is at 
least 70 miles from the nearest surface accessible commercial 
port and has no direct rail or highway link to another commu-
nity served by a surface accessible port or harbor; or 
(B) the project would be located in the State of Hawaii, 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth 
of the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin 
Islands, or American Samoa; 
(2) the harbor is economically critical such that over 80 
percent of the goods transported through the harbor would 
be consumed within the community served by the harbor and 
navigation improvement; and 
(3) the long-term viability of the community would be 
threatened without the harbor and navigation improvement. 
(b) JUSTIFICATION.—In considering whether to recommend a 
project under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the bene-
fits of the project to— 
(1) public health and safety of the local community, 
including access to facilities designed to protect public health 
and safety; 
(2) access to natural resources for subsistence purposes; 
(3) local and regional economic opportunities; 
(4) welfare of the local population; and 
(5) social and cultural value to the community. 
SEC. 2007. USE OF OTHER FEDERAL FUNDS. 
The non-Federal interest for a water resources study or project 
may use, and the Secretary shall accept, funds provided by a 
Federal agency under any other Federal program, to satisfy, in 
whole or in part, the non-Federal share of the cost of the study 
or project if the Federal agency that provides the funds determines 
that the funds are authorized to be used to carry out the study 
or project. 
SEC. 2008. REVISION OF PROJECT PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT; COST 
SHARING. 
(a) FEDERAL ALLOCATION.—Upon authorization by law of an 
increase in the maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 
33 USC 2340. 
33 USC 2222. 
33 USC 2242. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01071
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1074 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
allocated for a water resources project or an increase in the total 
cost of a water resources project authorized to be carried out by 
the Secretary, the Secretary shall enter into a revised partnership 
agreement for the project to take into account the change in Federal 
participation in the project. 
(b) COST SHARING.—An increase in the maximum amount of 
Federal funds that may be allocated for a water resources project, 
or an increase in the total cost of a water resources project, author-
ized to be carried out by the Secretary shall not affect any cost- 
sharing requirement applicable to the project. 
(c) COST ESTIMATES.—The estimated Federal and non-Federal 
costs of water resources projects authorized to be carried out by 
the Secretary before, on, or after the date of enactment of this 
Act are for informational purposes only and shall not be interpreted 
as affecting the cost-sharing responsibilities established by law. 
SEC. 2009. EXPEDITED ACTIONS FOR EMERGENCY FLOOD DAMAGE 
REDUCTION. 
The Secretary shall expedite any authorized planning, design, 
and construction of any project for flood damage reduction for 
an area that, within the preceding 5 years, has been subject to 
flooding that resulted in the loss of life and caused damage of 
sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a declaration of a 
major disaster by the President under the Robert T. Stafford Dis-
aster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et 
seq.). 
SEC. 2010. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS. 
Section 729 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2267a; 114 Stat. 2587–2588; 100 Stat. 4164) is 
amended— 
(1) in subsection (d)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (4); 
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph 
(5) and inserting a semicolon; and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(6) Tuscarawas River Basin, Ohio; 
‘‘(7) Sauk River Basin, Snohomish and Skagit Counties, 
Washington; 
‘‘(8) Niagara River Basin, New York; 
‘‘(9) Genesee River Basin, New York; and 
‘‘(10) White River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri.’’; 
(2) by striking paragraph (1) of subsection (f) and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(1) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal share of the 
costs of an assessment carried out under this section on or 
after December 11, 2000, shall be 25 percent.’’; and 
(3) by striking subsection (g). 
SEC. 2011. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM. 
(a) PROGRAM.—Section 203(b) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2269(b); 114 Stat. 2589) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (1) by inserting ‘‘carry out water-related 
planning activities and’’ after ‘‘the Secretary may’’; 
(2) in paragraph (1)(B) by inserting after ‘‘Code’’ the fol-
lowing: ‘‘, and including lands that are within the jurisdictional 
area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe, as determined by the Sec-
retary of the Interior, and are recognized by the Secretary 
Effective date. 
33 USC 2341. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01072
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1075 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
of the Interior as eligible for trust land status under part 
151 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations’’; and 
(3) in paragraph (2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subparagraph (A); 
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subpara-
graph (C); and 
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following: 
‘‘(B) watershed assessments and planning activities; 
and’’. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 203(e) of such 
Act is amended by striking ‘‘2006’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’. 
SEC. 2012. WILDFIRE FIREFIGHTING. 
Section 309 of Public Law 102–154 (42 U.S.C. 1856a–1; 105 
Stat. 1034) is amended by inserting ‘‘the Secretary of the Army,’’ 
after ‘‘the Secretary of Energy,’’. 
SEC. 2013. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. 
Section 22 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–16) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and 
inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) FEDERAL STATE COOPERATION.— 
‘‘(1) COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.—The Secretary’’; 
(2) by inserting after the last sentence in subsection (a) 
the following: 
‘‘(2) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—At the request of a governmental 
agency or non-Federal interest, the Secretary may provide, 
at Federal expense, technical assistance to such agency 
or non-Federal interest in managing water resources. 
‘‘(B) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Technical assistance under 
this paragraph may include provision and integration of 
hydrologic, economic, and environmental data and anal-
yses.’’; 
(3) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ‘‘this section’’ each place 
it appears and inserting ‘‘subsection (a)(1)’’; 
(4) in subsection (b)(2) by striking ‘‘Up to 1⁄2 of the’’ and 
inserting ‘‘The’’; 
(5) in subsection (c) by striking ‘‘(c) There is’’ and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— 
‘‘(1) FEDERAL AND STATE COOPERATION.—There is’’; 
(6) in subsection (c)(1) (as designated by paragraph (5))— 
(A) by striking ‘‘the provisions of this section’’ and 
inserting ‘‘subsection (a)(1),’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘$500,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,000,000’’; 
(7) by inserting at the end of subsection (c) the following: 
‘‘(2) TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE.—There is authorized to be 
appropriated $5,000,000 annually to carry out subsection (a)(2), 
of which not more than $2,000,000 annually may be used 
by the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements with 
nonprofit organizations to provide assistance to rural and small 
communities.’’; 
(8) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and 
(9) by inserting after subsection (c) the following: 
‘‘(d) ANNUAL SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES.—Concurrent 
with the President’s submission to Congress of the President’s 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01073
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1076 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
request for appropriations for the Civil Works Program for a fiscal 
year, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 
report describing the individual activities proposed for funding 
under subsection (a)(1) for that fiscal year.’’. 
SEC. 2014. LAKES PROGRAM. 
Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (100 Stat. 4148; 110 Stat. 3758; 113 Stat. 295) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at end of paragraph (18); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (19) 
and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(20) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois, removal of 
silt and aquatic growth and measures to address excessive 
sedimentation; 
‘‘(21) McCarter Pond, Borough of Fairhaven, New Jersey, 
removal of silt and measures to address water quality; 
‘‘(22) Rogers Pond, Franklin Township, New Jersey, 
removal of silt and restoration of structural integrity; 
‘‘(23) Greenwood Lake, New York and New Jersey, removal 
of silt and aquatic growth; 
‘‘(24) Lake Rodgers, Creedmoor, North Carolina, removal 
of silt and excessive nutrients and restoration of structural 
integrity; 
‘‘(25) Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota, removal of silt and 
aquatic growth and measures to address excessive sedimenta-
tion; 
‘‘(26) Lake Luxembourg, Pennsylvania; 
‘‘(27) Lake Fairlee, Vermont, removal of silt and aquatic 
growth and measures to address excessive sedimentation; and 
‘‘(28) Lake Morley, Vermont, removal of silt and aquatic 
growth and measures to address excessive sedimentation.’’. 
SEC. 2015. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—For the purpose of expediting the cost-effec-
tive design and construction of wetlands restoration that is part 
of an authorized water resources project, the Secretary may enter 
into cooperative agreements under section 6305 of title 31, United 
States Code, with nonprofit organizations with expertise in wetlands 
restoration to carry out such design and construction on behalf 
of the Secretary. 
(b) LIMITATIONS.— 
(1) PER PROJECT LIMIT.—A cooperative agreement under 
this section may not obligate the Secretary to pay the nonprofit 
organization more than $1,000,000 for any single wetlands 
restoration project. 
(2) ANNUAL LIMIT.—The total value of work carried out 
under cooperative agreements under this section may not 
exceed $5,000,000 in any fiscal year. 
SEC. 2016. TRAINING FUNDS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may include individuals not 
employed by the Department of the Army in training classes and 
courses offered by the Corps of Engineers in any case in which 
the Secretary determines that it is in the best interest of the 
Federal Government to include those individuals as participants. 
33 USC 574a. 
33 USC 2317a. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01074
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1077 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) EXPENSES.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—An individual not employed by the 
Department of the Army attending a training class or course 
described in subsection (a) shall pay the full cost of the training 
provided to the individual. 
(2) PAYMENTS.—Payments made by an individual for 
training received under paragraph (1), up to the actual cost 
of the training— 
(A) may be retained by the Secretary; 
(B) shall be credited to an appropriations account used 
for paying training costs; and 
(C) shall be available for use by the Secretary, without 
further appropriation, for training purposes. 
(3) EXCESS AMOUNTS.—Any payments received under para-
graph (2) that are in excess of the actual cost of training 
provided shall be credited as miscellaneous receipts to the 
Treasury of the United States. 
SEC. 2017. ACCESS TO WATER RESOURCE DATA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a program 
to provide public access to water resources and related water quality 
data in the custody of the Corps of Engineers. 
(b) DATA.—Public access under subsection (a) shall— 
(1) include, at a minimum, access to data generated in 
water resources project development and regulation under sec-
tion 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1344); and 
(2) appropriately employ geographic information system 
technology and linkages to water resource models and analytical 
techniques. 
(c) PARTNERSHIPS.—To the maximum extent practicable, in car-
rying out activities under this section, the Secretary shall develop 
partnerships, including cooperative agreements, with State, tribal, 
and local governments and other Federal agencies. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000 for each 
fiscal year. 
SEC. 2018. SHORE PROTECTION PROJECTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with the Act of July 3, 1930 
(33 U.S.C. 426), and notwithstanding administrative actions, it 
is the policy of the United States to promote beach nourishment 
for the purposes of flood damage reduction and hurricane and 
storm damage reduction and related research that encourage the 
protection, restoration, and enhancement of sandy beaches, 
including beach restoration and periodic beach renourishment for 
a period of 50 years, on a comprehensive and coordinated basis 
by the Federal Government, States, localities, and private enter-
prises. 
(b) PREFERENCE.—In carrying out the policy under subsection 
(a), preference shall be given to— 
(1) areas in which there has been a Federal investment 
of funds for the purposes described in subsection (a); and 
(2) areas with respect to which the need for prevention 
or mitigation of damage to shores and beaches is attributable 
to Federal navigation projects or other Federal activities. 
(c) APPLICABILITY.—The Secretary shall apply the policy under 
subsection (a) to each shore protection and beach renourishment 
33 USC 426e–1. 
Public 
information. 
33 USC 2342. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01075
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1078 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
project (including shore protection and beach renourishment 
projects constructed before the date of enactment of this Act). 
SEC. 2019. ABILITY TO PAY. 
(a) CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES.—Section 103(m)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)(2)) is 
amended by striking ‘‘180 days after such date of enactment’’ and 
inserting ‘‘December 31, 2007’’. 
(b) PROJECTS.—The Secretary shall apply the criteria and proce-
dures referred to in section 103(m) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) to the following projects: 
(1) ST. JOHNS BAYOU AND NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MIS-
SOURI.—The project for flood control, St. Johns Bayou and 
New Madrid Floodway, Missouri, authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
4118). 
(2) 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). 
(3) WEST
VIRGINIA
AND
PENNSYLVANIA
PROJECTS.—The 
projects for flood control authorized by section 581 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790–3791). 
SEC. 2020. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM AND ESTUARY RESTORATION. 
Section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(33 U.S.C. 2330; 110 Stat. 3679) is amended— 
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) GENERAL AUTHORITY.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a project 
to restore and protect an aquatic ecosystem or estuary if the 
Secretary determines that the project— 
‘‘(A)(i) will improve the quality of the environment 
and is in the public interest; or 
‘‘(ii) will improve the elements and features of an 
estuary (as defined in section 103 of the Estuaries and 
Clean Waters Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2902)); and 
‘‘(B) is cost-effective. 
‘‘(2) DAM
REMOVAL.—A project under this section may 
include removal of a dam.’’; and 
(2) in subsection (e) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$50,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2021. SMALL FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECTS. 
Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) 
is amended by striking ‘‘$50,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$55,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2022. SMALL RIVER AND HARBOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. 
Section 107(b) of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
577(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘$4,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$7,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2023. PROTECTION OF HIGHWAYS, BRIDGE APPROACHES, PUBLIC 
WORKS, AND NONPROFIT PUBLIC SERVICES. 
Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r) 
is amended by striking ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,500,000’’. 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01076
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1079 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 2024. MODIFICATION OF PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE 
QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT. 
Section 1135(h) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(h)) is amended by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$40,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2025. REMEDIATION OF ABANDONED MINE SITES. 
Section 560(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(33 U.S.C. 2336(f)) is amended by striking ‘‘$7,500,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$20,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2026. LEASING AUTHORITY. 
Section 4 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construc-
tion of certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, 
and other purposes’’, approved December 22, 1944 (16 U.S.C. 460d), 
is amended— 
(1) by inserting ‘‘federally recognized Indian tribes and’’ 
before ‘‘Federal’’ the first place it appears; 
(2) by inserting ‘‘Indian tribes or’’ after ‘‘considerations, 
to such’’; and 
(3) by inserting ‘‘federally recognized Indian tribe’’ after 
‘‘That in any such lease or license to a’’. 
SEC. 2027. FISCAL TRANSPARENCY REPORT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—On the third Tuesday of January of each 
year beginning January 2008, the Chief of Engineers shall submit 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives a report on— 
(1) the expenditures by the Corps for the preceding fiscal 
year and estimated expenditures by the Corps for the current 
fiscal year; and 
(2) for projects and activities that are not scheduled for 
completion in the current fiscal year, the estimated expendi-
tures by the Corps necessary in the following fiscal year for 
each project or activity to maintain the same level of effort 
being achieved in the current fiscal year. 
(b) CONTENTS.—In addition to the information described in 
subsection (a), the report shall contain a detailed accounting of 
the following information: 
(1) With respect to activities carried out with funding pro-
vided under the Construction appropriations account for the 
Secretary, information on— 
(A) projects currently under construction, including— 
(i) allocations to date; 
(ii) the number of years remaining to complete 
construction; 
(iii) the estimated annual Federal cost to maintain 
that construction schedule; and 
(iv) a list of projects the Corps of Engineers expects 
to complete during the current fiscal year; and 
(B) projects for which there is a signed partnership 
agreement and completed planning, engineering, and 
design, including— 
(i) the number of years the project is expected 
to require for completion; and 
(ii) estimated annual Federal cost to maintain that 
construction schedule. 
10 USC 3036 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01077
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1080 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) With respect to operation and maintenance of the inland 
and intracoastal waterways identified by section 206 of the 
Inland Waterways Revenue Act of 1978 (33 U.S.C. 1804)— 
(A) the estimated annual cost to maintain each water-
way for the authorized reach and at the authorized depth; 
(B) the estimated annual cost of operation and mainte-
nance of locks and dams to ensure navigation without 
interruption; and 
(C) the actual expenditures to maintain each waterway. 
(3) With respect to activities carried out with funding pro-
vided under the Investigations appropriations account for the 
Secretary— 
(A) the number of active studies; 
(B) the number of completed studies not yet authorized 
for construction; 
(C) the number of initiated studies; and 
(D) the number of studies expected to be completed 
during the fiscal year. 
(4) Funding received and estimates of funds to be received 
for interagency and international support activities under sec-
tion 234 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(33 U.S.C. 2323a). 
(5) Recreation fees and lease payments. 
(6) Hydropower and water storage receipts. 
(7) Deposits into the Inland Waterways Trust Fund and 
the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 
(8) Other revenues and fees collected by the Corps of Engi-
neers. 
(9) With respect to permit applications and notifications, 
a list of individual permit applications and nationwide permit 
notifications, including— 
(A) the date on which each permit application is filed; 
(B) the date on which each permit application is deter-
mined to be complete; 
(C) the date on which any permit application is with-
drawn; and 
(D) the date on which the Corps of Engineers grants 
or denies each permit. 
(10) With respect to projects that are authorized but for 
which construction is not complete, a list of such projects for 
which no funds have been allocated for the 5 preceding fiscal 
years, including, for each project— 
(A) the authorization date; 
(B) the last allocation date; 
(C) the percentage of construction completed; 
(D) the estimated cost remaining until completion of 
the project; and 
(E) a brief explanation of the reasons for the delay. 
SEC. 2028. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 2361 of title 10, 
United States Code, the Secretary may provide assistance through 
contracts, cooperative agreements, and grants to— 
(1) the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, for 
establishment and operation of the Southeastern Water 
Resources Institute to study sustainable development and utili-
zation of water resources in the southeastern United States; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01078
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1081 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) Lewis and Clark Community College, Illinois, for the 
Great Rivers National Research and Education Center 
(including facilities that have been or will be constructed at 
one or more locations in the vicinity of the confluence of the 
Illinois River, the Missouri River, and the Mississippi River), 
a collaborative effort of Lewis and Clark Community College, 
the University of Illinois, the Illinois Department of Natural 
Resources and Environmental Sciences, and other entities, for 
the study of river ecology, developing watershed and river 
management strategies, and educating students and the public 
on river issues; and 
(3) the University of Texas at Dallas for support and oper-
ation of the International Center for Decision and Risk Analysis 
to study risk analysis and control methods for transboundary 
water resources management in the southwestern United 
States and other international water resources management 
problems. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out subsection (a)(1) 
$2,000,000, to carry out subsection (a)(2) $2,000,000, and to carry 
out subsection (a)(3) $5,000,000. 
SEC. 2029. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CRITERIA FOR OPERATION AND 
MAINTENANCE OF HARBOR DREDGING PROJECTS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Insufficient maintenance dredging results in inefficient 
water transportation and harmful economic consequences. 
(2) The estimated dredging backlog at commercial harbors 
in the Great Lakes alone is 16,000,000 cubic yards. 
(3) Approximately two-thirds of all shipping in the United 
States either starts or finishes at small harbors. 
(4) Small harbors often have a greater proportional impact 
on local economies than do larger harbors. 
(5) Performance metrics can be valuable tools in the budget 
process for water resources projects. 
(6) The use of a single performance metric for water 
resources projects can result in a budget biased against small 
and rural communities. 
(b) SENSE
OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that 
the operations and maintenance budget of the Corps of Engineers 
should reflect the use of all available economic data, rather than 
a single performance metric. 
SEC. 2030. INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT AUTHORITY. 
Section 234 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(33 U.S.C. 2323a) is amended— 
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may engage in activities 
(including contracting) in support of other Federal agencies, inter-
national organizations, or foreign governments to address problems 
of national significance to the United States.’’; 
(2) in subsection (b) by striking ‘‘Secretary of State’’ and 
inserting ‘‘Department of State’’; and 
(3) in subsection (d)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘$250,000 for fiscal year 2001’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$1,000,000 for fiscal year 2008’’; and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01079
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1082 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(B) by striking ‘‘or international organizations’’ and 
inserting ‘‘, international organizations, or foreign govern-
ments’’. 
SEC. 2031. WATER RESOURCES PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES. 
(a) NATIONAL WATER RESOURCES PLANNING POLICY.—It is the 
policy of the United States that all water resources projects should 
reflect national priorities, encourage economic development, and 
protect the environment by— 
(1) seeking to maximize sustainable economic development; 
(2) seeking to avoid the unwise use of floodplains and 
flood-prone areas and minimizing adverse impacts and 
vulnerabilities in any case in which a floodplain or flood-prone 
area must be used; and 
(3) protecting and restoring the functions of natural sys-
tems and mitigating any unavoidable damage to natural sys-
tems. 
(b) PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.— 
(1) PRINCIPLES
AND
GUIDELINES
DEFINED.—In this sub-
section, the term ‘‘principles and guidelines’’ means the prin-
ciples and guidelines contained in the document prepared by 
the Water Resources Council pursuant to section 103 of the 
Water Resources Planning Act (42 U.S.C. 1962a–2), entitled 
‘‘Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for 
Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies’’, 
and dated March 10, 1983. 
(2) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue revisions, 
consistent with paragraph (3), to the principles and guidelines 
for use by the Secretary in the formulation, evaluation, and 
implementation of water resources projects. 
(3) CONSIDERATIONS.—In developing revisions to the prin-
ciples and guidelines under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall 
evaluate the consistency of the principles and guidelines with, 
and ensure that the principles and guidelines address, the 
following: 
(A) The use of best available economic principles and 
analytical techniques, including techniques in risk and 
uncertainty analysis. 
(B) The assessment and incorporation of public safety 
in the formulation of alternatives and recommended plans. 
(C) Assessment methods that reflect the value of 
projects for low-income communities and projects that use 
nonstructural approaches to water resources development 
and management. 
(D) The assessment and evaluation of the interaction 
of a project with other water resources projects and pro-
grams within a region or watershed. 
(E) The use of contemporary water resources para-
digms, including integrated water resources management 
and adaptive management. 
(F) Evaluation methods that ensure that water 
resources projects are justified by public benefits. 
(4) CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—In carrying 
out paragraph (2), the Secretary shall— 
Evaluation. 
Deadline. 
Revisions. 
42 USC 1962–3. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01080
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1083 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) consult with the Secretary of the Interior, the Sec-
retary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Sec-
retary of Housing and Urban Development, the Secretary 
of Transportation, the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary 
of Homeland Security, the National Academy of Sciences, 
and the Council on Environmental Quality; and 
(B) solicit and consider public and expert comments. 
(5) PUBLICATION.—The Secretary shall— 
(A) submit to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives copies of— 
(i) the revisions to the principles and guidelines 
for use by the Secretary; and 
(ii) an explanation of the intent of each revision, 
how each revision is consistent with this section, and 
the probable impact of each revision on water resources 
projects carried out by the Secretary; and 
(B) make the revisions to the principles and guidelines 
for use by the Secretary available to the public, including 
on the Internet. 
(6) EFFECT.—Subject to the requirements of this subsection, 
the principles and guidelines as revised under this subsection 
shall apply to water resources projects carried out by the Sec-
retary instead of the principles and guidelines for such projects 
in effect on the day before date of enactment of this Act. 
(7) APPLICABILITY.—After the date of issuance of the revi-
sions to the principles and guidelines, the revisions shall 
apply— 
(A) to all water resources projects carried out by the 
Secretary, other than projects for which the Secretary has 
commenced a feasibility study before the date of such 
issuance; 
(B) at the request of a non-Federal interest, to a water 
resources project for which the Secretary has commenced 
a feasibility study before the date of such issuance; and 
(C) to the reevaluation or modification of a water 
resources project, other than a reevaluation or modification 
that has been commenced by the Secretary before the date 
of such issuance. 
(8) EXISTING
STUDIES.—Revisions to the principles and 
guidelines issued under paragraph (2) shall not affect the 
validity of any completed study of a water resources project. 
(9) RECOMMENDATION.—Upon completion of the revisions 
to the principles and guidelines for use by the Secretary, the 
Secretary shall make a recommendation to Congress as to 
the advisability of repealing subsections (a) and (b) of section 
80 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–17). 
SEC. 2032. WATER RESOURCE PRIORITIES REPORT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress 
a report describing the vulnerability of the United States to damage 
from flooding, including— 
(1) the risk to human life; 
President. 
Public 
information. 
Internet. 
Revisions. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01081
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1084 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) the risk to property; and 
(3) the comparative risks faced by different regions of the 
United States. 
(b) INCLUSIONS.—The report under subsection (a) shall 
include— 
(1) an assessment of the extent to which programs in 
the United States relating to flooding address flood risk reduc-
tion priorities; 
(2) the extent to which those programs may be encouraging 
development and economic activity in flood-prone areas; 
(3) recommendations for improving those programs with 
respect to reducing and responding to flood risks; and 
(4) proposals for implementing the recommendations. 
SEC. 2033. PLANNING. 
(a) MATTERS
TO BE ADDRESSED
IN PLANNING.—Section 904 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2281) 
is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘Enhancing’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Enhancing’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) ASSESSMENTS.—For all feasibility reports for water 
resources projects completed after December 31, 2007, the Secretary 
shall assess whether— 
‘‘(1) the water resources project and each separable element 
is cost-effective; and 
‘‘(2) the water resources project complies with Federal, 
State, and local laws (including regulations) and public poli-
cies.’’. 
(b) PLANNING PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS.—The Chief of Engi-
neers— 
(1) shall adopt a risk analysis approach to project cost 
estimates for water resources projects; and 
(2) not later than one year after the date of enactment 
of this Act, shall— 
(A) issue procedures for risk analysis for cost esti-
mation for water resources projects; and 
(B) submit to Congress a report that includes any 
recommended amendments to section 902 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2280). 
(c) BENCHMARKS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Chief of Engineers shall establish 
benchmarks for determining the length of time it should take 
to conduct a feasibility study for a water resources project 
and its associated review process under the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Chief 
of Engineers shall use such benchmarks as a management 
tool to make the feasibility study process more efficient in 
all districts of the Corps of Engineers. 
(2) BENCHMARK
GOALS.—The Chief of Engineers shall 
establish, to the extent practicable, under paragraph (1) bench-
mark goals for completion of feasibility studies for water 
resources projects generally within 2 years. In the case of 
feasibility studies that the Chief of Engineers determines may 
require additional time based on the project type, size, cost, 
Deadlines. 
Reports. 
Procedures. 
Deadline. 
Effective date. 
33 USC 2282a. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01082
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1085 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
or complexity, the benchmark goal for completion shall be gen-
erally within 4 years. 
(d) CALCULATION OF BENEFITS AND COSTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE 
REDUCTION PROJECTS.—A feasibility study for a project for flood 
damage reduction shall include, as part of the calculation of benefits 
and costs— 
(1) a calculation of the residual risk of flooding following 
completion of the proposed project; 
(2) a calculation of the residual risk of loss of human 
life and residual risk to human safety following completion 
of the proposed project; 
(3) a calculation of any upstream or downstream impacts 
of the proposed project; and 
(4) calculations to ensure that the benefits and costs associ-
ated with structural and nonstructural alternatives are evalu-
ated in an equitable manner. 
(e) CENTERS OF SPECIALIZED PLANNING EXPERTISE.— 
(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary may establish centers 
of expertise to provide specialized planning expertise for water 
resources projects to be carried out by the Secretary in order 
to enhance and supplement the capabilities of the districts 
of the Corps of Engineers. 
(2) DUTIES.—A center of expertise established under this 
subsection shall— 
(A) provide technical and managerial assistance to dis-
trict commanders of the Corps of Engineers for project 
planning, development, and implementation; 
(B) provide agency peer reviews of new major scientific, 
engineering, or economic methods, models, or analyses that 
will be used to support decisions of the Secretary with 
respect to feasibility studies for water resources projects; 
(C) provide support for independent peer review panels 
under section 2034; and 
(D) carry out such other duties as are prescribed by 
the Secretary. 
(f) COMPLETION OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS REPORTS.— 
(1) ALTERNATIVES.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—Feasibility and other studies and 
assessments for a water resources project shall include 
recommendations for alternatives— 
(i) that, as determined in coordination with the 
non-Federal interest for the project, promote integrated 
water resources management; and 
(ii) for which the non-Federal interest is willing 
to provide the non-Federal share for the studies or 
assessments. 
(B) CONSTRAINTS.—The alternatives contained in 
studies and assessments described in subparagraph (A) 
shall not be constrained by budgetary or other policy. 
(C) REPORTS
OF
CHIEF
OF
ENGINEERS.—The reports 
of the Chief of Engineers shall identify any recommendation 
that is not the best technical solution to water resource 
needs and problems and the reason for the deviation. 
(2) REPORT COMPLETION.—The completion of a report of 
the Chief of Engineers for a water resources project— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01083
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1086 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) shall not be delayed while consideration is being 
given to potential changes in policy or priority for project 
consideration; and 
(B) shall be submitted, on completion, to— 
(i) the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works of the Senate; and 
(ii) the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives. 
(g) COMPLETION REVIEW.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), not 
later than 120 days after the date of completion of a report 
of the Chief of Engineers that recommends to Congress a water 
resources project, the Secretary shall— 
(A) review the report; and 
(B) provide any recommendations of the Secretary 
regarding the water resources project to Congress. 
(2) PRIOR
REPORTS.—Not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act, with respect to any report of 
the Chief of Engineers recommending a water resources project 
that is complete prior to the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary shall complete review of, and provide rec-
ommendations to Congress for, the report in accordance with 
paragraph (1). 
SEC. 2034. INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW. 
(a) PROJECT STUDIES SUBJECT TO INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Project studies shall be subject to a peer 
review by an independent panel of experts as determined under 
this section. 
(2) SCOPE.—The peer review may include a review of the 
economic and environmental assumptions and projections, 
project evaluation data, economic analyses, environmental anal-
yses, engineering analyses, formulation of alternative plans, 
methods for integrating risk and uncertainty, models used in 
evaluation of economic or environmental impacts of proposed 
projects, and any biological opinions of the project study. 
(3) PROJECT STUDIES SUBJECT TO PEER REVIEW.— 
(A) MANDATORY.—A project study shall be subject to 
peer review under paragraph (1) if— 
(i) the project has an estimated total cost of more 
than $45,000,000, including mitigation costs, and is 
not determined by the Chief of Engineers to be exempt 
from peer review under paragraph (6); 
(ii) the Governor of an affected State requests a 
peer review by an independent panel of experts; or 
(iii) the Chief of Engineers determines that the 
project study is controversial considering the factors 
set forth in paragraph (4). 
(B) DISCRETIONARY.— 
(i) AGENCY
REQUEST.—A project study shall be 
considered by the Chief of Engineers for peer review 
under this section if the head of a Federal or State 
agency charged with reviewing the project study deter-
mines that the project is likely to have a significant 
adverse impact on environmental, cultural, or other 
resources under the jurisdiction of the agency after 
implementation of proposed mitigation plans and 
33 USC 2343. 
Deadlines. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01084
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1087 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
requests a peer review by an independent panel of 
experts. 
(ii) DEADLINE
FOR
DECISION.—A decision of the 
Chief of Engineers under this subparagraph whether 
to conduct a peer review shall be made within 21 
days of the date of receipt of the request by the head 
of the Federal or State agency under clause (i). 
(iii) REASONS FOR NOT CONDUCTING PEER REVIEW.— 
If the Chief of Engineers decides not to conduct a 
peer review following a request under clause (i), the 
Chief shall make publicly available, including on the 
Internet, the reasons for not conducting the peer 
review. 
(iv) APPEAL TO CHAIRMAN OF COUNCIL ON ENVIRON-
MENTAL QUALITY.—A decision by the Chief of Engineers 
not to conduct a peer review following a request under 
clause (i) shall be subject to appeal by a person referred 
to in clause (i) to the Chairman of the Council on 
Environmental Quality if such appeal is made within 
the 30-day period following the date of the decision 
being made available under clause (iii). A decision 
of the Chairman on an appeal under this clause shall 
be made within 30 days of the date of the appeal. 
(4) FACTORS
TO
CONSIDER.—In determining whether a 
project study is controversial under paragraph (3)(A)(iii), the 
Chief of Engineers shall consider if— 
(A) there is a significant public dispute as to the size, 
nature, or effects of the project; or 
(B) there is a significant public dispute as to the eco-
nomic or environmental costs or benefits of the project. 
(5) PROJECT STUDIES EXCLUDED FROM PEER REVIEW.—The 
Chief of Engineers may exclude a project study from peer 
review under paragraph (1)— 
(A) if the project study does not include an environ-
mental impact statement and is a project study subject 
to peer review under paragraph (3)(A)(i) that the Chief 
of Engineers determines— 
(i) is not controversial; 
(ii) has no more than negligible adverse impacts 
on scarce or unique cultural, historic, or tribal 
resources; 
(iii) has no substantial adverse impacts on fish 
and wildlife species and their habitat prior to the 
implementation of mitigation measures; and 
(iv) has, before implementation of mitigation meas-
ures, no more than a negligible adverse impact on 
a species listed as endangered or threatened species 
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.) or the critical habitat of such species 
designated under such Act; 
(B) if the project study— 
(i) involves only the rehabilitation or replacement 
of existing hydropower turbines, lock structures, or 
flood control gates within the same footprint and for 
the same purpose as an existing water resources 
project; 
Deadlines. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01085
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1088 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(ii) is for an activity for which there is ample 
experience within the Corps of Engineers and industry 
to treat the activity as being routine; and 
(iii) has minimal life safety risk; or 
(C) if the project study does not include an environ-
mental impact statement and is a project study pursued 
under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 
U.S.C. 701s), section 2 of the Flood Control Act of August 
28, 1937 (33 U.S.C. 701g), section 14 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), section 107(a) of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577(a)), section 3 of 
the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation 
in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned prop-
erty’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g), section 
111 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i), 
section 3 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the 
construction, repair, and preservation of certain public 
works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes’’, 
approved March 2, 1945 (33 U.S.C. 603a), section 1135 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2309a), or section 206 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). 
(6) DETERMINATION OF TOTAL COST.—For purposes of deter-
mining the estimated total cost of a project under paragraph 
(3)(A), the total cost shall be based upon the reasonable esti-
mates of the Chief of Engineers at the completion of the recon-
naissance study for the project. If the reasonable estimate 
of total costs is subsequently determined to be in excess of 
the amount in paragraph (3)(A), the Chief of Engineers shall 
make a determination whether a project study is required to 
be reviewed under this section. 
(b) TIMING OF PEER REVIEW.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Chief of Engineers shall determine 
the timing of a peer review of a project study under subsection 
(a). In all cases, the peer review shall occur during the period 
beginning on the date of the signing of the feasibility cost- 
sharing agreement for the study and ending on the date estab-
lished under subsection (e)(1)(A) for the peer review and shall 
be accomplished concurrent with the conducting of the project 
study. 
(2) FACTORS TO CONSIDER.—In any case in which the Chief 
of Engineers has not initiated a peer review of a project study, 
the Chief of Engineers shall consider, at a minimum, whether 
to initiate a peer review at the time that— 
(A) the without-project conditions are identified; 
(B) the array of alternatives to be considered are identi-
fied; and 
(C) the preferred alternative is identified. 
(3) LIMITATION
ON
MULTIPLE
PEER
REVIEW.—Nothing in 
this subsection shall be construed to require the Chief of Engi-
neers to conduct multiple peer reviews for a project study. 
(c) ESTABLISHMENT OF PANELS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—For each project study subject to peer 
review under subsection (a), as soon as practicable after the 
Chief of Engineers determines that a project study will be 
subject to peer review, the Chief of Engineers shall contract 
with the National Academy of Sciences or a similar independent 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01086
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1089 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
scientific and technical advisory organization or an eligible 
organization to establish a panel of experts to conduct a peer 
review for the project study. 
(2) MEMBERSHIP.—A panel of experts established for a 
project study under this section shall be composed of inde-
pendent experts who represent a balance of areas of expertise 
suitable for the review being conducted. 
(3) LIMITATION ON APPOINTMENTS.—The National Academy 
of Sciences or any other organization the Chief of Engineers 
contracts with under paragraph (1) to establish a panel of 
experts shall apply the National Academy of Science’s policy 
for selecting committee members to ensure that members 
selected for the panel of experts have no conflict with the 
project being reviewed. 
(4) CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION.—Upon identification of 
a project study for peer review under this section, but prior 
to initiation of the review, the Chief of Engineers shall notify 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
the House of Representatives of the review. 
(d) DUTIES
OF PANELS.—A panel of experts established for 
a peer review for a project study under this section shall— 
(1) conduct the peer review for the project study; 
(2) assess the adequacy and acceptability of the economic, 
engineering, and environmental methods, models, and analyses 
used by the Chief of Engineers; 
(3) receive from the Chief of Engineers the public written 
and oral comments provided to the Chief of Engineers; 
(4) provide timely written and oral comments to the Chief 
of Engineers throughout the development of the project study, 
as requested; and 
(5) submit to the Chief of Engineers a final report con-
taining the panel’s economic, engineering, and environmental 
analysis of the project study, including the panel’s assessment 
of the adequacy and acceptability of the economic, engineering, 
and environmental methods, models, and analyses used by 
the Chief of Engineers, to accompany the publication of the 
report of the Chief of Engineers for the project. 
(e) DURATION OF PROJECT STUDY PEER REVIEWS.— 
(1) DEADLINE.—A panel of experts established under this 
section shall— 
(A) complete its peer review under this section for 
a project study and submit a report to the Chief of Engi-
neers under subsection (d)(5) not more than 60 days after 
the last day of the public comment period for the draft 
project study, or, if the Chief of Engineers determines 
that a longer period of time is necessary, such period of 
time determined necessary by the Chief of Engineers; and 
(B) terminate on the date of initiation of the State 
and agency review required by the first section of the 
Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 887). 
(2) FAILURE
TO
MEET
DEADLINE.—If a panel of experts 
does not complete its peer review of a project study under 
this section and submit a report to the Chief of Engineers 
under subsection (d)(5) on or before the deadline established 
by paragraph (1) for the peer review, the Chief of Engineers 
shall complete the project study without delay. 
Termination 
date. 
Reports. 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01087
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1090 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(f) RECOMMENDATIONS OF PANEL.— 
(1) CONSIDERATION
BY
THE
CHIEF
OF
ENGINEERS.—After 
receiving a report on a project study from a panel of experts 
under this section and before entering a final record of decision 
for the project, the Chief of Engineers shall consider any rec-
ommendations contained in the report and prepare a written 
response for any recommendations adopted or not adopted. 
(2) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY AND TRANSMITTAL TO CONGRESS.— 
After receiving a report on a project study from a panel of 
experts under this section, the Chief of Engineers shall— 
(A) make a copy of the report and any written response 
of the Chief of Engineers on recommendations contained 
in the report available to the public by electronic means, 
including the Internet; and 
(B) transmit to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives a copy of the report, together with any such 
written response, on the date of a final report of the Chief 
of Engineers or other final decision document for the project 
study. 
(g) COSTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The costs of a panel of experts established 
for a peer review under this section— 
(A) shall be a Federal expense; and 
(B) shall not exceed $500,000. 
(2) WAIVER.—The Chief of Engineers may waive the 
$500,000 limitation contained in paragraph (1)(B) in cases that 
the Chief of Engineers determines appropriate. 
(h) APPLICABILITY.—This section shall apply to— 
(1) project studies initiated during the 2-year period pre-
ceding the date of enactment of this Act and for which the 
array of alternatives to be considered has not been identified; 
and 
(2) project studies initiated during the period beginning 
on such date of enactment and ending 7 years after such 
date of enactment. 
(i) REPORTS.— 
(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after the date 
of enactment of this section, the Chief of Engineers shall submit 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture of the House of Representatives a report on the 
implementation of this section. 
(2) ADDITIONAL REPORT.—Not later than 6 years after the 
date of enactment of this section, the Chief of Engineers shall 
update the report under paragraph (1) taking into account 
any further information on implementation of this section and 
submit such updated report to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-
tives. 
(j) NONAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Federal Advisory Com-
mittee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to a peer review panel 
established under this section. 
(k) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section shall be construed 
to affect any authority of the Chief of Engineers to cause or conduct 
Effective date. 
Termination 
date. 
Internet. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01088
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1091 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
a peer review of a water resources project existing on the date 
of enactment of this section. 
(l) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply: 
(1) PROJECT
STUDY.—The term ‘‘project study’’ means— 
(A) a feasibility study or reevaluation study for a water 
resources project, including the environmental impact 
statement prepared for the study; and 
(B) any other study associated with a modification 
of a water resources project that includes an environmental 
impact statement, including the environmental impact 
statement prepared for the study. 
(2) AFFECTED STATE.—The term ‘‘affected State’’, as used 
with respect to a water resources project, means a State all 
or a portion of which is within the drainage basin in which 
the project is or would be located and would be economically 
or environmentally affected as a consequence of the project. 
(3) ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘‘eligible organiza-
tion’’ means an organization that— 
(A) is described in section 501(c)(3), and exempt from 
Federal tax under section 501(a), of the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1986; 
(B) is independent; 
(C) is free from conflicts of interest; 
(D) does not carry out or advocate for or against Fed-
eral water resources projects; and 
(E) has experience in establishing and administering 
peer review panels. 
(4) TOTAL COST.—The term ‘‘total cost’’, as used with respect 
to a water resources project, means the cost of construction 
(including planning and designing) of the project. In the case 
of a project for hurricane and storm damage reduction or flood 
damage reduction that includes periodic nourishment over the 
life of the project, the term includes the total cost of the 
nourishment. 
SEC. 2035. SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEW. 
(a) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEW.—The 
Chief of Engineers shall ensure that the design and construction 
activities for hurricane and storm damage reduction and flood dam-
age reduction projects are reviewed by independent experts under 
this section if the Chief of Engineers determines that a review 
by independent experts is necessary to assure public health, safety, 
and welfare. 
(b) FACTORS.—In determining whether a review of design and 
construction of a project is necessary under this section, the Chief 
of Engineers shall consider whether— 
(1) the failure of the project would pose a significant threat 
to human life; 
(2) the project involves the use of innovative materials 
or techniques; 
(3) the project design lacks redundancy; or 
(4) the project has a unique construction sequencing or 
a reduced or overlapping design construction schedule. 
(c) SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEW.— 
(1) INITIATION
OF
REVIEW.—At the appropriate point in 
the development of detailed engineering and design specifica-
tions for each water resources project subject to review under 
33 USC 2344. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01089
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1092 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
this section, the Chief of Engineers shall initiate a safety assur-
ance review by independent experts on the design and construc-
tion activities for the project. 
(2) SELECTION OF REVIEWERS.—A safety assurance review 
under this section shall include participation by experts selected 
by the Chief of Engineers from among individuals who are 
distinguished experts in engineering, hydrology, or other appro-
priate disciplines. The Chief of Engineers shall apply the 
National Academy of Science’s policy for selecting reviewers 
to ensure that reviewers have no conflict of interest with the 
project being reviewed. 
(3) COMPENSATION.—An individual serving as an inde-
pendent reviewer under this section shall be compensated at 
a rate of pay to be determined by the Secretary and shall 
be allowed travel expenses. 
(d) SCOPE OF SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEWS.—A safety assurance 
review under this section shall include a review of the design 
and construction activities prior to the initiation of physical 
construction and periodically thereafter until construction activities 
are completed on a regular schedule sufficient to inform the Chief 
of Engineers on the adequacy, appropriateness, and acceptability 
of the design and construction activities for the purpose of assuring 
public health, safety, and welfare. The Chief of Engineers shall 
ensure that reviews under this section do not create any unneces-
sary delays in design and construction activities. 
(e) SAFETY ASSURANCE REVIEW RECORD.—The written rec-
ommendations of a reviewer or panel of reviewers under this section 
and the responses of the Chief of Engineers shall be available 
to the public, including through electronic means on the Internet. 
(f) APPLICABILITY.—This section shall apply to any project in 
design or under construction on the date of enactment of this 
Act and to any project with respect to which design or construction 
is initiated during the period beginning on the date of enactment 
of this Act and ending 7 years after such date of enactment. 
SEC. 2036. MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND WETLANDS 
LOSSES. 
(a) MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE LOSSES.—Section 906(d) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(d)) 
is amended— 
(1) in the first sentence of paragraph (1) by striking ‘‘to 
the Congress’’ and inserting ‘‘to Congress in any report, and 
shall not select a project alternative in any report,’’; 
(2) in the second sentence of paragraph (1) by inserting 
‘‘, and other habitat types are mitigated to not less than in- 
kind conditions’’ after ‘‘mitigated in-kind’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—To mitigate losses to flood damage 
reduction capabilities and fish and wildlife resulting from 
a water resources project, the Secretary shall ensure that 
the mitigation plan for each water resources project com-
plies with the mitigation standards and policies established 
pursuant to the regulatory programs administered by the 
Secretary. 
Effective date. 
Termination 
date. 
Public 
information. 
Internet. 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01090
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1093 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(B) INCLUSIONS.—A specific mitigation plan for a 
water resources project under paragraph (1) shall include, 
at a minimum— 
‘‘(i) a plan for monitoring the implementation and 
ecological success of each mitigation measure, including 
the cost and duration of any monitoring, and, to the 
extent practicable, a designation of the entities that 
will be responsible for the monitoring; 
‘‘(ii) the criteria for ecological success by which 
the mitigation will be evaluated and determined to 
be successful based on replacement of lost functions 
and values of the habitat, including hydrologic and 
vegetative characteristics; 
‘‘(iii) a description of the land and interests in 
land to be acquired for the mitigation plan and the 
basis for a determination that the land and interests 
are available for acquisition; 
‘‘(iv) a description of— 
‘‘(I) the types and amount of restoration activi-
ties to be conducted; 
‘‘(II) the physical action to be undertaken to 
achieve the mitigation objectives within the water-
shed in which such losses occur and, in any case 
in which the mitigation will occur outside the 
watershed, a detailed explanation for undertaking 
the mitigation outside the watershed; and 
‘‘(III) the functions and values that will result 
from the mitigation plan; and 
‘‘(v) a contingency plan for taking corrective actions 
in cases in which monitoring demonstrates that mitiga-
tion measures are not achieving ecological success in 
accordance with criteria under clause (ii). 
‘‘(C) RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORING.—In any case in 
which it is not practicable to identify in a mitigation plan 
for a water resources project the entity responsible for 
monitoring at the time of a final report of the Chief of 
Engineers or other final decision document for the project, 
such entity shall be identified in the partnership agreement 
entered into with the non-Federal interest under section 
221 of Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b). 
‘‘(4) DETERMINATION OF SUCCESS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A mitigation plan under this sub-
section shall be considered to be successful at the time 
at which the criteria under paragraph (3)(B)(ii) are 
achieved under the plan, as determined by monitoring 
under paragraph (3)(B)(i). 
‘‘(B) CONSULTATION.—In determining whether a mitiga-
tion plan is successful under subparagraph (A), the Sec-
retary shall consult annually with appropriate Federal 
agencies and each State in which the applicable project 
is located on at least the following: 
‘‘(i) The ecological success of the mitigation as of 
the date on which the report is submitted. 
‘‘(ii) The likelihood that the mitigation will achieve 
ecological success, as defined in the mitigation plan. 
‘‘(iii) The projected timeline for achieving that suc-
cess. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01091
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1094 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(iv) Any recommendations for improving the like-
lihood of success. 
‘‘(5) MONITORING.—Mitigation monitoring shall continue 
until it has been demonstrated that the mitigation has met 
the ecological success criteria.’’. 
(b) STATUS REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Concurrent with the President’s submis-
sion to Congress of the President’s request for appropriations 
for the Civil Works Program for a fiscal year, the Secretary 
shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on 
the status of construction of projects that require mitigation 
under section 906 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283), the status of such mitigation, and 
the results of the consultation under subsection (d)(4)(B) of 
such section. 
(2) PROJECTS INCLUDED.—The status report shall include 
the status of— 
(A) all projects that are under construction as of the 
date of the report; 
(B) all projects for which the President requests 
funding for the next fiscal year; and 
(C) all projects that have undergone or completed 
construction, but have not completed the mitigation 
required under section 906 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986. 
(3) AVAILABILITY
OF
INFORMATION.—The Secretary shall 
make information contained in the status report available to 
the public, including on the Internet. 
(c) WETLANDS MITIGATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out a water resources project 
that involves wetlands mitigation and that has impacts that 
occur within the service area of a mitigation bank, the Sec-
retary, where appropriate, shall first consider the use of the 
mitigation bank if the bank contains sufficient available credits 
to offset the impact and the bank is approved in accordance 
with the Federal Guidance for the Establishment, Use and 
Operation of Mitigation Banks (60 Fed. Reg. 58605) or other 
applicable Federal law (including regulations). 
(2) SERVICE AREA.—To the maximum extent practicable, 
the service area of the mitigation bank under paragraph (1) 
shall be in the same watershed as the affected habitat. 
(3) RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORING.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Purchase of credits from a mitigation 
bank for a water resources project relieves the Secretary 
and the non-Federal interest from responsibility for moni-
toring or demonstrating mitigation success. 
(B) APPLICABILITY.—The relief of responsibility under 
subparagraph (A) applies only in any case in which the 
Secretary determines that monitoring of mitigation success 
is being conducted by the Secretary or by the owner or 
operator of the mitigation bank. 
SEC. 2037. REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 204 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326) is amended to read as follows: 
33 USC 2317b. 
Public 
information. 
Internet. 
33 USC 2283a. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01092
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1095 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘SEC. 204. REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT. 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.— 
‘‘(1) SEDIMENT USE.—For sediment obtained through the 
construction, operation, or maintenance of an authorized Fed-
eral water resources project, the Secretary shall develop, at 
Federal expense, regional sediment management plans and 
carry out projects at locations identified in plans developed 
under this section, or identified jointly by the non-Federal 
interest and the Secretary, for use in the construction, repair, 
modification, or rehabilitation of projects associated with Fed-
eral water resources projects for purposes listed in paragraph 
(3). 
‘‘(2) COOPERATION.—The Secretary shall develop plans 
under this subsection in cooperation with the appropriate Fed-
eral, State, regional, and local agencies. 
‘‘(3) PURPOSES FOR SEDIMENT USE IN PROJECTS.—The pur-
poses of using sediment for the construction, repair, modifica-
tion, or rehabilitation of Federal water resources projects are— 
‘‘(A) to reduce storm damage to property; 
‘‘(B) to protect, restore, and create aquatic and eco-
logically related habitats, including wetlands; and 
‘‘(C) to transport and place suitable sediment. 
‘‘(b) SECRETARIAL FINDINGS.—Subject to subsection (c), projects 
carried out under subsection (a) may be carried out in any case 
in which the Secretary finds that— 
‘‘(1) the environmental, economic, and social benefits of 
the project, both monetary and nonmonetary, justify the cost 
of the project; and 
‘‘(2) the project will not result in environmental degrada-
tion. 
‘‘(c) DETERMINATION OF PROJECT COSTS.— 
‘‘(1) COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Costs associated with construction 
of a project under this section or identified in a regional 
sediment management plan shall be limited solely to 
construction costs that are in excess of the costs necessary 
to carry out the dredging for construction, operation, or 
maintenance of an authorized Federal water resources 
project in the most cost-effective way, consistent with eco-
nomic, engineering, and environmental criteria. 
‘‘(B) COST SHARING.— 
‘‘(i) IN
GENERAL.—Except as provided in clause 
(ii), the non-Federal share of the construction cost of 
a project under this section shall be determined as 
provided in subsections (a) through (d) of section 103 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2213). 
‘‘(ii) SPECIAL
RULE.—Construction of a project 
under this section for one or more of the purposes 
of protection, restoration, or creation of aquatic and 
ecologically related habitat, the cost of which does not 
exceed $750,000 and which is located in a disadvan-
taged community as determined by the Secretary, may 
be carried out at Federal expense. 
‘‘(C) TOTAL COST.—The total Federal costs associated 
with construction of a project under this section may not 
exceed $5,000,000. 
Plans. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01093
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1096 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(2) 
OPERATION, 
MAINTENANCE, 
REPLACEMENT, 
AND 
REHABILITATION COSTS.—Operation, maintenance, replacement, 
and rehabilitation costs associated with a project under this 
section are the responsibility of the non-Federal interest. 
‘‘(d) SELECTION OF DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL METHOD FOR 
ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSES.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In developing and carrying out a Federal 
water resources project involving the disposal of dredged mate-
rial, the Secretary may select, with the consent of the non- 
Federal interest, a disposal method that is not the least cost 
option if the Secretary determines that the incremental costs 
of the disposal method are reasonable in relation to the environ-
mental benefits, including the benefits to the aquatic environ-
ment to be derived from the creation of wetlands and control 
of shoreline erosion. 
‘‘(2) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of such incre-
mental costs shall be determined in accordance with subsection 
(c). 
‘‘(e) STATE AND REGIONAL PLANS.—The Secretary may— 
‘‘(1) cooperate with any State in the preparation of a com-
prehensive State or regional sediment management plan within 
the boundaries of the State; 
‘‘(2) encourage State participation in the implementation 
of the plan; and 
‘‘(3) submit to Congress reports and recommendations with 
respect to appropriate Federal participation in carrying out 
the plan. 
‘‘(f) PRIORITY AREAS.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary 
shall give priority to a regional sediment management project in 
the vicinity of each of the following: 
‘‘(1) Little Rock Slackwater Harbor, Arkansas. 
‘‘(2) Fletcher Cove, California. 
‘‘(3) Egmont Key, Florida. 
‘‘(4) Calcasieu Ship Channel, Louisiana. 
‘‘(5) Delaware River Estuary, New Jersey and Pennsyl-
vania. 
‘‘(6) Fire Island Inlet, Suffolk County, New York. 
‘‘(7) Smith Point Park Pavilion and the TWA Flight 800 
Memorial, Brookhaven, New York. 
‘‘(8) Morehead City, North Carolina. 
‘‘(9) Toledo Harbor, Lucas County, Ohio. 
‘‘(10) Galveston Bay, Texas. 
‘‘(11) Benson Beach, Washington. 
‘‘(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000 per fiscal 
year, of which not more than $5,000,000 per fiscal year may be 
used for the development of regional sediment management plans 
authorized by subsection (e) and of which not more than $3,000,000 
per fiscal year may be used for construction of projects to which 
subsection (c)(1)(B)(ii) applies. Such funds shall remain available 
until expended.’’. 
(b) CONFORMING REPEAL.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Section 145 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j) is repealed. 
(2) EXISTING PROJECTS.—The Secretary may complete any 
project being carried out under section 145 of the Water 
Termination 
date. 
33 USC 426j 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01094
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1097 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Resources Development Act of 1976 on the day before the 
date of enactment of this Act. 
SEC. 2038. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT 
PROGRAM. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act author-
izing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores 
of publicly owned property’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 
426g), is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 3. STORM AND HURRICANE RESTORATION AND IMPACT MINI-
MIZATION PROGRAM. 
‘‘(a) CONSTRUCTION OF SMALL SHORE AND BEACH RESTORATION 
AND PROTECTION PROJECTS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a program 
for the construction of small shore and beach restoration and 
protection projects not specifically authorized by Congress that 
otherwise comply with the first section of this Act if the Sec-
retary determines that such construction is advisable. 
‘‘(2) LOCAL COOPERATION.—The local cooperation require-
ment of the first section of this Act shall apply to a project 
under this section. 
‘‘(3) COMPLETENESS.—A project under this subsection— 
‘‘(A) shall be complete; and 
‘‘(B) shall not commit the United States to any addi-
tional improvement to ensure the successful operation of 
the project; except for participation in periodic beach 
nourishment in accordance with— 
‘‘(i) the first section of this Act; and 
‘‘(ii) the procedure for projects authorized after 
submission of a survey report. 
‘‘(b) NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT 
AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct under the 
program authorized by subsection (a) a national shoreline ero-
sion control development and demonstration program (referred 
to in this section as the ‘demonstration program’). 
‘‘(2) REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The demonstration program shall 
include provisions for— 
‘‘(i) 
projects 
consisting 
of 
planning, 
design, 
construction, and monitoring of prototype engineered 
and native and naturalized vegetative shoreline erosion 
control devices and methods; 
‘‘(ii) monitoring of the applicable prototypes; 
‘‘(iii) detailed engineering and environmental 
reports on the results of each project carried out under 
the demonstraton program; and 
‘‘(iv) technology transfers, as appropriate, to pri-
vate property owners, State and local entities, non-
profit educational institutions, and nongovernmental 
organizations. 
‘‘(B) DETERMINATION OF FEASIBILITY.—A project under 
the demonstration program shall not be carried out until 
the Secretary determines that the project is feasible. 
‘‘(C) EMPHASIS.—A project under the demonstration 
program shall emphasize, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable— 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01095
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1098 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(i) the development and demonstration of innova-
tive technologies; 
‘‘(ii) efficient designs to prevent erosion at a shore-
line site, taking into account the lifecycle cost of the 
design, including cleanup, maintenance, and amortiza-
tion; 
‘‘(iii) new and enhanced shore protection project 
design and project formulation tools the purposes of 
which are to improve the physical performance, and 
lower the lifecycle costs, of the projects; 
‘‘(iv) natural designs, including the use of native 
and naturalized vegetation or temporary structures 
that minimize permanent structural alterations to the 
shoreline; 
‘‘(v) the avoidance of negative impacts to adjacent 
shorefront communities; 
‘‘(vi) in areas with substantial residential or 
commercial interests located adjacent to the shoreline, 
designs that do not impair the aesthetic appeal of 
the interests; 
‘‘(vii) 
the 
potential 
for 
long-term 
protection 
afforded by the technology; and 
‘‘(viii) recommendations developed from evalua-
tions of the program established under the Shoreline 
Erosion Control Demonstration Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
1962–5 note), including— 
‘‘(I) adequate consideration of the subgrade; 
‘‘(II) proper filtration; 
‘‘(III) durable components; 
‘‘(IV) adequate connection between units; and 
‘‘(V) 
consideration 
of 
additional 
relevant 
information. 
‘‘(D) SITES.— 
‘‘(i) IN
GENERAL.—Each project under the dem-
onstration program may be carried out at— 
‘‘(I) a privately owned site with substantial 
public access; or 
‘‘(II) a publicly owned site on open coast or 
in tidal waters. 
‘‘(ii) SELECTION.—The Secretary shall develop cri-
teria for the selection of sites for projects under the 
demonstration program, including criteria based on— 
‘‘(I) a variety of geographic and climatic condi-
tions; 
‘‘(II) the size of the population that is 
dependent on the beaches for recreation or the 
protection of private property or public infrastruc-
ture; 
‘‘(III) the rate of erosion; 
‘‘(IV) significant natural resources or habitats 
and environmentally sensitive areas; and 
‘‘(V) significant threatened historic structures 
or landmarks. 
‘‘(3) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall carry out the 
demonstration program in consultation with— 
Criteria. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01096
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1099 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(A) the Secretary of Agriculture, particularly with 
respect to native and naturalized vegetative means of pre-
venting and controlling shoreline erosion; 
‘‘(B) Federal, State, and local agencies; 
‘‘(C) private organizations; 
‘‘(D) the Coastal Engineering Research Center estab-
lished by the first section of Public Law 88–172 (33 U.S.C. 
426–1); and 
‘‘(E) applicable university research facilities. 
‘‘(4) COMPLETION OF DEMONSTRATION.—After carrying out 
the initial construction and evaluation of the performance and 
cost of a project under the demonstration program, the Sec-
retary may— 
‘‘(A) amend, at the request of a non-Federal interest 
of the project, the partnership agreement for a federally 
authorized shore protection project in existence on the date 
on which initial construction of the project under the dem-
onstration program is complete to incorporate the project 
constructed under the demonstration program as a feature 
of the shore protection project, with the future cost sharing 
of the project constructed under the demonstration program 
to be determined by the project purposes of the shore 
protection project; or 
‘‘(B) transfer all interest in and responsibility for the 
completed project constructed under the demonstration pro-
gram to a non-Federal interest or another Federal agency. 
‘‘(5) AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary may enter into a partner-
ship agreement with the non-Federal interest or a cooperative 
agreement with the head of another Federal agency under 
the demonstration program— 
‘‘(A) to share the costs of construction, operation, 
maintenance, and monitoring of a project under the dem-
onstration program; 
‘‘(B) to share the costs of removing the project, or 
element of the project if the Secretary determines that 
the project or element of the project is detrimental to 
public or private property, public infrastructure, or public 
safety; or 
‘‘(C) to specify ownership of the completed project if 
the Secretary determines that the completed project will 
not be part of a Corps of Engineers project. 
‘‘(6) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, 2008, and every 
3 years thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and submit 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture of the House of Representatives a report describing— 
‘‘(A) the activities carried out and accomplishments 
made under the demonstration program since the previous 
report under this paragraph; and 
‘‘(B) any recommendations of the Secretary relating 
to the program. 
‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary 
may expend, from any appropriations made available to the 
Secretary for the purpose of carrying out civil works, not more 
than $30,000,000 during any fiscal year to pay the Federal 
share of the costs of construction of small shore and beach 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01097
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1100 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
restoration and protection projects or small projects under this 
section. 
‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—The total amount expended for a project 
under this section shall— 
‘‘(A) be sufficient to pay the cost of Federal participa-
tion in the project (including periodic nourishment as pro-
vided for under the first section of this Act), as determined 
by the Secretary; and 
‘‘(B) be not more than $5,000,000.’’. 
(b) REPEAL.—Section 5 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. 426h), is 
repealed. 
SEC. 2039. MONITORING ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting a feasibility study for a project 
(or a component of a project) for ecosystem restoration, the Secretary 
shall ensure that the recommended project includes, as an integral 
part of the project, a plan for monitoring the success of the eco-
system restoration. 
(b) MONITORING PLAN.—The monitoring plan shall— 
(1) include a description of the monitoring activities to 
be carried out, the criteria for ecosystem restoration success, 
and the estimated cost and duration of the monitoring; and 
(2) specify that the monitoring shall continue until such 
time as the Secretary determines that the criteria for ecosystem 
restoration success will be met. 
(c) COST SHARE.—For a period of 10 years from completion 
of construction of a project (or a component of a project) for eco-
system restoration, the Secretary shall consider the cost of carrying 
out the monitoring as a project cost. If the monitoring plan under 
subsection (b) requires monitoring beyond the 10-year period, the 
cost of monitoring shall be a non-Federal responsibility. 
SEC. 2040. ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall implement a program 
to allow electronic submission of permit applications for permits 
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary. 
(b) LIMITATIONS.—This section does not preclude the submission 
of a physical copy. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000. 
SEC. 2041. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION. 
(a) PROJECT TRACKING.—The Secretary shall assign a unique 
tracking number to each water resources project under the jurisdic-
tion of the Secretary to be used by each Federal agency throughout 
the life of the project. 
(b) REPORT REPOSITORY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide to the Library 
of Congress a copy of each final feasibility study, final environ-
mental impact statement, final reevaluation report, record of 
decision, and report to Congress prepared by the Corps of 
Engineers. 
(2) AVAILABILITY TO PUBLIC.—Each document described in 
paragraph (1) shall be made available to the public, and an 
Public 
information. 
Internet. 
Records. 
33 USC 2346. 
Deadline. 
33 USC 2345. 
33 USC 2330a. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01098
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1101 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
electronic copy of each document shall be made permanently 
available to the public through the Internet. 
SEC. 2042. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION. 
Sections 101, 106, and 108 of the Energy and Water Develop-
ment Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109–103; 119 Stat. 
2252–2254), are repealed. 
SEC. 2043. STUDIES AND REPORTS FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS. 
(a) STUDIES.— 
(1) COST-SHARING REQUIREMENTS.—Section 105(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215(a)) 
is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) DETAILED PROJECT REPORTS.—The requirements of this 
subsection that apply to a feasibility study also shall apply 
to a study that results in a detailed project report, except 
that— 
‘‘(A) the first $100,000 of the costs of a study that 
results in a detailed project report shall be a Federal 
expense; and 
‘‘(B) paragraph (1)(C)(ii) shall not apply to such a 
study.’’. 
(2) PLANNING AND ENGINEERING.—Section 105(b) of such 
Act (33 U.S.C. 2215(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘authorized 
by this Act’’. 
(3) DEFINITIONS.—Section 105 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2215) 
is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
‘‘(1) DETAILED PROJECT REPORT.—The term ‘detailed project 
report’ means a report for a project not specifically authorized 
by Congress in law or otherwise that determines the feasibility 
of the project with a level of detail appropriate to the scope 
and complexity of the recommended solution and sufficient 
to proceed directly to the preparation of contract plans and 
specifications. The term includes any associated environmental 
impact statement and mitigation plan. For a project for which 
the Federal cost does not exceed $1,000,000, the term includes 
a planning and design analysis document. 
‘‘(2) FEASIBILITY STUDY.—The term ‘feasibility study’ means 
a study that results in a feasibility report under section 905, 
and any associated environmental impact statement and miti-
gation plan, prepared by the Corps of Engineers for a water 
resources project. The term includes a study that results in 
a project implementation report prepared under title VI of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680– 
2694), a general reevaluation report, and a limited reevaluation 
report.’’. 
(b) REPORTS.— 
(1) PREPARATION.—Section 905(a) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282(a)) is amended— 
(A) by striking ‘‘(a) In the case of any’’ and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(a) PREPARATION OF REPORTS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘the Secretary, the Secretary shall’’ 
and inserting ‘‘the Secretary that results in recommenda-
tions concerning a project or the operation of a project 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01099
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1102 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
and that requires specific authorization by Congress in 
law or otherwise, the Secretary shall perform a reconnais-
sance study and’’; 
(C) by striking ‘‘Such feasibility report’’ and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(2) CONTENTS
OF
FEASIBILITY
REPORTS.—A feasibility 
report’’; 
(D) by striking ‘‘The feasibility report’’ and inserting 
‘‘A feasibility report’’; and 
(E) by striking the last sentence and inserting the 
following: 
‘‘(3) APPLICABILITY.—This subsection shall not apply to— 
‘‘(A) any study with respect to which a report has 
been submitted to Congress before the date of enactment 
of this Act; 
‘‘(B) any study for a project, which project is authorized 
for construction by this Act and is not subject to section 
903(b); 
‘‘(C) any study for a project which does not require 
specific authorization by Congress in law or otherwise; 
and 
‘‘(D) general studies not intended to lead to rec-
ommendation of a specific water resources project. 
‘‘(4) FEASIBILITY REPORT DEFINED.—In this subsection, the 
term ‘feasibility report’ means each feasibility report, and any 
associated environmental impact statement and mitigation 
plan, prepared by the Corps of Engineers for a water resources 
project. The term includes a project implementation report pre-
pared under title VI of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680–2694), a general reevaluation report, 
and a limited reevaluation report.’’. 
(2) PROJECTS
NOT
SPECIFICALLY
AUTHORIZED
BY
CON-
GRESS.—Section 905 of such Act is further amended— 
(A) in subsection (b) by inserting ‘‘RECONNAISSANCE 
STUDIES.—’’ before ‘‘Before initiating’’; 
(B) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as 
subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively; 
(C) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: 
‘‘(c) PROJECTS NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS.— 
In the case of any water resources project-related study authorized 
to be undertaken by the Secretary without specific authorization 
by Congress in law or otherwise, the Secretary shall prepare a 
detailed project report.’’; 
(D) in subsection (d) (as so redesignated) by inserting 
‘‘INDIAN TRIBES.—’’ before ‘‘For purposes of’’; and 
(E) in subsection (e) (as so redesignated) by inserting 
‘‘STANDARD AND UNIFORM PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES.— 
’’ before ‘‘The Secretary shall’’. 
SEC. 2044. 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, wastewater infrastructure, 
Procedures. 
33 USC 2347. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01100
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1103 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
flood damage reduction, storm damage reduction, ecosystem restora-
tion, or navigation project that requires the approval of the Sec-
retary, the Secretary shall initiate, subject to subsection (c), proce-
dures to establish a schedule for consolidating Federal, State, and 
local agency and Indian tribe environmental assessments, project 
reviews, and issuance of all permits for the construction or modifica-
tion of the project. All States and Indian tribes 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) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall seek, to the extent 
practicable, to consolidate hearing and comment periods, procedures 
for data collection and report preparation, and the environmental 
review and permitting processes associated with the project and 
related activities. The Secretary shall notify, to the extent possible, 
the non-Federal interest of its 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 should be provided to the appropriate Federal, State, 
or local agency or Indian tribe. 
(c) COSTS OF COORDINATION.—The costs incurred by the Sec-
retary to establish and carry out a schedule to consolidate Federal, 
State, and local agency and Indian tribe environmental assess-
ments, project reviews, and permit issuance for a project under 
this section shall be paid by the non-Federal interest. 
(d) REPORT ON TIMESAVINGS METHODS.—Not later than 3 years 
after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall 
prepare and transmit to Congress a report estimating the time 
required for the issuance of all Federal, State, local, and tribal 
permits for the construction of non-Federal projects for water 
supply, wastewater infrastructure, flood damage reduction, storm 
damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, and navigation. 
SEC. 2045. PROJECT STREAMLINING. 
(a) POLICY.—The benefits of water resources projects are impor-
tant to the Nation’s economy and environment, and recommenda-
tions to Congress regarding such projects should not be delayed 
due to uncoordinated or inefficient reviews or the failure to timely 
resolve disputes during the development of water resources projects. 
(b) SCOPE.—This section 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 reevaluation report, for a water 
resources project if the Secretary determines that such study 
requires an environmental impact statement under the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 
(c) WATER RESOURCES PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS.—The Sec-
retary shall develop and implement a coordinated review process 
for the development of water resources projects. 
(d) COORDINATED REVIEWS.—The coordinated review process 
under this section may provide that all reviews, analyses, opinions, 
permits, licenses, and approvals that must be issued or made by 
a Federal, State, or local government agency or Indian tribe for 
the development of a water resources project described in subsection 
Applicability. 
33 USC 2348. 
Notification. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01101
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1104 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) will be conducted, to the maximum extent practicable, concur-
rently and completed within a time period established by the Sec-
retary in cooperation with the agencies identified under subsection 
(e) with respect to the project. 
(e) IDENTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES.—With respect 
to the development of each water resources project, the Secretary 
shall identify, as soon as practicable, all Federal, State, and local 
government agencies and Indian tribes that may— 
(1) have jurisdiction over the project; 
(2) be required by law to conduct or issue a review, analysis, 
or opinion for the project; or 
(3) be required to make a determination on issuing a 
permit, license, or approval for the project. 
(f) STATE AUTHORITY.—If the coordinated review process is 
being implemented under this section by the Secretary with respect 
to the development of a water resources project described in sub-
section (b) within the boundaries of a State, the State, consistent 
with State law, may choose to participate in the process and to 
make subject to the process all State agencies that— 
(1) have jurisdiction over the project; 
(2) are required to conduct or issue a review, analysis, 
or opinion for the project; or 
(3) are required to make a determination on issuing a 
permit, license, or approval for the project. 
(g) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The coordinated review 
process developed under this section may be incorporated into a 
memorandum of understanding for a water resources project 
between the Secretary, the heads of Federal, State, and local govern-
ment agencies, Indian tribes identified under subsection (e), and 
the non-Federal interest for the project. 
(h) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINE.— 
(1) NOTIFICATION.—If the Secretary determines that a Fed-
eral, State, or local government agency, Indian tribe, or non- 
Federal interest that is participating in the coordinated review 
process under this section with respect to the development 
of a water resources project has not met a deadline established 
under subsection (d) for the project, the Secretary shall notify, 
within 30 days of the date of such determination, the agency, 
Indian tribe, or non-Federal interest about the failure to meet 
the deadline. 
(2) AGENCY
REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the 
date of receipt of a notice under paragraph (1), the Federal, 
State, or local government agency, Indian tribe, or non-Federal 
interest involved may submit a report to the Secretary, 
explaining why the agency, Indian tribe, or non-Federal interest 
did not meet the deadline and what actions it intends to take 
to complete or issue the required review, analysis, or opinion 
or determination on issuing a permit, license, or approval. 
(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 30 days after 
the date of receipt of a report under paragraph (2), the Sec-
retary shall compile and submit a report to the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives, the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
of the Senate, and the Council on Environmental Quality, 
describing any deadlines identified in paragraph (1), and any 
information provided to the Secretary by the Federal, State, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01102
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1105 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
or local government agency, Indian tribe, or non-Federal 
interest involved under paragraph (2). 
(i) LIMITATIONS.—Nothing in this section shall preempt or inter-
fere with— 
(1) any statutory requirement for seeking public comment; 
(2) any power, jurisdiction, or authority that a Federal, 
State, or local government agency, Indian tribe, or non-Federal 
interest has with respect to carrying out a water resources 
project; or 
(3) any obligation to comply with the provisions of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the regulations 
issued by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry out 
such Act. 
SEC. 2046. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATION. 
Section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)) is amended— 
(1) in the first sentence— 
(A) by striking ‘‘two years’’ and inserting ‘‘year’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘7’’ and inserting ‘‘5’’; 
(2) in the last sentence by striking ‘‘30 months after the 
date’’ and inserting ‘‘the last date of the fiscal year following 
the fiscal year in which’’; and 
(3) in the last sentence by striking ‘‘such 30 month period’’ 
and inserting ‘‘such period’’. 
SEC. 2047. FEDERAL HOPPER DREDGES. 
(a) HOPPER DREDGE MCFARLAND.—Section 563 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3784) is amended 
to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 563. HOPPER DREDGE MCFARLAND. 
‘‘(a) PLACEMENT
IN
READY
RESERVE
STATUS.—Not before 
October 1, 2009, and not after December 31, 2009, the Secretary 
shall— 
‘‘(1) place the Federal hopper dredge McFarland (referred 
to in this section as the ‘vessel’) in a ready reserve status; 
and 
‘‘(2) use the vessel solely for urgent and emergency purposes 
in accordance with existing emergency response protocols. 
‘‘(b) ROUTINE TESTS AND MAINTENANCE.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall periodically perform 
routine underway dredging tests of the equipment (not to exceed 
70 days per year) of the vessel in a ready reserve status 
to ensure the ability of the vessel to perform urgent and emer-
gency work. 
‘‘(2) MAINTENANCE.—The Secretary— 
‘‘(A) shall not assign any scheduled hopper dredging 
work to the vessel other than dredging tests in the Dela-
ware River and Bay; but 
‘‘(B) shall perform any repairs, including any asbestos 
abatement, necessary to maintain the vessel in a ready 
reserve fully operational condition. 
‘‘(c) ACTIVE STATUS FOR DREDGING.—The Secretary, in consulta-
tion with affected stakeholders, shall place the vessel in active 
status in order to perform dredging work if the Secretary determines 
that private industry has failed— 
Effective date. 
Termination 
date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01103
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1106 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(1) to submit a responsive and responsible bid for work 
advertised by the Secretary; or 
‘‘(2) to carry out a project as required pursuant to a contract 
between the industry and the Secretary.’’. 
(b) HOPPER
DREDGES
ESSAYONS
AND
YAQUINA.—Section 
3(c)(7)(B) of the Act of August 11, 1888 (33 U.S.C. 622; 25 Stat. 
423), is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘This subpara-
graph shall not apply to the Federal hopper dredges Essayons 
and Yaquina of the Corps of Engineers.’’. 
TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED 
PROVISIONS 
SEC. 3001. BLACK WARRIOR-TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALABAMA. 
Section 111 of title I of division C of the Consolidated Appropria-
tions Act, 2005 (118 Stat. 2944) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 111. BLACK WARRIOR-TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALABAMA. 
‘‘(a) CONSTRUCTION OF NEW FACILITIES.— 
‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection, the following defini-
tions apply: 
‘‘(A) EXISTING
FACILITY.—The term ‘existing facility’ 
means the administrative and maintenance facility for the 
project for Black Warrior-Tombigbee Rivers, Alabama, 
authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor 
Appropriations Act of July 5, 1884 (24 Stat. 141), in exist-
ence on the date of enactment of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2007. 
‘‘(B) PARCEL.—The term ‘Parcel’ means the land owned 
by the Corps of Engineers serving as the operations and 
maintenance facility of the Corps of Engineers in the city 
of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, in existence on the date of enact-
ment of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. 
‘‘(2) AUTHORIZATION.—In carrying out the project for Black 
Warrior-Tombigbee Rivers, Alabama, the Secretary is author-
ized, at Federal expense— 
‘‘(A) to purchase land on which the Secretary may 
construct a new maintenance facility for the project, to 
be located— 
‘‘(i) at a different location from the existing facility; 
and 
‘‘(ii) in the vicinity of the city of Tuscaloosa, Ala-
bama; 
‘‘(B) at any time during or after the completion of 
(and relocation to) the new maintenance facility, to 
demolish the existing facility; and 
‘‘(C) to construct on the Parcel a new administrative 
facility for the project. 
‘‘(b) ACQUISITION
AND DISPOSITION
OF PROPERTY.—The Sec-
retary— 
‘‘(1) may acquire any real property necessary for the 
construction of the new maintenance facility under subsection 
(a)(2)(A); and 
‘‘(2) shall convey to the city of Tuscaloosa fee simple title 
in and to any portion of the Parcel not required for construction 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01104
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1107 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
of the new administrative facility under subsection (a)(2)(C) 
through— 
‘‘(A) sale at fair market value; 
‘‘(B) exchange for city of Tuscaloosa owned land on 
an acre-for-acre basis; or 
‘‘(C) any combination of a sale under subparagraph 
(A) and an exchange under subparagraph (B). 
‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $32,000,000.’’. 
SEC. 3002. COOK INLET, ALASKA. 
Section 118(a)(3) of the Energy and Water Development Appro-
priations Act, 2005 (title I of division C of the Consolidated Appro-
priations Act, 2005; 118 Stat. 2945) is amended by inserting ‘‘as 
part of the operation and maintenance of such project modification’’ 
after ‘‘by the Secretary’’. 
SEC. 3003. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for navigation, King Cove Harbor, Alaska, being 
carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 
1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be $8,000,000. 
SEC. 3004. SEWARD HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The project for navigation, Seward Harbor, Alaska, authorized 
by section 101(a)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 274), is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
extend the existing breakwater by approximately 215 feet, at a 
total cost of $3,333,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$2,666,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $667,000. 
SEC. 3005. SITKA, ALASKA. 
The Sitka, Alaska, element of the project for navigation, South-
east Alaska Harbors of Refuge, Alaska, authorized by section 101(1) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4801), 
is modified to direct the Secretary to take such action as is necessary 
to correct design deficiencies in the Sitka Harbor Breakwater at 
Federal expense. The estimated cost is $6,300,000. 
SEC. 3006. TATITLEK, ALASKA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for navigation, Tatitlek, Alaska, being carried out 
under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
577), shall be $10,000,000. 
SEC. 3007. RIO DE FLAG, FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Rio De Flag, Flagstaff, 
Arizona, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), is modified to authorize 
the Secretary to construct the project at a total cost of $54,100,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $35,000,000 and a non-Federal 
cost of $19,100,000. 
SEC. 3008. NOGALES WASH AND TRIBUTARIES FLOOD CONTROL 
PROJECT, ARIZONA. 
The project for flood control, Nogales Wash and tributaries, 
Arizona, authorized by section 101(a)(4) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4606) and modified by section 
303 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01105
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1108 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
3711) and section 302 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2600), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
to construct the project at a total cost of $25,410,000, with an 
estimated Federal cost of $22,930,000 and an estimated non-Federal 
cost of $2,480,000. 
SEC. 3009. TUCSON DRAINAGE AREA, ARIZONA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, environmental restora-
tion, and recreation, Tucson drainage area, Arizona, authorized 
by section 101(a)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 274), is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
construct the project at a total cost of $66,700,000, with an esti-
mated Federal cost of $43,350,000 and an estimated non-Federal 
cost of $23,350,000. 
SEC. 3010. OSCEOLA HARBOR, ARKANSAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Osceola Harbor, 
Arkansas, constructed under section 107 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to allow non-Federal 
interests to construct a mooring facility within the existing author-
ized harbor channel, subject to all necessary permits, certifications, 
and other requirements. 
(b) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
section shall be construed as affecting the responsibility of the 
Secretary to maintain the general navigation features of the project 
at a bottom width of 250 feet. 
SEC. 3011. ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI. 
The project for flood control, St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas 
and Missouri, authorized by the Act of June 15, 1936 (49 Stat. 
1508), is modified to authorize the Secretary to undertake channel 
stabilization and sediment removal measures on the St. Francis 
River and tributaries as a nonseparable element of the original 
project. 
SEC. 3012. PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, ARKANSAS. 
The Pine Mountain Dam feature of the project for flood protec-
tion, Lee Creek, Arkansas and Oklahoma, authorized by section 
204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1078), is modified— 
(1) to add environmental restoration as a project purpose; 
and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to finance the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project, including treatment and distributions 
components, over a 30-year period in accordance with section 
103(k) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2213(k)). 
SEC. 3013. RED-OUACHITA RIVER BASIN LEVEES, ARKANSAS AND LOU-
ISIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 
(64 Stat. 173) is amended in the matter under the heading ‘‘RED- 
OUACHITA
RIVER
BASIN’’ by striking ‘‘improvements at Calion, 
Arkansas’’ and inserting ‘‘improvements at Calion, Arkansas 
(including authorization for the comprehensive flood-control project 
for Ouachita River and tributaries, incorporating in the project 
all flood control, drainage, and power improvements in the basin 
above the lower end of the left bank Ouachita River levee)’’. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01106
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1109 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) MODIFICATION.—Section 3 of the Flood Control Act of August 
18, 1941 (55 Stat. 642), is amended in the second sentence of 
subsection (a) in the matter under the heading ‘‘LOWER MISSISSIPPI 
RIVER’’ by inserting before the period at the end the following: 
‘‘; except that the Ouachita River Levees, Louisiana, authorized 
by the first section of the Mississippi River Flood Control Act 
of May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534), shall remain as a component 
of the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project and afforded oper-
ation and maintenance responsibilities as provided under section 
3 of that Act (45 Stat. 535)’’. 
SEC. 3014. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Cache Creek 
Basin, California, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4112), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to mitigate the impacts of the new south 
levee of the Cache Creek settling basin on the storm drainage 
system of the city of Woodland, including all appurtenant features, 
erosion control measures, and environmental protection features. 
(b) OBJECTIVES.—Mitigation under subsection (a) shall restore 
the preproject capacity of the city of Woodland to release 1,360 
cubic feet per second of water to the Yolo Bypass and shall include— 
(1) channel improvements; 
(2) an outlet work through the west levee of the Yolo 
Bypass; and 
(3) a new low flow cross channel to handle city and county 
storm drainage and settling basin flows (1,760 cubic feet per 
second) when the Yolo Bypass is in a low flow condition. 
SEC. 3015. CALFED STABILITY PROGRAM, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 103(f)(3) of the Water Supply, Reli-
ability, and Environmental Improvement Act (118 Stat. 1695–1696) 
is amended— 
(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘within the Delta (as 
defined in Cal. Water Code §12220)’’; 
(2) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(C) JUSTIFICATION.— 
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 209 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962–2), 
in carrying out levee stability programs and projects 
pursuant to this paragraph, the Secretary of the Army 
may determine that the programs and projects are 
justified by the benefits of the project purposes 
described in subparagraph (A), and the programs and 
projects shall require no additional economic justifica-
tion if the Secretary of the Army further determines 
that the programs and projects are cost effective. 
‘‘(ii) APPLICABILITY.—Clause (i) shall not apply to 
any separable element intended to produce benefits 
that are predominantly unrelated to the project pur-
poses described in subparagraph (A).’’; and 
(3) in subparagraph (D)(i) by inserting ‘‘as described in 
the Record of Decision’’ after ‘‘Public Law 84–99 standard)’’. 
(b) ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—In addi-
tion to funds made available pursuant to the Water Supply, Reli-
ability, and Environmental Improvement Act (Public Law 108– 
361) to carry out section 103(f)(3)(D) of that Act (118 Stat. 1696), 
33 USC 702a–12. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01107
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1110 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
there is authorized to be appropriated to carry out projects described 
in that section $106,000,000, to remain available until expended. 
SEC. 3016. COMPTON CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Los Angeles Drainage Area, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 101(b) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611), is modified to add environmental 
restoration and recreation as project purposes. 
SEC. 3017. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER’S CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Grayson Creek/ 
Murderer’s Creek, California, being carried out under section 206 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), 
is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national eco-
system restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest 
in the project. 
SEC. 3018. HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for environmental restoration, Hamilton Airfield, 
California, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 279), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to construct the project substantially in accordance 
with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 19, 2004, 
at a total cost of $228,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $171,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $57,000,000. 
SEC. 3019. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCKTON SHIP 
CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, San Francisco to Stockton, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091) is modified— 
(1) to provide that the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel 
element of the project may be provided in the form of in- 
kind services and materials; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of such element 
the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non- 
Federal interest for such element before the date of an agree-
ment for such planning and design. 
SEC. 3020. KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, 
California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3658), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project, or provide reimbursement not 
to exceed $800,000, for the costs of any work carried out by the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01108
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1111 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the project 
partnership agreement. 
SEC. 3021. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, 
California, authorized by section 601(d) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to determine whether maintenance of the project 
is feasible, and if the Secretary determines that maintenance of 
the project is feasible, to carry out such maintenance. 
SEC. 3022. LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage reduction, 
Llagas Creek, California, authorized by section 501(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 333), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to carry out the project at a total cost 
of $105,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $65,000,000 
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $40,000,000. 
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and implementing the project, 
the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate 
in the financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) 
if the detailed project report evaluation indicates that applying 
such section is necessary to implement the project. 
SEC. 3023. MAGPIE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for Magpie Creek, California, 
authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
(33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to direct the Secretary to apply the 
cost-sharing requirements of section 103(b) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4085) for the portion of the 
project consisting of land acquisition to preserve and enhance 
existing floodwater storage. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership agreement 
for the project. 
(c) COST.—The maximum amount of Federal funds that may 
be expended for the project referred to in subsection (a) shall 
be $10,000,000. 
SEC. 3024. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Pacific Flyway 
Center, Sacramento, California, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330), is modified to authorize the Secretary to expend $2,000,000 
to enhance public access to the project. 
SEC. 3025. PETALUMA RIVER, PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Petaluma River, 
Petaluma, California, authorized by section 112 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2587), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total cost 
of $41,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $26,975,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $14,525,000. 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01109
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1112 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3026. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Pinole Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under section 
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3027. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA. 
Upon completion of the modifications to the Prado Dam element 
of the project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, Cali-
fornia, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113), the Memorandum of Agreement 
for the Operation for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Water 
Conservation between the Department of the Army and the Orange 
County Water District (including all the conditions and stipulations 
in the memorandum) shall remain in effect for volumes of water 
made available prior to such modifications. 
SEC. 3028. REDWOOD CITY NAVIGATION CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary may dredge the Redwood City Navigation 
Channel, California, on an annual basis, to maintain the authorized 
depth of –30 feet mean lower low water. 
SEC. 3029. SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS FLOOD CONTROL, 
CALIFORNIA. 
(a) NATOMAS LEVEE FEATURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control and recre-
ation, Sacramento and American Rivers, California (Natomas 
Levee features), authorized by section 9159 of the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act, 1993 (106 Stat. 1944), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to credit $20,503,000 to the Sac-
ramento Area Flood Control Agency for the nonreimbursed 
Federal share of costs incurred by the Agency in connection 
with the project. 
(2) ALLOCATION OF CREDIT.—The Secretary shall allocate 
the amount to be credited pursuant to paragraph (1) toward 
the non-Federal share of such projects as are requested by 
the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. 
(b) JOINT FEDERAL PROJECT AT FOLSOM DAM.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, American 
and Sacramento Rivers, California, authorized by section 
101(a)(6)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 274) and modified by section 128 of the Energy 
and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 
2259), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the 
auxiliary spillway generally in accordance with the Post 
Authorization Change Report, American River Watershed 
Project (Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam Raise 
Projects), dated March 2007, at a total cost of $683,000,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $444,000,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $239,000,000. 
(2) DAM SAFETY.—Nothing in this subsection limits the 
authority of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out dam 
safety activities in connection with the auxiliary spillway in 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01110
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1113 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
accordance with the Bureau of Reclamation safety of dams 
program. 
(3) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary and the Secretary of 
the Interior are authorized to transfer between the Depart-
ment of the Army and the Department of the Interior 
appropriated amounts and other available funds (including 
funds contributed by non-Federal interests) for the purpose 
of planning, design, and construction of the auxiliary spill-
way. 
(B) TERMS
AND
CONDITIONS.—Any transfer made 
pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to such terms 
and conditions as may be agreed on by the Secretary and 
the Secretary of the Interior. 
SEC. 3030. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water Ship 
Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning 
and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the 
project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3031. SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 202 of the River Basin Monetary Authorization Act 
of 1974 (88 Stat. 49) is amended by striking ‘‘and the monetary 
authorization’’ and all that follows through the period at the end 
and inserting ‘‘; except that the lineal feet in the second phase 
shall be increased from 405,000 lineal feet to 485,000 lineal feet.’’. 
SEC. 3032. SALTON SEA RESTORATION, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
(1) SALTON
SEA
AUTHORITY.—The term ‘‘Salton Sea 
Authority’’ means the joint powers authority established under 
the laws of the State by a joint power agreement signed on 
June 2, 1993. 
(2) SALTON SEA SCIENCE OFFICE.—The term ‘‘Salton Sea 
Science Office’’ means the office established by the United 
States Geological Survey and located on the date of enactment 
of this Act in La Quinta, California. 
(3) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of California. 
(b) PILOT PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.— 
(A) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall review the plan 
approved by the State, entitled the ‘‘Salton Sea Ecosystem 
Restoration Program Preferred Alternative Report and 
Funding Plan’’, and dated May 2007 to determine whether 
the pilot projects described in the plan are feasible. 
(B) IMPLEMENTATION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause (ii), if the Sec-
retary determines that the pilot projects referred to 
in subparagraph (A) meet the requirements described 
in that subparagraph, the Secretary may— 
(I) enter into an agreement with the State; 
and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01111
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1114 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(II) in consultation with the Salton Sea 
Authority and the Salton Sea Science Office, carry 
out pilot projects for improvement of the environ-
ment in the area of the Salton Sea. 
(ii) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall be a party 
to each contract for construction entered into under 
this subparagraph. 
(2) LOCAL
PARTICIPATION.—In prioritizing pilot projects 
under this section, the Secretary shall— 
(A) consult with the State, the Salton Sea Authority, 
and the Salton Sea Science Office; and 
(B) take into consideration the priorities of the State 
and the Salton Sea Authority. 
(3) COST
SHARING.—Before carrying out a pilot project 
under this section, the Secretary shall enter into a written 
agreement with the State that requires the non-Federal interest 
for the pilot project to pay 35 percent of the total costs of 
the pilot project. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out subsection (b) $30,000,000, of which 
not more than $5,000,000 shall be used for any one pilot project 
under this section. 
SEC. 3033. SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem 
(including Santiago Creek, California), authorized by section 401(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113) 
and modified by section 104 of the Energy and Water Development 
Appropriation Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–111) and section 309 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), 
is further modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the 
project at a total cost of $1,800,000,000 and to clarify that the 
Santa Ana River Interceptor Line is an element of the project. 
SEC. 3034. SANTA BARBARA STREAMS, LOWER MISSION CREEK, CALI-
FORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Santa Barbara streams, 
Lower Mission Creek, California, authorized by section 101(b)(8) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2577), 
is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at 
a total cost of $30,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
$15,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,000,000. 
SEC. 3035. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for navigation, Santa Cruz Harbor, California, 
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 
(72 Stat. 300) and modified by section 809 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) and section 526 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 346), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary— 
(1) to renegotiate the memorandum of agreement with the 
non-Federal interest to increase the annual payment to reflect 
the updated cost of operation and maintenance that is the 
Federal and non-Federal share as provided by law based on 
the project purpose; and 
(2) to revise the memorandum of agreement to include 
terms that revise such payments for inflation. 
Contracts. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01112
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1115 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3036. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood control, Santa Ana Mainstem, authorized 
by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4113) and modified by section 104 of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–11), 
section 102(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
(104 Stat. 4611), and section 311 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), is modified to direct the Sec-
retary— 
(1) to include ecosystem restoration benefits in the calcula-
tion of benefits for the Seven Oaks Dam, California, portion 
of the project; and 
(2) to conduct a study of water conservation and water 
quality at the Seven Oaks Dam. 
SEC. 3037. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Upper 
Guadalupe River, California, authorized by section 101(a)(9) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modi-
fied to authorize the Secretary to construct the project generally 
in accordance with the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Damage 
Reduction, San Jose, California, Limited Reevaluation Report, dated 
March 2004, at a total cost of $256,000,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $136,700,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $119,300,000. 
SEC. 3038. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Walnut Creek 
Channel, California, being carried out under section 206 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is 
modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national eco-
system restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest 
in the project. 
SEC. 3039. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, being carried out 
under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to 
credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non- 
Federal interest for the project before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3040. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wildcat/San 
Pablo Creek Phase II, California, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01113
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1116 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project and 
to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restora-
tion benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project. 
SEC. 3041. YUBA RIVER BASIN PROJECT, CALIFORNIA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Yuba River Basin, 
California, authorized by section 101(a)(10) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modified— 
(1) to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at 
a total cost of $107,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of 
$70,000,000 
and 
an 
estimated 
non-Federal 
cost 
of 
$37,700,000; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project. 
SEC. 3042. SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO. 
Section 808 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(100 Stat. 4168) is amended by striking ‘‘agriculture,’’ and inserting 
‘‘agriculture, environmental restoration,’’. 
SEC. 3043. INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESA-
PEAKE BAY, DELAWARE AND MARYLAND. 
The project for navigation, Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware 
River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, authorized by 
the first section of the Rivers and Harbors Act of August 30, 
1935 (49 Stat. 1030), and section 101 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1249), is modified to add recreation as a 
project purpose. 
SEC. 3044. ST. GEORGE’S BRIDGE, DELAWARE. 
Section 102(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1990 (104 Stat. 4612) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘The Secretary shall assume ownership responsibility for the 
replacement bridge not later than the date on which the construc-
tion of the bridge is completed and the contractors are released 
of their responsibility by the State. In addition, the Secretary may 
not carry out any action to close or remove the St. George’s Bridge, 
Delaware, without specific congressional authorization.’’. 
SEC. 3045. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. 
(a) SHORELINE.—The project for shoreline protection, Brevard 
County, Florida, authorized by section 101(b)(7) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to include the mid-reach as an element 
of the project from the Florida department of environmental protec-
tion monuments 75.4 to 118.3, a distance of approximately 7.6 
miles. The restoration work shall only be undertaken upon a deter-
mination by the Secretary, following completion of the general 
reevaluation report authorized by section 418 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2637), that the 
shoreline protection is feasible. 
Reports. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01114
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1117 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) CREDIT.—Section 310 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301) is amended by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(d) CREDIT.—After completion of the study, the Secretary may 
credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project for shore protection the cost of nourishment 
and renourishment associated with the project for shore protection 
incurred by the non-Federal interest to respond to damages to 
Brevard County beaches that are the result of a Federal navigation 
project, as determined in the final report for the study.’’. 
SEC. 3046. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO INLET, FLORIDA. 
The project for shore protection, Broward County and Hillsboro 
Inlet, Florida, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1090), and modified by section 311 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301), is modi-
fied to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of mitigation 
construction and derelict erosion control structure removal carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3047. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA. 
In carrying out the project for navigation, Canaveral Harbor, 
Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1962 (76 Stat. 1174), the Secretary shall construct a sediment 
trap if the Secretary determines construction of the sediment trap 
is feasible. 
SEC. 3048. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA. 
The project for shore protection, Gasparilla and Estero Island 
segments, Lee County, Florida, authorized by section 201 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073), by Senate Resolution 
dated December 17, 1970, and by House Resolution dated December 
15, 1970, and modified by section 309 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2602), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by 
the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3049. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for shore protection, Lido Key 
Beach, Sarasota, Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1819), deauthorized under section 
1001(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
579a(b)), and reauthorized by section 364(2)(A) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 313), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to construct the project substantially in 
accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $15,190,000, with an estimated 
Federal cost of $9,320,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$5,870,000, and at an estimated total cost of $65,000,000 for periodic 
nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01115
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1118 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Federal cost of $30,550,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
of $34,450,000. 
(b) CONSTRUCTION
OF SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECTS
BY 
NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—The Secretary shall enter into a partner-
ship agreement with the non-Federal interest in accordance with 
section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 
U.S.C. 426i–1) for the modified project. 
SEC. 3050. PEANUT ISLAND, FLORIDA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Peanut Island, Palm Beach County, Florida, being carried out under 
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2309a) shall be $9,750,000. 
SEC. 3051. PORT SUTTON, FLORIDA. 
The project for navigation, Port Sutton, Florida, authorized 
by section 101(b)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2577), is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
carry out the project at a total cost of $12,900,000. 
SEC. 3052. TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FLORIDA. 
The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, 
Florida, authorized by section 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276) is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of planning, design, and 
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the 
project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3053. TAMPA HARBOR CUT B, FLORIDA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, 
Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
to construct passing lanes in an area approximately 3.5 miles long 
and centered on Tampa Harbor Cut B if the Secretary determines 
that such improvements are necessary for navigation safety. 
(b) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT.—The non-Federal share 
of the cost of the general reevaluation report for Tampa Harbor, 
Florida, being conducted on June 1, 2005, shall be the same percent-
age as the non-Federal share of the cost of construction of the 
project. 
(c) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter into a new partner-
ship agreement with the non-Federal interest to reflect the cost 
sharing required by subsection (b). 
SEC. 3054. ALLATOONA LAKE, GEORGIA. 
(a) LAND EXCHANGE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may exchange land above 
863 feet in elevation at Allatoona Lake, Georgia, identified 
in the Real Estate Design Memorandum prepared by the Mobile 
district engineer, April 5, 1996, and approved October 8, 1996, 
for land on the north side of Allatoona Lake that is required 
for wildlife management and protection of the water quality 
and overall environment of Allatoona Lake. 
Contracts. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01116
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1119 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) TERMS
AND
CONDITIONS.—The basis for all land 
exchanges under this subsection shall be a fair market 
appraisal to ensure that land exchanged is of equal value. 
(b) DISPOSAL
AND ACQUISITION
OF LAND, ALLATOONA LAKE, 
GEORGIA.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may— 
(A) sell land above 863 feet in elevation at Allatoona 
Lake, Georgia, identified in the memorandum referred to 
in subsection (a)(1); and 
(B) use the proceeds of the sale, without further appro-
priation, to pay costs associated with the purchase of land 
required for wildlife management and protection of the 
water quality and overall environment of Allatoona Lake. 
(2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— 
(A) WILLING SELLERS.—Land acquired under this sub-
section shall be by negotiated purchase from willing sellers 
only. 
(B) BASIS.—The basis for all transactions under this 
subsection shall be a fair market value appraisal acceptable 
to the Secretary. 
(C) SHARING OF COSTS.—Each purchaser of land under 
this subsection shall share in the associated costs of the 
purchase, including surveys and associated fees in accord-
ance with the memorandum referred to in subsection (a)(1). 
(D) OTHER CONDITIONS.—The Secretary may impose 
on the sale and purchase of land under this subsection 
such other conditions as the Secretary determines to be 
appropriate. 
(c) REPEAL.—Section 325 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4849) is repealed. 
SEC. 3055. LATHAM RIVER, GLYNN COUNTY, GEORGIA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
Latham River, Glynn County, Georgia, being carried out under 
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2309a) shall be $6,175,000. 
SEC. 3056. DWORSHAK RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS, IDAHO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out additional gen-
eral construction measures to allow for operation at lower pool 
levels to satisfy the recreation mission at Dworshak Dam, Idaho. 
(b) IMPROVEMENTS.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Sec-
retary shall provide for appropriate improvements to— 
(1) facilities that are operated by the Corps of Engineers; 
and 
(2) facilities that, as of the date of enactment of this Act, 
are leased, permitted, or licensed for use by others. 
(c) COST SHARING.—The Secretary shall carry out this section 
through a cost-sharing program with Idaho State parks and recre-
ation department at a total estimated project cost of $5,300,000. 
Notwithstanding section 103 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2313), the Federal share of such cost shall 
be 75 percent. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01117
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1120 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3057. LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, IDAHO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Gooding, Idaho, 
constructed under the emergency conservation work program estab-
lished under the Act of March 31, 1933 (16 U.S.C. 585 et seq.), 
is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to rehabilitate the Gooding 
Channel project for the purposes of flood control and ecosystem 
restoration if the Secretary determines that such rehabilitation 
is not required as a result of improper operation and mainte-
nance of the project by the non-Federal interest and that the 
rehabilitation and ecosystem restoration is feasible; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to plan, design, and construct 
the project at a total cost of $9,000,000. 
(b) COST SHARING.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Costs for reconstruction of a project under 
this section shall be shared by the Secretary and the non- 
Federal interest in the same percentages as the costs of 
construction of the original project were shared. 
(2) OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND
REPAIR
COSTS.—The 
costs of operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of 
a project carried out under this section shall be a non-Federal 
responsibility. 
(c) ECONOMIC
JUSTIFICATION.—Reconstruction efforts and 
activities carried out under this section shall not require economic 
justification. 
SEC. 3058. BEARDSTOWN COMMUNITY BOAT HARBOR, BEARDSTOWN, 
ILLINOIS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Muscooten Bay, 
Illinois River, Beardstown Community Boat Harbor, Beardstown, 
Illinois, constructed under section 107 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified— 
(1) to include the channel between the harbor and the 
Illinois River; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to enter into a partnership 
agreement with the city of Beardstown to replace the local 
cooperation agreement dated August 18, 1983, with the 
Beardstown Community Park District. 
(b) TERMS
OF
PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT.—The partnership 
agreement referred to in subsection (a) shall include the same 
rights and responsibilities as the local cooperation agreement dated 
August 18, 1983, changing only the identity of the non-Federal 
sponsor. 
(c) MAINTENANCE.—Following execution of the partnership 
agreement referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary may carry 
out maintenance of the project referred to in subsection (a) on 
an annual basis. 
SEC. 3059. CACHE RIVER LEVEE, ILLINOIS. 
The Cache River Levee constructed for flood control at the 
Cache River, Illinois, and authorized by the Act of June 28, 1938 
(52 Stat. 1217), is modified to add environmental restoration as 
a project purpose. 
SEC. 3060. CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS. 
The Federal navigation channel for the North Branch Channel 
portion of the Chicago River authorized by section 22 of the Act 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01118
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1121 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1156), extending from 100 feet down-
stream of the Halsted Street Bridge to 100 feet upstream of the 
Division Street Bridge, Chicago, Illinois, shall be no wider than 
66 feet. 
SEC. 3061. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIERS 
PROJECT, ILLINOIS. 
(a) TREATMENT
AS SINGLE PROJECT.—The Chicago Sanitary 
and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier Project (in this section referred 
to as ‘‘Barrier I’’), as in existence on the date of enactment of 
this Act and constructed as a demonstration project under section 
1202(i)(3) of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and 
Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4722(i)(3)), and the project relating 
to the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, author-
ized by section 345 of the District of Columbia Appropriations 
Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 1352) (in this section 
referred to as ‘‘Barrier II’’) shall be considered to constitute a 
single project. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary, at Federal expense, 
shall— 
(A) upgrade and make permanent Barrier I; 
(B) construct Barrier II, notwithstanding the project 
cooperation agreement with the State of Illinois dated June 
14, 2005; 
(C) operate and maintain Barrier I and Barrier II 
as a system to optimize effectiveness; 
(D) conduct, in consultation with appropriate Federal, 
State, local, and nongovernmental entities, a study of a 
range of options and technologies for reducing impacts 
of hazards that may reduce the efficacy of the Barriers; 
and 
(E) provide to each State a credit in an amount equal 
to the amount of funds contributed by the State toward 
Barrier II. 
(2) USE OF CREDIT.—A State may apply a credit provided 
to the State under paragraph (1)(E) to any cost sharing respon-
sibility for an existing or future Federal project carried out 
by the Secretary in the State. 
(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 345 of the District of 
Columbia Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 
1352) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 345. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, 
ILLINOIS. 
‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 
be necessary to carry out the Barrier II element of the project 
for the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, Illinois, 
initiated pursuant to section 1135 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2294 note; 100 Stat. 4251).’’. 
(d) FEASIBILITY STUDY.—The Secretary, in consultation with 
appropriate Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental entities, 
shall conduct, at Federal expense, a feasibility study of the range 
of options and technologies available to prevent the spread of 
aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi 
River Basins through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and 
other aquatic pathways. 
Appropriation 
authorization. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01119
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1122 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3062. EMIQUON, ILLINOIS. 
(a) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum amount of Federal 
funds that may be expended for the project for aquatic ecosystem 
restoration, Emiquon, Illinois, being carried out under section 206 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), 
shall be $7,500,000. 
(b) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall affect the eligi-
bility of the project for emergency repair assistance under section 
5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain 
public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
purposes’’, approved August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
SEC. 3063. LASALLE, ILLINOIS. 
In carrying out section 312 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639–4640), the Secretary shall give priority 
to work in the vicinity of LaSalle, Illinois, on the Illinois and 
Michigan Canal. 
SEC. 3064. SPUNKY BOTTOMS, ILLINOIS. 
(a) PROJECT PURPOSE.—The project for flood control, Spunky 
Bottoms, Illinois, authorized by section 5 of the Flood Control 
Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1583), is modified to add environ-
mental restoration as a project purpose. 
(b) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum amount of Federal 
funds that may be expended for the project for improvement of 
the quality of the environment, Spunky Bottoms, Illinois, being 
carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), shall be $7,500,000. 
(c) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall affect the eligi-
bility of the project for emergency repair assistance under section 
5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain 
public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
purposes’’, approved August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
(d) POST CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT.—Of 
the Federal funds expended under subsection (b), not less than 
$500,000 shall remain available for a period of 5 years after the 
date of completion of construction of the modifications for use in 
carrying out post construction monitoring and adaptive manage-
ment. 
SEC. 3065. CEDAR LAKE, INDIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, 
and construct an aquatic ecosystem restoration project at Cedar 
Lake, Indiana. 
(b) COMPLETE FEASIBILITY REPORT.—In planning the project 
authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall expedite completion 
of the feasibility report for the project for aquatic ecosystem restora-
tion and protection, Cedar Lake, Indiana, initiated pursuant to 
section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act 1996 (33 
U.S.C. 2330). 
(c) AUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated 
$11,050,000 to carry out the activities authorized by this sec-
tion. 
(2) OTHER.—The Secretary is authorized to use funds pre-
viously appropriated for the project for aquatic ecosystem res-
toration and protection, Cedar Lake, Indiana, under section 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01120
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1123 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330) to carry out the activities authorized by this section. 
SEC. 3066. KOONTZ LAKE, INDIANA. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Koontz Lake, 
Indiana, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330) and modified by section 
520 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 
2655), is modified to direct the Secretary to seek to reduce the 
cost of the project by using innovative technologies and cost reduc-
tion measures determined from a review of non-Federal lake 
dredging projects in the vicinity of Koontz Lake. 
SEC. 3067. 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 control, and for 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), is modified— 
(1) to authorize the Secretary to carry out the ecosystem 
restoration, recreation, and flood damage reduction components 
described in the Central Indianapolis Waterfront Concept Plan, 
dated February 1994, and revised by the Master Plan Revision 
Central Indianapolis Waterfront, dated April 2004, at a total 
cost of $28,545,000; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3068. DES MOINES RIVER AND GREENBELT, IOWA. 
The project for the Des Moines Recreational River and Green-
belt, Iowa, authorized by Public Law 99–88 and modified by section 
604 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
4153), is modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out ecosystem 
restoration, recreation, and flood damage reduction components of 
the project, at a Federal cost of $10,000,000. 
SEC. 3069. PERRY CREEK, IOWA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—On making a determination described in sub-
section (b), the Secretary shall increase the Federal contribution 
by up to $4,000,000 for the project for flood control, Perry Creek, 
Iowa, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4116) and modified by section 151 
of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2004 
(117 Stat. 1844). 
(b) DETERMINATION.—A determination referred to in subsection 
(a) is a determination that a modification to the project described 
in subsection (a) is necessary for the Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency to certify that the project provides flood damage 
reduction benefits to at least a 100-year level of flood protection. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $4,000,000. 
Certification. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01121
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1124 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3070. RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA. 
(a) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.—The Secretary shall provide, 
in accordance with the recommendations in the Rathbun Lake 
Reallocation Report approved by the Chief of Engineers on July 
22, 1985, the Rathbun Regional Water Association with the right 
of first refusal to contract for or purchase any increment of the 
remaining allocation of 8,320 acre-feet of water supply storage 
in Rathbun Lake, Iowa. 
(b) PAYMENT OF COST.—The Rathbun Regional Water Associa-
tion shall pay the cost of any water supply storage allocation 
provided under subsection (a). 
SEC. 3071. HICKMAN BLUFF STABILIZATION, KENTUCKY. 
The project for Hickman Bluff, Kentucky, authorized by chapter 
II of title II of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and 
Rescissions for the Department of Defense to Preserve and Enhance 
Military Readiness Act of 1995 (109 Stat. 85), is modified to 
authorize the Secretary to repair and restore the project, at Federal 
expense, with no further economic studies or analyses, at a total 
cost of not more than $250,000. 
SEC. 3072. MCALPINE LOCK AND DAM, KENTUCKY AND INDIANA. 
Section 101(a)(10) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1990 (104 Stat. 4606) is amended by striking ‘‘$219,600,000’’ 
each place it appears and inserting ‘‘$430,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3073. 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 Kentucky, 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 for the 
city of Prestonsburg. 
SEC. 3074. AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, LOUISIANA, EAST BATON 
ROUGE PARISH WATERSHED. 
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Amite 
River and Tributaries, Louisiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Water-
shed, authorized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 277) and modified by section 
116 of division D of Public Law 108–7 (117 Stat. 140), is further 
modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to carry out the project with 
the cost sharing for the project determined in accordance with 
section 103(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2213(a)), as in effect on October 11, 1996; 
(2) to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at 
a total cost of $187,000,000; and 
(3) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01122
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1125 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3075. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LOUISIANA. 
(a) ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LAND.—The public access fea-
ture of the project for flood control, Atchafalaya Basin Floodway 
System, Louisiana, authorized by section 601(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to acquire from willing sellers the fee 
interest (exclusive of oil, gas, and minerals) of an additional 20,000 
acres of land in the Lower Atchafalaya Basin Floodway for such 
feature. 
(b) MODIFICATION.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), effective 
November 17, 1986, the $32,000,000 limitation on the maximum 
Federal expenditure for the first costs of the public access 
feature referred to in subsection (a) shall not apply. 
(2) COST.—The modification under paragraph (1) shall not 
increase the total authorized cost of the project referred to 
in subsection (a). 
(c) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—Section 315(a)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2603) is amended 
by inserting before the period at the end the following: ‘‘and shall 
consider Eagle Point Park, Jeanerette, Louisiana, and the town 
of Melville, Louisiana, as site alternatives for such recreation fea-
tures’’. 
SEC. 3076. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, REGIONAL VIS-
ITOR CENTER, LOUISIANA. 
(a) PROJECT FOR FLOOD CONTROL.—Notwithstanding paragraph 
(3) of the report of the Chief of Engineers dated February 28, 
1983 (relating to recreational development in the Lower Atchafalaya 
Basin Floodway), the Secretary shall carry out the project for flood 
control, Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana, authorized 
by chapter IV of title I of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
1985 (99 Stat. 313) and section 601(a) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142). 
(b) VISITORS CENTER.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
State of Louisiana, shall study, design, and construct a type 
A regional visitors center in the vicinity of Morgan City, Lou-
isiana. 
(2) COST SHARING.— 
(A) COST OF TYPE B VISITORS CENTER.—The cost of 
construction of the visitors center up to the cost of construc-
tion of a type B visitors center shall be shared in accordance 
with the recreation cost-sharing requirement of section 
103(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2213(c)). 
(B) COST OF UPGRADING.—The non-Federal share of 
the cost of upgrading the visitors center from a type B 
to type A regional visitors center shall be 100 percent. 
(C) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The cost of oper-
ation and maintenance of the visitors center shall be a 
Federal responsibility. 
(3) DONATIONS.—In carrying out the project under this 
subsection, the Mississippi River Commission may accept the 
donation of cash or other funds, land, materials, and services 
from any non-Federal government entity or nonprofit corpora-
tion, as the Commission determines to be appropriate. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01123
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1126 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3077. ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF, AND 
BLACK, LOUISIANA. 
The project for navigation, Atchafalaya River and Bayous 
Chene, Boeuf, and Black, Louisiana, authorized by section 101 
of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to deepen up to a 1000-foot section 
of the area on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway west of the Bayou 
Boeuf Lock and east of the intersection of the Atchafalaya River, 
at a cost not to exceed $200,000, to provide for ingress and egress 
to the port of Morgan City at a depth not to exceed 20 feet. 
SEC. 3078. BAYOU PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANA. 
The project for the improvement of the quality of the environ-
ment, Bayou Plaquemine, Louisiana, being carried out under section 
1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3079. CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LOUISIANA. 
The project for the Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana, author-
ized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 
481), is modified to authorize the Secretary to provide $3,000,000 
for each fiscal year, in a total amount of $15,000,000, for such 
rock bank protection of the Calcasieu River from mile 5 to mile 
16 as the Secretary determines to be advisable to reduce mainte-
nance dredging needs and facilitate protection of disposal areas 
for the Calcasieu River and Pass, Louisiana, if the Secretary deter-
mines that the rock bank protection is feasible. 
SEC. 3080. RED RIVER (J. BENNETT JOHNSTON) WATERWAY, LOU-
ISIANA. 
The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Red River 
Waterway, 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 Resources Development Act of 1988 
(102 Stat. 4016), section 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. 
2604), is modified— 
(1) to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project 
at a total cost of $33,912,000; 
(2) to authorize the purchase and reforestation of lands 
that have been cleared or converted to agricultural uses (in 
addition to the purchase of bottomland hardwood); and 
(3) to incorporate wildlife and forestry management prac-
tices to improve species diversity on mitigation land that meets 
habitat goals and objectives of the United States and the State 
of Louisiana. 
SEC. 3081. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOUISIANA. 
The Mississippi Delta Region project, Louisiana, authorized 
as part of the project for hurricane-flood protection on Lake Pont-
chartrain, Louisiana, by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 
1965 (79 Stat. 1077) and modified by section 365 of the Water 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01124
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1127 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3739), is modified 
to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the costs of relocating 
oyster beds in the Davis Pond project area. 
SEC. 3082. MISSISSIPPI RIVER-GULF OUTLET RELOCATION ASSIST-
ANCE, LOUISIANA. 
(a) PORT FACILITIES RELOCATION.— 
(1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is author-
ized to be appropriated to the Assistant Secretary for Economic 
Development (referred to in this section as the ‘‘Assistant Sec-
retary’’) $75,000,000, to remain available until expended, to 
support the relocation of Port of New Orleans deep draft facili-
ties from the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet (referred to in this 
section as the ‘‘Outlet’’), the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and 
the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal to the Mississippi River. 
(2) ADMINISTRATION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Amounts appropriated pursuant to 
paragraph (1) shall be administered by the Assistant Sec-
retary pursuant to sections 209(c)(2) and 703 of the Public 
Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 
3149(c)(2), 3233). 
(B) REQUIREMENT.—The Assistant Secretary shall 
make amounts appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1) 
available to the Port of New Orleans to relocate to the 
Mississippi River within the State of Louisiana the port- 
owned facilities that are occupied by businesses in the 
vicinity that may be impacted due to the treatment of 
the Outlet under title VII of this Act. 
(b) REVOLVING LOAN FUND GRANTS.—There is authorized to 
be appropriated to the Assistant Secretary $85,000,000, to remain 
available until expended, to provide assistance pursuant to sections 
209(c)(2) and 703 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3149(c)(2), 3233) to one or more eligible 
recipients under such Act to establish revolving loan funds to make 
loans for terms up to 20 years at or below market interest rates 
(including interest-free loans) to private businesses within the Port 
of New Orleans that may need to relocate to the Mississippi River 
within the State of Louisiana due to the treatment of the Outlet 
under title VII of this Act. 
(c) REQUIREMENTS.—In selecting one or more recipients under 
subsection (b), the Assistant Secretary shall ensure that each 
recipient has established procedures to target lending to businesses 
that will be directly and substantially impacted by the treatment 
of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet under title VII of this Act. 
(d) COORDINATION WITH SECRETARY.—The Assistant Secretary 
shall ensure that the programs described in subsections (a) and 
(b) are coordinated with the Secretary to ensure that facilities 
are relocated in a manner that is consistent with the analysis 
and design of comprehensive hurricane protection authorized by 
title I of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 
2006 (119 Stat. 2247). 
(e) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—The Assistant Secretary may 
use up to 2 percent of the amounts made available under sub-
sections (a) and (b) for administrative expenses. 
Appropriation 
authorization. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01125
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1128 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3083. VIOLET, LOUISIANA. 
(a) VIOLET DIVERSION PROJECT.—The Secretary shall design 
and implement a project for a diversion of freshwater at or near 
Violet, Louisiana, for the purposes of reducing salinity in the 
western Mississippi Sound, enhancing oyster production, and pro-
moting the sustainability of coastal wetlands. 
(b) SALINITY LEVELS.—The project shall be designed to meet, 
or maximize the ability to meet, the salinity levels identified in 
the feasibility study of the Corps of Engineers entitled ‘‘Mississippi 
and Louisiana Estuarine Areas: Freshwater Diversion to Lake Pont-
chartrain Basin and Mississippi Sound’’ and dated 1984. 
(c) ADDITIONAL MEASURES.— 
(1) RECOMMENDATIONS.—If the Secretary determines that 
the diversion of freshwater at or near Violet, Louisiana, will 
not restore salinity levels to meet the requirements of sub-
section (b), the Secretary shall recommend additional measures 
for freshwater diversions sufficient to meet those levels. 
(2) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary shall implement 
measures included in the recommendations developed under 
paragraph (1) beginning 60 days after the date on which a 
report containing the recommendations is provided to the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives. 
(d) NON-FEDERAL FINANCING REQUIREMENTS.— 
(1) ESTIMATES.—Before October 1 of each fiscal year, the 
Secretary shall notify the States of Louisiana and Mississippi 
of each State’s respective estimated costs for that fiscal year 
for the activities authorized under this section. 
(2) ESCROW.—The States of Louisiana and Mississippi shall 
provide the funds described in paragraph (1) by making a 
deposit into an escrow account, or such other account, of the 
Treasury as the Secretary determines to be acceptable within 
30 days after the date of receipt of the notification from the 
Secretary under paragraph (1). 
(3) DEPOSITS BY LOUISIANA.— 
(A) USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS.—The State of Louisiana 
may use funds available to the State under the coastal 
impact assistance program authorized under section 31 
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a) 
in meeting its cost-sharing responsibilities under this sec-
tion. 
(B) FAILURE TO PROVIDE FUNDS.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—If the State of Louisiana does 
not provide the funds under paragraph (2), the Sec-
retary of the Interior, using funds to be disbursed 
to the State under the program referred to in subpara-
graph (A) or under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security 
Act of 2006 (title I of Division C of Public Law 109– 
432; (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; 120 Stat. 3000)), shall 
deposit such funds as are necessary to meet the 
requirements for the State under paragraph (2). 
(ii) DEADLINE FOR DEPOSIT.—Any deposit required 
under clause (i) shall be made prior to any other 
disbursements made to the State of Louisiana under 
the programs referred to in clause (i). 
Deadline. 
Notification. 
Mississippi. 
Effective date. 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01126
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1129 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(C) EXCEPTION.—The State of Louisiana shall not be 
required to make a deposit of its share in any fiscal year 
in which the State of Mississippi does not make its deposit 
following a notification under paragraph (1) or the State 
of Mississippi notifies the Secretary that it does not intend 
to make a deposit in that fiscal year. 
(4) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
for the costs of design work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership agree-
ment for the project. 
(5) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of the 
project authorized by subsection (a) shall be 75 percent. 
(e) SCHEDULE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of appropria-
tions, the Secretary shall complete the design of the project 
not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this 
Act and shall complete the construction of the project by not 
later than September 30, 2012. 
(2) MISSED DEADLINE.—If the Secretary does not complete 
the design or construction of the project in accordance with 
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall complete the design or 
construction as expeditiously as possible. 
SEC. 3084. 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 maintenance’’ and 
inserting ‘‘operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, repair, 
and replacement’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘Algiers Channel’’ and inserting ‘‘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. 3085. CAMP ELLIS, SACO, MAINE. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project being carried out under section 111 of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i) for the mitigation of 
shore damages attributable to the project for navigation, Camp 
Ellis, Saco, Maine, shall be $26,900,000. 
SEC. 3086. CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND. 
Section 580(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 375) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$25,750,000’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘$9,750,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$16,738,000’’; 
and 
(3) by striking ‘‘$5,250,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$9,012,000’’. 
SEC. 3087. POPLAR ISLAND, MARYLAND. 
The project for navigation and environmental restoration 
through the beneficial use of dredged material, Poplar Island, Mary-
land, authorized by section 537 of the Water Resources Development 
Deadlines. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01127
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1130 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3776) and modified by section 318 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2604), is 
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the expansion 
of the project in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers 
dated March 31, 2006, at an additional total cost of $260,000,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $195,000,000 and an estimated 
non-Federal cost of $65,000,000. 
SEC. 3088. DETROIT RIVER SHORELINE, DETROIT, MICHIGAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for emergency streambank and 
shoreline protection, Detroit River Shoreline, 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 maximum amount 
of Federal funds that may be expended for the project shall be 
$3,000,000. 
SEC. 3089. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHIGAN. 
Section 426 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 326) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘SEC. 426. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHIGAN. 
‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
‘‘(1) MANAGEMENT
PLAN.—The term ‘management plan’ 
means the management plan for the St. Clair River and Lake 
St. Clair, Michigan, that is in effect as of the date of enactment 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. 
‘‘(2) PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘Partnership’ means the part-
nership established by the Secretary under subsection (b)(1). 
‘‘(b) PARTNERSHIP.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish and lead 
a partnership of appropriate Federal agencies (including the 
Environmental Protection Agency) and the State of Michigan 
(including political subdivisions of the State)— 
‘‘(A) to promote cooperation among the Federal Govern-
ment, State and local governments, and other involved 
parties in the management of the St. Clair River and 
Lake St. Clair watersheds; and 
‘‘(B) to develop and implement projects consistent with 
the management plan. 
‘‘(2) COORDINATION WITH ACTIONS UNDER OTHER LAW.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Actions taken under this section 
by the Partnership shall be coordinated with actions to 
restore and conserve the St. Clair River and Lake St. 
Clair and watersheds taken under other provisions of Fed-
eral and State law. 
‘‘(B) NO EFFECT ON OTHER LAW.—Nothing in this sec-
tion alters, modifies, or affects any other provision of Fed-
eral or State law. 
‘‘(c) IMPLEMENTATION OF ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR 
MANAGEMENT PLAN.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— 
‘‘(A) develop a St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair stra-
tegic implementation plan in accordance with the manage-
ment plan; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01128
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1131 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(B) provide technical, planning, and engineering 
assistance to non-Federal interests for developing and 
implementing activities consistent with the management 
plan; 
‘‘(C) plan, design, and implement projects consistent 
with the management plan; and 
‘‘(D) provide, in coordination with the Administrator 
of the Environmental Protection Agency, financial and tech-
nical assistance, including grants, to the State of Michigan 
(including political subdivisions of the State) and interested 
nonprofit entities for the Federal share of the cost of plan-
ning, design, and implementation of projects to restore, 
conserve, manage, and sustain the St. Clair River, Lake 
St. Clair, and associated watersheds. 
‘‘(2) SPECIFIC MEASURES.—Financial and technical assist-
ance provided under subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph 
(1) may be used in support of non-Federal activities consistent 
with the management plan. 
‘‘(d) SUPPLEMENTS
TO MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND STRATEGIC 
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.—In consultation with the Partnership and 
after providing an opportunity for public review and comment, 
the Secretary shall develop information to supplement— 
‘‘(1) the management plan; and 
‘‘(2) the strategic implementation plan developed under 
subsection (c)(1)(A). 
‘‘(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000.’’. 
SEC. 3090. ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICHIGAN. 
The Secretary shall expedite development of the dredged mate-
rial management plan for the project for navigation, St. Joseph 
Harbor, Michigan, authorized by section 101 of the River and 
Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 299). 
SEC. 3091. SAULT SAINTE MARIE, MICHIGAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The text of section 1149 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4254) is amended 
to read as follows: 
‘‘The Secretary shall construct, at Federal expense, a second 
lock, of a width not less than 110 feet and a length not less 
than 1,200 feet, adjacent to the existing lock at Sault Sainte Marie, 
Michigan, generally in accordance with the report of the Board 
of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, dated May 19, 1986, and 
the limited reevaluation report dated February 2004 at a total 
cost of $341,714,000.’’. 
(b) CONFORMING
REPEALS.—The following provisions are 
repealed: 
(1) Section 107(a)(8) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4620). 
(2) Section 330 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3717). 
(3) Section 330 of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1999 (113 Stat. 305). 
SEC. 3092. ADA, MINNESOTA. 
In carrying out the project for flood damage reduction, Wild 
Rice River, Ada, Minnesota, under section 205 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), the Secretary shall allow the non- 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01129
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1132 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Federal interest to participate in the financing of the project in 
accordance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) if the detailed project report evaluation 
indicates that applying such section is necessary to implement 
the project. 
SEC. 3093. DULUTH HARBOR, MCQUADE ROAD, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Duluth 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 modified to direct the Secretary to provide 
public access and recreational facilities as generally described in 
the Detailed Project Report and Environmental Assessment, 
McQuade Road Harbor of Refuge, Duluth, Minnesota, dated August 
1999. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for 
the costs of design work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
for the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project. 
(c) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The maximum amount 
of Federal funds that may be expended for the project shall be 
$9,000,000. 
SEC. 3094. GRAND MARAIS, MINNESOTA. 
The project for navigation, Grand Marais, Minnesota, carried 
out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 
U.S.C. 577) is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accord-
ance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of design work carried out for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3095. GRAND PORTAGE HARBOR, MINNESOTA. 
The Secretary shall provide credit in accordance with section 
221 of the Flood Control Act (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the navigation project for Grand 
Portage Harbor, Minnesota, carried out under section 107 of the 
River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), for the costs of 
design work carried out for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3096. GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is directed to implement the 
locally preferred plan for flood damage reduction, Granite Falls, 
Minnesota, 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. 
In carrying out the project, the Secretary shall utilize, to the extent 
practicable, the existing detailed project report dated 2002 for the 
project prepared under the authority of section 205 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). 
(b) PROJECT FINANCING.—In evaluating and implementing the 
project under this section, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal 
interests to participate in the financing of the project in accordance 
with section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (100 Stat. 4184) if the detailed project report evaluation 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01130
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1133 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
indicates that applying such section is necessary to implement 
the project. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the project the cost of design 
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of execution of a partnership agreement 
for 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. 3097. KNIFE RIVER HARBOR, MINNESOTA. 
The project for navigation, Harbor at Knife River, Minnesota, 
authorized by section 2 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 
2, 1945 (59 Stat. 19), is modified to direct the Secretary to develop 
a final design and prepare plans and specifications to correct the 
harbor entrance and mooring conditions at the project. 
SEC. 3098. RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA. 
The project for flood control, Red Lake River, Crookston, Min-
nesota, authorized by section 101(a)(23) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 278), is modified to include 
flood protection for the adjacent and interconnected areas generally 
known as the Sampson and Chase/Loring neighborhoods, in accord-
ance with the feasibility report supplement for local flood protection, 
Crookston, Minnesota, 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. 3099. 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 facilities as a Federal responsibility. 
SEC. 3100. TACONITE HARBOR, MINNESOTA. 
The project for navigation, Taconite Harbor, Minnesota, carried 
out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 
U.S.C. 577), is modified to include operation and maintenance of 
the general navigation facilities as a Federal responsibility. 
SEC. 3101. TWO HARBORS, MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the requirements of section 
107(a) of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577(a)), 
the project for navigation, Two Harbors, Minnesota, being carried 
out under such authority, is justified on the basis of navigation 
safety. 
(b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURES.—The maximum amount 
of Federal funds that may be expended for the project shall be 
$7,000,000. 
SEC. 3102. DEER ISLAND, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. 
The project for ecosystem restoration, Deer Island, Harrison 
County, Mississippi, being carried out under section 204 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326), is 
modified to authorize the non-Federal interest to provide, in accord-
ance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01131
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1134 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
1962d–5b), any portion of the non-Federal share of the cost of 
the project in the form of in-kind services and materials. 
SEC. 3103. JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. 
(a) MODIFICATION.—Section 331 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 305) is amended by striking 
‘‘$5,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$9,000,000’’. 
(b) APPLICABILITY OF CREDIT.—The credit provided by section 
331 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
305) (as amended by subsection (a) of this section) shall apply 
to costs incurred by the Jackson County Board of Supervisors 
during the period beginning on February 8, 1994, and ending on 
the date of enactment of this Act for projects authorized by section 
219(c)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 
Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 1494). 
SEC. 3104. PEARL RIVER BASIN, MISSISSIPPI. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage reduction, Pearl 
River Basin, including Shoccoe, Mississippi, authorized by section 
401(e)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
Stat. 4132), is modified to authorize the Secretary, subject to sub-
section (c), to construct the project generally in accordance with 
the plan described in the ‘‘Pearl River Watershed, Mississippi, 
Feasibility Study Main Report, Preliminary Draft’’, dated February 
2007, at a total cost of $205,800,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $133,770,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$72,030,000. 
(b) COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES.—Before initiating construc-
tion of the project, the Secretary shall compare the level of flood 
damage reduction provided by the plan that maximizes national 
economic development benefits of the project and the locally pre-
ferred plan, referred to as the LeFleur Lakes plan, to that portion 
of Jackson, Mississippi and vicinity, located below the Ross Barnett 
Reservoir Dam. 
(c) IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary determines under sub-
section (b) that the locally preferred plan provides a level 
of flood damage reduction that is equal to or greater than 
the level of flood damage reduction provided by the national 
economic development plan and that the locally preferred plan 
is environmentally acceptable and technically feasible, the Sec-
retary may construct the project identified as the national 
economic development plan, or the locally preferred plan, or 
some combination thereof. 
(2) CONSTRUCTION BY NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—The non- 
Federal interest may carry out the project under section 211 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
701b–13). 
(d) PROJECT FINANCING.—In evaluating and implementing the 
project under this section, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal 
interests to participate in the financing of the project in accordance 
with section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (100 Stat. 4184) if the detailed project report evaluation 
indicates that applying such section is necessary to implement 
the project. 
(e) NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE.—If the locally preferred plan 
is selected for construction of the project, the Federal share of 
the cost of the project shall be limited to the share as provided 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01132
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1135 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
by law for the elements of the national economic development 
plan. 
SEC. 3105. FESTUS AND CRYSTAL CITY, MISSOURI. 
Section 102(b)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 282) is amended by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$13,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3106. L–15 LEVEE, MISSOURI. 
The portion of the L–15 levee system that is under the jurisdic-
tion of the Consolidated North County Levee District and situated 
along the right descending bank of the Mississippi River from 
the confluence of that river with the Missouri River and running 
upstream approximately 14 miles shall be considered to be a Federal 
levee for purposes of cost sharing under section 5 of the Act of 
August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 
SEC. 3107. MONARCH-CHESTERFIELD, MISSOURI. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Monarch-Chesterfield, 
Missouri, authorized by section 101(b)(18) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified to direct 
the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project the cost of the planning, design, 
and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for the 
project. 
SEC. 3108. RIVER DES PERES, MISSOURI. 
The projects for flood control, River Des Peres, Missouri, author-
ized by section 101(a)(17) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607) and section 102(13) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3668), are each 
modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3109. LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT, MONTANA. 
The Secretary may use funds appropriated to carry out the 
Missouri River recovery and mitigation program to assist the 
Bureau of Reclamation in the design and construction of the Lower 
Yellowstone project of the Bureau, Intake, Montana, for the purpose 
of ecosystem restoration. 
SEC. 3110. YELLOWSTONE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, MONTANA AND 
NORTH DAKOTA. 
(a) DEFINITION OF RESTORATION PROJECT.—In this section, the 
term ‘‘restoration project’’ means a project that will produce, in 
accordance with other Federal programs, projects, and activities, 
substantial ecosystem restoration and related benefits, as deter-
mined by the Secretary. 
(b) PROJECTS.—The Secretary shall carry out, in accordance 
with other Federal programs, projects, and activities, restoration 
projects in the watershed of the Yellowstone River and tributaries 
in Montana, and in North Dakota, to produce immediate and 
substantial ecosystem restoration and recreation benefits. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01133
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1136 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) LOCAL PARTICIPATION.—In carrying out subsection (b), the 
Secretary shall— 
(1) consult with, and consider the activities being carried 
out by— 
(A) other Federal agencies; 
(B) Indian tribes; 
(C) conservation districts; and 
(D) the Yellowstone River Conservation District 
Council; and 
(2) seek the participation of the State of Montana. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000. 
SEC. 3111. ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NEBRASKA. 
The project for flood damage reduction, Antelope Creek, Lincoln, 
Nebraska, authorized by section 101(b)(19) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of design and construction work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the part-
nership agreement for the project; and 
(2) to allow the non-Federal interest for the project to 
use, and to direct the Secretary to accept, funds provided under 
any other Federal program to satisfy, in whole or in part, 
the non-Federal share of the project if the Federal agency 
that provides such funds determines that the funds are author-
ized to be used to carry out the project. 
SEC. 3112. SAND CREEK WATERSHED, WAHOO, NEBRASKA. 
The project for ecosystem restoration and flood damage reduc-
tion, Sand Creek watershed, Wahoo, Nebraska, authorized by sec-
tion 101(b)(20) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(114 Stat. 2578), is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
or reimbursement for the costs of any work performed by the 
non-Federal interest for the project before the approval of the 
project partnership agreement, including work performed by 
the non-Federal interest in connection with the design and 
construction of 7 upstream detention storage structures; 
(2) to require that in-kind work to be credited under para-
graph (1) be subject to audit; and 
(3) to direct the Secretary to accept advance funds from 
the non-Federal interest as needed to maintain the project 
schedule. 
SEC. 3113. WESTERN SARPY AND CLEAR CREEK, NEBRASKA. 
The project for ecosystem restoration and flood damage reduc-
tion, Western Sarpy and Clear Creek, Nebraska, authorized by 
section 101(b)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(114 Stat. 2578), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct 
the project at a total cost of $21,664,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $14,082,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,582,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01134
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1137 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3114. LOWER TRUCKEE RIVER, MCCARRAN RANCH, NEVADA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project being carried out, as of the date of enactment 
of this Act, under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a) for environmental restoration of 
McCarran Ranch, Nevada, shall be $5,775,000. 
SEC. 3115. LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NEW 
JERSEY. 
The project for navigation mitigation, ecosystem restoration, 
shore protection, and hurricane and storm damage reduction, Lower 
Cape May Meadows, Cape May Point, New Jersey, authorized by 
section 101(a)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 278), is modified to incorporate the project for shoreline 
erosion control, Cape May Point, New Jersey, carried out under 
section 5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participa-
tion in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned property’’, 
approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426h), if the Secretary deter-
mines that such incorporation is feasible. 
SEC. 3116. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NEW JERSEY. 
The project for flood control, Passaic River, New Jersey and 
New York, authorized by section 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607) and modified by section 
327 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 
2607), is modified to direct the Secretary to include the benefits 
and costs of preserving natural flood storage in any future economic 
analysis of the project. 
SEC. 3117. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS, NEW MEXICO. 
The Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with 
any Indian tribe any land of which is located in the State of 
New Mexico and occupied by a flood control project that is owned 
and operated by the Corps of Engineers to assist in carrying out 
any operation or maintenance activity associated with the flood 
control project. 
SEC. 3118. MIDDLE RIO GRANDE RESTORATION, NEW MEXICO. 
(a) RESTORATION PROJECTS DEFINED.—In this section, the term 
‘‘restoration project’’ means a project that will produce, consistent 
with other Federal programs, projects, and activities, immediate 
and substantial ecosystem restoration and recreation benefits. 
(b) PROJECT SELECTION.—The Secretary shall select and shall 
carry out restoration projects in the Middle Rio Grande from Cochiti 
Dam to the headwaters of Elephant Butte Reservoir in the State 
of New Mexico. 
(c) LOCAL PARTICIPATION.—In carrying out subsection (b), the 
Secretary shall consult with, and consider the activities being car-
ried out by— 
(1) the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Act Collabo-
rative Program; and 
(2) the Bosque Improvement Group of the Middle Rio 
Grande Bosque Initiative. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $25,000,000 to carry out this section. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01135
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1138 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3119. BUFFALO HARBOR, NEW YORK. 
The project for navigation, Buffalo Harbor, New York, author-
ized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 
1176), is modified to include measures to enhance public access, 
at Federal cost of $500,000. 
SEC. 3120. LONG ISLAND SOUND OYSTER RESTORATION, NEW YORK 
AND CONNECTICUT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall plan, design, and con-
struct projects to increase aquatic habitats within Long Island 
Sound and adjacent waters, including the construction and restora-
tion of oyster beds and related shellfish habitat. 
(b) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the cost of activi-
ties carried out under this section shall be 25 percent and may 
be provided through in-kind services and materials. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $25,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 3121. MAMARONECK AND SHELDRAKE RIVERS WATERSHED 
MANAGEMENT, NEW YORK. 
(a) WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
State of New York and local entities, shall develop watershed 
management plans for the Mamaroneck and Sheldrake River 
watershed for the purposes of evaluating existing and new 
flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration. 
(2) EXISTING PLANS.—In developing the watershed manage-
ment plans, the Secretary shall use existing studies and plans, 
as appropriate. 
(b) CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in any 
eligible critical restoration project in the Mamaroneck and 
Sheldrake Rivers watershed in accordance with the watershed 
management plans developed under subsection (a). 
(2) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—A critical restoration project shall 
be eligible for assistance under this section if the project— 
(A) meets the purposes described in the watershed 
management plans developed under subsection (a); and 
(B) with respect to the Mamaroneck and Sheldrake 
Rivers watershed in New York, consists of flood damage 
reduction or ecosystem restoration through— 
(i) bank stabilization of the mainstem, tributaries, 
and streams; 
(ii) wetland restoration; 
(iii) soil and water conservation; 
(iv) restoration of natural flows; 
(v) restoration of stream stability; 
(vi) structural and nonstructural flood damage 
reduction measures; or 
(vii) any other project or activity the Secretary 
determines to be appropriate. 
(c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In carrying out this section, 
the Secretary may enter into one or more cooperative agreements 
to provide financial assistance to appropriate Federal, State, or 
local governments or nonprofit agencies, including assistance for 
the implementation of projects to be carried out under subsection 
(b). 
Plans. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01136
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1139 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000, to remain 
available until expended. 
SEC. 3122. ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NEW YORK. 
Section 554 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3781) is amended by striking ‘‘maximum Federal cost 
of $5,200,000’’ and inserting ‘‘total cost of $20,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3123. PORT OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK AND 
NEW JERSEY. 
The navigation project, 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), is 
modified— 
(1) to authorize the Secretary to allow the non-Federal 
interest to construct a temporary dredged material storage 
facility to receive dredged material from the project if— 
(A) the non-Federal interest submits, in writing, a 
list of potential sites for the temporary storage facility 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Environ-
ment and Public Works of the Senate, and the Secretary 
at least 180 days before the selection of the final site; 
and 
(B) at least 70 percent of the dredged material gen-
erated in connection with the project suitable for beneficial 
reuse will be used at sites in the State of New Jersey 
to the extent that there are sufficient sites available; and 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of construction of the temporary storage facility for 
the project. 
SEC. 3124. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM. 
Section 553(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3781) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(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, Cayuga-Seneca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals 
and the historic alignments of these canals, including the cities 
of Albany, Rochester, and Buffalo.’’. 
SEC. 3125. SUSQUEHANNA RIVER AND UPPER DELAWARE RIVER 
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, NEW YORK. 
(a) WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
State of New York, the Delaware or Susquehanna River Basin 
Commission, as appropriate, and local entities, shall develop 
watershed management plans for the Susquehanna River 
watershed in New York State and the Upper Delaware River 
watershed for the purposes of evaluating existing and new 
flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration. 
(2) EXISTING PLANS.—In developing the watershed manage-
ment plans, the Secretary shall use existing studies and plans, 
as appropriate. 
List. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01137
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1140 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in any 
eligible critical restoration project in the Susquehanna River 
or Upper Delaware Rivers in accordance with the watershed 
management plans developed under subsection (a). 
(2) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—A critical restoration project shall 
be eligible for assistance under this section if the project— 
(A) meets the purposes described in the watershed 
management plans developed under subsection (a); and 
(B) with respect to the Susquehanna River or Upper 
Delaware River watershed in New York, consists of flood 
damage reduction or ecosystem restoration through— 
(i) bank stabilization of the mainstem, tributaries, 
and streams; 
(ii) wetland restoration; 
(iii) soil and water conservation; 
(iv) restoration of natural flows; 
(v) restoration of stream stability; 
(vi) structural and nonstructural flood damage 
reduction measures; or 
(vii) any other project or activity the Secretary 
determines to be appropriate. 
(c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In carrying out this section, 
the Secretary may enter into 1 or more cooperative agreements 
to provide financial assistance to appropriate Federal, State, or 
local governments or nonprofit agencies, including assistance for 
the implementation of projects to be carried out under subsection 
(b). 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000, to remain 
available until expended. 
SEC. 3126. MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, NORTH DAKOTA. 
Section 707(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2699) is amended in the first sentence by striking 
‘‘$5,000,000’’ and all that follows through ‘‘2005’’ and inserting 
‘‘$25,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3127. WAHPETON, NORTH DAKOTA. 
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be allotted 
for the project for flood damage reduction, Wahpeton, North Dakota, 
being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 
1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), shall be $12,000,000. 
SEC. 3128. OHIO. 
Section 594 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 381) is amended— 
(1) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
(g) and (h), respectively; and 
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following: 
‘‘(f) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), a non-Federal 
interest for any project carried out under this section may include 
a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the affected local govern-
ment.’’. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01138
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1141 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3129. LOWER GIRARD LAKE DAM, GIRARD, OHIO. 
Section 507 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3758) is amended— 
(1) by inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’ before ‘‘The Secretary’’; 
(2) in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) (as designated by 
paragraph (1) of this subsection)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘Repair and rehabilitation’’ and all that 
follows through ‘‘Ohio’’ and inserting ‘‘Correction of struc-
tural deficiencies of the Lower Girard Lake Dam, Girard, 
Ohio, and the appurtenant features to meet the dam safety 
standards of the State of Ohio’’; and 
(B) 
by 
striking 
‘‘$2,500,000’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘$16,000,000’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) SPECIAL RULES.—The project for Lower Girard Lake Dam, 
Girard, Ohio, authorized by subsection (a)(1) is justified on the 
basis of public safety.’’. 
SEC. 3130. MAHONING RIVER, OHIO. 
In carrying out the project for environmental dredging, author-
ized by section 312(f)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1272(f)(4)), the Secretary is directed to credit, 
in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost 
of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership agreement 
for the project. 
SEC. 3131. ARCADIA LAKE, OKLAHOMA. 
Payments made by the city of Edmond, Oklahoma, to the Sec-
retary in October 1999 of all costs associated with present and 
future water storage costs at Arcadia Lake, Oklahoma, under 
Arcadia Lake Water Storage Contract Number DACW56–79–C– 
0072 shall satisfy the obligations of the city under that contract. 
SEC. 3132. ARKANSAS RIVER CORRIDOR, OKLAHOMA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to participate 
in the ecosystem restoration, recreation, and flood damage reduction 
components of the Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan dated 
October 2005. The Secretary shall coordinate with appropriate rep-
resentatives in the vicinity of Tulsa, Oklahoma, including represent-
atives of Tulsa County and surrounding communities and the Indian 
Nations Council of Governments. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $50,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 3133. LAKE EUFAULA, OKLAHOMA. 
(a) PROJECT GOAL.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The goal for operation of Lake Eufaula, 
Oklahoma, shall be to maximize the use of available storage 
in a balanced approach that incorporates advice from represent-
atives from all the project purposes to ensure that the full 
value of the reservoir is realized by the United States. 
(2) RECOGNITION
OF
PURPOSE.—To achieve the goal 
described in paragraph (1), recreation is recognized as a project 
purpose at Lake Eufaula, pursuant to section 4 of the Flood 
Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 889). 
(b) LAKE EUFAULA ADVISORY COMMITTEE.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01139
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1142 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), the Secretary shall establish 
an advisory committee for the Lake Eufaula, Canadian River, 
Oklahoma project authorized by the first section of the River 
and Harbor Act of July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 635). 
(2) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the committee shall be 
advisory only. 
(3) DUTIES.—The committee shall provide information and 
recommendations to the Corps of Engineers regarding the oper-
ations of Lake Eufaula for the project purposes for Lake 
Eufaula. 
(4) COMPOSITION.—The Committee shall be composed of 
members that equally represent the project purposes for Lake 
Eufaula. 
(c) REALLOCATION STUDY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the appropriation of funds, 
the Secretary shall perform a reallocation study, at Federal 
expense, to develop and present recommendations concerning 
the best value, while minimizing ecological damages, for current 
and future use of the Lake Eufaula storage capacity for the 
authorized project purposes of flood control, water supply, 
hydroelectric power, navigation, fish and wildlife, and recre-
ation. 
(2) FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION.—The reallocation study 
shall take into consideration the recommendations of the Lake 
Eufaula Advisory Committee. 
(d) POOL MANAGEMENT PLAN.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date 
of enactment of this Act, to the extent feasible within available 
project funds and subject to the completion and approval of 
the reallocation study under subsection (c), the Tulsa district 
engineer, taking into consideration recommendations of the 
Lake Eufaula Advisory Committee, shall develop an interim 
management plan that accommodates all project purposes for 
Lake Eufaula. 
(2) MODIFICATIONS.—A modification of the plan under para-
graph (1) shall not cause significant adverse impacts on any 
existing permit, lease, license, contract, public law, or project 
purpose, including flood control operation, relating to Lake 
Eufaula. 
SEC. 3134. OKLAHOMA LAKES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, OKLA-
HOMA. 
(a) IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAM.—Not later than one year 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall imple-
ment an innovative program at the lakes located primarily in the 
State of Oklahoma that are a part of an authorized civil works 
project under the administrative jurisdiction of the Corps of Engi-
neers for the purpose of demonstrating the benefits of enhanced 
recreation facilities and activities at those lakes. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—In implementing the program under sub-
section (a), the Secretary, consistent with authorized project pur-
poses, shall— 
(1) pursue strategies that will enhance, to the maximum 
extent practicable, recreation experiences at the lakes included 
in the program; 
Deadline. 
Deadline. 
Recommenda- 
tions. 
Establishment. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01140
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1143 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) use creative management strategies that optimize rec-
reational activities; and 
(3) ensure continued public access to recreation areas 
located on or associated with the civil works project. 
(c) GUIDELINES.—Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidelines for 
the implementation of this section, to be developed in coordination 
with the State of Oklahoma. 
(d) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
the House of Representatives a report describing the results 
of the program under subsection (a). 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall 
include a description of the projects undertaken under the 
program, including— 
(A) an estimate of the change in any related rec-
reational opportunities; 
(B) a description of any leases entered into, including 
the parties involved; and 
(C) the financial conditions that the Corps of Engineers 
used to justify those leases. 
(3) AVAILABILITY TO PUBLIC.—The Secretary shall make 
the report available to the public in electronic and written 
formats. 
(e) TERMINATION.—The authority provided by this section shall 
terminate on the date that is 10 years after the date of enactment 
of this Act. 
SEC. 3135. OTTAWA COUNTY, OKLAHOMA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated 
$30,000,000 for the purposes set forth in subsection (b). 
(b) PURPOSES.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
funds appropriated under subsection (a) may be used for the purpose 
of— 
(1) the buyout of properties and permanently relocating 
residents and businesses in or near Picher, Cardin, and 
Hockerville, Oklahoma, from areas determined by the State 
of Oklahoma to be at risk of damage caused by land subsidence 
and remaining properties; and 
(2) providing funding to the State of Oklahoma to buyout 
properties and permanently relocate residents and businesses 
of Picher, Cardin, and Hockerville, Oklahoma, from areas deter-
mined by the State of Oklahoma to be at risk of damage 
caused by land subsidence and remaining properties. 
(c) LIMITATION.—The use of funds in accordance with subsection 
(b) shall not be considered to be part of a federally assisted program 
or project for purposes of Public Law 91–646 (42 U.S.C. 4601 
et seq.), consistent with section 2301 of Public Law 109–234 (120 
Stat. 455). 
(d) CONSISTENCY WITH STATE PROGRAM.—Any actions taken 
under subsection (b) shall be consistent with the relocation program 
in the State of Oklahoma under 27A O.S. Supp. 2006, sections 
2201 et seq. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01141
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1144 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(e) CONSIDERATION OF REMEDIAL ACTION.—The Administrator 
of the Environmental Protection Agency shall consider, without 
delay, a remedial action under the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 
et seq.) for the Tar Creek, Oklahoma, National Priorities List site 
that includes permanent relocation of residents consistent with 
the program currently being administered by the State of Okla-
homa. Such relocation shall not be subject to the Uniform Relocation 
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 4601 et seq.). 
(f) ESTIMATING COSTS.—In estimating and comparing the cost 
of a remedial alternative for the Tar Creek Oklahoma, National 
Priorities List site that includes the permanent relocation of resi-
dents, the Administrator shall not include the cost of compliance 
with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisi-
tion Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.). 
(g) EFFECT
OF CERTAIN REMEDIES.—Inclusion of subsidence 
remedies, such as permanent relocation within any remedial action, 
shall not preempt, alter, or delay the right of any sovereign entity, 
including any State or tribal government, to seek remedies, 
including abatement, for land subsidence and subsidence risks 
under State law. 
(h) AMENDMENT.—Section 111 of Public Law 108–137 (117 Stat. 
1835) is amended— 
(1) by adding at the end of subsection (a) the following: 
‘‘Such activities also may include the provision of financial 
assistance to facilitate the buy out of properties located in 
areas identified by the State as areas that are or will be 
at risk of damage caused by land subsidence and associated 
properties otherwise identified by the State. Any buyout of 
such properties shall not be considered to be part of a federally 
assisted program or project for purposes of Public Law 91– 
646 (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.), consistent with section 2301 of 
Public Law 109–234 (120 Stat. 455–456).’’; and 
(2) by striking the first sentence of subsection (d) and 
inserting the following: ‘‘Non-Federal interests shall be respon-
sible for operating and maintaining any restoration alternatives 
constructed or carried out pursuant to this section.’’. 
SEC. 3136. RED RIVER CHLORIDE CONTROL, OKLAHOMA AND TEXAS. 
The project for water quality control in the Arkansas and 
Red River Basin, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas, authorized by 
section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 1420) and 
modified by section 1107(a) of the Water Resources Development 
A of 1986 (100 Stat. 4229) is further modified to direct the Secretary 
to provide operation and maintenance for the Red River Chloride 
Control project, Oklahoma and Texas, at Federal expense. 
SEC. 3137. 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 payment schedules— 
(1) is set at the amounts, rates of interest, and payment 
schedules that existed on June 3, 1986, with respect to the 
project for Waurika Lake, Oklahoma; and 
(2) may not be adjusted, altered, or changed without a 
specific, separate, and written agreement between the District 
and the United States. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01142
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1145 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3138. UPPER WILLAMETTE RIVER WATERSHED ECOSYSTEM RES-
TORATION, OREGON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct studies and eco-
system restoration projects for the upper Willamette River water-
shed from Albany, Oregon, to the headwaters of the Willamette 
River and tributaries. 
(b) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall carry out ecosystem 
restoration projects under this section for the Upper Willamette 
River watershed in consultation with the Governor of the State 
of Oregon, the heads of appropriate Indian tribes, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, the United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Bureau of Land 
Management, the Forest Service, and local entities. 
(c) AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES.—In carrying out ecosystem restora-
tion projects under this section, the Secretary shall undertake activi-
ties necessary to protect, monitor, and restore fish and wildlife 
habitat. 
(d) PRIORITY.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall 
give priority to a project to restore the millrace in Eugene, Oregon, 
and shall include noneconomic benefits associated with the histor-
ical significance of the millrace and associated with preservation 
and enhancement of resources in evaluating the benefits of the 
project. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000. 
SEC. 3139. DELAWARE RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA, NEW JERSEY, AND DELA-
WARE. 
The Secretary may remove debris from the project for naviga-
tion, Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, 
Philadelphia to the Sea. 
SEC. 3140. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary may take such action as may be necessary, 
including construction of a breakwater, to prevent shoreline erosion 
between .07 and 2.7 miles south of Pennsylvania State Route 994 
on the east shore of Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania. 
SEC. 3141. SHERADEN PARK STREAM AND CHARTIERS CREEK, ALLE-
GHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
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 Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the Sec-
retary to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), 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 for the project before 
the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3142. SOLOMON’S CREEK, WILKES-BARRE, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania, 
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources 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, Pennsylvania. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01143
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1146 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3143. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 313 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(106 Stat. 4845; 109 Stat. 407; 110 Stat. 3723; 113 Stat. 310; 
117 Stat. 142) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (g)(1) by striking ‘‘$180,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$200,000,000’’; and 
(2) in subsection (h)(2) by striking ‘‘Allegheny, Armstrong, 
Beford, Blair, Cambria, Clearfield, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, 
Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Mifflin, Somerset, 
Snyder, 
Washington, 
and 
Westmoreland 
Counties’’ 
and 
inserting ‘‘Allegheny, Armstrong, Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fay-
ette, Franklin, Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, 
Somerset, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties’’. 
SEC. 3144. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
In carrying out the project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, 
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), the Secretary shall 
coordinate with non-Federal interests to review opportunities for 
increased public access. 
SEC. 3145. NARRAGANSETT BAY, RHODE ISLAND. 
The Secretary may use amounts in the Environmental Restora-
tion Account, Formerly Used Defense Sites, under section 2703(a)(5) 
of title 10, United States Code, for the removal of abandoned 
marine camels at any formerly used defense site under the jurisdic-
tion of the Department of Defense that is undergoing (or is sched-
uled to undergo) environmental remediation under chapter 160 
of title 10, United States Code (and other provisions of law), in 
Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, in accordance with the Corps 
of Engineers prioritization process under the Formerly Used 
Defense Sites program. 
SEC. 3146. MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, SOUTH DAKOTA. 
(a) MEMBERSHIP.—Section 904(b)(1)(B) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2708) is amended— 
(1) in clause (vii) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 
(2) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (ix); and 
(3) by inserting after clause (vii) the following: 
‘‘(viii) rural water systems; and’’. 
(b) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 907(a) of such Act (114 Stat. 
2712) is amended in the first sentence by striking ‘‘2005’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2010’’. 
SEC. 3147. CEDAR BAYOU, TEXAS. 
(a) CREDIT FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN.—The project for naviga-
tion, Cedar Bayou, Texas, reauthorized by section 349(a)(2) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2632), is 
modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with section 
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning 
and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the 
project before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(b) COST SHARING.—Cost sharing for construction and operation 
and maintenance of the project shall be determined in accordance 
with section 101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2211). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01144
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1147 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) PROJECT FOR NAVIGATION.—Section 349(a)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2632) is amended 
by striking ‘‘12 feet deep by 125 feet wide’’ and inserting ‘‘that 
is 10 feet deep by 100 feet wide’’. 
SEC. 3148. FREEPORT HARBOR, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Freeport Harbor, 
Texas, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818), is modified to provide that— 
(1) all project costs incurred as a result of the discovery 
of the sunken vessel COMSTOCK of the Corps of Engineers 
are a Federal responsibility; and 
(2) the Secretary shall not seek further obligation or respon-
sibility for removal of the vessel COMSTOCK, or costs associ-
ated with a delay due to the discovery of the sunken vessel 
COMSTOCK, from the Port of Freeport. 
(b) COST SHARING.—This section does not affect the authorized 
cost sharing for the balance of the project described in subsection 
(a). 
SEC. 3149. 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 improvement occurring after the date of enact-
ment 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 owners of a Lake Kemp improve-
ment, their lessees, or occupants 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 flowage easement of Lake Kemp, 
Texas, below elevation 1159 feet mean sea level. 
SEC. 3150. 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 include as part of the project flood protection works 
to reroute drainage to Raymondville Drain constructed by the 
non-Federal interests in Hidalgo County in the vicinity of Edin-
burg, Texas, if the Secretary determines that such work is 
feasible; 
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project; and 
(3) to direct the Secretary in calculating the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the project, to make a determination, 
within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, under 
section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
Determination. 
Deadline. 
Effective date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01145
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1148 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) on the non-Federal interest’s ability 
to pay. 
SEC. 3151. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TEXAS. 
The project for ecosystem restoration and storm damage reduc-
tion, 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 pur-
pose. 
SEC. 3152. PAT MAYSE LAKE, TEXAS. 
The Secretary is directed to accept from the city of Paris, 
Texas, $3,461,432 as payment in full of monies owed to the United 
States for water supply storage space in Pat Mayse Lake, Texas, 
under contract number DA–34–066–CIVENG–65–1272, including 
accrued interest. 
SEC. 3153. PROCTOR LAKE, TEXAS. 
The Secretary is authorized to purchase fee simple title to 
all properties located within the boundaries, and necessary for 
the operation, of the Proctor Lake project, Texas, authorized by 
section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1259). 
SEC. 3154. 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 modified to authorize the Secretary 
to credit, in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the cost of design and construction work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project. 
SEC. 3155. CONNECTICUT RIVER RESTORATION, VERMONT. 
Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), as in effect on August 5, 2005, with respect 
to the study entitled ‘‘Connecticut River Restoration Authority’’, 
dated May 23, 2001, a nonprofit entity may act as the non-Federal 
interest for purposes of carrying out the activities described in 
the agreement executed between The Nature Conservancy and the 
Department of the Army on August 5, 2005. 
SEC. 3156. DAM REMEDIATION, VERMONT. 
Section 543 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(114 Stat. 2673) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a)(2) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 
(2) in subsection (a)(3) by striking the period at the end 
and inserting ‘‘; and’’; 
(3) by adding at the end of subsection (a) the following: 
‘‘(4) may carry out measures to restore, protect, and pre-
serve an ecosystem affected by a dam described in subsection 
(b).’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following: 
‘‘(11) Camp Wapanacki, Hardwick. 
‘‘(12) Star Lake Dam, Mt. Holly. 
‘‘(13) Curtis Pond, Calais. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01146
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1149 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(14) Weathersfield Reservoir, Springfield. 
‘‘(15) Burr Pond, Sudbury. 
‘‘(16) Maidstone Lake, Guildhall. 
‘‘(17) Upper and Lower Hurricane Dam. 
‘‘(18) Lake Fairlee. 
‘‘(19) West Charleston Dam. 
‘‘(20) White River, Sharon.’’. 
SEC. 3157. LAKE CHAMPLAIN EURASIAN MILFOIL, WATER CHESTNUT, 
AND OTHER NONNATIVE PLANT CONTROL, VERMONT. 
Under authority of section 104 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610), the Secretary may revise the existing 
General Design Memorandum to permit the use of chemical means 
of control, when appropriate, of Eurasian milfoil, water chestnuts, 
and other nonnative plants in the Lake Champlain basin, Vermont. 
SEC. 3158. UPPER CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN WETLAND RESTORA-
TION, VERMONT AND NEW HAMPSHIRE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in cooperation with the States 
of Vermont and New Hampshire, shall carry out a study and 
develop a strategy for the use of wetland restoration, soil and 
water conservation practices, and nonstructural measures to reduce 
flood damage, improve water quality, and create wildlife habitat 
in the Upper Connecticut River watershed. 
(b) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In conducting the study and 
developing the strategy under this section, the Secretary may enter 
into one or more cooperative agreements to provide technical assist-
ance to appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies and nonprofit 
organizations with wetland restoration experience. Such assistance 
may include assistance for the implementation of wetland restora-
tion projects and soil and water conservation measures. 
(c) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary shall carry out develop-
ment and implementation of the strategy under this section in 
cooperation with local landowners and local government officials. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000, to remain 
available until expended. 
SEC. 3159. UPPER CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN ECOSYSTEM RESTORA-
TION, VERMONT AND NEW HAMPSHIRE. 
(a) GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
Secretary of Agriculture and in consultation with the States 
of Vermont and New Hampshire and the Connecticut River 
Joint Commission, shall conduct a study and develop a general 
management plan for ecosystem restoration of the Upper Con-
necticut River ecosystem for the purposes of— 
(A) habitat protection and restoration; 
(B) streambank stabilization; 
(C) restoration of stream stability; 
(D) water quality improvement; 
(E) aquatic nuisance species control; 
(F) wetland restoration; 
(G) fish passage; and 
(H) natural flow restoration. 
(2) EXISTING PLANS.—In developing the general manage-
ment plan, the Secretary shall depend heavily on existing plans 
for the restoration of the Upper Connecticut River. 
Study. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01147
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1150 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in any 
critical restoration project in the Upper Connecticut River basin 
in accordance with the general management plan developed 
under subsection (a). 
(2) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—A critical restoration project shall 
be eligible for assistance under this section if the project— 
(A) meets the purposes described in the general 
management plan developed under subsection (a); and 
(B) with respect to the Upper Connecticut River and 
Upper Connecticut River watershed, consists of— 
(i) bank stabilization of the main stem, tributaries, 
and streams; 
(ii) wetland restoration and migratory bird habitat 
restoration; 
(iii) soil and water conservation; 
(iv) restoration of natural flows; 
(v) restoration of stream stability; 
(vi) implementation of an intergovernmental agree-
ment for coordinating ecosystem restoration, fish pas-
sage installation, streambank stabilization, wetland 
restoration, habitat protection and restoration, or nat-
ural flow restoration; 
(vii) water quality improvement; 
(viii) aquatic nuisance species control; 
(ix) improvements in fish migration; and 
(x) conduct of any other project or activity deter-
mined to be appropriate by the Secretary. 
(c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In carrying out this section, 
the Secretary may enter into one or more cooperative agreements 
to provide financial assistance to appropriate Federal, State, or 
local governments or nonprofit agencies. Such assistance may 
include assistance for the implementation of projects to be carried 
out under subsection (b). 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000. Such 
sums shall remain available until expended. 
SEC. 3160. LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED, VERMONT AND NEW YORK. 
Section 542 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(114 Stat. 2671) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (b)(2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph (D); 
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subpara-
graph (G); and 
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following: 
‘‘(E) river corridor assessment, protection, manage-
ment, and restoration for the purposes of ecosystem restora-
tion; 
‘‘(F) geographic mapping conducted by the Secretary 
using existing technical capacity to produce a high-resolu-
tion, multispectral satellite imagery-based land use and 
cover data set; or’’; 
(2) in subsection (e)(2)(A)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘The non-Federal’’ and inserting the 
following: 
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal’’; and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01148
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1151 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(B) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(ii) APPROVAL OF DISTRICT ENGINEER.—Approval 
of credit for design work of less than $100,000 shall 
be determined by the appropriate district engineer.’’; 
(3) in subsection (e)(2)(C) by striking ‘‘up to 50 percent 
of’’; and 
(4) in subsection (g) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$32,000,000’’. 
SEC. 3161. SANDBRIDGE BEACH, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA. 
The project for beach erosion control and hurricane protection, 
Sandbridge Beach, Virginia Beach, Virginia, authorized by section 
101(22) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 
Stat. 4804) and modified by section 338 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2612), is modified to authorize 
the Secretary to review the project to determine whether any addi-
tional Federal interest exists with respect to the project, taking 
into consideration conditions and development levels relating to 
the project in existence on the date of enactment of this Act. 
SEC. 3162. TANGIER ISLAND SEAWALL, VIRGINIA. 
Section 577(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 (110 Stat. 3789) is amended by striking ‘‘at a total cost 
of $1,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $900,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $300,000.’’ and inserting ‘‘at a 
total cost of $3,600,000.’’. 
SEC. 3163. DUWAMISH/GREEN, WASHINGTON. 
The project for ecosystem restoration, Duwamish/Green, Wash-
ington, authorized by section 101(b)(26) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2579), is modified— 
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
(2) to authorize the non-Federal interest to provide any 
portion of the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
in the form of in-kind services and materials. 
SEC. 3164. MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, MCNARY NATIONAL WILDLIFE 
REFUGE, WASHINGTON AND IDAHO. 
(a) TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION.—Administra-
tive jurisdiction over the land acquired for the McNary Lock and 
Dam project and managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service under cooperative agreement number DACW68–4–00–13 
with the Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, is transferred 
from the Secretary to the Secretary of the Interior. 
(b) EASEMENTS.—The transfer of administrative jurisdiction 
under paragraph (1) shall be subject to easements in existence 
as of the date of enactment of this Act on land subject to the 
transfer. 
(c) RIGHTS OF SECRETARY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (C), 
the Secretary shall retain rights described in subparagraph 
(B) with respect to the land for which administrative jurisdic-
tion is transferred under paragraph (1). 
16 USC 668dd 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01149
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1152 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) RIGHTS.—The rights of the Secretary referred to in 
paragraph (1) are the rights— 
(A) to flood land described in subsection (a) to the 
standard project flood elevation; 
(B) to manipulate the level of the McNary project pool; 
(C) to access land described in subsection (a) as may 
be required to install, maintain, and inspect sediment 
ranges and carry out similar activities; 
(D) to construct and develop wetland, riparian habitat, 
or other environmental restoration features authorized by 
section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a) and section 206 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330); 
(E) to dredge and deposit fill materials; and 
(F) to carry out management actions for the purpose 
of reducing the take of juvenile salmonids by avian colonies 
that inhabit, before, on, or after the date of enactment 
of this Act, any island included in the land described in 
subsection (a). 
(3) COORDINATION.—Before exercising a right described in 
any of subparagraphs (C) through (F) of paragraph (2), the 
Secretary shall coordinate the exercise with the Director of 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 
(d) MANAGEMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The land described in subsection (a) shall 
be managed by the Secretary of the Interior as part of the 
McNary National Wildlife Refuge. 
(2) CUMMINS PROPERTY.— 
(A) RETENTION
OF
CREDITS.—Habitat unit credits 
described in the memorandum entitled ‘‘Design Memo-
randum No. 6, LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILD-
LIFE COMPENSATION PLAN, Wildlife Compensation and 
Fishing Access Site Selection, Letter Supplement No. 15, 
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE WALLULA HMU’’ 
provided for the Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife 
Compensation Plan through development of the parcel of 
land formerly known as the ‘‘Cummins property’’ shall be 
retained by the Secretary despite any changes in manage-
ment of the parcel on or after the date of enactment of 
this Act. 
(B) SITE
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN.—The Director shall 
obtain prior approval of the Washington State department 
of fish and wildlife for any change to the previously 
approved site development plan for the parcel of land for-
merly known as the ‘‘Cummins property’’. 
(3) MADAME DORIAN RECREATION AREA.—The Director shall 
continue operation of the Madame Dorian Recreation Area for 
public use and boater access. 
(e) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—The Director shall be responsible 
for all survey, environmental compliance, and other administrative 
costs required to implement the transfer of administrative jurisdic-
tion under subsection (a). 
SEC. 3165. SNAKE RIVER PROJECT, WASHINGTON AND IDAHO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The fish and wildlife compensation plan for 
the Lower Snake River, Washington and Idaho, as authorized by 
section 102 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01150
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1153 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Stat. 2921), is amended to authorize the Secretary to conduct 
studies and implement aquatic and riparian ecosystem restorations 
and improvements specifically for fisheries and wildlife. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 3166. YAKIMA RIVER, PORT OF SUNNYSIDE, WASHINGTON. 
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Yakima River, 
Port of Sunnyside, Washington, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 3167. BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 102(ff) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1992 (106 Stat. 4810, 110 Stat. 3726, 113 Stat. 312) is amended 
to read as follows: 
‘‘(ff) BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Bluestone 
Lake, Ohio River Basin, West Virginia, authorized by section 
4 of the Flood Control Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 1217) is modified 
to direct the Secretary to implement Plan C/G, as defined 
in the Evaluation Report of the District Engineer dated 
December 1996, to prohibit the release of drift and debris 
into waters downstream of the project (other than organic 
matter necessary to maintain and enhance the biological 
resources of such waters and such nonobtrusive items of debris 
as may not be economically feasible to prevent being released 
through such project), including measures to prevent the 
accumulation of drift and debris at the project, the collection 
and removal of drift and debris on the segment of the New 
River upstream of the project, and the removal (through use 
of temporary or permanent systems) and disposal of accumu-
lated drift and debris at Bluestone Dam. 
‘‘(2) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.—In carrying out the down-
stream cleanup under the plan referred to in paragraph (1), 
the Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement with 
the West Virginia department of environmental protection for 
the department to carry out the cleanup, including contracting 
and procurement services, contract administration and manage-
ment, transportation and disposal of collected materials, and 
disposal fees. 
‘‘(3) INITIAL CLEANUP.—The Secretary may provide the West 
Virginia department of environmental protection up to $150,000 
from funds previously appropriated for this purpose for the 
Federal share of the costs of the initial cleanup under the 
plan.’’. 
SEC. 3168. 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 ‘‘$99,000,000’’. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01151
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1154 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3169. LESAGE/GREENBOTTOM SWAMP, WEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 30(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 
(102 Stat. 4030; 114 Stat. 2678) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(d) HISTORIC STRUCTURE.—The Secretary shall ensure the 
preservation and restoration of the structure known as the ‘Jenkins 
House’ and the reconstruction of associated buildings and landscape 
features of such structure located within the Lesage/Greenbottom 
Swamp in accordance with the standards of the Department of 
the Interior for the treatment of historic properties. Amounts made 
available for expenditure for the project authorized by section 301(a) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4110) 
shall be available for the purposes of this subsection.’’. 
SEC. 3170. LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WEST VIRGINIA. 
The project for flood control at Milton, West Virginia, authorized 
by section 580 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3790) and modified by section 340 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2612), is modified to authorize 
the Secretary to construct the project substantially in accordance 
with the draft report of the Corps of Engineers dated May 2004, 
at an estimated total cost of $57,100,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $42,825,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$14,275,000. 
SEC. 3171. MCDOWELL COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA. 
The McDowell County nonstructural component of the project 
for flood control, Levisa and Tug Fork of the Big Sandy and Cum-
berland Rivers, West Virginia, Virginia, and Kentucky, authorized 
by section 202(a) of the Energy and Water Development Appropria-
tion Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339), is modified to direct the Secretary 
to take measures to provide protection, throughout McDowell 
County, West Virginia, from the reoccurrence of the greater of— 
(1) the April 1977 flood; 
(2) the July 2001 flood; 
(3) the May 2002 flood; or 
(4) the 100-year frequency event. 
SEC. 3172. PARKERSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA. 
The Secretary is authorized to carry out the ecosystem restora-
tion, recreation, and flood control components of the report of the 
Corps of Engineers, entitled ‘‘Parkersburg/Vienna Riverfront Park 
Feasibility Study’’, dated June 1998, as amended by the limited 
reevaluation report of the Corps of Engineers, dated March 2004, 
at a total cost of $12,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
of $6,000,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,000,000. 
SEC. 3173. GREEN BAY HARBOR, GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN. 
The portion of the inner harbor of the Federal navigation 
channel of the Green Bay Harbor project, authorized 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 July 5, 1884 
(23 Stat. 136), from Station 190+00 to Station 378+00 is authorized 
to a width of 75 feet and a depth of 6 feet. 
SEC. 3174. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN. 
The project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin, 
authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1852 (10 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01152
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1155 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Stat. 58), 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 $405,000. 
SEC. 3175. MISSISSIPPI RIVER HEADWATERS RESERVOIRS. 
Section 21 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 
(102 Stat. 4027) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘1276.42’’ and inserting ‘‘1278.42’’; 
(B) by striking ‘‘1218.31’’ and inserting ‘‘1221.31’’; and 
(C) by striking ‘‘1234.82’’ and inserting ‘‘1235.30’’; and 
(2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(b) EXCEPTION.—The Secretary may operate the headwaters 
reservoirs below the minimum or above the maximum water levels 
established in subsection (a) in accordance with water control regu-
lation manuals (or revisions thereto) developed by the Secretary, 
after consultation with the Governor of Minnesota and affected 
tribal governments, landowners, and commercial and recreational 
users. The water control regulation manuals (and any revisions 
thereto) shall be effective when the Secretary transmits them to 
Congress. The Secretary shall report to Congress at least 14 days 
before operating any such headwaters reservoir below the minimum 
or above the maximum water level limits specified in subsection 
(a); except that notification is not required for operations necessary 
to prevent the loss of life or to ensure the safety of the dam 
or if the drawdown of lake levels is in anticipation of flood control 
operations.’’. 
SEC. 3176. UPPER BASIN OF MISSOURI RIVER. 
(a) USE OF FUNDS.—Notwithstanding the Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109–103), funds 
made available for recovery or mitigation activities in the lower 
basin of the Missouri River may be used for recovery or mitigation 
activities in the upper basin of the Missouri River, including the 
States of Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. 
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The matter under the heading 
‘‘MISSOURI
RIVER
MITIGATION, MISSOURI, KANSAS, IOWA, AND 
NEBRASKA’’ of section 601(a) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143), as modified by section 334 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 306), is 
amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The Secretary may 
carry out any recovery or mitigation activities in the upper basin 
of the Missouri River, including the States of Montana, Nebraska, 
North Dakota, and South Dakota, using funds made available under 
this paragraph in accordance with the Endangered Species Act 
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and consistent with the project 
purposes of the Missouri River Mainstem System as authorized 
by section 10 of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 
Stat. 897).’’. 
SEC. 3177. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL 
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. 
Section 1103(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(1)(A)(ii)) is amended by inserting 
before the period at the end the following: ‘‘, including research 
on water quality issues affecting the Mississippi River (including 
elevated nutrient levels) and the development of remediation strate-
gies’’. 
Reports. 
Deadline. 
Effective date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01153
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1156 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 3178. UPPER OHIO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES NAVIGATION SYSTEM 
NEW TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAM. 
(a) UPPER OHIO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES NAVIGATION SYSTEM 
DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘Upper Ohio River and Tribu-
taries navigation system’’ means the Allegheny, Kanawha, 
Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a pilot pro-
gram to evaluate new technologies applicable to the Upper 
Ohio River and Tributaries navigation system. 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The program may include the design, 
construction, or implementation of innovative technologies and 
solutions for the Upper Ohio River and Tributaries navigation 
system, including projects for— 
(A) improved navigation; 
(B) environmental stewardship; 
(C) increased navigation reliability; and 
(D) reduced navigation costs. 
(3) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the program shall be— 
(A) to increase the reliability and availability of feder-
ally owned and federally operated navigation facilities; 
(B) to decrease system operational risks; and 
(C) to improve— 
(i) vessel traffic management; 
(ii) access; and 
(iii) Federal asset management. 
(c) FEDERAL OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may 
provide assistance for a project under this section only if the project 
is federally owned. 
(d) LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter into local 
cooperation agreements with non-Federal interests to provide 
for the design, construction, installation, and operation of the 
projects to be carried out under the program. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each local cooperation agreement 
entered into under this subsection shall include the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a 
navigation improvement project, including appropriate 
engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project. 
(3) COST SHARING.—Total project costs under each local 
cooperation agreement shall be cost-shared in accordance with 
the formula relating to the applicable original construction 
project. 
(4) EXPENDITURES.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—Expenditures under the program 
may include, for establishment at federally owned property, 
such as locks, dams, and bridges— 
(i) transmitters; 
(ii) responders; 
(iii) hardware; 
(iv) software; and 
(v) wireless networks. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01154
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1157 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(B) EXCLUSIONS.—Transmitters, responders, hardware, 
software, and wireless networks and other equipment 
installed on privately owned vessels or equipment shall 
not be eligible under the program. 
(e) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, 2008, the Secretary 
shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the pilot program 
carried out under this section, together with recommendations con-
cerning whether the program or any component of the program 
should be implemented on a national basis. 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,100,000. Such sums 
shall remain available until expended. 
SEC. 3179. 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, Sacramento Deep Water 
Ship Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092). 
(2) The project for flood control, Agana River, Guam, 
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4127). 
(3) The project for navigation, Baltimore Harbor and Chan-
nels, Maryland and Virginia, authorized by section 101 of the 
River and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818). 
(4) The project for navigation, Fall River Harbor, Massachu-
setts, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1968 (82 Stat. 731); except that the authorized depth of 
that portion of the project extending riverward of the Charles 
M. Braga, Jr. Memorial Bridge, Fall River and Somerset, 
Massachusetts, shall not exceed 35 feet. 
(5) The project for flood control, Ecorse Creek, Wayne 
County, Michigan, authorized by section 101(a)(14) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607). 
(b) LIMITATION.—A project described in subsection (a) shall 
not be authorized for construction after the last day of the 5- 
year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, unless, 
during such period, funds have been obligated for the construction 
(including planning and design) of the project. 
SEC. 3180. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS. 
Each of the following projects may be carried out by the Sec-
retary and no construction on any such project may be initiated 
until the Secretary determines that the project is feasible: 
(1) MENOMINEE HARBOR AND RIVER, MICHIGAN AND WIS-
CONSIN.—The project for navigation, Menominee Harbor and 
River, Michigan and Wisconsin, authorized by section 101 of 
the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 482) and deauthor-
ized on April 15, 2002, in accordance with section 1001(b)(2) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
579a(b)(2)). 
(2) HEARDING ISLAND INLET, DULUTH HARBOR, MINNESOTA.— 
The project for dredging, Hearding Island Inlet, Duluth Harbor, 
Minnesota, authorized by section 22 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4027). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01155
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1158 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(3) MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN.—That portion of the 
project for navigation, Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin, author-
ized by the first section of the River and Harbor Act of August 
30, 1852 (10 Stat. 58), 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). 
SEC. 3181. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The following projects are not authorized 
after the date of enactment of this Act: 
(1) BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The portion of the 
project for navigation, Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut, author-
ized by the first section of the River and Harbor Act of July 
3, 1930 (46 Stat. 919), consisting 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 northwesterly 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 eastern limit of the existing channel, 
N125,133.87, E482,488.19, thence running southwesterly about 
1,588.98 feet to the point of origin. 
(2) MYSTIC RIVER, CONNECTICUT.—The portion of the project 
for navigation, Mystic River, Connecticut, authorized by the 
first section of the River and Harbor Appropriations Act of 
September 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 436) consisting of a 12-foot-deep 
channel, approximately 7,554 square feet in area, starting at 
a point N193,086.51, E815,092.78, thence running north 59 
degrees 21 minutes 46.63 seconds west about 138.05 feet to 
a point N193,156.86, E814,974.00, thence running north 51 
degrees 04 minutes 39.00 seconds west about 166.57 feet to 
a point N193,261.51, E814,844.41, thence running north 43 
degrees 01 minutes 34.90 seconds west about 86.23 feet to 
a point N193,324.55, E814,785.57, thence running north 06 
degrees 42 minutes 03.86 seconds west about 156.57 feet to 
a point N193,480.05, E814,767.30, thence running south 21 
degrees 21 minutes 17.94 seconds east about 231.42 feet to 
a point N193,264.52, E814,851.57, thence running south 53 
degrees 34 minutes 23.28 seconds east about 299.78 feet to 
the point of origin. 
(3) NORWALK HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The portions of a 10-foot channel 
of the project for navigation, Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut, 
authorized by the first section of the Act of March 2, 
1919 (40 Stat. 1276) and described in subparagraph (B). 
(B) DESCRIPTION OF PORTIONS.—The portions of the 
channel referred to in subparagraph (A) are as follows: 
(i) RECTANGULAR
PORTION.—An approximately 
rectangular-shaped section along the northwesterly ter-
minus of the channel. The section is 35-feet wide and 
about 460-feet long and is further described as com-
mencing 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 
running south 00 degrees 38 minutes 06 seconds east 
87.84 feet to a point N103,717.49, E417,825.07, thence 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01156
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1159 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
running north 24 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds west 
480.00 feet, to a point N104,155.59, E417,628.96, 
thence running north 73 degrees 05 minutes 25 seconds 
east 35.28 feet to the point of origin. 
(ii) PARALLELOGRAM-SHAPED
PORTION.—An area 
having the approximate shape of a parallelogram along 
the northeasterly portion of the channel, southeast of 
the area described in clause (i), approximately 20 feet 
wide and 260 feet long, and further described as com-
mencing at a point N103,855.48, E417,849.99, thence 
running south 33 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds east 
133.40 feet to a point N103,743.76, E417,922.89, thence 
running south 24 degrees 07 minutes 04 seconds east 
127.75 feet to a point N103,627.16, E417,975.09, thence 
running north 33 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds west 
190.00 feet to a point N103,786.28, E417,871.26, thence 
running north 17 degrees 05 minutes 15 seconds west 
72.39 feet to the point of origin. 
(C) EXCLUSION.—Notwithstanding any other provision 
of this paragraph, the Secretary shall realign the 10-foot 
channel potion of the project referred to in subparagraph 
(A) to include, immediately north of the area described 
in subparagraph (B)(ii), a triangular section described as 
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. 
(4) ROCKLAND HARBOR, MAINE.—The portion of the project 
for navigation, Rockland Harbor, Maine, authorized by the 
Act of June 3, 1896 (29 Stat. 202), consisting of a 14-foot 
channel located in Lermond Cove and beginning at a point 
with coordinates N99,977.37, E340,290.02, thence running eas-
terly about 200.00 feet to a point with coordinates N99,978.49, 
E340,490.02, thence running northerly about 138.00 feet to 
a point with coordinates N100,116.49, E340,289.25, thence run-
ning westerly about 200.00 feet to a point with coordinates 
N100,115.37, E340,289.25, thence running southerly about 
138.00 feet to the point of origin. 
(5) ROCKPORT HARBOR, MAINE.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The portion of the project for naviga-
tion, Rockport Harbor, Maine, authorized by the first sec-
tion of the Act of August 11, 1888 (25 Stat. 400), located 
within the 12-foot anchorage described in subparagraph 
(B). 
(B) DESCRIPTION
OF
ANCHORAGE.—The anchorage 
referred to in subparagraph (A) is more particularly 
described as— 
(i) beginning at the westernmost point of the 
anchorage at N128800.00, E349311.00; 
(ii) thence running north 12 degrees, 52 minutes, 
37.2 seconds east 127.08 feet to a point N128923.88, 
E349339.32; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01157
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1160 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(iii) thence running north 17 degrees, 40 minutes, 
13.0 seconds east 338.61 feet to a point N129246.51, 
E349442.10; 
(iv) thence running south 89 degrees, 21 minutes, 
21.0 seconds east 45.36 feet to a point N129246.00, 
E349487.46; 
(v) thence running south 44 degrees, 13 minutes, 
32.6 seconds east 18.85 feet to a point N129232.49, 
E349500.61; 
(vi) thence running south 17 degrees, 40 minutes 
13.0 seconds west 340.50 feet to a point N128908.06, 
E349397.25; 
(vii) thence running south 12 degrees, 52 minutes, 
37.2 seconds west 235.41 feet to a point at N128678.57, 
E349344.79; and 
(viii) thence running north 15 degrees, 32 minutes, 
59.3 seconds west 126.04 feet to the point of origin. 
(6) FALMOUTH HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.—The portion of 
the project for navigation, Falmouth Harbor, Massachusetts, 
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 
1948 (62 Stat. 1172), beginning at a point along the eastern 
side of the inner harbor N200,415.05, E845,307.98, thence run-
ning north 25 degrees 48 minutes 54.3 seconds east 160.24 
feet to a point N200,559.20, E845,377.76, thence running north 
22 degrees 7 minutes 52.4 seconds east 596.82 feet to a point 
N201,112.15, E845,602.60, thence running north 60 degrees 
1 minute 0.3 seconds east 83.18 feet to a point N201,153.72, 
E845,674.65, thence running south 24 degrees 56 minutes 43.4 
seconds west 665.01 feet to a point N200,550.75, E845,394.18, 
thence running south 32 degrees 25 minutes 29.0 seconds west 
160.76 feet to the point of origin. 
(7) ISLAND
END
RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS.—The portion of 
the project for navigation, Island End River, Massachusetts, 
carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act 
of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), described as follows: Beginning at 
a point along the eastern limit of the existing project, 
N507,348.98, E721,180.01, thence running northeast about 35 
feet to a point N507,384.17, E721,183.36, thence running north-
east about 324 feet to a point N507,590.51, E721,433.17, thence 
running northeast about 345 feet to a point along the northern 
limit of the existing project, N507,927.29, E721,510.29, thence 
running southeast about 25 feet to a point N507,921.71, 
E721,534.66, thence running southwest about 354 feet to a 
point N507,576.65, E721,455.64, thence running southwest 
about 357 feet to the point of origin. 
(8) CITY WATERWAY, TACOMA, WASHINGTON.—The portion 
of the project for navigation, City Waterway, Tacoma, Wash-
ington, authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor 
Appropriations Act of June 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 347), consisting 
of the last 1,000 linear feet of the inner portion of the waterway 
beginning at station 70+00 and ending at station 80+00. 
(9) AUNT LYDIA’S COVE, MASSACHUSETTS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The portion of the project for naviga-
tion, Aunt Lydia’s Cove, Massachusetts, constructed under 
section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
577), consisting of the 8-foot deep anchorage in the cove 
described in subparagraph (B). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01158
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1161 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(B) DESCRIPTION
OF
PORTION.—The portion of the 
project described in subparagraph (A) is more particularly 
described as the portion beginning at a point along the 
southern limit of the existing project, N254,332.00, 
E1,023,103.96, thence running northwesterly about 761.60 
feet to a point along the western limit of the existing 
project N255,076.84, E1,022,945.07, thence running south-
westerly about 38.11 feet to a point N255,038.99, 
E1,022,940.60, thence running southeasterly about 267.07 
feet to a point N254,772.00, E1,022,947.00, thence running 
southeasterly about 462.41 feet to a point N254,320.06, 
E1,023,044.84, thence running northeasterly about 60.31 
feet to the point of origin. 
(10) WHATCOM
CREEK
WATERWAY, BELLINGHAM, WASH-
INGTON.—The portion of the project for navigation, Whatcom 
Creek Waterway, Bellingham, Washington, authorized by the 
River and Harbor Act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 664), and 
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 
299), consisting of the last 2,900 linear feet of the inner portion 
of the waterway and beginning at station 29+00 to station 
0+00. 
(11) OCONTO HARBOR, WISCONSIN.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The portion of the project for naviga-
tion, Oconto Harbor, Wisconsin, authorized by the Act of 
August 2, 1882 (22 Stat. 196), and the Act of June 25, 
1910 (36 Stat. 664) (commonly known as the ‘‘River and 
Harbor Act of 1910’’), consisting of a 15-foot-deep turning 
basin in the Oconto River, as described in subparagraph 
(B). 
(B) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—The project referred to in 
subparagraph (B) is more particularly described as— 
(i) beginning at a point along the western limit 
of the existing project, N394,086.71, E2,530,202.71; 
(ii) thence northeasterly about 619.93 feet to a 
point N394,459.10, E2,530,698.33; 
(iii) thence southeasterly about 186.06 feet to a 
point N394,299.20, E2,530,793.47; 
(iv) thence southwesterly about 355.07 feet to a 
point N393,967.13, E2,530,667.76; 
(v) thence southwesterly about 304.10 feet to a 
point N393,826.90, E2,530,397.92; and 
(vi) thence northwesterly about 324.97 feet to the 
point of origin. 
(b) ANCHORAGE AREA, NEW LONDON HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.— 
The portion of the project for navigation, New London Harbor, 
Connecticut, authorized by the River and Harbor Appropriations 
Act of June 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 333), that consists of a 23-foot 
waterfront channel and that is further described as beginning at 
a point along the western limit of the existing project, N188, 802.75, 
E779, 462.81, thence running northeasterly about 1,373.88 feet 
to a point N189, 554.87, E780, 612.53, thence running southeasterly 
about 439.54 feet to a point N189, 319.88, E780, 983.98, thence 
running southwesterly about 831.58 feet to a point N188, 864.63, 
E780, 288.08, thence running southeasterly about 567.39 feet to 
a point N188, 301.88, E780, 360.49, thence running northwesterly 
about 1,027.96 feet to the point of origin, is redesignated as an 
anchorage area. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01159
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1162 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) SOUTHPORT HARBOR, FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT.—The project 
for navigation, Southport Harbor, Fairfield, Connecticut, authorized 
by section 2 of the River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1829, and 
by the first section of the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 
1935 (49 Stat. 1029), and section 364 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3733–3734), is modified to 
redesignate a portion of the 9-foot-deep channel to an anchorage 
area, approximately 900 feet in length and 90,000 square feet 
in area, and lying generally north of a line with points at coordinates 
N108,043.45, E452,252.04 and N107,938.74, E452,265.74. 
(d) SACO RIVER, MAINE.—The portion of the project for naviga-
tion, Saco River, Maine, constructed under section 107 of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and described as a 6- 
foot deep, 10-acre maneuvering basin located at the head of naviga-
tion, is redesignated as an anchorage area. 
(e) UNION RIVER, MAINE.—The project for navigation, Union 
River, Maine, authorized by the first section of the Act of 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 degrees 27 minutes 20.71 
seconds 
west 
about 
132.34 
feet 
to 
a 
point 
N316,038.37, 
E1,004,308.61. 
(f) MYSTIC RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS.—The portion of the project 
for navigation, Mystic River, Massachusetts, authorized by the first 
section of the River and Harbor Appropriations Act of July 13, 
1892 (27 Stat. 96), between a line starting at a point N515,683.77, 
E707,035.45 and ending at a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85 and 
a line starting at a point N514,595.15, E707,746.15 and ending 
at a point N514,732.94, E707,658.38 shall be relocated and reduced 
from a 100-foot wide channel to a 50-foot wide channel after the 
date of enactment of this Act described as follows: Beginning at 
a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85, thence running southeasterly 
about 840.50 feet to a point N515,070.16, E707,601.27, thence run-
ning southeasterly about 177.54 feet to a point N514,904.84, 
E707,665.98, thence running southeasterly about 319.90 feet to 
a point with coordinates N514,595.15, E707,746.15, thence running 
northwesterly 
about 
163.37 
feet 
to 
a 
point 
N514,732.94, 
E707,658.38, thence running northwesterly about 161.58 feet to 
a point N514.889.47, E707,618.30, thence running northwesterly 
about 166.61 feet to a point N515.044.62, E707,557.58, thence run-
ning northwesterly about 825.31 feet to a point N515,683.77, 
E707,035.45, thence running northeasterly about 50.90 feet 
returning to a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85. 
(g) RIVERCENTER, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.—Section 38(c) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (33 U.S.C. 59j– 
1; 102 Stat. 4038) is amended by striking ‘‘subsection (a) of this 
section’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (a) (except 30 years from such 
date of enactment, in the case of the area or any part thereof 
described in subsection (a)(5))’’. 
(h) ADDITIONAL DEAUTHORIZATIONS.—The following projects are 
not authorized after the date of enactment 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: 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01160
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1163 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) The project for flood protection on Atascadero Creek 
and its tributaries of Goleta, California, authorized by section 
201 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1826). 
(2) The project for the construction of bridge fenders for 
the Summit and St. Georges Bridge for the Inland Waterway 
of the Delaware River to the C & D Canal of the Chesapeake 
Bay, Delaware and Maryland, authorized by the River and 
Harbor Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1249). 
(3) The project for flood control, central and southern 
Florida, Shingle Creek basin, Florida, authorized by section 
203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1182). 
(4) The project for flood control, Brevoort, Indiana, author-
ized by section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 
(49 Stat. 1587). 
(5) The project for flood control, Middle Wabash, Greenfield 
Bayou, Indiana, authorized by section 10 of the Flood Control 
Act of July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 649). 
(6) The project for flood damage reduction, Lake George, 
Hobart, Indiana, authorized by section 602(a)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148). 
(7) The project for navigation at the Muscatine Harbor 
on the Mississippi River at Muscatine, Iowa, authorized by 
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 
166). 
(8) The project for flood control and water supply, Eagle 
Creek Lake, Kentucky, authorized by section 203 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1188). 
(9) The project for flood control, Hazard, Kentucky, author-
ized by section 3(a)(7) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1988 (100 Stat. 4014) and section 108 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4621). 
(10) The project for flood control, western Kentucky tribu-
taries, Kentucky, authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1076) and modified by section 210 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1829). 
(11) The project for flood damage reduction, Tensas- 
Cocodrie area, Louisiana, authorized by section 3 of the Flood 
Control Act of August 18, 1941 (55 Stat. 643). 
(12) The uncompleted portions of the project for navigation 
improvement for Bayou LaFourche and LaFourche Jump, Lou-
isiana, authorized by the Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 
1033), and the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 481). 
(13) The project for flood control, Eastern Rapides and 
South-Central Avoyelles Parishes, Louisiana, authorized by sec-
tion 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1825). 
(14) The project for erosion protection and recreation, Fort 
Livingston, Grande Terre Island, Louisiana, authorized by the 
Act of August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426e et seq.). 
(15) The project for navigation, Northeast Harbor, Maine, 
authorized by section 2 of the Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 
12). 
(16) The project for navigation, Tenants Harbor, Maine, 
authorized by the first section of the Act of March 2, 1919 
(40 Stat. 1275). 
(17) The project for navigation, New York Harbor and 
adjacent channels, Claremont Terminal, Jersey City, New 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01161
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1164 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Jersey, authorized by section 202(b) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4098). 
(18) The project for navigation, Olcott Harbor, Lake 
Ontario, New York, authorized by section 601(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143). 
(19) The project for navigation, Outer Harbor, Buffalo, New 
York, authorized by section 110 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4817). 
(20) The project for the Columbia River, Seafarers Memo-
rial, Hammond, Oregon, authorized by title I of the Energy 
and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1991 (104 Stat. 
2078). 
(21) The project for navigation, Narragansett Town Beach, 
Narragansett, Rhode Island, authorized by section 361 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4861). 
(22) The project for bulkhead repairs, Quonset Point- 
Davisville, Rhode Island, authorized by section 571 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3788). 
(23) The structural portion of the project for flood control, 
Cypress Creek, Texas, authorized by section 3(a)(13) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4014). 
(24) The project for flood protection, East Fork Channel 
Improvement, Increment 2, East Fork of the Trinity River, 
Texas, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act 
of 1962 (76 Stat. 1185). 
(25) The project for flood control, Falfurrias, Texas, author-
ized by section 3(a)(14) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4014). 
(26) The project for flood control, Pecan Bayou Lake, Texas, 
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1968 
(82 Stat. 742). 
(27) The project for navigation improvements affecting Lake 
of the Pines, Texas, for the portion of the Red River below 
Fulton, Arkansas, authorized by the Act of July 13, 1892 (27 
Stat. 103) and modified by the Act of July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 
635), the Act of May 17, 1950 (64 Stat. 163), and the River 
and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731). 
(28) The project for navigation, Tennessee Colony Lake, 
Trinity River, Texas, authorized by section 204 of the River 
and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091). 
(29) The project for streambank erosion, Kanawha River, 
Charleston, West Virginia, authorized by section 603(f)(13) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4153). 
SEC. 3182. LAND CONVEYANCES. 
(a) ST. FRANCIS BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey to the State 
of Arkansas, without monetary consideration and subject to 
paragraph (2), all right, title, and interest in and to real prop-
erty within the State acquired by the Federal Government 
as mitigation land for the project for flood control, St. Francis 
Basin, Arkansas and Missouri Project, authorized by the Flood 
Control Act of May 15, 1928 (33 U.S.C. 702a et seq.). 
(2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The conveyance by the United States 
under this subsection shall be subject to— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01162
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1165 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(i) the condition that the State of Arkansas agree 
to operate, maintain, and manage the real property 
for fish and wildlife, recreation, and environmental 
purposes at no cost or expense to the United States; 
and 
(ii) such other terms and conditions as the Sec-
retary determines to be in the interest of the United 
States. 
(B) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines that the 
real property conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be 
held in public ownership or the State ceases to operate, 
maintain, and manage the real property in accordance 
with this subsection, all right, title, and interest in and 
to the property shall revert to the United States, at the 
option of the Secretary. 
(3) MITIGATION.—Nothing in this subsection extinguishes 
the responsibility of the Federal Government or the non-Federal 
interest for the project referred to in paragraph (1) from the 
obligation to implement mitigation for such project that existed 
on the day prior to the transfer authorized by this subsection. 
(b) OAKLAND INNER HARBOR TIDAL CANAL, CALIFORNIA.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may convey, by separate 
quitclaim deeds, as soon as the conveyance of each individual 
portion is practicable, the title of the United States in and 
to all or portions of the approximately 86 acres of upland, 
tideland, and submerged land, commonly referred to as the 
‘‘Oakland Inner Harbor Tidal Canal’’, California (referred to 
in this section as the ‘‘Canal Property’’), as follows: 
(A) To the city of Oakland, without consideration, the 
title of the United States in and to all or portions of 
that part of the Canal Property that are located within 
the boundaries of the City of Oakland. 
(B) To the city of Alameda, or to a public entity created 
by or designated by the city of Alameda that is eligible 
to hold title to real property, without consideration, the 
title of the United States in and to all or portions of 
that part of the Canal Property that are located within 
the boundaries of the city of Alameda. 
(C) To the owners of lands adjacent to the Canal Prop-
erty, or to a public entity created by or designated by 
one or more of the adjacent land owners that are eligible 
to hold title to real property, at fair market value, the 
title of the United States in and to all or portions of 
that part of the Canal Property that are located within 
the boundaries of the city in which the adjacent land is 
located. 
(2) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may reserve and retain 
from any conveyance under this subsection a right-of-way or 
other rights as the Secretary determines to be necessary for 
the operation and maintenance of the authorized Federal 
channel in the Canal Property. 
(3) ANNUAL
REPORTS.—Until the date on which each 
conveyance described in paragraph (1) is complete, the Sec-
retary shall submit, by not later than November 30 of each 
year, to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
of the Senate and Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture of the House of Representatives an annual report that 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01163
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1166 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
describes the efforts of the Secretary to complete that convey-
ance during the preceding fiscal year. 
(4) FORM.—A conveyance made under this subsection may 
be, in whole or in part, in the form of an easement. 
(5) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.—For any property on which 
an easement is granted under this subsection, should the Sec-
retary seek to dispose of the property, the holder of the ease-
ment shall have the right of first refusal to the property without 
cost or consideration. 
(6) REPEAL.—Section 205 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4633; 110 Stat. 3748) is repealed. 
(c) MILFORD, KANSAS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
deed without consideration to the Geary County Fire Depart-
ment, Milford, Kansas, all right, title, and interest of the United 
States in and to real property consisting of approximately 7.4 
acres located in Geary County, Kansas, for construction, oper-
ation, and maintenance of a fire station. 
(2) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines that the real 
property conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in 
public ownership or ceases to be operated and maintained as 
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. 
(d) STRAWN CEMETERY, JOHN REDMOND LAKE, KANSAS.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, acting through the 
Tulsa District of the Corps of Engineers, shall transfer to 
Pleasant Township, Coffey County, Kansas, for use as the New 
Strawn Cemetery, all right, title, and interest of the United 
States in and to the land described in paragraph (3). 
(2) REVERSION.—If the land transferred under this sub-
section ceases at any time to be used as a nonprofit cemetery 
or for another public purpose, the land shall revert to the 
United States. 
(3) DESCRIPTION.—The land to be conveyed under this sub-
section is a tract of land near John Redmond Lake, Kansas, 
containing approximately 3 acres and lying adjacent to the 
west line of the Strawn Cemetery located in the SE corner 
of the NE1⁄4 of section 32, township 20 south, range 14 east, 
Coffey County, Kansas. 
(e) PIKE COUNTY, MISSOURI.— 
(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection, the following defini-
tions apply: 
(A) FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘Federal land’’ means 
the 2 parcels of Corps of Engineers land totaling approxi-
mately 42 acres, located on Buffalo Island in Pike County, 
Missouri, and consisting of Government Tract Numbers 
MIS–7 and a portion of FM–46. 
(B) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘non-Federal land’’ 
means the approximately 42 acres of land, subject to any 
existing flowage easements situated in Pike County, Mis-
souri, upstream and northwest, about 200 feet from Drake 
Island (also known as Grimes Island). 
(2) LAND EXCHANGE.—Subject to paragraph (3), on convey-
ance by S.S.S., Inc., to the United States of all right, title, 
and interest in and to the non-Federal land, the Secretary 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01164
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1167 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
shall convey to S.S.S., Inc., all right, title, and interest of 
the United States in and to the Federal land. 
(3) CONDITIONS.— 
(A) DEEDS.— 
(i) NON-FEDERAL
LAND.—The conveyance of the 
non-Federal land to the Secretary shall be by a war-
ranty deed acceptable to the Secretary. 
(ii) FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of the Federal 
land to S.S.S., Inc., shall be— 
(I) by quitclaim deed; and 
(II) subject to any reservations, terms, and 
conditions that the Secretary determines to be nec-
essary to allow the United States to operate and 
maintain the Mississippi River 9-Foot Navigation 
Project. 
(iii) LEGAL
DESCRIPTIONS.—The Secretary shall 
provide a legal description of the Federal land, and 
S.S.S., Inc., shall provide a legal description of the 
non-Federal land, for inclusion in the deeds referred 
to in clauses (i) and (ii). 
(B) REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may require the 
removal of, or S.S.S., Inc., may voluntarily remove, 
any improvements to the non-Federal land before the 
completion of the exchange or as a condition of the 
exchange. 
(ii) NO
LIABILITY.—If S.S.S., Inc., removes any 
improvements to the non-Federal land under clause 
(i)— 
(I) S.S.S., Inc., shall have no claim against 
the United States relating to the removal; and 
(II) the United States shall not incur or be 
liable for any cost associated with the removal 
or relocation of the improvements. 
(C) ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS.—The Secretary shall 
require S.S.S., Inc. to pay reasonable administrative costs 
associated with the exchange. 
(D) CASH EQUALIZATION PAYMENT.—If the appraised 
fair market value, as determined by the Secretary, of the 
Federal land exceeds the appraised fair market value, as 
determined by the Secretary, of the non-Federal land, 
S.S.S., Inc., shall make a cash equalization payment to 
the United States. 
(E) DEADLINE.—The land exchange under subpara-
graph (B) shall be completed not later than 2 years after 
the date of enactment of this Act. 
(f) UNION LAKE, MISSOURI.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall offer to convey to 
the State of Missouri, before June 30, 2007, all right, title, 
and interest in and to approximately 205.50 acres of land 
described in paragraph (2) purchased for the Union Lake Project 
that was deauthorized as of January 1, 1990 (55 Fed. Reg. 
40906), in accordance with section 1001(a) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(a)). 
(2) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The land referred to in paragraph 
(1) is described as follows: 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01165
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1168 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) TRACT 500.—A tract of land situated in Franklin 
County, Missouri, being part of the SW1⁄4 of section 7, 
and the NW1⁄4 of the SW1⁄4 of section 8, township 42 
north, range 2 west of the fifth principal meridian, con-
sisting of approximately 112.50 acres. 
(B) TRACT 605.—A tract of land situated in Franklin 
County, Missouri, being part of the N1⁄2 of the NE, and 
part of the SE of the NE of section 18, township 42 north, 
range 2 west of the fifth principal meridian, consisting 
of approximately 93.00 acres. 
(3) CONVEYANCE.—On acceptance by the State of Missouri 
of the offer by the Secretary under paragraph (1), the land 
described in paragraph (2) shall immediately be conveyed, in 
its current condition, by Secretary to the State of Missouri. 
(g) 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 inserting ‘‘the 
Boardman Park and Recreation District, Boardman,’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘such city’’ and inserting ‘‘the city of 
Boardman’’. 
(h) LOOKOUT POINT PROJECT, LOWELL, OREGON.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may convey without consid-
eration to Lowell School District, by quitclaim deed, all right, 
title, and interest of the United States in and to land and 
buildings thereon, known as Tract A–82, located in Lowell, 
Oregon, and described in paragraph (2). 
(2) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The parcel of land author-
ized to be conveyed under paragraph (1) is as follows: Com-
mencing 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 Lowell, 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 west line of Pioneer Street a distance of 170.0 
feet; thence east 250.0 feet to the true point of beginning 
of this description in Section 14, Township 19 South, Range 
1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Lane County, Oregon. 
(3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Before conveying the parcel 
to the school district, the Secretary shall ensure that the condi-
tions of buildings and facilities meet the requirements of 
applicable Federal law. 
(4) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines that the prop-
erty conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in public 
ownership, all right, title, and interest in and to the property 
shall revert to the United States, at the option of the United 
States. 
(i) RICHARD B. RUSSELL LAKE, SOUTH CAROLINA.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey, at fair market 
value, to the State of South Carolina, by quitclaim deed, all 
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the 
parcels of land described in paragraph (2)(A) that are managed, 
as of the date of enactment of this Act, by the South Carolina 
department of commerce for public recreation purposes for the 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01166
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1169 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South Carolina, project 
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1966 
(80 Stat. 1420). 
(2) LAND DESCRIPTION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraphs (B) and 
(C), the parcels of land referred to in paragraph (1) are 
the parcels contained in the portion of land described in 
Army Lease Number DACW21–1–92–0500. 
(B) RETENTION OF INTERESTS.—The United States shall 
retain— 
(i) ownership of all land included in the lease 
referred to in subparagraph (A) that would have been 
acquired for operational purposes in accordance with 
the 1971 implementation of the 1962 Army/Interior 
Joint Acquisition Policy; and 
(ii) such other land as is determined by the Sec-
retary to be required for authorized project purposes, 
including easement rights-of-way to remaining Federal 
land. 
(C) SURVEY.—The cost of the survey shall be paid 
by the State. 
(3) COSTS OF CONVEYANCE.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The State shall be responsible for 
all costs, including real estate transaction and environ-
mental costs, associated with the conveyance under this 
subsection. 
(B) FORM
OF
CONTRIBUTION.—As determined appro-
priate by the Secretary, in lieu of payment of compensation 
to the United States under subparagraph (A), the State 
may perform certain environmental or real estate actions 
associated with the conveyance under this subsection if 
those actions are performed in close coordination with, 
to the satisfaction of, and in compliance with the laws 
of the United States. 
(4) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— 
(A) NO EFFECT ON SHORE MANAGEMENT POLICY.—The 
Shoreline Management Policy (ER–1130–2–406) of the 
Corps of Engineers may not be changed or altered for 
any proposed development of land conveyed under this 
subsection. 
(B) COST SHARING.—In carrying out the conveyance 
under this subsection, the Secretary and the State shall 
comply with all obligations of any cost sharing agreement 
between the Secretary and the State in effect as of the 
date of the conveyance. 
(C) LAND NOT CONVEYED.—The State shall continue 
to manage the land that is subject to Army Lease Number 
DACW21–1–92–0500 and that is not conveyed under this 
subsection in accordance with the terms and conditions 
of Army Lease Number DACW21–1–92–0500. 
(j) DENISON, TEXAS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall offer to convey 
at fair market value to the city of Denison, Texas, all right, 
title, and interest of the United States in and to the approxi-
mately 900 acres of land located in Grayson County, Texas, 
which is currently subject to an application for lease for public 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01167
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1170 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
park and recreational purposes made by the city of Denison, 
dated August 17, 2005. 
(2) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—The exact acre-
age and description of the real property referred to in paragraph 
(1) shall be determined by a survey paid for by the city of 
Denison, Texas, that is satisfactory to the Secretary. 
(3) CONVEYANCE.—Not later than 90 days after the date 
of acceptance by the city of Denison, Texas, of an offer under 
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall convey the land surveyed 
under paragraph (2) by quitclaim deed to the city of Denison, 
Texas. 
(k) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.— 
(1) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—The exact acre-
age and the legal description of any real property to be conveyed 
under this section shall be determined by a survey that is 
satisfactory to the Secretary. 
(2) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING PROVISIONS.— 
Section 2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply 
to any conveyance under this section. 
(3) 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 con-
siders appropriate and necessary to protect the interests of 
the United States. 
(4) COSTS OF CONVEYANCE.—An entity to which a convey-
ance is made under this section shall be responsible for all 
reasonable and necessary costs, including real estate trans-
action and environmental documentation costs, associated with 
the conveyance. 
(5) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a conveyance is made 
under this section shall hold the United States harmless from 
any liability with respect 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. 3183. EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY INTERESTS AND USE 
RESTRICTIONS. 
(a) IDAHO.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to the property covered by 
each deed in paragraph (2)— 
(A) the reversionary interests and use restrictions 
relating to port and industrial use purposes are extin-
guished; 
(B) the restriction that no activity shall be permitted 
that will compete with services and facilities offered by 
public marinas is extinguished; and 
(C) the human habitation or other building structure 
use restriction is extinguished if the elevation of the prop-
erty is above the standard project flood elevation. 
(2) AFFECTED DEEDS.—The deeds with the following county 
auditor’s file numbers are referred to in paragraph (1): 
(A) Auditor’s Instrument No. 399218 of Nez Perce 
County, Idaho—2.07 acres. 
(B) Auditor’s Instrument No. 487437 of Nez Perce 
County, Idaho—7.32 acres. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01168
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1171 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) LAKE TEXOMA, OKLAHOMA.— 
(1) RELEASE.—Any reversionary interest relating to public 
parks and recreation on the land conveyed by the Secretary 
to the State of Oklahoma at Lake Texoma pursuant to the 
Act entitled ‘‘An Act to authorize the sale of certain lands 
to the State of Oklahoma’’ (67 Stat. 63), shall terminate on 
the date of enactment of this Act. 
(2) INSTRUMENT OF RELEASE.—As soon as practicable after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall execute 
and file in the appropriate office a deed of release, an amended 
deed, or any other appropriate instrument to release each rever-
sionary interest to which paragraph (1) applies. 
(3) PRESERVATION OF RESERVED RIGHTS.—A release of a 
reversionary interest under this subsection shall not affect any 
other right of the United States in any deed of conveyance 
pursuant to the Act referred to in paragraph (1). 
(c) LOWELL, OREGON.— 
(1) RELEASE
AND
EXTINGUISHMENT
OF
DEED
RESERVA-
TIONS.— 
(A) RELEASE AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF DEED RESERVA-
TIONS.—The Secretary may release and extinguish the deed 
reservations for access and communication cables contained 
in the quitclaim deed, dated January 26, 1965, and recorded 
February 15, 1965, in the records of Lane County, Oregon; 
except that such reservations may only be released and 
extinguished for the lands owned by the city of Lowell 
as described in the quitclaim deed, dated April 11, 1991, 
in such records. 
(B) ADDITIONAL
RELEASE
AND
EXTINGUISHMENT
OF 
DEED RESERVATIONS.—The Secretary may also release and 
extinguish the same deed reservations referred to in 
subparagraph (A) over land owned by Lane County, Oregon, 
within the city limits of Lowell, Oregon, to accommodate 
the development proposals of the city of Lowell/St. Vincent 
de Paul, Lane County, affordable housing project; except 
that the Secretary may require, at no cost to the United 
States— 
(i) the alteration or relocation of any existing facili-
ties, utilities, roads, or similar improvements on such 
lands; and 
(ii) the right-of-way for such facilities, utilities, 
roads, or improvements as a precondition of any release 
or extinguishment of the deed reservations. 
(2) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary may convey to the city 
of Lowell, Oregon, the parcel of land situated in the city of 
Lowell, Oregon, at fair market value consisting of the strip 
of federally owned lands located northeast of West Boundary 
Road between Hyland Lane and the city of Lowell’s eastward 
city limits. 
(3) ADMINISTRATIVE
COST.—Notwithstanding paragraphs 
(1) and (2), the city of Lowell, Oregon, shall pay the administra-
tive costs incurred by the United States to execute the release 
and extinguishment of the deed reservations under paragraph 
(1) and the conveyance under paragraph (2). 
(d) OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, CUMBERLAND RIVER, TEN-
NESSEE.— 
Termination 
date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01169
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1172 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) RELEASE
OF
RETAINED
RIGHTS, INTERESTS, RESERVA-
TIONS.—With respect to land conveyed by the Secretary to 
the Tennessee Society of Crippled Children and Adults, Incor-
porated (commonly known as ‘‘Easter Seals Tennessee’’) at Old 
Hickory Lock and Dam, Cumberland River, Tennessee, under 
section 211 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1087), 
the reversionary interests and the use restrictions relating 
to recreation and camping purposes are extinguished. 
(2) INSTRUMENT OF RELEASE.—As soon as practicable after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall execute 
and file in the appropriate office a deed of release, amended 
deed, or other appropriate instrument effectuating the release 
of interests required by paragraph (1). 
(e) LOWER GRANITE POOL, WASHINGTON.— 
(1) EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY INTERESTS AND USE 
RESTRICTIONS.—With respect to property covered by each deed 
described in paragraph (2)— 
(A) the reversionary interests and use restrictions 
relating to port or industrial purposes are extinguished; 
and 
(B) the human habitation or other building structure 
use restriction is extinguished in each area in which the 
elevation is above the standard project flood elevation. 
(2) DEEDS.—The deeds referred to in paragraph (1) are 
as follows: 
(A) Auditor’s File Numbers 432576, 443411, 499988, 
and 579771 of Whitman County, Washington. 
(B) Auditor’s File Numbers 125806, 138801, 147888, 
154511, 156928, and 176360 of Asotin County, Washington. 
(f) PORT OF PASCO, WASHINGTON.— 
(1) EXTINGUISHMENT OF USE RESTRICTIONS AND FLOWAGE 
EASEMENT.—With respect to the property covered by the deed 
in paragraph (3)(A)— 
(A) the flowage easement and human habitation or 
other building structure use restriction is extinguished if 
the elevation of the property is above the standard project 
flood elevation; and 
(B) the use of fill material to raise areas of the property 
above the standard project flood elevation is authorized, 
except in any area for which a permit under section 404 
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) 
is required. 
(2) EXTINGUISHMENT OF FLOWAGE EASEMENT.—With respect 
to the property covered by each deed in paragraph (3)(B), 
the flowage easement is extinguished if the elevation of the 
property is above the standard project flood elevation. 
(3) AFFECTED DEEDS.—The deeds referred to in paragraphs 
(1) and (2) are as follows: 
(A) Auditor’s File Number 262980 of Franklin County, 
Washington. 
(B) Auditor’s File Numbers 263334 and 404398 of 
Franklin County, Washington. 
(g) NO EFFECT ON OTHER RIGHTS.—Nothing in this section 
affects the remaining rights and interests of the Corps of Engineers 
for authorized project purposes. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01170
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1173 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
TITLE IV—STUDIES 
SEC. 4001. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM. 
Section 455 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–21) 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 in-kind services and 
materials.’’. 
SEC. 4002. LAKE ERIE DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the nature 
and frequency of avian botulism problems in the vicinity of Lake 
Erie associated with dredged material disposal sites and shall make 
recommendations to eliminate the conditions that result in such 
problems. 
SEC. 4003. SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES DROUGHT STUDY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Sec-
retary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary 
of Commerce, and other appropriate agencies, shall conduct, at 
Federal expense, a comprehensive study of drought conditions in 
the southwestern United States, with particular emphasis on the 
Colorado River basin, the Rio Grande River basin, and the Great 
Basin. 
(b) INVENTORY OF ACTIONS.—In conducting the study, the Sec-
retary shall assemble an inventory of actions taken or planned 
to be taken to address drought-related situations in the south-
western United States. 
(c) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the study shall be to develop 
recommendations to more effectively address current and future 
drought conditions in the southwestern United States. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section 
$7,000,000. Such funds shall remain available until expended. 
SEC. 4004. DELAWARE RIVER. 
The Secretary shall review, in consultation with the Delaware 
River Basin Commission and the States of Delaware, Pennsylvania, 
New Jersey, and New York, the report of the Chief of Engineers 
on the Delaware River, published as House Document Numbered 
522, 87th Congress, Second Session, as it relates to the Mid-Dela-
ware River Basin from Wilmington to Port Jervis, and any other 
pertinent reports (including the strategy for resolution of interstate 
flow management issues in the Delaware River Basin dated August 
2004 and the National Park Service Lower Delaware River Manage-
ment Plan (1997–1999)), with a view to determining whether any 
modifications of recommendations contained in the first report 
referred to are advisable at the present time, in the interest of 
flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, and other related 
problems. 
SEC. 4005. EURASIAN MILFOIL. 
Under the authority of section 104 of the River and Harbor 
Act of 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610), the Secretary shall conduct a study, 
at Federal expense, to develop national protocols for the use of 
Review. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01171
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1174 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
the Euhrychiopsis lecontei weevil for biological control of Eurasian 
milfoil in the lakes of Vermont and other northeastern States. 
SEC. 4006. FIRE ISLAND, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for navigational improvements, including 
a barge landing facility, Fire Island, Alaska. 
SEC. 4007. KNIK ARM, COOK INLET, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the potential 
impacts on navigation of construction of a bridge across Knik Arm, 
Cook Inlet, Alaska. 
SEC. 4008. KUSKOKWIM RIVER, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for navigation, Kuskokwim River, Alaska, 
in the vicinity of the village of Crooked Creek. 
SEC. 4009. NOME HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall review the project for navigation, Nome 
Harbor improvements, Alaska, authorized by section 101(a)(1) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 273), 
to determine whether the project cost increases, including the cost 
of rebuilding the entrance channel damaged in a September 2005 
storm, resulted from a design deficiency. 
SEC. 4010. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of providing navigation improvements at St. George Harbor, Alaska. 
SEC. 4011. SUSITNA RIVER, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for hydropower, recreation, and related 
purposes on the Susitna River, Alaska. 
SEC. 4012. VALDEZ, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for navigation, Valdez, Alaska, and if 
the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, shall carry 
out the project at a total cost of $20,000,000. 
SEC. 4013. GILA BEND, MARICOPA, ARIZONA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
reduction, Gila Bend, Maricopa, Arizona. 
(b) REVIEW OF PLANS.—In conducting the study, the Secretary 
shall review plans and designs developed by non-Federal interests 
and shall incorporate such plans and designs into the Federal 
study if the Secretary determines that such plans and designs 
are consistent with Federal standards. 
SEC. 4014. SEARCY COUNTY, ARKANSAS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of using Greers Ferry Lake as a water supply source for Searcy 
County, Arkansas. 
SEC. 4015. ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for streambank protection and environ-
mental restoration along Aliso Creek, California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01172
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1175 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4016. FRESNO, KINGS, AND KERN COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply for Fresno, Kings, and 
Kern Counties, California. 
SEC. 4017. FRUITVALE AVENUE RAILROAD BRIDGE, ALAMEDA, CALI-
FORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall prepare a comprehensive 
report that examines the condition of the existing Fruitvale Avenue 
Railroad Bridge, Alameda County, California (referred to in this 
section as the ‘‘Railroad Bridge’’), and determines the most economic 
means to maintain that rail link by either repairing or replacing 
the Railroad Bridge. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The report under this section shall 
include— 
(1) a determination of whether the Railroad Bridge is in 
immediate danger of failing or collapsing; 
(2) the annual costs to maintain the Railroad Bridge; 
(3) the costs to place the Railroad Bridge in a safe, ‘‘no- 
collapse’’ condition, such that the Railroad Bridge will not 
endanger maritime traffic; 
(4) the costs to retrofit the Railroad Bridge such that the 
Railroad Bridge may continue to serve as a rail link between 
the Island of Alameda and the mainland; and 
(5) the costs to construct a replacement for the Railroad 
Bridge capable of serving the current and future rail, light 
rail, and homeland security needs of the region. 
(c) SUBMISSION OF REPORT.—The Secretary shall— 
(1) complete the Railroad Bridge report under subsection 
(a) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act; and 
(2) submit the report to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate and Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. 
(d) LIMITATIONS.—The Secretary shall not— 
(1) demolish the Railroad Bridge or otherwise render the 
Railroad Bridge unavailable or unusable for rail traffic; or 
(2) reduce maintenance of the Railroad Bridge. 
(e) EASEMENT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide to the city 
of Alameda, California, a nonexclusive access easement over 
the Oakland Estuary that comprises the subsurface land and 
surface approaches for the Railroad Bridge that— 
(A) is consistent with the Bay Trail Proposal of the 
city of Oakland; and 
(B) is otherwise suitable for the improvement, oper-
ation, and maintenance of the Railroad Bridge or construc-
tion, operation, and maintenance of a suitable replacement 
bridge. 
(2) COST.—The easement under paragraph (1) shall be 
provided to the city of Alameda without consideration and 
at no cost to the United States. 
SEC. 4018. LOS ANGELES RIVER REVITALIZATION STUDY, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordination with the city 
of Los Angeles, shall— 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01173
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1176 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) prepare a feasibility study for environmental ecosystem 
restoration, flood control, recreation, and other aspects of Los 
Angeles River revitalization that is consistent with the goals 
of the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan published 
by the city of Los Angeles; and 
(2) consider any locally-preferred project alternatives devel-
oped through a full and open evaluation process for inclusion 
in the study. 
(b) USE OF EXISTING INFORMATION AND MEASURES.—In pre-
paring the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall use, 
to the maximum extent practicable— 
(1) information obtained from the Los Angeles River 
Revitalization Master Plan; and 
(2) the development process of that plan. 
(c) DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to construct 
demonstration projects in order to provide information to 
develop the study under subsection (a)(1). 
(2) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of any 
project under this subsection shall be not more than 65 percent. 
(3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is author-
ized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $25,000,000. 
SEC. 4019. LYTLE CREEK, RIALTO, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and ground-
water recharge, Lytle Creek, Rialto, California. 
SEC. 4020. MOKELUMNE RIVER, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply 
along the Mokelumne River, San Joaquin County, California. 
(b) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to invalidate, preempt, or create any 
exception to State water law, State water rights, or Federal or 
State permitted activities or agreements. 
SEC. 4021. ORICK, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
reduction and ecosystem restoration, Orick, California. 
(b) FEASIBILITY OF RESTORING OR REHABILITATING REDWOOK 
CREEK LEVEES.—In conducting the study, the Secretary shall deter-
mine the feasibility of restoring or rehabilitating the Redwood Creek 
Levees, Humboldt County, California. 
SEC. 4022. SHORELINE STUDY, 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. 4023. RIALTO, FONTANA, AND COLTON, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply for Rialto, Fontana, 
and Colton, California. 
SEC. 4024. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study to deter-
mine the feasibility of, and alternatives for, measures to protect 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01174
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1177 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
water diversion facilities and fish protective screen facilities in 
the vicinity of river mile 178 on the Sacramento River, California. 
SEC. 4025. SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, San Diego County, 
California, including a review of the feasibility of connecting 4 
existing reservoirs to increase usable storage capacity. 
SEC. 4026. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, 
CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of the beneficial use of dredged material from 
the San Francisco Bay in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Cali-
fornia, including the benefits and impacts of salinity in the Delta 
and the benefits to navigation, flood damage reduction, ecosystem 
restoration, water quality, salinity control, water supply reliability, 
and recreation. 
(b) COOPERATION.—In conducting the study, the Secretary shall 
cooperate with the California department of water resources and 
appropriate Federal and State entities in developing options for 
the beneficial use of dredged material from San Francisco Bay 
for the Sacramento-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 carrying out and monitoring a pilot project using up to 
150,000 cubic yards of dredged material and being carried out 
at the Sherman Island site, examining larger scale use of dredged 
materials from the San Francisco Bay and Suisun Bay Channel, 
and analyzing the feasibility of the potential use of saline materials 
from the San Francisco Bay for both rehandling and ecosystem 
restoration purposes. 
SEC. 4027. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORELINE, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in cooperation with non-Fed-
eral interests, shall conduct a study of the feasibility of carrying 
out a project for— 
(1) flood damage reduction along the South San Francisco 
Bay shoreline, California; 
(2) restoration of the South San Francisco Bay salt ponds 
(including on land owned by other Federal agencies); and 
(3) other related purposes, as the Secretary determines 
to be appropriate. 
(b) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
a report describing the results of the study under subsection 
(a). 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall 
include recommendations of the Secretary with respect to the 
project described in subsection (a) based on planning, design, 
and land acquisition documents prepared by— 
(A) the California State Coastal Conservancy; 
(B) the Santa Clara Valley Water District; and 
(C) other local interests. 
(c) CREDIT.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01175
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1178 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with section 221 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), and subject 
to paragraph (2), the Secretary shall credit toward the non- 
Federal share of the cost of any project authorized by law 
as a result of the South San Francisco Bay shoreline study— 
(A) the cost of work performed by the non-Federal 
interest in preparation of the feasibility study that is con-
ducted before the date of the feasibility cost sharing agree-
ment; and 
(B) the funds expended by the non-Federal interest 
for acquisition costs of land that constitutes a part of 
such a project and that is owned by the United States 
Fish and Wildlife Service. 
(2) CONDITIONS.—The Secretary may provide credit under 
paragraph (1) if— 
(A) the value of all or any portion of land referred 
to in paragraph (1)(B) that would be subject to the credit 
has not previously been credited to the non-Federal interest 
for a project; and 
(B) the land was not acquired to meet any mitigation 
requirement of the non-Federal interest. 
SEC. 4028. TWENTYNINE PALMS, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out projects for flood damage reduction in the vicinity 
of Twentynine Palms, California. 
SEC. 4029. YUCCA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Burnt Mountain 
basin, in the vicinity of Yucca Valley, California. 
SEC. 4030. SELENIUM STUDIES, COLORADO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the United States Geological 
Survey, in consultation with State water quality and resource and 
conservation agencies, shall conduct regional and watershed-wide 
studies to address selenium concentrations in the State of Colorado, 
including studies— 
(1) to measure selenium on specific sites; and 
(2) to determine whether specific selenium measures 
studied should be recommended for use in demonstration 
projects. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000. 
SEC. 4031. DELAWARE AND CHRISTINA RIVERS AND SHELLPOT CREEK, 
WILMINGTON, DELAWARE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and related 
purposes along the Delaware and Christina Rivers and Shellpot 
Creek, Wilmington, Delaware. 
SEC. 4032. DELAWARE INLAND BAYS AND TRIBUTARIES AND ATLANTIC 
COAST, DELAWARE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of modifying the project for navigation, Indian 
River Inlet and Bay, Delaware. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01176
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1179 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION AND PRIORITY.—In carrying 
out the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall— 
(1) take into consideration all necessary activities to sta-
bilize the scour holes threatening the Inlet and Bay shorelines; 
and 
(2) give priority to stabilizing and restoring the Inlet 
channel and scour holes adjacent to the United States Coast 
Guard pier and helipad and the adjacent State-owned prop-
erties. 
SEC. 4033. COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES, FLORIDA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for hurricane and storm damage reduction 
and flood damage reduction in the vicinity of Vanderbilt, Park 
Shore, and Naples beaches, Collier County, Florida. 
SEC. 4034. LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, including 
improved water quality, and related purposes, Lower St. Johns 
River, Florida. 
SEC. 
4035. 
HERBERT 
HOOVER 
DIKE 
SUPPLEMENTAL 
MAJOR 
REHABILITATION REPORT, FLORIDA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish a supplemental 
report to the major rehabilitation report for the Herbert Hoover 
Dike system approved by the Chief of Engineers in November 
2000. 
(b) INCLUSIONS.—The supplemental report under subsection (a) 
shall include— 
(1) an evaluation of existing conditions at the Herbert 
Hoover Dike system; 
(2) an identification of additional risks associated with 
flood events at the system that are equal to or greater than 
the standard projected flood risks; 
(3) an evaluation of the potential to integrate projects of 
the Corps of Engineers into an enhanced flood protection system 
for Lake Okeechobee, including— 
(A) the potential for additional water storage north 
of Lake Okeechobee; and 
(B) an analysis of other project features included in 
the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan; and 
(4) a review of the report prepared for the South Florida 
Water Management District dated April 2006. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,500,000. 
SEC. 4036. VANDERBILT BEACH LAGOON, FLORIDA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, water 
supply, and improvement of water quality at Vanderbilt Beach 
Lagoon, Florida. 
SEC. 4037. MERIWETHER COUNTY, GEORGIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Meriwether County, 
Georgia. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01177
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1180 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4038. BOISE RIVER, IDAHO. 
The study for flood control, Boise River, Idaho, authorized 
by section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 324), is modified— 
(1) to add ecosystem restoration and water supply as project 
purposes to be studied; and 
(2) to require the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the study the cost, not to exceed $500,000, 
of 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. 
SEC. 4039. BALLARD’S ISLAND SIDE CHANNEL, ILLINOIS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for ecosystem restoration, Ballard’s Island 
side channel, Illinois. 
SEC. 4040. 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. 4041. SALEM, INDIANA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project to provide an additional water supply 
source for Salem, Indiana. 
SEC. 4042. BUCKHORN LAKE, KENTUCKY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of modifying the project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Buckhorn Lake, Kentucky, authorized by section 2 of the 
Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), to add ecosystem 
restoration and recreation as project purposes. 
(b) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The non-Federal interest may 
provide the non-Federal share of the cost of the study in the 
form of in-kind services and materials. 
SEC. 4043. DEWEY LAKE, KENTUCKY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of modifying the project for Dewey Lake, Kentucky, to add water 
supply as a project purpose. 
SEC. 4044. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the project for flood 
control, Louisville, Kentucky, authorized by section 4 of the Flood 
Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), to investigate measures 
to address the rehabilitation of the project. 
SEC. 4045. VIDALIA PORT, LOUISIANA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for navigation improvement at Vidalia, 
Louisiana. 
SEC. 4046. FALL RIVER HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS AND RHODE 
ISLAND. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of deepening that portion of the navigation channel of the navigation 
project for Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, 
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01178
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1181 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(82 Stat. 731), seaward of the Charles M. Braga, Jr. Memorial 
Bridge, Fall River and Somerset, Massachusetts. 
SEC. 4047. CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, Clinton 
River, Michigan. 
SEC. 4048. HAMBURG AND GREEN OAK TOWNSHIPS, MICHIGAN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction on Ore Lake 
and the Huron River for Hamburg and Green Oak Townships, 
Michigan. 
SEC. 4049. LAKE ERIE AT LUNA PIER, MICHIGAN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for storm damage reduction and other 
related purposes along Lake Erie at Luna Pier, Michigan. 
SEC. 4050. DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study and 
prepare a report to evaluate the integrity of the bulkhead system 
located on and in the vicinity of Duluth-Superior Harbor, Duluth, 
Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin. 
(b) CONTENTS.—The report shall include— 
(1) a determination of causes of corrosion of the bulkhead 
system; 
(2) recommendations to reduce corrosion of the bulkhead 
system; 
(3) a description of the necessary repairs to the bulkhead 
system; and 
(4) an estimate of the cost of addressing the causes of 
the corrosion and carrying out necessary repairs. 
SEC. 4051. NORTHEAST MISSISSIPPI. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of modifying the project for navigation, Tennessee-Tombigbee 
Waterway, Alabama and Mississippi, to provide water supply for 
northeast Mississippi. 
SEC. 4052. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project in the vicinity of the Atlantic Intracoastal 
Waterway, New Jersey, for the construction of a dredged material 
disposal transfer facility to make dredged material available for 
beneficial reuse. 
SEC. 4053. BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, including 
improved water quality, enhanced public access, and recreation, 
on the Kill Van Kull, Bayonne, New Jersey. 
SEC. 4054. CARTERET, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, including 
improved water quality, enhanced public access, and recreation, 
on the Raritan River, Carteret, New Jersey. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01179
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1182 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4055. GLOUCESTER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Gloucester 
County, New Jersey, including the feasibility of restoring the flood 
protection dikes in Gibbstown, New Jersey, and the associated 
tidegates in Gloucester County, New Jersey. 
SEC. 4056. PERTH AMBOY, NEW JERSEY. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for environmental restoration and recre-
ation on the Arthur Kill, Perth Amboy, New Jersey. 
SEC. 4057. BATAVIA, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for hydropower and related purposes in 
the vicinity of Batavia, New York. 
SEC. 4058. BIG SISTER CREEK, EVANS, NEW YORK. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
reduction, Big Sister Creek, Evans, New York. 
(b) EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS.—In conducting the 
study, the Secretary shall evaluate potential solutions to flooding 
from all sources, including flooding that results from ice jams. 
SEC. 4059. FINGER LAKES, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for aquatic ecosystem restoration and 
protection, Finger Lakes, New York, to address water quality and 
aquatic nuisance species. 
SEC. 4060. LAKE ERIE SHORELINE, BUFFALO, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for storm damage reduction and shoreline 
protection in the vicinity of Gallagher Beach, Lake Erie Shoreline, 
Buffalo, New York. 
SEC. 4061. NEWTOWN CREEK, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out ecosystem restoration improvements on Newtown 
Creek, Brooklyn and Queens, New York. 
SEC. 4062. NIAGARA RIVER, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for a low-head hydroelectric generating 
facility in the Niagara River, New York. 
SEC. 4063. SHORE PARKWAY GREENWAY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the feasibility of carrying 
out a project for shoreline protection in the vicinity of the confluence 
of the Narrows and Gravesend Bay, Upper New York Bay, Shore 
Parkway Greenway, Brooklyn, New York. 
SEC. 4064. UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, NEW YORK. 
In accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), a nonprofit organization may serve, 
with the consent of the affected local government, as the non- 
Federal interest for a study for the Upper Delaware River water-
shed, New York, being carried out under Committee Resolution 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01180
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1183 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
2495 of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
the House of Representatives, adopted May 9, 1996. 
SEC. 4065. LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of existing water and 
water quality-related infrastructure in Lincoln County, North Caro-
lina, to assist local interests in determining the most efficient 
and effective way to connect county infrastructure. 
SEC. 4066. WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Wilkes County, North 
Carolina. 
SEC. 4067. YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Yadkinville, North Caro-
lina. 
SEC. 4068. FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, OHIO. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out projects for flood damage reduction in Cuyahoga, 
Lake, Ashtabula, Geauga, Erie, Lucas, Sandusky, Huron, and Stark 
Counties, Ohio. 
SEC. 4069. LAKE ERIE, OHIO. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out projects for power generation at confined disposal 
facilities along Lake Erie, Ohio. 
SEC. 4070. OHIO RIVER, OHIO. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out projects for flood damage reduction on the Ohio 
River in Mahoning, Columbiana, Jefferson, Belmont, Noble, Monroe, 
Washington, Athens, Meigs, Gallia, Lawrence, and Scioto Counties, 
Ohio. 
SEC. 4071. TOLEDO HARBOR DREDGED MATERIAL PLACEMENT, 
TOLEDO, OHIO. 
The Secretary shall study the feasibility of removing previously 
dredged and placed materials from the Toledo Harbor confined 
disposal facility, transporting the materials, and disposing of the 
materials in or at abandoned mine sites in southeastern Ohio. 
SEC. 4072. TOLEDO HARBOR, MAUMEE RIVER, AND LAKE CHANNEL 
PROJECT, TOLEDO, OHIO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter-
mine the feasibility of constructing a project for navigation, Toledo, 
Ohio. 
(b) FACTORS
FOR CONSIDERATION.—In conducting the study 
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall take into consideration— 
(1) realigning the existing Toledo Harbor channel widening 
occurring where the River Channel meets the Lake Channel 
from the northwest to the southeast side of the River Channel; 
(2) realigning the entire 200-foot wide channel located at 
the upper river terminus of the River Channel southern river 
embankment towards the northern river embankment; and 
(3) adjusting the existing turning basin to accommodate 
those changes. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01181
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1184 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4073. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND FISH PASSAGE IMPROVE-
MENTS, OREGON. 
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine 
the feasibility of undertaking ecosystem restoration 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 Oregon, local 
governments, and other Federal agencies; and 
(2) place emphasis on— 
(A) fish passage and conservation and restoration 
strategies to benefit species that are listed or proposed 
for listing as threatened or endangered species under the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); 
and 
(B) other watershed restoration objectives. 
(c) PILOT PROGRAM.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In conjunction with conducting the study 
under subsection (a), the Secretary may carry out pilot projects 
to demonstrate the effectiveness of ecosystem restoration and 
fish passages. 
(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is author-
ized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this subsection. 
SEC. 4074. WALLA WALLA RIVER BASIN, OREGON. 
In conducting the study of determine the feasibility of carrying 
out a project for ecosystem restoration, Walla Walla River basin, 
Oregon, the Secretary shall— 
(1) credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
study 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 
(2) allow the non-Federal interest to provide the non-Fed-
eral share of the cost of the study in the form of in-kind 
services and materials. 
SEC. 4075. CHARTIERS CREEK WATERSHED, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Chartiers 
Creek watershed, Pennsylvania. 
SEC. 4076. KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the project for flood 
control, Kinzua Dam and Allegheny Reservoir, Warren, Pennsyl-
vania, authorized by section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 
22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1570), and modified by section 2 of the Flood 
Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1215), section 2 of the 
Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941 (55 Stat. 646), and section 
4 of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 887), 
to review operations of and identify modifications to the project 
to expand recreational opportunities. 
SEC. 4077. WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study of struc-
tural and nonstructural flood damage reduction, stream bank 
protection, storm water management, channel clearing and modi-
fication, and watershed coordination measures in the Mahoning 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01182
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1185 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
River basin, Pennsylvania, the Allegheny River basin, Pennsylvania, 
and the Upper Ohio River basin, Pennsylvania, to provide a level 
of flood protection sufficient to prevent future losses to communities 
located in such basins from flooding such as occurred in September 
2004, but not less than a 100-year level of flood protection. 
(b) PRIORITY COMMUNITIES.—In carrying out this section, the 
Secretary shall give priority to the following Pennsylvania commu-
nities: Marshall Township, Ross Township, Shaler Township, Jack-
son Township, Harmony, Zelienople, Darlington Township, Houston 
Borough, Chartiers Township, Washington, Canton Township, 
Tarentum Borough, and East Deer Township. 
SEC. 4078. WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the project for flood 
control, Williamsport, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 5 of the 
Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1570), to investigate 
measures to rehabilitate the project. 
SEC. 4079. YARDLEY BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, at Yardley 
Borough, Pennsylvania, including the alternative of raising River 
Road. 
SEC. 4080. RIO VALENCIANO, JUNCOS, PUERTO RICO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
reevaluate the project for flood damage reduction and water supply, 
Rio Valenciano, Juncos, Puerto Rico, authorized by section 209 
of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1197) and section 204 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1828), to determine 
the feasibility of carrying out the project. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the study the cost of 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. 
SEC. 4081. WOONSOCKET LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, BLACKSTONE 
RIVER BASIN, RHODE ISLAND. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study, and, not later than June 
30, 2008, submit to Congress a report that describes the results 
of the study, on the flood damage reduction project, Woonsocket, 
Blackstone River basin, Rhode Island, authorized by section 10 
of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 892), 
to determine the measures necessary to restore the level of protec-
tion of the project as originally designed and constructed. 
SEC. 4082. CROOKED CREEK, BENNETTSVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Crooked Creek, 
Bennettsville, South Carolina. 
SEC. 4083. BROAD RIVER, YORK COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Broad River, York County, 
South Carolina. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01183
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1186 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4084. SAVANNAH RIVER, SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall determine the feasibility 
of carrying out projects— 
(1) to improve the Savannah River for navigation and 
related purposes that may be necessary to support the location 
of container cargo and other port facilities to be located in 
Jasper County, South Carolina, in the vicinity of Mile 6 of 
the Savannah Harbor entrance channel; and 
(2) to remove from the proposed Jasper County port site 
the easements used by the Corps of Engineers for placement 
of dredged fill materials for the Savannah Harbor Federal 
navigation project. 
(b) FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION.—In making a determination 
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall take into consideration— 
(1) landside infrastructure; 
(2) the provision of any additional dredged material dis-
posal area as a consequence of removing from the proposed 
Jasper County port site the easements used by the Corps of 
Engineers for placement of dredged fill materials for the 
Savannah Harbor Federal navigation project; and 
(3) the results of the proposed bistate compact between 
the State of Georgia and the State of South Carolina to own, 
develop, and operate port facilities at the proposed Jasper 
County port site, as described in the term sheet executed by 
the Governor of the State of Georgia and the Governor of 
the State of South Carolina on March 12, 2007. 
SEC. 4085. CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Chattanooga 
Creek, Dobbs Branch, Chattanooga, Tennessee. 
SEC. 4086. CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Cleveland, 
Tennessee. 
SEC. 4087. CUMBERLAND RIVER, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for recreation on, riverbank protection 
for, and environmental protection of, the Cumberland River and 
riparian habitats in the city of Nashville and Davidson County, 
Tennessee. 
SEC. 4088. LEWIS, LAWRENCE, AND WAYNE COUNTIES, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply for Lewis, Lawrence, 
and Wayne Counties, Tennessee. 
SEC. 4089. WOLF RIVER AND NONCONNAH CREEK, MEMPHIS, TEN-
NESSEE. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction along Wolf 
River and Nonconnah Creek, in the vicinity of Memphis, Tennessee, 
to include the repair, replacement, rehabilitation, and restoration 
of the following pumping stations: Cypress Creek, Nonconnah 
Creek, Ensley, Marble Bayou, and Bayou Gayoso. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01184
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1187 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4090. ABILENE, TEXAS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply, Abilene, Texas. 
SEC. 4091. COASTAL TEXAS ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND RESTORA-
TION, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop a comprehensive 
plan to determine the feasibility of carrying out projects for flood 
damage reduction, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and 
ecosystem restoration in the coastal areas of the State of Texas. 
(b) SCOPE.—The comprehensive plan shall provide for the 
protection, conservation, and restoration of wetlands, 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. 
(c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘coastal 
areas in the State of Texas’’ means the coastal areas of the State 
of Texas from the Sabine River on the east to the Rio Grande 
River on the west and includes tidal waters, barrier islands, 
marshes, coastal wetlands, rivers and streams, and adjacent areas. 
SEC. 4092. PORT OF GALVESTON, TEXAS. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the feasibility of carrying 
out a project for dredged material disposal in the vicinity of the 
project for navigation and environmental restoration, Houston-Gal-
veston Navigation Channels, Texas, authorized by section 101(a)(30) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3666). 
SEC. 4093. GRAND COUNTY AND MOAB, UTAH. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for water supply for Grand County and 
the city of Moab, Utah, including a review of the impact of current 
and future demands on the Spanish Valley Aquifer. 
SEC. 4094. SOUTHWESTERN UTAH. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Santa Clara 
River, Washington, Iron, and Kane Counties, Utah. 
SEC. 4095. ECOSYSTEM AND HYDROPOWER GENERATION DAMS, 
VERMONT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study of the 
potential to carry out ecosystem restoration and hydropower genera-
tion at dams in the State of Vermont, including a review of the 
report of the Secretary on the land and water resources of the 
New England–New York region submitted to the President on April 
27, 1956 (published as Senate Document Number 14, 85th Con-
gress), and other relevant reports. 
(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the study under subsection (a) 
shall be to determine the feasibility of providing water resource 
improvements and small-scale hydropower generation in the State 
of Vermont, including, as appropriate, options for dam restoration, 
hydropower, dam removal, and fish passage enhancement. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to carry out this section $500,000. Such sums shall remain available 
until expended. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01185
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1188 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 4096. ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The study for rehabilitation of the Elliott 
Bay Seawall, Seattle, Washington, being carried out under Com-
mittee Resolution 2704 of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives adopted September 
25, 2002, is modified to include a determination of the feasibility 
of reducing future damage to the seawall from seismic activity. 
(b) ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRIBUTIONS.—In carrying out the study, 
the Secretary may accept contributions in excess of the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the study from the non-Federal interest to 
the extent that the Secretary determines that the contributions 
will facilitate completion of the study. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of any project authorized by law as a result 
of the study the value of contributions accepted by the Secretary 
under subsection (b). 
SEC. 4097. 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. 
SEC. 4098. KENOSHA HARBOR, WISCONSIN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for navigation, Kenosha Harbor, Wisconsin, 
including the extension of existing piers. 
SEC. 4099. JOHNSONVILLE DAM, JOHNSONVILLE, WISCONSIN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the Johnsonville Dam, 
Johnsonville, Wisconsin, to determine if the structure prevents ice 
jams on the Sheboygan River. 
SEC. 4100. WAUWATOSA, WISCONSIN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility 
of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and environ-
mental restoration, Menomonee River and Underwood Creek, 
Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, and greater Milwaukee watersheds, Wis-
consin. 
SEC. 4101. DEBRIS REMOVAL. 
(a) EVALUATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
States, in coordination with the Secretary and the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and in consulta-
tion with affected communities, shall conduct a complete 
evaluation of Federal and non-Federal demolition, debris 
removal, segregation, transportation, and disposal practices 
relating to disaster areas designated in response to Hurricanes 
Katrina and Rita (including regulated and nonregulated mate-
rials and debris). 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The evaluation under paragraph (1) shall 
include a review of— 
(A) compliance with all applicable environmental laws; 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01186
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1189 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(B) permits issued or required to be issued with respect 
to debris handling, transportation, storage, or disposal; and 
(C) administrative actions relating to debris removal 
and disposal in the disaster areas described in paragraph 
(1). 
(b) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enact-
ment of this Act, the Comptroller General, in consultation with 
the Secretary and the Administrator, shall submit to the Committee 
on the Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Com-
mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep-
resentatives a report that— 
(1) describes the findings of the Comptroller General with 
respect to the evaluation under subsection (a); 
(2)(A) certifies compliance with all applicable environ-
mental laws; and 
(B) identifies any area in which a violation of such a 
law has occurred or is occurring; 
(3) includes recommendations to ensure— 
(A) the protection of the environment; 
(B) sustainable practices; and 
(C) the integrity of hurricane and flood protection infra-
structure relating to debris disposal practices; 
(4) contains an enforcement plan that is designed to prevent 
illegal dumping of hurricane debris in a disaster area; and 
(5) contains plans of the Secretary and the Administrator 
to involve the public and non-Federal interests, including 
through the formation of a Federal advisory committee, as 
necessary, to seek public comment relating to the removal, 
disposal, and planning for the handling of post-hurricane debris. 
(c) RESTRICTION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—No Federal funds may be used to pay 
for or reimburse any State or local entity in Louisiana for 
the disposal of construction and demolition debris generated 
as a result of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 in a landfill designated 
for construction and demolition debris as described in section 
257.2 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, unless that 
waste meets the definition of construction and demolition 
debris, as specified under Federal law and described in that 
section on the date of enactment of this Act. 
(2) APPLICABILITY.—The restriction in paragraph (1) shall 
apply only to any disposal that occurs after the date of enact-
ment of this Act. 
TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS 
SEC. 5001. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the 
Secretary shall be responsible for maintenance of the following 
navigation channels and breakwaters constructed or improved by 
the non-Federal interest if the Secretary determines that such 
maintenance is economically justified and environmentally accept-
able and that the channel or breakwater was constructed in accord-
ance with applicable permits and appropriate engineering and 
design standards: 
(1) Manatee Harbor basin, Florida. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01187
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1190 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) Tampa Harbor, Sparkman Channel and Davis Island, 
Florida. 
(3) West turning basin, Canaveral Harbor, Florida. 
(4) Bayou LaFourche Channel, Port Fourchon, Louisiana. 
(5) Calcasieu River at Devil’s Elbow, Louisiana. 
(6) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, Pidgeon Industrial Park, 
Memphis Harbor, Tennessee. 
(7) Houston Ship Channel, Bayport Cruise Channel and 
Bayport Cruise turning basin, as part of the existing Bayport 
Channel, Texas. 
(8) Pix Bayou Navigation Channel, Chambers County, 
Texas. 
(9) Jacintoport Channel at Houston Ship Channel, Texas. 
(10) 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 maintenance of a channel listed in sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall make a determination as provided 
in subsection (a) and advise the non-Federal interest of the Sec-
retary’s determination. 
SEC. 5002. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide technical, plan-
ning, and design assistance to non-Federal interests for carrying 
out watershed management, restoration, 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 quality. 
(2) Control and remediation of toxic sediments. 
(3) Restoration of degraded streams, rivers, wetlands, and 
other water bodies to their natural condition as a means to 
control flooding, excessive erosion, and sedimentation. 
(4) Protection and restoration of watersheds, including 
urban watersheds. 
(5) Demonstration of technologies for nonstructural meas-
ures 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 25 percent. 
(d) PROJECT LOCATIONS.—The locations referred to in subsection 
(a) are the following: 
(1) Charlotte Harbor watershed, Florida. 
(2) Those portions of the watersheds of the Chattahoochee, 
Etowah, Flint, Ocmulgee, and Oconee Rivers lying within the 
counties of Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, 
Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, 
Paulding, Rockdale, and Walton, Georgia. 
(3) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois. 
(4) Amite River basin, Louisiana. 
(5) East Atchafalaya River basin, Iberville Parish and 
Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana. 
(6) Red River watershed, Louisiana. 
(7) Taunton River basin, Massachusetts. 
(8) Marlboro Township, New Jersey. 
(9) Esopus, Plattekill, and Rondout Creeks, Greene, Sul-
livan, and Ulster Counties, New York. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01188
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1191 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(10) Greenwood Lake watershed, New York and New 
Jersey. 
(11) Long Island Sound watershed, New York. 
(12) Ramapo River watershed, New York. 
(13) Tuscarawas River basin, Ohio. 
(14) Western Lake Erie basin, Ohio. 
(15) Those portions of the watersheds of the Beaver, Upper 
Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower Allegheny, Kiskiminetas, Lower 
Monongahela, Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Rivers 
lying within the counties of Beaver, Butler, Lawrence, and 
Mercer, Pennsylvania. 
(16) Otter Creek watershed, Pennsylvania. 
(17) Unami Creek watershed, Milford Township, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(18) Sauk River basin, Washington. 
(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 assistance to 
enhance dam safety at the following locations: 
(1) Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho. 
(2) Keith Creek, Rockford, Illinois. 
(3) Mount Zion Mill Pond Dam, Fulton County, Indiana. 
(4) Hamilton Dam, Flint River, Flint, Michigan. 
(5) Congers Lake Dam, Rockland County, New York. 
(6) Lake Lucille Dam, New City, New York. 
(7) Peconic River Dams, town of Riverhead, Suffolk, Long 
Island, New York. 
(8) Pine Grove Lakes Dam, Sloatsburg, New York. 
(9) State Dam, Auburn, New York. 
(10) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York. 
(11) Brightwood Dam, Concord Township, Ohio. 
(12) Ingham Spring Dam, Solebury Township, Pennsyl-
vania. 
(13) Leaser Lake Dam, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. 
(14) Stillwater Dam, Monroe County, Pennsylvania. 
(15) 
Wissahickon 
Creek 
Dam, 
Montgomery 
County, 
Pennsylvania. 
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—The assistance provided under subsection 
(a) for State Dam, Auburn, New York, shall be for a project for 
rehabilitation in accordance with the report on State Dam 
Rehabilitation, Owasco Lake Outlet, New York, dated March 1999, 
if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out subsection (a) $12,000,000. 
SEC. 5004. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATIONS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the 
Secretary shall evaluate the structural integrity and effectiveness 
of a project for flood damage reduction and, if the Secretary deter-
mines that the project does not meet such minimum standards 
as the Secretary may establish 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 carry out an evaluation and 
take such actions as may be necessary under subsection (a) for 
33 USC 701b–14. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01189
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1192 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
the project for flood damage reduction, Arkansas River Levees, 
Arkansas. 
SEC. 5005. FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS. 
(a) IN
GENERAL.—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 paragraphs (23) and 
(27); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (28) 
and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(29) Ascension Parish, Louisiana; 
‘‘(30) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana; 
‘‘(31) Iberville Parish, Louisiana; 
‘‘(32) Livingston Parish, Louisiana; and 
‘‘(33) Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana.’’. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 212(i)(1) of 
such Act (33 U.S.C. 2332(i)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘section— 
’’ and all that follows before the period at the end and inserting 
‘‘section $20,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5006. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AUTHORIZED PROJECTS. 
(a) IN
GENERAL.—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 paragraph (8) 
and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(9) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(18); 
‘‘(10) $27,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(19); 
‘‘(11) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(20); 
‘‘(12) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(23); 
‘‘(13) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(25); 
‘‘(14) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(26); 
‘‘(15) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(27); 
‘‘(16) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(28); and 
‘‘(17) $30,000,000 for the project described in subsection 
(c)(40).’’. 
(b) EAST ARKANSAS ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY, ARKANSAS.—Fed-
eral assistance made available under the rural enterprise zone 
program of the Department of Agriculture may be used toward 
payment of the non-Federal share of the costs of the project 
described in section 219(c)(20) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–219) if such assistance is authorized 
to be used for such purposes. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01190
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1193 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5007. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS AND CONSTRUCTION 
FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS. 
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports and, 
if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, shall expe-
dite completion of construction for the following projects: 
(1) Project for navigation, Whittier, Alaska. 
(2) Laguna Creek watershed flood damage reduction 
project, California. 
(3) Daytona Beach shore protection project, Florida. 
(4) Flagler Beach shore protection project, Florida. 
(5) St. Johns County shore protection project, Florida. 
(6) Chenier Plain environmental restoration project, Lou-
isiana. 
(7) False River, Louisiana, being carried out under section 
206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 
2330). 
(8) North River, Peabody, Massachusetts, being carried 
out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 
U.S.C. 701s). 
(9) 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). 
(10) 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). 
(11) 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). 
(12) Oriskany Wildlife Management Area, Rome, New York, 
being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). 
(13) Whitney Point Lake, Otselic River, Whitney Point, 
New York, being carried out under section 1135 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a). 
(14) Chenango Lake, Chenango County, New York, being 
carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). 
SEC. 5008. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CERTAIN 
PROJECTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall expedite completion of 
the reports 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 water supply, Little Red River, Arkansas. 
(2) Watershed study, Fountain Creek, north of Pueblo, 
Colorado. 
(3) Project for shoreline stabilization at Egmont Key, 
Florida. 
(4) Project for navigation, Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas 
and Louisiana. 
(5) Project for ecosystem restoration, University Lake, 
Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 
(b) SPECIAL RULE
FOR EGMONT KEY, FLORIDA.—In carrying 
out the project for shoreline stabilization at Egmont Key, Florida, 
referred to in subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall waive any cost 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01191
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1194 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
share to be provided by non-Federal interests for any portion of 
the project that benefits federally owned property. 
SEC. 5009. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal 
expense, an assessment of the water resources needs of the river 
basins and watersheds of the southeastern United States. 
(b) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In carrying out the assess-
ment, the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with 
State and local agencies, non-Federal and nonprofit entities, and 
regional researchers. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $7,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5010. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT 
PROJECT. 
Section 514 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 343; 117 Stat. 142) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(A) by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: ‘‘The Secretary shall ensure that such activities are 
carried out throughout the geographic area that is subject 
to the plan.’’; 
(2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
(g) and (h), respectively; 
(3) by inserting after subsection (e) the following: 
‘‘(f) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project or activity carried out under this section, a non-Federal 
interest may include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the 
affected local government.’’; 
(4) in subsection (g) (as redesignated by paragraph (2) 
of this section) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(4) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of the costs 
of activities carried out under the plan may be provided— 
‘‘(i) in cash; 
‘‘(ii) by the provision of land, easements, rights- 
of-way, relocations, or disposal areas; 
‘‘(iii) by in-kind services to implement the project; 
or 
‘‘(iv) by any combination thereof. 
‘‘(B) PRIVATE OWNERSHIP.—Land needed for activities 
carried out under the plan and credited toward the non- 
Federal share of the cost of an activity may remain in 
private ownership subject to easements that are— 
‘‘(i) satisfactory to the Secretary; and 
‘‘(ii) necessary to ensure achievement of the project 
purposes.’’; and 
(5) in subsection (h) (as redesignated by paragraph (2) 
of this section) by striking ‘‘for the period of fiscal years 2003 
and 2004.’’ and inserting ‘‘per fiscal year through fiscal year 
2015.’’. 
SEC. 5011. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION 
PROGRAM. 
(a) GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.—Sec-
tion 506(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–22(c)) is amended— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01192
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1195 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
(3) and (4), respectively; 
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following: 
‘‘(2) 
RECONNAISSANCE
STUDIES.—Before 
planning, 
designing, or constructing a project under paragraph (3), the 
Secretary shall carry out a reconnaissance study— 
‘‘(A) to identify methods of restoring the fishery, eco-
system, and beneficial uses of the Great Lakes; and 
‘‘(B) to determine whether planning of a project under 
paragraph (3) should proceed.’’; and 
(3) in paragraph (4)(A) (as redesignated by paragraph (1) 
of this subsection) by striking ‘‘paragraph (2)’’ and inserting 
‘‘paragraph (3)’’. 
(b) COST SHARING.—Section 506(f) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–22(f)) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (2)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘The Federal share’’ and inserting 
‘‘Except for reconnaissance studies, the Federal share’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘(2) or (3)’’ and inserting ‘‘(3) or (4)’’; 
(2) in paragraph (3)— 
(A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘subsection (c)(2)’’ 
and inserting ‘‘subsection (c)(3)’’; and 
(B) in subparagraph (B) by striking ‘‘50 percent’’ and 
inserting ‘‘100 percent’’; and 
(3) in paragraph (5) by striking ‘‘Notwithstanding’’ and 
inserting ‘‘In accordance with’’. 
SEC. 5012. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT 
REMEDIATION. 
Section 401(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
(33 U.S.C. 1268 note; 104 Stat. 4644; 114 Stat. 2613) is amended 
by striking ‘‘through 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘through 2012’’. 
SEC. 5013. GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODELS. 
Section 516(g)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326b(g)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘through 2006’’ 
and inserting ‘‘through 2012’’. 
SEC. 5014. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION AND PROTECTION. 
(a) GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION.—Using available funds, the Sec-
retary shall expedite the operation and maintenance, including 
dredging, of the navigation features of the Great Lakes and Con-
necting Channels for the purpose of supporting commercial naviga-
tion to authorized project depths. 
(b) GREAT LAKES PILOT PROJECT.—Using available funds, the 
Director of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, in 
coordination with the Secretary, the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, 
and the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 
shall carry out a pilot project, on an emergency basis, to control 
and prevent further spreading of viral hemorrhagic septicemia in 
the Great Lakes and Connecting Channels. 
(c) GREAT LAKES AND CONNECTING CHANNELS DEFINED.—In 
this section, the term ‘‘Great Lakes and Connecting Channels’’ 
includes Lakes Superior, Huron, Michigan, Erie, and Ontario, all 
connecting waters between and among such lakes used for commer-
cial navigation, any navigation features in such lakes or waters 
that are a Federal operation or maintenance responsibility, and 
33 USC 426o–2. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01193
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1196 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
areas of the Saint Lawrence River that are operated or maintained 
by the Federal Government for commercial navigation. 
SEC. 5015. SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized, using amounts 
contributed by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corpora-
tion under subsection (b), to carry out projects for operations, 
maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation, including associated 
maintenance dredging, of the Eisenhower and Snell lock facilities 
and related navigational infrastructure for the Saint Lawrence Sea-
way, at a total cost of $134,650,000. 
(b) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—The Secretary is authorized to accept 
funds from the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 
to carry out projects under this section. Such funds may include 
amounts made available to the Corporation from the Harbor Mainte-
nance Trust Fund and the general fund of the Treasury of the 
United States pursuant to section 210 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238). 
(c) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
section authorizes the construction of any project to increase the 
depth or width of the navigation channel to a level greater than 
that previously authorized and existing on the date of enactment 
of this Act or to increase the dimensions of the Eisenhower and 
Snell lock facilities. 
SEC. 5016. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER DISPERSAL BARRIER PROJECT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with appro-
priate Federal and State agencies, shall study, design, and carry 
out a project to delay, deter, impede, or restrict the dispersal 
of aquatic nuisance species into the northern reaches of the Upper 
Mississippi River system. The Secretary shall complete the study, 
design, and construction of the project not later than 6 months 
after the date of enactment of this Act. 
(b) DISPERSAL BARRIER.—In carrying out subsection (a), the 
Secretary, at Federal expense, shall— 
(1) investigate and identify environmentally sound methods 
for preventing and reducing the dispersal of aquatic nuisance 
species through the northern reaches of the Upper Mississippi 
River system; 
(2) use available technologies and measures; 
(3) monitor and evaluate, in cooperation with the Director 
of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the effectiveness 
of the project in preventing and reducing the dispersal of 
aquatic nuisance species through the northern reaches of the 
Upper Mississippi River system; 
(4) submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on 
the results of the evaluation conducted under paragraph (3); 
and 
(5) operate and maintain the project. 
(c) REQUIREMENT.—In conducting the study under subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall take into consideration the feasibility of 
locating the dispersal barrier at the lock portion of the project 
at Lock and Dam 11 in the Upper Mississippi River basin. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $4,000,000 to carry out this section. 
Reports. 
Deadline. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01194
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1197 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5017. ESTUARY RESTORATION. 
(a) PURPOSES.—Section 102 of the Estuary Restoration Act 
of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2901) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (1) by inserting before the semicolon at 
the end the following: ‘‘by implementing a coordinated Federal 
approach to estuary habitat restoration activities, including 
the use of common monitoring standards and a common system 
for tracking restoration acreage’’; 
(2) in paragraph (2) by inserting ‘‘and implement’’ after 
‘‘to develop’’; and 
(3) in paragraph (3) by inserting ‘‘through cooperative 
agreements’’ after ‘‘restoration projects’’. 
(b) DEFINITION OF ESTUARY HABITAT RESTORATION PLAN.—Sec-
tion 103(6)(A) of the Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 
2902(6)(A)) is amended by striking ‘‘Federal or State’’ and inserting 
‘‘Federal, State, or regional’’. 
(c) ESTUARY HABITAT RESTORATION PROGRAM.—Section 104 of 
the Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2903) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘through the award of 
contracts and cooperative agreements’’ after ‘‘assistance’’; 
(2) in subsection (c)— 
(A) in paragraph (3)(A) by inserting ‘‘or State’’ after 
‘‘Federal’’; and 
(B) in paragraph (4)(B) by inserting ‘‘or approach’’ after 
‘‘technology’’; 
(3) in subsection (d)— 
(A) in paragraph (1)— 
(i) by striking ‘‘Except’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except’’; and 
(ii) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) MONITORING.— 
‘‘(i) COSTS.—The costs of monitoring an estuary 
habitat restoration project funded under this title may 
be included in the total cost of the estuary habitat 
restoration project. 
‘‘(ii) GOALS.—The goals of the monitoring shall 
be— 
‘‘(I) to measure the effectiveness of the restora-
tion project; and 
‘‘(II) to allow adaptive management to ensure 
project success.’’; 
(B) in paragraph (2) by inserting ‘‘or approach’’ after 
‘‘technology’’; and 
(C) in paragraph (3) by inserting ‘‘(including moni-
toring)’’ after ‘‘services’’; 
(4) in subsection (f)(1)(B) by inserting ‘‘long-term’’ before 
‘‘maintenance’’; and 
(5) in subsection (g)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘In carrying’’ and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying’’; and 
(B) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) SMALL PROJECTS.— 
‘‘(A) SMALL PROJECT DEFINED.—In this paragraph, the 
term ‘small project’ means a project carried out under 
this title with an estimated Federal cost of less than 
$1,000,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01195
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1198 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(B) DELEGATION
OF
PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION.—In 
carrying out this section, the Secretary, on recommendation 
of the Council, may delegate implementation of a small 
project to— 
‘‘(i) the Secretary of the Interior (acting through 
the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service); 
‘‘(ii) 
the 
Under 
Secretary 
for 
Oceans 
and 
Atmosphere of the Department of Commerce; 
‘‘(iii) the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency; or 
‘‘(iv) the Secretary of Agriculture. 
‘‘(C) FUNDING.—A small project delegated to the head 
of a Federal department or agency under this paragraph 
may be carried out using funds appropriated to the depart-
ment or agency under section 109(a)(1) or other funds 
available to the department or agency. 
‘‘(D) AGREEMENTS.—The head of a Federal department 
or agency to which a small project is delegated under 
this paragraph shall enter into an agreement with the 
non-Federal interest for the project generally in conform-
ance with the criteria in subsections (d) and (e). Cooperative 
agreements may be used for any delegated project to allow 
the non-Federal interest to carry out the project on behalf 
of the Federal agency.’’. 
(d) 
ESTABLISHMENT
OF
ESTUARY
HABITAT
RESTORATION 
COUNCIL.—Section 105(b) of the Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 
(33 U.S.C. 2904(b)) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (4) by striking ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; 
(2) in paragraph (5) by striking the period at the end 
and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(6) cooperating in the implementation of the strategy 
developed under section 106; 
‘‘(7) recommending standards for monitoring for restoration 
projects and contribution of project information to the database 
developed under section 107; and 
‘‘(8) otherwise using the respective authorities of the 
Council members to carry out this title.’’. 
(e) 
MONITORING
OF
ESTUARY
HABITAT
RESTORATION 
PROJECTS.—Section 107(d) of the Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 
(33 U.S.C. 2906(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘compile’’ and inserting 
‘‘have general data compilation, coordination, and analysis respon-
sibilities to carry out this title and in support of the strategy 
developed under this section, including compilation of’’. 
(f) REPORTING.—Section 108(a) of the Estuary Restoration Act 
of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2907(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘At the end 
of the third and fifth fiscal years following the date of enactment 
of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘Not later than September 30, 2008, 
and every 2 years thereafter’’. 
(g) FUNDING.—Section 109(a) of the Estuary Restoration Act 
of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2908(a)) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (1)— 
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by 
striking ‘‘to the Secretary’’; and 
(B) by striking subparagraphs (A) through (D) and 
inserting the following: 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01196
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1199 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(A) to the Secretary, $25,000,000 for each of fiscal 
years 2008 through 2012; 
‘‘(B) to the Secretary of the Interior (acting through 
the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service), 
$2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012; 
‘‘(C) to the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere 
of the Department of Commerce, $2,500,000 for each of 
fiscal years 2008 through 2012; 
‘‘(D) to the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, $2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 
through 2012; and 
‘‘(E) to the Secretary of Agriculture, $2,500,000 for 
each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012.’’; and 
(2) in the first sentence of paragraph (2)— 
(A) by inserting ‘‘and other information compiled under 
section 107’’ after ‘‘this title’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘2005’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’. 
(h) GENERAL PROVISIONS.—Section 110 of the Estuary Restora-
tion Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2909) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (b)(1)— 
(A) by inserting ‘‘or contracts’’ after ‘‘agreements’’; and 
(B) by inserting ‘‘, nongovernmental organizations,’’ 
after ‘‘agencies’’; and 
(2) by striking subsections (d) and (e). 
SEC. 
5018. 
MISSOURI 
RIVER 
AND 
TRIBUTARIES, 
MITIGATION, 
RECOVERY, AND RESTORATION, IOWA, KANSAS, MIS-
SOURI, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH 
DAKOTA, AND WYOMING. 
(a) STUDY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee to be 
established under subsection (b)(1), shall conduct a study of 
the Missouri River and its tributaries to determine actions 
required— 
(A) to mitigate losses of aquatic and terrestrial habitat; 
(B) to recover federally listed species under the Endan-
gered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and 
(C) to restore the ecosystem to prevent further declines 
among other native species. 
(2) FUNDING.—The study to be conducted under paragraph 
(1) shall be funded using amounts made available to carry 
out the Missouri River recovery and mitigation plan authorized 
by section 601(a) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143). 
(b) MISSOURI RIVER RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE.— 
(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 6 months after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish 
a committee to be known as the Missouri River Recovery 
Implementation Committee (in this section referred to as the 
‘‘Committee’’). 
(2) MEMBERSHIP.—The Committee shall include representa-
tives from— 
(A) Federal agencies; 
(B) States located near the Missouri River basin; and 
(C) other appropriate entities, as determined by the 
Secretary, including— 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01197
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1200 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(i) water management and fish and wildlife agen-
cies; 
(ii) Indian tribes located near the Missouri River 
basin; and 
(iii) nongovernmental stakeholders, which may 
include— 
(I) navigation interests; 
(II) irrigation interests; 
(III) flood control interests; 
(IV) fish, wildlife, and conservation organiza-
tions; 
(V) recreation interests; and 
(VI) power supply interests. 
(3) DUTIES.—The Committee shall— 
(A) with respect to the study to be conducted under 
subsection (a)(1), provide guidance to the Secretary and 
any affected Federal agency, State agency, or Indian tribe; 
and 
(B) provide guidance to the Secretary with respect 
to the Missouri River recovery and mitigation plan in exist-
ence on the date of enactment of this Act, including rec-
ommendations relating to— 
(i) changes to the implementation strategy from 
the use of adaptive management; 
(ii) coordination of the development of consistent 
policies, strategies, plans, programs, projects, activities, 
and priorities for the Missouri River recovery and miti-
gation plan; 
(iii) exchange of information regarding programs, 
projects, and activities of the agencies and entities 
represented on the Committee to promote the goals 
of the Missouri River recovery and mitigation plan; 
(iv) establishment of such working groups as the 
Committee determines to be necessary to assist in 
carrying out the duties of the Committee, including 
duties relating to public policy and scientific issues; 
(v) facilitating the resolution of interagency and 
intergovernmental conflicts between entities rep-
resented on the Committee associated with the Mis-
souri River recovery and mitigation plan; 
(vi) coordination of scientific and other research 
associated with the Missouri River recovery and miti-
gation plan; and 
(vii) annual preparation of a work plan and associ-
ated budget requests. 
(4) RECOMMENDATIONS AND GUIDANCE.—In providing rec-
ommendations and guidance from the Committee, the members 
of the Committee may include dissenting opinions. 
(5) COMPENSATION; TRAVEL EXPENSES.— 
(A) COMPENSATION.—Members of the Committee shall 
not receive compensation from the Secretary in carrying 
out the duties of the Committee under this section. 
(B) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Travel expenses incurred by 
a member of the Committee in carrying out the duties 
of the Committee under this section shall not be eligible 
for Federal reimbursement. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01198
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1201 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) NONAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Federal Advisory Com-
mittee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Committee. 
SEC. 5019. SUSQUEHANNA, DELAWARE, AND POTOMAC RIVER BASINS, 
DELAWARE, MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA, AND VIRGINIA. 
(a) EX OFFICIO MEMBER.—Notwithstanding section 3001(a) of 
the 1997 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery 
From Natural Disasters, and for Overseas Peacekeeping Efforts, 
Including Those in Bosnia (Public Law 105–18; 111 Stat. 176), 
section 2.2 of the Susquehanna River Basin Compact to which 
consent was given by Public Law 91–575 (84 Stat. 1512), and 
section 2.2 of the Delaware River Basin Compact to which consent 
was given by Public Law 87–328 (75 Stat. 691), beginning in fiscal 
year 2002, and each fiscal year thereafter, the Division Engineer, 
North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers— 
(1) shall be— 
(A) the ex officio United States member of the Susque-
hanna River Basin Compact and the Delaware River Basin 
Compact; and 
(B) one of the 3 members appointed by the President 
under the Potomac River Basin Compact to which consent 
was given by Public Law 91–407 (84 Stat. 856); 
(2) shall serve without additional compensation; and 
(3) may designate an alternate member in accordance with 
the terms of those compacts. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION TO ALLOCATE.—The Secretary shall allocate 
funds to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, Delaware River 
Basin Commission, and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac 
River Basin to fulfill the equitable funding requirements of the 
respective interstate compacts. 
(c) WATER SUPPLY
AND CONSERVATION STORAGE, DELAWARE 
RIVER BASIN.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter into an agree-
ment with the Delaware River Basin Commission to provide 
temporary water supply and conservation storage at the Francis 
E. Walter Dam, Pennsylvania, for any period during which 
the Commission has determined that a drought warning or 
drought emergency exists. 
(2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide that the cost 
for water supply and conservation storage under paragraph 
(1) shall not exceed the incremental operating costs associated 
with providing the storage. 
(d) WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION STORAGE, SUSQUEHANNA 
RIVER BASIN.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter into an agree-
ment with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission to provide 
temporary water supply and conservation storage at Federal 
facilities operated by the Corps of Engineers in the Susque-
hanna River basin for any period for which the Commission 
has determined that a drought warning or drought emergency 
exists. 
(2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide that the cost 
for water supply and conservation storage under paragraph 
(1) shall not exceed the incremental operating costs associated 
with providing the storage. 
(e) WATER SUPPLY
AND CONSERVATION STORAGE, POTOMAC 
RIVER BASIN.— 
Contracts. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01199
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1202 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter into an agree-
ment with the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River 
Basin to provide temporary water supply and conservation 
storage at Federal facilities operated by the Corps of Engineers 
in the Potomac River basin for any period for which the 
Commission has determined that a drought warning or drought 
emergency exists. 
(2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide that the cost 
for water supply and conservation storage under paragraph 
(1) shall not exceed the incremental operating costs associated 
with providing the storage. 
SEC. 5020. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND 
PROTECTION PROGRAM. 
(a) FORM
OF ASSISTANCE.—Section 510(a)(2) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3759) is amended 
by striking ‘‘, and beneficial uses of dredged material’’ and inserting 
‘‘, beneficial uses of dredged material, and restoration of submerged 
aquatic vegetation’’. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 510(i) of such 
Act (110 Stat. 3761) is amended by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$40,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5021. CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RESTORATION, VIRGINIA AND 
MARYLAND. 
Section 704(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2263(b)) is amended— 
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (4); 
(2) in paragraph (1)— 
(A) in the second sentence by striking ‘‘$30,000,000’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$50,000,000’’; and 
(B) in the third sentence by striking ‘‘Such projects’’ 
and inserting the following: 
‘‘(2) INCLUSIONS.—Such projects’’; 
(3) by striking paragraph (2)(D) (as redesignated by para-
graph (2)(B) of this subsection) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(D) the restoration and rehabilitation of habitat for 
fish, including native oysters, in the Chesapeake Bay and 
its tributaries in Virginia and Maryland, including— 
‘‘(i) the construction of oyster bars and reefs; 
‘‘(ii) the rehabilitation of existing marginal habitat; 
‘‘(iii) the use of appropriate alternative substrate 
material in oyster bar and reef construction; 
‘‘(iv) the construction and upgrading of oyster 
hatcheries; and 
‘‘(v) activities relating to increasing the output of 
native oyster broodstock for seeding and monitoring 
of restored sites to ensure ecological success. 
‘‘(3) RESTORATION
AND
REHABILITATION
ACTIVITIES.—The 
restoration and rehabilitation activities described in paragraph 
(2)(D) shall be— 
‘‘(A) for the purpose of establishing permanent sanc-
tuaries and harvest management areas; and 
‘‘(B) consistent with plans and strategies for guiding 
the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay oyster resource and 
fishery.’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following: 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01200
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1203 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(5) DEFINITION
OF
ECOLOGICAL
SUCCESS.—In this sub-
section, the term ‘ecological success’ means— 
‘‘(A) achieving a tenfold increase in native oyster bio-
mass by the year 2010, from a 1994 baseline; and 
‘‘(B) the establishment of a sustainable fishery as deter-
mined by a broad scientific and economic consensus.’’. 
SEC. 5022. HYPOXIA ASSESSMENT. 
The Secretary may participate with Federal, State, and local 
agencies, non-Federal and nonprofit entities, regional researchers, 
and other interested parties to assess hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. 
SEC. 5023. POTOMAC RIVER WATERSHED ASSESSMENT AND TRIBU-
TARY STRATEGY EVALUATION AND MONITORING PRO-
GRAM. 
The Secretary may participate in the Potomac River watershed 
assessment and tributary strategy evaluation and monitoring pro-
gram to identify a series of resource management indicators to 
accurately monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of the 
agreed upon tributary strategies and other public policies that 
pertain to natural resource protection of the Potomac River water-
shed. 
SEC. 5024. LOCK AND DAM SECURITY. 
(a) STANDARDS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Fed-
eral Emergency Management Agency, the Tennessee Valley 
Authority, and the Coast Guard, shall develop standards for the 
security of locks and dams, including the testing and certification 
of vessel exclusion barriers. 
(b) SITE SURVEYS.—At the request of a lock or dam owner, 
the Secretary shall provide technical assistance, on a reimbursable 
basis, to improve lock or dam security. 
(c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.—The Secretary may enter into 
a cooperative agreement with a nonprofit alliance of public and 
private organizations that has the mission of promoting safe water-
ways and seaports to carry out testing and certification activities, 
and to perform site surveys, under this section. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $3,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5025. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR COLUMBIA 
AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON SURVIVAL. 
Section 511 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(16 U.S.C. 3301 note; 110 Stat. 3761; 113 Stat. 375) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a)(6) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$25,000,000’’; and 
(2) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$10,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5026. WAGE SURVEYS. 
Employees of the Corps of Engineers who are paid wages deter-
mined under the last undesignated paragraph under the heading 
‘‘Administrative Provisions’’ of chapter V of the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 1982 (5 U.S.C. 5343 note; 96 Stat. 832) shall 
be allowed, through appropriate employee organization representa-
tives, to participate in wage surveys under such paragraph to 
the same extent as are prevailing rate employees under subsection 
(c)(2) of section 5343 of title 5, United States Code. Nothing in 
5 USC 5343 note. 
33 USC 467f–1. 
16 USC 1451 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01201
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1204 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
such section 5343 shall be construed to affect which agencies are 
to be surveyed under such paragraph. 
SEC. 5027. REHABILITATION. 
The Secretary, at Federal expense and in an amount not to 
exceed $1,000,000, shall rehabilitate and improve the water-related 
infrastructure and the transportation infrastructure for the historic 
property in the Anacostia River watershed located in the District 
of Columbia, including measures to address wet weather conditions. 
To carry out this section, the Secretary shall accept funds provided 
for such project under any other Federal program. 
SEC. 5028. AUBURN, ALABAMA. 
The Secretary may provide technical assistance relating to 
water supply to Auburn, Alabama. There is authorized to be appro-
priated $5,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5029. PINHOOK CREEK, HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA. 
(a) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary shall design and 
construct the locally preferred plan for flood protection at Pinhook 
Creek, Huntsville, Alabama. In carrying out the project, the Sec-
retary shall utilize, to the extent practicable, the existing detailed 
project report for the project prepared under the authority of section 
205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). 
(b) PARTICIPATION BY NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.—The Secretary 
shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in the financing 
of the project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) if the detailed 
project report evaluation indicates that applying such section is 
necessary to implement the project. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
SEC. 5030. ALASKA. 
Section 570 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 369) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (c) by inserting ‘‘environmental restora-
tion,’’ after ‘‘water supply and related facilities,’’; 
(2) in subsection (e)(3)(B) by striking the last sentence; 
(3) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$45,000,000’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense.’’. 
SEC. 5031. BARROW, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall carry out, under section 117 of the Energy 
and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (118 Stat. 2944), 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01202
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1205 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
a nonstructural project for coastal erosion and storm damage 
prevention and reduction at Barrow, Alaska, including relocation 
of infrastructure. 
SEC. 5032. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, ALASKA. 
(a) LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.— 
(1) MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.—The Secretary shall assume 
responsibility for the long-term maintenance and repair of the 
Lowell Creek tunnel, Seward, Alaska. 
(2) DURATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES.—The responsibility of 
the Secretary for long-term maintenance and repair of the 
tunnel shall continue until an alternative method of flood diver-
sion is constructed and operational under this section, or 15 
years after the date of enactment of this Act, whichever is 
earlier. 
(b) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine 
whether an alternative method of flood diversion in Lowell Canyon 
is feasible. 
(c) CONSTRUCTION.— 
(1) ALTERNATIVE METHODS.—If the Secretary determines 
under the study conducted under subsection (b) that an alter-
native method of flood diversion in Lowell Canyon is feasible, 
the Secretary shall carry out the alternative method. 
(2) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of car-
rying out an alternative method under paragraph (1) shall 
be the same as the Federal share of the cost of the construction 
of the Lowell Creek tunnel. 
SEC. 5033. ST. HERMAN AND ST. PAUL HARBORS, KODIAK, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall carry out, on an emergency basis, necessary 
removal of rubble, sediment, and rock impeding the entrance to 
the St. Herman and St. Paul Harbors, Kodiak, Alaska, at a Federal 
cost of $2,000,000. 
SEC. 5034. TANANA RIVER, ALASKA. 
The Secretary shall carry out, on an emergency basis, the 
removal of the hazard to navigation on the Tanana River, Alaska, 
near the mouth of the Chena River, as described in the January 
3, 2005, memorandum from the Commander, Seventeenth Coast 
Guard District, to the Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, Anchor-
age, Alaska. 
SEC. 5035. WRANGELL HARBOR, ALASKA. 
(a) GENERAL
NAVIGATION
FEATURES.—In carrying out the 
project for navigation, Wrangell Harbor, Alaska, authorized by sec-
tion 101(b)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 279), the Secretary shall consider the dredging of the 
mooring basin and construction of the inner harbor facilities to 
be general navigation features for purposes of estimating the non- 
Federal share of project costs. 
(b) REVISION
OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.—The Secretary 
shall revise the partnership agreement for the project to reflect 
the change required by subsection (a). 
SEC. 5036. AUGUSTA AND CLARENDON, ARKANSAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out rehabilitation 
of authorized and completed levees on the White River between 
Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas, at a total estimated cost of 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01203
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1206 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
$8,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,200,000 and an 
estimated non-Federal cost of $2,800,000. 
(b) REIMBURSEMENT.—After performing the rehabilitation 
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek reimbursement from 
the Secretary of the Interior of an amount equal to the costs 
allocated to benefits to a Federal wildlife refuge of such rehabilita-
tion. 
SEC. 5037. DES ARC LEVEE PROTECTION, ARKANSAS. 
The Secretary shall review the project for flood control, Des 
Arc, Arkansas, to determine whether bank and channel scour along 
the White River threaten the existing project and whether the 
scour is a result of a design deficiency. If the Secretary determines 
that such conditions exist as a result of a deficiency, the Secretary 
shall carry out measures to eliminate the deficiency. 
SEC. 5038. 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. 5039. CALIFORNIA. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in California. 
(b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in California, including projects for 
wastewater treatment and related facilities, water supply and 
related facilities, environmental restoration, and surface water 
resource protection and development. 
(c) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(d) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01204
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1207 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of the costs of a project 
that is the subject of an agreement under this section, 
the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for reasonable 
interest incurred in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(e) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(f) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity. 
(g) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of amounts made available to carry out this section may be used 
by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5040. CALAVERAS RIVER AND LITTLEJOHN CREEK AND TRIBU-
TARIES, STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Unless the Secretary determines, by not later 
than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, that the 
relocation of the portion of the project described in subsection 
(b)(2) would be injurious to the public interest, a non-Federal 
interest may reconstruct and relocate that portion of the project 
approximately 300 feet in a westerly direction. 
(b) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The project referred to in subsection (a) 
is the project for flood control, Calaveras River and Littlejohn 
Creek and tributaries, California, authorized by section 10 of 
the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 902). 
(2) SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION.—The portion of the project to 
be reconstructed and relocated is that portion consisting of 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01205
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1208 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
approximately 5.34 acres of dry land levee beginning at a 
point N. 2203542.3167, E. 6310930.1385, thence running west 
about 59.99 feet to a point N. 2203544.6562, E. 6310870.1468, 
thence running south about 3,874.99 feet to a point N. 
2199669.8760, E. 6310861.7956, thence running east about 
60.00 feet to a point N. 2199668.8026, E. 6310921.7900, thence 
running north about 3,873.73 feet to the point of origin. 
(c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the cost of recon-
structing and relocating the portion of the project described in 
subsection (b)(2) shall be 100 percent. 
SEC. 5041. CAMBRIA, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(48) of the Water Resources Development 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, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project not to exceed $3,000,000 for the cost 
of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project.’’; 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. 5042. CONTRA COSTA CANAL, OAKLEY AND KNIGHTSEN, CALI-
FORNIA; MALLARD SLOUGH, PITTSBURG, CALIFORNIA. 
Sections 512 and 514 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2650) are each amended by adding at the 
end the following: ‘‘All planning, study, design, and construction 
on the project shall be carried out by the office of the district 
engineer, San Francisco, California.’’. 
SEC. 5043. DANA POINT HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the causes of water 
quality degradation within Dana Point Harbor, California, to deter-
mine if the degradation is the result of a Federal navigation project, 
and, if the Secretary determines that the degradation is the result 
of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary shall carry out a 
project to mitigate the degradation at Federal expense. 
SEC. 5044. EAST SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(22) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (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, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of design and construction 
work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
‘‘(C) 
IN-KIND
CONTRIBUTIONS.—The 
non-Federal 
interest may provide any portion of the non-Federal share 
106 Stat. 4835. 
Study. 
106 Stat. 4835; 
113 Stat. 335. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01206
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1209 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
of the cost of the project in the form of in-kind services 
and materials.’’; 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. 5045. EASTERN SANTA CLARA BASIN, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 111(c) of the Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001 
(as enacted into law by Public Law 106–554; 114 Stat. 2763A– 
224) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$28,000,000’’; 
and 
(2) by striking ‘‘$7,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$10,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5046. LA–3 DREDGED MATERIAL OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE DESIGNA-
TION, CALIFORNIA. 
The third sentence of section 102(c)(4) of the Marine Protection, 
Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1412(c)(4)) is 
amended by striking ‘‘January 1, 2003’’ and inserting ‘‘January 
1, 2011’’. 
SEC. 5047. LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(f)(50) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–220) is amended— 
(1) by inserting after ‘‘water’’ the following: ‘‘and waste-
water’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘$14,500,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$24,500,000’’. 
SEC. 5048. LOS OSOS, CALIFORNIA. 
Section 219(c)(27) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–219) is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(27) LOS OSOS, CALIFORNIA.—Wastewater infrastructure, 
Los Osos, California.’’. 
SEC. 5049. PINE FLAT DAM FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) COOPERATIVE PROGRAM.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall participate with 
appropriate State and local agencies in the implementation 
of a cooperative program to improve and manage fisheries 
and aquatic habitat conditions in Pine Flat Reservoir and in 
the 14-mile reach of the Kings River immediately below Pine 
Flat Dam, California, in a manner that— 
(A) provides for long-term aquatic resource enhance-
ment; and 
(B) avoids adverse effects on water storage and water 
rights holders. 
(2) GOALS
AND
PRINCIPLES.—The cooperative program 
described in paragraph (1) shall be carried out— 
(A) substantially in accordance with the goals and prin-
ciples of the document entitled ‘‘Kings River Fisheries 
Management Program Framework Agreement’’ and dated 
May 29, 1999, between the California department of fish 
and game and the Kings River Water Association and 
the Kings River Conservation District; and 
(B) in cooperation with the parties to that agreement. 
(b) PARTICIPATION BY SECRETARY.— 
106 Stat. 4835. 
106 Stat. 4835; 
113 Stat. 335. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01207
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1210 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In furtherance of the goals of the agree-
ment described in subsection (a)(2), the Secretary shall partici-
pate in the planning, design, and construction of projects and 
pilot projects on the Kings River and its tributaries to enhance 
aquatic habitat and water availability for fisheries purposes 
(including maintenance of a trout fishery) in accordance with 
flood control operations, water rights, and beneficial uses in 
existence as of the date of enactment of this Act. 
(2) PROJECTS.—Projects referred to in paragraph (1) may 
include— 
(A) projects to construct or improve pumping, convey-
ance, and storage facilities to enhance water transfers; 
and 
(B) projects to carry out water exchanges and create 
opportunities to use floodwater within and downstream 
of Pine Flat Reservoir. 
(c) NO AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN DAM-RELATED PROJECTS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize any project 
for the raising of Pine Flat Dam or the construction of a multilevel 
intake structure at Pine Flat Dam. 
(d) USE OF EXISTING STUDIES.—In carrying out this section, 
the Secretary shall use, to the maximum extent practicable, studies 
in existence on the date of enactment of this Act, including data 
and environmental documentation in the document entitled ‘‘Final 
Feasibility Report and Report of the Chief of Engineers for Pine 
Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration’’ and dated July 
19, 2002. 
(e) CREDIT FOR LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY.—The 
Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost 
of construction of any project under subsection (b) the value, regard-
less of the date of acquisition, of any land, easements, rights- 
of-way, dredged material disposal areas, or relocations provided 
by the non-Federal interest for use in carrying out the project. 
(f) OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE.—The operation, mainte-
nance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of projects carried 
out under this section shall be a non-Federal responsibility. 
(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000. Such 
sums shall remain available until expended. 
SEC. 5050. RAYMOND BASIN, SIX BASINS, CHINO BASIN, AND SAN 
GABRIEL BASIN, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The Secretary, in consultation and 
coordination with appropriate Federal, State, and local entities, 
shall develop a comprehensive plan for the management of water 
resources in the Raymond Basin, Six Basins, Chino Basin, and 
San Gabriel Basin, California. The Secretary may carry out activi-
ties identified in the comprehensive plan to demonstrate practicable 
alternatives for water resources management. 
(b) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal share of 
the cost of operation and maintenance of any measures constructed 
under this section shall be 100 percent. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000. 
SEC. 5051. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in cooperation with the Port 
of San Francisco, California, may carry out the project for repair 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01208
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1211 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
and removal, as appropriate, of Piers 30–32, 35, 36, 70 (including 
Wharves 7 and 8), and 80 in San Francisco, California, substantially 
in accordance with the Port’s redevelopment plan. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION
OF APPROPRIATION.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $25,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5052. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, WATERFRONT AREA. 
(a) AREA TO BE DECLARED NONNAVIGABLE; PUBLIC INTEREST.— 
Unless the Secretary finds, after consultation 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 
interest, 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 northeasterly prolongation of that portion of the northwest-
erly line of Bryant Street lying between Beale Street and Main 
Street with the southwesterly line of Spear Street, which intersec-
tion lies on the line of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Port 
Commission; following thence southerly along said line of jurisdic-
tion as described in the State of California Harbor and Navigation 
Code Section 1770, as amended in 1961, to its intersection with 
the southeasterly line of Townsend Street; thence northeasterly 
along said southeasterly line of Townsend Street, to its intersection 
with a line that is parallel and distant 10 feet southerly from 
the existing southern boundary of Pier 40 produced; thence easterly 
along said parallel line, to its point of intersection with the United 
States Government Pierhead line; thence northerly along said 
Pierhead line to its intersection with a line parallel with, and 
distant 10 feet easterly from, the existing easterly boundary line 
of Pier 30–32; thence northerly along said parallel line and its 
northerly prolongation, to a point of intersection with a line parallel 
with, and distant 10 feet northerly from, the existing northerly 
boundary of Pier 30–32; thence westerly along last said parallel 
line to its intersection with the United States Government Pierhead 
line; thence northerly along said Pierhead line, to its intersection 
aforementioned northwesterly line of Bryant Street produced north-
easterly; 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 bulk-
headed, filled, or otherwise occupied by permanent structures and 
does not affect the applicability 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 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 described in subsection (b) 
is not bulkheaded or filled or occupied by permanent structures, 
Deadline. 
33 USC 59h–1. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01209
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1212 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
including marina facilities, in accordance with the requirements 
set out in subsection (c), or if work in connection with any activity 
permitted 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. 5053. SAN PABLO BAY, CALIFORNIA, WATERSHED AND SUISUN 
MARSH ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. 
(a) SAN PABLO BAY WATERSHED, CALIFORNIA.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall complete work, as 
expeditiously as possible, on the ongoing San Pablo Bay water-
shed, California, study to determine the feasibility of opportuni-
ties for restoring, preserving, and protecting the San Pablo 
Bay watershed. 
(2) REPORT.—Not later than March 31, 2008, the Secretary 
shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study. 
(b) SUISUN MARSH, CALIFORNIA.—The Secretary shall conduct 
a comprehensive study to determine the feasibility of opportunities 
for restoring, preserving, and protecting the Suisun Marsh, Cali-
fornia. 
(c) SAN PABLO AND SUISUN BAY MARSH WATERSHED CRITICAL 
RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in critical 
restoration projects that will produce, consistent with Federal 
programs, projects, and activities, immediate and substantial 
ecosystem restoration, preservation, and protection benefits in 
the following sub-watersheds of the San Pablo and Suisun 
Bay Marsh watersheds: 
(A) The tidal areas of the Petaluma River, Napa- 
Sonoma Marsh. 
(B) The shoreline of West Contra Costa County. 
(C) Novato Creek. 
(D) Suisun Marsh. 
(E) Gallinas-Miller Creek. 
(2) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Participation in critical restora-
tion projects under this subsection may include assistance for 
planning, design, or construction. 
(d) CREDIT.—In accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), the Secretary shall credit toward 
the non-Federal share of the cost of construction of a project under 
this section— 
(1) the value of any lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
dredged material disposal areas, or relocations provided by 
the non-Federal interest for carrying out the project, regardless 
of the date of acquisition; 
(2) funds received from the CALFED Bay-Delta program; 
and 
(3) the cost of the studies, design, and construction work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5054. ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may construct a project for 
flood control and environmental restoration, St. Helena, California, 
substantially in accordance with the plan for the St. Helena com-
prehensive flood protection project dated 2006 and described in 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01210
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1213 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
the addendum dated June 27, 2006, to the report prepared by 
the city of St. Helena entitled ‘‘City of St. Helena Comprehensive 
Flood Protection Project, Final Environmental Impact Report’’, and 
dated January 2004, if the Secretary determines that the plans 
and designs for the project are feasible. 
(b) COST.—The total cost of the project to be constructed pursu-
ant to subsection (a) shall be $30,000,000, with an estimated Federal 
cost of $19,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
$10,500,000. 
(c) REIMBURSEMENT.—The non-Federal interest shall be 
reimbursed for any work performed by the non-Federal interest 
for the project described in subsection (a) that is in excess of 
the required non-Federal contribution toward the total cost of the 
project, if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to 
the project. 
SEC. 5055. UPPER CALAVERAS RIVER, STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. 
(a) REEVALUATION.—The Secretary shall reevaluate the feasi-
bility 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 
reimbursement under section 211 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 701b– 
13). 
(b) SPECIAL RULES
FOR REEVALUATION.—In conducting the 
reevaluation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall not reject 
a feasibility determination based on one or more of the policies 
of the Corps of Engineers concerning the frequency of flooding, 
the drainage area, and the amount of runoff. 
(c) REIMBURSEMENT.—If the Secretary determines that the ele-
ments 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. 5056. RIO GRANDE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, 
COLORADO, NEW MEXICO, AND TEXAS. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
(1) RIO GRANDE COMPACT.—The term ‘‘Rio Grande Compact’’ 
means the compact approved by Congress under the Act of 
May 31, 1939 (53 Stat. 785), and ratified by the States. 
(2) RIO
GRANDE
BASIN.—The term ‘‘Rio Grande Basin’’ 
means the Rio Grande (including all tributaries and their head-
waters) located— 
(A) in the State of Colorado, from the Rio Grande 
Reservoir, near Creede, Colorado, to the New Mexico State 
border; 
(B) in the State of New Mexico, from the Colorado 
State border downstream to the Texas State border; and 
(C) in the State of Texas, from the New Mexico State 
border to the southern terminus of the Rio Grande at 
the Gulf of Mexico. 
(3) STATES.—The term ‘‘States’’ means the States of Colo-
rado, New Mexico, and Texas. 
(b) PROGRAM AUTHORITY.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01211
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1214 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out, in the 
Rio Grande Basin— 
(A) a program for the planning, construction, and 
evaluation of measures for fish and wildlife habitat 
rehabilitation and enhancement; and 
(B) implementation of a long-term monitoring, comput-
erized data inventory and analysis, applied research, and 
adaptive management program. 
(2) REPORTS.—Not later than December 31, 2008, and not 
later than December 31 of every sixth year thereafter, the 
Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior 
and the States, shall submit to Congress a report that— 
(A) contains an evaluation of the programs described 
in paragraph (1); 
(B) describes the accomplishments of each program; 
(C) provides updates of a systemic habitat needs assess-
ment; and 
(D) identifies any needed adjustments in the authoriza-
tion of the programs. 
(c) STATE
AND
LOCAL
CONSULTATION
AND
COOPERATIVE 
EFFORT.—For the purpose of ensuring the coordinated planning 
and implementation of the programs described in subsection (b), 
the Secretary shall— 
(1) consult with the States, and other appropriate entities 
in the States, the rights and interests of which might be affected 
by specific program activities; and 
(2) enter into an interagency agreement with the Secretary 
of the Interior to provide for the direct participation of, and 
transfer of funds to, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service 
and any other agency or bureau of the Department of the 
Interior for the planning, design, implementation, and evalua-
tion of those programs. 
(d) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The costs of operation and 
maintenance of a project located on Federal land, or land owned 
or operated by a State or local government, shall be borne by 
the Federal, State, or local agency that has jurisdiction over fish 
and wildlife activities on the land. 
(e) EFFECT ON OTHER LAW.— 
(1) WATER LAW.—Nothing in this section shall be construed 
to preempt any State water law. 
(2) COMPACTS AND DECREES.—In carrying out this section, 
the Secretary shall comply with the Rio Grande Compact, and 
any applicable court decrees or Federal and State laws, affecting 
water or water rights in the Rio Grande Basin. 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section 
$15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2011. 
SEC. 5057. CHARLES HERVEY TOWNSHEND BREAKWATER, NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR, CONNECTICUT. 
The western breakwater for the project for navigation, New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the first section of the 
Act of September 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 428), shall be known and 
designated as the ‘‘Charles Hervey Townshend Breakwater’’. 
Designation. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01212
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1215 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5058. STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, navigation, flood damage reduction, and recre-
ation components of the Mill River and Long Island Sound revital-
ization project, Stamford, Connecticut. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5059. DELMARVA CONSERVATION CORRIDOR, DELAWARE, MARY-
LAND, AND VIRGINIA. 
(a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide technical assist-
ance to the Secretary of Agriculture for use in carrying out the 
Conservation Corridor Demonstration Program established under 
subtitle G of title II of the Farm Security and Rural Investment 
Act of 2002 (16 U.S.C. 3801 note; 116 Stat. 275). 
(b) COORDINATION AND INTEGRATION.—In carrying out water 
resources projects in the States on the Delmarva Peninsula, the 
Secretary shall coordinate and integrate those projects, to the max-
imum extent practicable, with any activities carried out to imple-
ment a conservation corridor plan approved by the Secretary of 
Agriculture under section 2602 of the Farm Security and Rural 
Investment Act of 2002 (16 U.S.C. 3801 note; 116 Stat. 275). 
SEC. 5060. ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MARY-
LAND. 
(a) COMPREHENSIVE ACTION PLAN.—Not later than one year 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in coordina-
tion with the Mayor of the District of Columbia, the Governor 
of Maryland, the county executives of Montgomery County and 
Prince George’s County, Maryland, and other interested entities, 
shall develop and make available to the public a 10-year comprehen-
sive action plan to provide for the restoration and protection of 
the ecological integrity of the Anacostia River and its tributaries. 
(b) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—On completion of the comprehensive 
action plan under subsection (a), the Secretary shall make the 
plan available to the public, including on the Internet. 
SEC. 5061. EAST CENTRAL AND NORTHEAST FLORIDA. 
(a) EAST CENTRAL AND NORTHEAST FLORIDA REGION DEFINED.— 
In this section, the term ‘‘East Central and Northeast Florida 
Region’’ means Flagler County, St. Johns County, Putman County 
(east of the St. Johns River), Seminole County, Volusia County, 
the towns of Winter Park, Maitland, and Palatka, Florida. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the East Central and Northeast Florida Region. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in the East Central and Northeast 
Florida Region, including projects for wastewater treatment and 
related facilities, water supply and related facilities, environmental 
restoration, and surface water resource protection and development. 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
Deadline. 
Public 
information. 
16 USC 3801 
note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01213
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1216 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of the costs of a project 
that is the subject of an agreement under this section, 
the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for reasonable 
interest incurred in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01214
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1217 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5062. FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS. 
Section 109 of the Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001 
(enacted into law by Public Law 106–554) (114 Stat. 2763A–222) 
is amended— 
(1) by adding at the end of subsection (e)(2) the following: 
‘‘(C) CREDIT FOR WORK PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE 
PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall credit 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project— 
‘‘(i) in accordance with section 221 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), the cost 
of construction work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partner-
ship agreement for the project; and 
‘‘(ii) the cost of land acquisition carried out by 
the non-Federal interest for projects to be carried out 
under this section.’’; and 
(2) in subsection (f) by striking ‘‘$100,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$100,000,000, of which not more than $15,000,000 
may be used to provide planning, design, and construction 
assistance to the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority for a water 
treatment plant, Florida City, Florida’’. 
SEC. 5063. LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA. 
The Secretary may carry out necessary repairs for the Lake 
Worth bulkhead replacement project, West Palm Beach, Florida, 
at an estimated total cost of $9,000,000. 
SEC. 5064. BIG CREEK, GEORGIA, WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND RES-
TORATION PROGRAM. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may cooperate with, by pro-
viding technical, planning, and construction assistance to, the city 
of Roswell, Georgia, as the non-Federal interest and coordinator 
with other local governments in the Big Creek watershed, Georgia, 
to assess the quality and quantity of water resources, conduct 
comprehensive watershed management planning, develop and 
implement water efficiency technologies and programs, and plan, 
design, and construct water resource facilities to restore the water-
shed. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary $5,000,000 to carry out this 
section. 
SEC. 5065. METROPOLITAN NORTH GEORGIA WATER PLANNING DIS-
TRICT. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall estab-
lish a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning Dis-
trict. 
(b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in north Georgia, including projects 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01215
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1218 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
for wastewater treatment and related facilities, elimination or con-
trol of combined sewer overflows, water supply and related facilities, 
environmental restoration, and surface water resource protection 
and development. 
(c) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(d) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of a project under this section, in an amount 
not to exceed 6 percent of the total construction costs 
of the project, the cost of design work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of the costs of a project 
that is the subject of an agreement under this section, 
the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for reasonable 
interest incurred in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(e) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01216
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1219 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000. 
SEC. 5066. SAVANNAH, GEORGIA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—After completion of a Savannah Riverfront 
plan, the Secretary may participate in the ecosystem restoration, 
recreation, navigation, and flood damage reduction components of 
the plan. 
(b) COORDINATION.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary 
shall coordinate with appropriate representatives in the vicinity 
of Savannah, Georgia, including the Georgia Ports Authority, the 
city of Savannah, and Camden County. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5067. IDAHO, MONTANA, RURAL NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, RURAL 
UTAH, AND WYOMING. 
Section 595 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 383; 117 Stat. 139; 117 Stat. 142; 117 Stat. 1836; 118 
Stat. 440) is amended— 
(1) in the section heading by striking ‘‘AND RURAL UTAH’’ 
and inserting ‘‘RURAL UTAH, AND WYOMING’’; 
(2) in subsections (b) and (c) by striking ‘‘and rural Utah’’ 
each place it appears and inserting ‘‘rural Utah, and Wyoming’’; 
and 
(3) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section for the period beginning 
with fiscal year 2001 $150,000,000 for rural Nevada, $25,000,000 
for each of Montana and New Mexico, $55,000,000 for Idaho, 
$50,000,000 for rural Utah, and $30,000,000 for Wyoming. Such 
sums shall remain available until expended.’’. 
SEC. 5068. RILEY CREEK RECREATION AREA, IDAHO. 
The Secretary is authorized to carry out the Riley Creek Recre-
ation Area Operation Plan of the Albeni Falls Management Plan, 
dated October 2001, for the Riley Creek Recreation Area, Albeni 
Falls Dam, Bonner County, Idaho. 
SEC. 5069. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, CHICAGO, 
ILLINOIS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide assistance for 
a project to develop maps identifying 100- and 500-year flood 
inundation areas along the Little Calumet River, Chicago, Illinois. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—Maps developed under the project shall 
include hydrologic and hydraulic information and shall accurately 
show the flood inundation of each property by flood risk in the 
floodplain. The maps shall be produced in a high resolution format 
and shall be made available to all flood prone areas along the 
Little Calumet River, Chicago, Illinois, in an electronic format. 
(c) PARTICIPATION OF FEMA.—The Secretary and the non-Fed-
eral interests for the project shall work with the Administrator 
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to ensure the 
validity of the maps developed under the project for flood insurance 
purposes. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01217
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1220 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(d) FORMS OF ASSISTANCE.—In carrying out the project, the 
Secretary may enter into contracts or cooperative agreements with 
the non-Federal interests or provide reimbursements of project 
costs. 
(e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of the 
project shall be 50 percent. 
(f) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to modify the prioritization of map 
updates or the substantive requirements of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency flood map modernization program authorized 
by section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
U.S.C. 4101). 
(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,000,000. 
SEC. 5070. RECONSTRUCTION OF ILLINOIS AND MISSOURI FLOOD 
PROTECTION PROJECTS. 
(a) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the 
reconstruction of an eligible flood control project if the Secretary 
determines that such reconstruction is not required as a result 
of improper operation and maintenance of the project by the non- 
Federal interest. 
(b) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of the costs for 
the reconstruction of a flood control project authorized by this 
section shall be the same non-Federal share that was applicable 
to construction of the project. The non-Federal interest shall be 
responsible for operation and maintenance and repair of a project 
for which reconstruction is undertaken under this section. 
(c) RECONSTRUCTION
DEFINED.—In this section, the term 
‘‘reconstruction’’, as used with respect to a project, means addressing 
major project deficiencies caused by long-term degradation of the 
foundation, construction materials, or engineering systems or 
components of the project, the results of which render the project 
at risk of not performing in compliance with its authorized project 
purposes. In addressing such deficiencies, the Secretary may incor-
porate current design standards and efficiency improvements, 
including the replacement of obsolete mechanical and electrical 
components at pumping stations, if such incorporation does not 
significantly change the scope, function, and purpose of the project 
as authorized. 
(d) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—The following flood control projects 
are eligible for reconstruction under this section: 
(1) Clear Creek Drainage and Levee District, Illinois. 
(2) Fort Chartres and Ivy Landing Drainage District, 
Illinois. 
(3) Prairie Du Pont Levee and Sanitary District, including 
Fish Lake Drainage and Levee District, Illinois. 
(4) Cairo, Illinois Mainline Levee, Cairo, Illinois. 
(5) Goose Pond Pump Station, Cairo, Illinois. 
(6) Cottonwood Slough Pump Station, Alexander County, 
Illinois. 
(7) 10th and 28th Street Pump Stations, Cairo, Illinois. 
(8) Flood control levee projects in Brookport, Shawneetown, 
Old Shawneetown, Golconda, Rosiclare, Harrisburg, and 
Reevesville, Illinois. 
(9) City of St. Louis, Missouri. 
(10) Missouri River Levee Drainage District, Missouri. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01218
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1221 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(e) JUSTIFICATION.—The reconstruction of a project authorized 
by this section shall not be considered a separable element of 
the project. 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $50,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5071. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION. 
(a) EXTENSION
OF AUTHORIZATION.—Section 519(c)(2) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2654) is 
amended by striking ‘‘2004’’ and inserting ‘‘2010’’. 
(b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL SHARE.—Section 519(c)(3) of such Act 
(114 Stat. 2654) is amended by striking ‘‘$5,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$20,000,000’’. 
(c) IN-KIND SERVICES.—Section 519(g)(3) of such Act (114 Stat. 
2655) is amended by inserting before the period at the end of 
the first sentence ‘‘if such services are provided not more than 
5 years before the date of initiation of the project or activity’’. 
(d) MONITORING.—Section 519 of such Act (114 Stat. 2654) 
is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(h) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall develop an Illinois River 
basin monitoring program to support the plan developed under 
subsection (b). Data collected under the monitoring program shall 
incorporate data provided by the State of Illinois and shall be 
publicly accessible through electronic means, including on the Inter-
net.’’. 
SEC. 5072. PROMONTORY POINT THIRD-PARTY REVIEW, CHICAGO 
SHORELINE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. 
(a) REVIEW.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a third-party 
review of the Promontory Point feature of the project for storm 
damage reduction and shoreline erosion protection, Lake 
Michigan, Illinois, from Wilmette, Illinois, to the Illinois- 
Indiana State line, authorized by section 101(a)(12) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3664), at a 
cost not to exceed $450,000. 
(2) JOINT REVIEW.—The Buffalo and Seattle Districts of 
the Corps of Engineers shall jointly conduct the review under 
paragraph (1). 
(3) STANDARDS.—The review under paragraph (1) shall be 
based on the standards under part 68 of title 36, Code of 
Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation). 
(b) CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary may accept funds from a 
State or political subdivision of a State to conduct the review 
under paragraph (1). 
(c) TREATMENT.—The review under paragraph (1) shall not 
be considered to be an element of the project referred to in para-
graph (1). 
(d) EFFECT OF SECTION.—Nothing in this section shall be con-
strued to affect the authorization for the project referred to in 
paragraph (1). 
SEC. 5073. KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, ILLINOIS, RESTORATION. 
(a) KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN DEFINED.—In this section, 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.— 
Public 
information. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01219
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1222 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) DEVELOPMENT.—The Secretary shall develop, as expedi-
tiously as practicable, a comprehensive plan for the purpose 
of restoring, preserving, and protecting the Kaskaskia River 
Basin. 
(2) TECHNOLOGIES AND INNOVATIVE APPROACHES.—The com-
prehensive plan shall provide for the development of new tech-
nologies and innovative approaches— 
(A) to enhance the Kaskaskia River as a transportation 
corridor; 
(B) to improve water quality within the entire 
Kaskaskia River Basin; 
(C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habitat for plants 
and wildlife; 
(D) to ensure aquatic integrity of side channels and 
backwaters and their connectivity with the mainstem river; 
(E) to increase economic opportunity for agriculture 
and business communities; and 
(F) to reduce the impacts of flooding to communities 
and landowners. 
(3) SPECIFIC COMPONENTS.—The comprehensive plan shall 
include such features as are necessary to provide for— 
(A) the development and implementation of a program 
for sediment removal technology, sediment characteriza-
tion, 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 
rehabilitation, and stabilization and enhancement of land 
and water resources in the Kaskaskia River Basin; 
(C) the development and implementation of a long- 
term resource monitoring program for the Basin; 
(D) a conveyance study of the Kaskaskia River flood-
plain from Vandalia, Illinois, to Carlyle Lake to determine 
the impacts of existing and future waterfowl improvements 
on flood stages, including detailed surveys and mapping 
information to ensure proper hydraulic and hydrological 
analysis; 
(E) the development and implementation of a comput-
erized inventory and analysis system for the Basin; 
(F) the development and implementation of a systemic 
plan for the Basin to reduce flood impacts by means of 
ecosystem restoration projects; and 
(G) the study and design of necessary measures to 
reduce ongoing headcutting and restore the aquatic 
environment of the Basin that has been degraded by the 
headcutting that has occurred above the existing grade 
control structure. 
(4) CONSULTATION.—The comprehensive plan shall be 
developed by the Secretary in consultation with appropriate 
Federal agencies, the State of Illinois, and the Kaskaskia River 
Watershed Association. 
(5) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 2 years after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate a report containing the com-
prehensive plan. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01220
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1223 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(6) ADDITIONAL STUDIES AND ANALYSES.—After submission 
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 activities under this 
section, the Secretary’s recommendations shall be consistent 
with applicable State water quality standards. 
(2) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—In developing the comprehen-
sive plan under subsection (b), the Secretary shall implement 
procedures to facilitate public participation, including providing 
advance notice of meetings, providing adequate opportunity 
for public input and comment, maintaining appropriate records, 
and making a record of the proceedings of meetings available 
for public inspection. 
(d) CRITICAL PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES.—If the Secretary, in 
cooperation with appropriate Federal agencies and the State of 
Illinois, determines that a project or initiative for the Kaskaskia 
River Basin will produce independent, immediate, and substantial 
benefits, the Secretary may proceed with the implementation of 
the project. 
(e) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall integrate activities car-
ried out under this section with ongoing Federal and State pro-
grams, projects, and activities, including the following: 
(1) Farm programs of the Department of Agriculture. 
(2) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (State of 
Illinois) and Conservation 2000 Ecosystem Program of the 
Illinois department of natural resources. 
(3) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices Program and 
the Livestock Management Facilities Act administered by the 
Illinois department of agriculture. 
(4) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service. 
(5) Nonpoint source grant program administered by the 
Illinois environmental protection agency. 
(6) Other programs that may be developed by the State 
of Illinois or the Federal Government, or that are carried out 
by nonprofit organizations, to carry out the objectives of the 
Kaskaskia River Basin Comprehensive Plan. 
(f) 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 expended on programs that accomplish 
the goals of this section, as determined by the Secretary. The 
programs may include the Kaskaskia River Conservation Reserve 
Program, the Illinois Conservation 2000 Program, the Open Lands 
Trust Fund, and other appropriate programs carried out in the 
Kaskaskia River Basin. 
(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $20,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5074. SOUTHWEST ILLINOIS. 
(a) SOUTHWEST ILLINOIS DEFINED.—In this section, the term 
‘‘Southwest Illinois’’ means the counties of Madison, St. Clair, 
Monroe, Randolph, Perry, Franklin, Jackson, Union, Alexander, 
Pulaski, and Williamson, Illinois. 
Procedures. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01221
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1224 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in Southwest Illinois. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in Southwest Illinois, including 
projects for wastewater treatment and related facilities, water 
supply and related facilities, and surface water resource protection 
and development. 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of a project that is the 
subject of an agreement under this section, the non-Federal 
interest shall receive credit for reasonable interest incurred 
in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01222
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1225 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5075. CALUMET REGION, INDIANA. 
Section 219(f)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 335; 117 Stat. 1843) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘$30,000,000’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$100,000,000’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of planning and design work 
carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the 
project.’’; 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. 5076. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, MISSOURI RIVER, IOWA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide assistance for 
a project to develop maps identifying 100- and 500-year flood 
inundation areas in the State of Iowa, along the Missouri River. 
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—Maps developed under the project shall 
include hydrologic and hydraulic information and shall accurately 
portray the flood hazard areas in the floodplain. The maps shall 
be produced in a high resolution format and shall be made available 
to the State of Iowa in an electronic format. 
(c) PARTICIPATION OF FEMA.—The Secretary and the non-Fed-
eral interests for the project shall work with the Administrator 
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to ensure the 
validity of the maps developed under the project for flood insurance 
purposes. 
(d) FORMS OF ASSISTANCE.—In carrying out the project, the 
Secretary may enter into contracts or cooperative agreements with 
the non-Federal interests or provide reimbursements of project 
costs. 
(e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of the 
project shall be 50 percent. 
106 Stat. 4835. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01223
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1226 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(f) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to modify the prioritization of map 
updates or the substantive requirements of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency flood map modernization program authorized 
by section 1360 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
U.S.C. 4101). 
(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000. 
SEC. 5077. PADUCAH, KENTUCKY. 
The Secretary shall complete a feasibility report for rehabilita-
tion of the project for flood damage reduction, Paducah, Kentucky, 
authorized by section 4 of the Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 
(52 Stat. 1217), and, if the Secretary determines that the project 
is feasible, the Secretary may carry out the project at a total 
cost of $3,000,000. 
SEC. 5078. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY. 
Section 531 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
(110 Stat. 3773; 113 Stat. 348; 117 Stat. 142) is amended by 
adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense.’’. 
SEC. 5079. WINCHESTER, KENTUCKY. 
Section 219(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(106 Stat. 4835; 114 Stat. 2763A–219) is amended by adding at 
the end the following: 
‘‘(41) WINCHESTER, KENTUCKY.—Wastewater infrastructure, 
Winchester, Kentucky.’’. 
SEC. 5080. BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA. 
Section 219(f)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A–220) is amended by striking 
‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5081. CALCASIEU SHIP CHANNEL, LOUISIANA. 
The Secretary shall expedite completion of a dredged material 
management plan for the Calcasieu Ship Channel, Louisiana, and 
may take interim measures to increase the capacity of existing 
disposal areas, or to construct new confined or beneficial use dis-
posal areas, for the channel. 
SEC. 5082. EAST ATCHAFALAYA BASIN AND AMITE RIVER BASIN 
REGION, LOUISIANA. 
(a) EAST ATCHAFALAYA BASIN AND AMITE RIVER BASIN REGION 
DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘East Atchafalaya Basin and 
Amite River Basin Region’’ means the following parishes and 
municipalities in the State of Louisiana: Ascension, East Baton 
Rouge, East Feliciana, Iberville, Livingston, Pointe Coupee, St. 
Helena, West Baton Rouge, and West Feliciana. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the East Atchafalaya Basin and Amite River Basin 
Region. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
106 Stat. 4835. 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01224
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1227 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in the East Atchafalaya Basin and 
Amite River Basin Region, including projects for wastewater treat-
ment and related facilities, water supply and related facilities, 
environmental restoration, and surface water resource protection 
and development. 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement of a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of a project that is the 
subject of an agreement under this section, the non-Federal 
interest shall receive credit for reasonable interest incurred 
in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01225
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1228 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5083. INNER HARBOR NAVIGATION CANAL LOCK PROJECT, LOU-
ISIANA. 
Not later than July 1, 2008, the Secretary shall— 
(1) issue a final environmental impact statement relating 
to the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock project, Louisiana; 
and 
(2) develop and maintain a transportation mitigation pro-
gram relating to that project in coordination with— 
(A) St. Bernard Parish; 
(B) Orleans Parish; 
(C) the Old Arabi Neighborhood Association; and 
(D) other interested parties. 
SEC. 5084. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LOUISIANA. 
For purposes of carrying out section 121 of the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1273), the Lake Pontchartrain, 
Louisiana, basin stakeholders conference convened by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, and United States Geological Survey on February 
25, 2002, shall be treated as being a management conference con-
vened under section 320 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 1330). 
SEC. 5085. SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA REGION, LOUISIANA. 
(a) DEFINITION OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA REGION.—In this sec-
tion, the term ‘‘Southeast Louisiana Region’’ means any of the 
following parishes and municipalities in the State of Louisiana: 
(1) Orleans. 
(2) Jefferson. 
(3) St. Tammany. 
(4) Tangipahoa. 
(5) St. Bernard. 
(6) St. Charles. 
(7) St. John. 
(8) Plaquemines. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the Southeast Louisiana Region. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in the Southeast Louisiana Region, 
including projects for wastewater treatment and related facilities, 
water supply and related facilities, environmental restoration, and 
33 USC 1273 
note. 
Deadline. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01226
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1229 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
surface water resource protection and development (including 
projects to improve water quality in the Lake Pontchartrain basin). 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of the costs of a project 
that is the subject of an agreement under this section, 
the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for reasonable 
interest incurred in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01227
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1230 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of amounts made available to carry out this section may be used 
by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $17,000,000. 
SEC. 5086. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOUISIANA. 
(a) MODIFICATION OF STUDY.—The study for the project for 
waterfront and riverine preservation, restoration, and enhancement, 
Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, being car-
ried out under Committee Resolution 2570 of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives 
adopted July 23, 1998, is modified to add West Feliciana Parish 
and East Baton Rouge Parish to the geographic scope of the study. 
(b) CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary may, upon completion of 
the study, participate in the ecosystem restoration, navigation, flood 
damage reduction, and recreation components of the project. 
(c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for the 
project. 
(d) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—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, West Feliciana, 
and East Baton Rouge Parishes, Louisiana, project for water-
front and riverine preservation, restoration, and enhancement 
modifications.’’. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000. 
SEC. 5087. CHARLESTOWN, MARYLAND. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a project for 
nonstructural flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration 
at Charlestown, Maryland. 
(b) LAND ACQUISITION.—The flood damage reduction component 
of the project may include the acquisition of private property from 
willing sellers. 
(c) JUSTIFICATION.—Any nonstructural flood damage reduction 
project to be carried out under this section that will result in 
the conversion of property to use for ecosystem restoration and 
wildlife habitat shall be justified based on national ecosystem res-
toration benefits. 
(d) USE OF ACQUIRED PROPERTY.—Property acquired under this 
section shall be maintained in public ownership for ecosystem res-
toration and wildlife habitat. 
(e) ABILITY TO PAY.—In determining the appropriate non-Fed-
eral cost share for the project, the Secretary shall determine the 
ability of Cecil County, Maryland, to participate as a cost-sharing 
non-Federal interest in accordance with section 103(m) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01228
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1231 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $2,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5088. ST. MARY’S RIVER, MARYLAND. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out the project 
for shoreline protection, St. Mary’s River, Maryland, 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). 
(b) USE OF FUNDS.—In carrying out the project under subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall use funds made available for such project 
under Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 
(Public Law 109–103). 
SEC. 5089. MASSACHUSETTS DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES. 
The Secretary may cooperate with Massachusetts in the 
management and long-term monitoring of aquatic dredged material 
disposal sites within the State and is authorized to accept funds 
from the State to carry out such activities. 
SEC. 5090. ONTONAGON HARBOR, MICHIGAN. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of shore damage in the 
vicinity of the project for navigation, Ontonagon Harbor, Ontonagon 
County, Michigan, authorized by section 101 of the Rivers and 
Harbors Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1176) and reauthorized by section 
363 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
3730), to determine if the damage is the result of a Federal naviga-
tion 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. 5091. CROOKSTON, MINNESOTA. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study for a project for emergency 
streambank protection along the Red Lake River in Crookston, 
Minnesota, and, if the Secretary determines that the project is 
feasible, the Secretary may carry out the project under section 
14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r); except that 
the maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended 
for the project shall be $6,500,000. 
SEC. 5092. 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— 
(1) in the paragraph heading by striking ‘‘AND
KATHIO 
TOWNSHIP’’ and inserting ‘‘, CROW WING COUNTY, MILLE LACS 
COUNTY, MILLE LACS INDIAN RESERVATION, AND KATHIO TOWN-
SHIP’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘$11,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$17,000,000’’; 
(3) by inserting ‘‘, Crow Wing County, Mille Lacs County, 
Mille Lacs Indian Reservation established by the treaty of 
February 22, 1855 (10 Stat. 1165),’’ after ‘‘Garrison’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Such assistance 
shall be provided directly to the Garrison-Kathio-West Mille 
Lacs Lake Sanitary District, Minnesota, except for assistance 
provided directly to the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe at the 
discretion of the Secretary.’’. 
106 Stat. 4835; 
113 Stat. 335. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01229
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1232 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) PROCEDURES.—In carrying out the project authorized by 
such section 219(f)(61), the Secretary may use the cost sharing 
and contracting procedures available to the Secretary under section 
569 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
368). 
SEC. 5093. ITASCA COUNTY, MINNESOTA. 
The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood damage reduc-
tion, Trout Lake and Canisteo Pit, Itasca County, Minnesota, with-
out regard to normal policy considerations. 
SEC. 5094. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA. 
(a) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary shall convey to the city of 
Minneapolis by quitclaim deed and without consideration all right, 
title, and interest of the United States to the property known 
as the War Department (Fort Snelling Interceptor) Tunnel in Min-
neapolis, Minnesota. 
(b) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING PROVISIONS.—Sec-
tion 2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to the 
conveyance under this section. 
SEC. 5095. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 569 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment 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.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government.’’; 
(4) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$40,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$54,000,000’’; and 
(5) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense.’’. 
(b) BIWABIK, MINNESOTA.—The Secretary shall reimburse the 
non-Federal interest for the project for environmental infrastruc-
ture, Biwabik, Minnesota, carried out under section 569 of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368), for 
planning, design, and construction costs that were incurred by 
the non-Federal interest with respect to the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project and that were 
in excess of the non-Federal share of the cost of the project if 
the Secretary determines that the costs are appropriate. 
SEC. 5096. WILD RICE RIVER, MINNESOTA. 
The Secretary shall expedite the completion of the general 
reevaluation report, authorized by section 438 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2640), for the project 
for flood protection, Wild Rice River, Minnesota, authorized by 
section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1825), to 
develop alternatives to the Twin Valley Lake feature, and upon 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01230
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1233 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
the completion of such report, shall construct the project at a 
total cost of $20,000,000. 
SEC. 5097. MISSISSIPPI. 
Section 592(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 380; 117 Stat. 1837) is amended by striking 
‘‘$100,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$110,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5098. HARRISON, HANCOCK, AND JACKSON COUNTIES, MIS-
SISSIPPI. 
In carrying out projects for the protection, restoration, and 
creation of aquatic and ecologically related habitats located in Har-
rison, Hancock, and Jackson Counties, Mississippi, under section 
204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 
2326), the Secretary shall accept any portion of the non-Federal 
share of the cost of the projects in the form of in-kind services 
and materials. 
SEC. 5099. MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS. 
As a part of the operation and maintenance of the project 
for the Mississippi River (Regulating Works), between the Ohio 
and Missouri Rivers, Missouri and Illinois, authorized by the first 
section of an Act entitled ‘‘Making appropriations for the construc-
tion, repair, and preservation of certain public works on rivers 
and harbors, and for other purposes’’, approved June 25, 1910 
(36 Stat. 630), the Secretary may carry out activities necessary 
to restore and protect fish and wildlife habitat in the middle Mis-
sissippi 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 management principles in 
design of future work. 
SEC. 5100. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. 
Section 219(f)(32) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 337) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘a project’’ and inserting ‘‘projects’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’; 
and 
(3) by inserting ‘‘and St. Louis County’’ before ‘‘, Missouri’’. 
SEC. 5101. ST. LOUIS REGIONAL GREENWAYS, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, recreation, and flood damage reduction compo-
nents of the St. Louis Regional Greenways Proposal of the Metro-
politan Park and Recreation District, St. Louis, Missouri, dated 
March 31, 2004. 
(b) COORDINATION.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary 
shall coordinate with appropriate representatives in the vicinity 
of St. Louis, Missouri, including the Metropolitan Park and Recre-
ation District, the city of St. Louis, St. Louis County, and St. 
Charles County. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
106 Stat. 4835. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01231
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1234 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5102. MISSOULA, MONTANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, flood damage reduction, and recreation compo-
nents of the Clark Fork River Revitalization Project, Missoula, 
Montana. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5103. ST. MARY PROJECT, GLACIER COUNTY, MONTANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
Bureau of Reclamation, shall conduct all necessary studies, develop 
an emergency response plan, provide technical and planning and 
design assistance, and rehabilitate and construct the St. Mary 
Diversion and Conveyance Works project located within the exterior 
boundaries of the Blackfeet Reservation in the State of Montana, 
at a total cost of $153,000,000. 
(b) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the total cost of 
the project under this section shall be 75 percent. 
(c) PARTICIPATION BY BLACKFEET TRIBE AND FORT BELKNAP 
INDIAN COMMUNITY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), no 
construction shall be carried out under this section until the 
earlier of— 
(A) the date on which Congress approves the reserved 
water rights settlements of the Blackfeet Tribe and the 
Fort Belknap Indian Community; and 
(B) January 1, 2011. 
(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect 
to construction relating to— 
(A) standard operation and maintenance; or 
(B) emergency repairs to ensure water transportation 
or the protection of life and property. 
(3) REQUIREMENT.—The Blackfeet Tribe shall be a partici-
pant in all phases of the project authorized by this section. 
SEC. 
5104. 
LOWER 
PLATTE 
RIVER 
WATERSHED 
RESTORATION, 
NEBRASKA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may cooperate with and pro-
vide assistance to the Lower Platte River natural resources districts 
in the State of Nebraska to serve as non-Federal interests with 
respect to— 
(1) conducting comprehensive watershed planning in the 
natural resource districts; 
(2) assessing water resources in the natural resource dis-
tricts; and 
(3) providing project feasibility planning, design, and 
construction assistance for water resource and watershed 
management in the natural resource districts, including projects 
for environmental restoration and flood damage reduction. 
(b) FUNDING.— 
(1) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of car-
rying out an activity described in subsection (a)(1) shall be 
75 percent. 
(2) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal share of the 
cost of carrying out an activity described in subsection (a) 
may be provided in cash or in kind. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01232
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1235 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section 
$12,000,000. 
SEC. 5105. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JERSEY. 
Section 324 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(106 Stat. 4849; 110 Stat. 3779) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (a)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘design’’ and inserting ‘‘planning, 
design,’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘Hackensack Meadowlands Develop-
ment’’ and all that follows through ‘‘Plan for’’ and inserting 
‘‘New Jersey Meadowlands Commission for the develop-
ment 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’’; 
(C) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(1) Restoration and acquisitions of significant wetlands 
and aquatic habitat that contribute to the Meadowlands eco-
system.’’; 
(D) in paragraph (2) by inserting ‘‘and aquatic habitat’’ 
before the period at the end; and 
(E) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(7) Research, development, and implementation for a 
water quality improvement program, including restoration of 
hydrology and tidal flows and remediation of hot spots and 
other sources of contaminants that degrade existing or planned 
sites.’’; 
(3) in subsection (c)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘non-Federal sponsor’’ and inserting 
‘‘non-Federal interest’’; and 
(B) by inserting before the last sentence the following: 
‘‘The non-Federal interest may also provide in-kind services 
not to exceed the non-Federal share of the total project 
cost.’’; 
(4) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); 
(5) by inserting after subsection (c) the following: 
‘‘(d) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of a project to be 
carried out under the program developed under subsection (a) the 
cost of design work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for the 
project.’’; and 
(6) in subsection (e) (as redesignated by paragraph (4) 
of this subsection) by striking ‘‘$5,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$20,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5106. 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 following: ‘‘(and 
associated back bays)’’; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01233
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1236 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(3) by inserting after ‘‘actions’’ the following: ‘‘, environ-
mental restoration or conservation measures for coastal and 
back bays,’’; and 
(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The plan for col-
lecting data and monitoring information included in such 
annual report shall be coordinated with and agreed to by appro-
priate 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 the enactment of this Act, the’’ and inserting 
‘‘ANNUAL REPORTS.—The’’; 
(2) by striking ‘‘initial plan for data collection and moni-
toring’’ 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 2004, and $7,500,000 
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2004,’’. 
(d) TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM.—Section 404 of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4863) is amended 
by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(d) TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM.—There is authorized to be 
appropriated $800,000 for the Secretary to carry out a project 
for a tsunami warning system, Atlantic Coast of New York.’’. 
SEC. 5107. COLLEGE POINT, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK. 
In carrying out section 312 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639), the Secretary shall give priority 
to work in College Point, New York City, New York. 
SEC. 5108. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with section 221 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project for ecosystem restora-
tion, 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. 
SEC. 5109. HUDSON RIVER, NEW YORK. 
The Secretary may participate with the State of New York, 
New York City, and the Hudson River Park Trust in carrying 
out activities to restore critical marine habitat, improve safety, 
and protect and rehabilitate critical infrastructure with respect 
to the Hudson River. There is authorized to be appropriated 
$10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5110. MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NEW YORK. 
As part of the operation and maintenance of the Mount Morris 
Dam, New York, the Secretary may make improvements to the 
access road for the dam to provide safe access to a Federal visitor’s 
center. 
Appropriation 
authorization. 
106 Stat. 4863. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01234
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1237 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5111. NORTH HEMPSTEAD AND GLEN COVE NORTH SHORE 
WATERSHED RESTORATION, NEW YORK. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, navigation, flood damage reduction, and recre-
ation components of the North Hempstead and Glen Cove North 
Shore watershed restoration, New York. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5112. ROCHESTER, NEW YORK. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, navigation, flood damage reduction, and recre-
ation components of the Port of Rochester waterfront revitalization 
project, Rochester, New York. 
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5113. NORTH CAROLINA. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall estab-
lish a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the State of North Carolina. 
(b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for environmental infrastructure and resource protection and 
development projects in North Carolina, including projects for— 
(1) wastewater treatment and related facilities; 
(2) combined sewer overflow, water supply, storage, treat-
ment, and related facilities; 
(3) drinking water infrastructure including treatment and 
related facilities; 
(4) environmental restoration; 
(5) stormwater infrastructure; and 
(6) surface water resource protection and development. 
(c) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(d) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties development plan or resource protection plan, including 
appropriate plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01235
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1238 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project, in an amount not to exceed 
6 percent of the total construction costs of the project, 
the cost of design work carried out by the non-Federal 
interest for the project before the date of the partnership 
agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of the costs of a project 
that is the subject of an agreement under this section, 
the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for reasonable 
interest incurred in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land). 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(e) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $13,000,000. 
SEC. 5114. STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. 
Section 219(f)(64) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is amended by inserting ‘‘water 
and’’ before ‘‘wastewater’’. 
SEC. 5115. JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, NORTH CAROLINA. 
The Secretary shall expedite the completion of the calculations 
necessary to negotiate and execute a revised, permanent contract 
for water supply storage at John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir, 
North Carolina, among the Secretary and the Kerr Lake Regional 
Water System and the city of Henderson, North Carolina. 
SEC. 5116. CINCINNATI, OHIO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may undertake the ecosystem 
restoration and recreation components of the Central Riverfront 
Park Master Plan, dated December 1999, at a total cost of 
$30,000,000. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 
cost of planning, design, and construction work carried out by 
the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
Contracts. 
106 Stat. 4835; 
113 Stat. 335. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01236
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1239 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5117. OHIO RIVER BASIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions 
apply: 
(1) OHIO RIVER BASIN.—The term ‘‘Ohio River Basin’’ means 
the Ohio River, its backwaters, its side channels, and all tribu-
taries (including their watersheds) that drain into the Ohio 
River and encompassing areas of any of the States of Indiana, 
Ohio, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Illinois, New 
York, and Virginia. 
(2) COMPACT.—The term ‘‘Compact’’ means the Ohio River 
Watershed Sanitation Commission flood and pollution control 
compact between the States of Indiana, West Virginia, Ohio, 
Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New York, Illinois, and Virginia, to 
which consent was given by Congress pursuant to the Act 
of July 11, 1940 (54 Stat. 752) and that was chartered in 
1948. 
(b) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide planning, design, 
and construction assistance to the Compact for the improvement 
of the quality of the environment in and along the Ohio River 
Basin. 
(c) PRIORITIES.—In providing assistance under this section, the 
Secretary shall give priority to reducing or eliminating the presence 
of organic pollutants in the Ohio River Basin through the renovation 
and technological improvement of the organic detection system mon-
itoring stations along the Ohio River in the States of Indiana, 
Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,500,000. 
SEC. 5118. TOUSSAINT RIVER NAVIGATION PROJECT, CARROLL TOWN-
SHIP, OHIO. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The costs of operation and maintenance 
activities for the Toussaint River Federal navigation project, Carroll 
Township, Ohio, that are carried out in accordance with section 
107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and 
relate directly to the presence of unexploded ordnance, shall be 
carried out at Federal expense. 
(b) CALCULATION OF TOTAL COSTS.—The Secretary shall not 
consider the additional costs of dredging due to the presence of 
unexploded ordnance when calculating the costs of the project 
referred to in subsection (a) for the purposes of section 107(b) 
of such Act (33 U.S.C. 577(b)). 
SEC. 5119. STATEWIDE COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING, OKLA-
HOMA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide technical assist-
ance for the development of updates of the Oklahoma comprehensive 
water plan. 
(b) TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE.—Technical assistance provided 
under subsection (a) may include— 
(1) acquisition of hydrologic data, groundwater character-
ization, database development, and data distribution; 
(2) expansion of surface water and groundwater monitoring 
networks; 
(3) assessment of existing water resources, surface water 
storage, and groundwater storage potential; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01237
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1240 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(4) numerical analysis and modeling necessary to provide 
an integrated understanding of water resources and water 
management options; 
(5) participation in State planning forums and planning 
groups; 
(6) coordination of Federal water management planning 
efforts; and 
(7) technical review of data, models, planning scenarios, 
and water plans developed by the State. 
(c) ALLOCATION.—The Secretary shall allocate, subject to the 
availability of appropriations, $6,500,000 to provide technical assist-
ance and for the development of updates of the Oklahoma com-
prehensive water plan. 
(d) COST SHARING REQUIREMENT.—The non-Federal share of 
the total cost of any activity carried out under this section— 
(1) shall be 25 percent; and 
(2) may be in the form of cash or any in-kind services 
that the Secretary determines would contribute substantially 
toward the conduct and completion of the activity assisted. 
SEC. 5120. FERN RIDGE DAM, OREGON. 
The Secretary may treat all work carried out for emergency 
corrective actions to repair the embankment dam at the Fern Ridge 
Lake project, Oregon, as a dam safety project. The cost of work 
carried out may be recovered in accordance with section 1203 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 467n; 
100 Stat. 4263). 
SEC. 5121. ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 219(f)(66) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$20,000,000’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for 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. 5122. CLINTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 219(f)(13) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is amended by striking ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$2,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5123. KEHLY RUN DAMS, PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 504(a)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 338; 117 Stat. 1842) is amended by striking ‘‘Dams’’ 
and inserting ‘‘Dams No. 1–5’’. 
SEC. 5124. LEHIGH RIVER, LEHIGH COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
The Secretary shall use existing water quality data to model 
the effects of the Francis E. Walter Dam, at different water levels, 
to determine its impact on water and related resources in and 
106 Stat. 4835. 
106 Stat. 4835; 
113 Stat. 335. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01238
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1241 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
along the Lehigh River in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. There 
is authorized to be appropriated $500,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5125. NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA. 
Section 219(f)(11) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is amended by striking ‘‘and Monroe’’ and 
inserting ‘‘Northumberland, Union, Snyder, Luzerne, and Monroe’’. 
SEC. 5126. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND 
NEW YORK. 
(a) STUDY AND STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT.—Section 567(a) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3787; 114 
Stat. 2662) is amended— 
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting 
‘‘and carry out’’ after ‘‘develop’’; and 
(2) in paragraph (2) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000.’’ and inserting 
‘‘$20,000,000, of which the Secretary may utilize not more 
than $5,000,000 to design and construct feasible pilot projects 
during the development of the strategy to demonstrate alter-
native 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 strategy.’’. 
(b) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.—Section 567(c) of such Act (114 
Stat. 2662) is amended— 
(1) in the subsection heading by striking ‘‘COOPERATION’’ 
and inserting ‘‘PARTNERSHIP’’; and 
(2) in the first sentence— 
(A) by inserting ‘‘and carrying out’’ after ‘‘developing’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘cooperation’’ and inserting ‘‘cost- 
sharing and partnership’’. 
(c) IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGY.—Section 567(d) of such Act 
(114 Stat. 2663) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; 
(2) in the second sentence of paragraph (1) (as so des-
ignated)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘implement’’ and inserting ‘‘carry out’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘implementing’’ and inserting ‘‘carrying 
out’’; 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) PRIORITY PROJECT.—In carrying out projects to imple-
ment the strategy, the Secretary shall give priority to the 
project for ecosystem restoration, Cooperstown, New York, 
described in the Upper Susquehanna River Basin—Coopers-
town Area Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study, dated 
December 2004, prepared by the Corps of Engineers and the 
New York State department of environmental conservation.’’; 
and 
(4) 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 (3) of this subsection). 
(d) CREDIT.—Section 567 of such Act (110 Stat. 3787; 114 
Stat. 2662) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(e) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal 
share of the cost of a project under this section— 
106 Stat. 4835. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01239
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1242 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(1) in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), the cost of design and 
construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest for 
the project before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project; and 
‘‘(2) the cost of in-kind services and materials provided 
for the project by the non-Federal interest.’’. 
SEC. 5127. CANO MARTIN PENA, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO. 
The Secretary shall review a report prepared by the non-Federal 
interest concerning flood protection and environmental restoration 
for Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico, and, if the Secretary 
determines that the report meets the evaluation and design stand-
ards of the Corps of Engineers and that the project is feasible, 
the Secretary may carry out the project at a total cost of 
$150,000,000. 
SEC. 5128. LAKES MARION AND MOULTRIE, SOUTH CAROLINA. 
Section 219(f)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A–220; 117 Stat. 1838) is 
amended by striking ‘‘$35,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$60,000,000’’. 
SEC. 5129. CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX 
TRIBE, AND TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORA-
TION, SOUTH DAKOTA. 
(a) DISBURSEMENT PROVISIONS OF STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA 
AND CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE AND LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE 
TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORATION TRUST FUNDS.—Sec-
tion 602(a)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
(113 Stat. 386) is amended— 
(1) in subparagraph (A)— 
(A) in clause (i) by inserting ‘‘and the Secretary of 
the Treasury’’ after ‘‘Secretary’’; and 
(B) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—On notification in 
accordance with clause (i), the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall make available to the State of South 
Dakota funds from the State of South Dakota Terres-
trial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Trust Fund estab-
lished under section 603 to be used to carry out the 
plan for terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration sub-
mitted by the State of South Dakota after the State 
certifies to the Secretary of the Treasury that the 
funds to be disbursed will be used in accordance with 
section 603(d)(3) and only after the Trust Fund is 
fully capitalized.’’; and 
(2) in subparagraph (B) by striking clause (ii) and inserting 
the following: 
‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—On notification in 
accordance with clause (i), the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall make available to the Cheyenne River 
Sioux Tribe and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe funds 
from the Cheyenne River Sioux Terrestrial Wildlife 
Habitat Restoration Trust Fund and the Lower Brule 
Sioux Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Trust 
Fund, respectively, established under section 604, to 
be used to carry out the plans for terrestrial wildlife 
habitat restoration submitted by the Cheyenne River 
106 Stat. 4835. 
Reports. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01240
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1243 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Sioux Tribe and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, respec-
tively, to after the respective tribe certifies to the Sec-
retary of the Treasury that the funds to be disbursed 
will be used in accordance with section 604(d)(3) and 
only after the Trust Fund is fully capitalized.’’. 
(b) INVESTMENT PROVISIONS OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA 
TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE RESTORATION TRUST FUND.—Section 603 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 388; 
114 Stat. 2664) is amended— 
(1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(c) INVESTMENTS.— 
‘‘(1) ELIGIBLE
OBLIGATIONS.—Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Secretary of the Treasury shall invest 
the amounts deposited under subsection (b) and the interest 
earned on those amounts only in interest-bearing obligations 
of the United States issued directly to the Fund. 
‘‘(2) INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
invest the amounts in the Fund in accordance with the 
requirements of this paragraph. 
‘‘(B) 
SEPARATE
INVESTMENTS
OF
PRINCIPAL
AND 
INTEREST.— 
‘‘(i) PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.—The amounts deposited 
in the Fund under subsection (b) shall be credited 
to an account within the Fund (referred to in this 
paragraph as the ‘principal account’) and invested as 
provided in subparagraph (C). 
‘‘(ii) INTEREST ACCOUNT.—The interest earned from 
investing amounts in the principal account of the Fund 
shall be transferred to a separate account within the 
Fund (referred to in this paragraph as the ‘interest 
account’) and invested as provided in subparagraph 
(D). 
‘‘(iii) 
CREDITING.—The 
interest 
earned 
from 
investing amounts in the interest account of the Fund 
shall be credited to the interest account. 
‘‘(C) INVESTMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.— 
‘‘(i) INITIAL INVESTMENT.—Each amount deposited 
in the principal account of the Fund shall be invested 
initially in eligible obligations having the shortest 
maturity then available until the date on which the 
amount is divided into 3 substantially equal portions 
and those portions are invested in eligible obligations 
that are identical (except for transferability) to the 
next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations having 
a 2-year maturity, a 5-year maturity, and a 10-year 
maturity, respectively. 
‘‘(ii) SUBSEQUENT INVESTMENT.—As each 2-year, 5- 
year, and 10-year eligible obligation matures, the prin-
cipal of the maturing eligible obligation shall also be 
invested initially in the shortest-maturity eligible 
obligation then available until the principal is 
reinvested substantially equally in the eligible obliga-
tions that are identical (except for transferability) to 
the next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations 
having 2-year, 5-year, and 10-year maturities. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01241
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1244 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(iii) DISCONTINUANCE
OF
ISSUANCE
OF
OBLIGA-
TIONS.—If the Department of the Treasury discontinues 
issuing to the public obligations having 2-year, 5-year, 
or 10-year maturities, the principal of any maturing 
eligible obligation shall be reinvested substantially 
equally in eligible obligations that are identical (except 
for transferability) to the next-issued publicly issued 
Treasury obligations of the maturities longer than 1 
year then available. 
‘‘(D) INVESTMENT OF INTEREST ACCOUNT.— 
‘‘(i) BEFORE FULL CAPITALIZATION.—Until the date 
on which the Fund is fully capitalized, amounts in 
the interest account of the Fund shall be invested 
in eligible obligations that are identical (except for 
transferability) to publicly issued Treasury obligations 
that have maturities that coincide, to the maximum 
extent practicable, with the date on which the Fund 
is expected to be fully capitalized. 
‘‘(ii) AFTER FULL CAPITALIZATION.—On and after 
the date on which the Fund is fully capitalized, 
amounts in the interest account of the Fund shall 
be invested and reinvested in eligible obligations 
having the shortest maturity then available until the 
amounts are withdrawn and transferred to fund the 
activities authorized under subsection (d)(3). 
‘‘(E) PAR PURCHASE PRICE.—The price to be paid for 
eligible obligations purchased as investments of the prin-
cipal account shall not exceed the par value of the obliga-
tions so that the amount of the principal account shall 
be preserved in perpetuity. 
‘‘(F) 
HIGHEST
YIELD.—Among 
eligible 
obligations 
having the same maturity and purchase price, the obliga-
tion to be purchased shall be the obligation having the 
highest yield. 
‘‘(G) HOLDING TO MATURITY.—Eligible obligations pur-
chased shall generally be held to their maturities. 
‘‘(3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES.—Not less 
frequently than once each calendar year, the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall review with the State of South Dakota the 
results of the investment activities and financial status of the 
Fund during the preceding 12-month period. 
‘‘(4) AUDITS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The activities of the State of South 
Dakota (referred to in this subsection as the ‘State’) in 
carrying out the plan of the State for terrestrial wildlife 
habitat restoration under section 602(a) shall be audited 
as part of the annual audit that the State is required 
to prepare under the Office of Management and Budget 
Circular A–133 (or a successor circulation). 
‘‘(B) DETERMINATION BY AUDITORS.—An auditor that 
conducts an audit under subparagraph (A) shall— 
‘‘(i) determine whether funds received by the State 
under this section during the period covered by the 
audit were used to carry out the plan of the State 
in accordance with this section; and 
‘‘(ii) include the determination under clause (i) in 
the written findings of the audit. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01242
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1245 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(5) MODIFICATION OF INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the Treasury 
determines that meeting the requirements under para-
graph (2) with respect to the investment of a Fund is 
not practicable, or would result in adverse consequences 
for the Fund, the Secretary shall modify the requirements, 
as the Secretary determines to be necessary. 
‘‘(B) CONSULTATION.—Before modifying a requirement 
under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the Treasury 
shall consult with the State regarding the proposed modi-
fication.’’; 
(2) in subsection (d)(2) by inserting ‘‘of the Treasury’’ after 
‘‘Secretary’’; and 
(3) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(f) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary of the Treasury to pay expenses 
associated with investing the Fund and auditing the uses of 
amounts withdrawn from the Fund— 
‘‘(1) $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007; and 
‘‘(2) such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal 
year.’’. 
(c) INVESTMENT PROVISIONS FOR CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE 
AND LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE TRUST FUNDS.—Section 604 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 389; 
114 Stat. 2665) is amended— 
(1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(c) INVESTMENTS.— 
‘‘(1) ELIGIBLE
OBLIGATIONS.—Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Secretary of the Treasury shall invest 
the amounts deposited under subsection (b) and the interest 
earned on those amounts only in interest-bearing obligations 
of the United States issued directly to the Funds. 
‘‘(2) INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
invest the amounts in each of the Funds in accordance 
with the requirements of this paragraph. 
‘‘(B) 
SEPARATE
INVESTMENTS
OF
PRINCIPAL
AND 
INTEREST.— 
‘‘(i) PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.—The amounts deposited 
in each Fund under subsection (b) shall be credited 
to an account within the Fund (referred to in this 
paragraph as the ‘principal account’) and invested as 
provided in subparagraph (C). 
‘‘(ii) INTEREST ACCOUNT.—The interest earned from 
investing amounts in the principal account of each 
Fund shall be transferred to a separate account within 
the Fund (referred to in this paragraph as the ‘interest 
account’) and invested as provided in subparagraph 
(D). 
‘‘(iii) 
CREDITING.—The 
interest 
earned 
from 
investing amounts in the interest account of each Fund 
shall be credited to the interest account. 
‘‘(C) INVESTMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.— 
‘‘(i) INITIAL INVESTMENT.—Each amount deposited 
in the principal account of each Fund shall be invested 
initially in eligible obligations having the shortest 
maturity then available until the date on which the 
Appropriation 
authorization. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01243
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1246 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
amount is divided into 3 substantially equal portions 
and those portions are invested in eligible obligations 
that are identical (except for transferability) to the 
next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations having 
a 2-year maturity, a 5-year maturity, and a 10-year 
maturity, respectively. 
‘‘(ii) SUBSEQUENT INVESTMENT.—As each 2-year, 5- 
year, and 10-year eligible obligation matures, the prin-
cipal of the maturing eligible obligation shall also be 
invested initially in the shortest-maturity eligible 
obligation then available until the principal is 
reinvested substantially equally in the eligible obliga-
tions that are identical (except for transferability) to 
the next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations 
having 2-year, 5-year, and 10-year maturities. 
‘‘(iii) DISCONTINUATION
OF
ISSUANCE
OF
OBLIGA-
TIONS.—If the Department of the Treasury discontinues 
issuing to the public obligations having 2-year, 5-year, 
or 10-year maturities, the principal of any maturing 
eligible obligation shall be reinvested substantially 
equally in eligible obligations that are identical (except 
for transferability) to the next-issued publicly issued 
Treasury obligations of the maturities longer than 1 
year then available. 
‘‘(D) INVESTMENT OF INTEREST ACCOUNT.— 
‘‘(i) BEFORE FULL CAPITALIZATION.—Until the date 
on which each Fund is fully capitalized, amounts in 
the interest account of the Fund shall be invested 
in eligible obligations that are identical (except for 
transferability) to publicly issued Treasury obligations 
that have maturities that coincide, to the maximum 
extent practicable, with the date on which the Fund 
is expected to be fully capitalized. 
‘‘(ii) AFTER FULL CAPITALIZATION.—On and after 
the date on which each Fund is fully capitalized, 
amounts in the interest account of the Fund shall 
be invested and reinvested in eligible obligations 
having the shortest maturity then available until the 
amounts are withdrawn and transferred to fund the 
activities authorized under subsection (d)(3). 
‘‘(E) PAR PURCHASE PRICE.—The price to be paid for 
eligible obligations purchased as investments of the prin-
cipal account shall not exceed the par value of the obliga-
tions so that the amount of the principal account shall 
be preserved in perpetuity. 
‘‘(F) 
HIGHEST
YIELD.—Among 
eligible 
obligations 
having the same maturity and purchase price, the obliga-
tion to be purchased shall be the obligation having the 
highest yield. 
‘‘(G) HOLDING TO MATURITY.—Eligible obligations pur-
chased shall generally be held to their maturities. 
‘‘(3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES.—Not less 
frequently than once each calendar year, the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall review with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe 
and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe (referred to in this subsection 
as the ‘Tribes’) the results of the investment activities and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01244
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1247 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
financial status of the Funds during the preceding 12-month 
period. 
‘‘(4) AUDITS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The activities of the Tribes in car-
rying out the plans of the Tribes for terrestrial wildlife 
habitat restoration under section 602(a) shall be audited 
as part of the annual audit that the Tribes are required 
to prepare under the Office of Management and Budget 
Circular A–133 (or a successor circulation). 
‘‘(B) DETERMINATION BY AUDITORS.—An auditor that 
conducts an audit under subparagraph (A) shall— 
‘‘(i) determine whether funds received by the 
Tribes under this section during the period covered 
by the audit were used to carry out the plan of the 
appropriate Tribe in accordance with this section; and 
‘‘(ii) include the determination under clause (i) in 
the written findings of the audit. 
‘‘(5) MODIFICATION OF INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the Treasury 
determines that meeting the requirements under para-
graph (2) with respect to the investment of a Fund is 
not practicable, or would result in adverse consequences 
for the Fund, the Secretary shall modify the requirements, 
as the Secretary determines to be necessary. 
‘‘(B) CONSULTATION.—Before modifying a requirement 
under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the Treasury 
shall consult with the Tribes regarding the proposed modi-
fication.’’; and 
(2) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(f) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary of the Treasury to pay expenses 
associated with investing the Funds and auditing the uses of 
amounts withdrawn from the Funds— 
‘‘(1) $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007; and 
‘‘(2) such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal 
year.’’. 
SEC. 5130. EAST TENNESSEE. 
(a) EAST TENNESSEE DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘East 
Tennessee’’ means the counties of Blount, Knox, Loudon, McMinn, 
Monroe, and Sevier, Tennessee. 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in East Tennessee. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in East Tennessee, including projects 
for wastewater treatment and related facilities, water supply and 
related facilities, environmental restoration, and surface water 
resource protection and development. 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01245
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1248 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost of design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of a project that is the 
subject of an agreement under this section, the non-Federal 
interest shall receive credit for reasonable interest incurred 
in providing the non-Federal share of the project cost. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project cost (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01246
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1249 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5131. FRITZ LANDING, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall— 
(1) conduct a study of the Fritz Landing Agricultural Spur 
Levee, Tennessee, to determine the extent of levee modifications 
that would be required to make the levee and associated drain-
age structures consistent with Federal standards; 
(2) design and construct such modifications; and 
(3) after completion of such modifications, incorporate 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). 
SEC. 5132. J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TENNESSEE. 
The Secretary shall plan, design, and construct a trail system 
at the J. Percy Priest Dam and Reservoir, Tennessee, authorized 
by section 4 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction 
of certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, 
and for other purposes’’, approved June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), 
and adjacent public property, including design and construction 
of support facilities. In carrying out such improvements, the Sec-
retary is authorized to use funds made available by the State 
of Tennessee from any Federal or State source, or both. 
SEC. 5133. NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may participate in the eco-
system restoration, recreation, navigation, and flood damage reduc-
tion components of the Nashville Riverfront Concept Plan, dated 
February 2007. 
(b) COORDINATION.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary 
shall coordinate with appropriate representatives in the vicinity 
of Nashville, Tennessee, including the Nashville Parks and Recre-
ation Department, the city of Nashville, and Davidson County. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5134. NONCONNAH WEIR, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. 
The project for flood control, Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee and 
Mississippi, authorized by section 401 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124) and modified by the 
section 334 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 
Stat. 2611), is modified to authorize the Secretary— 
(1) to reconstruct, at Federal expense, the weir originally 
constructed in the vicinity of the mouth of Nonconnah Creek; 
and 
(2) to make repairs and maintain the weir in the future 
so that the weir functions properly. 
SEC. 5135. 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 
River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 927), the Secretary 
may enter into a partnership with a nonprofit entity to remove 
National Trail 
System. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01247
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1250 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
debris from the Tennessee River in the vicinity of Knoxville, Ten-
nessee, 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. 5136. 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 County, Tennessee, 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), notwithstanding 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(m) of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)). 
SEC. 5137. UPPER MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT, TENNESSEE, ARKANSAS, 
AND MISSISSIPPI. 
The Secretary may participate with non-Federal and nonprofit 
entities to address issues concerning managing groundwater as 
a sustainable resource through the Upper Mississippi Embayment, 
Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi, and to coordinate the protec-
tion of groundwater supply and groundwater quality of the 
Embayment with local surface water protection programs. There 
is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry out this section. 
SEC. 5138. TEXAS. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall estab-
lish a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the State of Texas. 
(b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of planning, design, and construction 
assistance for water-related environmental infrastructure and 
resource protection and development projects in Texas, including 
projects for water supply, storage, treatment, and related facilities, 
water quality protection, wastewater treatment, and related facili-
ties, environmental restoration, and surface water resource protec-
tion, and development, as identified by the Texas Water Develop-
ment Board. 
(c) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(d) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.—Before providing assistance 
under this section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership 
agreement with a non-Federal interest. 
(e) COST SHARING.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of the 
project under this section— 
(A) shall be 75 percent; and 
(B) may be provided in the form of grants or reimburse-
ments of project costs. 
(2) IN-KIND SERVICES.—The non-Federal share may be pro-
vided in the form of materials and in-kind services, including 
planning, design, construction, and management services, as 
the Secretary determines to be compatible with, and necessary 
for, the project. 
Appropriation 
authorization. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01248
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1251 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(3) CREDIT
FOR
WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of design work carried out by 
the non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for the project. 
(4) CREDIT FOR LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY.— 
The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for land, ease-
ments, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the non-Federal 
share of project costs. 
(5) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal share 
of operation and maintenance costs for projects constructed 
with assistance provided under this section shall be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5139. BOSQUE RIVER WATERSHED, TEXAS. 
(a) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The Secretary, in consultation with 
appropriate Federal, State, and local entities, shall develop, as 
expeditiously as practicable, a comprehensive plan for development 
of new technologies and innovative approaches for restoring, pre-
serving, and protecting the Bosque River watershed within Bosque, 
Hamilton, McLennan, and Erath Counties, Texas. The Secretary, 
in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, may carry out 
activities identified in the comprehensive plan to demonstrate prac-
ticable alternatives for stabilization and enhancement of land and 
water resources in the basin. 
(b) SERVICES OF NONPROFIT INSTITUTIONS AND OTHER ENTI-
TIES.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary may utilize, 
through contracts or other means, the services of nonprofit institu-
tions and such other entities as the Secretary considers appropriate. 
(c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— 
(1) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(2) DEVELOPMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The non-Fed-
eral share of the cost of development of the plan under sub-
section (a) shall be 25 percent. 
(3) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal share 
of the cost of operation and maintenance for measures con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall be 
100 percent. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000. 
SEC. 5140. DALLAS COUNTY REGION, TEXAS. 
(a) DALLAS COUNTY REGION DEFINED.—In this section, the term 
‘‘Dallas County region’’ means the city of Dallas, and the municipali-
ties of DeSoto, Duncanville, Lancaster, Wilmer, Hutchins, Balch 
Springs, Cedar Hill, Glenn Heights, and Ferris, Texas. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01249
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1252 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Secretary may establish 
a program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal 
interests in the Dallas County region. 
(c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance provided under this sec-
tion may be in the form of design and construction assistance 
for water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protec-
tion and development projects in the Dallas County region, 
including projects for wastewater treatment and related facilities, 
water supply and related facilities, environmental restoration, and 
surface water resource protection and development. 
(d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may provide 
assistance for a project under this section only if the project is 
publicly owned. 
(e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assistance under this 
section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement 
with a non-Federal interest to provide for design and construc-
tion of the project to be carried out with the assistance. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership agreement for a 
project entered into under this subsection shall provide for 
the following: 
(A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facili-
ties or resource protection and development plan, including 
appropriate engineering plans and specifications. 
(B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES.—Establish-
ment of such legal and institutional structures as are nec-
essary to ensure the effective long-term operation of the 
project by the non-Federal interest. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Federal share of the cost of 
a project under this section— 
(i) shall be 75 percent; and 
(ii) may be provided in the form of grants or 
reimbursements of project costs. 
(B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The Secretary shall credit, in 
accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share 
of the cost of the project the cost design work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a delay in the 
funding of the non-Federal share of a project that is the 
subject of an agreement under this section, the non-Federal 
interest shall receive credit for reasonable interest incurred 
in providing the non-Federal share. 
(D) CREDIT
FOR
LAND, EASEMENTS, AND
RIGHTS-OF- 
WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for 
land, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward the 
non-Federal share of project costs (including all reasonable 
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of the project 
on publicly owned or controlled land), but the credit may 
not exceed 25 percent of total project costs. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01250
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1253 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non-Federal 
share of operation and maintenance costs for projects con-
structed with assistance provided under this section shall 
be 100 percent. 
(f) APPLICABILITY
OF OTHER FEDERAL
AND STATE LAWS.— 
Nothing in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or other-
wise affect the applicability of any provision of Federal or State 
law that would otherwise apply to a project to be carried out 
with assistance provided under this section. 
(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000. 
SEC. 5141. DALLAS FLOODWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, Trinity River 
and tributaries, Texas, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled, 
‘‘An Act authorizing the construction, repair, and preservation of 
certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes’’, 
approved March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 18), is modified to— 
(1) direct the Secretary to review the Balanced Vision Plan 
for the Trinity River Corridor, Dallas, Texas, dated December 
2003 and amended in March 2004, prepared by the non-Federal 
interest for the project; 
(2) direct the Secretary to review the Interior Levee Drain-
age Study Phase-I report, Dallas, Texas, dated September 2006, 
prepared by the non-Federal interest; and 
(3) if the Secretary determines that the project is tech-
nically sound and environmentally acceptable, authorize the 
Secretary to construct the project at a total cost of $459,000,000, 
with an estimated Federal cost of $298,000,000 and an esti-
mated non-Federal cost of $161,000,000. 
(b) CREDIT.— 
(1) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary shall credit, 
in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of 
the cost of the project the cost of planning, design, and construc-
tion work carried out by the non-Federal interest for the project 
before the date of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(2) CASH CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary shall accept funds 
provided by the non-Federal interest for use in carrying out 
planning, engineering, and design for the project. The Federal 
share of such planning, engineering, and design carried out 
with non-Federal contributions shall be credited against the 
non-Federal share of the cost of the project. 
SEC. 5142. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. 
Section 575(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 (110 Stat. 3789; 113 Stat. 311) is amended— 
(1) in paragraph (3) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01251
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1254 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) in paragraph (4) by striking the period at the end 
and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 
(3) by adding the following: 
‘‘(5) the project for flood control, Upper White Oak Bayou, 
Texas, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4125).’’. 
SEC. 5143. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood damage reduction, 
environmental 
restoration, 
and 
recreation, 
Johnson 
Creek, 
Arlington, Texas, authorized by section 101(b)(14) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat 280), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to construct the project substantially 
in accordance with the report entitled ‘‘Johnson Creek: A Vision 
of Conservation’’, dated March 30, 2006, at a total cost of 
$80,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $52,000,000 and 
an estimated non-Federal cost of $28,000,000, if the Secretary deter-
mines that the project is feasible. 
(b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of the cost of 
the project may be provided in cash or in the form of in- 
kind services or materials. 
(2) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
the cost of planning, design, and construction work carried 
out by the non-Federal interest for the project before the date 
of the partnership agreement for the project. 
(c) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and implementing the project, 
the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate 
in the financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) 
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184). 
(d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 134 of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2263) is 
repealed. 
SEC. 5144. ONION CREEK, TEXAS. 
(a) INCLUSION
OF COSTS
AND BENEFITS
OF RELOCATION
OF 
FLOOD-PRONE RESIDENCES.—In carrying out the study for the 
project for flood damage reduction, recreation, and ecosystem res-
toration, 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 in the period beginning 2 years 
before the date of initiation of the study and ending on the date 
of execution of the partnership agreement for construction of the 
project to the extent the Secretary determines such relocations 
are compatible with the project. 
(b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– 
5b), toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project referred 
to in subsection (a) the cost of relocation of those flood-prone resi-
dences described in subsection (a) that are incurred by the non- 
Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for 
the project. 
SEC. 5145. CONNECTICUT RIVER DAMS, VERMONT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall evaluate, design, and 
carry out structural modifications at Federal cost to the Union 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01252
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1255 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Village Dam (Ompompanoosuc River), North Hartland Dam 
(Ottauquechee River), North Springfield Dam (Black River), Ball 
Mountain Dam (West River), and Townshend Dam (West River), 
Vermont, to regulate flow and temperature to mitigate downstream 
impacts on aquatic habitat and fisheries. 
(b) INCLUSION.—During the evaluation and design portion of 
the modifications authorized by this section, the Secretary shall 
ensure that a sustainable flow analysis is conducted for each dam. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000. 
SEC. 5146. LAKE CHAMPLAIN CANAL, VERMONT AND NEW YORK. 
(a) DISPERSAL BARRIER PROJECT.—The Secretary shall deter-
mine, at Federal expense, the feasibility of a dispersal barrier 
project at the Lake Champlain Canal, Vermont and New York, 
to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance species. 
(b) CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION.—If the Sec-
retary determines that the project described in subsection (a) is 
feasible, the Secretary shall construct, maintain, and operate a 
dispersal barrier at the Lake Champlain Canal at Federal expense. 
SEC. 5147. DYKE MARSH, FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA. 
The Secretary shall accept funds from the National Park Service 
to restore Dyke Marsh, Fairfax County, Virginia. 
SEC. 5148. EASTERN SHORE AND SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA. 
Section 219(f)(10) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000 for water supply and waste-
water infrastructure’’ and inserting the following: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$20,000,000 for water supply, waste-
water infrastructure, and environmental restoration’’; 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance 
with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 
U.S.C. 1962d–5b), toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the 
non-Federal interest for the project before the date of the 
partnership agreement for 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. 5149. JAMES RIVER, VIRGINIA. 
The Secretary shall accept funds from the National Park Service 
to provide technical and project management assistance for the 
James River, Virginia, with a particular emphasis on locations 
along the shoreline adversely impacted by Hurricane Isabel. 
SEC. 5150. BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary shall conduct a study of increased siltation in 
Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, Washington, to determine if the 
siltation is the result of a Federal navigation project (including 
diverted flows from the Columbia River) and, if the Secretary deter-
mines 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. 
Study. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01253
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1256 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5151. HAMILTON ISLAND CAMPGROUND, WASHINGTON. 
The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, and construct a 
campground for Bonneville Lock and Dam at Hamilton Island (also 
known as ‘‘Strawberry Island’’) in Skamania County, Washington. 
SEC. 5152. EROSION CONTROL, PUGET ISLAND, WAHKIAKUM COUNTY, 
WASHINGTON. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Lower Columbia River levees and bank 
protection works authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control 
Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 178) is modified with regard to the Wahkiakum 
County diking districts No. 1 and 3, but without regard to any 
cost ceiling authorized before the date of enactment of this Act, 
to direct the Secretary to provide a one-time placement of dredged 
material along portions of the Columbia River shoreline of Puget 
Island, Washington, between river miles 38 to 47, and the shoreline 
of Westport Beach, Clatsop County, Oregon, between river miles 
43 to 45, to protect economic and environmental resources in the 
area from further erosion. 
(b) COORDINATION
AND COST-SHARING REQUIREMENTS.—The 
Secretary shall carry out subsection (a)— 
(1) in coordination with appropriate resource agencies; and 
(2) at Federal expense. 
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000. 
SEC. 5153. WILLAPA BAY, WASHINGTON. 
Section 545 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(114 Stat. 2675) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ‘‘may construct’’ and 
inserting ‘‘shall construct’’; and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘and ecosystem restoration’’ after ‘‘erosion 
protection’’ each place it appears. 
SEC. 5154. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD CONTROL. 
(a) CHEAT AND TYGART RIVER BASINS, WEST VIRGINIA.—Section 
581(a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
Stat. 3790; 113 Stat. 313) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘flood control measures’’ and inserting 
‘‘structural and nonstructural flood control, streambank protec-
tion, stormwater management, and channel clearing and modi-
fication measures’’; and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘with respect to measures that incorporate 
levees or floodwalls’’ before the semicolon. 
(b) PRIORITY
COMMUNITIES.—Section 581(b) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3791) is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (5); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) 
and inserting a semicolon; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(7) Etna, Pennsylvania, in the Pine Creek watershed; and 
‘‘(8) Millvale, Pennsylvania, in the Girty’s Run River 
basin.’’. 
(c) 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’’. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01254
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1257 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 5155. 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,’’; 
(2) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting 
‘‘$20,000,000’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project undertaken under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government. 
‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Not more than 10 percent 
of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
used by the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects 
under this section at Federal expense.’’. 
SEC. 5156. 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.—Not more than 10 percent of the 
amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be used by 
the Corps of Engineers district offices to administer projects under 
this section at 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 following: 
‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—In accordance with section 221(b) 
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may 
include a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local 
government.’’. 
SEC. 5157. 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 by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(12) PERRIS, CALIFORNIA.—The project for flood control, 
Perris, California. 
‘‘(13) THORNTON RESERVOIR, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—An 
element of the project for flood control, Chicagoland Underflow 
Plan, Illinois. 
‘‘(14) LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LOUISIANA.—The project 
for flood control, Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana. 
‘‘(15) BUFFALO BAYOU, TEXAS.—A project for flood control, 
Buffalo Bayou, Texas, to provide an alternative to the project 
authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor Act 
of June 20, 1938 (52 Stat. 804) and modified by section 3a 
of the Flood Control Act of August 11, 1939 (53 Stat. 1414). 
‘‘(16) HALLS
BAYOU, TEXAS.—A project for flood control, 
Halls Bayou, Texas, to provide an alternative to the project 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01255
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1258 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
for flood control, Buffalo Bayou and tributaries, Texas, author-
ized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610). 
‘‘(17) MENOMONEE
RIVER
WATERSHED, WISCONSIN.—The 
project for the Menomonee River Watershed, Wisconsin, 
including— 
‘‘(A) the Underwood Creek diversion facility project 
(Milwaukee County Grounds); and 
‘‘(B) the Greater Milwaukee Rivers watershed project.’’. 
SEC. 5158. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CRITICAL PROJECTS. 
Section 219 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(106 Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 334; 113 Stat. 1494; 
114 Stat. 2763A–219; 119 Stat. 2255) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (c)(5) by striking ‘‘a project for the elimi-
nation or control of combined sewer overflows’’ and inserting 
‘‘projects for the design, installation, enhancement, or repair 
of sewer systems’’; 
(2) in subsection (e)(1) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and 
inserting ‘‘$32,500,000’’; and 
(3) in subsection (f)— 
(A) by striking the undesignated paragraph relating 
to Charleston, South Carolina, and inserting the following: 
‘‘(72) CHARLESTON, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.—$10,000,000 for 
wastewater infrastructure, including wastewater collection sys-
tems, and stormwater system improvements, Charleston, South 
Carolina.’’; 
(B) by redesignating the paragraph (71) relating to 
Placer and El Dorado Counties, California, as paragraph 
(73); 
(C) by redesignating the paragraph (72) relating to 
Lassen, Plumas, Butte, Sierra, and Nevada Counties, Cali-
fornia, as paragraph (74); 
(D) by striking the paragraph (71) relating to Indianap-
olis, Indiana, and inserting the following: 
‘‘(75) INDIANAPOLIS, 
INDIANA.—$6,430,000 for environ-
mental infrastructure for Indianapolis, Indiana.’’; 
(E) by redesignating the paragraph (73) relating to 
St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin, as paragraph (76); 
(F) by redesignating paragraph (72), relating to Alpine, 
California, as paragraph (77); and 
(G) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(78) ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ALABAMA.—$5,000,000 for water 
related infrastructure, St. Clair County, Alabama. 
‘‘(79) CRAWFORD
COUNTY, 
ARKANSAS.—$35,000,000 for 
water supply infrastructure, Crawford County, Arkansas. 
‘‘(80) ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA.— 
$25,000,000 for recycled water treatment facilities within the 
East Bay Municipal Utility District service area, Alameda and 
Contra Costa Counties, California. 
‘‘(81) 
ALISO
CREEK, 
ORANGE
COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.— 
$5,000,000 for water related infrastructure, Aliso Creek, Orange 
County, California. 
‘‘(82) AMADOR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 for waste-
water collection and treatment infrastructure, Amador County, 
California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01256
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1259 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(83) ARCADIA, SIERRA MADRE, AND UPLAND, CALIFORNIA.— 
$33,000,000 for water and wastewater infrastructure, Arcadia, 
Sierra Madre, and Upland, California, including $13,000,000 
for stormwater infrastructure for Upland, California. 
‘‘(84) BIG BEAR AREA REGIONAL WASTEWATER AGENCY, CALI-
FORNIA.—$15,000,000 for water reclamation and distribution 
infrastructure, Big Bear Area Regional Wastewater Agency, 
California. 
‘‘(85) BRAWLEY COLONIA, IMPERIAL COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— 
$1,400,000 for water infrastructure to improve water quality 
in the Brawley Colonia Water District, Imperial County, Cali-
fornia. 
‘‘(86) CALAVERAS
COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 for 
water supply and wastewater infrastructure improvement 
projects in Calaveras County, California, including wastewater 
reclamation, recycling, and conjunctive use projects. 
‘‘(87) CONTRA
COSTA
WATER
DISTRICT, 
CALIFORNIA.— 
$23,000,000 for water and wastewater infrastructure for the 
Contra Costa Water District, California. 
‘‘(88) EAST BAY, SAN FRANCISCO, AND SANTA CLARA AREAS, 
CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for a desalination project to serve the 
East Bay, San Francisco, and Santa Clara areas, California. 
‘‘(89) EAST PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for a new 
pump station and stormwater management and drainage 
system, East Palo Alto, California. 
‘‘(90) IMPERIAL
COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA.—$10,000,000 for 
wastewater infrastructure, including a wastewater disinfection 
facility and polishing system, to improve water quality in the 
vicinity of Calexico, California, on the southern New River, 
Imperial County, California. 
‘‘(91) LA HABRA, CALIFORNIA.—$5,000,000 for wastewater 
and water related infrastructure, city of La Habra, California. 
‘‘(92) LA MIRADA, CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for the planning, 
design, and construction of a stormwater program in La Mirada, 
California. 
‘‘(93) LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 for 
wastewater and water related infrastructure, Diamond Bar, 
La Habra Heights, and Rowland Heights, Los Angeles County, 
California. 
‘‘(94) LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$20,000,000 for 
the planning, design, and construction of water related infra-
structure for Santa Monica Bay and the coastal zone of Los 
Angeles County, California. 
‘‘(95) MALIBU, 
CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 for municipal 
wastewater and recycled water infrastructure, Malibu Creek 
Watershed Protection Project, Malibu, California. 
‘‘(96) MONTEBELLO, 
CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for water 
infrastructure improvements in south Montebello, California. 
‘‘(97) NEW RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—$10,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure to improve water quality in the New River, Cali-
fornia. 
‘‘(98) ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$10,000,000 for waste-
water and water related infrastructure, Anaheim, Brea, Mission 
Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Yorba Linda, Orange 
County, California. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01257
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1260 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(99) 
PORT
OF
STOCKTON, 
STOCKTON, 
CALIFORNIA.— 
$3,000,000 for water and wastewater infrastructure projects 
for Rough and Ready Island and vicinity, Stockton, California. 
‘‘(100) PERRIS, CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 for recycled water 
transmission infrastructure, Eastern Municipal Water District, 
Perris, California. 
‘‘(101) SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$9,000,000 
for wastewater and water related infrastructure, Chino and 
Chino Hills, San Bernardino County, California. 
‘‘(102) SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$5,500,000 for 
an advanced recycling water treatment plant in Santa Clara 
County, California. 
‘‘(103) 
SANTA
MONICA, 
CALIFORNIA.—$3,000,000 
for 
improving water system reliability, Santa Monica, California. 
‘‘(104) SOUTHERN
LOS
ANGELES
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— 
$15,000,000 for environmental infrastructure for the ground-
water basin optimization pipeline, Southern Los Angeles 
County, California. 
‘‘(105) STOCKTON, 
CALIFORNIA.—$33,000,000 for water 
treatment and distribution infrastructure, Stockton, California. 
‘‘(106) SWEETWATER RESERVOIR, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALI-
FORNIA.—$375,000 to improve water quality and remove non-
native aquatic nuisance species from the Sweetwater Reservoir, 
San Diego County, California. 
‘‘(107) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—$8,000,000 for water, waste-
water, and water related infrastructure, Whittier, California. 
‘‘(108) ARKANSAS VALLEY CONDUIT, COLORADO.—$10,000,000 
for the Arkansas Valley Conduit, Colorado. 
‘‘(109) BOULDER
COUNTY, 
COLORADO.—$10,000,000 for 
water supply infrastructure, Boulder County, Colorado. 
‘‘(110) MONTEZUMA AND LA PLATA COUNTIES, COLORADO.— 
$1,000,000 for water and wastewater related infrastructure 
for the Ute Mountain project, Montezuma and La Plata Coun-
ties, Colorado. 
‘‘(111) OTERO, BENT, CROWLEY, KIOWA, AND PROWERS COUN-
TIES, COLORADO.—$35,000,000 for water transmission infra-
structure, Otero, Bent, Crowley, Kiowa, and Prowers Counties, 
Colorado. 
‘‘(112) 
PUEBLO
AND
OTERO
COUNTIES, 
COLORADO.— 
$34,000,000 for water transmission infrastructure, Pueblo and 
Otero Counties, Colorado. 
‘‘(113) ENFIELD, CONNECTICUT.—$1,000,000 for infiltration 
and inflow correction, Enfield, Connecticut. 
‘‘(114) 
LEDYARD
AND
MONTVILLE, 
CONNECTICUT.— 
$7,113,000 for water infrastructure, Ledyard and Montville, 
Connecticut. 
‘‘(115) 
NEW
HAVEN, 
CONNECTICUT.—$300,000 
for 
stormwater system improvements, New Haven, Connecticut. 
‘‘(116) NORWALK, CONNECTICUT.—$3,000,000 for the Keeler 
Brook Storm Water Improvement Project, Norwalk, Con-
necticut. 
‘‘(117) PLAINVILLE, CONNECTICUT.—$6,280,000 for waste-
water treatment, Plainville, Connecticut. 
‘‘(118) SOUTHINGTON, CONNECTICUT.—$9,420,000 for water 
supply infrastructure, Southington, Connecticut. 
‘‘(119) ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MARY-
LAND.—$20,000,000 for environmental infrastructure and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01258
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1261 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
resource protection and development to enhance water quality 
and living resources in the Anacostia River watershed, District 
of Columbia and Maryland. 
‘‘(120) 
DISTRICT
OF
COLUMBIA.—$35,000,000 
for 
implementation of a combined sewer overflow long-term control 
plan in the District of Columbia. 
‘‘(121) CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$3,000,000 for water 
supply infrastructure, Charlotte County, Florida. 
‘‘(122) CHARLOTTE, LEE, AND COLLIER COUNTIES, FLORIDA.— 
$20,000,000 for water supply interconnectivity infrastructure, 
Charlotte, Lee, and Collier Counties, Florida. 
‘‘(123) COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$5,000,000 for water 
infrastructure to improve water quality in the vicinity of the 
Gordon River, Collier County, Florida. 
‘‘(124) HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$6,250,000 for 
water infrastructure and supply enhancement, Hillsborough 
County, Florida. 
‘‘(125) JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.—$25,000,000 for waste-
water related infrastructure, including septic tank replace-
ments, Jacksonville, Florida. 
‘‘(126) SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$10,000,000 for water 
and wastewater infrastructure in Sarasota County, Florida. 
‘‘(127) SOUTH
SEMINOLE
AND
NORTH
ORANGE
COUNTY, 
FLORIDA.—$30,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure for the 
South Seminole and North Orange Wastewater Transmission 
Authority, Florida. 
‘‘(128) MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$6,250,000 for water 
reuse supply and a water transmission pipeline, Miami-Dade 
County, Florida. 
‘‘(129) PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$7,500,000 for water 
infrastructure, Palm Beach County, Florida. 
‘‘(130) ALBANY, GEORGIA.—$4,000,000 for a storm drainage 
system, Albany, Georgia. 
‘‘(131) BANKS
COUNTY, GEORGIA.—$5,000,000 for water 
infrastructure improvements, Banks County, Georgia. 
‘‘(132) BERRIEN COUNTY, GEORGIA.—$5,000,000 for water 
infrastructure improvements, Berrien County, Georgia. 
‘‘(133) CHATTOOGA
COUNTY, 
GEORGIA.—$8,000,000 for 
wastewater and drinking water infrastructure improvement, 
Chattooga County, Georgia. 
‘‘(134) 
CHATTOOGA, 
FLOYD, 
GORDON, 
WALKER, 
AND 
WHITIFIELD COUNTIES, GEORGIA.—$10,000,000 for water infra-
structure improvements, Armuchee Valley, Chattooga, Floyd, 
Gordon, Walker, and Whitifield Counties, Georgia. 
‘‘(135) DAHLONEGA, GEORGIA.—$5,000,000 for water infra-
structure improvements, Dahlonega, Georgia. 
‘‘(136) EAST POINT, GEORGIA.—$5,000,000 for water infra-
structure improvements, city of East Point, Georgia. 
‘‘(137) FAYETTEVILLE, GRANTVILLE, LAGRANGE, PINE MOUN-
TAIN
(HARRIS
COUNTY), 
DOUGLASVILLE, 
AND
CARROLLTON, 
GEORGIA.—$24,500,000 for water and wastewater infrastruc-
ture, Fayetteville, Grantville, LaGrange, Pine Mountain (Harris 
County), Douglasville, and Carrollton, Georgia. 
‘‘(138) MERIWETHER AND SPALDING COUNTIES, GEORGIA.— 
$7,000,000 
for 
water 
and 
wastewater 
infrastructure, 
Meriwether and Spalding Counties, Georgia. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01259
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1262 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(139) MOULTRIE, GEORGIA.—$5,000,000 for water supply 
infrastructure, Moultrie, Georgia. 
‘‘(140) STEPHENS
COUNTY/CITY
OF
TOCCOA, GEORGIA.— 
$8,000,000 
water 
infrastructure 
improvements, 
Stephens 
County/city of Toccoa, Georgia. 
‘‘(141) NORTH
VERNON
AND
BUTLERVILLE, 
INDIANA.— 
$1,700,000 for wastewater infrastructure, North Vernon and 
Butlerville, Indiana. 
‘‘(142) SALEM, WASHINGTON COUNTY, INDIANA.—$3,200,000 
for water supply infrastructure, Salem, Washington County, 
Indiana. 
‘‘(143) ATCHISON, KANSAS.—$20,000,000 to address com-
bined sewer overflows, Atchison, Kansas. 
‘‘(144) CENTRAL KENTUCKY.—$10,000,000 for water related 
infrastructure and resource protection and development, Scott, 
Franklin, Woodford, Anderson, Fayette, Mercer, Jessamine, 
Boyle, Lincoln, Garrard, Madison, Estill, Powell, Clark, Mont-
gomery, and Bourbon Counties, Kentucky. 
‘‘(145) LAFAYETTE, LOUISIANA.—$1,200,000 for water and 
wastewater improvements, Lafayette, Louisiana. 
‘‘(146) LAFOURCHE
PARISH, 
LOUISIANA.—$2,300,000 for 
measures to prevent the intrusion of saltwater into the fresh-
water system, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. 
‘‘(147) LAKE
CHARLES, LOUISIANA.—$1,000,000 for water 
and wastewater improvements, Lake Charles, Louisiana. 
‘‘(148) NORTHWEST LOUISIANA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, 
LOUISIANA.—$2,000,000 for water and wastewater improve-
ments, Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments, Lou-
isiana. 
‘‘(149) OUACHITA PARISH, LOUISIANA.—$1,000,000 for water 
and wastewater improvements, Ouachita Parish, Louisiana. 
‘‘(150) PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANA.—$7,000,000 for sanitary 
sewer and wastewater infrastructure, Plaquemine, Louisiana. 
‘‘(151) RAPIDES AREA PLANNING COMMISSION, LOUISIANA.— 
$1,000,000 for water and wastewater improvements, Rapides, 
Louisiana. 
‘‘(152) SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA.—$20,000,000 for water 
supply infrastructure in Shreveport, Louisiana. 
‘‘(153) SOUTH
CENTRAL
PLANNING
AND
DEVELOPMENT 
COMMISSION, LOUISIANA.—$2,500,000 for water and wastewater 
improvements, South Central Planning and Development 
Commission, Louisiana. 
‘‘(154) UNION-LINCOLN REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, 
LOUISIANA.—$2,000,000 for the Union-Lincoln Regional Water 
Supply project, Louisiana. 
‘‘(155) CHESAPEAKE
BAY
IMPROVEMENTS, MARYLAND, VIR-
GINIA, AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.—$30,000,000 for environ-
mental infrastructure projects to benefit the Chesapeake Bay, 
including the nutrient removal project at the Blue Plains Waste-
water Treatment facility in the District of Columbia. 
‘‘(156) CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION, MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA.— 
$40,000,000 for water pollution control, Chesapeake Bay 
Region, Maryland and Virginia. 
‘‘(157) 
MICHIGAN
COMBINED
SEWER
OVERFLOWS.— 
$35,000,000 for correction of combined sewer overflows, 
Michigan. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01260
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1263 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(158) CENTRAL IRON RANGE SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT, MIN-
NESOTA.—$12,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure for the 
Central Iron Range Sanitary Sewer District to serve the cities 
of Hibbing, Chisholm, Buhl, and Kinney, and Balkan and Great 
Scott Townships, Minnesota. 
‘‘(159) CENTRAL
LAKE
REGION
SANITARY
DISTRICT, MIN-
NESOTA.—$2,000,000 for sanitary sewer and wastewater infra-
structure for the Central Lake Region Sanitary District, Min-
nesota, to serve Le Grande and Moe Townships, Minnesota. 
‘‘(160) 
GOODVIEW, 
MINNESOTA.—$3,000,000 
for 
water 
quality infrastructure, Goodview, Minnesota. 
‘‘(161) GRAND RAPIDS, MINNESOTA.—$5,000,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Grand Rapids, Minnesota. 
‘‘(162) WILLMAR, MINNESOTA.—$15,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Willmar, Minnesota. 
‘‘(163) BILOXI, 
MISSISSIPPI.—$5,000,000 for water and 
wastewater related infrastructure, city of Biloxi, Mississippi. 
‘‘(164) CORINTH, MISSISSIPPI.—$7,500,000 for a surface 
water program, city of Corinth, Mississippi. 
‘‘(165) GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI.—$5,000,000 for water and 
wastewater related infrastructure, city of Gulfport, Mississippi. 
‘‘(166) HARRISON
COUNTY, 
MISSISSIPPI.—$5,000,000 for 
water and wastewater related infrastructure, Harrison County, 
Mississippi. 
‘‘(167) JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI.—$25,000,000 for water and 
wastewater infrastructure, Jackson, Mississippi. 
‘‘(168) CLARK
COUNTY, NEVADA.—$30,000,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Clark County, Nevada. 
‘‘(169) CLEAN WATER COALITION, NEVADA.—$50,000,000 for 
the Systems Conveyance and Operations Program, Clark 
County, Henderson, Las Vegas, and North Las Vegas, Nevada. 
‘‘(170) GLENDALE
DAM
DIVERSION
STRUCTURE, NEVADA.— 
$10,000,000 for water system improvements to the Glendale 
Dam Diversion Structure for the Truckee Meadows Water 
Authority, Nevada. 
‘‘(171) HENDERSON, NEVADA.—$13,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Henderson, Nevada. 
‘‘(172) INDIAN SPRINGS, NEVADA.—$12,000,000 for construc-
tion of wastewater system improvements for the Indian Springs 
community, Nevada. 
‘‘(173) RENO, NEVADA.—$13,000,000 for construction of a 
water conservation project for the Highland Canal, Mogul 
Bypass in Reno, Nevada. 
‘‘(174) 
WASHOE
COUNTY, 
NEVADA.—$14,000,000 
for 
construction of water infrastructure improvements to the 
Huffaker Hills Reservoir Conservation Project, Washoe County, 
Nevada. 
‘‘(175) CRANFORD TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY.—$6,000,000 for 
storm sewer improvements, Cranford Township, New Jersey. 
‘‘(176) MIDDLETOWN TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY.—$1,100,000 
for storm sewer improvements, Middletown Township, New 
Jersey. 
‘‘(177) PATERSON, NEW
JERSEY.—$35,000,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Paterson, New Jersey. 
‘‘(178) RAHWAY VALLEY, NEW JERSEY.—$25,000,000 for sani-
tary sewer and storm sewer improvements in the service area 
of the Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority, New Jersey. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01261
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1264 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(179) BABYLON, NEW
YORK.—$5,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Town of Babylon, New York. 
‘‘(180) ELLICOTTVILLE, NEW
YORK.—$2,000,000 for water 
supply, water, and wastewater infrastructure in Ellicottville, 
New York. 
‘‘(181) ELMIRA, NEW
YORK.—$5,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Elmira, New York. 
‘‘(182) ESSEX HAMLET, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Essex Hamlet, New York. 
‘‘(183) FLEMING, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for drinking water 
infrastructure, Fleming, New York. 
‘‘(184) KIRYAS JOEL, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for drinking 
water infrastructure, village of Kiryas Joel, New York. 
‘‘(185) NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Niagara Falls Water Board, New York. 
‘‘(186) PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, village of Patchogue, New York. 
‘‘(187) SENNETT, NEW YORK.—$1,500,000 for water infra-
structure, town of Sennett, New York. 
‘‘(188) SPRINGPORT AND FLEMING, NEW YORK.—$10,000,000 
for water related infrastructure, including water mains, pump 
stations, and water storage tanks, Springport and Fleming, 
New York. 
‘‘(189) WELLSVILLE, NEW
YORK.—$2,000,000 for water 
supply, water, and wastewater infrastructure in Wellsville, New 
York. 
‘‘(190) YATES COUNTY, NEW YORK.—$5,000,000 for drinking 
water infrastructure, Yates County, New York. 
‘‘(191) CABARRUS
COUNTY, NORTH
CAROLINA.—$4,500,000 
for water related infrastructure, Cabarrus County, North Caro-
lina. 
‘‘(192) CARY, WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.—$4,000,000 
for a water reclamation facility, Cary, Wake County, North 
Carolina. 
‘‘(193) CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA.—$14,000,000 for the 
Briar Creek Relief Sewer project, city of Charlotte, North Caro-
lina. 
‘‘(194) FAYETTEVILLE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CARO-
LINA.—$6,000,000 for water and sewer upgrades, city of 
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina. 
‘‘(195) MOORESVILLE, NORTH
CAROLINA.—$4,000,000 for 
water and wastewater infrastructure improvements, town of 
Mooresville, North Carolina. 
‘‘(196) NEUSE
REGIONAL
WATER
AND
SEWER
AUTHORITY, 
NORTH CAROLINA.—$4,000,000 for the Neuse regional drinking 
water facility, Kinston, North Carolina. 
‘‘(197) RICHMOND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.—$13,500,000 
for water related infrastructure, Richmond County, North Caro-
lina. 
‘‘(198) UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.—$6,000,000 for 
water related infrastructure, Union County, North Carolina. 
‘‘(199) WASHINGTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.—$1,000,000 
for water and wastewater infrastructure, Washington County, 
North Carolina. 
‘‘(200) WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA.—$3,000,000 for 
stormwater upgrades, city of Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01262
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1265 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(201) NORTH
DAKOTA.—$15,000,000 for water-related 
infrastructure, North Dakota. 
‘‘(202) DEVILS LAKE, NORTH DAKOTA.—$15,000,000 for water 
supply infrastructure, Devils Lake, North Dakota. 
‘‘(203) SAIPAN, NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.—$20,000,000 
for water related infrastructure, Saipan, Northern Mariana 
Islands. 
‘‘(204) AKRON, OHIO.—$5,000,000 for wastewater infrastruc-
ture, Akron, Ohio. 
‘‘(205) BURR
OAK
REGIONAL
WATER
DISTRICT, OHIO.— 
$4,000,000 for construction of a water line to extend from 
a well field near Chauncey, Ohio, to a water treatment plant 
near Millfield, Ohio. 
‘‘(206) CINCINNATI, OHIO.—$1,000,000 for wastewater infra-
structure, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
‘‘(207) CLEVELAND, OHIO.—$2,500,000 for Flats East Bank 
water and wastewater infrastructure, city of Cleveland, Ohio. 
‘‘(208) COLUMBUS, OHIO.—$4,500,000 for wastewater infra-
structure, Columbus, Ohio. 
‘‘(209) DAYTON, OHIO.—$1,000,000 for water and waste-
water infrastructure, Dayton, Ohio. 
‘‘(210) DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO.—$1,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Defiance County, Ohio. 
‘‘(211) FOSTORIA, OHIO.—$2,000,000 for wastewater infra-
structure, Fostoria, Ohio. 
‘‘(212) FREMONT, OHIO.—$2,000,000 for construction of off- 
stream water supply reservoir, Fremont, Ohio. 
‘‘(213) LAKE
COUNTY, OHIO.—$1,500,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Lake County, Ohio. 
‘‘(214) LAWRENCE
COUNTY, OHIO.—$5,000,000 for Union 
Rome wastewater infrastructure, Lawrence County, Ohio. 
‘‘(215) MEIGS
COUNTY, OHIO.—$1,000,000 to extend the 
Tupper Plains Regional Water District water line to Meigs 
County, Ohio. 
‘‘(216) MENTOR-ON-LAKE, OHIO.—$625,000 for water and 
wastewater infrastructure, Mentor-on-Lake, Ohio. 
‘‘(217) VINTON
COUNTY, OHIO.—$1,000,000 to construct 
water lines in Vinton and Brown Townships, Ohio. 
‘‘(218) WILLOWICK, OHIO.—$665,000 for water and waste-
water infrastructure, Willowick, Ohio. 
‘‘(219) ADA, OKLAHOMA.—$1,700,000 for sewer improve-
ments and other water infrastructure, city of Ada, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(220) ALVA, OKLAHOMA.—$250,000 for wastewater infra-
structure improvements, city of Alva, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(221) ARDMORE, OKLAHOMA.—$1,900,000 for water and 
sewer infrastructure improvements, city of Ardmore, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(222) BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA.—$2,500,000 for water 
supply infrastructure, city of Bartlesville, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(223) 
BETHANY, 
OKLAHOMA.—$1,500,000 
for 
water 
improvements and water related infrastructure, city of Bethany, 
Oklahoma. 
‘‘(224) CHICKASHA, OKLAHOMA.—$650,000 for industrial 
park sewer infrastructure, city of Chickasha, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(225) DISNEY AND LANGLEY, OKLAHOMA.—$2,500,000 for 
water and sewer improvements and water related infrastruc-
ture, cities of Disney and Langley, Oklahoma. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01263
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1266 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(226) DURANT, OKLAHOMA.—$3,300,000 for bayou restora-
tion and water related infrastructure, city of Durant, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(227) EASTERN OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY, WILBERTON, 
OKLAHOMA.—$1,000,000 for sewer and utility upgrades and 
water related infrastructure, Eastern Oklahoma State Univer-
sity, Wilberton, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(228) GUYMON, OKLAHOMA.—$16,000,000 for water and 
wastewater related infrastructure, city of Guymon, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(229) KONAWA, OKLAHOMA.—$500,000 for water treatment 
infrastructure improvements, city of Konawa, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(230) LUGERT-ALTUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT, ALTUS, OKLA-
HOMA.—$5,000,000 for water related infrastructure improve-
ments, Lugert-Altus Irrigation District, Altus, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(231) MIDWEST CITY, OKLAHOMA.—$2,000,000 for improve-
ments to water related infrastructure, the City of Midwest 
City, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(232) 
MUSTANG, 
OKLAHOMA.—$3,325,000 
for 
water 
improvements and water related infrastructure, city of Mus-
tang, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(233) NORMAN, OKLAHOMA.—$10,000,000 for water related 
infrastructure, Norman, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(234) OKLAHOMA PANHANDLE STATE UNIVERSITY, GUYMON, 
OKLAHOMA.—$275,000 for water testing facility and water 
related infrastructure development, Oklahoma Panhandle State 
University, Guymon, Oklahoma. 
‘‘(235) WEATHERFORD, OKLAHOMA.—$500,000 for arsenic 
program and water related infrastructure, city of Weatherford, 
Oklahoma. 
‘‘(236) WOODWARD, 
OKLAHOMA.—$1,500,000 for water 
improvements and water related infrastructure, Woodward, 
Oklahoma. 
‘‘(237) ALBANY, OREGON.—$35,000,000 for wastewater infra-
structure to improve habitat restoration, Albany, Oregon. 
‘‘(238) 
BEAVER
CREEK
RESERVOIR, 
PENNSYLVANIA.— 
$3,000,000 for projects for water supply and related activities, 
Beaver Creek Reservoir, Clarion County, Beaver and Salem 
Townships, Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(239) HATFIELD BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA.—$310,000 for 
wastewater related infrastructure for Hatfield Borough, 
Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(240) LEHIGH
COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.—$5,000,000 for 
stormwater control measures and storm sewer improvements, 
Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(241) NORTH WALES BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA.—$1,516,584 
for wastewater related infrastructure for North Wales Borough, 
Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(242) PEN ARGYL, PENNSYLVANIA.—$5,250,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(243) 
PHILADELPHIA, 
PENNSYLVANIA.—$1,600,000 
for 
wastewater related infrastructure for Philadelphia, Pennsyl-
vania. 
‘‘(244) STOCKERTON
BOROUGH, TATAMY
BOROUGH, AND 
PALMER TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.—$10,000,000 for stormwater 
control measures, particularly to address sinkholes, in the 
vicinity of Stockerton Borough, Tatamy Borough, and Palmer 
Township, Pennsylvania. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01264
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1267 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(245) VERA CRUZ, PENNSYLVANIA.—$5,500,000 for waste-
water infrastructure, Vera Cruz, Pennsylvania. 
‘‘(246) COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO.—$35,000,000 for 
water and wastewater infrastructure in the Commonwealth 
of Puerto Rico. 
‘‘(247) CHARLESTON, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.—$4,000,000 for 
stormwater control measures and storm sewer improvements, 
Spring Street/Fishburne Street drainage project, Charleston, 
South Carolina. 
‘‘(248) CHARLESTON AND WEST ASHLEY, SOUTH CAROLINA.— 
$6,000,000 for wastewater tunnel replacement, Charleston and 
West Ashley, South Carolina. 
‘‘(249) CROOKED CREEK, MARLBORO COUNTY, SOUTH CARO-
LINA.—$25,000,000 for a project for water storage and water 
supply infrastructure on Crooked Creek, Marlboro County, 
South Carolina. 
‘‘(250) MYRTLE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA.—$18,000,000 for 
environmental infrastructure, including ocean outfalls, Myrtle 
Beach, South Carolina. 
‘‘(251) 
NORTH
MYRTLE
BEACH, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.— 
$11,000,000 for environmental infrastructure, including ocean 
outfalls, North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. 
‘‘(252) 
SURFSIDE, 
SOUTH
CAROLINA.—$11,000,000 
for 
environmental infrastructure, including stormwater system 
improvements and ocean outfalls, Surfside, South Carolina. 
‘‘(253) CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX RESERVATION (DEWEY AND 
ZIEBACH COUNTIES) AND PERKINS AND MEADE COUNTIES, SOUTH 
DAKOTA.—$65,000,000 for water related infrastructure, Chey-
enne River Sioux Reservation (Dewey and Ziebach counties) 
and Perkins and Meade Counties, South Dakota. 
‘‘(254) ATHENS, TENNESSEE.—$16,000,000 for wastewater 
infrastructure, Athens, Tennessee. 
‘‘(255) BLAINE, TENNESSEE.—$500,000 for water supply and 
wastewater infrastructure, Blaine, Tennessee. 
‘‘(256) CLAIBORNE
COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—$1,250,000 for 
water supply and wastewater infrastructure, Claiborne County, 
Tennessee. 
‘‘(257) GILES COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—$2,000,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, county of Giles, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(258) GRAINGER
COUNTY, 
TENNESSEE.—$1,250,000 for 
water supply and wastewater infrastructure, Grainger County, 
Tennessee. 
‘‘(259) HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—$500,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, Hamilton County, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(260) HARROGATE, 
TENNESSEE.—$2,000,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, city of Harrogate, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(261) JOHNSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—$600,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, Johnson County, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(262) KNOXVILLE, 
TENNESSEE.—$5,000,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, city of Knoxville, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(263) NASHVILLE, 
TENNESSEE.—$5,000,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, Nashville, Tennessee. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01265
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1268 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
‘‘(264) LEWIS, LAWRENCE, AND
WAYNE
COUNTIES, TEN-
NESSEE.—$2,000,000 for water supply and wastewater infra-
structure, counties of Lewis, Lawrence, and Wayne, Tennessee. 
‘‘(265) OAK
RIDGE, 
TENNESSEE.—$4,000,000 for water 
supply and wastewater infrastructure, city of Oak Ridge, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(266) PLATEAU UTILITY DISTRICT, MORGAN COUNTY, TEN-
NESSEE.—$1,000,000 for water supply and wastewater infra-
structure, Morgan County, Tennessee. 
‘‘(267) SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—$4,000,000 for water 
related environmental infrastructure, county of Shelby, Ten-
nessee. 
‘‘(268) CENTRAL TEXAS.—$20,000,000 for water and waste-
water infrastructure in Bosque, Brazos, Burleson, Grimes, Hill, 
Hood, Johnson, Madison, McLennan, Limestone, Robertson, and 
Somervell Counties, Texas. 
‘‘(269) EL
PASO
COUNTY, TEXAS.—$25,000,000 for water 
related infrastructure and resource protection, including 
stormwater management, and development, El Paso County, 
Texas. 
‘‘(270) FT. BEND COUNTY, TEXAS.—$20,000,000 for water 
and wastewater infrastructure, Ft. Bend County, Texas. 
‘‘(271) DUCHESNE, IRON, AND UINTAH COUNTIES, UTAH.— 
$10,800,000 for water related infrastructure, Duchesne, Iron, 
and Uintah Counties, Utah. 
‘‘(272) NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.—$20,000,000 for water 
and wastewater infrastructure in Hancock, Ohio, Marshall, 
Wetzel, Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, Doddridge, Monongalia, 
Marion, Harrison, Taylor, Barbour, Preston, Tucker, Mineral, 
Grant, Gilmer, Brooke, and Ritchie Counties, West Virginia. 
‘‘(273) UNITED
STATES
VIRGIN
ISLANDS.—$25,000,000 for 
wastewater infrastructure for the St. Croix Anguilla wastewater 
treatment plant and the St. Thomas Charlotte Amalie waste-
water treatment plant, United States Virgin Islands.’’. 
TITLE VI—FLORIDA EVERGLADES 
SEC. 6001. HILLSBORO AND OKEECHOBEE AQUIFER, FLORIDA. 
(a) MODIFICATION.—The project for Hillsboro and Okeechobee 
Aquifer, Florida, authorized by section 101(a)(16) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276), is modified 
to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project at a total cost 
of $42,500,000. 
(b) TREATMENT.—Section 601(b)(2)(A) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2681) is amended— 
(1) in clause (i) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The 
project for aquifer storage and recovery, Hillsboro and Okee-
chobee 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, except that operation and maintenance costs of the project 
shall remain a non-Federal responsibility.’’; and 
(2) in clause (iii) by inserting after ‘‘subparagraph (B)’’ 
the following: ‘‘and the project for aquifer storage and recovery, 
Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer’’. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01266
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1269 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 6002. PILOT PROJECTS. 
Section 601(b)(2)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2681) is amended— 
(1) in the matter preceding clause (i)— 
(A) 
by 
striking 
‘‘$69,000,000’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘$71,200,000’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘$34,500,000’’ each place it appears 
and inserting ‘‘$35,600,000’’; and 
(2) in clause (i)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘$6,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$8,200,000’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘$3,000,000’’ each place it appears and 
inserting ‘‘$4,100,000’’. 
SEC. 6003. MAXIMUM COSTS. 
(a) MAXIMUM COST OF PROJECTS.—Section 601(b)(2)(E) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2683) is 
amended by inserting ‘‘and section (d)’’ before the period at the 
end. 
(b) MAXIMUM COST OF PROGRAM AUTHORITY.—Section 601(c)(3) 
of such Act (114 Stat. 2684) is amended by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(C) MAXIMUM COST OF PROGRAM AUTHORITY.—Section 
902 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
U.S.C. 2280) shall apply to the individual project funding 
limits in subparagraph (A) and the aggregate cost limits 
in subparagraph (B).’’. 
SEC. 6004. CREDIT. 
Section 601(e)(5)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000 (114 Stat. 2685) is amended— 
(1) in clause (i)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subclause (I); 
(B) by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end of subclause (II); and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(III) the credit is provided for work carried out 
before the date of the partnership agreement between 
the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor, as defined 
in an agreement between the Secretary and the non- 
Federal sponsor providing for such credit;’’; and 
(2) in clause (ii)— 
(A) by striking ‘‘design agreement or the project 
cooperation’’; and 
(B) by inserting before the semicolon the following: 
‘‘, including in the case of credit provided under clause 
(i)(III) conditions relating to design and construction’’. 
SEC. 6005. OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE. 
Section 601(k) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
2000 (114 Stat. 2691) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) MAXIMUM EXPENDITURES.—The Secretary may expend 
up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year for fiscal years beginning after 
September 30, 2004, to carry out this subsection.’’. 
SEC. 6006. CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS. 
Section 528(b)(3)(C) of the Water Resources Development Act 
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769) is amended— 
Applicability. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01267
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1270 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘$75,000,000’’ and all that 
follows and inserting ‘‘$95,000,000’’; and 
(2) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(ii) FEDERAL SHARE.— 
‘‘(I) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in sub-
clause (II), the Federal share of the cost of carrying 
out a project under subparagraph (A) shall not 
exceed $25,000,000. 
‘‘(II) SEMINOLE WATER CONSERVATION PLAN.— 
The Federal share of the cost of carrying out the 
Seminole water conservation plan shall not exceed 
$30,000,000.’’. 
SEC. 6007. REGIONAL ENGINEERING MODEL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 
RESTORATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall complete the development 
and testing of the regional engineering model for environmental 
restoration as expeditiously as practicable. 
(b) USAGE.—The Secretary shall consider using, as appropriate, 
the regional engineering model for environmental restoration in 
the development of future water resource projects, including projects 
developed pursuant to section 601 of the Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680). 
TITLE VII—LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA 
SEC. 7001. DEFINITIONS. 
In this title, the following definitions 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, 
including those parts of the Atchafalaya River Basin and the 
Mississippi River Deltaic Plain below the Old River Control 
Structure and the Chenier Plain included within the study 
area of the restoration plan. 
(2) GOVERNOR.—The term ‘‘Governor’’ means the Governor 
of the State of Louisiana. 
(3) RESTORATION PLAN.—The term ‘‘restoration plan’’ means 
the report of the Chief of Engineers for ecosystem restoration 
for the Louisiana Coastal Area dated January 31, 2005. 
(4) TASK FORCE.—The term ‘‘Task Force’’ means the Coastal 
Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task Force 
established by section 7003. 
(5) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The term ‘‘comprehensive plan’’ 
means the plan developed under section 7002 and any revisions 
thereto. 
SEC. 7002. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Gov-
ernor, shall develop a comprehensive plan for protecting, preserving, 
and restoring the coastal Louisiana ecosystem. 
(b) INTEGRATION OF PLAN INTO COMPREHENSIVE HURRICANE 
PROTECTION STUDY.—In developing the comprehensive plan, the 
Secretary shall integrate the restoration plan into the analysis 
and design of the comprehensive hurricane protection study author-
ized by title I of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2247). 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01268
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1271 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(c) CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE COASTAL PROTECTION 
MASTER PLAN.—In developing the comprehensive plan, the Sec-
retary shall ensure that the plan is not inconsistent with the 
goals, analysis, and design of the comprehensive coastal protection 
master plan authorized and defined pursuant to Act 8 of the First 
Extraordinary Session of the Louisiana State Legislature, 2005. 
(d) INCLUSIONS.—The comprehensive plan shall include a 
description of— 
(1) the framework of a long-term program integrated with 
hurricane and storm damage reduction, flood damage reduction, 
and navigation activities that provide for the comprehensive 
protection, conservation, and restoration of the wetlands, estu-
aries, barrier islands, shorelines, and related land and features 
of the coastal Louisiana ecosystem, including protection of crit-
ical resources, habitat, and infrastructure from the effects of 
a coastal storm, a hurricane, erosion, or subsidence; 
(2) the means by which a new technology, or an improved 
technique, can be integrated into the program referred to in 
paragraph (1); 
(3) the role of other Federal and State agencies and pro-
grams in carrying out such program; 
(4) 
specific, 
measurable 
success 
criteria 
(including 
ecological criteria) by which success of the plan will be meas-
ured; 
(5) proposed projects in order of priority as determined 
by their respective potential to contribute to— 
(A) creation of coastal wetlands; and 
(B) flood protection of communities ranked by popu-
lation density and level of protection; and 
(6) efforts by Federal, State, and local interests to address 
sociological, economic, and related fields of law. 
(e) CONSIDERATIONS.—In developing the comprehensive plan, 
the Secretary shall consider the advisability of integrating into 
the program referred to in subsection (d)(1)— 
(1) an investigation and study of the maximum effective 
use of the water and sediment of the Mississippi and 
Atchafalaya Rivers for coastal restoration purposes consistent 
with flood control and navigation; 
(2) a schedule for the design and implementation of large- 
scale water and sediment reintroduction projects and an assess-
ment of funding needs from any source; 
(3) an investigation and assessment of alterations in the 
operation of the Old River Control Structure, consistent with 
flood control and navigation purposes; 
(4) any related Federal or State project being carried out 
on the date on which the plan is developed; 
(5) any activity in the restoration plan; and 
(6) any other project or activity identified in one or more 
of— 
(A) the Mississippi River and Tributaries program; 
(B) the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation Plan; 
(C) the Louisiana Coastal Zone Management Plan; 
(D) the plan of the State of Louisiana entitled 
‘‘Integrated Ecosystem Restoration and Hurricane Protec-
tion—Louisiana’s Comprehensive Master Plan for a 
Sustainable Coast’’; and 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01269
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1272 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(E) other relevant reports as determined by the Sec-
retary. 
(f) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.— 
(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
a report containing the comprehensive plan. 
(2) UPDATES.—Not later than 5 years after the date of 
submission of a report under paragraph (1), and at least once 
every 5 years thereafter until implementation of the comprehen-
sive plan is complete, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
a report containing an update of the plan and an assessment 
of the progress made in implementing the plan. 
SEC. 7003. LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a program for 
ecosystem restoration, Louisiana Coastal Area, Louisiana, substan-
tially in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers, 
dated January 31, 2005. 
(b) PRIORITIES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the program under sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall give priority to— 
(A) any portion of the program identified in the report 
described in subsection (a) as a critical restoration feature; 
(B) any Mississippi River diversion project that— 
(i) will protect a major population area of the Pont-
chartrain, 
Pearl, 
Breton 
Sound, 
Barataria, 
or 
Terrebonne basins; and 
(ii) will produce an environmental benefit to the 
coastal Louisiana ecosystem; 
(C) any barrier island, or barrier shoreline, project 
that— 
(i) will be carried out in conjunction with a Mis-
sissippi River diversion project; and 
(ii) will protect a major population area; 
(D) any project that will reduce storm surge and pre-
vent or reduce the risk of loss of human life and the 
risk to public safety; and 
(E) a project to physically modify the Mississippi River- 
Gulf Outlet and to restore the areas affected by the Mis-
sissippi River-Gulf Outlet in accordance with the com-
prehensive plan to be developed under section 7002(a) and 
consistent with sections 7006(c)(1)(A) and 7013. 
SEC. 7004. COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND RES-
TORATION TASK FORCE. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a task force to be 
known as the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restora-
tion Task Force (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Task Force’’). 
(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Task Force shall consist of the following 
members (or, in the case of the head of a Federal agency, a designee 
of the head of the agency at the level of Assistant Secretary or 
an equivalent level): 
(1) The Secretary. 
(2) The Secretary of the Interior. 
(3) The Secretary of Commerce. 
(4) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency. 
(5) The Secretary of Agriculture. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01270
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1273 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(6) The Secretary of Transportation. 
(7) The Secretary of Energy. 
(8) The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency. 
(9) The Commandant of the Coast Guard. 
(10) The Chair of the Coastal Protection and Restoration 
Authority of Louisiana. 
(11) Two representatives of the State of Louisiana selected 
by the Governor. 
(c) DUTIES.—The Task Force shall make recommendations to 
the Secretary regarding— 
(1) policies, strategies, plans, programs, projects, and activi-
ties for addressing conservation, protection, restoration, and 
maintenance of the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; 
(2) financial participation by each agency represented on 
the Task Force in conserving, protecting, restoring, and 
maintaining the coastal Louisiana ecosystem, including rec-
ommendations— 
(A) that identify funds from current agency missions 
and budgets; and 
(B) for coordinating individual agency budget requests; 
and 
(3) the comprehensive plan to be developed under section 
7002(a). 
(d) REPORT.—The Task Force shall submit to Congress a 
biennial report that summarizes the activities and recommendations 
of the Task Force. 
(e) WORKING GROUPS.— 
(1) GENERAL AUTHORITY.—The Task Force may establish 
such working groups as the Task Force determines to be nec-
essary to assist the Task Force in carrying out this section. 
(2) HURRICANES KATRINA AND RITA.— 
(A) INTEGRATION TEAM.—The Task Force shall estab-
lish a working group for the purpose of advising the Task 
Force 
of 
opportunities 
to 
integrate 
the 
planning, 
engineering, design, implementation, and performance of 
Corps of Engineers projects for hurricane and storm dam-
age reduction, flood damage reduction, ecosystem restora-
tion, and navigation in those areas in Louisiana for which 
a major disaster has been declared by the President as 
a result of Hurricane Katrina or Rita. 
(B) EXPERTISE; REPRESENTATION.—In establishing the 
working group under subparagraph (A), the Task Force 
shall ensure that the group— 
(i) has expertise in coastal estuaries, diversions, 
coastal restoration and wetlands protection, ecosystem 
restoration, hurricane protection, storm damage reduc-
tion systems, navigation, and ports; and 
(ii) represents the State of Louisiana and local 
governments in southern Louisiana. 
(C) DUTIES.—In developing its recommendations under 
this subsection, the working group shall— 
(i) review reports relating to the performance of, 
and recommendations relating to the future perform-
ance of, the hurricane, coastal, and flood protection 
systems in southern Louisiana, including the reports 
issued by the Interagency Performance Evaluation 
Establishment. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01271
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1274 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
Team, the National Academy of Sciences, the National 
Science Foundation, the American Society of Civil 
Engineers, and Team Louisiana for the purpose of 
advising the Task Force and the Secretary on 
opportunities to improve the performance of the protec-
tion systems; 
(ii) assist in providing reviews under section 2035; 
and 
(iii) carry out such other duties as the Task Force 
or the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 
(f) COMPENSATION.—Members of the Task Force and members 
of a working group established by the Task Force may not receive 
compensation for their services as members of the Task Force 
or working group, as the case may be. 
(g) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Travel expenses incurred by members 
of the Task Force and members of a working group established 
by the Task Force, in the performance of their service on the 
Task Force or working group, as the case may be, shall be paid 
by the agency or entity that the member represents. 
(h) NONAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Federal Advisory Com-
mittee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Task Force or 
any working group established by the Task Force. 
SEC. 7005. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS. 
(a) REVIEW.—The Secretary, in cooperation with the non-Fed-
eral interest of the project involved, shall review each Federally- 
authorized water resources project in the coastal Louisiana eco-
system being carried out or completed as of the date of enactment 
of this Act to determine whether the project needs to be modified— 
(1) to take into account the program authorized by section 
7003 and the projects authorized by sections 7006(e) and 7013; 
or 
(2) to contribute to ecosystem restoration under section 
7003, 7006(e), or 7013. 
(b) MODIFICATIONS.—Subject to subsections (c) and (d), the Sec-
retary may carry out the modifications described in subsection 
(a). 
(c) PUBLIC NOTICE
AND COMMENT.—Before completing the 
report required under subsection (d), the Secretary shall provide 
an opportunity for public notice and comment. 
(d) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Before modifying an operation or feature 
of a project under subsection (b), the Secretary shall submit 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate a report describing the modi-
fication. 
(2) INCLUSION.—A report describing a modification under 
paragraph (1) shall include such information relating to the 
timeline for and cost of the modification, as the Secretary 
determines to be relevant. 
(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000. 
SEC. 7006. CONSTRUCTION. 
(a) SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01272
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1275 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a coastal 
Louisiana ecosystem science and technology program substan-
tially in accordance with the restoration plan at a total cost 
of $100,000,000. 
(2) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the program shall be— 
(A) to identify any uncertainty relating to the physical, 
chemical, geological, biological, and cultural baseline condi-
tions in the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; 
(B) to improve knowledge of the physical, chemical, 
geological, biological, and cultural baseline conditions in 
the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; 
(C) to identify and develop technologies, models, and 
methods to carry out this subsection; and 
(D) to advance and expedite the implementation of 
the comprehensive plan. 
(3) WORKING GROUPS.—The Secretary may establish such 
working groups as the Secretary determines to be necessary 
to assist the Secretary in carrying out this subsection. 
(4) CONTRACTS
AND
COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENTS.—In car-
rying out this subsection, the Secretary may enter into a con-
tract or cooperative agreement with a consortium of academic 
institutions in Louisiana with scientific or engineering expertise 
in the restoration of aquatic and marine ecosystems for coastal 
restoration and enhancement through science and technology. 
(5) APPLICABILITY OF THE FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE 
ACT.—The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) 
shall not apply to a working group established under this 
subsection. 
(b) DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary 
may carry out demonstration projects substantially in accord-
ance with the restoration plan and within the coastal Louisiana 
ecosystem for the purpose of resolving critical areas of scientific 
or technological uncertainty related to the implementation of 
the comprehensive plan. 
(2) MAXIMUM COST.— 
(A) TOTAL COST.—The total cost for planning, design, 
and construction of all projects under this subsection shall 
not exceed $100,000,000. 
(B) INDIVIDUAL PROJECT.—The total cost of any single 
project under this subsection shall not exceed $25,000,000. 
(c) INITIAL PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
the following projects substantially in accordance with the res-
toration plan: 
(A) Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet environmental res-
toration at a total cost of $105,300,000, but not including 
those elements of the project that produce navigation bene-
fits. 
(B) Small diversion at Hope Canal at a total cost 
of $68,600,000. 
(C) Barataria basin barrier shoreline restoration at 
a total cost of $242,600,000. 
(D) Small Bayou Lafourche reintroduction at a total 
cost of $133,500,000. 
(E) Medium diversion at Myrtle Grove with dedicated 
dredging at a total cost of $278,300,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01273
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1276 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) MODIFICATIONS.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out each project under 
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall carry out such modifica-
tions as may be necessary to the ecosystem restoration 
features identified in the restoration plan— 
(i) to address the impacts of Hurricanes Katrina 
and Rita on the areas of the project; and 
(ii) to ensure consistency with the project author-
ized by section 7013 (including work in and around 
the vicinity of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet). 
(B) INTEGRATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that 
each modification under subparagraph (A) is taken into 
account in conducting the study of comprehensive hurricane 
protection authorized by title I of the Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2247). 
(C) MISSISSIPPI RIVER-GULF OUTLET.—In carrying out 
the project under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary shall 
carry out such modifications as may be necessary to make 
the project consistent with and complementary to the clo-
sure and restoration of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet 
authorized by section 7013. 
(3) CONSTRUCTION
REPORTS.—Before the Secretary may 
begin construction of any project under this subsection, the 
Secretary shall submit a report documenting any modifications 
to the project, including cost changes, to the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-
tives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
of the Senate. 
(4) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER PROVISIONS.—Notwithstanding 
section 902 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
(33 U.S.C. 2280), the cost of a project under this subsection, 
including any modifications to the project, shall not exceed 
150 percent of the cost of such project set forth in paragraph 
(1). 
(d) BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATERIAL.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, substantially in accord-
ance with the restoration plan, shall implement in the coastal 
Louisiana ecosystem a program for the beneficial use of mate-
rial dredged from federally maintained waterways at a total 
cost of $100,000,000. 
(2) CONSIDERATION.—In carrying out the program under 
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider the beneficial use 
of sediment from the Illinois River System for wetlands restora-
tion in wetlands-depleted watersheds of the coastal Louisiana 
ecosystem. 
(e) ADDITIONAL PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
the following projects referred to in the restoration plan if 
the Secretary determines such projects are feasible: 
(A) Land Bridge between Caillou Lake and the Gulf 
of Mexico at a total cost of $56,300,000. 
(B) Gulf Shoreline at Point Au Fer Island at a total 
cost of $43,400,000. 
(C) Modification of Caernarvon Diversion at a total 
cost of $20,700,000. 
(D) Modification of Davis Pond Diversion at a total 
cost of $64,200,000. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01274
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1277 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(2) REPORTS.—Not later than December 31, 2009, the Sec-
retary shall submit feasibility reports on the projects described 
in paragraph (1) to the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate. 
(3) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO REPORTS.— 
(A) FEASIBILITY REPORTS.—Not later than December 
31, 2008, the Secretary shall submit to Congress feasibility 
reports on the following projects referred to in the restora-
tion plan: 
(i) Multipurpose Operation of Houma Navigation 
Lock at a total cost of $18,100,000. 
(ii) Terrebonne Basin Barrier Shoreline Restora-
tion at a total cost of $124,600,000. 
(iii) Small Diversion at Convent/Blind River at 
a total cost of $88,000,000. 
(iv) Amite River Diversion Canal Modification at 
a total cost of $5,600,000. 
(v) Medium Diversion at White’s Ditch at a total 
cost of $86,100,000. 
(vi) Convey Atchafalaya River Water to Northern 
Terrebonne Marshes at a total cost of $221,200,000. 
(B) CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary may carry out the 
projects under subparagraph (A) substantially in accord-
ance with the plans and subject to the conditions, rec-
ommended in a final report of the Chief of Engineers if 
a favorable report of the Chief is completed by not later 
than December 31, 2010. 
(4) CONSTRUCTION.—No appropriations shall be made to 
construct any project under this subsection if the report under 
paragraph (2) or paragraph (3), as the case may be, has not 
been approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-
tives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
of the Senate. 
SEC. 7007. NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE. 
(a) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit, in accordance with 
section 221 of the Flood Control Act 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), 
toward the non-Federal share of the cost of a study or project 
under this title the cost of work carried out in the coastal Louisiana 
ecosystem by the non-Federal interest for the project before the 
date of the execution of the partnership agreement for the study 
or project. 
(b) SOURCES OF FUNDS.—The non-Federal interest may use, 
and the Secretary shall accept, funds provided by a Federal agency 
under any other Federal program, to satisfy, in whole or in part, 
the non-Federal share of the cost of the study or project if the 
Federal agency that provides the funds determines that the funds 
are authorized to be used to carry out the study or project. 
(c) NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.—A nongovernmental 
organization shall be eligible to contribute all or a portion of the 
non-Federal share of the cost of a project under this title. 
(d) TREATMENT
OF CREDIT BETWEEN PROJECTS.—Any credit 
provided under this section toward the non-Federal share of the 
cost of a study or project under this title may be applied toward 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01275
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1278 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
the non-Federal share of the cost of any other study or project 
under this title. 
(e) PERIODIC MONITORING.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—To ensure that the contributions of the 
non-Federal interest equal the non-Federal share of the cost 
of a study or project under this title during each 5-year period 
beginning after the date of commencement of the first study 
or project under this title, the Secretary shall— 
(A) monitor for each study or project under this title 
the non-Federal provision of cash, in-kind services and 
materials, and land, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, 
and disposal areas; and 
(B) manage the requirement of the non-Federal interest 
to provide for each such study or project cash, in-kind 
services and materials, and land, easements, rights-of-way, 
relocations, and disposal areas. 
(2) OTHER MONITORING.—The Secretary shall conduct moni-
toring separately for the study phase, construction phase, 
preconstruction engineering and design phase, and planning 
phase for each project authorized on or after the date of enact-
ment of this Act for all or any portion of the coastal Louisiana 
ecosystem. 
(f) AUDITS.—Credit for land, easements, rights-of-way, reloca-
tions, and disposal areas (including land value and incidental costs) 
provided under this section, and the cost of work provided under 
this section, shall be subject to audit by the Secretary. 
SEC. 7008. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 209 of the Flood 
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962–2) or any other provision 
of law, in carrying out any project or activity under this title 
or any other provision of law to protect, conserve, and restore 
the coastal Louisiana ecosystem, the Secretary may determine 
that— 
(1) the project or activity is justified by the environmental 
benefits derived by the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; and 
(2) no further economic justification for the project or 
activity shall be required if the Secretary determines that the 
project or activity is cost effective. 
(b) LIMITATION
ON APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall not 
apply to any separable element of a project intended to produce 
benefits that are predominantly unrelated to the protection, 
preservation, and restoration of the coastal Louisiana ecosystem. 
SEC. 7009. INDEPENDENT REVIEW. 
The Secretary shall establish a council, to be known as the 
‘‘Louisiana Water Resources Council’’, which shall serve as the 
exclusive peer review panel for activities conducted by the Corps 
of Engineers in the areas in the State of Louisiana declared as 
major disaster areas in accordance with section 401 of the Robert 
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
5170) in response to Hurricane Katrina or Rita of 2005, in accord-
ance with the requirements of section 2034. 
Establishment. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01276
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1279 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
SEC. 7010. EXPEDITED REPORTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall expedite completion of 
the reports for the following projects and, if the Secretary deter-
mines that a project is feasible, proceed directly to project 
preconstruction engineering and design: 
(1) The projects identified in the study of comprehensive 
hurricane protection authorized by title I of the Energy and 
Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2447). 
(2) The projects identified in the Southwest Coastal Lou-
isiana hurricane and storm damage reduction study authorized 
by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives on December 7, 2005. 
(b) SUBMISSION OF REPORTS.—Upon completion of the reports 
identified in subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit the reports 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives. 
SEC. 7011. REPORTING. 
Not later than 6 years after the date of enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report, 
including a description of— 
(1) the projects authorized and undertaken under this title; 
(2) the construction status of the projects; 
(3) the cost to date and the expected final cost of each 
project undertaken under this title; and 
(4) the benefits and environmental impacts of the projects. 
SEC. 7012. NEW ORLEANS AND VICINITY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to— 
(1) raise levee heights where necessary and otherwise 
enhance the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity project and the 
West Bank and Vicinity project to provide the level of protection 
necessary to achieve the certification required for a 100-year 
level of flood protection in accordance with the national flood 
insurance program under the base flood elevations current at 
the time of construction of the levee; 
(2) modify the 17th Street, Orleans Avenue, and London 
Avenue drainage canals in the city of New Orleans and install 
pumps and closure structures at or near the lakefront at Lake 
Pontchartrain; 
(3) armor critical elements of the New Orleans hurricane 
and storm damage reduction system; 
(4) modify the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal to increase 
the reliability of the flood protection system for the city of 
New Orleans; 
(5) replace or modify certain non-Federal levees in 
Plaquemines Parish to incorporate the levees into the New 
Orleans to Venice Hurricane Protection project; 
(6) reinforce or replace flood walls in the existing Lake 
Pontchartrain and Vicinity project and the existing West Bank 
and Vicinity project to improve performance of the flood and 
storm damage reduction systems; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01277
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1280 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(7) perform one time stormproofing of interior pump sta-
tions to ensure the operability of the stations during hurricanes, 
storms, and high water events; 
(8) repair, replace, modify and improve non-Federal levees 
and associated protection measures in Terrebonne Parish; and 
(9) reduce the risk of storm damage to the greater New 
Orleans metropolitan area by restoring the surrounding wet-
lands through measures to begin to reverse wetland losses 
in areas affected by navigation, oil and gas, and other channels 
and through modification of the Caernarvon Freshwater Diver-
sion structure or its operations. 
(b) COST SHARING.—Activities authorized by subsection (a) and 
section 7013 shall be carried out in a manner that is consistent 
with the cost-sharing requirements specified in the Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on 
Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 109–234). 
(c) CONDITIONS.—The Secretary shall notify the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
if estimates for the expenditure of funds on any single project 
or activity identified in subsection (a) exceeds the amount specified 
for that project or activity in the Emergency Supplemental Appro-
priations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane 
Recovery, 2006. No appropriation in excess of 25 percent above 
the amount specified for a project or activity in such Act may 
be made until an increase in the level of expenditure has been 
approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate. 
SEC. 7013. MISSISSIPPI RIVER-GULF OUTLET. 
(a) DEAUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Effective beginning on the date of submis-
sion of the plan required under paragraph (3), the navigation 
channel portion of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet element 
of the project for navigation, Mississippi River, Baton Rouge 
to the Gulf of Mexico, authorized by the Act entitled ‘‘An 
Act to authorize construction of the Mississippi River-Gulf 
outlet’’, approved March 29, 1956 (70 Stat. 65) and modified 
by section 844 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 (100 Stat. 4177) and section 326 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3717), which extends from 
the Gulf of Mexico to Mile 60 at the southern bank of the 
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, is not authorized. 
(2) SCOPE.—Nothing in this paragraph modifies or 
deauthorizes the Inner Harbor navigation canal replacement 
project authorized by that Act of March 29, 1956. 
(3) CLOSURE AND RESTORATION PLAN.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 
the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
structure of the House of Representatives a final report 
on the deauthorization of the Mississippi River-Gulf outlet, 
as described under the heading ‘‘INVESTIGATIONS’’ under 
Deadline. 
Reports. 
Effective date. 
Notification. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01278
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1281 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
chapter 3 of title II of the Emergency Supplemental Appro-
priations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 
Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (120 Stat. 453). 
(B) INCLUSIONS.—At a minimum, the report under 
subparagraph (A) shall include— 
(i) a plan to physically modify the Mississippi 
River-Gulf Outlet and restore the areas affected by 
the navigation channel; 
(ii) a plan to restore natural features of the eco-
system that will reduce or prevent damage from storm 
surge; 
(iii) a plan to prevent the intrusion of saltwater 
into the waterway; 
(iv) efforts to integrate the recommendations of 
the report with the program authorized under section 
7003 and the analysis and design authorized by title 
I of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2247); and 
(v) consideration of— 
(I) use of native vegetation; and 
(II) diversions of fresh water to restore the 
Lake Borgne ecosystem. 
(4) CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary shall carry out a plan 
to close the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet and restore and pro-
tect the ecosystem substantially in accordance with the plan 
required under paragraph (3), if the Secretary determines that 
the project is cost-effective, environmentally acceptable, and 
technically feasible. 
SEC. 7014. HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION. 
(a) REPORTS.—With respect to the projects identified in the 
analysis and design of comprehensive hurricane protection author-
ized by title I of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2247), the Secretary shall submit, to the 
maximum extent practicable, specific project recommendations in 
a report developed under that title. 
(b) EMERGENCY PROCEDURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—If the President determines that a project 
recommended in the analysis and design of comprehensive 
hurricane protection under title I of the Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations Act, 2006 could— 
(A) address an imminent threat to life and property; 
(B) prevent a dangerous storm surge from reaching 
a populated area; 
(C) prevent the loss of coastal areas that reduce the 
impact of storm surge; 
(D) benefit national energy security; 
(E) protect emergency hurricane evacuation routes or 
shelters; or 
(F) address inconsistencies in hurricane protection 
standards, 
the President may submit to the President pro tempore of 
the Senate for authorization a legislative proposal relating to 
the project, as the President determines to be appropriate. 
(2) PRIORITIZATION.—In submitting legislative proposals 
under paragraph (1), the President shall give priority to any 
project that, as determined by the President, would— 
President. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01279
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1282 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) to the maximum extent practicable, reduce the 
risk— 
(i) of loss of human life; 
(ii) to public safety; and 
(iii) of damage to property; and 
(B) minimize costs and environmental impacts. 
(3) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Beginning after December 31, 2008, 
any legislative proposal submitted by the President under 
paragraph (1) shall be eligible for expedited consideration 
in accordance with this paragraph. 
(B) INTRODUCTION.—As soon as practicable after the 
date of receipt of a legislative proposal under paragraph 
(1), the Chairman of the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works of the Senate shall introduce the proposal 
as a bill, by request, in the Senate. 
(C) REFERRAL.—A bill introduced under subparagraph 
(B) shall be referred to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works of the Senate. 
(D) COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 45 legislative days 
after a bill under subparagraph (B) is referred to the 
committee in accordance with subparagraph (C), the 
committee shall act on the bill. 
(ii) FAILURE
TO
ACT.—If the committee fails to 
act on a bill by the date specified in clause (i), the 
bill shall be discharged from the committee and placed 
on the calendar of the Senate. 
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The requirements of, and authorities 
under, this subsection shall expire on December 31, 2010. 
SEC. 7015. LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW. 
(a) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enact-
ment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-
tives a report describing any modification required to the project 
for flood damage reduction, Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana, 
to provide the level of protection necessary to achieve the certifi-
cation required for a 100-year level of flood protection in accordance 
with the national flood insurance program. 
(b) MODIFICATIONS.—The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
a modification described in subsection (a) if— 
(1) the Secretary determines that the modification in the 
report under subsection (a) is feasible; and 
(2) the total cost of the modification does not exceed 
$90,000,000. 
(c) REQUIREMENT.—No appropriation shall be made to construct 
any modification under this section if the report under subsection 
(a) has not been approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-
tives. 
SEC. 7016. LOWER JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUISIANA. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out a project for 
flood damage reduction in Lower Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. 
Deadline. 
Effective date. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01280
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1283 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(b) EXISTING STUDIES.—In carrying out the project, the Sec-
retary shall use, to the maximum extent practicable, existing studies 
for projects for flood damage reduction in the vicinity of Lower 
Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, prepared under section 205 of the 
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). 
(c) CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary may proceed to construction 
or complete the construction of projects in Lower Jefferson Parish 
if the projects are being developed or carried out under section 
205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 as of the date of enactment 
of this Act. 
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
to be appropriated $100,000,000 to carry out this section. 
TITLE VIII—UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER 
AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY SYSTEM 
SEC. 8001. DEFINITIONS. 
In this title, the following definitions apply: 
(1) PLAN.—The term ‘‘Plan’’ means the project for naviga-
tion and ecosystem improvements for the Upper Mississippi 
River and Illinois Waterway System: Report of the Chief of 
Engineers, dated December 15, 2004. 
(2) UPPER
MISSISSIPPI
RIVER
AND
ILLINOIS
WATERWAY 
SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘Upper Mississippi River and Illinois 
Waterway System’’ means the projects for navigation and eco-
system restoration authorized by Congress for— 
(A) the segment of the Mississippi River from the con-
fluence with the Ohio River, River Mile 0.0, to Upper 
St. Anthony Falls Lock in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, 
River Mile 854.0; and 
(B) the Illinois Waterway from its confluence with the 
Mississippi River at Grafton, Illinois, River Mile 0.0, to 
T.J. O’Brien Lock in Chicago, Illinois, River Mile 327.0. 
SEC. 8002. NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS AND RESTORATION. 
Except as modified by this title, the Secretary shall undertake 
navigation improvements and restoration of the ecosystem for the 
Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway System substantially 
in accordance with the Plan and subject to the conditions described 
therein. 
SEC. 8003. AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF NAVIGATION 
IMPROVEMENTS. 
(a) SMALL SCALE AND NONSTRUCTURAL MEASURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— 
(A) construct mooring facilities at Locks 12, 14, 18, 
20, 22, 24, and LaGrange Lock or other alternative loca-
tions that are economically and environmentally feasible; 
(B) provide switchboats at Locks 20 through 25; and 
(C) conduct development and testing of an appointment 
scheduling system. 
(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—The total cost of 
projects authorized under this subsection shall be $256,000,000. 
Such costs are to be paid half from amounts appropriated 
from the general fund of the Treasury and half from amounts 
33 USC 652 note. 
33 USC 652 note. 
33 USC 652 note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01281
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1284 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. Such 
sums shall remain available until expended. 
(b) NEW LOCKS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall construct new 1,200- 
foot locks at Locks 20, 21, 22, 24, and 25 on the Upper Mis-
sissippi River and at LaGrange Lock and Peoria Lock on the 
Illinois Waterway. 
(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—The total cost of 
projects 
authorized 
under 
this 
subsection 
shall 
be 
$1,948,000,000. Such costs are to be paid half from amounts 
appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and half 
from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust 
Fund. Such sums shall remain available until expended. 
(c) CONCURRENCE.—The mitigation required for the projects 
authorized under subsections (a) and (b), including any acquisition 
of lands or interests in lands, shall be undertaken or acquired 
concurrently with lands and interests in lands for the projects 
authorized under subsections (a) and (b), and physical construction 
required for the purposes of mitigation shall be undertaken concur-
rently with the physical construction of such projects. 
SEC. 8004. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AUTHORIZATION. 
(a) OPERATION.—To ensure the environmental sustainability 
of the existing Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway 
System, the Secretary shall modify, consistent with requirements 
to avoid adverse effects on navigation, the operation of the Upper 
Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway System to address the 
cumulative environmental impacts of operation of the system and 
improve the ecological integrity of the Upper Mississippi River 
and Illinois River. 
(b) ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out, consistent 
with requirements to avoid adverse effects on navigation, eco-
system restoration projects to attain and maintain the sustain-
ability of the ecosystem of the Upper Mississippi River and 
Illinois River in accordance with the general framework out-
lined in the Plan. 
(2) PROJECTS
INCLUDED.—Ecosystem restoration projects 
may include— 
(A) island building; 
(B) construction of fish passages; 
(C) floodplain restoration; 
(D) water level management (including water draw-
down); 
(E) backwater restoration; 
(F) side channel restoration; 
(G) wing dam and dike restoration and modification; 
(H) island and shoreline protection; 
(I) topographical diversity; 
(J) dam point control; 
(K) use of dredged material for environmental pur-
poses; 
(L) tributary confluence restoration; 
(M) spillway, dam, and levee modification to benefit 
the environment; and 
(N) land and easement acquisition. 
(3) COST SHARING.— 
33 USC 652 note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01282
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1285 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraphs 
(B) and (C), the Federal share of the cost of carrying 
out an ecosystem restoration project under this subsection 
shall be 65 percent. 
(B) EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN RESTORATION PROJECTS.— 
In the case of a project under this section for ecosystem 
restoration, the Federal share of the cost of carrying out 
the project shall be 100 percent if the project— 
(i) is located below the ordinary high water mark 
or in a connected backwater; 
(ii) modifies the operation of structures for naviga-
tion; or 
(iii) is located on federally owned land. 
(C) SAVINGS
CLAUSE.—Nothing in this subsection 
affects the applicability of section 906(e) of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(e)). 
(D) NONGOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS.—In accord-
ance with section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
(42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), for any project carried out under 
this title, a non-Federal sponsor may include a nonprofit 
entity, with the consent of the affected local government. 
(4) LAND ACQUISITION.—The Secretary may acquire land 
or an interest in land for an ecosystem restoration project 
from a willing seller through conveyance of— 
(A) fee title to the land; or 
(B) a flood plain conservation easement. 
(c) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall carry out a long term 
resource monitoring, computerized data inventory and analysis, 
and applied research program for the Upper Mississippi River and 
Illinois River to determine trends in ecosystem health, to under-
stand systemic changes, and to help identify restoration needs. 
The program shall consider and adopt the monitoring program 
established under section 1103(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(1)(A)(ii)). 
(d) ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PRECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING 
AND DESIGN.— 
(1) RESTORATION DESIGN.—Before initiating the construc-
tion of any individual ecosystem restoration project, the Sec-
retary shall— 
(A) establish ecosystem restoration goals and identify 
specific performance measures designed to demonstrate 
ecosystem restoration; 
(B) establish the without-project condition or baseline 
for each performance indicator; and 
(C) for each separable element of the ecosystem restora-
tion, identify specific target goals for each performance 
indicator. 
(2) OUTCOMES.—Performance measures identified under 
paragraph (1)(A) shall include specific measurable environ-
mental outcomes, such as changes in water quality, hydrology, 
or the well-being of indicator species the population and dis-
tribution of which are representative of the abundance and 
diversity of ecosystem-dependent aquatic and terrestrial spe-
cies. 
(3) RESTORATION DESIGN.—Restoration design carried out 
as part of ecosystem restoration shall include a monitoring 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01283
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1286 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
plan for the performance measures identified under paragraph 
(1)(A), including— 
(A) a timeline to achieve the identified target goals; 
and 
(B) a timeline for the demonstration of project comple-
tion. 
(e) CONSULTATION AND FUNDING AGREEMENTS.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—In carrying out the environmental 
sustainability, ecosystem restoration, and monitoring activities 
authorized in this section, the Secretary shall consult with 
the Secretary of the Interior and the States of Illinois, Iowa, 
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin. 
(2) FUNDING
AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary is authorized 
to enter into agreements with the Secretary of the Interior, 
the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association, and natural 
resource and conservation agencies of the States of Illinois, 
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin to provide for the 
direct participation of and transfer of funds to such entities 
for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of projects 
and programs established by this section. 
(f) SPECIFIC PROJECTS AUTHORIZATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated 
to carry out this subsection $1,717,000,000, of which not more 
than $245,000,000 shall be available for projects described in 
subsection (b)(2)(B) and not more than $48,000,000 shall be 
available for projects described in subsection (b)(2)(J). Such 
sums shall remain available until expended. 
(2) LIMITATION
ON
AVAILABLE
FUNDS.—Of the amounts 
made available under paragraph (1), not more than $35,000,000 
in any fiscal year may be used for land acquisition under 
subsection (b)(4). 
(3) INDIVIDUAL
PROJECT
LIMIT.—Other than for projects 
described in subparagraphs (B) and (J) of subsection (b)(2), 
the total cost of any single project carried out under this sub-
section shall not exceed $25,000,000. 
(4) MONITORING.—In addition to amounts authorized under 
paragraph (1), there are authorized $10,420,000 per fiscal year 
to carry out the monitoring program under subsection (c) if 
such sums are not appropriated pursuant to section 1103(e)(4) 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
652(e)(4)). 
(g) IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than June 30, 2009, and every 
4 years thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Com-
mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
Representatives an implementation report that— 
(A) includes baselines, milestones, goals, and priorities 
for ecosystem restoration projects; and 
(B) measures the progress in meeting the goals. 
(2) ADVISORY PANEL.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall appoint and con-
vene an advisory panel to provide independent guidance 
in the development of each implementation report under 
paragraph (1). 
(B) PANEL MEMBERS.—Panel members shall include— 
Establishment. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01284
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1287 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(i) one representative of each of the State resource 
agencies (or a designee of the Governor of the State) 
from each of the States of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, 
Missouri, and Wisconsin; 
(ii) one representative of the Department of Agri-
culture; 
(iii) one representative of the Department of 
Transportation; 
(iv) one representative of the United States 
Geological Survey; 
(v) one representative of the United States Fish 
and Wildlife Service; 
(vi) one representative of the Environmental 
Protection Agency; 
(vii) one representative of affected landowners; 
(viii) two representatives of conservation and 
environmental advocacy groups; and 
(ix) two representatives of agriculture and industry 
advocacy groups. 
(C) CHAIRPERSON.—The Secretary shall serve as chair-
person of the advisory panel. 
(D) APPLICATION
OF
FEDERAL
ADVISORY
COMMITTEE 
ACT.—The Advisory Panel and any working group estab-
lished by the Advisory Panel shall not be considered an 
advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (5 U.S.C. App.). 
(h) RANKING SYSTEM.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 
Advisory Panel, shall develop a system to rank proposed 
projects. 
(2) PRIORITY.—The ranking system shall give greater 
weight to projects that restore natural river processes, including 
those projects listed in subsection (b)(2). 
SEC. 8005. COMPARABLE PROGRESS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—As the Secretary conducts pre-engineering, 
design, and construction for projects authorized under this title, 
the Secretary shall— 
(1) select appropriate milestones; 
(2) determine, at the time of such selection, whether the 
projects are being carried out at comparable rates; and 
(3) make an annual report to Congress, beginning in fiscal 
year 2009, regarding whether the projects are being carried 
out at a comparable rate. 
(b) NO COMPARABLE RATE.—If the Secretary or Congress deter-
mines under subsection (a)(2) that projects authorized under this 
title are not moving toward completion at a comparable rate, annual 
funding requests for the projects shall be adjusted to ensure that 
the projects move toward completion at a comparable rate in the 
future. 
Reports. 
33 USC 652 note. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01285
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1288 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
TITLE IX—NATIONAL LEVEE SAFETY 
PROGRAM 
SEC. 9001. SHORT TITLE. 
This title may be cited as the ‘‘National Levee Safety Act 
of 2007’’. 
SEC. 9002. DEFINITIONS. 
In this title, the following definitions apply: 
(1) COMMITTEE.—The term ‘‘committee’’ means the Com-
mittee on Levee Safety established by section 9003(a). 
(2) INSPECTION.—The term ‘‘inspection’’ means an actual 
inspection of a levee— 
(A) to establish the global information system location 
of the levee; 
(B) to determine the general condition of the levee; 
and 
(C) to estimate the number of structures and popu-
lation at risk and protected by the levee that would be 
adversely impacted if the levee fails or water levels exceed 
the height of the levee. 
(3) LEVEE.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘levee’’ means an embank-
ment, including floodwalls— 
(i) the primary purpose of which is to provide 
hurricane, storm, and flood protection relating to sea-
sonal high water, storm surges, precipitation, and other 
weather events; and 
(ii) that normally is subject to water loading for 
only a few days or weeks during a year. 
(B) INCLUSION.—The term includes structures along 
canals that constrain water flows and are subject to more 
frequent water loadings but that do not constitute a barrier 
across a watercourse. 
(4) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means— 
(A) a State; 
(B) the District of Columbia; 
(C) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and 
(D) any other territory or possession of the United 
States. 
(5) STATE LEVEE SAFETY AGENCY.—The term ‘‘State levee 
safety agency’’ means the agency of a State that has regulatory 
authority over the safety of any non-Federal levee in the State. 
(6) UNITED STATES.—The term ‘‘United States’’, when used 
in a geographical sense, means all of the States. 
SEC. 9003. COMMITTEE ON LEVEE SAFETY. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a committee to be 
known as the ‘‘Committee on Levee Safety’’. 
(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The committee shall be composed of 16 mem-
bers as follows: 
(1) The Secretary (or the Secretary’s designee), who shall 
serve as the chairperson of the Committee. 
(2) The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency (or the Administrator’s designee). 
(3) The following 14 members appointed by the Secretary: 
33 USC 3302. 
33 USC 3301. 
33 USC 3301 
note. 
National Levee 
Safety Act 
of 2007. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01286
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1289 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(A) Eight representatives of State levee safety agencies, 
one from each of the eight civil works divisions of the 
Corps of Engineers. 
(B) Two representatives of the private sector who have 
expertise in levee safety. 
(C) Two representatives of local and regional govern-
mental agencies who have expertise in levee safety. 
(D) Two representatives of Indian tribes who have 
expertise in levee safety. 
(c) DUTIES.— 
(1) DEVELOPMENT
OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR
NATIONAL 
LEVEE
SAFETY
PROGRAM.—The 
committee 
shall 
develop 
recomendations for a national levee safety program, including 
a strategic plan for implementation of the program. 
(2) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the committee shall submit to the Sec-
retary, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Environ-
ment and Public Works of the Senate a report containing the 
recommendations developed under paragraph (1). 
(d) PURPOSES.—In developing recommendations under sub-
section (c)(1), the committee shall ensure that the national levee 
safety program meets the following goals: 
(1) Ensuring the protection of human life and property 
by levees through the development of technologically, economi-
cally, socially, and environmentally feasible programs and 
procedures for hazard reduction and mitigation relating to 
levees. 
(2) Encouraging use of the best available engineering poli-
cies and procedures for levee site investigation, design, 
construction, operation and maintenance, and emergency 
preparedness. 
(3) Encouraging the establishment and implementation of 
an effective national levee safety program that may be dele-
gated to qualified States for implementation, including identi-
fication of incentives and disincentives for State levee safety 
programs. 
(4) Ensuring that levees are operated and maintained in 
accordance with appropriate and protective standards by con-
ducting an inventory and inspection of levees. 
(5) Developing and supporting public education and aware-
ness projects to increase public acceptance and support of State 
and national levee safety programs. 
(6) Building public awareness of the residual risks associ-
ated with living in levee protected areas. 
(7) Developing technical assistance materials for State and 
national levee safety programs. 
(8) Developing methods to provide technical assistance 
relating to levee safety to non-Federal entities. 
(9) Developing technical assistance materials, seminars, 
and guidelines relating to the physical integrity of levees in 
the United States. 
(e) COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.—A member of the committee 
shall serve without compensation. 
(f) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—To the extent amounts are made avail-
able in advance in appropriations Acts, the Secretary shall 
reimburse a member of the committee for travel expenses, including 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01287
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1290 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for an employee 
of a Federal agency under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 
5, United States Code, while away from the home or regular place 
of business of the member in performance of services for the com-
mittee. 
(g) APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT.— 
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not 
apply to the committee. 
SEC. 9004. INVENTORY AND INSPECTION OF LEVEES. 
(a) LEVEE DATABASE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish and 
maintain a database with an inventory of the Nation’s levees. 
(2) CONTENTS.—The database shall include— 
(A) location information of all Federal levees in the 
Nation (including global information system information) 
and, for non-Federal levees, such information on levee loca-
tion as is provided to the Secretary by State and local 
governmental agencies; 
(B) utilizing such information as is available, the gen-
eral condition of each levee; and 
(C) an estimate of the number of structures and popu-
lation at risk and protected by each levee that would be 
adversely impacted if the levee fails or water levels exceed 
the height of the levee. 
(3) AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION.— 
(A) AVAILABILITY
TO
FEDERAL, STATE, AND
LOCAL 
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.—The Secretary shall make all 
of the information in the database available to appropriate 
Federal, State, and local governmental agencies. 
(B) AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC.—The Secretary shall 
make the information in the database described in para-
graph (2)(A), and such other information in the database 
as the Secretary determines appropriate, available to the 
public. 
(b) INVENTORY AND INSPECTION OF LEVEES.— 
(1) FEDERAL LEVEES.—The Secretary, at Federal expense, 
shall establish an inventory and conduct an inspection of all 
federally owned and operated levees. 
(2) FEDERALLY
CONSTRUCTED, NONFEDERALLY
OPERATED 
AND
MAINTAINED
LEVEES.—The Secretary shall establish an 
inventory and conduct an inspection of all federally constructed, 
non-federally operated and maintained levees, at the original 
cost share for the project. 
(3) PARTICIPATING
LEVEES.—For non-Federal levees the 
owners of which are participating in the emergency response 
to natural disasters program established under section 5 of 
the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain 
public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for 
other purposes’’, approved August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), 
the Secretary shall establish an inventory and conduct an 
inspection of each such levee if the owner of the levee requests 
such inspection. The Federal share of the cost of an inspection 
under this paragraph shall be 65 percent. 
SEC. 9005. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. 
Nothing in this title shall be construed as— 
33 USC 3304. 
Deadline. 
33 USC 3303. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01288
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1291 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
(1) creating any liability of the United States or its officers 
or employees for the recovery of damages caused by an action 
or failure to act; or 
(2) relieving an owner or operator of a levee of a legal 
duty, obligation, or liability incident to the ownership or oper-
ation of a levee. 
SEC. 9006. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 
carry out this title $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 
2013. 
Nancy Pelosi 
Speaker of the House of Representatives. 
Robert C. Byrd 
President of the Senate pro tempore. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. 
November 6, 2007. 
The House of Representatives having proceeded to reconsider the bill (H.R. 1495) 
entitled ‘‘An Act to provide for the conservation and development of water and re-
lated resources, to authorize the Secretary of the Army to construct various projects 
for improvements to rivers and harbors of the United States, and for other pur-
poses’’, returned by the President of the United States with his objections, to the 
House of Representatives, in which it originated, it was 
Resolved, That the said bill pass, two-thirds of the House of Representatives 
agreeing to pass the same. 
Lorraine C. Miller 
Clerk. 
I certify that this Act originated in the House of Representatives. 
Lorraine C. Miller 
Clerk. 
33 USC 3305. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01289
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW
121 STAT. 1292 
PUBLIC LAW 110–114—NOV. 8, 2007 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1495 (S. 1248): 
HOUSE REPORTS: Nos. 110–80 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure) and 
110–280 (Comm. of Conference). 
SENATE REPORTS: No. 110–58 accompanying S. 1248 (Comm. on Environment 
and Public Works). 
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 
Apr. 19, considered and passed House. 
May 14–16, considered and passed Senate, amended. 
Aug. 1, House agreed to conference report. 
Sept. 24, Senate agreed to conference report. 
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 43 (2007): 
Nov. 2, Presidential veto message. 
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 
Nov. 6, House overrode veto. 
Nov. 8, Senate overrode veto. 
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
November 8, 2007. 
The Senate having proceeded to reconsider the bill (H.R. 1495) entitled ‘‘An Act 
to provide for the conservation and development of water and related resources, to 
authorize the Secretary of the Army to construct various projects for improvements 
to rivers and harbors of the United States, and for other purposes’’, returned by the 
President of the United States with his objections, to the House of Representatives, 
in which it originated, and passed by the House of Representatives on reconsider-
ation of the same, it was 
Resolved, That the said bill pass, two-thirds of the Senators present having voted 
in the affirmative. 
Nancy Erickson 
Secretary. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
13:52 Jan 23, 2009
Jkt 059194
PO 00001
Frm 01290
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6580
M:\STATUTES\2007\59194PT1.001
APPS10
PsN: 59194PT1
dkrause on GSDDPC44 with PUBLAW