Congressional Record, Volume 142 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)

[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H8693-H8756]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1996

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3592) to provide for 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, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 3592

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 1996''.
(b) Table of Contents.--

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition.

TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

Sec. 101. Project authorizations.
Sec. 102. Small flood control projects.
Sec. 103. Small bank stabilization projects.
Sec. 104. Small navigation projects.
Sec. 105. Small shoreline protection projects.
Sec. 106. Small snagging and sediment removal project, Mississippi
River, Little Falls, Minnesota.
Sec. 107. Small projects for improvement of the environment.
Sec. 108. Project to mitigate shore damage.

TITLE II--GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS

Sec. 201. Cost sharing for dredged material disposal areas.
Sec. 202. Flood control policy.
Sec. 203. Feasibility study cost-sharing.
Sec. 204. Restoration of environmental quality.
Sec. 205. Environmental dredging.
Sec. 206. Aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 207. Beneficial uses of dredged material.
Sec. 208. Recreation policy and user fees.
Sec. 209. Recovery of costs.
Sec. 210. Cost sharing of environmental projects.
Sec. 211. Construction of flood control projects by non-Federal
interests.
Sec. 212. Engineering and environmental innovations of national
significance.
Sec. 213. Lease authority.
Sec. 214. Collaborative research and development.
Sec. 215. Dam safety program.
Sec. 216. Maintenance, rehabilitation, and modernization of facilities.
Sec. 217. Long-term sediment management strategies.
Sec. 218. Dredged material disposal facility partnerships.
Sec. 219. Obstruction removal requirement.
Sec. 220. Small project authorizations.
Sec. 221. Uneconomical cost-sharing requirements.
Sec. 222. Planning assistance to States.
Sec. 223. Corps of Engineers expenses.
Sec. 224. State and Federal agency review period.
Sec. 225. Limitation on reimbursement of non-Federal costs per project.
Sec. 226. Aquatic plant control.
Sec. 227. Sediments decontamination technology.
Sec. 228. Shore protection.
Sec. 229. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 230. Support of Army Civil Works Program.
Sec. 231. Benefits to navigation.
Sec. 232. Loss of life prevention.
Sec. 233. Scenic and aesthetic considerations.
Sec. 234. Removal of study prohibitions.
Sec. 235. Sense of Congress; requirement regarding notice.
Sec. 236. Reservoir Management Technical Advisory Committee.
Sec. 237. Technical corrections.

TITLE III--PROJECT MODIFICATIONS

Sec. 301. Mobile Harbor, Alabama.
Sec. 302. Alamo Dam, Arizona.

[[Page H8694]]

Sec. 303. Nogales Wash and Tributaries, Arizona.
Sec. 304. Phoenix, Arizona.
Sec. 305. San Francisco River at Clifton, Arizona.
Sec. 306. Channel Islands Harbor, California
Sec. 307. Glenn-Colusa, California.
Sec. 308. Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, San Pedro Bay,
California.
Sec. 309. Oakland Harbor, California.
Sec. 310. Queensway Bay, California.
Sec. 311. San Luis Rey, California.
Sec. 312. Thames River, Connecticut.
Sec. 313. Potomac River, Washington, District Of Columbia.
Sec. 314. Canaveral Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 315. Captiva Island, Florida.
Sec. 316. Central and southern Florida, Canal 51.
Sec. 317. Central and southern Florida, Canal 111 (C-111).
Sec. 318. Jacksonville Harbor (Mill Cove), Florida.
Sec. 319. Panama City Beaches, Florida.
Sec. 320. Tybee Island, Georgia.
Sec. 321. White River, Indiana.
Sec. 322. Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 323. Chicago Lock and Thomas J. O'Brien Lock, Illinois.
Sec. 324. Kaskaskia River, Illinois.
Sec. 325. Locks and Dam 26, Alton, Illinois and Missouri.
Sec. 326. North Branch of Chicago River, Illinois.
Sec. 327. Illinois and Michigan Canal.
Sec. 328. Halstead, Kansas.
Sec. 329. Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and Cumberland
River, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia.
Sec. 330. Prestonburg, Kentucky.
Sec. 331. Comite River, Louisiana.
Sec. 332. Grand Isle and vicinity, Louisiana.
Sec. 333. Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana.
Sec. 334. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana.
Sec. 335. Mississippi River Outlets, Venice, Louisiana.
Sec. 336. Red River Waterway, Louisiana.
Sec. 337. Westwego to Harvey Canal, Louisiana.
Sec. 338. Tolchester Channel, Maryland.
Sec. 339. Saginaw River, Michigan.
Sec. 340. Sault Sainte Marie, Chippewa County, Michigan.
Sec. 341. Stillwater, Minnesota.
Sec. 342. Cape Girardeau, Missouri.
Sec. 343. New Madrid Harbor, Missouri.
Sec. 344. St. John's Bayou--New Madrid Floodway, Missouri.
Sec. 345. Joseph G. Minish Passaic River Park, New Jersey.
Sec. 346. Molly Ann's Brook, New Jersey.
Sec. 347. Passaic River, New Jersey.
Sec. 348. Ramapo River at Oakland, New Jersey and New York.
Sec. 349. Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, New Jersey.
Sec. 350. Arthur Kill, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 351. Jones Inlet, New York.
Sec. 352. Kill Van Kull, New York and New Jersey.
Sec. 353. Wilmington Harbor-Northeast Cape Fear River, North Carolina.
Sec. 354. Garrison Dam, North Dakota.
Sec. 355. Reno Beach-Howards Farm, Ohio.
Sec. 356. Wister Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 357. Bonneville Lock and Dam, Columbia River, Oregon and
Washington.
Sec. 358. Columbia River dredging, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 359. Grays Landing Lock and Dam, Monongahela River, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 360. Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 361. Mussers Dam, Middle Creek, Snyder County, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 362. Saw Mill Run, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 363. Schuylkill River, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 364. South Central Pennsylvania.
Sec. 365. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 366. San Juan Harbor, Puerto Rico.
Sec. 367. Narragansett, Rhode Island.
Sec. 368. Charleston Harbor, South Carolina.
Sec. 369. Dallas Floodway Extension, Dallas, Texas.
Sec. 370. Upper Jordan River, Utah.
Sec. 371. Haysi Lake, Virginia.
Sec. 372. Rudee Inlet, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Sec. 373. Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Sec. 374. East Waterway, Washington.
Sec. 375. Bluestone Lake, West Virginia.
Sec. 376. Moorefield, West Virginia.
Sec. 377. Southern West Virginia.
Sec. 378. West Virginia trail head facilities.
Sec. 379. Kickapoo River, Wisconsin.
Sec. 380. Teton County, Wyoming.

TITLE IV--STUDIES

Sec. 401. Corps capability study, Alaska.
Sec. 402. McDowell Mountain, Arizona.
Sec. 403. Nogales Wash and Tributaries, Arizona.
Sec. 404. Garden Grove, California.
Sec. 405. Mugu Lagoon, California.
Sec. 406. Santa Ynez, California.
Sec. 407. Southern California infrastructure.
Sec. 408. Yolo Bypass, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California.
Sec. 409. Chain of Rocks Canal, Illinois.
Sec. 410. Quincy, Illinois.
Sec. 411. Springfield, Illinois.
Sec. 412. Beauty Creek Watershed, Valparaiso City, Porter County,
Indiana.
Sec. 413. Grand Calumet River, Hammond, Indiana.
Sec. 414. Indiana Harbor Canal, East Chicago, Lake County, Indiana.
Sec. 415. Koontz Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 416. Little Calumet River, Indiana.
Sec. 417. Tippecanoe River Watershed, Indiana.
Sec. 418. Calcasieu Ship Channel, Hackberry, Louisiana.
Sec. 419. Huron River, Michigan.
Sec. 420. Saco River, New Hampshire.
Sec. 421. Buffalo River Greenway, New York.
Sec. 422. Port of Newburgh, New York.
Sec. 423. Port of New York-New Jersey sediment study.
Sec. 424. Port of New York-New Jersey navigation study.
Sec. 425. Chagrin River, Ohio.
Sec. 426. Cuyahoga River, Ohio.
Sec. 427. Charleston, South Carolina, estuary.
Sec. 428. Mustang Island, Corpus Christi, Texas.
Sec. 429. Prince William County, Virginia.
Sec. 430. Pacific region.
Sec. 431. Financing of infrastructure needs of small and medium ports.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 502. Project reauthorizations.
Sec. 503. Continuation of authorization of certain projects.
Sec. 504. Land conveyances.
Sec. 505. Namings.
Sec. 506. Watershed management, restoration, and development.
Sec. 507. Lakes program.
Sec. 508. Maintenance of navigation channels.
Sec. 509. Great Lakes remedial action plans and sediment remediation.
Sec. 510. Great Lakes dredged material testing and evaluation manual.
Sec. 511. Great Lakes sediment reduction.
Sec. 512. Great Lakes confined disposal facilities.
Sec. 513. Chesapeake Bay restoration and protection program.
Sec. 514. Extension of jurisdiction of Mississippi River Commission.
Sec. 515. Alternative to annual passes.
Sec. 516. Recreation partnership initiative.
Sec. 517. Environmental infrastructure.
Sec. 518. Corps capability to conserve fish and wildlife.
Sec. 519. Periodic beach nourishment.
Sec. 520. Control of aquatic plants.
Sec. 521. Hopper dredges.
Sec. 522. Design and construction assistance.
Sec. 523. Field office headquarters facilities.
Sec. 524. Corps of Engineers restructuring plan.
Sec. 525. Lake Superior Center.
Sec. 526. Jackson County, Alabama.
Sec. 527. Earthquake Preparedness Center of Expertise Extension.
Sec. 528. Quarantine facility.
Sec. 529. Benton and Washington Counties, Arkansas.
Sec. 530. Calaveras County, California.
Sec. 531. Farmington Dam, California.
Sec. 532. Prado Dam safety improvements, California.
Sec. 533. Los Angeles County Drainage Area, California.
Sec. 534. Seven Oaks Dam, California.
Sec. 535. Manatee County, Florida.
Sec. 536. Tampa, Florida.
Sec. 537. Watershed management plan for Deep River Basin, Indiana.
Sec. 538. Southern and eastern Kentucky.
Sec. 539. Louisiana coastal wetlands restoration projects.
Sec. 540. Southeast Louisiana.
Sec. 541. Restoration projects for Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West
Virginia.
Sec. 542. Cumberland, Maryland.
Sec. 543. Beneficial use of dredged material, Poplar Island, Maryland.
Sec. 544. Erosion control measures, Smith Island, Maryland.
Sec. 545. Duluth, Minnesota, alternative technology project.
Sec. 546. Redwood River Basin, Minnesota.
Sec. 547. Natchez Bluffs, Mississippi.
Sec. 548. Sardis Lake, Mississippi.
Sec. 549. Missouri River management.
Sec. 550. St. Charles County, Missouri, flood protection.
Sec. 551. Durham, New Hampshire.
Sec. 552. Hackensack Meadowlands area, New Jersey.
Sec. 553. Authorization of dredge material containment facility for
Port of New York/New Jersey.
Sec. 554. Hudson River habitat restoration, New York.
Sec. 555. Queens County, New York.
Sec. 556. New York Bight and Harbor study.
Sec. 557. New York State Canal System.
Sec. 558. New York City Watershed.
Sec. 559. Ohio River Greenway.
Sec. 560. Northeastern Ohio.
Sec. 561. Grand Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 562. Broad Top region of Pennsylvania.
Sec. 563. Curwensville Lake, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 564. Hopper Dredge McFarland.
Sec. 565. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 566. Upper Susquehanna River Basin, Pennsylvania and New York.
Sec. 567. Seven Points Visitors Center, Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 568. Southeastern Pennsylvania.
Sec. 569. Wills Creek, Hyndman, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 570. Blackstone River Valley, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.
Sec. 571. East Ridge, Tennessee.
Sec. 572. Murfreesboro, Tennessee.
Sec. 573. Buffalo Bayou, Texas.
Sec. 574. Harris County, Texas.
Sec. 575. San Antonio River, Texas.
Sec. 576. Neabsco Creek, Virginia.

[[Page H8695]]

Sec. 577. Tangier Island, Virginia.
Sec. 578. Pierce County, Washington.
Sec. 579. Washington Aqueduct.
Sec. 580. Greenbrier River Basin, West Virginia, flood protection.
Sec. 581. Huntington, West Virginia.
Sec. 582. Lower Mud River, Milton, West Virginia.
Sec. 583. West Virginia and Pennsylvania flood control.
Sec. 584. Evaluation of beach material.
Sec. 585. National Center for Nanofabrication and Molecular Self-
Assembly.
Sec. 586. Sense of Congress regarding St. Lawrence Seaway tolls.
Sec. 587. Prado Dam, California.

TITLE VI--EXTENSION OF EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY UNDER HARBOR MAINTENANCE
TRUST FUND

SEC. 2. DEFINITION.

For purposes of this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the
Secretary of the Army.
TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) Projects with Chief's Reports.--Except as 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 substantially
in accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions,
described in the respective reports designated in this
section:
(1) American river watershed, california.--
(A) In general.--The project for flood damage reduction,
American and Sacramento Rivers, California: Supplemental
Information Report for the American River Watershed Project,
California, dated March 1996, at a total cost of $57,300,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $42,975,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $14,325,000, consisting of the
following:
(i) Approximately 24 miles of slurry wall in the existing
levees along the lower American River.
(ii) Approximately 12 miles of levee modifications along
the east bank of the Sacramento River downstream from the
Natomas Cross Canal.
(iii) 3 telemeter streamflow gages upstream from the Folsom
Reservoir.
(iv) Modifications to the existing flood warning system
along the lower American River.
(B) Credit toward non-federal share.--The non-Federal
sponsor shall receive credit toward the non-Federal share of
the cost of the project for expenses that the sponsor has
incurred for design and construction of any of the features
authorized pursuant to this paragraph prior to the date on
which Federal funds are appropriated for construction of the
project. The amount of the credit shall be determined by the
Secretary.
(C) Operation of folsom dam.--The Secretary of the Interior
shall continue to operate the Folsom Dam and Reservoir to the
variable 400,000/670,000 acre-feet of flood control storage
capacity as an interim measure and extend the agreement
between the Bureau of Reclamation and the Sacramento Area
Flood Control Agency until such date as a comprehensive flood
control plan for the American River Watershed has been
implemented.
(D) Responsibility of non-federal sponsor.--The non-Federal
sponsor shall be responsible for all operation, maintenance,
repair, replacement, and rehabilitation costs associated with
the improvements undertaken pursuant to this paragraph, as
well as for 25 percent of the costs for the variable flood
control operation of the Folsom Dam and Reservoir (including
any incremental power and water purchase costs incurred by
the Western Area Power Administration or the Bureau of
Reclamation and any direction, capital, and operation and
maintenance costs borne by either of such agencies).
Notwithstanding any contract or other agreement, the
remaining 75 percent of the costs for the variable flood
control operation of the Folsom Dam and Reservoir shall be
the responsibility of the United States and shall be
nonreimbursable.
(2) San lorenzo river, santa cruz, california.--The project
for flood control, San Lorenzo River, Santa Cruz, California:
Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 30, 1994, at a
total cost of $21,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$10,900,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $10,900,000.
(3) Santa barbara harbor, california.--The project for
navigation, Santa Barbara Harbor, California: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated April 26, 1994, at a total cost of
$5,840,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $4,670,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,170,000.
(4) Santa monica breakwater, california.--The project for
navigation and storm damage reduction, Santa Monica
Breakwater, Santa Monica, California: Report of the Chief of
Engineers, dated June 7, 1996, at a total cost of $6,440,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $4,220,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $2,220,000.
(5) Marin county shoreline, san rafael, california.--The
project for storm damage reduction, Marin County shoreline,
San Rafael, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated January 28, 1994, at a total cost of $28,300,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $18,400,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $9,900,000.
(6) Humboldt harbor and bay, california.--The project for
navigation, Humboldt Harbor and Bay, California: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated October 30, 1995, at a total
cost of $15,180,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$10,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,180,000.
(7) Anacostia river and tributaries, district of columbia
and maryland.--The project for environmental restoration,
Anacostia River and Tributaries, District of Columbia and
Maryland: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated November
15, 1994, at a total cost of $17,144,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $12,858,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $4,286,000.
(8) Atlantic intracoastal waterway, st. johns county,
florida.--The project for navigation, Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, St. Johns County, Florida: Report of the Chief of
Engineers, dated June 24, 1994, at a total Federal cost of
$15,881,000. Operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and
rehabilitation shall be a non-Federal responsibility and the
non-Federal interest must assume ownership of the bridge.
(9) Lake michigan, illinois.--The project for storm damage
reduction and shoreline erosion protection, Lake Michigan,
Illinois, from Wilmette, Illinois, to the Illinois-Indiana
State line: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 14,
1994, at a total cost of $204,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $110,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal
cost of $94,000,000. The project shall include the breakwater
near the South Water Filtration Plant described in the report
as a separate element of the project, at a total cost of
$11,470,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,460,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,010,000. The Secretary
shall reimburse the non-Federal interest for the Federal
share of any costs incurred by the non-Federal interest--
(A) in reconstructing the revetment structures protecting
Solidarity Drive in Chicago, Illinois, if such work is
determined by the Secretary to be a component of the project;
and
(B) in constructing the breakwater near the South Water
Filtration Plant in Chicago, Illinois.
(10) Kentucky lock and dam, tennessee river, kentucky.--The
project for navigation, Kentucky Lock and Dam, Tennessee
River, Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June
1, 1992, at a total cost of $393,200,000. 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.
(11) Pond creek, jefferson county, kentucky.--The project
for flood control, Pond Creek, Jefferson County, Kentucky:
Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 28, 1994, at a
total cost of $16,080,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$10,993,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,087,000.
(12) Wolf creek dam and lake cumberland, kentucky.--The
project for hydropower, Wolf Creek Dam and Lake Cumberland,
Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 28,
1994, at a total cost of $53,763,000, with an estimated non-
Federal cost of $53,763,000. Funds derived by the Tennessee
Valley Authority from its power program and funds derived
from any private or public entity designated by the
Southeastern Power Administration may be used to pay all or
part of the costs of the project.
(13) Port fourchon, lafourche parish, louisiana.--A project
for navigation, Belle Pass and Bayou Lafourche, Louisiana:
Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 7, 1995, at a
total cost of $4,440,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$2,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,140,000.
(14) West bank of the mississippi river, new orleans (east
of harvey canal), louisiana.--The project for hurricane
damage reduction, West Bank of the Mississippi River in the
vicinity of New Orleans (East of Harvey Canal), Louisiana:
Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 1, 1995, at a
total cost of $126,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$82,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $43,800,000.
(15) Wood river, grand island, nebraska.--The project for
flood control, Wood River, Grand Island, Nebraska: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated May 3, 1994, at a total cost of
$11,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $6,040,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,760,000.
(16) Las cruces, new mexico.--The project for flood
control, Las Cruces, New Mexico: Report of the Chief of
Engineers, dated June 24, 1996, at a total cost of
$8,278,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,494,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,784,000.
(17) Long beach island, new york.--The project for storm
damage reduction, Long Beach Island, New York: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated April 5, 1996, at a total cost of
$72,090,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $46,858,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,232,000.
(18) Wilmington harbor, cape fear river, north carolina.--
The project for navigation, Wilmington Harbor, Cape Fear and
Northeast Cape Fear Rivers, North Carolina: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated June 24, 1994, at a total cost of
$23,953,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $15,032,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,921,000.
(19) Duck creek, cincinnati, ohio.--The project for flood
control, Duck Creek, Cincinnati, Ohio: Report of the Chief of
Engineers, dated June 28, 1994, at a total cost of
$15,947,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,960,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,987,000.

[[Page H8696]]

(20) Willamette river temperature control, mckenzie
subbasin, oregon.--The project for environmental restoration,
Willamette River Temperature Control, McKenzie Subbasin,
Oregon: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 1,
1996, at a total cost of $38,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $38,000,000.
(21) Rio grande de arecibo, puerto rico.--The project for
flood control, Rio Grande de Arecibo, Puerto Rico: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated April 5, 1994, at a total cost
of $19,951,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $10,557,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,394,000.
(22) Charleston harbor, south carolina.--The project for
navigation, Charleston Harbor Deepening and Widening, South
Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 18,
1996, at a total cost of $116,639,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $72,798,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $43,841,000.
(23) Big sioux river and skunk creek, sioux falls, south
dakota.--The project for flood control, Big Sioux River and
Skunk Creek, Sioux Falls, South Dakota: Report of the Chief
of Engineers, dated June 30, 1994, at a total cost of
$34,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $25,900,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,700,000.
(24) Watertown, south dakota.--The project for flood
control, Watertown and Vicinity, South Dakota: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated August 31, 1994, at a total cost of
$18,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $13,200,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,800,000.
(25) Gulf intracoastal waterway, aransas national wildlife
refuge, texas.--The project for navigation and environmental
preservation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Aransas National
Wildlife Refuge, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated May 28, 1996, at a total cost of $18,283,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $18,283,000.
(26) Houston-galveston navigation channels, texas.--The
project for navigation and environmental restoration,
Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated May 9, 1996, at a total initial
construction cost of $292,797,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $210,891,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$81,906,000. The project shall include deferred construction
of additional environmental restoration features over the
life of the project, at a total average annual cost of
$786,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $590,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $196,000. The construction of
berthing areas and the removal of pipelines and other
obstructions that are necessary for the project shall be
accomplished at non-Federal expense. Non-Federal interests
shall receive credit toward cash contributions required
during construction and subsequent to construction for design
and construction management work that is performed by non-
Federal interests and that the Secretary determines is
necessary to implement the project.
(27) Marmet lock, kanawha river, west virginia.--The
project for navigation, Marmet Lock, Kanawha River, West
Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 24,
1994, at a total cost of $229,581,000. 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. In conducting any real estate acquisition activities
with respect to the project, the Secretary shall give
priority consideration to those individuals who would be
directly affected by any physical displacement due to project
design and shall consider the financial circumstances of such
individuals. The Secretary shall proceed with real estate
acquisition in connection with the project expeditiously.
(b) Projects With Pending Chief's Reports.--The following
projects are authorized to be carried out by the Secretary
substantially in accordance with a final report of the Chief
of Engineers if such report is completed not later than
December 31, 1996:
(1) Chignik, alaska.--The project for navigation, Chignik,
Alaska, at a total cost of $10,365,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $4,344,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $6,021,000.
(2) Cook inlet, alaska.--The project for navigation, Cook
Inlet, Alaska, at a total cost of $5,342,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $4,006,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $1,336,000.
(3) St. paul island harbor, st. paul, alaska.--The project
for navigation, St. Paul Harbor, St. Paul, Alaska, with an
estimated total cost of $18,981,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $12,188,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $6,793,000.
(4) Norco bluffs, riverside county, california.--A project
for bluff stabilization, Norco Bluffs, Riverside County,
California, with an estimated total cost of $8,600,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $6,450,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $2,150,000.
(5) Port of long beach (deepening), california.--The
project for navigation, Port of Long Beach (Deepening),
California, at a total cost of $37,288,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $14,318,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $22,970,000.
(6) Terminus dam, kaweah river, california.--The project
for flood damage reduction and water supply, Terminus Dam,
Kaweah River, California, at a total estimated cost of
$34,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $20,200,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $14,300,000.
(7) Rehoboth beach and dewey beach, delaware.--A project
for storm damage reduction and shoreline protection, Rehoboth
Beach and Dewey Beach, Delaware, at a total cost of
$9,423,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of
$6,125,000, and an estimated first non-Federal cost of
$3,298,000, and an average annual cost of $282,000 for
periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project,
with an estimated annual Federal cost of $183,000 and an
estimated annual non-Federal cost of $99,000.
(8) Brevard county, florida.--The project for shoreline
protection, Brevard County, Florida, at a total first cost of
$76,620,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of
$36,006,000, and an estimated first non-Federal cost of
$40,614,000, and an average annual cost of $2,341,000 for
periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project,
with an estimated annual Federal cost of $1,109,000 and an
estimated annual non-Federal cost of $1,232,000.
(9) Miami harbor channel, florida.--The project for
navigation, Miami Harbor Channel, Miami, Florida, with an
estimated total cost of $3,221,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $1,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$1,421,000.
(10) North worth inlet, florida.--The project for
navigation and shoreline protection, Lake Worth Inlet, Palm
Beach Harbor, Florida, at a total cost of $3,915,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $1,762,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $2,153,000.
(11) Lower savannah river basin, savannah river, georgia
and south carolina.--The project for navigation and related
purposes, Lower Savannah River Basin, Savannah River, Georgia
and South Carolina, at a total cost of $3,419,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $2,551,000, and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $868,000.
(12) Absecon island, new jersey.--The project for storm
damage reduction and shoreline protection, Brigantine Inlet
to Great Egg Harbor Inlet, Absecon Island, New Jersey, at a
total cost of $52,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$34,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $18,000,000.
(13) Cape fear river, north carolina.--The project for
navigation, Cape Fear River deepening, North Carolina, at a
total cost of $210,264,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$130,159,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$80,105,000.

SEC. 102. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.

(a) Project Descriptions.--The Secretary shall conduct a
study for each of the following projects and, if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible, shall
carry out the project under section 205 of the Flood Control
Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s):
(1) South upland, san bernadino county, california.--
Project for flood control, South Upland, San Bernadino
County, California.
(2) Birds, lawrence county, illinois.--Project for flood
control, Birds, Lawrence County, Illinois.
(3) Bridgeport, lawrence county, illinois.--Project for
flood control, Bridgeport, Lawrence County, Illinois.
(4) Embarras river, villa grove, illinois.--Project for
flood control, Embarras River, Villa Grove, Illinois.
(5) Frankfort, will county, illinois.--Project for flood
control, Frankfort, Will County, Illinois.
(6) Sumner, lawrence county, illinois.--Project for flood
control, Sumner, Lawrence County, Illinois.
(7) Vermillion river, demanade park, lafayette,
louisiana.--Project for nonstructural flood control,
Vermillion River, Demanade Park, Lafayette, Louisiana. In
carrying out the study and the project (if any) under this
paragraph, the Secretary shall use relevant information from
the Lafayette Parish feasibility study and expedite
completion of the study under this paragraph.
(8) Vermillion river, quail hollow subdivision, lafayette,
louisiana.--Project for nonstructural flood control,
Vermillion River, Quail Hollow Subdivision, Lafayette,
Louisiana. In carrying out the study and the project (if any)
under this paragraph, the Secretary shall use relevant
information from the Lafayette Parish feasibility study and
expedite completion of the study under this paragraph.
(9) Kawkawlin river, bay county, michigan.--Project for
flood control, Kawkawlin River, Bay County, Michigan.
(10) Whitney drain, arenac county, michigan.--Project for
flood control, Whitney Drain, Arenac County, Michigan.
(11) Festus and crystal city, missouri.--Project for flood
control, Festus and Crystal City, Missouri. In carrying out
the study and the project (if any) under this paragraph, the
Secretary shall use relevant information from the existing
reconnaissance study and shall expedite completion of the
study under this paragraph.
(12) Kimmswick, missouri.--Project for flood control,
Kimmswick, Missouri. In carrying out the study and the
project (if any) under this paragraph, the Secretary shall
use relevant information from the existing reconnaissance
study and shall expedite completion of the study under this
paragraph.
(13) River Des Peres, St. Louis County, Missouri.--Project
for flood control, River Des Peres, St. Louis County,
Missouri. In carrying out the study and the project (if any),
the Secretary shall determine the feasibility of potential
flood control measures, consider potential storm water runoff
and related improvements, and cooperate with the Metropolitan
St. Louis Sewer District.

[[Page H8697]]

(14) Buffalo creek, erie county, new york.--Project for
flood control, Buffalo Creek, Erie County, New York.
(15) Cazenovia creek, erie county, new york.--Project for
flood control, Cazenovia Creek, Erie County, New York.
(16) Cheektowaga, erie county, new york.--Project for flood
control, Cheektowaga, Erie County, New York.
(17) Fulmer creek, village of mohawk, new york.--Project
for flood control, Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk, New York.
(18) Moyer creek, village of frankfort, new york.--Project
for flood control, Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New
York.
(19) Sauquoit creek, whitesboro, new york.--Project for
flood control, Sauquoit Creek, Whitesboro, New York.
(20) Steele creek, village of ilion, new york.--Project for
flood control, Steele Creek, Village of Ilion, New York.
(21) Willamette river, oregon.--Project for nonstructural
flood control, Willamette River, Oregon, including floodplain
and ecosystem restoration.
(22) Greenbrier river basin, west virginia.--Project for
flood control, consisting of an early flood warning system,
Greenbrier River Basin, West Virginia.
(b) Cost Allocations.--
(1) Lake elsinore, california.--The maximum amount of
Federal funds that may be allotted under section 205 of the
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) for the project
for flood control, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County,
California, shall be $7,500,000.
(2) Lost creek, columbus, nebraska.--The maximum amount of
Federal funds that may be allotted under such section 205 for
the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus,
Nebraska, shall be $5,500,000.
(3) Revision of project cooperation agreement.--The
Secretary shall revise the project cooperation agreement for
the projects referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) in order
to take into account the change in the Federal participation
in such projects pursuant to such paragraphs.
(4) Cost sharing.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to affect any cost-sharing requirement applicable
to the project referred to in paragraph (1) under the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986.

SEC. 103. SMALL BANK STABILIZATION PROJECTS.

The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that the
project is feasible, shall carry out the project under
section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r):
(1) St. joseph river, indiana.--Project for bank
stabilization, St. Joseph River, South Bend, Indiana,
including recreation and pedestrian access features.
(2) Allegheny river at oil city, pennsylvania.--Project for
bank stabilization to address erosion problems affecting the
pipeline crossing the Allegheny River at Oil City,
Pennsylvania, including measures to address erosion affecting
the pipeline in the bed of the Allegheny River and its
adjacent banks.
(3) Cumberland river, nashville, tennessee.--Project for
bank stabilization, Cumberland River, Nashville, Tennessee.
(4) Tennessee river, hamilton county, tennessee.--Project
for bank stabilization, Tennessee River, Hamilton County,
Tennessee; except that the maximum amount of Federal funds
that may be allotted for the project shall be $7,500,000.

SEC. 104. SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS.

The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that the
project is feasible, shall carry out the project under
section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C.
577):
(1) Akutan, alaska.--Project for navigation, Akutan,
Alaska, consisting of a bulkhead and a wave barrier,
including application of innovative technology involving use
of a permeable breakwater.
(2) Grand marais harbor breakwater, michigan.--Project for
navigation, Grand Marais Harbor breakwater, Michigan.
(3) Duluth, minnesota.--Project for navigation, Duluth,
Minnesota.
(4) Taconite, minnesota.--Project for navigation, Taconite,
Minnesota.
(5) Two harbors, minnesota.--Project for navigation, Two
Harbors, Minnesota.
(6) Caruthersville harbor, pemiscot county, missouri.--
Project for navigation, Caruthersville Harbor, Pemiscot
County, Missouri, including enlargement of the existing
harbor and bank stabilization measures.
(7) New madrid county harbor, missouri.--Project for
navigation, New Madrid County Harbor, Missouri, including
enlargement of the existing harbor and bank stabilization
measures.
(8) Brooklyn, new york.--Project for navigation, Brooklyn,
New York, including restoration of the pier and related
navigation support structures, at the Sixty-Ninth Street
Pier.
(9) Buffalo inner harbor, buffalo, new york.--Project for
navigation, Buffalo Inner Harbor, Buffalo, New York.
(10) Glenn cove creek, new york.--Project for navigation,
Glenn Cove Creek, New York, including bulkheading.
(11) Union ship canal, buffalo and lackawanna, new york.--
Project for navigation, Union Ship Canal, Buffalo and
Lackawanna, New York.

SEC. 105. SMALL SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECTS.

(a) Project Authorizations.--The Secretary shall conduct a
study for each of the following projects, and if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible, shall
carry out the project under section 3 of the Shoreline
Protection Act of August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g):
(1) Faulkner's island, connecticut.--Project for shoreline
protection, Faulkner's Island, Connecticut; except that the
maximum amount of Federal funds that may be allotted for the
project shall be $4,500,000.
(2) Fort pierce, florida.--Project for 1 mile of additional
shoreline protection, Fort Pierce, Florida.
(3) Orchard beach, bronx, new york.--Project for shoreline
protection, Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York, New York; except
that the maximum amount of Federal funds that may be allotted
for the project shall be $5,200,000.
(4) Sylvan beach breakwater, verona, oneida county, new
york.--Project for shoreline protection, Sylvan Beach
breakwater, Verona, Oneida County, New York.
(b) Cost Sharing Agreement.--In carrying out the project
authorized by subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall enter
into an agreement with the property owner to determine the
allocation of the project costs.

SEC. 106. SMALL SNAGGING AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT,
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, LITTLE FALLS, MINNESOTA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study for a project for
clearing, snagging, and sediment removal, East Bank of the
Mississippi River, Little Falls, Minnesota, including removal
of sediment from culverts. The study shall include a
determination of the adequacy of culverts to maintain flows
through the channel. If the Secretary determines that the
project is feasible, the Secretary shall carry out the
project under section 3 of the River and Harbor Act of March
2, 1945 (33 U.S.C. 603a; 59 Stat. 23).

SEC. 107. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the
following projects and, if the Secretary determines that the
project is appropriate, shall carry out the project under
section 1135(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309(a)):
(1) Upper truckee river, el dorado county, california.--
Project for environmental restoration, Upper Truckee River,
El Dorado County, California, including measures for
restoration of degraded wetlands and wildlife enhancement.
(2) San lorenzo river, california.--Project for habitat
restoration, San Lorenzo River, California.
(3) Whittier narrows dam, california.--Project for
environmental restoration and remediation of contaminated
water sources, Whittier Narrows Dam, California.
(4) Upper jordan river, salt lake county, utah.--Project
for channel restoration and environmental improvement, Upper
Jordan River, Salt Lake County, Utah.

SEC. 108. PROJECT TO MITIGATE SHORE DAMAGE.

The Secretary shall expedite the Assateague Island
restoration feature of the Ocean City, Maryland, and vicinity
study and, if the Secretary determines that the Federal
navigation project has contributed to degradation of the
shoreline, the Secretary shall carry out the project for
shoreline restoration under section 111 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 735); except that the maximum
amount of Federal funds that may be allotted by the Secretary
for the project shall be $35,000,000. In carrying out the
project, the Secretary shall coordinate with affected Federal
and State agencies and shall enter into an agreement with the
Federal property owner to determine the allocation of the
project costs.
TITLE II--GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS

SEC. 201. COST SHARING FOR DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL AREAS.

(a) Construction.--Section 101(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211(a); 100 Stat. 4082-
4083) is amended--
(1) by striking the last sentence of paragraph (2) and
inserting the following: ``The value of lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations provided under paragraph (3)
and the costs of relocations borne by the non-Federal
interests under paragraph (4) shall be credited toward the
payment required under this paragraph.'';
(2) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by inserting ``and'' after ``rights-of-way,'';
(B) by striking ``, and dredged material disposal areas'';
and
(C) by inserting ``, including any lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations (other than utility
relocations accomplished under paragraph (4)) that are
necessary for dredged material disposal facilities'' before
the period at the end of such paragraph; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Dredged material disposal facilities for project
construction.--For purposes of this subsection, the term
`general navigation features' includes constructed land-based
and aquatic dredged material disposal facilities that are
necessary for the disposal of dredged material required for
project construction and for which a contract for
construction has not been awarded on or before the date of
the enactment of this paragraph.''.
(b) Operation and Maintenance.--Section 101(b) of such Act
(33 U.S.C. 2211(b); 100 Stat. 4083) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1) In general.--'' before ``The
Federal'';

[[Page H8698]]

(2) by indenting and moving paragraph (1), as designated by
paragraph (1) of this subsection, 2 ems to the right;
(3) by striking ``pursuant to this Act'' and inserting ``by
the Secretary pursuant to this Act or any other law approved
after the date of the enactment of this Act''; and
(4) by adding at the end thereof the following:
``(2) Dredged material disposal facilities.--The Federal
share of the cost of constructing land-based and aquatic
dredged material disposal facilities that are necessary for
the disposal of dredged material required for the operation
and maintenance of a project and for which a contract for
construction has not been awarded on or before the date of
the enactment of this paragraph shall be determined in
accordance with subsection (a). The Federal share of
operating and maintaining such facilities shall be determined
in accordance with paragraph (1).''.
(c) Agreement.--Section 101(e)(1) of such Act (33 U.S.C.
2211(e)(1); 100 Stat. 4083) is amended by striking ``and to
provide dredged material disposal areas and perform'' and
inserting ``including those necessary for dredged material
disposal facilities, and to perform''.
(d) Consideration of Funding Requirements and Equitable
Apportionment.--Section 101 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2211; 100
Stat. 4082-4084) is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Consideration of Funding Requirements and Equitable
Apportionment.--The Secretary shall ensure, to the extent
practicable, that--
``(1) funding necessary for operation and maintenance
dredging of commercial navigation harbors is provided before
Federal funds are obligated for payment of the Federal share
of costs associated with construction of dredged material
disposal facilities in accordance with subsections (a) and
(b);
``(2) funds expended for such construction are equitably
apportioned in accordance with regional needs; and
``(3) the Secretary's participation in the construction of
dredged material disposal facilities does not result in
unfair competition with potential private sector providers of
such facilities.''.
(e) Eligible Operations and Maintenance Defined.--Section
214(2) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2241; 100 Stat. 4108) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) by inserting ``Federal'' after ``means all'';
(B) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``including''; and
(C) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``; (ii) the construction of dredged material
disposal facilities that are necessary for the operation and
maintenance of any harbor or inland harbor; (iii) dredging
and disposing of contaminated sediments which are in or which
affect the maintenance of Federal navigation channels; (iv)
mitigating for impacts resulting from Federal navigation
operation and maintenance activities; and (v) operating and
maintaining dredged material disposal facilities''; and
(2) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``rights-of-way, or
dredged material disposal areas,'' and inserting ``or rights-
of-way,''.
(f) Amendment of Cooperation Agreement.--If requested by
the non-Federal interest, the Secretary shall amend a project
cooperation agreement executed on or before the date of the
enactment of this Act to reflect the application of the
amendments made by this section to any project for which a
contract for construction has not been awarded on or before
such date of enactment.
(g) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section (including the
amendments made by this section) shall increase, or result in
the increase of, the non-Federal share of the costs of--
(1) any dredged material disposal facility authorized
before the date of the enactment of this Act, including any
facility authorized by section 123 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1823); or
(2) any dredged material disposal facility that is
necessary for the construction or maintenance of a project
authorized before the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 202. FLOOD CONTROL POLICY.

(a) Flood Control Cost Sharing.--
(1) Increased non-federal contributions.--Subsections (a)
and (b) of section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(a) and (b)) are each amended by
striking ``25 percent'' each place it appears and inserting
``35 percent''.
(2) Applicability.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to any project authorized after the date of the
enactment of this Act and to any flood control project which
is not specifically authorized by Congress for which a
Detailed Project Report is approved after such date of
enactment or, in the case of a project for which no Detailed
Project Report is prepared, construction is initiated after
such date of enactment.
(b) Ability To Pay.--
(1) In general.--Section 103(m) of such Act (33 U.S.C.
2213(m)) is amended to read as follows:
``(m) Ability To Pay.--
``(1) In general.--Any cost-sharing agreement under this
section for flood control or agricultural water supply shall
be subject to the ability of a non-Federal interest to pay.
``(2) Criteria and procedures.--The ability of any non-
Federal interest to pay shall be determined by the Secretary
in accordance with criteria and procedures in effect on the
day before the date of the enactment of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996; except that such criteria and
procedures shall be revised within 6 months after the date of
such enactment to reflect the requirements of paragraph (3).
``(3) Revision of procedures.--In revising procedures
pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary--
``(A) shall consider--
``(i) per capita income data for the county or counties in
which the project is to be located; and
``(ii) the per capita non-Federal cost of construction of
the project for the county or counties in which the project
is to be located;
``(B) shall not consider criteria (other than criteria
described in subparagraph (A)) in effect on the day before
the date of the enactment of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996; and
``(C) may consider additional criteria relating to the non-
Federal interest's financial ability to carry out its cost-
sharing responsibilities, to the extent that the application
of such criteria does not eliminate areas from eligibility
for a reduction in the non-Federal share as determined under
subparagraph (A).
``(4) Non-federal share.--Notwithstanding subsection (a),
the Secretary shall reduce or eliminate the requirement that
a non-Federal interest make a cash contribution for any
project that is determined to be eligible for a reduction in
the non-Federal share under procedures in effect under
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).''.
(2) Applicability.--
(A) Generally.--Subject to subparagraph (C), the amendment
made by paragraph (1) shall apply to any project, or
separable element thereof, with respect to which the
Secretary and the non-Federal interest have not entered into
a project cooperation agreement on or before the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(B) Amendment of cooperation agreement.--If requested by
the non-Federal interest, the Secretary shall amend a project
cooperation agreement executed on or before the date of the
enactment of this Act to reflect the application of the
amendment made by paragraph (1) to any project for which a
contract for construction has not been awarded on or before
such date of enactment.
(C) Non-federal option.--If requested by the non-Federal
interest, the Secretary shall apply the criteria and
procedures established pursuant to section 103(m) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 as in effect on the
day before the date of the enactment of this Act for projects
that are authorized before the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(c) Flood Plain Management Plans.--
(1) In general.--Section 402 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 701b-
12; 100 Stat. 4133) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 402. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS.

``(a) Compliance With Flood Plain Management and Insurance
Programs.--Before construction of any project for local flood
protection or any project for hurricane or storm damage
reduction and involving Federal assistance from the
Secretary, the non-Federal interest shall agree to
participate in and comply with applicable Federal flood plain
management and flood insurance programs.
``(b) Flood Plain Management Plans.--Within 1 year after
the date of signing a project cooperation agreement for
construction of a project to which subsection (a) applies,
the non-Federal interest shall prepare a flood plain
management plan designed to reduce the impacts of future
flood events in the project area. Such plan shall be
implemented by the non-Federal interest not later than 1 year
after completion of construction of the project.
``(c) Guidelines.--
``(1) In general.--Within 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall develop
guidelines for preparation of flood plain management plans by
non-Federal interests under subsection (b). Such guidelines
shall address potential measures, practices and policies to
reduce loss of life, injuries, damages to property and
facilities, public expenditures, and other adverse impacts
associated with flooding and to preserve and enhance natural
flood plain values.
``(2) Limitation on statutory construction.--Nothing in
this subsection shall be construed to confer any regulatory
authority upon the Secretary.
``(d) Technical Support.--The Secretary is authorized to
provide technical support to a non-Federal interest for a
project to which subsection (a) applies for the development
and implementation of plans prepared under subsection (b).''.
(2) Applicability.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to any project or separable element thereof with
respect to which the Secretary and the non-Federal interest
have not entered into a project cooperation agreement on or
before the date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Non-Structural Flood Control Policy.--
(1) Review.--The Secretary shall conduct a review of
policies, procedures, and techniques relating to the
evaluation and development of flood control measures with a
view toward identifying impediments that may exist to
justifying non-structural flood control measures as
alternatives to structural measures.
(2) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the

[[Page H8699]]

Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the findings
on the review conducted under this subsection, together with
any recommendations for modifying existing law to remove any
impediments identified under such review.
(e) Emergency Response.--Section 5(a)(1) 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(a)(1)), is amended by inserting before the first
semicolon the following: ``, or in implementation of
nonstructural alternatives to the repair or restoration of
such flood control work if requested by the non-Federal
sponsor''.
(f) Nonstructural Alternatives.--Section 73 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 701b-11; 88
Stat. 32) is amended by striking subsection (a) and inserting
the following:
``(a) In the survey, planning, or design by any Federal
agency of any project involving flood protection, such
agency, with a view toward formulating the most economically,
socially, and environmentally acceptable means of reducing or
preventing flood damages, shall consider and address in
adequate detail nonstructural alternatives, including
measures that may be implemented by others, to prevent or
reduce flood damages. Such alternatives may include watershed
management, wetlands restoration, elevation or flood proofing
of structures, floodplain regulation, relocation, and
acquisition of floodplain lands for recreational, fish and
wildlife, and other public purposes.''.

SEC. 203. FEASIBILITY STUDY COST-SHARING.

(a) Non-Federal Share.--Section 105(a)(1) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215(a)(1)) is
amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``during the period
of such study'';
(2) by inserting after the first sentence the following:
``During the period of the study, the non-Federal share of
the cost of the study shall be not more than 50 percent of
the estimate of the cost of the study as contained in the
feasibility cost-sharing agreement. The cost estimate may
be amended only by mutual agreement of the Secretary and
the non-Federal interests. The non-Federal share of any
costs in excess of the cost estimate shall, except as
otherwise mutually agreed by the Secretary and the non-
Federal interests, be payable after the project has been
authorized for construction and on the date on which the
Secretary and non-Federal interests enter into an
agreement pursuant to section 101(e) or 103(j). In the
event the project which is the subject of the study is not
authorized within the earlier of 5 years of the date of
the final report of the Chief of Engineers concerning such
study or 2 years of the date of termination of the study,
the non-Federal share of any such excess costs shall be
paid to the United States on the last day of such
period.''; and
(3) in the second sentence, by striking ``such non-Federal
contribution'' and inserting ``the non-Federal share required
under this paragraph''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply notwithstanding any feasibility cost-sharing
agreement entered into by the Secretary and non-Federal
interests. Upon request of the non-Federal interest, the
Secretary shall amend any feasibility cost-sharing agreements
in effect on the date of enactment of this Act so as to
conform the agreements with the amendments.
(c) Limitation on Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this
section or any amendment made by this section shall require
the Secretary to reimburse the non-Federal interests for
funds previously contributed for a study.

SEC. 204. RESTORATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.

(a) Review of Projects.--Section 1135(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(a)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``the operation of''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``and to determine if the operation of such
projects has contributed to the degradation of the quality of
the environment''.
(b) Program of Projects.--Section 1135(b) of such Act is
amended by striking the last 2 sentences of subsection (b).
(c) Restoration of Environmental Quality.--Section 1135 of
such Act is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as
subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively;
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsections:
``(c) Restoration of Environmental Quality.--If the
Secretary determines that construction of a water resource
project by the Secretary or operation of a water resources
project constructed by the Secretary has contributed to the
degradation of the quality of the environment, the Secretary
may undertake measures for restoration of environmental
quality and measures for enhancement of environmental quality
that are associated with the restoration, either through
modifications at the project site or at other locations that
have been affected by the construction or operation of the
project, if such measures do not conflict with the authorized
project purposes.
``(d) Non-Federal Share; Limitation on Maximum Federal
Expenditure.--The non-Federal share of the cost of any
modifications or measures carried out or undertaken pursuant
to subsection (b) or (c) of this section shall be 25 percent.
Not more than 80 percent of the non-Federal share may be in
kind, including a facility, supply, or service that is
necessary to carry out the modification. No more than
$5,000,000 in Federal funds may be expended on any single
modification or measure carried out or undertaken pursuant to
this section.''; and
(3) in subsection (f), as so redesignated, by striking
``program conducted under subsection (b)'' and inserting
``programs conducted under subsections (b) and (c)''.
(d) Definition.--Section 1135 of such Act is further
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(h) Definition.--In this section the term `water
resources project constructed by the Secretary' includes a
water resources project constructed or funded jointly by the
Secretary and the head of any other Federal agency (including
the Natural Resources Conservation Service).''.

SEC. 205. ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING.

Section 312 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(104 Stat. 4639-4640) is amended--
(1) in each of subsections (a), (b), and (c) by inserting
``and remediate'' after ``remove'' each place it appears;
(2) in subsection (b)(1) by inserting ``and remediation''
after ``removal'' each place it appears;
(3) in subsection (b)(2) by striking ``$10,000,000'' and
inserting ``$30,000,000''; and
(4) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
``(f) In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall
give priority to work in the following areas:
``(1) Brooklyn Waterfront, New York.
``(2) Buffalo Harbor and River, New York.
``(3) Ashtabula River, Ohio.
``(4) Mahoning River, Ohio.
``(5) Lower Fox River, Wisconsin.''.

SEC. 206. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

(a) General Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to
carry out aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection
projects when the Secretary determines that such projects
will improve the quality of the environment and are in the
public interest and that the environmental and economic
benefits, both monetary and nonmonetary, of the project to be
undertaken pursuant to this section justify the cost.
(b) Cost Sharing.--Non-Federal interests shall provide 50
percent of the cost of construction of any project carried
out under this section, including provision of all lands,
easements, rights-of-way, and necessary relocations.
(c) Agreements.--Construction of a project under this
section shall be initiated only after a non-Federal interest
has entered into a binding agreement with the Secretary to
pay the non-Federal share of the costs of construction
required by this section and to pay 100 percent of any
operation, maintenance, and replacement and rehabilitation
costs with respect to the project in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
(d) Cost Limitation.--Not more than $5,000,000 in Federal
funds may be allotted under this section for a project at any
single locality.
(e) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated not to
exceed $25,000,000 annually to carry out this section.

SEC. 207. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.

Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4826) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Selection of Dredged Material Disposal Method.--In
developing and carrying out a project for navigation
involving the disposal of dredged material, 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 such
disposal method are minimal and that the benefits to the
aquatic environment to be derived from such disposal method,
including the creation of wetlands and control of shoreline
erosion, justify its selection. The Federal share of such
incremental costs shall be determined in accordance with
subsection (c).''.

SEC. 208. RECREATION POLICY AND USER FEES.

(a) Recreation Policies.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide increased
emphasis on and opportunities for recreation at water
resources projects operated, maintained, or constructed by
the Corps of Engineers.
(2) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on specific measures taken to implement
this subsection.
(b) Recreation User Fees.--Section 210(b) of the Flood
Control Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d-3(b)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(5) Use of fees collected at facility.--Subject to
advance appropriations, the Secretary of the Army shall
ensure that at least an amount equal to the total amount of
fees collected at any project under this subsection in a
fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1996, are expended
in the succeeding fiscal year at such project for operation
and maintenance of recreational facilities at such
project.''.

[[Page H8700]]

SEC. 209. RECOVERY OF COSTS.

Amounts recovered under section 107 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) for any response action taken by the
Secretary in support of the Army Civil Works program and any
other amounts recovered by the Secretary from a contractor,
insurer, surety, or other person to reimburse the Army for
any expenditure for environmental response activities in
support of the Army civil works program shall be credited to
the appropriate trust fund account from which the cost of
such response action has been paid or will be charged.

SEC. 210. COST SHARING OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS.

(a) In General.--Section 103(c) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(c)) 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 ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new
paragraph:
``(7) subject to section 906 of this Act, environmental
protection and restoration: 50 percent.''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
apply only to projects authorized after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 211. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS BY NON-
FEDERAL INTERESTS.

(a) Authority.--Non-Federal interests are authorized to
undertake flood control projects in the United States,
subject to obtaining any permits required pursuant to Federal
and State laws in advance of actual construction.
(b) Studies and Design Activities.--
(1) By non-federal interests.--A non-Federal interest may
prepare, for review and approval by the Secretary, the
necessary studies and design documents for any construction
to be undertaken pursuant to subsection (a).
(2) By secretary.--Upon request of an appropriate non-
Federal interest, the Secretary may undertake all necessary
studies and design activities for any construction to be
undertaken pursuant to subsection (a) and provide technical
assistance in obtaining all necessary permits for such
construction if the non-Federal interest contracts with the
Secretary to furnish the United States funds for the studies
and design activities during the period that the studies and
design activities will be conducted.
(c) Completion of Studies and Design Activities.--In the
case of any study or design documents for a flood control
project that were initiated before the date of the enactment
of this Act, the Secretary is authorized to complete and
transmit to the appropriate non-Federal interests the study
or design documents or, upon the request of such non-Federal
interests, to terminate the study or design activities and
transmit the partially completed study or design documents to
such non-Federal interests for completion. Studies and design
documents subject to this subsection shall be completed
without regard to the requirements of subsection (b).
(d) Authority To Carry Out Improvement.--
(1) In general.--Any non-Federal interest which has
received from the Secretary pursuant to subsection (b) or (c)
a favorable recommendation to carry out a flood control
project or separable element thereof based on the results of
completed studies and design documents for the project or
element, may carry out the project or element if a final
environmental impact statement has been filed for the project
or element.
(2) Permits.--Any plan of improvement proposed to be
implemented in accordance with this subsection shall be
deemed to satisfy the requirements for obtaining the
appropriate permits required under the Secretary's authority
and such permits shall be granted subject to the non-Federal
interest's acceptance of the terms and conditions of such
permits if the Secretary determines that the applicable
regulatory criteria and procedures have been satisfied.
(3) Monitoring.--The Secretary shall monitor any project
for which a permit is granted under this subsection in order
to ensure that such project is constructed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with the terms and conditions of
such permit.
(e) Reimbursement.--
(1) General rule.--Subject to appropriation Acts, the
Secretary is authorized to reimburse any non-Federal interest
an amount equal to the estimate of the Federal share, without
interest, of the cost of any authorized flood control
project, or separable element thereof, constructed pursuant
to this section--
(A) if, after authorization and before initiation of
construction of the project or separable element, the
Secretary approves the plans for construction of such project
by the non-Federal interest; and
(B) if the Secretary finds, after a review of studies and
design documents prepared pursuant to this section, that
construction of the project or separable element is
economically justified and environmentally acceptable.
(2) Special rules.--
(A) Reimbursement.--For work (including work associated
with studies, planning, design, and construction) carried out
by a non-Federal interest with respect to a project described
in subsection (f), the Secretary shall, subject to amounts
being made available in advance in appropriations Acts,
reimburse, without interest, the non-Federal interest an
amount equal to the estimated Federal share of the cost of
such work if such work is later recommended by the Chief of
Engineers and approved by the Secretary.
(B) Credit.--If the non-Federal interest for a project
described in subsection (f) carries out work before
completion of a reconnaissance study by the Secretary and if
such work is determined by the Secretary to be compatible
with the project later recommended by the Secretary, the
Secretary shall credit the non-Federal interest for its share
of the cost of the project for such work.
(3) Matters to be considered in reviewing plans.--In
reviewing plans under this subsection, the Secretary shall
consider budgetary and programmatic priorities and other
factors that the Secretary deems appropriate.
(4) Monitoring.--The Secretary shall regularly monitor and
audit any project for flood control approved for construction
under this section by a non-Federal interest in order to
ensure that such construction is in compliance with the plans
approved by the Secretary and that the costs are reasonable.
(5) Limitation on reimbursements.--No reimbursement shall
be made under this section unless and until the Secretary has
certified that the work for which reimbursement is requested
has been performed in accordance with applicable permits and
approved plans.
(f) Specific Projects.--For the purpose of demonstrating
the potential advantages and effectiveness of non-Federal
implementation of flood control projects, the Secretary shall
enter into agreements pursuant to this section with non-
Federal interests for development of the following flood
control projects by such interests:
(1) Berryessa creek, california.--The Berryessa Creek
element of the project for flood control, Coyote and
Berryessa Creeks, California, authorized by section 101(a)(5)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat.
4606); except that, subject to the approval of the Secretary
as provided by this section, the non-Federal interest may
design and construct an alternative to such element.
(2) Los angeles county drainage area, california.--The
project for flood control, Los Angeles County Drainage Area,
California, authorized by section 101(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611).
(3) Stockton metropolitan area, california.--The project
for flood control, Stockton Metropolitan Area, California.
(4) Upper guadalupe river, california.--The project for
flood control, Upper Guadalupe River, California.
(5) Brays bayou, texas.--Flood control components
comprising the Brays Bayou element of the project for flood
control, Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries, Texas, authorized by
section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1990 (104 Stat. 4610); except that, subject to the approval
of the Secretary as provided by this section, the non-Federal
interest may design and construct an alternative to the
diversion component of such element.
(6) Hunting bayou, texas.--The Hunting Bayou element of the
project for flood control, Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries,
Texas, authorized by such section; except that, subject to
the approval of the Secretary as provided by this section,
the non-Federal interest may design and construct an
alternative to such element.
(7) White oak bayou, texas.--The project for flood control,
White Oak Bayou watershed, Texas.
(g) Treatment of Flood Damage Prevention Measures.--For the
purposes of this section, flood damage prevention measures at
or in the vicinity of Morgan City and Berwick, Louisiana,
shall be treated as an authorized element of the Atchafalaya
Basin feature of the project for flood control, Mississippi
River and Tributaries.

SEC. 212. ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATIONS OF
NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

(a) Surveys, Plans, and Studies.--To encourage innovative
and environmentally sound engineering solutions and
innovative environmental solutions to problems of national
significance, the Secretary may undertake surveys, plans, and
studies and prepare reports which may lead to work under
existing civil works authorities or to recommendations for
authorizations.
(b) Funding.--
(1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000 for
each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1996.
(2) Funding from other sources.--The Secretary may accept
and expend additional funds from other Federal agencies,
States, or non-Federal entities for purposes of carrying out
this section.

SEC. 213. LEASE AUTHORITY.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary
may lease space available in buildings for which funding for
construction or purchase was provided from the revolving fund
established by the 1st section of the Civil Functions
Appropriations Act, 1954 (33 U.S.C. 576; 67 Stat. 199) under
such terms and conditions as are acceptable to the Secretary.
The proceeds from such leases shall be credited to the
revolving fund for the purposes set forth in such Act.

[[Page H8701]]

SEC. 214. COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

(a) Funding From Other Federal Sources.--Section 7 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4022-4023)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by inserting ``civil works'' before
``mission''; and
(2) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:
``(e) Funding From Other Federal Sources.--The Secretary
may accept and expend additional funds from other Federal
programs, including other Department of Defense programs, to
carry out the purposes of this section.''.
(b) Pre-Agreement Temporary Protection of Technology.--Such
section 7 is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) as
subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f), respectively;
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection:
``(b) Pre-Agreement Temporary Protection of Technology.--
``(1) In general.--If the Secretary determines that
information developed as a result of research and development
activities conducted by the Corps of Engineers is likely to
be subject to a cooperative research and development
agreement within 2 years of its development and that such
information would be a trade secret or commercial or
financial information that would be privileged or
confidential if the information had been obtained from a non-
Federal party participating in a cooperative research and
development agreement under section 12 of the Stevenson-
Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980, the Secretary may
provide appropriate protection against the dissemination of
such information, including exemption from subchapter II of
chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, until the earlier
of the date the Secretary enters into such an agreement with
respect to such technology or the last day of the 2-year
period beginning on the date of such determination.
``(2) Treatment.--Any technology covered by this section
which becomes the subject of a cooperative research and
development agreement shall be accorded the protection
provided under section 12(c)(7)(B) of such Act (15 U.S.C.
3710a(c)(7)(B)) as if such technology had been developed
under a cooperative research and development agreement.'';
and
(3) in subsection (d), as so redesignated, by striking
``(b)'' and inserting ``(c)''.

SEC. 215. DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the
``National Dam Safety Program Act of 1996''.
(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Dams are an essential part of the national
infrastructure. Dams fail from time to time with catastrophic
results; thus, dam safety is a vital public concern.
(2) Dam failures have caused, and can cause in the future,
enormous loss of life, injury, destruction of property, and
economic and social disruption.
(3) Some dams are at or near the end of their structural,
useful, or operational life. With respect to future dam
failures, the loss, destruction, and disruption can be
substantially reduced through the development and
implementation of dam safety hazard reduction measures,
including--
(A) improved design and construction standards and
practices supported by a national dam performance resource
bank;
(B) safe operations and maintenance procedures;
(C) early warning systems;
(D) coordinated emergency preparedness plans; and
(E) public awareness and involvement programs.
(4) Dam safety problems persist nationwide. The diversity
in Federal and State dam safety programs calls for national
leadership in a cooperative effort involving Federal and
State governments and the private sector. An expertly staffed
and adequately financed dam safety hazard reduction program,
based on Federal, State, local, and private research,
planning, decisionmaking, and contributions, would reduce the
risk of such loss, destruction, and disruption from dam
failure by an amount far greater than the cost of such
program.
(5) There is a fundamental need for a national dam safety
program and the need will continue. An effective national
program in dam safety hazards reduction will require input
from and review by Federal and non-Federal experts in dams
design, construction, operation, and maintenance and in the
practical application of dam failure hazards reduction
measures. At the present time, there is no national dam
safety program.
(6) The coordinating authority for national leadership is
provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
(hereinafter in this section referred to as ``FEMA'') dam
safety program through Executive Order 12148 in coordination
with appropriate Federal agencies and the States.
(7) While FEMA's dam safety program shall continue as a
proper Federal undertaking and shall provide the foundation
for a National Dam Safety Program, statutory authority to
meet increasing needs and to discharge Federal
responsibilities in national dam safety is needed.
(8) Statutory authority will strengthen FEMA's leadership
role, will codify the national dam safety program, and will
authorize the Director of FEMA (hereinafter in this section
referred to as the ``Director'') to communicate directly with
Congress on authorizations and appropriations and to build
upon the hazard reduction aspects of national dam safety.
(c) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section to reduce
the risks to life and property from dam failure in the United
States through the establishment and maintenance of an
effective national dam safety program which will bring
together the Federal and non-Federal communities' expertise
and resources to achieve national dam safety hazard
reduction. It is not the intent of this section to preempt
any other Federal or State authorities nor is the intent of
this section to mandate State participation in the grant
assistance program to be established under this section.
(d) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
(1) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' means any
Federal agency that designs, finances, constructs, owns,
operates, maintains, or regulates the construction,
operation, or maintenance of any dam.
(2) Non-federal agency.--The term ``non-Federal agency''
means any State agency that has regulatory authority over the
safety of non-Federal dams.
(3) Federal guidelines for dam safety.--The term ``Federal
Guidelines for Dam Safety'' refers to a FEMA publication
number 93, dated June 1979, which defines management
practices for dam safety at all Federal agencies.
(4) Program.--The term ``program'' means the national dam
safety program established under subsection (e).
(5) Dam.--The term ``dam'' means any artificial barrier
with the ability to impound water, wastewater, or liquid-
borne materials for the purpose of storage or control of
water which is--
(A) 25 feet or more in height from (i) the natural bed of
the stream or watercourse measured at the downstream toe of
the barrier, or (ii) from the lowest elevation of the outside
limit of the barrier if the barrier is not across a stream
channel or watercourse, to the maximum water storage
elevation; or
(B) has an impounding capacity for maximum storage
elevation of 50 acre-feet or more.
Such term does not include any such barrier which is not
greater than 6 feet in height regardless of storage capacity
or which has a storage capacity at maximum water storage
elevation not greater than 15 acre-feet regardless of height,
unless such barrier, due to its location or other physical
characteristics, is likely to pose a significant threat to
human life or property in the event of its failure. Such term
does not include a levee.
(6) Hazard reduction.--The term ``hazard reduction'' means
those efforts utilized to reduce the potential consequences
of dam failure to life and property.
(7) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States
of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United
States.
(8) Participating state.--The term ``participating State''
means any State that elects to participate in the grant
assistance program established under this Act.
(9) United states.--The term ``United States'' means, when
used in a geographical sense, all of the States.
(10) Model state dam safety program.--The term ``Model
State Dam Safety Program'' refers to a document, published by
FEMA (No. 123, dated April 1987) and its amendments,
developed by State dam safety officials, which acts as a
guideline to State dam safety agencies for establishing a dam
safety regulatory program or improving an already-established
program.
(e) National Dam Safety Program.--
(1) Authority.--The Director, in consultation with
appropriate Federal agencies, State dam safety agencies, and
the National Dam Safety Review Board established by paragraph
(5)(C), shall establish and maintain, in accordance with the
provisions and policies of this Act, a coordinated national
dam safety program. This program shall--
(A) be administered by FEMA to achieve the objectives set
forth in paragraph (3);
(B) involve, where appropriate, the Departments of
Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, and Labor, the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, the International Boundaries Commission (United
States section), the Tennessee Valley Authority, and FEMA;
and
(C) include each of the components described in paragraph
(4), the implementation plan described in paragraph (5), and
the assistance for State dam safety programs to be provided
under this section.
(2) Duties.--The Director--
(A) within 270 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, shall develop the implementation plan described in
paragraph (5);
(B) within 300 days after such date of enactment, shall
submit to the appropriate authorizing committees of Congress
the implementation plan described in paragraph (5); and
(C) by rule within 360 days after such date of enactment--
(i) shall develop and implement the national dam safety
program under this section;
(ii) shall establish goals, priorities, and target dates
for implementation of the program; and

[[Page H8702]]

(iii) shall provide a method for cooperation and
coordination with, and assistance to (as feasible),
interested governmental entities in all States.
(3) Objectives.--The objectives of the national dam safety
program are as follows:
(A) To ensure that new and existing dams are safe through
the development of technologically and economically feasible
programs and procedures for national dam safety hazard
reduction.
(B) To encourage acceptable engineering policies and
procedures used for dam site investigation, design,
construction, operation and maintenance, and emergency
preparedness.
(C) To encourage establishment and implementation of
effective dam safety programs in each participating State
based on State standards.
(D) To develop and encourage public awareness projects to
increase public acceptance and support of State dam safety
programs.
(E) To develop technical assistance materials for Federal
and non-Federal dam safety programs.
(F) To develop mechanisms with which to provide Federal
technical assistance for dam safety to the non-Federal
sector.
(4) Components.--
(A) In general.--The national dam safety program shall
consist of a Federal element and a non-Federal element and 3
functional activities: leadership, technical assistance, and
public awareness.
(B) Elements.--
(i) Federal element.--The Federal element of the program
incorporates all the activities and practices undertaken by
Federal agencies to implement the Federal Guidelines for Dam
Safety.
(ii) Non-federal element.--The non-Federal element of the
program involves the activities and practices undertaken by
participating States, local governments, and the private
sector to safely build, regulate, operate, and maintain dams
and Federal activities which foster State efforts to develop
and implement effective programs for the safety of dams.
(C) Activities.--
(i) Leadership activity.--The leadership activity of the
program shall be the responsibility of FEMA. FEMA shall
coordinate Federal efforts in cooperation with appropriate
Federal agencies and State dam safety agencies.
(ii) Technical assistance activity.--The technical
assistance activity of the program involves the transfer of
knowledge and technical information among the Federal and
non-Federal elements.
(iii) Public awareness activity.--The public awareness
activity provides for the education of the public, including
State and local officials, to the hazards of dam failure and
ways to reduce the adverse consequences of dam failure and
related matters.
(5) Grant assistance program.--The Director shall develop
an implementation plan which shall demonstrate dam safety
improvements through fiscal year 2001 and shall recommend
appropriate roles for Federal agencies and for State and
local units of government, individuals, and private
organizations. The implementation plan shall provide, at a
minimum, for the following:
(A) Assistance program.--In order to encourage the
establishment and maintenance of effective programs intended
to ensure dam safety to protect human life and property and
to improve such existing programs, the Director shall
provide, from amounts made available under subsection (g) of
this section, assistance to participating States to establish
and maintain dam safety programs, first, according to the
basic provisions for a dam safety program listed below and,
second, according to more advanced requirements and standards
authorized by the review board under subparagraph (C) and the
Director with the assistance of established criteria such as
the Model State Dam Safety Program. Participating State dam
safety programs must be working toward meeting the following
primary criteria to be eligible for primary assistance or
must meet the following primary criteria prior to working
toward advanced assistance:
(i) State legislation.--A dam safety program must be
authorized by State legislation to include, at a minimum, the
following:

(I) Plan review and approval.--Authority to review and
approve plans and specifications to construct, enlarge,
modify, remove, or abandon dams.
(II) Periodic inspections during construction.--Authority
to perform periodic inspections during construction for the
purpose of ensuring compliance with approved plans and
specifications.
(III) State approval.--Upon completion of construction, a
requirement that, before operation of the structure, State
approval is received.
(IV) Safety inspections.--Authority to require or perform
the inspection of all dams and reservoirs that pose a
significant threat to human life and property in the event of
failure at least every 5 years to determine their continued
safety and a procedure for more detailed and frequent safety
inspections.
(V) Professional engineer.--A requirement that all
inspections be performed under the supervision of a
registered professional engineer with related experience in
dam design and construction.
(VI) Orders.--Authority to issue orders, when appropriate,
to require owners of dams to perform necessary maintenance or
remedial work, revise operating procedures, or take other
actions, including breaching dams when deemed necessary.
(VII) Regulations.--Rules and regulations for carrying out
the provisions of the State's legislative authority.
(VIII) Emergency funds.--Necessary emergency funds to
assure timely repairs or other changes to, or removal of, a
dam in order to protect human life and property and, if the
owner does not take action, to take appropriate action as
expeditiously as possible.
(IX) Emergency procedures.--A system of emergency
procedures that would be utilized in the event a dam fails or
in the event a dam's failure is imminent, together with an
identification of those dams where failure could be
reasonably expected to endanger human life and of the maximum
area that could be inundated in the event of a failure of the
dam, as well as identification of those necessary public
facilities that would be affected by such inundation.

(ii) State appropriations.--State appropriations must be
budgeted to carry out the provisions of the State
legislation.
(B) Work plan contracts.--The Director shall enter into
contracts with each participating State to determine a work
plan necessary for a particular State dam safety program to
reach a level of program performance previously agreed upon
in the contract. Federal assistance under this section shall
be provided to aid the State dam safety program in achieving
its goal.
(C) National dam safety review board.--
(i) In general.--There is authorized to be established a
National Dam Safety Review Board (hereinafter in this section
referred to as the ``Board''), which shall be responsible for
monitoring participating State implementation of the
requirements of the assistance program. The Board is
authorized to utilize the expertise of other agencies of the
United States and to enter into contracts for necessary
studies to carry out the requirements of this section. The
Board shall consist of 11 members selected for their
expertise in dam safety as follows:

(I) 5 to represent FEMA, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, and the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, and
Interior.
(II) 5 members selected by the Director who are dam safety
officials of States.
(III) 1 member selected by the Director to represent the
United States Committee on Large Dams.

(ii) No compensation of members.--Each member of the Board
who is an officer or employee of the United States shall
serve without compensation in addition to compensation
received for the services of the member as an officer or
employee of the United States. Each member of the Board who
is not an officer or employee of the United States shall
serve without compensation.
(iii) Travel expenses.--Each member of the Board shall be
allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for an employee of an agency
under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States
Code, while away from home or regular place of business of
the member in the performance of services for the Board.
(iv) Nonapplicability of federal advisory committee act.--
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not
apply to the Board.
(D) Maintenance of effort.--No grant may be made to a
participating State under this subsection in any fiscal year
unless the State enters into such agreement with the Director
as the Director may require to ensure that the participating
State will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other
sources for programs to assure dam safety for the protection
of human life and property at or above the average level of
such expenditures in its 2 fiscal years preceding the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(E) Procedure for approval of state participation.--Any
program which is submitted to the Director for participation
in the assistance program under this subsection shall be
deemed approved 120 days following its receipt by the
Director unless the Director determines within such 120-day
period that the submitted program fails to reasonably meet
the requirements of subparagraphs (A) and (B). If the
Director determines the submitted program cannot be approved
for participation, the Director shall immediately notify the
State in writing, together with his or her reasons and those
changes needed to enable the submitted program to be
approved.
(F) Review of state programs.--Utilizing the expertise of
the Board, the Director shall periodically review the
approved State dam safety programs. In the event the Board
finds that a program of a participating State has proven
inadequate to reasonably protect human life and property and
the Director agrees, the Director shall revoke approval of
the State's participation in the assistance program and
withhold assistance under this section, until the State
program has been reapproved.
(G) Cooperation of federal agencies.--The head of any
Federal agency, when requested by any State dam safety
agency, shall provide information on the construction,
operation, or maintenance of any dam or allow officials of
the State agency to participate in any Federal inspection of
any dam.
(H) Dam insurance report.--Within 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall report to
the Congress on the availability of dam insurance and make
recommendations.

[[Page H8703]]

(f) Biennial Report.--Within 90 days after the last day of
each odd-numbered fiscal year, the Director shall submit a
biennial report to Congress describing the status of the
program being implemented under this section and describing
the progress achieved by the Federal agencies during the 2
previous years in implementing the Federal Guidelines for Dam
Safety. Each such report shall include any recommendations
for legislative and other action deemed necessary and
appropriate. The report shall also include a summary of the
progress being made in improving dam safety by participating
States.
(g) Authorizing of Appropriations.--
(1) General program.--
(A) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Director to carry out the provisions of subsections (e)
and (f) (in addition to any authorizations for similar
purposes included in other Acts and the authorizations set
forth in paragraphs (2) through (5) of this subsection)--
(i) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1997;
(ii) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;
(iii) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;
(iv) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
(v) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.
(B) Apportionment formula.--
(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), sums appropriated
under this paragraph shall be distributed annually among
participating States on the following basis: One-third among
those States determined in subsection (e) as qualifying for
funding, and two-thirds in proportion to the number of dams
and appearing as State-regulated dams on the National Dam
Inventory in each participating State that has been
determined in subsection (e)(5)(A) as qualifying for funding,
to the number of dams in all participating States.
(ii) Limitation to 50 percent of cost.--In no event shall
funds distributed to any State under this paragraph exceed 50
percent of the reasonable cost of implementing an approved
dam safety program in such State.
(iii) Allocation between primary and advanced assistance
programs.-- The Director and Review Board shall determine how
much of funds appropriated under this paragraph is allotted
to participating States needing primary funding and those
needing advanced funding.
(2) Training.--
(A) In general.--The Director shall, at the request of any
State that has or intends to develop a dam safety program
under subsection (e)(5)(A), provide training for State dam
safety staff and inspectors.
(B) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this paragraph $500,000 for each of fiscal years
1997 through 2001.
(3) Research.--
(A) In general.--The Director shall undertake a program of
technical and archival research in order to develop improved
techniques, historical experience, and equipment for rapid
and effective dam construction, rehabilitation, and
inspection, together with devices for the continued
monitoring, of dams for safety purposes.
(B) State participation; reports.--The Director shall
provide for State participation in the research under this
paragraph and periodically advise all States and Congress of
the results of such research.
(C) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this paragraph $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years
1997 through 2001.
(4) Dam inventory.--
(A) Maintenance and publication.--The Secretary is
authorized to maintain and periodically publish updated
information on the inventory of dams.
(B) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this paragraph $500,000 for each of fiscal years
1997 through 2001.
(5) Personnel.--
(A) Employment.--The Director is authorized to employ
additional staff personnel in numbers sufficient to carry out
the provisions of this section.
(B) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this paragraph $400,000 for each of fiscal years
1997 through 2001.
(6) Limitation.--No funds authorized by this section shall
be used to construct or repair any Federal or non-Federal
dams.
(h) Conforming Amendments.--The Act entitled ``An Act to
authorize the Secretary of the Army to undertake a national
program of inspection of dams'', approved August 8, 1972 (33
U.S.C 467-467m; Public Law 92-367), is amended--
(1) in the first section by striking ``means any artificial
barrier'' and all that follows through the period at the end
and inserting ``has the meaning such term has under
subsection (d) of the National Dam Safety Program Act of
1996.'';
(2) by striking the 2d sentence of section 3;
(3) by striking section 5 and sections 7 through 14; and
(4) by redesignating section 6 as section 5.

SEC. 216. MAINTENANCE, REHABILITATION, AND MODERNIZATION OF
FACILITIES.

In accomplishing the maintenance, rehabilitation, and
modernization of hydroelectric power generating facilities at
water resources projects under the jurisdiction of the
Department of the Army, the Secretary is authorized to
increase the efficiency of energy production and the capacity
of these facilities if, after consulting with other
appropriate Federal and State agencies, the Secretary
determines that such uprating--
(1) is economically justified and financially feasible;
(2) will not result in significant adverse effects on the
other purposes for which the project is authorized;
(3) will not result in significant adverse environmental
impacts; and
(4) will not involve major structural or operation changes
in the project.

SEC. 217. LONG-TERM SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES.

(a) Development.--The Secretary shall enter into
cooperative agreements with non-Federal sponsors of
navigation projects for development of long-term management
strategies for controlling sediments in such projects.
(b) Contents of Strategies.--Each strategy developed under
this section for a navigation project--
(1) shall include assessments of the following with respect
to the project: sediment rates and composition, sediment
reduction options, dredging practices, long-term management
of any dredged material disposal facilities, remediation of
such facilities, and alternative disposal and reuse options;
(2) shall include a timetable for implementation of the
strategy; and
(3) shall incorporate, as much as possible, relevant
ongoing planning efforts, including remedial action planning,
dredged material management planning, harbor and waterfront
development planning, and watershed management planning.
(c) Consultation.--In developing strategies under this
section, the Secretary shall consult with interested Federal
agencies, States, and Indian tribes and provide an
opportunity for public comment.

SEC. 218. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITY PARTNERSHIPS.

(a) Additional Capacity.--
(1) Provided by secretary.--At the request of a non-Federal
project sponsor, the Secretary may provide additional
capacity at a dredged material disposal facility constructed
by the Secretary beyond that which would be required for
project purposes if the non-Federal project sponsor agrees to
pay, during the period of construction, all costs associated
with the construction of the additional capacity.
(2) Cost recovery authority.--The non-Federal project
sponsor may recover the costs assigned to the additional
capacity through fees assessed on 3rd parties whose dredged
material is deposited in the facility and who enter into
agreements with the non-Federal sponsor for the use of such
facility. The amount of such fees may be determined by the
non-Federal sponsor.
(b) Non-Federal use of Disposal Facilities.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary--
(A) may permit the use of any dredged material disposal
facility under the jurisdiction of, or managed by, the
Secretary by a non-Federal interest if the Secretary
determines that such use will not reduce the availability of
the facility for project purposes; and
(B) may impose fees to recover capital, operation, and
maintenance costs associated with such use.
(2) Use of fees.--Notwithstanding section 401(c) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act but subject to advance
appropriations, any monies received through collection of
fees under this subsection shall be available to the
Secretary, and shall be used by the Secretary, for the
operation and maintenance of the disposal facility from which
they were collected.
(c) Public-Private Partnerships.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may carry out a program to
evaluate and implement opportunities for public-private
partnerships in the design, construction, management, or
operation of dredged material disposal facilties in
connection with construction or maintenance of Federal
navigation projects.
(2) Private financing.--
(A) Agreements.--In carrying out this subsection, the
Secretary may enter into an agreement with a project sponsor,
a private entity, or both for the acquisition, design,
construction, management, or operation of a dredged material
disposal facility (including any facility used to demonstrate
potential beneficial uses of dredged material) using funds
provided in whole or in part by the private entity.
(B) Reimbursement.--If any funds provided by a private
entity are used to carry out a project under this subsection,
the Secretary may reimburse the private entity over a period
of time agreed to by the parties to the agreement through the
payment of subsequent user fees. Such fees may include the
payment of a disposal or tipping fee for placement of
suitable dredged material at the facility.
(C) Amount of fees.--User fees paid pursuant to
subparagraph (B) shall be sufficient to repay funds
contributed by the private entity plus a reasonable return on
investment approved by the Secretary in cooperation with the
project sponsor and the private entity.
(D) Federal share.--The Federal share of such fee shall be
equal to the percentage of the total cost which would
otherwise be borne by the Federal Government as required
pursuant to existing cost sharing requirements, including
section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2213) and section 204 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2325).
(E) Budget act compliance.--Any spending authority (as
defined in section 401(c)(2)

[[Page H8704]]

of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 651(c)(2))
authorized by this section shall be effective only to such
extent and in such amounts as are provided in appropriation
Acts.

SEC. 219. OBSTRUCTION REMOVAL REQUIREMENT.

(a) Penalty.--Section 16 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33
U.S.C. 411; 30 Stat. 1153), is amended--
(1) by striking ``thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen'' each
place it appears and inserting ``13, 14, 15, 19, and 20'';
and
(2) by striking ``not exceeding twenty-five hundred dollars
nor less than five hundred dollars'' and inserting ``of up to
$25,000 per day''.
(b) General Authority.--Section 20 of the Act of March 3,
1899 (33 U.S.C. 415; 30 Stat. 1154), is amended--
(1) by striking ``expense'' the first place it appears in
subsection (a) and inserting ``actual expense, including
administrative expenses,'';
(2) in subsection (b) by striking ``cost'' and inserting
``actual cost, including administrative costs,'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
(4) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection:
``(b) Removal Requirement.--Within 24 hours after the
Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is
operating issues an order to stop or delay navigation in any
navigable waters of the United States because of conditions
related to the sinking or grounding of a vessel, the owner or
operator of the vessel, with the approval of the Secretary of
the Army, shall begin removal of the vessel using the most
expeditious removal method available or, if appropriate,
secure the vessel pending removal to allow navigation to
resume. If the owner or operator fails to begin removal or to
secure the vessel pending removal or fails to complete
removal as soon as possible, the Secretary of the Army shall
remove or destroy the vessel using the summary removal
procedures under subsection (a) of this section.''.

SEC. 220. SMALL PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C.
701r) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$12,500,000'' and inserting
``$15,000,000''; and
(2) by striking ``$500,000'' and inserting ``$1,500,000''.

SEC. 221. UNECONOMICAL COST-SHARING REQUIREMENTS.

Section 221(a) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C.
1962d-5b) is amended by striking the period at the end of the
first sentence and inserting the following: ``; except that
no such agreement shall be required if the Secretary
determines that the administrative costs associated with
negotiating, executing, or administering the agreement would
exceed the amount of the contribution required from the non-
Federal interest and are less than $25,000.''.

SEC. 222. PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.

Section 22 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974
(42 U.S.C. 1962d-16) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by inserting ``, watersheds, or
ecosystems'' after ``basins'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking paragraph (2); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``$6,000,000'' and inserting
``$10,000,000''; and
(B) by striking ``$300,000'' and inserting ``$500,000''.

SEC. 223. CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.

Section 211 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (33 U.S.C.
701u; 64 Stat. 183) is amended--
(1) by striking ``continental limits of the''; and
(2) by striking the 2d colon and all that follows through
``for this purpose''.

SEC. 224. STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCY REVIEW PERIOD.

The 1st section of the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing
the construction of certain public works on rivers and
harbors for flood control, and other purposes'', approved
December 22, 1944 (33 U.S.C. 701-1(a); 58 Stat. 888), is
amended--
(1) by striking ``Within ninety'' and inserting ``Within
30''; and
(2) by striking ``ninety-day period.'' and inserting ``30-
day period.''.

SEC. 225. LIMITATION ON REIMBURSEMENT OF NON-FEDERAL COSTS
PER PROJECT.

Section 215(a) of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
1962d-5a(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$3,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,000,000''; and
(2) by striking the final period.

SEC. 226. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL.

(a) Additional Controlled Plants.--Section 104(a) of the
River and Harbor Act of 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610(a)) is amended by
inserting after ``alligatorweed,'' the following:
``melaleuca,''.
(b) Authorization.--Section 104(b) of such Act (33 U.S.C.
610(b)) is amended by striking ``$12,000,000'' and inserting
``$15,000,000''.

SEC. 227. SEDIMENTS DECONTAMINATION TECHNOLOGY.

(a) Project Purpose.--Section 405(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2239 note; 106 Stat. 4863)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Project purpose.--The purpose of the project to be
carried out under this section is to provide for the
development of 1 or more sediment decontamination
technologies on a pilot scale demonstrating a capacity of at
least 500,000 cubic yards per year.''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--The first sentence of
section 405(c) of such Act is amended to read as follows:
``There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
section $10,000,000 for fiscal years beginning after
September 30, 1996.''.
(c) Reports.--Section 405 of such Act is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(d) Reports.--Not later than September 30, 1998, and
periodically thereafter, the Administrator and the Secretary
shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of the
project to be carried out under this section, including an
assessment of the progress made in achieving the intent of
the program set forth in subsection (a)(3).''.

SEC. 228. SHORE PROTECTION.

(a) Declaration of Policy.--Subsection (a) of the first
section 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. 426e; 60 Stat. 1056), is amended--
(1) by striking ``damage to the shores'' and inserting
``damage to the shores and beaches''; and
(2) by striking ``the following provisions'' and all that
follows through the period at the end of subsection (a) and
inserting the following: ``this Act, to promote shore
protection projects and related research that encourage the
protection, restoration, and enhancement of sandy beaches,
including beach restoration and periodic beach nourishment,
on a comprehensive and coordinated basis by the Federal
Government, States, localities, and private enterprises. In
carrying out this policy, preference shall be given to areas
in which there has been a Federal investment of funds and
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.''.
(b) Nonpublic Shores.--Subsection (d) of such section is
amended by striking ``or from the protection of nearby public
property or'' and inserting ``, if there are sufficient
benefits, including benefits to local and regional economic
development and to the local and regional ecology (as
determined under subsection (e)(2)(B)), or''; and
(c) Authorization of Projects.--Subsection (e) of such
section is amended--
(1) by striking ``(e) No'' and inserting the following:
``(e) Authorization of Projects.--
``(1) In general.--No'';
(2) by moving the remainder of the text of paragraph (1)
(as designated by paragraph (1) of this subsection) 2 ems to
the right; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Studies.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall--
``(i) recommend to Congress studies concerning shore
protection projects that meet the criteria established under
this Act (including subparagraph (B)(iii)) and other
applicable law;
``(ii) conduct such studies as Congress requires under
applicable laws; and
``(iii) report the results of the studies to the
appropriate committees of Congress.
``(B) Recommendations for shore protection projects.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall recommend to
Congress the authorization or reauthorization of shore
protection projects based on the studies conducted under
subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Considerations.--In making recommendations, the
Secretary shall consider the economic and ecological benefits
of a shore protection project and the ability of the non-
Federal interest to participate in the project.
``(iii) Consideration of local and regional benefits.--In
analyzing the economic and ecological benefits of a shore
protection project, or a flood control or other water
resource project the purpose of which includes shore
protection, the Secretary shall consider benefits to local
and regional economic development, and to the local and
regional ecology, in calculating the full economic and
ecological justifications for the project.
``(C) Coordination of projects.--In conducting studies and
making recommendations for a shore protection project under
this paragraph, the Secretary shall--
``(i) determine whether there is any other project being
carried out by the Secretary or the head of another Federal
agency that may be complementary to the shore protection
project; and
``(ii) if there is such a complementary project, describe
the efforts that will be made to coordinate the projects.
``(3) Shore protection projects.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall construct, or cause
to be constructed, any shore protection project authorized by
Congress, or separable element of such a project, for which
funds have been appropriated by Congress.
``(B) Agreements.--
``(i) Requirement.--After authorization by Congress, and
before commencement of construction, of a shore protection
project or separable element, the Secretary shall enter into
a written agreement with a non-Federal interest with respect
to the project or separable element.
``(ii) Terms.--The agreement shall--

``(I) specify the life of the project; and
``(II) ensure that the Federal Government and the non-
Federal interest will cooperate in carrying out the project
or separable element.

[[Page H8705]]

``(C) Coordination of projects.--In constructing a shore
protection project or separable element under this paragraph,
the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, coordinate
the project or element with any complementary project
identified under paragraph (2)(C).
``(4) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall report
biennially to the appropriate committees of Congress on the
status of all ongoing shore protection studies and shore
protection projects carried out under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary.''.
(d) Requirement of Agreements Prior to Reimbursements.--
(1) Small shore protection projects.--Section 2 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. 426f; 60 Stat. 1056), is
amended--
(A) by striking ``Sec. 2. The Secretary of the Army'' and
inserting the following:

``SEC. 2. REIMBURSEMENTS.

``(a) In General.--The Secretary'';
(B) in subsection (a) (as so designated)--
(i) by striking ``local interests'' and inserting ``non-
Federal interests'';
(ii) by inserting ``or separable element of the project''
after ``project''; and
(iii) by inserting ``or separable elements'' after
``projects'' each place it appears; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Agreements.--
``(1) Requirement.--After authorization of reimbursement by
the Secretary under this section, and before commencement of
construction, of a shore protection project, the Secretary
shall enter into a written agreement with the non-Federal
interest with respect to the project or separable element.
``(2) Terms.--The agreement shall--
``(A) specify the life of the project; and
``(B) ensure that the Federal Government and the non-
Federal interest will cooperate in carrying out the project
or separable element.''.
(2) Other shoreline protection projects.--Section
206(e)(1)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(33 U.S.C. 426i-1(e)(1)(A); 106 Stat. 4829) is amended by
inserting before the semicolon the following: ``and enters
into a written agreement with the non-Federal interest with
respect to the project or separable element (including the
terms of cooperation)''.
(e) State and Regional Plans.--The Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting
the shores of publicly owned property'', approved August 13,
1946, is further amended--
(1) by redesignating section 4 (33 U.S.C. 426h) as section
5; and
(2) by inserting after section 3 (33 U.S.C. 426g) the
following:

``SEC. 4. STATE AND REGIONAL PLANS.

``The Secretary may--
``(1) cooperate with any State in the preparation of a
comprehensive State or regional plan for the conservation of
coastal resources located 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) Definitions.--
(1) In general.--Section 5 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. 426h), (as redesignated by subsection (e)(1))
is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

``In this Act, the following definitions apply:
``(1) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.
``(2) Separable element.--The term `separable element' has
the meaning provided by section 103(f) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(f)).
``(3) Shore.--The term `shore' includes each shoreline of
the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the Gulf of Mexico, the
Great Lakes, and lakes, estuaries, and bays directly
connected therewith.
``(4) Shore protection project.--The term `shore protection
project' includes a project for beach nourishment, including
the replacement of sand.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--The Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting
the shores of publicly owned property'', approved August 13,
1946, is amended--
(A) in subsection (b)(3) of the first section (33 U.S.C.
426e(b)(3)) by striking ``of the Army, acting through the
Chief of Engineers,'' and by striking the final period; and
(B) in section 3 (33 U.S.C. 426g) by striking ``Secretary
of the Army'' and inserting ``Secretary''.
(g) Objectives of Projects.--Section 209 of the Flood
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2; 84 Stat. 1829) is
amended by inserting ``(including shore protection projects
such as projects for beach nourishment, including the
replacement of sand)'' after ``water resource projects''.

SEC. 229. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Before'' at the beginning of the second
sentence and inserting ``Upon''; and
(2) by inserting ``planning, designing, or'' before
``construction'' in the last sentence.
(b) Technical Amendment.--Section 52 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1988 (33 U.S.C. 579a note; 102 Stat. 4044)
is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) as
subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d), respectively.

SEC. 230. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM.

(a) General Authority.--In carrying out research and
development in support of the civil works program of the
Department of the Army, the Secretary may utilize contracts,
cooperative research and development agreements, cooperative
agreements, and grants with non-Federal entities, including
State and local governments, colleges and universities,
consortia, professional and technical societies, public and
private scientific and technical foundations, research
institutions, educational organizations, and nonprofit
organizations.
(b) Special Rules.--With respect to contracts for research
and development, the Secretary may include requirements that
have potential commercial application and may also use such
potential application as an evaluation factor where
appropriate.

SEC. 231. BENEFITS TO NAVIGATION.

In evaluating potential improvements to navigation and the
maintenance of navigation projects, the Secretary shall
consider, and include for purposes of project justification,
economic benefits generated by cruise ships as commercial
navigation benefits.

SEC. 232. LOSS OF LIFE PREVENTION.

Section 904 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2281) is amended by inserting ``including the loss
of life which may be associated with flooding and coastal
storm events,'' after ``costs,''.

SEC. 233. SCENIC AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS.

In conducting studies of potential water resources
projects, the Secretary shall consider measures to preserve
and enhance scenic and aesthetic qualities in the vicinity of
such projects.

SEC. 234. REMOVAL OF STUDY PROHIBITIONS.

Nothing in section 208 of the Urgent Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 1986 (100 Stat. 749), section 505 of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1993 (106
Stat. 1343), or any other provision of law shall be deemed to
limit the authority of the Secretary to undertake studies for
the purpose of investigating alternative modes of financing
hydroelectric power facilities under the jurisdiction of the
Department of the Army with funds appropriated after the date
of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 235. SENSE OF CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT REGARDING NOTICE.

(a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products.--It
is the sense of Congress that, to the greatest extent
practicable, all equipment and products purchased with funds
made available under this Act should be American-made.
(b) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing
financial assistance under this Act, the Secretary, to the
greatest extent practicable, shall provide to each recipient
of the assistance a notice describing the statement made in
subsection (a).

SEC. 236. RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Section 310 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(33 U.S.C. 2319; 104 Stat. 4639) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a); and
(2) by striking ``(b) Public Participa-tion.--''.

SEC. 237. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

(a) Section 203 of 1992 Act.--Section 203(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4826) is amended
by striking ``(8662)'' and inserting ``(8862)''.
(b) Section 225 of 1992 Act.--Section 225(c) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4838) is amended
by striking ``(8662)'' in the second sentence and inserting
``(8862)''.
TITLE III--PROJECT MODIFICATIONS

SEC. 301. MOBILE HARBOR, ALABAMA.

The undesignated paragraph under the heading ``mobile
harbor, alabama'' in section 201(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4090) is amended by
striking the first semicolon and all that follows and
inserting a period and the following: ``In disposing of
dredged material from such project, the Secretary, after
compliance with applicable laws and after opportunity for
public review and comment, may consider alternatives to
disposal of such material in the Gulf of Mexico, including
environmentally acceptable alternatives for beneficial uses
of dredged material and environmental restoration.''.

SEC. 302. ALAMO DAM, ARIZONA.

The project for flood control and other purposes, Alamo Dam
and Lake, Arizona, authorized by section 10 of the River and
Harbor Act of December 22, 1944, (58 Stat. 900), is modified
to authorize the Secretary to operate the Alamo Dam to
provide fish and wildlife benefits both upstream and
downstream of the Dam. Such operation shall not reduce flood
control and recreation benefits provided by the project.

[[Page H8706]]

SEC. 303. NOGALES WASH AND TRIBUTARIES, 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), is
modified to direct the Secretary to permit the non-Federal
contribution for the project to be determined in accordance
with sections 103(k) and 103(m) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 and to direct the Secretary to enter
into negotiations with non-Federal interests pursuant to
section 103(l) of such Act concerning the timing of the
initial payment of the non-Federal contribution.

SEC. 304. PHOENIX, ARIZONA.

Section 321 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4848) is amended--
(1) by striking ``control'' and inserting ``control,
ecosystem restoration,''; and
(2) by striking ``$6,500,000.'' and inserting
``$17,500,000.''.

SEC. 305. SAN FRANCISCO RIVER AT CLIFTON, ARIZONA.

The project for flood control, San Francisco River,
Clifton, Arizona, authorized by section 101(a)(3) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4606), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project
at a total cost of $21,100,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $13,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$7,300,000.

SEC. 306. CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.

The project for navigation, Channel Islands Harbor, Port of
Hueneme, California, authorized by section 101 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1252) is modified to direct
the Secretary to pay 100 percent of the costs of dredging the
Channel Islands Harbor sand trap.

SEC. 307. GLENN-COLUSA, CALIFORNIA.

The project for flood control, Sacramento River,
California, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An
Act to provide for the control of the floods of the
Mississippi River and the Sacramento River, California, and
for other purposes'', approved March 1, 1917 (39 Stat. 948),
and as modified by section 102 of the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 649), is
further modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the
portion of the project at Glenn-Colusa, California, at a
total cost of $14,200,000.

SEC. 308. LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS, SAN PEDRO BAY,
CALIFORNIA.

The navigation project for Los Angeles and Long Beach
Harbors, San Pedro Bay, California, authorized by section
201(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100
Stat. 4091), is modified to provide that, notwithstanding
section 101(a)(4) of such Act, the cost of the relocation of
the sewer outfall by the Port of Los Angeles shall be
credited toward the payment required from the non-Federal
interest by section 101(a)(2) of such Act.

SEC. 309. OAKLAND HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.

The projects for navigation, Oakland Outer Harbor,
California, and Oakland Inner Harbor, California, authorized
by section 202 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4092), are modified by combining the 2 projects
into 1 project, to be designated as the Oakland Harbor,
California, project. The Oakland Harbor, California, project
shall be prosecuted by the Secretary substantially in
accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions
recommended in the reports designated in such section 202, at
a total cost of $90,850,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $59,150,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$31,700,000. The non-Federal share of project costs and any
available credits toward the non-Federal share shall be
calculated on the basis of the total cost of the combined
project.

SEC. 310. QUEENSWAY BAY, CALIFORNIA.

Section 4(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988
(102 Stat. 4016) is amended by adding at the end the
following sentence: ``In addition, the Secretary shall
perform advance maintenance dredging in the Queensway Bay
Channel, California, at a total cost of $5,000,000.''.

SEC. 311. SAN LUIS REY, CALIFORNIA.

The project for flood control of the San Luis Rey River,
California, authorized pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Control Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5; 79 Stat. 1073-1074),
is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the
project at a total cost not to exceed $81,600,000 with an
estimated Federal cost of $61,100,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $20,500,000.

SEC. 312. THAMES RIVER, CONNECTICUT.

(a) Reconfiguration of Turning Basin.--The project for
navigation, Thames River, Connecticut, authorized by the
first section of the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing
construction, repair, and preservation of certain public
works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes'',
approved August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1029), is modified to make
the turning basin have the following alignment: Starting at a
point on the eastern limit of the existing project,
N251052.93, E783934.59, thence running north 5 degrees 25
minutes 21.3 seconds east 341.06 feet to a point, N251392.46,
E783966.82, thence running north 47 degrees 24 minutes 14.0
seconds west 268.72 feet to a point, N251574.34, E783769.00,
thence running north 88 degrees 41 minutes 52.2 seconds west
249.06 feet to a point, N251580.00, E783520.00, thence
running south 46 degrees 16 minutes 22.9 seconds west 318.28
feet to a point, N251360.00, E783290.00, thence running south
19 degrees 01 minute 32.2 seconds east 306.76 feet to a
point, N251070.00, E783390.00, thence running south 45
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds east 155.56 feet to a point,
N250960.00, E783500.00 on the existing western limit.
(b) Non-Federal Responsibility for Initial Dredging.--Any
required initial dredging of the widened portions of the
turning basin identified in subsection (a) shall be
accomplished at non-Federal expense.
(c) Conforming Deauthorization.--Those portions of the
existing turning basin which are not included in the
reconfigured turning basin as described in subsection (a)
shall no longer be authorized after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

SEC. 313. POTOMAC RIVER, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

The project for flood protection, Potomac River,
Washington, District of Columbia, authorized by section 5 of
the Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 (74 Stat. 1574), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project
substantially in accordance with the General Design
Memorandum dated May 1992 at a Federal cost of $1,800,000;
except that a temporary closure may be used instead of a
permanent structure at 17th Street. Operation and maintenance
of the project shall be a Federal responsibility.

SEC. 314. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA.

The project for navigation, Canaveral Harbor, Florida,
authorized by section 101(7) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4802), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to reclassify the removal and
replacement of stone protection on both sides of the channel
as general navigation features. The Secretary shall reimburse
any costs that are incurred by the non-Federal sponsor in
connection with the reclassified work and that the Secretary
determines to be in excess of the non-Federal share of costs
for general navigation features. The Federal and non-Federal
shares of the cost of the reclassified work shall be
determined in accordance with section 101 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986.

SEC. 315. CAPTIVA ISLAND, FLORIDA.

The project for shoreline protection, Captiva Island, Lee
County, Florida, authorized pursuant to section 201 of the
Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073), is modified to
direct the Secretary to reimburse the non-Federal interest
for beach renourishment work accomplished by such interest as
if such work occurred after execution of the agreement
entered into pursuant to section 215 of the Flood Control Act
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5) with respect to such project.

SEC. 316. CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, CANAL 51.

The project for flood protection of West Palm Beach,
Florida (C-51), authorized by section 203 of the Flood
Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1183), is modified to provide
for the construction of an enlarged stormwater detention
area, Storm Water Treatment Area 1 East, generally in
accordance with the plan of improvements described in the
February 15, 1994, report entitled ``Everglades Protection
Project, Palm Beach County, Florida, Conceptual Design'',
with such modifications as are approved by the Secretary. The
additional work authorized by this subsection shall be
accomplished at Federal expense. Operation and maintenance of
the stormwater detention area shall be consistent with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary for the Central and
Southern Florida project, and all costs of such operation and
maintenance shall be provided by non-Federal interests.

SEC. 317. CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, CANAL 111 (C-111).

(a) In General.--The project for Central and Southern
Florida, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act
of 1948 (62 Stat. 1176) and modified by section 203 of the
Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 740-741), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to implement the recommended plan of
improvement contained in a report entitled ``Central and
Southern Florida Project, Final Integrated General
Reevaluation Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Canal
111 (C-111), South Dade County, Florida'', dated May 1994,
including acquisition by non-Federal interests of such
portions of the Frog Pond and Rocky Glades areas as are
needed for the project.
(b) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of
implementing the plan of improvement shall be 50 percent.
(2) Department of interior responsibility.--The Department
of the Interior shall pay 25 percent of the cost of acquiring
such portions of the Frog Pond and Rocky Glades areas as are
needed for the project. The amount paid by the Department of
the Interior shall be included as part of the Federal share
of the cost of implementing the plan.
(3) Operation and maintenance.--The non-Federal share of
operation and maintenance costs of the improvements
undertaken pursuant to this subsection shall be 100 percent;
except that the Federal Government shall reimburse the non-
Federal project sponsor 60 percent of the costs of operating
and maintaining pump stations that pump water into Taylor
Slough in the Everglades National Park.

SEC. 318. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR (MILL COVE), FLORIDA.

The project for navigation, Jacksonville Harbor (Mill
Cove), Florida, authorized by section 601(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4139-4140), is
modified to direct the Secretary to carry out

[[Page H8707]]

a project for flow and circulation improvement within Mill
Cove, at a total cost of $2,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $2,000,000.

SEC. 319. PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FLORIDA.

(a) In General.--The project for shoreline protection,
Panama City Beaches, Florida, authorized by section 501(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4133),
is modified to direct the Secretary to enter into an
agreement with the non-Federal interest for carrying out such
project in accordance with section 206 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4828).
(b) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the progress made in carrying out this
section.

SEC. 320. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA.

The project for beach erosion control, Tybee Island,
Georgia, authorized pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Control Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5), is modified to
include as an integral part of the project the portion of the
ocean shore of Tybee Island located south of the existing
south terminal groin between 18th and 19th Streets.

SEC. 321. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA.

The project for flood control, Indianapolis on West Fork of
the White River, Indiana, authorized by section 5 of the
Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1586), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to undertake riverfront
alterations as described in the Central Indianapolis
Waterfront Concept Master Plan, dated February 1994, at a
total cost of $85,975,000, with an estimated first Federal
cost of $39,975,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost
of $46,000,000. The cost of work, including relocations
undertaken by the non-Federal interest after February 15,
1994, on features identified in the Master Plan shall be
credited toward the non-Federal share of project costs.

SEC. 322. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

The project for flood control, Chicagoland Underflow Plan,
Illinois, authorized by section 3(a)(5) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4013), is
modified to limit the capacity of the reservoir project not
to exceed 11,000,000,000 gallons or 32,000 acre-feet, to
provide that the reservoir project may not be located north
of 55th Street or west of East Avenue in the vicinity of
McCook, Illinois, and to provide that the reservoir project
may only be constructed on the basis of a specific plan that
has been evaluated by the Secretary under the provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

SEC. 323. CHICAGO LOCK AND THOMAS J. O'BRIEN LOCK, ILLINOIS.

The project for navigation, Chicago Harbor, Lake Michigan,
Illinois, for which operation and maintenance responsibility
was transferred to the Secretary under chapter IV of title I
of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1983 (97 Stat. 311)
and section 107 of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriation Act, 1982 (95 Stat. 1137) is modified to direct
the Secretary to conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of making such structural repairs as are necessary to prevent
leakage through the Chicago Lock and the Thomas J. O'Brien
Lock, Illinois, and to determine the need for installing
permanent flow measurement equipment at such locks to measure
any leakage. The Secretary is authorized to carry out such
repairs and installations as are necessary following
completion of the study.

SEC. 324. KASKASKIA RIVER, ILLINOIS.

The project for navigation, Kaskaskia River, Illinois,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962
(76 Stat. 1175), is modified to add fish and wildlife and
habitat restoration as project purposes.

SEC. 325. LOCKS AND DAM 26, ALTON, ILLINOIS AND MISSOURI.

Section 102(l) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1990 (104 Stat. 4613) is amended--
(1) by striking ``, that requires no separable project
lands and'' and inserting ``on project lands and other
contiguous nonproject lands, including those lands referred
to as the Alton Commons. The recreational development'';
(2) by inserting ``shall be'' before ``at a Federal
construction''; and
(3) by striking ``. The recreational development'' and
inserting ``, and''.

SEC. 326. NORTH BRANCH OF CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS.

The project for flood protection, North Branch of the
Chicago River, Illinois, authorized by section 401(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4115), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project
in accordance with the report of the Corps of Engineers dated
March 1994, at a total cost of $34,228,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $20,905,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $13,323,000.

SEC. 327. ILLINOIS AND MICHIGAN CANAL.

Section 314(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4847) is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``Such improvements shall include marina
development at Lock 14, to be carried out in consultation
with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, at a total
cost of $6,374,000.''.

SEC. 328. HALSTEAD, KANSAS.

The project for flood control, Halstead, Kansas, authorized
by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4116), is modified to authorize the Secretary
to carry out the project in accordance with the report of the
Corps of Engineers dated March 19, 1993, at a total cost of
$11,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $8,325,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,775,000.

SEC. 329. LEVISA AND TUG FORKS OF THE BIG SANDY RIVER AND
CUMBERLAND RIVER, KENTUCKY, WEST VIRGINIA, AND
VIRGINIA.

The project for flood control, Levisa and Tug Forks of the
Big Sandy River and Cumberland River, Kentucky, West
Virginia, and Virginia, authorized by section 202(a) of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act, 1981 (94
Stat. 1339), is modified to provide that the minimum level of
flood protection to be afforded by the project shall be the
level required to provide protection from a 100-year flood or
from the flood of April 1977, whichever level of protection
is greater.

SEC. 330. PRESTONBURG, KENTUCKY.

Section 109(a) of Public Law 104-46 (109 Stat. 408) is
amended by striking ``Modification No. 2'' and inserting
``Modification No. 3''.

SEC. 331. COMITE RIVER, LOUISIANA.

The Comite River Diversion project for flood control,
authorized as part of the project for flood control, Amite
River and Tributaries, Louisiana, by section 101(11) of the
Water Resource Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4802-4803),
is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the
project at a total cost of $121,600,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $70,577,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $51,023,000.

SEC. 332. GRAND ISLE AND VICINITY, LOUISIANA.

The project for hurricane damage prevention, flood control,
and beach erosion along Grand Isle and Vicinity, Louisiana,
authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965
(79 Stat. 1077), is modified to authorize the Secretary to
construct a permanent breakwater and levee system at a total
cost of $17,000,000.

SEC. 333. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LOUISIANA.

The project for hurricane damage prevention and flood
control, Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, authorized by section
204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077), is
modified to provide that St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana, and
the Lake Borgne Basin Levee District, Louisiana, shall not be
required to pay the unpaid balance, including interest, of
the non-Federal cost-share of the project.

SEC. 334. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOUISIANA.

The Mississippi Delta Region project, Louisiana, authorized
as part of the project for hurricane-flood protection project
on Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, by section 204 of the Flood
Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077), is modified to direct
the Secretary to provide a credit to the State of Louisiana
toward its non-Federal share of the cost of the project. The
credit shall be for the cost incurred by the State in
developing and relocating oyster beds to offset the adverse
impacts on active and productive oyster beds in the Davis
Pond project area but shall not exceed $7,500,000.

SEC. 335. MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS, VENICE, LOUISIANA.

The project for navigation, Mississippi River Outlets,
Venice, Louisiana, authorized by section 101 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731), is modified to provide for
the extension of the 16-foot deep by 250-foot wide Baptiste
Collette Bayou entrance channel to approximately Mile 8 of
the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet navigation channel, at a
total estimated Federal cost of $80,000.

SEC. 336. RED RIVER WATERWAY, LOUISIANA.

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Red
River Waterway, Louisiana, authorized by section 601(a) of
the Water Resources and Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4142) and modified by section 102(p) of the Water Resources
and Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4613), is further
modified--
(1) to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project at
a total cost of $10,500,000; and
(2) to provide that lands that are purchased adjacent to
the Loggy Bayou Wildlife Management Area may be located in
Caddo Parish or Red River Parish.

SEC. 337. WESTWEGO TO HARVEY CANAL, LOUISIANA.

The project West Bank Hurricane Protection Levee, Jefferson
Parish, Louisiana, authorized by section 401(f) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4128), is
modified to include the Lake Cataouatche Area Levee as part
of the authorized project, at a total cost of $14,375,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $9,344,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $5,031,000.

SEC. 338. TOLCHESTER CHANNEL, MARYLAND.

The project for navigation, Baltimore Harbor and Channels,
Maryland, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 297) is modified to direct the
Secretary--
(1) to expedite review of potential straightening of the
channel at the Tolchester Channel S-Turn; and
(2) if determined to be feasible and necessary for safe and
efficient navigation, to implement such straightening as part
of project maintenance.

SEC. 339. SAGINAW RIVER, MICHIGAN.

The project for flood protection, Saginaw River, Michigan,
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1958
(72 Stat. 311) is modified to include as part of the project
the

[[Page H8708]]

design and construction of an inflatable dam on the Flint
River, Michigan, at a total cost of $500,000.

SEC. 340. SAULT SAINTE MARIE, CHIPPEWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

(a) In General.--The project for navigation, Sault Sainte
Marie, Chippewa County, Michigan, authorized by section 1149
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4254-4255), is modified as provided by this subsection.
(b) Payment of Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of
the cost of the project referred to in subsection (a) shall
be paid as follows:
(1) That portion of the non-Federal share which the
Secretary determines is attributable to use of the lock by
vessels calling at Canadian ports shall be paid by the United
States.
(2) The remaining portion of the non-Federal share shall be
paid by the Great Lakes States pursuant to an agreement
entered into by such States.
(c) Payment Term of Additional Percentage.--The amount to
be paid by non-Federal interests pursuant to section 101(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2211(a)) and this subsection with respect to the project
referred to in subsection (a) may be paid over a period of 50
years or the expected life of the project, whichever is
shorter.
(d) Great Lakes States Defined.--For the purposes of this
section, the term ``Great Lakes States'' means the States of
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

SEC. 341. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA.

Section 363 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4861-4862) is amended--
(1) by inserting after ``riverfront,'' the following: ``and
expansion of such system if the Secretary determines that the
expansion is feasible,'';
(2) by striking ``$3,200,000'' and inserting
``$11,600,000'';
(3) by striking ``$2,400,000'' and inserting
``$8,700,000''; and
(4) by striking ``$800,000'' and inserting ``$2,900,000''.

SEC. 342. CAPE GIRARDEAU, MISSOURI.

The project for flood control, Cape Girardeau, Jackson
Metropolitan Area, Missouri, authorized by section 401(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4118-
4119), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct
the project, including implementation of nonstructural
measures, at a total cost of $45,414,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $33,030,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $12,384,000.

SEC. 343. NEW MADRID HARBOR, MISSOURI.

The project for navigation, New Madrid Harbor, Missouri,
authorized pursuant to section 107 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and modified by section 102(n) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4807),
is further modified to direct the Secretary to assume
responsibility for maintenance of the existing Federal
channel referred to in such section 102(n) in addition to
maintaining New Madrid County Harbor.

SEC. 344. ST. JOHN'S BAYOU--NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MISSOURI.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Federal
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
for flood control, St. John's Bayou and New Madrid Floodway,
Missouri, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4118).

SEC. 345. JOSEPH G. MINISH PASSAIC RIVER PARK, NEW JERSEY.

Section 101(a)(18)(B) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4608) is amended by striking
``$25,000,000'' and inserting ``$75,000,000''.

SEC. 346. MOLLY ANN'S BROOK, NEW JERSEY.

The project for flood control, Molly Ann's Brook, New
Jersey, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4119), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to carry out the project in
accordance with the report of the Corps of Engineers dated
April 3, 1996, at a total cost of $40,100,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $22,600,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $17,500,000.

SEC. 347. PASSAIC RIVER, NEW JERSEY.

Section 1148 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4254) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 1148. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN.

``(a) Acquisition of Lands.--The Secretary is authorized to
acquire from willing sellers lands on which residential
structures are located and which are subject to frequent and
recurring flood damage, as identified in the supplemental
floodway report of the Corps of Engineers, Passaic River
Buyout Study, September 1995, at an estimated total cost of
$194,000,000.
``(b) Retention of Lands for Flood Protection.--Lands
acquired by the Secretary under this section shall be
retained by the Secretary for future use in conjunction with
flood protection and flood management in the Passaic River
Basin.
``(c) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of
carrying out this section shall be 25 percent plus any amount
that might result from application of the requirements of
subsection (d).
``(d) Applicability of Benefit-Cost Ratio Waiver
Authority.--In evaluating and implementing the project under
this section, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal
interest to participate in the financing of the project in
accordance with section 903(c) of this Act, to the extent
that the Secretary's evaluation indicates that applying such
section is necessary to implement the project.''.

SEC. 348. RAMAPO RIVER AT OAKLAND, NEW JERSEY AND NEW YORK.

The project for flood control, Ramapo River at Oakland, New
Jersey and New York, authorized by section 401(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4120), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project
in accordance with the report of the Corps of Engineers dated
May 1994, at a total cost of $11,300,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $8,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $2,800,000.

SEC. 349. RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, NEW JERSEY.

Section 102(q) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4808) is amended by striking ``for Cliffwood
Beach''.

SEC. 350. ARTHUR KILL, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY.

The project for navigation, Arthur Kill, New York and New
Jersey, authorized by section 202(b) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4098), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to carry out the project to a depth
of not to exceed 45 feet if determined to be feasible by the
Secretary at a total cost of $83,000,000.

SEC. 351. JONES INLET, NEW YORK.

The project for navigation, Jones Inlet, New York,
authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing construction, repair, and preservation of certain
public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes'',
approved March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 13), is modified to direct
the Secretary to place uncontaminated dredged material on
beach areas downdrift from the federally maintained channel
for the purpose of mitigating the interruption of littoral
system natural processes caused by the jetty and continued
dredging of the federally maintained channel.

SEC. 352. KILL VAN KULL, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY.

The project for navigation, Kill Van Kull, New York and New
Jersey, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4095), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to carry out the project at a total
cost of $750,000,000.

SEC. 353. WILMINGTON HARBOR-NORTHEAST CAPE FEAR RIVER, NORTH
CAROLINA.

The project for navigation, Wilmington Harbor-Northeast
Cape Fear River, North Carolina, authorized by section 202(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4095), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct
the project substantially in accordance with the General
Design Memorandum dated April 1990 and the General Design
Memorandum Supplement dated February 1994, at a total cost of
$52,041,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $25,729,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $26,312,000.

SEC. 354. GARRISON DAM, NORTH DAKOTA.

The project for flood control, Garrison Dam, North Dakota,
authorized by section 9 of the Flood Control Act of December
22, 1944 (58 Stat. 891), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to acquire permanent flowage and saturation
easements over the lands in Williams County, North Dakota,
extending from the riverward margin of the Buford-Trenton
Irrigation District main canal to the north bank of the
Missouri River, beginning at the Buford-Trenton Irrigation
District pumping station located in the northeast quarter of
section 17, township 152 north, range 104 west, and
continuing northeasterly downstream to the land referred to
as the East Bottom, and any other lands outside of the
boundaries of the Buford-Trenton Irrigation District which
have been adversely affected by rising ground water and
surface flooding. Any easement acquired by the Secretary
pursuant to this subsection shall include the right, power,
and privilege of the Government to submerge, overflow,
percolate, and saturate the surface and subsurface of the
land. The cost of acquiring such easements shall not exceed
90 percent, or be less than 75 percent, of the unaffected fee
value of the lands. The project is further modified to
authorize the Secretary to provide a lump sum payment of
$60,000 to the Buford-Trenton Irrigation District for power
requirements associated with operation of the drainage pumps
and to relinquish all right, title, and interest of the
United States to the drainage pumps located within the
boundaries of the Irrigation District.

SEC. 355. RENO BEACH-HOWARDS FARM, OHIO.

The project for flood protection, Reno Beach-Howards Farm,
Ohio, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act,
1948 (62 Stat. 1178), is modified to provide that the value
of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and disposal areas that
are necessary to carry out the project and are provided by
the non-Federal interest shall be determined on the basis of
the appraisal performed by the Corps of Engineers and dated
April 4, 1985.

SEC. 356. WISTER LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

The flood control project for Wister Lake, LeFlore County,
Oklahoma, authorized by section 4 of the Flood Control Act of
June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1218), is modified to increase the
elevation of the conservation pool to 478 feet and to adjust
the seasonal pool operation to accommodate the change in the
conservation pool elevation.

[[Page H8709]]

SEC. 357. BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, OREGON AND
WASHINGTON.

(a) In General.--The project for Bonneville Lock and Dam,
Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, authorized by the Act
of August 20, 1937 (50 Stat. 731), and modified by section 83
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 35),
is further modified to authorize the Secretary to convey to
the city of North Bonneville, Washington, at no further cost
to the city, all right, title and interest of the United
States in and to the following:
(1) Any municipal facilities, utilities fixtures, and
equipment for the relocated city, and any remaining lands
designated as open spaces or municipal lots not previously
conveyed to the city, specifically, Lots M1 through M15, M16
(the ``community center lot''), M18, M19, M22, M24, S42
through S45, and S52 through S60.
(2) The ``school lot'' described as Lot 2, block 5, on the
plat of relocated North Bonneville.
(3) Parcels 2 and C, but only upon the completion of any
environmental response actions required under applicable law.
(4) That portion of Parcel B lying south of the existing
city boundary, west of the sewage treatment plant, and north
of the drainage ditch that is located adjacent to the
northerly limit of the Hamilton Island landfill, provided the
Secretary determines, at the time of the proposed conveyance,
that the Army has taken all action necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
(5) Such portions of Parcel H which can be conveyed without
a requirement for further investigation, inventory or other
action by the Department of the Army under the provisions of
the National Historic Preservation Act.
(6) Such easements as the Secretary deems necessary for--
(A) sewer and water line crossings of relocated Washington
State Highway 14; and
(B) reasonable public access to the Columbia River across
those portions of Hamilton Island that remain under the
ownership of the United States.
(b) Time Period for Conveyances.--The conveyances referred
to in subsections (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5), and (a)(6)(A) shall
be completed within 180 days after the United States receives
the release referred to in subsection (d). All other
conveyances shall be completed expeditiously, subject to any
conditions specified in the applicable subsection.
(c) Purpose.--The purpose of the conveyances authorized by
subsection (a) is to resolve all outstanding issues between
the United States and the city of North Bonneville.
(d) Acknowledgement of Payment; Release of Claims Relating
to Relocation of City.--As a prerequisite to the conveyances
authorized by subsection (a), the city of North Bonneville
shall execute an acknowledgement of payment of just
compensation and shall execute a release of any and all
claims for relief of any kind against the United States
growing out of the relocation of the city of North
Bonneville, or any prior Federal legislation relating
thereto, and shall dismiss, with prejudice, any pending
litigation, if any, involving such matters.
(e) Release by Attorney General.--Upon receipt of the
city's acknowledgment and release referred to in subsection
(d), the Attorney General of the United States shall dismiss
any pending litigation, if any, arising out of the relocation
of the city of North Bonneville, and execute a release of any
and all rights to damages of any kind under the February 20,
1987, judgment of the United States Claims Court, including
any interest thereon.
(f) Acknowledgment of Entitlements; Release by City of
Claims.--Within 60 days after the conveyances authorized by
subsection (a) (other than paragraph (6)(B)) have been
completed, the city shall execute an acknowledgement that all
entitlements under such paragraph have been completed and
shall execute a release of any and all claims for relief of
any kind against the United States arising out of this
subsection.
(g) Effects on City.--Beginning on the date of the
enactment of this Act, the city of North Bonneville, or any
successor in interest thereto, shall--
(1) be precluded from exercising any jurisdiction over any
lands owned in whole or in part by the United States and
administered by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in
connection with the Bonneville project; and
(2) be authorized to change the zoning designations of,
sell, or resell Parcels S35 and S56, which are presently
designated as open spaces.

SEC. 358. COLUMBIA RIVER DREDGING, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.

The project for navigation, Lower Willamette and Columbia
Rivers below Vancouver, Washington and Portland, Oregon,
authorized by the first section of the River and Harbor
Appropriations Act of June 18, 1878 (20 Stat. 152), is
modified to direct the Secretary--
(1) to conduct channel simulation and to carry out
improvements to the existing deep draft channel between the
mouth of the river and river mile 34 at a cost not to exceed
$2,400,000; and
(2) to conduct overdepth and advance maintenance dredging
that is necessary to maintain authorized channel dimensions.

SEC. 359. GRAYS LANDING LOCK AND DAM, MONONGAHELA RIVER,
PENNSYLVANIA.

The project for navigation Grays Landing Lock and Dam,
Monongahela River, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 301(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4110), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct
the project at a total cost of $181,000,000. 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.

SEC. 360. LACKAWANNA RIVER AT SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA.

The project for flood control, Lackawanna River at
Scranton, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 101(16) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4803), is
modified to direct the Secretary to carry out the project for
flood control for the Plot and Green Ridge sections of the
project.

SEC. 361. MUSSERS DAM, MIDDLE CREEK, SNYDER COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA.

Section 209(e)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4830) is amended by striking ``$3,000,000''
and inserting ``$5,000,000''.

SEC. 362. SAW MILL RUN, PENNSYLVANIA.

The project for flood control, Saw Mill Run, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project
in accordance with the report of the Corps of Engineers dated
April 8, 1994, at a total cost of $12,780,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $9,585,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $3,195,000.

SEC. 363. SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA.

The navigation project for the Schuylkill River,
Pennsylvania, authorized by the first section of the River
and Harbor Appropriations Act of August 8, 1917 (40 Stat.
252), is modified to provide for the periodic removal and
disposal of sediment to a depth of 6 feet detained within
portions of the Fairmount pool between the Fairmount Dam and
the Columbia Bridge, generally within the limits of the
channel alignments referred to as the Schuylkill River
Racecourse and return lane, and the Belmont Water Works
intakes and Boathouse Row.

SEC. 364. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA.

(a) Cost Sharing.--Section 313(d)(3)(A) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4846; 109 Stat.
407) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--Total project costs under each local
cooperation agreement entered into under this subsection
shall be shared at 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-
Federal. The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for
design and construction services and other in-kind work,
whether occurring subsequent to, or within 6 years prior to,
entering into an agreement with the Secretary. The Federal
share may be provided in the form of grants or reimbursements
of project costs. Non-Federal interests shall also receive
credit for grants and the value of work performed on behalf
of such interests by State and local agencies.''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 313(g)(1) of
such Act (106 Stat. 4846; 109 Stat. 407) is amended by
striking ``$50,000,000'' and inserting ``$90,000,000''.

SEC. 365. WYOMING VALLEY, 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 authorize the Secretary to undertake as part of
the construction of the project mechanical and electrical
upgrades to existing stormwater pumping stations in the
Wyoming Valley and to undertake mitigation measures.

SEC. 366. SAN JUAN HARBOR, PUERTO RICO.

The project for navigation, San Juan Harbor, Puerto Rico,
authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4097), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to deepen the bar channel to depths
varying from 49 feet to 56 feet below mean low water with
other modifications to authorized interior channels as
generally described in the General Reevaluation Report and
Environmental Assessment, dated March 1994, at a total cost
of $43,993,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $27,341,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $16,652,000.

SEC. 367. NARRAGANSETT, RHODE ISLAND.

Section 361(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4861) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$200,000'' and inserting ``$1,900,000'';
(2) by striking ``$150,000'' and inserting ``$1,425,000'';
and
(3) by striking ``$50,000'' and inserting ``$475,000''.

SEC. 368. CHARLESTON HARBOR, SOUTH CAROLINA.

The project for navigation, Charleston Harbor, South
Carolina, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4096), is modified to
direct the Secretary to undertake ditching, clearing,
spillway replacement, and dike reconstruction of the Clouter
Creek Disposal Area, as a part of the operation and
maintenance of the Charleston Harbor project.

SEC. 369. DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, DALLAS, TEXAS.

(a) In General.--The project for flood control, Dallas
Floodway Extension, Dallas, Texas, authorized by section 301
of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091), is
modified to provide that flood protection

[[Page H8710]]

works constructed by the non-Federal interests along the
Trinity River in Dallas, Texas, for Rochester Park and the
Central Wastewater Treatment Plant shall be included as a
part of the project and the cost of such works shall be
credited against the non-Federal share of project costs but
shall not be included in calculating benefits of the project.
(b) Determination of Amount.--The amount to be credited
under subsection (a) shall be determined by the Secretary. In
determining such amount, the Secretary may permit crediting
only for that portion of the work performed by the non-
Federal interests which is compatible with the project
referred to in subsection (a), including any modification
thereof, and which is required for construction of such
project.
(c) Cash Contribution.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to limit the applicability of the requirement
contained in section 103(a)(1)(A) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 to the project referred to in
subsection (a).

SEC. 370. UPPER JORDAN RIVER, UTAH.

The project for flood control, Upper Jordan River, Utah,
authorized by section 101(a)(23) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total
cost of $12,870,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$8,580,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,290,000.

SEC. 371. HAYSI LAKE, VIRGINIA.

The Haysi Lake, Virginia, feature of the project for flood
control, Tug Fork of the Big Sandy River, Kentucky, West
Virginia, and Virginia, authorized by section 202(a) of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act, 1981 (94
Stat. 1339), is modified--
(1) to add recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement as
project purposes;
(2) to direct the Secretary to construct the Haysi Dam
feature of the project substantially in accordance with Plan
A as set forth in the Draft General Plan Supplement Report
for the Levisa Fork Basin, Virginia and Kentucky, dated May
1995;
(3) to direct the Secretary to apply section 103(m) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4087) to
the construction of such feature in the same manner as that
section is applied to other projects or project features
construed pursuant to such section 202(a); and
(4) to provide for operation and maintenance of
recreational facilities on a reimbursable basis.

SEC. 372. RUDEE INLET, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA.

The project for navigation and shoreline protection, Rudee
Inlet, Virginia Beach, Virginia, authorized by section 601(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4148), is modified to authorize the Secretary to continue
maintenance of the project for 50 years beginning on the date
of initial construction of the project. The Federal share of
the cost of such maintenance shall be determined in
accordance with title I of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986.

SEC. 373. VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA.

The non-Federal share of the costs of the project for beach
erosion control and hurricane protection, Virginia Beach,
Virginia, authorized by section 501(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4136), shall be reduced by
$3,120,803, or by such amount as is determined by an audit
carried out by the Secretary to be due to the city of
Virginia Beach as reimbursement for the Federal share of
beach nourishment activities carried out by the city between
October 1, 1986, and September 30, 1993, if the Federal
Government has not reimbursed the city for the activities
prior to the date on which a project cooperative agreement is
executed for the project.

SEC. 374. EAST WATERWAY, WASHINGTON.

The project for navigation, East and West waterways,
Seattle Harbor, Washington, authorized by the first section
of the River and Harbor Appropriations Act of March 2, 1919
(40 Stat. 1275), is modified to direct the Secretary--
(1) to expedite review of potential deepening of the
channel in the East waterway from Elliott Bay to Terminal 25
to a depth of up to 51 feet; and
(2) if determined to be feasible, to implement such
deepening as part of project maintenance.

In carrying out work authorized by this section, the
Secretary shall coordinate with the Port of Seattle regarding
use of Slip 27 as a dredged material disposal area.

SEC. 375. BLUESTONE LAKE, WEST VIRGINIA.

Section 102(ff) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4810) is amended by inserting ``except for
that 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,'' after
``project,'' the first place it appears.

SEC. 376. MOOREFIELD, WEST VIRGINIA.

The project for flood control, Moorefield, West Virginia,
authorized by section 101(a)(25) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610-4611), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total
cost of $22,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$17,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,900,000.

SEC. 377. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.

(a) Cost Sharing.--Section 340(c)(3) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856) is amended to read
as follows:
``(3) Cost sharing.--
``(A) In general.--Total project costs under each local
cooperation agreement entered into under this subsection
shall be shared at 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-
Federal. The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for
the reasonable costs of design work completed by such
interest prior to entering into a local cooperation agreement
with the Secretary for a project. The credit for such design
work shall not exceed 6 percent of the total construction
costs of the project. The Federal share may be in the form of
grants or reimbursements of project costs.
``(B) Interest.--In the event of delays 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 a project's cost.
``(C) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way credit.--The non-
Federal interest shall receive credit for lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations toward its share of project
costs, including all reasonable costs associated with
obtaining permits necessary for the construction, operation,
and maintenance of such project on publicly owned or
controlled lands, but not to exceed 25 percent of total
project costs.
``(D) Operation and maintenance.--Operation and maintenance
costs for projects constructed with assistance provided under
this section shall be 100 percent non-Federal.''.
(b) Funding.--Section 340(g) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856) is amended by
striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting ``$25,000,000''.

SEC. 378. WEST VIRGINIA TRAIL HEAD FACILITIES.

Section 306 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4840-4841) is amended by adding at the end the
following:

``The Secretary shall enter into an interagency agreement
with the Federal entity which provided assistance in the
preparation of the study for the purposes of providing
ongoing technical assistance and oversight for the trail
facilities envisioned by the master plan developed under this
section. The Federal entity shall provide such assistance and
oversight.''.

SEC. 379. KICKAPOO RIVER, WISCONSIN.

(a) In General.--The project for flood control and allied
purposes, Kickapoo River, Wisconsin, authorized by section
203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1190) and
modified by section 814 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4169), is further modified as provided
by this section.
(b) Transfer of Property.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the requirements of this
subsection, the Secretary shall transfer to the State of
Wisconsin, without consideration, all right, title, and
interest of the United States to the lands described in
paragraph (3), including all works, structures, and other
improvements to such lands.
(2) Transfer to secretary of the interior.--Subject to the
requirements of this subsection, on the date of the transfer
under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall transfer to the
Secretary of the Interior, without consideration, all right,
title, and interest of the United States in and to lands that
are culturally and religiously significant sites of the Ho-
Chunk Nation (a federally recognized Indian tribe) and are
located within the lands described in paragraph (3). Such
lands shall be specified in accordance with paragraph (4)(C)
and may not exceed a total of 1,200 acres.
(3) Land description.--The lands to be transferred pursuant
to paragraphs (1) and (2) are the approximately 8,569 acres
of land associated with the LaFarge Dam and Lake portion of
the project referred to in subsection (a) in Vernon County,
Wisconsin, in the following sections:
(A) Section 31, Township 14 North, Range 1 West of the 4th
Principal Meridian.
(B) Sections 2 through 11, and 16, 17, 20, and 21, Township
13 North, Range 2 West of the 4th Principal Meridian.
(C) Sections 15, 16, 21 through 24, 26, 27, 31, and 33
through 36, Township 14 North, Range 2 West of the 4th
Principal Meridian.
(4) Terms and conditions.--
(A) Hold harmless; reimbursement of united states.--The
transfer under paragraph (1) shall be made on the condition
that the State of Wisconsin enters into a written agreement
with the Secretary to hold the United States harmless from
all claims arising from or through the operation of the lands
and improvements subject to the transfer. If title to the
lands described in paragraph (3) is sold or transferred by
the State, then the State shall reimburse the United States
for the price originally paid by the United States for
purchasing such lands.
(B) In general.--The Secretary shall make the transfers
under paragraphs (1) and (2) only if on or before October 31,
1997, the State of Wisconsin enters into and submits to the
Secretary a memorandum of understanding, as specified in
subparagraph (C), with the tribal organization (as defined by
section 4(l) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(l))) of the Ho-Chunk Nation.
(C) Memorandum of understanding.--The memorandum of
understanding referred to in subparagraph (B) shall contain,
at a minimum, the following:

[[Page H8711]]

(i) A description of sites and associated lands to be
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior under paragraph
(2).
(ii) An agreement specifying that the lands transferred
under paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be preserved in a natural
state and developed only to the extent necessary to enhance
outdoor recreational and educational opportunities.
(iii) An agreement specifying the terms and conditions of a
plan for the management of the lands to be transferred under
paragraphs (1) and (2).
(iv) A provision requiring a review of the plan referred to
in clause (iii) to be conducted every 10 years under which
the State of Wisconsin, acting through the Kickapoo Valley
Governing Board, and the Ho-Chunk Nation may agree to
revisions of the plan in order to address changed
circumstances on the lands transferred under paragraph (2).
Such provision may include a plan for the transfer by the
State to the Secretary of the Interior of any additional site
discovered to be culturally and religiously significant to
the Ho-Chunk Nation.
(5) Administration of lands.--The lands transferred to the
Secretary of the Interior under paragraph (2), and any lands
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the
memorandum of understanding entered into under paragraph (3),
shall be held in trust for, and added to and administered as
part of the reservation of, the Ho-Chunk Nation.
(6) Transfer of flowage easements.--The Secretary shall
transfer to the owner of the servient estate, without
consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to each flowage easement acquired as part of
the project referred to in subsection (a) within Township 14
North, Range 2 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Vernon
County, Wisconsin.
(7) Deauthorization.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
the LaFarge Dam and Lake portion of the project referred to
in subsection (a) is not authorized after the date of the
transfer under this subsection.
(8) Interim management and maintenance.--The Secretary
shall continue to manage and maintain the LaFarge Dam and
Lake portion of the project referred to in subsection (a)
until the date of the transfer under this section.
(c) Completion of Project Features.--
(1) Requirement.--The Secretary shall undertake the
completion of the following features of the project referred
to in subsection (a):
(A) The continued relocation of State highway route 131 and
county highway routes P and F substantially in accordance
with plans contained in Design Memorandum No. 6, Relocation-
LaFarge Reservoir, dated June 1970; except that the
relocation shall generally follow the existing road rights-
of-way through the Kickapoo Valley.
(B) Environmental cleanup and site restoration of abandoned
wells, farm sites, and safety modifications to the water
control structures.
(C) Cultural resource activities to meet the requirements
of Federal law.
(2) Participation by state of wisconsin.--In undertaking
the completion of the features described in paragraph (1),
the Secretary shall determine the requirements of the State
of Wisconsin on the location and design of each such feature.
(d) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this section for fiscal years beginning after
September 30, 1996, $17,000,000.

SEC. 380. TETON COUNTY, WYOMING.

Section 840 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4176) is amended--
(1) by striking ``: Provided, That'' and inserting ``;
except that'';
(2) by striking ``in cash or materials'' and inserting ``,
through providing in-kind services or cash or materials,'';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following: ``In carrying out
this section, the Secretary may enter into agreements with
the non-Federal sponsor permitting the non-Federal sponsor to
perform operation and maintenance for the project on a cost-
reimbursable basis.''.
TITLE IV--STUDIES

SEC. 401. CORPS CAPABILITY STUDY, ALASKA.

The Secretary shall review the capability of the Corps of
Engineers to plan, design, construct, operate, and maintain
rural sanitation projects for rural and Native villages in
Alaska. Not later than 18 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit findings
and recommendations on the agency's capability, together with
recommendations on the advisability of assuming such a
mission.

SEC. 402. MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN, ARIZONA.

The Secretary shall credit the non-Federal share of the
cost of the feasibility study on the McDowell Mountain
project an amount equivalent to the cost of work performed by
the city of Scottsdale, Arizona, and accomplished prior to
the city's entering into an agreement with the Secretary if
the Secretary determines that the work is necessary for the
study.

SEC. 403. NOGALES WASH AND TRIBUTARIES, ARIZONA.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the
relationship of flooding in Nogales, Arizona, and floodflows
emanating from Mexico.
(b) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit to Congress a
report on the results of the study conducted under subsection
(a), together with recommendations concerning the appropriate
level of non-Federal participation in 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).

SEC. 404. GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study to assess the
feasibility of implementing improvements in the regional
flood control system within Garden Grove, California.

SEC. 405. MUGU LAGOON, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the
environmental impacts associated with sediment transport,
flood flows, and upstream watershed land use practices on
Mugu Lagoon, California. The study shall include an
evaluation of alternatives for the restoration of the
estuarine ecosystem functions and values associated with Mugu
Lagoon and the endangered and threatened species inhabiting
the area.
(b) Consultation and Coordination.--In conducting the
study, the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of the
Navy and shall coordinate with State and local resource
agencies to assure that the study is compatible with
restoration efforts for the Calleguas Creek watershed.
(c) Report.--Not later than 24 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the study.

SEC. 406. SANTA YNEZ, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Planning.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare a
comprehensive river basin management plan addressing the long
term ecological, economic, and flood control needs of the
Santa Ynez River basin, California. In preparing such plan,
the Secretary shall consult the Santa Barbara Flood Control
District and other affected local governmental entities.
(b) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary shall provide
technical assistance to the Santa Barbara Flood Control
District with respect to implementation of the plan to be
prepared under subsection (a).

SEC. 407. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INFRASTRUCTURE.

(a) Assistance.--Section 116(d)(1) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4624) is amended--
(1) in the heading of paragraph (1) by inserting ``and
assistance'' after ``Study''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following: ``In addition, the
Secretary shall provide technical, design, and planning
assistance to non-Federal interests in developing potential
infrastructure projects.''.
(b) Funding.--Section 116(d)(3) of such Act is amended by
striking ``$1,500,000'' and inserting ``$7,500,000''.

SEC. 408. YOLO BYPASS, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA,
CALIFORNIA.

The Secretary shall study the advisability of acquiring
land in the vicinity of the Yolo Bypass in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta, California, for the purpose of environmental
mitigation for the flood control project for Sacramento,
California, and other water resources projects in the area.

SEC. 409. CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, ILLINOIS.

The Secretary shall complete a limited reevaluation of the
authorized St. Louis Harbor Project in the vicinity of the
Chain of Rocks Canal, Illinois, and consistent with the
authorized purposes of that project, to include evacuation of
waters interior to the Chain of Rocks Canal East Levee.

SEC. 410. QUINCY, ILLINOIS.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall study and evaluate the
critical infrastructure of the Fabius River Drainage
District, the South Quincy Drainage and Levee District, the
Sny Island Levee Drainage District, and the city of Quincy,
Illinois--
(1) to determine if additional flood protection needs of
such infrastructure should be identified or implemented;
(2) to produce a definition of critical infrastructure;
(3) to develop evaluation criteria; and
(4) to enhance existing geographic information system
databases to encompass relevant data that identify critical
infrastructure for use in emergencies and in routine
operation and maintenance activities.
(b) Consideration of Other Studies.--In conducting the
study under this section, the Secretary shall consider the
recommendations of the Interagency Floodplain Management
Committee Report, the findings of the Floodplain Management
Assessment of the Upper Mississippi River and Lower Missouri
Rivers and Tributaries, and other relevant studies and
findings.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the study, together with
recommendations regarding each of the purposes of the study
described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (a).

SEC. 411. SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS.

The Secretary shall provide technical, planning, and design
assistance to the city of Springfield, Illinois, in
developing--
(1) an environmental impact statement for the proposed
development of a water supply reservoir, including the
preparation of necessary documentation in support of the
environmental impact statement; and
(2) an evaluation of technical, economic, and environmental
impacts of such development.

SEC. 412. BEAUTY CREEK WATERSHED, VALPARAISO CITY, PORTER
COUNTY, INDIANA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study to assess the
feasibility of implementing

[[Page H8712]]

streambank erosion control measures and flood control
measures within the Beauty Creek watershed, Valparaiso City,
Porter County, Indiana.

SEC. 413. GRAND CALUMET RIVER, HAMMOND, INDIANA.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
establish a methodology and schedule to restore the wetlands
at Wolf Lake and George Lake in Hammond, Indiana.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the study conducted under
subsection (a).

SEC. 414. INDIANA HARBOR CANAL, EAST CHICAGO, LAKE COUNTY,
INDIANA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of the feasibility of
including environmental and recreational features, including
a vegetation buffer, as part of the project for navigation,
Indiana Harbor Canal, East Chicago, Lake County, Indiana,
authorized by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors
Appropriations Act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 657).

SEC. 415. KOONTZ LAKE, INDIANA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of the feasibility of
implementing measures to restore Koontz Lake, Indiana,
including measures to remove silt, sediment, nutrients,
aquatic growth, and other noxious materials from Koontz Lake,
measures to improve public access facilities to Koontz Lake,
and measures to prevent or abate the deposit of sediments and
nutrients in Koontz Lake.

SEC. 416. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, INDIANA.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the
impact of the project for flood control, Little Calumet
River, Indiana, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4115), on
flooding and water quality in the vicinity of the Black Oak
area of Gary, Indiana.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the study conducted under
subsection (a), together with recommendations for cost-
effective remediation of impacts described in subsection (a).
(c) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of the
study to be conducted under subsection (a) shall be 100
percent.

SEC. 417. TIPPECANOE RIVER WATERSHED, INDIANA.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of water
quality and environmental restoration needs in the Tippecanoe
River watershed, Indiana, including measures necessary to
reduce siltation in Lake Shafer and Lake Freeman.
(b) Assistance.--The Secretary shall provide technical,
planning, and design assistance to the Shafer Freeman Lakes
Environmental Conservation Corporation in addressing
potential environmental restoration activities determined as
a result of the study conducted under subsection (a).

SEC. 418. CALCASIEU SHIP CHANNEL, HACKBERRY, LOUISIANA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the need
for improved navigation and related support service
structures in the vicinity of the Calcasieu Ship Channel,
Hackberry, Louisiana.

SEC. 419. HURON RIVER, MICHIGAN.

The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the need
for channel improvements and associated modifications for the
purpose of providing a harbor of refuge at Huron River,
Michigan.

SEC. 420. SACO RIVER, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of flood control
problems along the Saco River in Hart's Location, New
Hampshire, for the purpose of evaluating retaining walls,
berms, and other structures with a view to potential
solutions involving repair or replacement of existing
structures and shall consider other alternatives for flood
damage reduction.

SEC. 421. BUFFALO RIVER GREENWAY, NEW YORK.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of a potential greenway
trail project along the Buffalo River between the park system
of the city of Buffalo, New York, and Lake Erie. Such study
shall include preparation of an integrated plan of
development that takes into consideration the adjacent parks,
nature preserves, bikeways, and related recreational
facilities.

SEC. 422. PORT OF NEWBURGH, NEW YORK.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of the feasibility of
carrying out improvements for navigation at the port of
Newburgh, New York.

SEC. 423. PORT OF NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEDIMENT STUDY.

(a) Study of Measures To Reduce Sediment Deposition.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study of measures that could reduce
sediment deposition in the vicinity of the Port of New York-
New Jersey for the purpose of reducing the volumes to be
dredged for navigation projects in the Port.
(b) Dredged Material Disposal Study.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of constructing
and operating an underwater confined dredged material
disposal site in the Port of New York-New Jersey which could
accommodate as much as 250,000 cubic yards of dredged
materials for the purpose of demonstrating the feasibility of
an underwater confined disposal pit as an environmentally
suitable method of containing certain sediments.
(c) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit to Congress a
report on the results of the studies conducted under this
section, together with any recommendations of the Secretary
concerning reduction of sediment deposition referred to in
subsection (a).

SEC. 424. PORT OF NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY NAVIGATION STUDY.

The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study of
navigation needs at the Port of New York-New Jersey
(including the South Brooklyn Marine and Red Hook Container
Terminals, Staten Island, and adjacent areas) to address
improvements, including deepening of existing channels to
depths of 50 feet or greater, that are required to provide
economically efficient and environmentally sound navigation
to meet current and future requirements.

SEC. 425. CHAGRIN RIVER, OHIO.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of flooding problems
along the Chagrin River in Eastlake, Ohio. In conducting such
study, the Secretary shall evaluate potential solutions to
flooding from all sources, including that resulting from ice
jams, and shall evaluate the feasibility of a sedimentation
collection pit and other potential measures to reduce
flooding.

SEC. 426. CUYAHOGA RIVER, OHIO.

The Secretary shall conduct a study to evaluate the
integrity of the bulkhead system located on the Federal
channel along the Cuyahoga River in the vicinity of
Cleveland, Ohio, and shall provide to the non-Federal
interest an analysis of costs and repairs of the bulkhead
system.

SEC. 427. CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, ESTUARY.

The Secretary is authorized to conduct a study of the
Charleston estuary area located in Charleston, Berkeley, and
Dorchester Counties, South Carolina, for the purpose of
evaluating environmental conditions in the tidal reaches of
the Ashley, Cooper, Stono, and Wando Rivers and the lower
portions of Charleston Harbor.

SEC. 428. MUSTANG ISLAND, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of navigation along the
south-central coast of Texas near Corpus Christi for the
purpose of determining the feasibility of constructing and
maintaining the Packery Channel on the southern portion of
Mustang Island.

SEC. 429. PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA.

The Secretary shall conduct a study of flooding, erosion,
and other water resources problems in Prince William County,
Virginia, including an assessment of wetlands protection,
erosion control, and flood damage reduction needs of the
County.

SEC. 430. PACIFIC REGION.

(a) Study.--The Secretary is authorized to conduct studies
in the interest of navigation in that part of the Pacific
region that includes American Samoa, Guam, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
(b) Cost Sharing.--The cost sharing provisions of section
105 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2215; 100 Stat. 4088-4089) shall apply to studies under this
section.

SEC. 431. FINANCING OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS OF SMALL AND
MEDIUM PORTS.

(a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of
alternative financing mechanisms for ensuring adequate
funding for the infrastructure needs of small and medium
ports.
(b) Mechanisms To Be Studied.--Mechanisms to be studied
under subsection (a) shall include the establishment of
revolving loan funds.
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report containing the results of the study
conducted under subsection (a).
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

SEC. 501. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

The following projects are not authorized after the date of
the enactment of this Act:
(1) Branford harbor, connecticut.--The following portion of
the project for navigation, Branford River, Connecticut,
authorized by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors
Appropriations Act of June 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 333): Starting
at a point on the Federal channel line whose coordinates are
N156181.32, E581572.38, running south 70 degrees 11 minutes 8
seconds west a distance of 171.58 feet to another point on
the Federal channel line whose coordinates are N156123.18,
E581410.96.
(2) Bridgeport harbor, connecticut.--The following portion
of the project for navigation, Bridgeport Harbor,
Connecticut, authorized by section 101 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 297): A 2.4-acre anchorage area,
9 feet deep, and an adjacent 0.6-acre anchorage, 6 feet deep,
located on the west side of Johnsons River.
(3) Guilford harbor, connecticut.--The following portion of
the project for navigation, Guilford Harbor, Connecticut,
authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing construction, repair, and preservation of certain
public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes'',
approved March 2, 1945 (50 Stat. 13): Starting at a point
where the Sluice Creek Channel intersects with the main
entrance channel, N159194.63, E623201.07, thence running
north 24 degrees 58 minutes 15.2 seconds west 478.40 feet to
a point N159628.31, E622999.11, thence running north 20
degrees 18 minutes 31.7 seconds west 351.53 feet to a point
N159957.99, E622877.10, thence running north 69 degrees 41
minutes 37.9 seconds east 55.000 feet to a point

[[Page H8713]]

N159977.08, E622928.69, thence turning and running south 20
degrees 18 minutes 31.0 seconds east 349.35 feet to a point
N159649.45, E623049.94, thence turning and running south 24
degrees 58 minutes 11.1 seconds east 341.36 feet to a point
N159340.00, E623194.04, thence turning and running south 90
degrees 0 minutes 0 seconds east 78.86 feet to a point
N159340.00, E623272.90.
(4) Johnsons river channel, bridgeport harbor,
connecticut.--The following portion of the project for
navigation, Johnsons River Channel, Bridgeport Harbor,
Connecticut, authorized by the first section of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 634): Northerly of
a line across the Federal channel. The coordinates of such
line are N 123318.35, E 486301.68 and N 123257.15, E
486380.77.
(5) Mystic river, connecticut.--The following portion of
the project for improving the Mystic River, Connecticut,
authorized by the River and Harbor Act approved March 4, 1913
(37 Stat. 802):
Beginning in the 15-foot deep channel at coordinates north
190860.82, east 814416.20, thence running southeast about
52.01 feet to the coordinates north 190809.47, east
814424.49, thence running southwest about 34.02 feet to
coordinates north 190780.46, east 814406.70, thence running
north about 80.91 feet to the point of beginning.
(6) Norwalk harbor, connecticut.--
(A) Deauthorization.--The portion of the project for
navigation, Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the
River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1919 (40 Stat. 1276), that
lies northerly of a line across the Federal channel having
coordinates N104199.72, E417774.12 and N104155.59,
E417628.96, and those portions of the 6-foot deep East
Norwalk Channel and Anchorage, 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. 13), not included in the description of the realignment
of the project contained in subparagraph (B).
(B) Realignment description.--The realigned 6-foot deep
East Norwalk Channel and Anchorage is described as follows:
starting at a point on the East Norwalk Channel, N95743.02,
E419581.37, thence running northwesterly about 463.96 feet to
a point N96197.93, E419490.18, thence running northwesterly
about 549.32 feet to a point N96608.49, E419125.23, thence
running northwesterly about 384.06 feet to a point N96965.94,
E418984.75, thence running northwesterly about 407.26 feet to
a point N97353.87, E418860.78, thence running westerly about
58.26 feet to a point N97336.26, E418805.24, thence running
northwesterly about 70.99 feet to a point N97390.30,
E418759.21, thence running westerly about 71.78 feet to a
point on the anchorage limit N97405.26, E418689.01, thence
running southerly along the western limits of the existing
Federal anchorage until reaching a point N95893.74,
E419449.17, thence running in a southwesterly direction about
78.74 feet to a point on the East Norwalk Channel N95815.62,
E419439.33.
(C) Redesignation.--All of the realigned channel shall be
redesignated as anchorage, with the exception of that portion
of the channel which narrows to a width of 100 feet and
terminates at a line whose coordinates are N96456.81,
E419260.06, and N96390.37, E419185.32, which shall remain as
a channel.
(7) Southport harbor, connecticut.--
(A) Deauthorization portion of project.--The following
portions of the project for navigation, Southport Harbor,
Connecticut, authorized by the first section of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1029):
(i) The 6-foot deep anchorage located at the head of the
project.
(ii) The portion of the 9-foot deep channel beginning at a
bend in the channel whose coordinates are north 109131.16,
east 452653.32 running thence in a northeasterly direction
about 943.01 feet to a point whose coordinates are north
109635.22, east 453450.31 running thence in a southeasterly
direction about 22.66 feet to a point whose coordinates are
north 109617.15, east 453463.98 running thence in a
southwesterly direction about 945.18 feet to the point of
beginning.
(B) Remainder.--The remaining portion of the project
referred to in subparagraph (A) northerly of a line whose
coordinates are north 108699.15, east 452768.36 and north
108655.66, east 452858.73 shall be redesignated as an
anchorage.
(8) Stony creek, branford, connecticut.--The following
portion of the project for navigation, Stony Creek,
Connecticut, authorized under section 107 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577): The 6-foot maneuvering
basin starting at a point N157031.91, E599030.79, thence
running northeasterly about 221.16 feet to a point
N157191.06, E599184.37, thence running northerly about 162.60
feet to a point N157353.56, E599189.99, thence running
southwesterly about 358.90 feet to the point of origin.
(9) Kennebunk river, maine.--That portion of the project
for navigation, Kennebunk River, Maine, authorized by section
101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173) and
consisting of a 6-foot deep channel that lies northerly of a
line whose coordinates are N191412.53, E417265.28 and
N191445.83, E417332.48.
(10) York harbor, maine.--That portion of the project for
navigation, York Harbor, Maine, authorized by section 101 of
the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 480), located in
the 8-foot deep anchorage area beginning at coordinates N
109340.19, E 372066.93, thence running north 65 degrees 12
minutes 10.5 seconds E 423.27 feet to a point N 109517.71,
E372451.17, thence running north 28 degrees 42 minutes 58.3
seconds west 11.68 feet to a point N 109527.95, E 372445.56,
thence running south 63 degrees 37 minutes 24.6 seconds west
422.63 feet returning to the point of beginning and that
portion in the 8-foot deep anchorage area beginning at
coordinates N 108557.24, E 371645.88, thence running south 60
degrees 41 minutes 17.2 seconds east 484.51 feet to a point N
108320.04, E 372068.36, thence running north 29 degrees 12
minutes 53.3 seconds east 15.28 feet to a point N 108333.38,
E 372075.82, thence running north 62 degrees 29 minutes 42.1
seconds west 484.73 feet returning to the point of beginning.
(11) Chelsea river, boston harbor, massachusetts.--The
following portion of the project for navigation, Boston
Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by section 101 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173), consisting of a 35-
foot deep channel in the Chelsea River: Beginning at a point
on the northern limit of the existing project N505357.84,
E724519.19, thence running northeasterly about 384.19 feet
along the northern limit of the existing project to a bend on
the northern limit of the existing project N505526.87,
E724864.20, thence running southeasterly about 368.00 feet
along the northern limit of the existing project to another
point N505404.77, E725211.35, thence running westerly about
594.53 feet to a point N505376.12, E724617.51, thence running
southwesterly about 100.00 feet to the point of origin.
(12) Cohasset harbor, cohasset, massachusetts.--The
following portions of the project for navigation, Cohasset
Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized under section 107 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577):
(A) The portion starting at a point N453510.15, E792664.63,
thence running south 53 degrees 07 minutes 05.4 seconds west
307.00 feet to a point N453325.90, E792419.07, thence running
north 57 degrees 56 minutes 36.8 seconds west 201.00 feet to
a point N453432.58, E792248.72, thence running south 88
degrees 57 minutes 25.6 seconds west 50.00 feet to a point
N453431.67, E792198.73, thence running north 01 degree 02
minutes 52.3 seconds west 66.71 feet to a point N453498.37,
E792197.51, thence running north 69 degrees 12 minutes 52.3
seconds east 332.32 feet to a point N453616.30, E792508.20,
thence running south 55 degrees 50 minutes 24.1 seconds east
189.05 feet to the point of origin.
(B) The portion starting at a point N452886.64, E791287.83,
thence running south 00 degrees 00 minutes 00.0 seconds west
56.04 feet to a point N452830.60, E791287.83, thence running
north 90 degrees 00 minutes 00.0 seconds west 101.92 feet to
a point, N452830.60, E791185.91, thence running north 52
degrees 12 minutes 49.7 seconds east 89.42 feet to a point,
N452885.39, E791256.58, thence running north 87 degrees 42
minutes 33.8 seconds east 31.28 feet to the point of origin.
(C) The portion starting at a point, N452261.08,
E792040.24, thence running north 89 degrees 07 minutes 19.5
seconds east 118.78 feet to a point, N452262.90, E792159.01,
thence running south 43 degrees 39 minutes 06.8 seconds west
40.27 feet to a point, N452233.76, E792131.21, thence running
north 74 degrees 33 minutes 29.1 seconds west 94.42 feet to a
point, N452258.90, E792040.20, thence running north 01 degree
03 minutes 04.3 seconds east 2.18 feet to the point of
origin.
(13) Falmouth, massachusetts.--
(A) Deauthorizations.--The following portions of the
project for navigation, Falmouth Harbor, Massachusetts,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1948
(62 Stat. 1172):
(i) The portion commencing at a point north 199286.37 east
844394.81 a line running north 73 degrees 09 minutes 29
seconds east 440.34 feet to a point north 199413.99 east
844816.36, thence turning and running north 43 degrees 09
minutes 34.5 seconds east 119.99 feet to a point north
199501.52 east 844898.44, thence turning and running south 66
degrees 52 minutes 03.5 seconds east 547.66 feet returning to
a point north 199286.41 east 844394.91.
(ii) The portion commencing at a point north 199647.41 east
845035.25 a line running north 43 degrees 09 minutes 33.1
seconds east 767.15 feet to a point north 200207.01 east
845560.00, thence turning and running north 11 degrees 04
minutes 24.3 seconds west 380.08 feet to a point north
200580.01 east 845487.00, thence turning and running north 22
degrees 05 minutes 50.8 seconds east 1332.36 feet to a point
north 201814.50 east 845988.21, thence turning and running
north 02 degrees 54 minutes 15.7 seconds east 15.0 feet to a
point north 201829.48 east 845988.97, thence turning and
running south 24 degrees 56 minutes 42.3 seconds west 1410.29
feet returning to the point north 200550.75 east 845394.18.
(B) Redesignation.--The portion of the project for
navigation Falmouth, Massachusetts, referred to in
subparagraph (A) upstream of a line designated by the 2
points north 199463.18 east 844496.40 and north 199350.36
east 844544.60 is redesignated as an anchorage area.
(14) Mystic river, massachusetts.--The following portion of
the project for navigation, Mystic River, Massachusetts,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1950
(64 Stat. 164): The 35-foot deep channel beginning at a point
on the northern limit of the existing project, N506243.78,
E717600.27, thence running easterly about 1000.00 feet along
the northern limit of the existing project to a point,
N506083.42,

[[Page H8714]]

E718587.33, thence running southerly about 40.00 feet to a
point, N506043.94, E718580.91, thence running westerly about
1000.00 feet to a point, N506204.29, E717593.85, thence
running northerly about 40.00 feet to the point of origin.
(15) Reserved Channel, Boston, Massachusetts.--That portion
of the project for navigation, Reserved Channel, Boston,
Massachusetts, authorized by section 101(a)(12) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607), that
consists of a 40-foot deep channel beginning at a point along
the southern limit of the authorized project, N489391.22,
E728246.54, thence running northerly about 54 feet to a
point, N489445.53, E728244.97, thence running easterly about
2,926 feet to a point, N489527.38, E731170.41, thence running
southeasterly about 81 feet to a point, N489474.87,
E731232.55, thence running westerly about 2,987 feet to the
point of origin.
(16) Weymouth-fore and town rivers, massachusetts.--The
following portions of the project for navigation, Weymouth-
Fore and Town Rivers, Boston Harbor, Massachusetts,
authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965
(79 Stat. 1089):
(A) The 35-foot deep channel beginning at a bend on the
southern limit of the existing project, N457394.01,
E741109.74, thence running westerly about 405.25 feet to a
point, N457334.64, E740708.86, thence running southwesterly
about 462.60 feet to another bend in the southern limit of
the existing project, N457132.00, E740293.00, thence running
northeasterly about 857.74 feet along the southern limit of
the existing project to the point of origin.
(B) The 15 and 35-foot deep channels beginning at a point
on the southern limit of the existing project, N457163.41,
E739903.49, thence running northerly about 111.99 feet to a
point, N457275.37, E739900.76, thence running westerly about
692.37 feet to a point N457303.40, E739208.96, thence running
southwesterly about 190.01 feet to another point on the
southern limit of the existing project, N457233.17,
E739032.41, thence running easterly about 873.87 feet along
the southern limit of the existing project to the point of
origin.
(17) Cocheco river, new hampshire.--The portion of the
project for navigation, Cocheco River, New Hampshire,
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 September 19, 1890 (26
Stat. 436), that consists of a 7-foot deep channel that lies
northerly of a line the coordinates of which are N255292.31,
E713095.36, and N255334.51, E713138.01.
(18) Morristown harbor, new york.--The following portion of
the project for navigation, Morristown Harbor, New York,
authorized by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors Act
of January 21, 1927 (44 Stat. 1011): The portion that lies
north of the north boundary of Morris Street extended.
(19) Oswegatchie river, ogdensburg new york.--The portion
of the Federal channel of the project for navigation,
Ogdensburg Harbor, New York, authorized by the first section
of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act of June 25, 1910
(36 Stat. 635), as modified by the first section of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1037),
that is in the Oswegatchie River in Ogdensburg, New York,
from the southernmost alignment of the Route 68 bridge
upstream to the northernmost alignment of the Lake Street
bridge.
(20) Conneaut harbor, ohio.--The most southerly 300 feet of
the 1,670-foot long Shore Arm of the project for navigation,
Conneaut Harbor, Ohio, authorized by the first section of the
Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of June 25, 1910 (36
Stat. 653).
(21) Lorain small boat basin, lake erie, ohio.--The portion
of the Federal navigation channel, Lorain Small Boat Basin,
Lake Erie, Ohio, authorized pursuant to section 107 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 486) that is situated
in the State of Ohio, County of Lorain, Township of Black
River and is a part of Original Black River Township Lot
Number 1, Tract Number 1, further known as being submerged
lands of Lake Erie owned by the State of Ohio and that is
more definitely described as follows:
Commencing at a drill hole found on the centerline of
Lakeside Avenue (60 feet in width) at the intersection of the
centerline of the East Shorearm of Lorain Harbor, said point
is known as United States Army Corps of Engineers Monument
No. 203 (N658012.20, E208953.88).
Thence, in a line north 75 degrees 26 minutes 12 seconds
west, a distance of 387.87 feet to a point (N658109.73,
E2089163.47). This point is hereinafter in this paragraph
referred to as the ``principal point of beginning''.
Thence, north 58 degrees 14 minutes 11 seconds west, a
distance of 50.00 feet to a point (N658136.05, E2089120.96).
Thence, south 67 degrees 49 minutes 32 seconds west, a
distance of 665.16 feet to a point (N657885.00, E2088505.00).
Thence, north 88 degrees 13 minutes 52 seconds west, a
distance of 551.38 feet to a point (N657902.02, E2087953.88).
Thence, north 29 degrees 17 minutes 42 seconds east, a
distance of 114.18 feet to point (N658001.60, E2088009.75).
Thence, south 88 degrees 11 minutes 40 seconds east, a
distance of 477.00 feet to a point (N657986.57, E2088486.51).
Thence, north 68 degrees 11 minutes 06 seconds east, a
distance of 601.95 feet to a point (N658210.26, E2089045.35).
Thence, north 35 degrees 11 minutes 34 seconds east, a
distance of 89.58 feet to a point (N658283.47, E2089096.98).
Thence, south 20 degrees 56 minutes 30 seconds east, a
distance of 186.03 feet to the principal point of beginning
(N658109.73, E2089163.47) and containing within such bounds
2.81 acres, more or less, of submerged land.
(22) Apponaug cove, warwick, rhode island.--The following
portion of the project for navigation, Apponaug Cove, Rhode
Island, authorized under section 101 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 480): The 6-foot channel bounded by
coordinates N223269.93, E513089.12; N223348.31, E512799.54;
N223251.78, E512773.41; and N223178.0, E513046.0.
(23) Port washington harbor, wisconsin.--The following
portion of the navigation project for Port Washington Harbor,
Wisconsin, authorized by the Rivers and Harbors
Appropriations Act of July 11, 1870 (16 Stat. 223): Beginning
at the northwest corner of project at Channel Pt. No. 36, of
the Federal Navigation Project, Port Washington Harbor,
Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, at coordinates N513529.68,
E2535215.64, thence 188 degrees 31 minutes 59 seconds, a
distance of 178.32 feet, thence 196 degrees 47 minutes 17
seconds, a distance of 574.80 feet, thence 270 degrees 58
minutes 25 seconds, a distance of 465.50 feet, thence 178
degrees 56 minutes 17 seconds, a distance of 130.05 feet,
thence 87 degrees 17 minutes 05 seconds, a distance of 510.22
feet, thence 104 degrees 58 minutes 31 seconds, a distance of
178.33 feet, thence 115 degrees 47 minutes 55 seconds, a
distance of 244.15 feet, thence 25 degrees 12 minutes 08
seconds, a distance of 310.00 feet, thence 294 degrees 46
minutes 50 seconds, a distance of 390.20 feet, thence 16
degrees 56 minutes 16 seconds, a distance of 570.90 feet,
thence 266 degrees 01 minutes 25 seconds, a distance of
190.78 feet to Channel Pt. No. 36, point of beginning.

SEC. 502. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) Grand Prairie Region and Bayou Meto Basin, Arkansas.--
The project for flood control, Grand Prairie Region and Bayou
Meto Basin, Arkansas, authorized by section 204 of the Flood
Control Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 174) and deauthorized pursuant
to section 1001(b)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(1)), is authorized to be carried
out by the Secretary; except that the scope of the project
includes ground water protection and conservation,
agricultural water supply, and waterfowl management.
(b) White River, Arkansas.--The project for navigation,
White River Navigation to Batesville, Arkansas, authorized by
section 601(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4139) and deauthorized by section 52(b) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4045), is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary.
(c) Des Plaines River, Illinois.--The project for wetlands
research, Des Plaines River, Illinois, authorized by section
45 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat.
4041) and deauthorized pursuant to section 1001 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary.
(d) Alpena Harbor, Michigan.--The project for navigation,
Alpena Harbor, Michigan, authorized by section 301 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1090) and deauthorized
pursuant to section 1001 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), is authorized to be carried
out by the Secretary.
(e) Ontonagon harbor, ontonagon county, michigan.--The
project for navigation, Ontonagon Harbor, Ontonagon County,
Michigan, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1176) and deauthorized pursuant to
section 1001 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), is authorized to be carried out by the
Secretary.
(f) Knife River Harbor, Minnesota.--The project for
navigation, Knife River Harbor, Minnesota, authorized by
section 100 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974
(88 Stat. 41) and deauthorized pursuant to section 1001 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
579a(b)), is authorized to be carried out by the Secretary.
(g) Cliffwood Beach, New Jersey.--The project for
hurricane-flood protection and beach erosion control on
Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, New Jersey, authorized by
section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 118)
and deauthorized pursuant to section 1001 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary.

SEC. 503. CONTINUATION OF AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN PROJECTS.

(a) General Rule.--Notwithstanding section 1001 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a), the
following projects shall remain authorized to be carried out
by the Secretary:
(1) Cedar river harbor, michigan.--The project for
navigation, Cedar River Harbor, Michigan, authorized by
section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat.
1090).
(2) Cross village harbor, michigan.--The project for
navigation, Cross Village Harbor, Michigan, authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1966 (80 Stat.
1405).
(b) Limitation.--A project described in subsection (a)
shall not be authorized for construction after the last day
of the 5-year period that begins on the date of the enactment
of this Act unless, during such period,

[[Page H8715]]

funds have been obligated for the construction (including
planning and design) of the project.

SEC. 504. LAND CONVEYANCES.

(a) Oakland Inner Harbor Tidal Canal Property,
California.--Section 205 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4633) is amended--
(1) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) To adjacent land owners, the United States title to
all or portions of that part of the Oakland Inner Harbor
Tidal Canal which are located within the boundaries of the
city in which such land rests. Such conveyance shall be at
fair market value.'';
(2) by inserting after ``right-of-way'' the following: ``or
other rights deemed necessary by the Secretary''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following: ``The conveyances
and processes involved will be at no cost to the United
States.''.
(b) Mariemont, Ohio.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the village
of Mariemont, Ohio, for a sum of $85,000 all right, title,
and interest of the United States in and to a parcel of land
(including improvements thereto) under the jurisdiction of
the Corps of Engineers and known as the ``Ohio River Division
Laboratory'', as such parcel is described in paragraph (4).
(2) Terms and conditions.--The conveyance under paragraph
(1) shall be subject to such terms and conditions as the
Secretary considers necessary and appropriate to protect the
interests of the United States.
(3) Proceeds.--All proceeds from the conveyance under
paragraph (1) shall be deposited in the general fund of the
Treasury of the United States and credited as miscellaneous
receipts.
(4) Property description.--The parcel of land referred to
in paragraph (1) is the parcel situated in the State of Ohio,
County of Hamilton, Township 4, Fractional Range 2, Miami
Purchase, Columbia Township, Section 15, being parts of Lots
5 and 6 of the subdivision of the dower tract of the estate
of Joseph Ferris as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 112, of the
Plat Records of Hamilton County, Ohio, Recorder's Office, and
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at an iron pin set to mark the intersection of
the easterly line of Lot 5 of said subdivision of said dower
tract with the northerly line of the right-of-way of the
Norfolk and Western Railway Company as shown in Plat Book 27,
Page 182, Hamilton County, Ohio, Surveyor's Office, thence
with said northerly right-of-way line;
South 70 degrees 10 minutes 13 seconds west 258.52 feet to
a point; thence leaving the northerly right-of-way of the
Norfolk and Western Railway Company;
North 18 degrees 22 minutes 02 seconds west 302.31 feet to
a point in the south line of Mariemont Avenue; thence along
said south line;
North 72 degrees 34 minutes 35 seconds east 167.50 feet to
a point; thence leaving the south line of Mariemont Avenue;
North 17 degrees 25 minutes 25 seconds west 49.00 feet to a
point; thence
North 72 degrees 34 minutes 35 seconds east 100.00 feet to
a point; thence
South 17 degrees 25 minutes 25 seconds east 49.00 feet to a
point; thence
North 72 degrees 34 minutes 35 seconds east 238.90 feet to
a point; thence
South 00 degrees 52 minutes 07 seconds east 297.02 feet to
a point in the northerly line of the Norfolk and Western
Railway Company; thence with said northerly right-of-way;
South 70 degrees 10 minutes 13 seconds west 159.63 feet to
a point of beginning, containing 3.22 acres, more or less.
(c) Eufaula Lake, Oklahoma.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the city of
Eufaula, Oklahoma, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to a parcel of land consisting of
approximately 12.5 acres located at the Eufaula Lake project.
(2) Consideration.--Consideration for the conveyance under
paragraph (1) shall be the fair market value of the parcel
(as determined by the Secretary) and payment of all costs of
the United States in making the conveyance, including the
costs of--
(A) the survey required under paragraph (4);
(B) any other necessary survey or survey monumentation;
(C) compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); and
(D) any coordination necessary with respect to requirements
relating to endangered species, cultural resources, and clean
air (including the costs of agency consultation and public
hearings).
(3) Land surveys.--The exact acreage and description of the
parcel to be conveyed under paragraph (1) shall be determined
by such surveys as the Secretary considers necessary, which
shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Secretary.
(4) Environmental baseline survey.--Prior to making the
conveyance under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall conduct
an environmental baseline survey to determine the levels of
any contamination (as of the date of the survey) for which
the United States would be responsible under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) and any other
applicable law.
(5) Conditions concerning rights and easement.--The
conveyance under paragraph (1) shall be subject to existing
rights and to retention by the United States of a flowage
easement over all portions of the parcel that lie at or below
the flowage easement contour for the Eufaula Lake project.
(6) Other terms and conditions.--The conveyance under
paragraph (1) shall be subject to such other terms and
conditions as the Secretary considers necessary and
appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.
(d) Boardman, Oregon.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the city of
Boardman, Oregon, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to a parcel of land consisting of
approximately 141 acres acquired as part of the John Day Lock
and Dam project in the vicinity of such city currently under
lease to the Boardman Park and Recreation District.
(2) Consideration.--
(A) Park and recreation properties.--Properties to be
conveyed under this subsection that will be retained in
public ownership and used for public park and recreation
purposes shall be conveyed without consideration. If any such
property is no longer used for public park and recreation
purposes, then title to such property shall revert to the
Secretary.
(B) Other properties.--Properties to be conveyed under this
subsection and not described in subparagraph (A) shall be
conveyed at fair market value.
(3) Conditions concerning rights and easement.--The
conveyance of properties under this subsection shall be
subject to existing first rights of refusal regarding
acquisition of such properties and to retention of a flowage
easement over portions of the properties that the Secretary
determines to be necessary for operation of the project.
(4) Other terms and conditions.--The conveyance of
properties under this subsection shall be subject to such
other terms and conditions as the Secretary considers
necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the
United States.
(e) Tri-Cities Area, Washington.--
(1) General authority.--As soon as practicable after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make
the conveyances to the local governments referred to in
paragraph (2) of all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to the property described in paragraph (2).
(2) Property descriptions.--
(A) Benton county.--The property to be conveyed pursuant to
paragraph (1) to Benton County, Washington, is the property
in such county which is designated ``Area D'' on Exhibit A to
Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-81-43.
(B) Franklin county, washington.--The property to be
conveyed pursuant to paragraph (1) to Franklin County,
Washington, is--
(i) the 105.01 acres of property leased pursuant to Army
Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-20 as executed by Franklin County,
Washington, on April 7, 1977;
(ii) the 35 acres of property leased pursuant to
Supplemental Agreement No. 1 to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-
20;
(iii) the 20 acres of property commonly known as ``Richland
Bend'' which is designated by the shaded portion of Lot 1,
Section 11, and the shaded portion of Lot 1, Section 12,
Township 9 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on Exhibit D to
Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-
20;
(iv) the 7.05 acres of property commonly known as ``Taylor
Flat'' which is designated by the shaded portion of Lot
1, Section 13, Township 11 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on
Exhibit D to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease
No. DACW-68-1-77-20;
(v) the 14.69 acres of property commonly known as ``Byers
Landing'' which is designated by the shaded portion of Lots 2
and 3, Section 2, Township 10 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on
Exhibit D to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease No.
DACW-68-1-77-20; and
(vi) all levees within Franklin County, Washington, as of
the date of the enactment of this Act, and the property upon
which the levees are situated.
(C) City of kennewick, washington.--The property to be
conveyed pursuant to paragraph (1) to the city of Kennewick,
Washington, is the property within the city which is subject
to the Municipal Sublease Agreement entered into on April 6,
1989, between Benton County, Washington, and the cities of
Kennewick and Richland, Washington.
(D) City of richland, washington.--The property to be
conveyed pursuant to paragraph (1), to the city of Richland,
Washington, is the property within the city which is subject
to the Municipal Sublease Agreement entered into on April 6,
1989, between Benton County, Washington, and the Cities of
Kennewick and Richland, Washington.
(E) City of pasco, washington.--The property to be conveyed
pursuant to paragraph (1), to the city of Pasco, Washington,
is--
(i) the property within the city of Pasco, Washington,
which is leased pursuant to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-10;
and
(ii) all levees within such city, as of the date of the
enactment of this Act, and the property upon which the levees
are situated.
(F) Port of pasco, washington.--The property to be conveyed
pursuant to paragraph (1) to the Port of Pasco, Washington,
is--
(i) the property owned by the United States which is south
of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks in Lots 1 and 2,
Section 20, Township 9 North, Range 31 East, W.M.; and

[[Page H8716]]

(ii) the property owned by the United States which is south
of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks in Lots 1, 2, 3,
and 4, in each of Sections 21, 22, and 23, Township 9 North,
Range 31 East, W.M.
(G) Additional properties.--In addition to properties
described in subparagraphs (A) through (F), the Secretary may
convey to a local government referred to in subparagraphs (A)
through (F) such properties under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary in the Tri-Cities area as the Secretary and the
local government agree are appropriate for conveyance.
(3) Terms and conditions.--
(A) In general.--The conveyances under paragraph (1) shall
be subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary
considers necessary and appropriate to protect the interests
of the United States.
(B) Special rules for franklin county.--The property
described in paragraph (2)(B)(vi) shall be conveyed only
after Franklin County, Washington, has entered into a written
agreement with the Secretary which provides that the United
States shall continue to operate and maintain the flood
control drainage areas and pump stations on the property
conveyed and that the United States shall be provided all
easements and rights necessary to carry out that agreement.
(C) Special rule for city of pasco.--The property described
in paragraph (2)(E)(ii) shall be conveyed only after the city
of Pasco, Washington, has entered into a written agreement
with the Secretary which provides that the United States
shall continue to operate and maintain the flood control
drainage areas and pump stations on the property conveyed and
that the United States shall be provided all easements and
rights necessary to carry out that agreement.
(D) Consideration.--
(i) Park and recreation properties.--Properties to be
conveyed under this subsection that will be retained in
public ownership and used for public park and recreation
purposes shall be conveyed without consideration. If any such
property is no longer used for public park and recreation
purposes, then title to such property shall revert to the
Secretary.
(ii) Other properties.--Properties to be conveyed under
this subsection and not described in clause (i) shall be
conveyed at fair market value.
(4) Lake wallula levees.--
(A) Determination of minimum safe height.--
(i) Contract.--Within 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall contract with a
private entity agreed to under clause (ii) to determine,
within 6 months after such date of enactment, the minimum
safe height for the levees of the project for flood control,
Lake Wallula, Washington. The Secretary shall have final
approval of the minimum safe height.
(ii) Agreement of local officials.--A contract shall be
entered into under clause (i) only with a private entity
agreed to by the Secretary, appropriate representatives of
Franklin County, Washington, and appropriate representatives
of the city of Pasco, Washington.
(B) Authority.--A local government may reduce, at its cost,
the height of any levee of the project for flood control,
Lake Wallula, Washington, within the boundaries of such local
government to a height not lower than the minimum safe height
determined pursuant to subparagraph (A).
(f) Applicability of Other Laws.--Any contract for sale,
deed, or other transfer of real property under this section
shall be carried out in compliance with all applicable
provisions of section 120(h) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and
other environmental laws.

SEC. 505. NAMINGS.

(a) Milt Brandt Visitors Center, California.--
(1) Designation.--The visitors center at Warm Springs Dam,
California, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control
Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1192), shall be known and designated as
the ``Milt Brandt Visitors Center''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the visitors center referred to in paragraph (1)
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Milt Brandt
Visitors Center''.
(b) Carr Creek Lake, Kentucky.--
(1) Designation.--Carr Fork Lake in Knott County, Kentucky,
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962
(76 Stat. 1188), shall be known and designated as the ``Carr
Creek Lake''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lake referred to in paragraph (1) shall be
deemed to be a reference to the ``Carr Creek Lake''.
(c) William H. Natcher Bridge, Maceo, Kentucky, and
Rockport, Indiana.--
(1) Designation.--The bridge on United States Route 231
which crosses the Ohio River between Maceo, Kentucky, and
Rockport, Indiana, shall be known and designated as the
``William H. Natcher Bridge''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the bridge referred to in paragraph (1) shall be
deemed to be a reference to the ``William H. Natcher
Bridge''.
(d) John T. Myers Lock and Dam, Indiana and Kentucky.--
(1) Designation.--Uniontown Lock and Dam, on the Ohio
River, Indiana and Kentucky, shall be known and designated as
the ``John T. Myers Lock and Dam''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) shall
be deemed to be a reference to the ``John T. Myers Lock and
Dam''.
(e) J. Edward Roush Lake, Indiana.--
(1) Redesignation.--The lake on the Wabash River in
Huntington and Wells Counties, Indiana, authorized by section
203 of the Flood Control Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 312), and
known as Huntington Lake, shall be known and designated as
the ``J. Edward Roush Lake''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lake referred to in paragraph (1) shall be
deemed to be a reference to the ``J. Edward Roush Lake''.
(f) Russell B. Long Lock and Dam, Red River Waterway,
Louisiana.--
(1) Designation.--Lock and Dam 4 of the Red River Waterway,
Louisiana, shall be known and designated as the ``Russell B.
Long Lock and Dam''.
(2) Legal references.--A reference in any law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) shall
be deemed to be a reference to the ``Russell B. Long Lock and
Dam''.
(g) William L. Jess Dam and Intake Structure, Oregon.--
(1) Designation.--The dam located at mile 153.6 on the
Rogue River in Jackson County, Oregon, and commonly known as
the Lost Creek Dam Lake Project, shall be known and
designated as the ``William L. Jess Dam and Intake
Structure''.
(2) Legal references.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the dam referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to
be a reference to the ``William L. Jess Dam and Intake
Structure''.
(h) Aberdeen Lock and Dam, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--The lock and dam at Mile 358 of the
Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``Aberdeen
Lock and Dam''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) is
deemed to be a reference to the ``Aberdeen Lock and Dam''.
(i) Amory Lock, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--Lock A at Mile 371 of the Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``Amory Lock''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock referred to in paragraph (1) is deemed to
be a reference to the ``Amory Lock''.
(j) Fulton Lock, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--Lock C at Mile 391 of the Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``Fulton Lock''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock referred to in paragraph (1) is deemed to
be a reference to the ``Fulton Lock''.
(k) Howell Heflin Lock and Dam, Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway.--
(1) Redesignation.--The lock and dam at Mile 266 of the
Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, known as the Gainesville Lock
and Dam, is redesignated as the ``Howell Heflin Lock and
Dam''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) is
deemed to be a reference to the ``Howell Heflin Lock and
Dam''.
(l) G.V. ``Sonny'' Montgomery Lock, Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--Lock E at Mile 407 of the Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``G.V. `Sonny'
Montgomery Lock''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock referred to in paragraph (1) is deemed to
be a reference to the ``G.V. `Sonny' Montgomery Lock''.
(m) John Rankin Lock, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--Lock D at Mile 398 of the Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``John Rankin Lock''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock referred to in paragraph (1) is deemed to
be a reference to the ``John Rankin Lock''.
(n) John C. Stennis Lock and Dam, Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway.--
(1) Redesignation.--The lock and dam at Mile 335 of the
Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, known as the Columbus Lock and
Dam, is redesignated as the ``John C. Stennis Lock and Dam''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) is
deemed to be a reference to the ``John C. Stennis Lock and
Dam''.

[[Page H8717]]

(o) Jamie Whitten Lock and Dam, Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway.--
(1) Redesignation.--The lock and dam at Mile 412 of the
Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, known as the Bay Springs Lock
and Dam, is redesignated as the ``Jamie Whitten Lock and
Dam''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the lock and dam referred to in paragraph (1) is
deemed to be a reference to the ``Jamie Whitten Lock and
Dam''.
(p) Glover Wilkins Lock, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.--
(1) Designation.--Lock B at Mile 376 of the Tennessee-
Tombigbee Waterway is designated as the ``Glover Wilkins
Lock''.
(2) Legal reference.--Any reference in a law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record to the lock
referred to in paragraph (1) is deemed to be a reference to
the ``Glover Wilkins Lock''.

SEC. 506. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION, AND DEVELOPMENT.

(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
technical, planning, 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 pursuant to
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 waterbodies 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
measures to reduce destructive impact of flooding.
(c) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of assistance provided under this section shall be 50
percent.
(d) Project Locations.--The Secretary may provide
assistance under subsection (a) for projects at the following
locations:
(1) Gila River and Tributaries, Santa Cruz River, Arizona.
(2) Rio Salado, Salt River, Phoenix and Tempe, Arizona.
(3) Colusa basin, California.
(4) Los Angeles River watershed, California.
(5) Russian River watershed, California.
(6) Sacramento River watershed, California.
(7) San Pablo Bay watershed, California.
(8) Nancy Creek, Utoy Creek, and North Peachtree Creek and
South Peachtree Creek basin, Georgia.
(9) Lower Platte River watershed, Nebraska.
(10) Juniata River watershed, Pennsylvania, including
Raystown Lake.
(11) Upper Potomac River watershed, Grant and Mineral
Counties, West Virginia.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996.

SEC. 507. LAKES PROGRAM.

Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4148-4149) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (10);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (11) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(12) Goodyear Lake, Otsego County, New York, removal of
silt and aquatic growth;
``(13) Otsego Lake, Otsego County, New York, removal of
silt and aquatic growth and measures to address high nutrient
concentration;
``(14) Oneida Lake, Oneida County, New York, removal of
silt and aquatic growth;
``(15) Skaneateles and Owasco Lakes, New York, removal of
silt and aquatic growth and prevention of sediment deposit;
and
``(16) Twin Lakes, Paris, Illinois, removal of silt and
excess aquatic vegetation, including measures to address
excessive sedimentation, high nutrient concentration, and
shoreline erosion.''.

SEC. 508. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS.

(a) In General.--Upon request of the non-Federal interest,
the Secretary shall be responsible for maintenance of the
following navigation channels constructed or improved by non-
Federal interests if the Secretary determines that such
maintenance is economically justified and environmentally
acceptable and that the channel was constructed in accordance
with applicable permits and appropriate engineering and
design standards:
(1) Humboldt Harbor and Bay, Fields Landing Channel,
California.
(2) Mare Island Strait, California; except that, for
purposes of this section, the navigation channel shall be
deemed to have been constructed or improved by non-Federal
interests.
(3) Mississippi River Ship Channel, Chalmette Slip,
Louisiana.
(4) Greenville Inner Harbor Channel, Mississippi.
(5) Providence Harbor Shipping Channel, Rhode Island.
(6) Matagorda Ship Channel, Point Comfort Turning Basin,
Texas.
(7) Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Rincon Canal System,
Texas.
(8) Brazos Island Harbor, Texas, connecting channel to
Mexico.
(9) Blair Waterway, Tacoma Harbor, Washington.
(b) Completion of Assessment.--Within 6 months of receipt
of a request from the non-Federal interest for Federal
assumption of maintenance of a channel listed in subsection
(a), the Secretary shall make a determination as provided in
subsection (a) and advise the non-Federal interest of the
Secretary's determination.

SEC. 509. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT
REMEDIATION.

Section 401 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(104 Stat. 4644) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 401. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT
REMEDIATION.

``(a) Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
technical, planning, and engineering assistance to State and
local governments and nongovernmental entities designated by
the State or local government in the development and
implementation of remedial action plans for areas of concern
in the Great Lakes identified under the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement of 1978.
``(2) Non-federal share.--Non-Federal interests shall
contribute, in cash or by providing in-kind contributions, 50
percent of costs of activities for which assistance is
provided under paragraph (1).
``(b) Sediment Remediation Demonstration Projects.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (acting
through the Great Lakes National Program Office), may conduct
pilot- and full-scale demonstration projects of promising
techniques to remediate contaminated sediments in freshwater
coastal regions in the Great Lakes basin. The Secretary must
conduct no fewer than 3 full-scale demonstration projects
under this subsection.
``(2) Site selection for demonstration projects.--In
selecting the sites for the technology demonstration
projects, the Secretary shall give priority consideration to
Saginaw Bay, Michigan, Sheboygan Harbor, Wisconsin, Grand
Calumet River, Indiana, Ashtabula River, Ohio, Buffalo River,
New York, and Duluth/Superior Harbor, Minnesota.
``(3) Deadline for identifications.--Within 18 months after
the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary
shall identify the sites and technologies to be demonstrated
and complete each such full-scale demonstration project
within 3 years after such date of enactment.
``(4) Non-federal share.--Non-Federal interests shall
contribute 50 percent of costs of projects under this
subsection. Such costs may be paid in cash or by providing
in-kind contributions.
``(5) Authorizations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section
$5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997 through 2000.''.

SEC. 510. GREAT LAKES DREDGED MATERIAL TESTING AND EVALUATION
MANUAL.

The Secretary, in cooperation with the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, shall provide technical
assistance to non-Federal interests on testing procedures
contained in the Great Lakes Dredged Material Testing and
Evaluation Manual developed pursuant to section 230.2(c) of
title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.

SEC. 511. GREAT LAKES SEDIMENT REDUCTION.

(a) Great Lakes Tributary Sediment Transport Model.--For
each major river system or set of major river systems
depositing sediment into a Great Lakes federally authorized
commercial harbor, channel maintenance project site, or Area
of Concern identified under the Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement of 1978, the Secretary, in consultation and
coordination with the Great Lakes States, shall develop a
tributary sediment transport model.
(b) Requirements for Models.--In developing a tributary
sediment transport model under this section, the Secretary
shall--
(1) build upon data and monitoring information generated in
earlier studies and programs of the Great Lakes and their
tributaries; and
(2) complete models for 30 major river systems, either
individually or in combination as part of a set, within the
5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act.

SEC. 512. GREAT LAKES CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITIES.

(a) Assessment.--The Secretary shall conduct an assessment
of the general conditions of confined disposal facilities in
the Great Lakes.
(b) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the assessment conducted
under subsection (a), including the following:
(1) A description of the cumulative effects of confined
disposal facilities in the Great Lakes.
(2) Recommendations for specific remediation actions for
each confined disposal facility in the Great Lakes.
(3) An evaluation of, and recommendations for, confined
disposal facility management

[[Page H8718]]

practices and technologies to conserve capacity at such
facilities and to minimize adverse environmental effects at
such facilities throughout the Great Lakes system.

SEC. 513. CHESAPEAKE BAY RESTORATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a pilot
program to provide to non-Federal interests in the Chesapeake
Bay watershed technical, planning, design, and construction
assistance for water-related environmental infrastructure and
resource protection and development projects affecting the
Chesapeake Bay, including projects for sediment and erosion
control, protection of eroding shorelines, protection of
essential public works, wastewater treatment and related
facilities, water supply and related facilities, and
beneficial uses of dredged material, and other related
projects.
(b) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may
provide assistance for a project under this section only if
the project is publicly owned and will be publicly operated
and maintained.
(c) Cooperation Agreement.--
(1) In general.--Before providing assistance under this
section, the Secretary shall enter into a project cooperation
agreement pursuant to section 221 of the Flood Control Act of
1970 (84 Stat. 1818) with a non-Federal interest to provide
for technical, planning, design, and construction assistance
for the project.
(2) Requirements.--Each agreement entered into pursuant to
this subsection shall provide for the following:
(A) Plan.--Development by the Secretary, in consultation
with appropriate Federal, State, and local officials, of a
plan, including appropriate engineering plans and
specifications and an estimate of expected benefits.
(B) Legal and institutional structures.--Establishment of
such legal and institutional structures as are necessary to
ensure the effective long-term operation and maintenance of
the project by the non-Federal interest.
(d) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Federal share.--Except as provided in paragraph (2)(B),
the Federal share of the total project costs of each local
cooperation agreement entered into under this section shall
be 75 percent.
(2) Non-federal share.--
(A) Provision of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and
relocations.--The non-Federal interests for a project to
which this section applies shall provide the lands,
easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged material
disposal areas necessary for the project.
(B) Value of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and
relocations.--In determining the non-Federal contribution
toward carrying out a local cooperation agreement entered
into under this section, the Secretary shall provide credit
to a non-Federal interest for the value of lands, easements,
rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged material disposal
areas provided by the non-Federal interest, except that the
amount of credit provided for a project under this paragraph
may not exceed 25 percent of total project costs.
(C) Operation and maintenance costs.--The non-Federal share
of the costs of operation and maintenance of carrying out the
agreement under this section shall be 100 percent.
(e) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws and
Agreements.--
(1) In general.--Nothing in this section waives, limits, or
otherwise affects the applicability of any provision of
Federal or State law that would otherwise apply to a project
carried out with assistance provided under this section.
(2) Cooperation.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary shall cooperate with the heads of appropriate
Federal agencies.
(f) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the program carried out under this section, together with
a recommendation concerning whether or not the program should
be implemented on a national basis.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.

SEC. 514. EXTENSION OF JURISDICTION OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER
COMMISSION.

The jurisdiction of the Mississippi River Commission,
established by the first section of the Act of June 28, 1879
(33 U.S.C. 641; 21 Stat. 37), is extended to include--
(1) all of the area between the eastern side of the Bayou
Lafourche Ridge from Donaldsonville, Louisiana, to the Gulf
of Mexico and the west guide levee of the Mississippi River
from Donaldsonville, Louisiana, to the Gulf of Mexico;
(2) Alexander County, Illinois; and
(3) the area in the State of Illinois from the confluence
of the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers northward to the vicinity
of Mississippi River mile 39.5, including the Len Small
Drainage and Levee District, insofar as such area is affected
by the flood waters of the Mississippi River.

SEC. 515. ALTERNATIVE TO ANNUAL PASSES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall evaluate the
feasibility of implementing an alternative to the $25 annual
pass that the Secretary currently offers to users of
recreation facilities at water resources projects of the
Corps of Engineers.
(b) Annual Pass.--The evaluation under subsection (a) shall
include the establishment of an annual pass which costs $10
or less for the use of recreation facilities at Raystown
Lake, Pennsylvania.
(c) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the project carried out under this section, together with
recommendations concerning whether annual passes for
individual projects should be offered on a nationwide basis.

SEC. 516. RECREATION PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall promote Federal, non-
Federal, and private sector cooperation in creating public
recreation opportunities and developing the necessary
supporting infrastructure at water resources projects of the
Corps of Engineers.
(b) Infrastructure Improvements.--
(1) Recreation infrastructure improvements.--In
demonstrating the feasibility of the public-private
cooperative, the Secretary shall provide, at Federal expense,
such infrastructure improvements as are necessary to support
a potential private recreational development at the Raystown
Lake Project, Pennsylvania, generally in accordance with the
Master Plan Update (1994) for the project.
(2) Agreement.--The Secretary shall enter into an agreement
with an appropriate non-Federal public entity to ensure that
the infrastructure improvements constructed by the Secretary
on non-project lands pursuant to paragraph (1) are
transferred to and operated and maintained by the non-Federal
public entity.
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $4,500,000
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996.
(c) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the cooperative efforts carried out under this section,
including the improvements required by subsection (b).

SEC. 517. ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

Section 219 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4836-4837) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for providing construction assistance
under this section--
``(1) $10,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(5);
``(2) $2,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(6);
``(3) $10,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(7);
``(4) $11,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(8);
``(5) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(16); and
``(6) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection
(c)(17).''.

SEC. 518. CORPS CAPABILITY TO CONSERVE FISH AND WILDLIFE.

Section 704(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2263(b); 100 Stat. 4157) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$5,000,000''; and inserting
``$10,000,000''; and
(2) in paragraph (4) by inserting ``and Virginia'' after
``Maryland''.

SEC. 519. PERIODIC BEACH NOURISHMENT.

The Secretary shall carry out periodic beach nourishment
for each of the following projects for a period of 50 years
beginning on the date of initiation of construction of such
project:
(1) Broward county, florida.--Project for shoreline
protection, segments II and III, Broward County, Florida.
(2) Fort pierce, florida.--Project for shoreline
protection, Fort Pierce, Florida.
(3) Lee county, florida.--Project for shoreline protection,
Lee County, Captiva Island segment, Florida.
(4) Palm beach county, florida.--Project for shoreline
protection, Jupiter/Carlin, Ocean Ridge, and Boca Raton North
Beach segments, Palm Beach County, Florida.
(5) Panama city beaches, florida.--Project for shoreline
protection, Panama City Beaches, Florida.
(6) Tybee island, georgia.--Project for beach erosion
control, Tybee Island, Georgia.

SEC. 520. CONTROL OF AQUATIC PLANTS.

The Secretary shall carry out under section 104(b) of the
River and Harbor Act of 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610(b))--
(1) a program to control aquatic plants in Lake St. Clair,
Michigan; and
(2) program to control aquatic plants in the Schuylkill
River, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

SEC. 521. HOPPER DREDGES.

Section 3 of the Act of August 11, 1888 (33 U.S.C. 622; 25
Stat. 423), is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Program To Increase Use of Private Hopper Dredges.--
``(1) Initiation.--The Secretary shall initiate a program
to increase the use of private industry hopper dredges for
the construction and maintenance of Federal navigation
channels.
``(2) Ready reserve status for hopper dredge wheeler.--In
order to carry out the requirements of this subsection, the
Secretary shall, not later than the earlier of 90 days after
the date of completion of the rehabilitation of the hopper
dredge McFarland pursuant to section 564 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 or October 1, 1997, place
the Federal hopper dredge Wheeler in a ready reserve status.
``(3) Testing and use of ready reserve hopper dredge.--The
Secretary may periodically perform routine tests of the
equipment

[[Page H8719]]

of the vessel placed in a ready reserve status under this
subsection to ensure the vessel's ability to perform
emergency work. The Secretary shall not assign any scheduled
hopper dredging work to such vessel but shall perform any
repairs needed to maintain the vessel in a fully operational
condition. The Secretary may place the vessel in active
status in order to perform any dredging work only in the
event the Secretary determines that private industry has
failed to submit a responsive and responsible bid for work
advertised by the Secretary or to carry out the project as
required pursuant to a contract with the Secretary.
``(4) Repair and rehabilitation.--The Secretary may
undertake any repair and rehabilitation of any Federal hopper
dredge, including the vessel placed in ready reserve status
under paragraph (2) to allow the vessel to be placed into
active status as provided in paragraph (3).
``(5) Procedures.--The Secretary shall develop and
implement procedures to ensure that, to the maximum extent
practicable, private industry hopper dredge capacity is
available to meet both routine and time-sensitive dredging
needs. Such procedures shall include--
``(A) scheduling of contract solicitations to effectively
distribute dredging work throughout the dredging season; and
``(B) use of expedited contracting procedures to allow
dredges performing routine work to be made available to meet
time-sensitive, urgent, or emergency dredging needs.
``(6) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall report to
Congress on whether the vessel placed in ready reserve status
pursuant to paragraph (2) is needed to be returned to active
status or continued in a ready reserve status or whether
another Federal hopper dredge should be placed in a ready
reserve status.
``(7) Limitations.--
``(A) Reductions in status.--The Secretary may not further
reduce the readiness status of any Federal hopper dredge
below a ready reserve status except any vessel placed in such
status for not less than 5 years which the Secretary
determines has not been used sufficiently to justify
retaining the vessel in such status.
``(B) Increase in assignments of dredging work.--For each
fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Secretary shall not assign any greater
quantity of dredging work to any Federal hopper dredge in an
active status than was assigned to that vessel in the average
of the 3 prior fiscal years.
``(8) Contracts; payment of capital costs.--The Secretary
may enter into a contract for the maintenance and crewing of
any vessel retained in a ready reserve status. The capital
costs (including depreciation costs) of any vessel retained
in such status shall be paid for out of funds made available
from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and shall not be
charged against the Corps of Engineers' Revolving Fund
Account or any individual project cost unless the vessel is
specifically used in connection with that project.''.

SEC. 522. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE.

The Secretary shall provide design and construction
assistance to non-Federal interests for the following
projects:
(1) Repair and rehabilitation of the Lower Girard Lake Dam,
Girard, Ohio, at an estimated total cost of $2,500,000.
(2) Construction of a multi-purpose dam and reservoir, Bear
Valley Dam, Franklin County, Pennsylvania, at an estimated
total cost of $15,000,000.
(3) Repair and upgrade of the dam and appurtenant features
at Lake Merriweather, Little Calfpasture River, Virginia, at
an estimated total cost of $6,000,000.

SEC. 523. FIELD OFFICE HEADQUARTERS FACILITIES.

Subject to amounts being made available in advance in
appropriations Acts, the Secretary may use Plant Replacement
and Improvement Program funds to design and construct a new
headquarters facility for--
(1) the New England Division, Waltham, Massachusetts; and
(2) the Jacksonville District, Jacksonville, Florida.

SEC. 524. CORPS OF ENGINEERS RESTRUCTURING PLAN.

(a) Division Office, Chicago, Illinois.--The Secretary
shall continue to maintain a division office of the Corps of
Engineers in Chicago, Illinois, notwithstanding any plan
developed pursuant to title I of the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act, 1996 (109 Stat. 405) to
reduce the number of division offices. Such division office
shall be responsible for the 5 district offices for which the
division office was responsible on June 1, 1996.
(b) District Office, St. Louis, Missouri.--The Secretary
shall not reassign the St. Louis District of the Corps of
Engineers from the operational control of the Lower
Mississippi Valley Division.

SEC. 525. LAKE SUPERIOR CENTER.

(a) Construction.--The Secretary, shall assist the
Minnesota Lake Superior Center authority in the construction
of an educational facility to be used in connection with
efforts to educate the public in the economic, recreational,
biological, aesthetic, and spiritual worth of Lake Superior
and other large bodies of fresh water.
(b) Public Ownership.--Prior to providing any assistance
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall verify that the
facility to be constructed under subsection (a) will be owned
by the public authority established by the State of Minnesota
to develop, operate, and maintain the Lake Superior Center.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September
30, 1996, $10,000,000 for the construction of the facility
under subsection (a).

SEC. 526. JACKSON COUNTY, ALABAMA.

The Secretary shall provide technical, planning, and design
assistance to non-Federal interests for wastewater treatment
and related facilities, remediation of point and nonpoint
sources of pollution and contaminated riverbed sediments, and
related activities in Jackson County, Alabama, including the
city of Stevenson. The Federal cost of such assistance may
not exceed $5,000,000.

SEC. 527. EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS CENTER OF EXPERTISE
EXTENSION.

The Secretary shall establish an extension of the
Earthquake Preparedness Center of Expertise for the central
United States at an existing district office of the Corps of
Engineers near the New Madrid fault.

SEC. 528. QUARANTINE FACILITY.

Section 108(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4816) is amended by striking ``$1,000,000''
and inserting ``$4,000,000''.

SEC. 529. BENTON AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, ARKANSAS.

Section 220 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4836-4837) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(c) Use of Federal Funds.--The Secretary may make
available to the non-Federal interests funds not to exceed an
amount equal to the Federal share of the total project cost
to be used by the non-Federal interests to undertake the work
directly or by contract.''.

SEC. 530. CALAVERAS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Cooperation Agreements.--The Secretary shall enter into
cooperation agreements with non-Federal interests to develop
and carry out, in cooperation with Federal and State
agencies, reclamation and protection projects for the purpose
of abating and mitigating surface water quality degradation
caused by abandoned mines in the watershed of the lower
Mokelume River in Calaveras County, California.
(b) Consultation With Federal Entities.--Any project under
subsection (a) that is located on lands owned by the United
States shall be undertaken in consultation with the Federal
entity with administrative jurisdiction over such lands.
(c) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of the
activities conducted under cooperation agreements entered
into under subsection (a) shall be 75 percent; except that,
with respect to projects located on lands owned by the United
States, the Federal share shall be 100 percent. The non-
Federal share of project costs may be provided in the form of
design and construction services. Non-Federal interests shall
receive credit for the reasonable costs of such services
completed by such interests prior to entering an agreement
with the Secretary for a project.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for
projects undertaken under this section.

SEC. 531. FARMINGTON DAM, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Conjunctive Use Study.--The Secretary is directed to
continue participation in the Stockton, California
Metropolitan Area Flood Control study to include the
evaluation of the feasibility of storage of water at
Farmington Dam to implement a conjunctive use plan. In
conducting the study, the Secretary shall consult with the
Stockton East Water District concerning joint operation or
potential transfer of Farmington Dam. The Secretary shall
make recommendations on facility transfers and operational
alternatives as part of the Secretary's report to Congress.
(b) Report.--The Secretary shall report to Congress, no
later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this
Act, on the feasibility of a conjunctive use plan using
Farmington Dam for water storage.

SEC. 532. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CALIFORNIA.

The non-Federal share for a project to add water
conservation to the existing Los Angeles County Drainage
Area, California, project shall be 100 percent of separable
first costs and separable operation, maintenance, and
replacement costs associated with the water conservation
purpose.

SEC. 533. PRADO DAM SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS, CALIFORNIA.

The Secretary, in coordination with the State of
California, shall provide technical assistance to Orange
County, California, in developing appropriate public safety
and access improvements associated with that portion of
California State Route 71 being relocated for the Prado Dam
feature of the project authorized as part of the project for
flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, California, by
section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4113).

SEC. 534. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA.

The non-Federal share for a project to add water
conservation to the Seven Oaks Dam, Santa Ana River Mainstem,
California, project shall be 100 percent of separable first
costs and separable operation, maintenance,

[[Page H8720]]

and replacement costs associated with the water conservation
purpose.

SEC. 535. MANATEE COUNTY, FLORIDA.

The project for flood control, Cedar Hammock (Wares Creek),
Florida, is authorized to be carried out by the Secretary
substantially in accordance with the Final Detailed Project
Report and Environmental Assessment, dated April 1995, at a
total cost of $13,846,000, with an estimated first Federal
cost of $8,783,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$5,063,000.

SEC. 536. TAMPA, FLORIDA.

The Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement under
section 230 of this Act with the Museum of Science and
Industry, Tampa, Florida, to provide technical, planning, and
design assistance to demonstrate the water quality functions
found in wetlands, at an estimated total Federal cost of
$500,000.

SEC. 537. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR DEEP RIVER BASIN,
INDIANA.

(a) Development.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Natural Resources Conservation Service of the Department of
Agriculture, shall develop a watershed management plan for
the Deep River Basin, Indiana, which includes Deep River,
Lake George, Turkey Creek, and other related tributaries in
Indiana.
(b) Contents.--The plan to be developed by the Secretary
under subsection (a) shall address specific concerns related
to the Deep River Basin area, including sediment flow into
Deep River, Turkey Creek, and other tributaries; control of
sediment quality in Lake George; flooding problems; the
safety of the Lake George Dam; and watershed management.

SEC. 538. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY.

(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary shall
establish a program for providing environmental assistance to
non-Federal interests in southern and eastern Kentucky. Such
assistance may be in the form of design and construction
assistance for water-related environmental infrastructure and
resource protection and development projects in southern and
eastern Kentucky, including projects for wastewater treatment
and related facilities, water supply, storage, treatment, and
distribution facilities, and surface water resource
protection and development.
(b) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may
provide assistance for a project under this section only if
the project is publicly owned.
(c) Project Cooperation Agreements.--
(1) In general.--Before providing assistance under this
section, the Secretary shall enter into a project cooperation
agreement with a non-Federal interest to provide for design
and construction of the project to be carried out with such
assistance.
(2) Requirements.--Each agreement entered into under this
subsection shall provide for the following:
(A) Plan.--Development by the Secretary, in consultation
with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facilities
development plan or resource protection plan, including
appropriate plans and specifications.
(B) Legal and institutional structures.--Establishment of
each such legal and institutional structures as are necessary
to assure the effective long-term operation of the project by
the non-Federal interest.
(3) Cost sharing.--
(A) In general.--Total project costs under each agreement
entered into under this subsection shall be shared at 75
percent Federal and 25 percent non-Federal, except that the
non-Federal interest shall receive credit for the reasonable
costs of design work completed by such interest before entry
into the agreement with the Secretary. The Federal share may
be in the form of grants or reimbursements of project costs.
(B) Credit for certain financing costs.--In the event of
delays in the reimbursement of the non-Federal share of a
project, the non-Federal interest shall receive credit for
reasonable interest and other associated financing costs
necessary for such non-Federal interest to provide the non-
Federal share of the project's cost.
(C) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way.--The non-Federal
interest shall receive credit for lands, easements, rights-
of-way, and relocations provided by the non-Federal interest
toward its share of project costs, including for costs
associated with obtaining permits necessary for the placement
of such project on publicly owned or controlled lands, but
not to exceed 25 percent of total project costs.
(D) Operation and maintenance.--Operation and maintenance
costs shall be 100 percent non-Federal.
(d) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws.--Nothing
in this section shall be construed as waiving, limiting, or
otherwise affecting the applicability of any provision of
Federal or State law which would otherwise apply to a project
to be carried out with assistance provided under this
section.
(e) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1999, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the program carried out under this section, together with
recommendations concerning whether or not such program should
be implemented on a national basis.
(f) Southern and Eastern Kentucky Defined.--For purposes of
this section, the term ``southern and eastern Kentucky''
means Morgan, Floyd, Pulaski, Wayne, Laurel, Knox, Pike,
Menifee, Perry, Harlan, Breathitt, Martin, Jackson, Wolfe,
Clay, Magoffin, Owsley, Johnson, Leslie, Lawrence, Knott,
Bell, McCreary, Rockcastle, Whitley, Lee, and Letcher
Counties, Kentucky.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000.

SEC. 539. LOUISIANA COASTAL WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECTS.

Section 303(f) of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection
and Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 3952(f); 104 Stat. 4782-4783)
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4) by striking ``and (3)'' and inserting
``(3), and (5)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Federal share in calendar years 1996 and 1997.--
Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), amounts made
available in accordance with section 306 of this title to
carry out coastal wetlands restoration projects under this
section in calendar years 1996 and 1997 shall provide 90
percent of the cost of such projects.''.

SEC. 540. SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA.

(a) Flood Control.--The Secretary is directed to proceed
with engineering, design, and construction of projects to
provide for flood control and improvements to rainfall
drainage systems in Jefferson, Orleans, and St. Tammany
Parishes, Louisiana, in accordance with the following reports
of the New Orleans District Engineer: Jefferson and Orleans
Parishes, Louisiana, Urban Flood Control and Water Quality
Management, July 1992; Tangipahoa, Techefuncte, and Tickfaw
Rivers, Louisiana, June 1991; St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana,
July 1996; and Schneider Canal, Slidell, Louisiana, Hurricane
Protection, May 1990.
(b) Cost Sharing.--The cost of any work performed by the
non-Federal interests subsequent to the reports referred to
in subsection (a) and determined by the Secretary to be a
compatible and integral part of the projects shall be
credited toward the non-Federal share of the projects.
(c) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated
$100,000,000 for the initiation and partial accomplishment of
projects described in the reports referred to in subsection
(a).

SEC. 541. RESTORATION PROJECTS FOR MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA,
AND WEST VIRGINIA.

(a) In General.--
(1) Cooperation agreements.--The Secretary shall enter into
cooperation agreements with non-Federal interests to develop
and carry out, in cooperation with Federal and State
agencies, reclamation and protection projects for the purpose
of abating and mitigating surface water quality degradation
caused by abandoned mines along--
(A) the North Branch of the Potomac River, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, and West Virginia; and
(B) the New River, West Virginia, watershed.
(2) Additional measures.--Projects under paragraph (1) may
also include measures for the abatement and mitigation of
surface water quality degradation caused by the lack of
sanitary wastewater treatment facilities or the need to
enhance such facilities.
(3) Consultation with federal entities.--Any project under
paragraph (1) that is located on lands owned by the United
States shall be undertaken in consultation with the Federal
entity with administrative jurisdiction over such lands.
(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of the
activities conducted under cooperation agreements entered
into under subsection (a)(1) shall be 75 percent; except
that, with respect to projects located on lands owned by the
United States, the Federal share shall be 100 percent. The
non-Federal share of project costs may be provided in the
form of design and construction services. Non-Federal
interests shall receive credit for the reasonable costs of
such services completed by such interests prior to entering
an agreement with the Secretary for a project.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for
projects undertaken under subsection (a)(1)(A) and $5,000,000
for projects undertaken under subsection (a)(1)(B).

SEC. 542. CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND.

The Secretary is directed to provide technical, planning,
and design assistance to State, local, and other Federal
entities for the restoration of the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal, in the vicinity of Cumberland, Maryland.

SEC. 543. BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATERIAL, POPLAR ISLAND,
MARYLAND.

The Secretary shall carry out a project for the beneficial
use of dredged material at Poplar Island, Maryland, pursuant
to section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992; except that, notwithstanding the limitation contained
in subsection (e) of such section, the initial cost of
constructing dikes for the project shall be $78,000,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $58,500,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $19,500,000.

SEC. 544. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES, SMITH ISLAND, MARYLAND.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall implement erosion
control measures in the vicinity of Rhodes Point, Smith
Island, Maryland, at an estimated total Federal cost of
$450,000.
(b) Implementation on Emergency Basis.--The project under
subsection (a) shall be carried out on an emergency basis in
view of the national, historic, and cultural value of the
island and in order to protect

[[Page H8721]]

the Federal investment in infrastructure facilities.
(c) Cost Sharing.--Cost sharing applicable to hurricane and
storm damage reduction shall be applicable to the project to
be carried out under subsection (a).

SEC. 545. DULUTH, MINNESOTA, ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT.

(a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary shall develop and
implement alternative methods for decontamination and
disposal of contaminated dredged material at the Port of
Duluth, Minnesota.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September
30, 1996, to carry out this section $1,000,000. Such sums
shall remain available until expended.

SEC. 546. REDWOOD RIVER BASIN, MINNESOTA.

(a) Study and Strategy Development.--The Secretary, in
cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture and the State
of Minnesota, shall conduct a study, and develop a strategy,
for using wetland restoration, soil and water conservation
practices, and nonstructural measures to reduce flood
damages, improve water quality, and create wildlife habitat
in the Redwood River basin and the subbasins draining into
the Minnesota River, at an estimated Federal cost of
$4,000,000.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of the study and development of the strategy shall be 25
percent and may be provided through in-kind services and
materials.
(c) Cooperation Agreement.--In conducting the study and
developing the strategy under this section, the Secretary
shall enter into cooperation agreements to provide financial
assistance to appropriate Federal, State, and local
government agencies, including activities for the
implementation of wetland restoration projects and soil and
water conservation measures.
(d) Implementation.--The Secretary shall undertake
development and implementation of the strategy authorized by
this section in cooperation with local landowners and local
government officials.

SEC. 547. NATCHEZ BLUFFS, MISSISSIPPI.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall carry out the project
for bluff stabilization, Natchez Bluffs, Natchez,
Mississippi, substantially in accordance with (1) the Natchez
Bluffs Study, dated September 1985, (2) the Natchez Bluffs
Study: Supplement I, dated June 1990, and (3) the Natchez
Bluffs Study: Supplement II, dated December 1993, in the
portions of the bluffs described in subsection (b), at a
total cost of $17,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$12,900,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,300,000.
(b) Description of Project Location.--The portions of the
Natchez Bluffs where the project is to be carried out under
subsection (a) are described in the studies referred to in
subsection (a) as--
(1) Clifton Avenue, area 3;
(2) the bluff above Silver Street, area 6;
(3) the bluff above Natchez Under-the-Hill, area 7; and
(4) Madison Street to State Street, area 4.

SEC. 548. SARDIS LAKE, MISSISSIPPI.

(a) Management.--The Secretary shall work cooperatively
with the State of Mississippi and the city of Sardis,
Mississippi, to the maximum extent practicable, in the
management of existing and proposed leases of land consistent
with the Sardis Lake Recreation and Tourism Master Plan
prepared by the city for the economic development of the
Sardis Lake area.
(b) Flood Control Storage.--The Secretary shall review the
study conducted by the city of Sardis, Mississippi, regarding
the impact of the Sardis Lake Recreation and Tourism Master
Plan prepared by the city on flood control storage in Sardis
Lake. The city shall not be required to reimburse the
Secretary for the cost of such storage, or the cost of the
Secretary's review, if the Secretary finds that the loss of
flood control storage resulting from implementation of the
master plan is not significant.

SEC. 549. MISSOURI RIVER MANAGEMENT.

(a) Navigation Season Extension.--
(1) Increases.--The Secretary, working with the Secretary
of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior, shall
incrementally increase the length of each navigation season
for the Missouri River by 15 days from the length of the
previous navigation season and those seasons thereafter,
until such time as the navigation season for the Missouri
River is increased by 1 month from the length of the
navigation season on April 1, 1996.
(2) Application of increases.--Increases in the length of
the navigation season under paragraph (1) shall be applied in
calendar year 1996 so that the navigation season in such
calendar year for the Missouri River begins on April 1, 1996,
and ends on December 15, 1996.
(3) Adjustment of navigation levels.--Scheduled full
navigation levels shall be incrementally increased to
coincide with increases in the navigation season under
paragraph (1).
(b) Water Control Policies Affecting Navigation Channels.--
The Secretary may not take any action which is inconsistent
with a water control policy of the Corps of Engineers in
effect on January 1, 1995, if such action would result in--
(1) a reduction of 10 days or more in the total number of
days in a year during which vessels are able to use
navigation channels; or
(2) a substantial increase in flood damage to lands
adjacent to a navigation channel, unless such action is
specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(c) Economic and Environmental Impact Evaluation.--Whenever
a Federal department, agency, or instrumentality conducts an
environmental impact statement with respect to management of
the Missouri River system, the head of such department,
agency, or instrumentality shall also conduct a cost benefit
analysis on any changes proposed in the management of the
Missouri River.

SEC. 550. ST. CHARLES COUNTY, MISSOURI, FLOOD PROTECTION.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
or regulation, no county located at the confluence of the
Missouri and Mississippi Rivers or community located in any
county located at the confluence of the Missouri and
Mississippi Rivers shall have its participation in any
Federal program suspended, revoked, or otherwise affected
solely due to that county or community permitting the raising
of levees by any public-sponsored levee district, along an
alignment approved by the circuit court of such county, to a
level sufficient to contain a 20-year flood.
(b) Treatment of Existing Permits.--If any public-sponsored
levee district has received a Federal permit valid during the
Great Flood of 1993 to improve or modify its levee system
before the date of the enactment of this Act, such permit
shall be considered adequate to allow the raising of the
height of levees in such system under subsection (a).

SEC. 551. DURHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

The Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement under
section 230 of this Act with the University of New Hampshire
to provide technical assistance for a water treatment
technology center addressing the needs of small communities.

SEC. 552. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JERSEY.

Section 324(b)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4849) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) Mitigation, enhancement, and acquisition of
significant wetlands that contribute to the Meadowlands
ecosystem.''.

SEC. 553. AUTHORIZATION OF DREDGE MATERIAL CONTAINMENT
FACILITY FOR PORT OF NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to construct,
operate, and maintain a dredged material containment facility
with a capacity commensurate with the long-term dredged
material disposal needs of port facilities under the
jurisdiction of the Port of New York/New Jersey. Such
facility may be a near-shore dredged material disposal
facility along the Brooklyn waterfront. The costs associated
with feasibility studies, design, engineering, and
construction shall be shared with the local sponsor in
accordance with the provisions of section 101 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986.
(b) Beneficial Use.--After the facility to be constructed
under subsection (a) has been filled to capacity with dredged
material, the Secretary shall maintain the facility for the
public benefit.

SEC. 554. HUDSON RIVER HABITAT RESTORATION, NEW YORK.

(a) Habitat Restoration Project.--The Secretary shall
expedite the feasibility study of the Hudson River Habitat
Restoration, Hudson River Basin, New York, and shall carry
out no fewer than 4 projects for habitat restoration, to the
extent the Secretary determines such work to be technically
feasible. Such projects shall be designed to--
(1) provide a pilot project to assess and improve habitat
value and environmental outputs of recommended projects;
(2) provide a demonstration project to evaluate various
restoration techniques for effectiveness and cost;
(3) fill an important local habitat need within a specific
portion of the study area; and
(4) take advantage of ongoing or planned actions by other
agencies, local municipalities, or environmental groups that
would increase the effectiveness or decrease the overall cost
of implementing one of the recommended restoration project
sites.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--Non-Federal interests shall provide
25 percent of the cost on each project undertaken under
subsection (a). The non-Federal share may be in the form of
cash or in-kind contributions.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $11,000,000.

SEC. 555. QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK.

(a) Description of Nonnavigable Area.--Subject to
subsections (b) and (c), the area of Long Island City, Queens
County, New York, that--
(1) is not submerged;
(2) lies between the southerly high water line (as of the
date of enactment of this Act) of Anable Basin (also known as
the ``11th Street Basin'') and the northerly high water line
(as of the date of enactment of this Act) of Newtown Creek;
and
(3) extends from the high water line (as of the date of
enactment of this Act) of the East River to the original high
water line of the East River;

is declared to be nonnavigable waters of the United States.
(b) Requirement That Area Be Improved.--
(1) In general.--The declaration of nonnavigability under
subsection (a) shall apply

[[Page H8722]]

only to those portions of the area described in subsection
(a) that are, or will be, bulkheaded, filled, or otherwise
occupied by permanent structures or other permanent physical
improvements (including parkland).
(2) Applicability of federal law.--Improvements described
in paragraph (1) shall be subject to applicable Federal laws,
including--
(A) sections 9 and 10 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 March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 and 403);
(B) section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344); and
(C) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(c) Expiration Date.--The declaration of nonnavigability
under subsection (a) shall expire with respect to a portion
of the area described in subsection (a), if the portion--
(1) is not bulkheaded, filled, or otherwise occupied by a
permanent structure or other permanent physical improvement
(including parkland) in accordance with subsection (b) by the
date that is 20 years after the date of the enactment of this
Act; or
(2) requires an improvement described in subsection (b)(2)
that is subject to a permit under an applicable Federal law
and the improvement is not commenced by the date that is 5
years after the date of issuance of the permit.

SEC. 556. NEW YORK BIGHT AND HARBOR STUDY.

Section 326(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4851) is amended by striking ``$1,000,000''
and inserting ``$5,000,000''.

SEC. 557. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM.

(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to make
capital improvements to the New York State Canal System.
(b) Agreements.--The Secretary shall, with the consent of
appropriate local and State entities, enter into such
arrangements, contracts, and leases with public and private
entities as may be necessary for the purposes of
rehabilitation, renovation, preservation, and maintenance of
the New York State Canal System and its related facilities,
including trailside facilities and other recreational
projects along the waterways of the canal system.
(c) New York State Canal System Defined.--In this section,
the term ``New York State Canal System'' means the Erie,
Oswego, Champlain, and Cayuga-Seneca Canals.
(d) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of
capital improvements under this section shall be 50 percent.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000.

SEC. 558. NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED.

(a) Establishment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a program
for providing environmental assistance to non-Federal
interests in the New York City Watershed.
(2) Form.--Assistance provided under this section may be in
the form of design and construction assistance for water-
related environmental infrastructure and resource protection
and development projects in the New York City Watershed,
including projects for water supply, storage, treatment, and
distribution facilities, and surface water resource
protection and development.
(b) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may
provide assistance for a project under this section only if
the project is publicly owned.
(c) Eligible Projects.--
(1) Certification.--A project shall be eligible for
financial assistance under this section only if the State
director for the project certifies to the Secretary that the
project will contribute to the protection and enhancement of
the quality or quantity of the New York City water supply.
(2) Special consideration.--In certifying projects to the
Secretary, the State director shall give special
consideration to those projects implementing plans,
agreements, and measures which preserve and enhance the
economic and social character of the watershed communities.
(3) Project descriptions.--Projects eligible for assistance
under this section shall include the following:
(A) Implementation of intergovernmental agreements for
coordinating regulatory and management responsibilities.
(B) Acceleration of whole farm planning to implement best
management practices to maintain or enhance water quality and
to promote agricultural land use.
(C) Acceleration of whole community planning to promote
intergovernmental cooperation in the regulation and
management of activities consistent with the goal of
maintaining or enhancing water quality.
(D) Natural resources stewardship on public and private
lands to promote land uses that preserve and enhance the
economic and social character of the watershed communities
and protect and enhance water quality.
(d) Cooperation Agreements.--Before providing assistance
under this section, the Secretary shall enter into a project
cooperation agreement with the State director for the project
to be carried out with such assistance.
(e) Cost Sharing.--
(1) In general.--Total project costs under each agreement
entered into under this section shall be shared at 75 percent
Federal and 25 percent non-Federal. The non-Federal interest
shall receive credit for the reasonable costs of design work
completed by such interest prior to entering into the
agreement with the Secretary for a project. The Federal share
may be in the form of grants or reimbursements of project
costs.
(2) Interest.--In the event of delays in the reimbursement
of the non-Federal share of a project, the non-Federal
interest shall receive credit for reasonable interest costs
incurred to provide the non-Federal share of a project's
cost.
(3) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way credit.--The non-
Federal interest shall receive credit for lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations provided by the non-Federal
interest toward its share of project costs, including direct
costs associated with obtaining permits necessary for the
placement of such project on public owned or controlled
lands, but not to exceed 25 percent of total project costs.
(4) Operation and maintenance.--Operation and maintenance
costs for projects constructed with assistance provided under
this section shall be 100 percent non-Federal.
(f) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws.--Nothing
in this section shall be construed to waive, limit, or
otherwise affect the applicability of any provision of
Federal or State law that would otherwise apply to a project
carried out with assistance provided under this section.
(g) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2000, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the program carried out under this section, together with
recommendations concerning whether such program should be
implemented on a national basis.
(h) New York City Watershed Defined.--For purposes of this
section, the term ``New York City Watershed'' means the land
area within the counties of Delaware, Greene, Schoharie,
Ulster, Sullivan, Westchester, Putnam, and Duchess which
contributes water to the water supply system of New York
City.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000.

SEC. 559. OHIO RIVER GREENWAY.

(a) Expedited Completion of Study.--The Secretary is
directed to expedite the completion of the study for the Ohio
River Greenway, Jeffersonville, Clarksville, and New Albany,
Indiana.
(b) Construction.--Upon completion of the study, if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible, the
Secretary shall participate with the non-Federal interests in
the construction of the project.
(c) Cost Sharing.--Total project costs under this section
shall be shared at 50 percent Federal and 50 percent non-
Federal.
(d) Lands, Easements, and Rights-of-Way.--Non-Federal
interests shall be responsible for providing all lands,
easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged material
disposal areas necessary for the project.
(e) Credit.--The non-Federal interests shall receive credit
for those costs incurred by the non-Federal interests that
the Secretary determines are compatible with the study,
design, and implementation of the project.

SEC. 560. NORTHEASTERN OHIO.

The Secretary is authorized to provide technical assistance
to local interests for planning the establishment of a
regional water authority in northeastern Ohio to address the
water problems of the region. The Federal share of the costs
of such planning shall not exceed 75 percent.

SEC. 561. GRAND LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

(a) Study.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall carry
out and complete a study of flood control in Grand/Neosho
Basin and tributaries in the vicinity of Pensacola Dam in
northeastern Oklahoma to determine the scope of the backwater
effects of operation of the dam and to identify any lands
which the Secretary determines have been adversely impacted
by such operation or should have been originally purchased as
flowage easement for the project.
(b) Acquisition of Real Property.--Upon completion of the
study and subject to advance appropriations, the Secretary
shall acquire from willing sellers such real property
interests in any lands identified in the study as the
Secretary determines are necessary to reduce the adverse
impacts identified in the study conducted under subsection
(a).
(c) Implementation Reports.--The Secretary shall transmit
to Congress reports on the operation of the Pensacola Dam,
including data on and a description of releases in
anticipation of flooding (referred to as preoccupancy
releases), and the implementation of this section. The first
of such reports shall be transmitted not later than 2 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this section $25,000,000 for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 1996.
(2) Maximum funding for study.--Of amounts appropriated to
carry out this section, not to exceed $1,500,000 shall be
available for carrying out the study under subsection (a).

SEC. 562. BROAD TOP REGION OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Section 304 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(106 Stat. 4840) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:

[[Page H8723]]

``(b) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of the
activities conducted under the cooperative agreement entered
into under subsection (a) shall be 75 percent. The non-
Federal share of project costs may be provided in the form of
design and construction services and other in-kind work
provided by the non-Federal interests, whether occurring
subsequent to, or within 6 years prior to, entering into an
agreement with the Secretary. Non-Federal interests shall
receive credit for grants and the value of work performed on
behalf of such interests by State and local agencies.''; and
(2) in subsection (c) by striking ``$5,500,000'' and
inserting ``$11,000,000''.

SEC. 563. CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA.

The Secretary shall modify the allocation of costs for the
water reallocation project at Curwensville Lake,
Pennsylvania, to the extent that the Secretary determines
that such reallocation will provide environmental restoration
benefits in meeting in-stream flow needs in the Susquehanna
River basin.

SEC. 564. HOPPER DREDGE MCFARLAND.

(a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary is authorized to
carry out a project at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard,
Pennsylvania, to make modernization and efficiency
improvements to the hopper dredge McFarland.
(b) Requirements.--In carrying out the project under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall--
(1) determine whether the McFarland should be returned to
active service or the reserve fleet after the project is
completed; and
(2) establish minimum standards of dredging service to be
met in areas served by the McFarland while the drydocking is
taking place.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000 for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996.

SEC. 565. PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.

(a) Water Works Restoration.--
(1)) In general.--The Secretary shall provide planning,
design, and construction assistance for the protection and
restoration of the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Water Works.
(2) Coordination.--In providing assistance under this
subsection, the Secretary shall coordinate with the Fairmount
Park Commission and the Secretary of the Interior.
(3) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this subsection $1,000,000 for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 1996.
(b) Cooperation Agreement for Schuylkill Navigation
Canal.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into a
cooperation agreement with the city of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, to participate in the operation, maintenance,
and rehabilitation of the Schuylkill Navigation Canal at
Manayunk.
(2) Limitation on federal share.--The Federal share of the
cost of the operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation under
paragraph (1) shall not exceed $300,000 annually.
(3) Area included.--For purposes of this subsection, the
Schuylkill Navigation Canal includes the section
approximately 10,000 feet long extending between Lock and
Fountain Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
(c) Schuylkill River Park.--
(1) Assistance.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
technical, planning, design, and construction assistance for
the Schuylkill River Park, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
(2) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated
$2,700,000 to carry out this subsection.
(d) Pennypack Park.--
(1) Assistance.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
technical, design, construction, and financial assistance for
measures for the improvement and restoration of aquatic
habitats and aquatic resources at Pennypack Park,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
(2) Cooperation agreements.--In providing assistance under
this subsection, the Secretary shall enter into cooperation
agreements with the city of Philadelphia, acting through the
Fairmount Park Commission.
(3) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996, $15,000,000
to carry out this subsection.
(e) Frankford Dam.--
(1) Cooperation agreements.--The Secretary shall enter into
cooperation agreements with the city of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, acting through the Fairmount Park Commission,
to provide assistance for the elimination of the Frankford
Dam, the replacement of the Rhawn Street Dam, and
modifications to the Roosevelt Dam and the Verree Road Dam.
(2) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996, $900,000, to
carry out this subsection.

SEC. 566. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW
YORK.

(a) Study and Strategy Development.--The Secretary, in
cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, the State of
Pennsylvania, and the State of New York, shall conduct a
study, and develop a strategy, for using wetland restoration,
soil and water conservation practices, and nonstructural
measures to reduce flood damages, improve water quality, and
create wildlife habitat in the following portions of the
Upper Susquehanna River basin:
(1) the Juniata River watershed, Pennsylvania, at an
estimated Federal cost of $15,000,000; and
(2) the Susquehanna River watershed upstream of the Chemung
River, New York, at an estimated Federal cost of $10,000,000.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of the study and development of the strategy shall be 25
percent and may be provided through in-kind services and
materials.
(c) Cooperation Agreements.--In conducting the study and
developing the strategy under this section, the Secretary
shall enter into cooperation agreements to provide financial
assistance to appropriate Federal, State, and local
government agencies, including activities for the
implementation of wetland restoration projects and soil and
water conservation measures.
(d) Implementation.--The Secretary shall undertake
development and implementation of the strategy authorized by
this section in cooperation with local landowners and local
government officials.

SEC. 567. SEVEN POINTS VISITORS CENTER, RAYSTOWN LAKE,
PENNSYLVANIA.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall construct a visitors
center and related public use facilities at the Seven Points
Recreation Area at Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania, generally in
accordance with the Master Plan Update (1994) for the
Raystown Lake Project.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,500,000.

SEC. 568. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA.

(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary shall
establish a pilot program for providing environmental
assistance to non-Federal interests in southeastern
Pennsylvania. Such assistance may be in the form of design
and construction assistance for water-related environmental
infrastructure and resource protection and development
projects in southeastern Pennsylvania, including projects for
waste water treatment and related facilities, water supply,
storage, treatment, and distribution facilities, and surface
water resource protection and development.
(b) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may
provide assistance for a project under this section only if
the project is publicly owned.
(c) Local Cooperation Agreements.--
(1) In general.--Before providing assistance under this
section, the Secretary shall enter into a local cooperation
agreement with a non-Federal interest to provide for design
and construction of the project to be carried out with such
assistance.
(2) Requirements.--Each local cooperation agreement entered
into under this subsection shall provide for the following:
(A) Plan.--Development by the Secretary, in consultation
with appropriate Federal and State officials, of a facilities
or resource protection and development plan, including
appropriate engineering plans and specifications.
(B) Legal and institutional structures.--Establishment of
each such legal and institutional structures as are necessary
to assure the effective long-term operation of the project by
the non-Federal interest.
(3) Cost sharing.--
(A) In general.--Total project costs under each local
cooperation agreement entered into under this subsection
shall be shared at 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-
Federal. The non-Federal interest shall receive credit for
the reasonable costs of design work completed by such
interest prior to entering into a local cooperation agreement
with the Secretary for a project. The credit for such design
work shall not exceed 6 percent of the total construction
costs of the project. The Federal share may be in the form
of grants or reimbursements of project costs.
(B) Interest.--In the event of delays 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 a project's cost.
(C) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way credit.--The non-
Federal interest shall receive credit for lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations toward its share of project
costs, including all reasonable costs associated with
obtaining permits necessary for the construction, operation,
and maintenance of such project on publicly owned or
controlled lands, but not to exceed 25 percent of total
project costs.
(D) Operation and maintenance.--Operation and maintenance
costs for projects constructed with assistance provided under
this section shall be 100 percent non-Federal.
(d) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws.--Nothing
in this section shall be construed as waiving, limiting, or
otherwise affecting the applicability of any provision of
Federal or State law which would otherwise apply to a project
to be carried out with assistance provided under this
section.
(e) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the pilot program carried out under this section, together
with recommendations concerning whether or not such program
should be implemented on a national basis.
(f) Southeastern Pennsylvania Defined.--For purposes of
this section, the term ``Southeastern Pennsylvania'' means
Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery
Counties, Pennsylvania.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to

[[Page H8724]]

carry out this section $25,000,000 for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 1996. Such sums shall remain available
until expended.

SEC. 569. WILLS CREEK, HYNDMAN, PENNSYLVANIA.

The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood control,
Wills Creek, Borough of Hyndman, Pennsylvania, at an
estimated total cost of $5,000,000. For purposes of section
209 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1829),
benefits attributable to the national economic development
objectives set forth in such section shall include all
primary, secondary, and tertiary benefits attributable to the
flood control project authorized by this section regardless
of to whom such benefits may accrue.

SEC. 570. BLACKSTONE RIVER VALLEY, RHODE ISLAND AND
MASSACHUSETTS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, in coordination with
Federal, State, and local interests, shall provide technical,
planning, and design assistance in the development and
restoration of the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.
(b) Federal Share.--Funds made available under this section
for planning and design of a project may not exceed 75
percent of the total cost of such planning and design.

SEC. 571. EAST RIDGE, TENNESSEE.

The Secretary shall review the flood management study for
the East Ridge and Hamilton County area undertaken by the
Tennessee Valley Authority and shall carry out the project at
an estimated total cost of $25,000,000.

SEC. 572. MURFREESBORO, TENNESSEE.

The Secretary shall carry out a project for environmental
enhancement, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, in accordance with the
Report and Environmental Assessment, Black Fox, Murfree and
Oaklands Spring Wetlands, Murfreesboro, Rutherford County,
Tennessee, dated August 1994.

SEC. 573. BUFFALO BAYOU, TEXAS.

The non-Federal interest for the projects for flood
control, Buffalo Bayou Basin, Texas, authorized by section
203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1258), and
Buffalo Bayou and tributaries, Texas, authorized by section
101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat.
4610), may be reimbursed by up to $5,000,000 or may receive a
credit of up to $5,000,000 against required non-Federal
project cost-sharing contributions for work performed by the
non-Federal interest at each of the following locations if
such work is compatible with the following authorized
projects: White Oak Bayou, Brays Bayou, Hunting Bayou,
Garners Bayou, and the Upper Reach on Greens Bayou.

SEC. 574. SAN ANTONIO RIVER, TEXAS.

Notwithstanding the last sentence of section 215(a) of the
Flood Control Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5(a)) and the
agreement executed on November 7, 1992, by the Secretary and
the San Antonio River Authority, Texas, the Secretary shall
reimburse the San Antonio River Authority an amount not to
exceed $5,000,000 for the work carried out by the Authority
under the agreement, including any amounts paid to the
Authority under the terms of the agreement before the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 575. NEABSCO CREEK, VIRGINIA.

The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood control,
Neabsco Creek Watershed, Prince William County, Virginia, at
an estimated total cost of $1,500,000.

SEC. 576. TANGIER ISLAND, VIRGINIA.

The Secretary is directed to design and construct a
breakwater at the North Channel on Tangier Island, Virginia,
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.
Congress finds that in view of the historic preservation
benefits resulting from the project authorized by this
section, the overall benefits of the project exceed the costs
of the project.

SEC. 577. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.

(a) In General.--During any evaluation of economic benefits
and costs for projects set forth in subsection (b) that
occurs after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall not consider flood control works constructed
by non-Federal interests within the drainage area of such
projects prior to the date of such evaluation in the
determination of conditions existing prior to construction of
the project.
(b) Specific Projects.--The projects to which subsection
(a) apply are--
(1) the project for flood control, Buffalo Bayou and
Tributaries, Texas, authorized by section 101(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610);
(2) 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); and
(3) the project for flood control, Buffalo Bayou Basin,
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954
(68 Stat. 1258).

SEC. 578. PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.

(a) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary shall provide
technical assistance to Pierce County, Washington, to address
measures that are necessary to assure that non-Federal levees
are adequately maintained and satisfy eligibility criteria
for rehabilitation 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;
55 Stat. 650). Such assistance shall include a review of the
requirements of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act
of 1989 (Public Law 101-41) and standards for project
maintenance and vegetation management used by the Secretary
to determine eligibility for levee rehabilitation assistance
with a view toward amending such standards as needed to make
non-Federal levees eligible for assistance that may be
necessary as a result of future flooding.
(b) Levee Rehabilitation.--The Secretary shall expedite a
review to determine the extent to which requirements of the
Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989 limited the
ability of non-Federal interests to adequately maintain
existing non-Federal levees that were damaged by flooding in
1995 and 1996 and, to the extent that such ability was
limited by such Act, the Secretary shall carry out the
rehabilitation of such levees.

SEC. 579. WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT.

(a) Regional Entity.--
(1) In general.--Congress encourages the non-Federal public
water supply customers of the Washington Aqueduct to
establish a non-Federal public or private entity, or to enter
into an agreement with an existing non-Federal public or
private entity, to receive title to the Washington Aqueduct
and to operate, maintain, and manage the Washington Aqueduct
in a manner that adequately represents all interests of such
customers.
(2) Consent of congress.--Congress grants consent to the
jurisdictions which are customers of the Washington Aqueduct
to establish a non-Federal entity to receive title to the
Washington Aqueduct and to operate, maintain, and manage the
Washington Aqueduct.
(3) Limitation on statutory construction.--Nothing in this
subsection shall preclude the jurisdictions referred to in
this subsection from pursuing alternative options regarding
ownership, operation, maintenance, and management of the
Washington Aqueduct.
(b) Progress Report and Plan.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
transmit 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
the progress in achieving the objectives of subsection (a)
and a plan for the transfer of ownership, operation,
maintenance, and management of the Washington Aqueduct to a
non-Federal public or private entity. Such plan shall include
a transfer of ownership, operation, maintenance, and
management of the Washington Aqueduct that is consistent with
the provisions of this section and a detailed consideration
of any proposal to transfer such ownership or operation,
maintenance, or management to a private entity.
(c) Transfer.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transfer,
without consideration but subject to such terms and
conditions as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect
the interests of the United States and the non-Federal public
water supply customers, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in the Washington Aqueduct, its real property,
facilities, equipment, supplies, and personalty--
(A) to a non-Federal public or private entity established
pursuant to subsection (a); or
(B) in the event no entity is established pursuant to
subsection (a), a non-Federal public or private entity
selected by the Secretary which reflects, to the extent
possible, a consensus among the non-Federal public water
supply customers.
(2) Transferee selection criteria.--The selection of a non-
Federal public or private entity under paragraph (1)(B) shall
be based on technical, managerial, and financial capabilities
and on consultation with the non-Federal public water supply
customers and after opportunity for public input.
(3) Assumption of responsibilities.--The entity to whom
transfer under paragraph (1) is made shall assume full
responsibility for performing and financing the operation,
maintenance, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, and
necessary capital improvements of the Washington Aqueduct so
as to ensure the continued operation of the Washington
Aqueduct consistent with its intended purpose of providing an
uninterrupted supply of potable water sufficient to meet the
current and future needs of the Washington Aqueduct service
area.
(4) Extension.--Notwithstanding the 2-year deadline
established in paragraph (1), the Secretary may provide a 1-
time 6-month extension of such deadline if the Secretary
determines that the non-Federal public water supply customers
are making progress in establishing an entity pursuant to
subsection (a) and that such an extension would likely result
in the establishment of such an entity.
(d) Interim Borrowing Authority.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), there is
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal
years 1997 and 1998 borrowing authority in amounts sufficient
to cover those obligations which the Army Corps of Engineers
is required to incur in carrying out capital improvements
during such fiscal years for the Washington Aqueduct to
assure its continued operation until such time as the
transfer under subsection (c) has taken place, provided that
such amounts do not exceed $16,000,000 for fiscal year 1997
and $54,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.

[[Page H8725]]

(2) Terms and conditions.--The borrowing authority under
paragraph (1) shall be provided to the Secretary by the
Secretary of the Treasury under such terms and conditions as
the Secretary of the Treasury determines to be necessary in
the public interest and may be provided only after each of
the non-Federal public water supply customers of the
Washington Aqueduct has entered into a contractual agreement
with the Secretary to pay its pro rata share of the costs
associated with such borrowing.
(3) Impact on improvement program.--Not later than 6 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary,
in consultation with other Federal agencies, shall transmit
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 that assesses the
impact of the borrowing authority provided under this
subsection on near-term improvement projects under the
Washington Aqueduct Improvement Program, work scheduled
during fiscal years 1997 and 1998, and the financial
liability to be incurred.
(e) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the
following definitions apply:
(1) Washington aqueduct.--The term ``Washington Aqueduct''
means the Washington Aqueduct facilities and related
facilities owned by the Federal Government as of the date of
the enactment of this Act, including the dams, intake works,
conduits, and pump stations that capture and transport raw
water from the Potomac River to the Dalecarlia Reservoir, the
infrastructure and appurtenances used to treat water taken
from the Potomac River by such facilities to potable
standards, and related water distributions facilities.
(2) Non-federal public water supply customers.--The term
``non-Federal public water supply customers'' means the
District of Columbia, Arlington County, Virginia, and the
city of Falls Church, Virginia.

SEC. 580. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA, FLOOD
PROTECTION.

(a) In General.--The Secretary is directed to design and
implement a flood damage reduction program for the Greenbrier
River Basin, West Virginia, in the vicinity of Durbin, Cass,
Marlinton, Renick, Ronceverte, and Alderson as generally
presented in the District Engineer's draft Greenbrier River
Basin Study Evaluation Report, dated July 1994, to the extent
provided under subsection (b) to afford those communities a
level of protection against flooding sufficient to reduce
future losses to these communities from the likelihood of
flooding such as occurred in November 1985, January 1996, and
May 1996.
(b) Flood Protection Measures.--The flood damage reduction
program referred to in subsection (a) may include the
following as the Chief of Engineers determines necessary and
advisable in consultation with the communities referred to in
subsection (a)--
(1) local protection projects such as levees, floodwalls,
channelization, small tributary stream impoundments, and
nonstructural measures such as individual flood proofing; and
(2) floodplain relocations and resettlement site
developments, floodplain evacuations, and a comprehensive
river corridor and watershed management plan generally in
accordance with the District Engineer's draft Greenbrier
River Corridor Management Plan, Concept Study, dated April
1996.
(c) Considerations.--For purposes of section 209 of the
Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1829), benefits
attributable to the national economic development objectives
set forth therein shall include all primary, secondary, and
tertiary benefits attributable to the flood damage reduction
program authorized by this section regardless to whomever
they might accrue.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000 for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996.

SEC. 581. HUNTINGTON, WEST VIRGINIA.

The Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement with
Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia, to provide
technical assistance to the Center for Environmental,
Geotechnical and Applied Sciences.

SEC. 582. LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WEST VIRGINIA.

The Secretary shall review the watershed plan and the
environmental impact statement prepared for the Lower Mud
River, Milton, West Virginia by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service pursuant to the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.) and shall carry
out the project.

SEC. 583. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD CONTROL.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall design and construct
flood control measures in the Cheat and Tygart River Basins,
West Virginia, and the Lower Allegheny, Lower Monongahela,
West Branch Susquehana, and Juanita River Basins,
Pennsylvania, at a level of protection sufficient to prevent
any future losses to these communities from flooding such as
occurred in January 1996, but no less than 100 year level of
protection.
(b) Priority Communities.-- In implementing this section,
the Secretary shall give priority to the communities of
Parsons and Rowlesburg, West Virginia, in the Cheat River
Basin and Bellington and Phillipi, West Virginia, in the
Tygart River Basin, and Connellsville, Pennsylvania, in the
Lower Monongahela River Basin, and Benson, Hooversville,
Clymer, and New Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in the Lower
Allegheny River Basin, and Patton, Barnesboro, Coalport and
Spangler, Pennsylvania, in the West Branch Susquehanna River
Basin, and Bedford, Linds Crossings, and Logan Township in
the Juniata River Basin.
(c) Considerations.--For purposes of section 209 of the
Flood Control Act of 1970, benefits attributable to the
national economic development objectives set forth in such
section shall include all primary, secondary, and tertiary
benefits attributable to the flood control measures
authorized by this section regardless of to whom such
benefits may accrue.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000 for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996.

SEC. 584. EVALUATION OF BEACH MATERIAL.

(a) In General.--The Secretary and the Secretary of the
Interior shall evaluate procedures and requirements used in
the selection and approval of materials to be used in the
restoration and nourishment of beaches. Such evaluation shall
address the potential effects of changing existing procedures
and requirements on the implementation of beach restoration
and nourishment projects and on the aquatic environment.
(b) Consultation.--In conducting the evaluation under this
section, the Secretaries shall consult with appropriate State
agencies.
(c) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall transmit a
report to Congress on their findings under this section.

SEC. 585. NATIONAL CENTER FOR NANOFABRICATION AND MOLECULAR
SELF-ASSEMBLY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to provide
financial assistance for not to exceed 50 percent of the
costs of the necessary fixed and movable equipment for a
National Center for Nanofabrication and Molecular Self-
Assembly to be located in Evansville, Illinois.
(b) Terms and Conditions.--No financial assistance may be
provided under this section unless an application is made to
the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing or
accompanied by such information as the Secretary may require.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $7,000,000 for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1996 .

SEC. 586. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY
TOLLS.

It is the sense of Congress that the President should
engage in negotiations with the Government of Canada for the
purposes of--
(1) eliminating tolls along the St. Lawrence Seaway system;
and
(2) identifying ways to maximize the movement of goods and
commerce through the St. Lawrence Seaway.

SEC. 587. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Separable Element Review.--
(1) Review.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall review, in
cooperation with the non-Federal interest, the Prado Dam
feature of the project for flood control, Santa Ana River
Mainstem, California, authorized by section 401(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113),
with a view toward determining whether the feature may be
considered a separable element, as that term is defined in
section 103(f) of such Act.
(2) Modification of cost-sharing requirement.--If the Prado
Dam feature is determined to be a separable element under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall reduce the non-Federal
cost-sharing requirement for such feature in accordance with
section 103(a)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(a)(3)) and shall enter into a project
cooperation agreement with the non-Federal interest to
reflect the modified cost-sharing requirement and to carry
out construction.
(b) Dam Safety Adjustment.--Not later than 6 months after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
determine the estimated costs associated with dam safety
improvements that would have been required in the absence of
flood control improvements authorized for the Santa Ana River
Mainstem project referred to in subsection (a) and shall
reduce the non-Federal share for the Prado Dam feature of
such project by an amount equal to the Federal share of such
dam safety improvements, updated to current price levels.
TITLE VI--EXTENSION OF EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY UNDER HARBOR MAINTENANCE
TRUST FUND

SEC. 601. EXTENSION OF EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY UNDER HARBOR
MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND.

Paragraph (1) of section 9505(c) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to expenditures from Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) to carry out section 210 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (as in effect on the date of the
enactment of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996),''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster] and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Borski] will each be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster].

[[Page H8726]]

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SHUSTER asked and was given permission to speak out of order.)

Bipartisan Cooperation Contributed to Aversion of National Railroad
Strike

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, with the Speaker's permission I will first
inform the House of another matter of great importance to the country
and to the Congress.
With regard to the potential national railroad strikes, as of early
this morning, labor and management have reached agreement on all the
outstanding disputes, thereby averting the possibility of a shutdown
and averting the need for congressional intervention. We are extremely
pleased about this.
The parties reached a voluntary agreement. The House and Senate, the
White House, and the Department of Transportation made it very clear
that labor and management should work out their differences on their
own. They did that. Labor and management deserve great credit for
having done it.
Here in the House, certainly the gentlewoman from New York, Ms.
Molinari, the gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Oberstar, and the gentleman
from West Virginia, Mr. Wise, worked diligently with us; in the Senate,
Senators Kassebaum and Kennedy; with the White House working very
closely, Mr. Panetta and Mr. Ickes, and indeed, the Secretary of
Transportation, Mr. Pena.
So we all worked together 6to present a united front. The bipartisan
effort created an environment in which this agreement could be reached
and a national rail strike averted. I thank the chairman for being able
to make these comments on my time before we move to the legislation
before us today, the Water Resources Development Act of 1996.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3592, the Water Resources Development Act of 1996,
is a comprehensive authorization of the water resources programs of the
Army Corps of Engineers. It represents 4 years of bipartisan effort to
preserve and develop the water infrastructure that is so vital to the
Nation's safety and economic well-being.
First, let me thank and congratulate my colleagues on the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure for their vision and tireless
efforts in helping move this legislation. I want to give special thanks
to Committee Ranking Member Jim Oberstar, Subcommittee Chairman Sherry
Boehlert, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Bob Borski. Their leadership
and contributions have been outstanding.
H.R. 3592 is the end result of 4 years of review and preparation. In
the 103d Congress, the House overwhelmingly passed H.R. 4460, a bill
that should have become the Water Resources Development Act of 1994.
Unfortunately, that bill did not become law, and for the first time
since 1986, Congress was unable to enact WRDA legislation.
During the 104th Congress, we committed to restoring certainty to the
process and fulfilling our commitment to non-Federal project sponsors,
most of whom had already committed substantial funds to projects.
We conducted 4 days of hearings, receiving testimony from over 90
witnesses, including numerous members of congress, the administration,
project sponsors, national water resources and environmental
organizations, and State and local officials.
The bill we bring to the floor today truly represents a fair and
balanced proposal.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3592 accomplishes three important objectives:
First, it reflects the committee's continued commitment to improving
the Nation's water infrastructure.
Second, it responds to policy initiatives to modernize Corps of
Engineers activities and to achieve programmatic reforms.
Third, and this is very important, it takes advantage of Corps
capabilities and recognizes evolving national priorities by expanding
and creating new authorities for protecting and enhancing the
environment.
In developing this bill, we have tried hard to be responsive to
Members' requests; however, in today's tight fiscal climate, we simply
had to establish and adhere to reasonable criteria. For example, we
adhered to the cost-sharing rules established in 1986.
In fact, in the area of flood control, we have actually increased the
non-Federal share for future projects. In another area, dredging for
navigation projects, we have revised the rules to assure consistency
and fairness in selecting methods for the disposal of dredged material.
Another criteria used in preparing this legislation was the
availability of a Corps report. We have adhered to the requirement that
new projects have a final Corps of Engineers report, or will have one
within the next few months. This assures that projects that have
undergone the Corps review process receive top priority.
Is the bill perfect? Probably not. We have heard concern about a
handful of provisions and intend to address those as the bill
progresses. There are some differences between H.R. 3592 and its Senate
counterpart that must be resolved. In addition, I understand that the
administration, while generally supportive of our approach, will
suggest some changes to the bill.
Therefore, as we move forward with this important legislation, I
intend to work with all parties to assure that the final product
reflects a balance of all interests.
H.R. 3592 is a strong bipartisan bill. It reflects balance in every
sense of the word and a responsible approach to developing water
infrastructure, preserving and enhancing the environment, and
strengthening Federal, State, and local partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. BORSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join with Chairman
Shuster, Chairman Boehlert, and ranking member Oberstar in support of
the Water Resources Act of 1996.
I want to compliment Chairman Shuster and Chairman Boehlert for the
totally fair and bipartisan manner in which this bill was drafted.
The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee works best when we
work together.
I am pleased that this bill marks a return to the bipartisan spirit
that existed in the past.
The bill also demonstrates the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee's continuing strong commitment to investment in the Nation's
infrastructure.
Harbor deepening, inland waterway improvements and flood control are
vital cornerstones of our Nation's economic vitality.
The ports of America are the doors that link our Nation to billions
of dollars of international trade.
In the Philadelphia area, our port supports 50,000 jobs--making a
vital contribution to our regional economy.
The 11,000 mile inland waterway system provides vital transportation
for bulk farm products and coal.
It is essential that we continue to provide funding for port and
inland waterway projects.
We are also proposing to continue the expansion of the mission of the
Corps of Engineers to improvement of environmental infrastructure.
We should be aggressive in using the talents and abilities of the
Corps of Engineers to meet our huge infrastructure needs.
We should also redirect the corps' program to address the
infrastructure needs of our Nation's metropolitan areas.
In flood control, this bill makes important changes that I strongly
support.
We have proposed to increase the requirements for mitigation planning
before structural flood control projects are built.
An upgraded mitigation program will save us money from start to
finish. We will be able to reduce the cost of project construction and
it is likely that we will reduce disaster relief costs.
We are also proposing an increase in the non-Federal cost sharing for
flood control projects from the current minimum of 25 percent to 35
percent.
This increase is a simple recognition of our Federal budget
situation.
We have dwindling resources available for these programs.
An increase in the local share will help spread Federal dollars to
more projects and will help FOCUS resources on more worthy projects.

[[Page H8727]]

The administration proposed a 50 percent non-Federal share which
would have done even more to spread scarce Federal dollars and weed out
poor quality projects.
The 50 percent cost-share is something to consider in the future.
At a hearing last year, I pointed out that we should be prepared for
cuts in the Corps of Engineers programs as part of general spending
reductions. Unfortunately, my prediction has become a reality.
The inadequate 602(b) allocation for energy and water development
appropriations shows the clear impact of the balanced budget.
We risk lasting, negative impacts on our infrastructure investment
programs in the future.
We must work together on a bipartisan basis to ensure that while we
are getting our Federal fiscal house in order, programs to invest in
critical infrastructure needs are protected.
I hope to work with Chairman Shuster, Chairman Boehlert, and ranking
member Oberstar in that effort in the same bipartisan manner in which
we drafted the Water Resources Development Act of 1996.
I urge support for the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I want to express my thanks to the people who really
made this Bill Happen--Ken Kopocis, Art, Chan, Barbara Rogers, and Pam
Keller of the Democratic staff of the Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee, and Mike Strachn and the Republican staff of the
subcommittee.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. DeLay], the majority whip.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation.
While this bill authorizes a number of much needed projects to address
infrastructure needs and environmental restoration throughout the
Nation, I am particularly pleased with two provisions in this bill.
One of these is the authorization of funding to deepen and widen the
Houston ship channel. These improvements are essential to the economic
development not only of the region, but of the country generally.
The Houston ship channel is a critical economic lifeline between our
Nation and the rest of the world. The Port of Houston draws cargo from
every State in the Nation. It is the No. 1 U.S. port in foreign tonnage
and the second busiest in total tonnage.
To remain competitive, however, the ship channel must be improved to
permit faster, safer handling of cargo vessels.
The improvements authorized are also consistent with the port's and
my enduring commitment to the environment.
By working with 13 Federal and State agencies, the port and the Corps
of Engineers arrived at a plan that will use the dredged material from
the ship channel project to create over 4,000 acres of additional marsh
land to be used in developing bird islands, boater destinations, and
shoreline erosion projects.
These beneficial uses have received the very strong support of
several key environmental groups in the Galveston Bay area.
The second provision allows certain flood control districts to carry
out flood control projects with far greater flexibility than ever
before. The Harris County Flood Control District will demonstrate to
the Corps of Engineers that it can design and construct flood projects
faster and cheaper when it is not burdened by Federal redtape.
For too long, excessive Federal regulation has slowed the design and
construction of flood projects. Many Harris County flood control
projects currently in the design stage were first authorized for study
in the 1940's.
Bringing these projects to the local level has the potential to save
the Federal Government hundreds of millions of dollars. Without the
unnecessary redtape, there can be greater efficiency and greater input
from the affected community. The result will be taxpayer savings and
projects being completed much more quickly.
Again, I strongly support this legislation and urge my colleagues to
support it, as well.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in today in support of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 for very important reasons: Shore protection
and responsible disposal of contaminated dredged materials. I would
like to thank Chairman Shuster Ranking Member Jim Oberstar,
Subcommittee Chairman Sherry Boehlert, and Ranking Member Bob Borski
for their support on these critical issues--issues that are
particularly important for my State, New Jersey.
Included as part of this bill is the Shore Protection Act, a bill
sponsored by Clay Shaw and myself as the cochairs of the Congressional
Coastal Caucus. This bill will clarify and reaffirm the role of the
Federal Government in shore protection, and--in particular--beach
nourishment activities. Congress has repeatedly rejected the
administration policy to end Army Corps participation inshore
protection projects. By passing this bill, we are taking the additional
step of actually mandating the Federal Government's role in shore
protection. And for that reason, I am pleased to support this bill.
In addition, WRDA 1996 contains provisions that are greatly
significant to the responsible disposal of contaminated dredged
material, and by that I mean disposal that does not include ocean
dumping. These provisions will allow our ports to be dredged without
threatening our ocean environment or our coastal economy. I would like
to thank my colleagues from new Jersey who are on the committee--and in
particular, Bob Franks and Bob Menendez--for their hard work and
support on this issue.
The port provisions in this bill will take us a long way to getting
out of the ocean for dredged material disposal by providing for
Federal/non-federal cost-sharing of confined disposal facilities, it
will open up the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for use on these
disposal facilities, it will allow for tipping fees to be levied for
use of these facilities, it authorizes a much needed confined disposal
facility for the Port of New York and New Jersey, and it reauthorizes
the ongoing sediment decontamination technology demonstration project
for the Port of New York and New Jersey.
Mr. Speaker, I really do again want to thank the committee, and the
ranking members and the chairman of both the full committee and
subcommittee, for their support. This is a very important bill for the
State of New Jersey, and does a lot and goes a long way towards
protecting our ocean environment.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Weller].
Mr. WELLER. I thank the chairman of the committee for yielding time
to me, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Water Resources Development
Act, 1996, which I note passed unanimously with strong bipartisan
support on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. This
legislation is essential if we want to improve our Nation's
infrastructure by improving and protecting our communities from flood
problems and improve water infrastructure. This bipartisan bill will
create jobs, protect property, lives, and protect the environment.
I do want to note that approximately one-fourth of the funding
authorized in this bill is directly related to preserving and
protecting the environment.

{time} 1145

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak very briefly about two provisions
in this bill that are very important to my home State of Illinois and
also to my congressional district, two provisions that will create
jobs, protect property from flooding, and preserve the environment.
First, this bill authorizes a much needed stormwater retention
facility in the village of Frankfort. The village experiences constant
flooding of the intersections of two strategic regional arterial
highways following any significant rain. Construction of this water
retention facility will greatly reduce the flow rate during heavy
rainfall.

[[Page H8728]]

The second provision I would like to touch on would provide for
improvements near lock 14 for future development of a marina on the
north side of the Illinois River, will bring jobs, promote tourism, and
promote recreation. Both projects have bipartisan support locally.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his help, and I ask for
bipartisan support for this important legislation.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas [Mr. Bentsen].
(Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Shuster], the chairman of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar], ranking
member, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], subcommittee
chairman, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Borski] for the
opportunity to speak on this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, the Water Resources Development Act is vital to
thousands of Americans that live along our Nation's shores including
those in my district. There are two important parts of this bill I
would like to recognize. The first is the Houston Ship Channel widening
and dredging project which will expand the capabilities of the Port of
Houston to meet the challenges of expanding global trade and maintain
its competitive edge as a major international port.
This port brings $5 billion annually to our area, providing 200,000
jobs and will be important as it continues to expand. It also is
important because of its environmental impact, which my colleague the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. DeLay] spoke of which affects Galveston Bay
which part of is also in my district.
This legislation also constructively addresses the issue of Federal
flood control polity reform. As Congress seeks to balance the budget,
the scarcity of Federal dollars for watershed management threatens
hundreds of projects in southeast Texas and around the country.
I greatly appreciate that the committee adopted legislative language
proposed by myself and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. DeLay], my fellow
Texan, the distinguished majority whip, which will give local agencies
more control.
Giving these agencies more control, such as the Harris County Flood
Control District, with the ability to construct these projects will
save precious time and thus lives and property, cut Federal costs,
better protect the environment, and reduce Federal disaster assistance
needed to bail out communities in times of floods.
This legislation is important because it designates three test sites
in Harris County providing for local control over project design,
implementation, and construction. Under this plan the Federal
Government would remain a partner in flood control but local
governments would gain the authority to respond more quickly and
innovatively to their community's flood control needs. Federal flood
control policy must adapt to increasing budgetary constraints without
sacrificing public safety and environmental protection. The bottom line
will be safer communities and savings for the taxpayers.

I thank my colleagues for including this in the bill, and I strongly
urge all my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Flanagan].
Mr. FLANAGAN. Mr. Speaker, this is a great day for America as well as
a great day for the residents and businesses of the Chicagoland area.
After nearly a decade of fruitless effort, both Houses of Congress are
finally approving a plan to preserve and protect the Chicago lakefront
which is in serious jeopardy of being washed away due to the severe
erosion of its protective seawall.
Included in this WRDA bill is an authorization for the Illinois
Erosion Protection Project which will direct the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to assist the city of Chicago in restoring 8 miles of Lake
Michigan shoreline.
The existing shoreline protection system was built between 1910 and
1930, and has outlived its design life by more than 30 years.
Significant deterioration of the existing shore structures is obvious
to those who live and work in that area or drive alone Chicago's
magnificent Lake Shore Drive.
Mr. Speaker, Lake Shore Drive, a Federal highway--US 41--as well as a
major local expressway carrying traffic to and from the center of the
city, was a victim of the deteriorating seawall this past spring.
On March 19th, high winds caused Lake Michigan waters to overtop the
current deteriorated structures, flooding the drive and hurling chunks
of the seawall onto the roadway. If the protection project is not
authorized, the Army Corps predicts partial failure of the structure
supporting the shorelines by 1998.
According to a Chicago Tribune editorial from this past April; ``The
seawall project, in which Chicago would shoulder a third of the $200
million cost, has nothing to do with pork. It has everything to do with
government's responsibility to maintain public-works infrastructure
that is crucial to the well-being of its citizens.''
I am happy to report that today the Federal Government will not
shrink from its responsibility.
Before I close, I want to take a moment to express my appreciation to
Chairman Shuster and Water Resources Subcommittee Chairman Boehlert for
their help and leadership in guiding this bill to the floor. My Chicago
colleague, Bill Lipinski, a member of the Tramsportation and
Infrastructure Committee, was instrumental in authorizing the shoreline
protection project, and I thank him as well.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West
Virginia [Mr. Wise], the distinguished ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Railroads.
Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, I particularly want to thank Chairman Shuster,
ranking Member Oberstar, Chairman Boehlert, and ranking Member Borski
for getting this bill to the floor and impressively getting it to the
floor in this fashion where it can move without controversy and move.
That is the important thing.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is about investment. It is about moving coal
and chemicals and commerce along our Nation's inland waterway system
and through our ports. It is about providing flood protection and
preventing soil erosion.
Most important for West Virginia, this bill provides the
authorization to build the important Marmet locks, which are at the top
of the priority list for the Army Corps of Engineers. It is about
ending uncertainty for the almost 200 families in that area that have
been waiting and waiting to see whether or not real estate acquisition
and appraisal would begin. Not everyone supports the locks in the area
but most understand that it is going to happen and the question is
when.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is about giving the go to the Huntington
District Corps of Engineers to get under way and to get those engineers
working now and to get the real estate acquisition project started as
soon as possible. It was only last week that this House was not able to
fund the real estate acquisition because of the policy that the
Committee on Appropriations had of not funding new starts, that is,
construction starts that had not been authorized. This bill is the
authorization. With this bill, that then gives the ability to begin to
seek the funding that is necessary.
Mr. Speaker, with this authorization bill that passes the House
today, we now have to go and conference with the Senate and work out
differences in that bill. Hopefully in September, we can conference
with the Senate and we can also then bring that bill back, get it
approved and sent to the President and make it law before the Congress
adjourns in October, and then we can begin the process of seeking the
funding.
Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill, and I certainly appreciate
those that have made it possible. I know a lot of people in the Marmet
and Belle areas of West Virginia appreciate it, also.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Martini].
(Mr. MARTINI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MARTINI. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

[[Page H8729]]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996. I want to thank the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Chairman Shuster, as well as the gentleman from New York,
Mr. Boehlert, chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and
Environment, who worked tirelessly to put together a fair and
economically responsible bill.
This bill has carefully balanced the interests of environmentalists
with those in the business community and provided the language that
will enable our ports to once again flourish, our citizens to be
protected from flooding; our environment to be protected and our
taxpayers' dollars to be wisely and not frivolously spent.
Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to state that this bill includes
authorized funds for a buyout alternative to the Passaic River Flood
Tunnel. In 1994 when I ran for Congress I recognized the importance of
flood protection to the citizens of my district. In addition, I
recognized that there must be a more economical and environmentally
sound flood control alternative to a $1.9 billion proposed flood tunnel
with potential negative effects on area wetlands and the existing
ecosystems.
By authorizing $194 million for the buyout alternative, we are taking
great strides toward both flood protection for our citizens and
environmental protection for the Passaic River, while saving taxpayers
money.
The bill also includes authorization for the Molly Ann's Brook flood
protection project and I am pleased that the committee treated this
project with the urgency and priority that it deserves.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I extend my thanks to the chairman for his
vigorous activity in making this bill a good bill to come to the floor
in a bipartisan manner and urge my colleagues to support its passage.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
South Dakota [Mr. Johnson].
(Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. Speaker, there is a great deal about
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 which is excellent, which
is a very positive constructive piece of legislation. I have to join my
colleagues, however, the gentleman from Montana [Mr. Williams] and the
gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy] in expressing my very strong
opposition to one particular provision within this bill which frankly
makes a mockery of the Missouri River management process that is
currently taking place by the Corps of Engineers.
Currently, Mr. Speaker, we are in the midst of a 6-year, $23 million
process in rewriting the Master Manual for the management of the
Missouri River. Despite that, however, there is a provision within this
legislation which gives priority to navigation, despite the fact that
navigation accounts only for 1 percent of the economic benefit that
flows from the uses of the Missouri River. It disregards flood control,
recreation, drinking water, power production and wildlife, and our
opposition is shared not just by the Northern Plains Members but by
this administration, by the American Rivers Group, by the National
Audubon Society, by the National Wildlife Federation, by the
Environmental Defense Fund, by the Sierra Club, by Friends of the
Earth, by the Bass Angler Sportsmens Society, the Western Association
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and other recreation, wildlife and
conservation organizations.
There is no doubt that this provision, if it remains in place, would
threaten water supply by mandating yearly extra releases of water from
upstream reservoirs, drawing down water reserves needed in times of
drought. It would increase flood risks by mandating releases of water
in December after the Missouri River is frozen. It will increase power
rates to western area power administration users by lowering water
levels, especially during the winter, thus in turn lowering generating
capacity. It will be an environmental disaster drawing down reservoir
levels, pose a threat to endangered and threatened species of native
fisheries, and, frankly, it will waste Federal resources already
devoted to the Master Manual design.
This Congress would be better served by allowing the Corps of
Engineers to pursue their Master Manual, redesign a $23 million project
rather than intervening legislative with no hearings, with no public
input on this major change in the management of the Missouri River.
If this bill were not on this calendar, I would be offering an
amendment with my colleagues. Since it is not, and no amendments are
permitted, I want to share with my colleagues that we will be working
with the conference committee very carefully to see to it that this
particular provision of this needed legislation is in fact stricken and
that the Missouri River management can be conducted on the basis of
science and proper management processes rather than by arbitrary
legislative effort.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Washington [Mrs. Smith].
(Mrs. SMITH of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
this legislation because it's going to create new jobs and economic
opportunity in Washington State's Third Congressional District.
This bill includes a proposal that settles 20 years of controversy
between the city of North Bonneville and the Federal Government. This
conflict started after the town was literally moved so that the
Government could build a powerhouse at the Bonneville Dam.
A key part of this settlement will free up parcels of land that the
city can use for economic development.
This bill will give community leaders a chance to bring in family
wage jobs and give the people of Skamania County more hope.
In addition to creating new jobs, this bill will help keep the
thousands of jobs supported by international trade on the Columbia
River.
This bill ensures that the Corps of Engineers will maintain safe
passage on the Columbia by calling for aggressive maintenance work in
the channel.
If ports in cities like Vancouver, Kalama, and Longview, are going to
remain competitive internationally, they need the certainty that larger
shipping vessels will be able to navigate the Columbia River safely and
efficiently.
I commend Chairman Boehlert and Chairman Shuster for their hard work
on this bill and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin].
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Shuster and his committee
for the excellent work they have done on this bill. I want to
particularly call to the chairman's attention language in the bill that
is extremely vital for safety, health, hurricane protection, and
environmental protection matters dealing with the Parish of Terrebonne
in the heart of the Third District of Louisiana. Terrebonne in French
means good Earth. Yet it is threatened more and more every day by
saltwater intrusion. Parish residents' safe drinking water has been
threatened by rising levels of salinity. Hurricane threats to the
community have been largely accumulating as a result of damage and
erosion to its coastal barriers and to its coastal marshlands. One
particular problem involves the Houma Navigation Canal which is a
direct outlet to the Gulf of Mexico. As salinity levels rush into this
canal, some 200,000 acres of sensitive marshlands are being destroyed
and salinity levels are increasingly putting at risk the drinking water
of the communities.

{time} 1200

My understanding is that this bill will allow the corps to separate
from its 3-to-5-year work on the entire Morganza, LA, to the Gulf of
Mexico feasibility study the central issue of a lock structure, which
the corps has already identified, under its reconnaissance and
feasibility studies, as a necessary feature in its overall plans; that
will permit the independent study of this lock structure in the hopes
of hastening its authorization and completion; and that this particular
project has been recommended not only by the State of Louisiana but by
the Federal task force of the Coastal Wetlands Planning and Protection
Restoration Act, the Federal act designed to protect those sensitive
coastal wetlands.
It is my understanding that that language is included. Yet because
the corps may not finish this independent study by December, the bill
does not

[[Page H8730]]

yet contain an authorization to proceed with this lock structure; is
that correct, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TAUZIN. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman that that is
correct. Certainly it is our intention to pursue this vigorously to get
the job done as quickly as possible.
Mr. TAUZIN. I would also assume that, if and when this independent
study is completed, as we expect it will be, that we will have the full
cooperation of the chairman of the committee in hastening the
completion of this?
Mr. SHUSTER. That would certainly be my intention.
Mr. TAUZIN. I thank the chairman and appreciate his help on this.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy].
Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
As we have heard throughout this debate, this is an important bill.
It accomplishes a lot of good for many parts of the country.
Unfortunately, this bill contains a poison pill relative to my part of
the country, and that is the provision in this legislation that would
direct the Corps of Engineers to extend navigation on the Missouri
River by 1 month.
The management of our Nation's rivers is a complex thing. The more
expertise we get on this issue, the more we begin to understand just
how complex it is. The Corps of Engineers, in fact, are looking at the
management issues attendant to the management of the Missouri River and
will end up investing nearly 10 years in a revision manual effort, an
effort that will cost up to $24.5 million. By exhaustive hearings and
research, they will weigh and come out with a product that ultimately
directs the management of this river.
Now, we are all frustrated that this process has taken so long.
Upstream is frustrated, downstream is frustrated. But the way the
downstream interests are reacting to their frustration is just to
direct with legislative language a management priority for navigation
and extend it 1 month while we are at it. It is not that simple.
That directive would shortchange and injure a variety of upstream
interests, including irrigation, hydropower, municipal water supply,
and flood control. The economic interests in comparison do not even
compare, $1 billion of economic activity from the collection of
upstream interests compared to the $10 million directly related to
downstream navigation.
It is not simply an upstream-downstream deal. In fact, downstream
interests are injured as well by this provision. The fact is when we
extend navigation on the Missouri through the month of December, we get
freeze-up, and freeze-up causes ice jams, and ice jams cause flooding
ironically to the areas of the very proponents of this measure.
Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, all would be hit with floods as a result of
this provision.
We need to work collectively and collaboratively in developing a plan
for the Missouri River, and that effort is underway locally right now.
I have a clipping quoting the Governor of Iowa opposing extending the
navigation season, even though he is a downstream interest, saying, ``I
hate to see this become a legislative football. I think there is enough
other important issues for Congress to address.''
They are working and trying to resolve locally these competing
interests. We should not be preempting the upstream interests with a
show of legislative clout from downstream interests. That is simply not
the way to manage our Nation's precious water issues.
Finally, and of great concern, is the fact that this poison pill does
more than cause me heartburn. This poison pill threatens enactment of
this legislation. We have assurances from the Senate that this
provision will never pass and, if it is insisted in the bill, the bill
will never pass. Let us pull this provision out in conference committee
and enact this comprehensive very important water bill.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. LaTourette].
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time.
I rise today in the strongest support of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996. On behalf of the people that I represent back
in Ohio, I want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Chairman
Shuster, and chairman of our subcommittee, the gentleman from New York,
Congressman Boehlert, and also the ranking members of our fine
committee, the gentleman from Minnesota, Congressman Oberstar, and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Borski, for making this a truly
bipartisan bill that we can all be proud of.
This bill is good for the water resources of the Nation, it is good
for the environment, and for the Great Lakes it is great. Many of the
ports and harbors within the Great Lakes are suffering from light
loading problems, where because of our inability to open late, dispose
of dredge spoils, contaminated and otherwise, we have a situation that
makes our ports and harbors noncompetitive.
The environmental dredging section of this particular bill will again
allow the Great Lakes' ports and harbors to be competitive for areas
like Eastlake and Ashtabula and also the City of Cleveland, OH.
I thank the chair and committee for bringing this bill forward today
in this manner, and I would urge every Member of this House to vote in
favor of its passage.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Montana [Mr. Williams].
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me
this time.
My colleagues, recognizing the importance of enacting a good Water
Resources Development Act and, sadly, recalling that this bill failed
to pass into law in the last Congress, and I want to see it pass this
Congress, I nonetheless take this opportunity early on here to rely my
objection to language in this bill which would create an entirely
inappropriate mandated intervention into the proper management of the
Missouri-Mississippi system.
I join my colleagues, the gentleman from South Dakota [Mr. Johnson]
and the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy]. My objection as an
upstream Representative is very similar to theirs.
This bill, we have been told, contains congressional directive to the
Army Corps of Engineers concerning the regulation of the Missouri's
main stem. The Corps of Engineers is, as we have heard, in the process
of completing their plan for managing the main flow of the Missouri.
This is a 10-year plan. They are in about their 6th year of it. They
are very carefully developing that plan by balancing the needs of all
the users along the main stem of the Missouri. Now along comes this
legislation and, through a kind of a midnight slam dunk of language, we
insert the mandate that upsets what the Corps of Engineers has spent
all this time and money trying to do, and that is balance the uses of
the Missouri.
If this bill became law as is, it would mandate, against the
objections of the Corps, a late release of water downstream from the
upstream reservoirs, which is greater than the Corps now things should
be done.
If that late release of water goes forward, it will threaten water
supply in the upstream States in a drought year. It will increase flood
risks in the very critical downstream States. It is likely to raise the
power rates of consumers who use WAPA. And finally, it will threaten
species and native fisheries. That is probably why most of the major
conservation groups in this country are opposing this language in this
bill.
I urge my colleagues to agree in conference with the Senate to take
this language out.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Wamp], vice chairman of the subcommittee.
(Mr. WAMP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and all those involved
from both sides of the aisle on a job well done.
As the vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and
Environment, I strongly encourage our

[[Page H8731]]

colleagues to support the Water Resources Development Act and remind
our colleagues that behind the national defense of our country, as our
ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] so
eloquently reminds us on the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, this was the second function of the Federal Government,
to meet the basic infrastructure needs of a thankful nation. The
natural disasters that we have, flooding, bank stabilization along our
riverways and waterways. Very essential function of our Federal
Government.
Many of these needs are met by the Army Corps of Engineers. Ladies
and gentlemen, my father wore the castles of the Army Corps of
Engineers on his lapels. They do good work and we are grateful for
their service. The Water Resources Development Act meets real needs in
real people's lives all across the country.
Earlier this year I held a field hearing in northeastern Oklahoma,
where Kansas and Oklahoma and Missouri all meet. This bill meets real
needs in that part of the world, in my part of the world, in the
Southeastern United States. This is one of those critical functions
that we are here to deliver to the people and they are waiting for this
bill. Many people.
Let us come together today with an overwhelming show of support. This
bill will save money. I encourage my colleagues to have an impact on
the people that we are elected to represent. Vote yes enthusiastically
for WRDA.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss with the chairman of the committee an
issue of great importance concerning a provision in this bill to extend
the navigation season on the Missouri River. As my three preceding
colleagues on this side of the aisle have said, extending navigation
and drawing down the reservoirs in the upper Mississippi basin have the
potential to negatively impact irrigation, drinking water, recreation,
and hydropower uses of the river.
I am concerned this particular provision was inserted in the bill
without the benefit of a hearing or comment with upstream Missouri
River interests. I seek the assurances of the chairman that as we work
through the conference he will be open to the concerns of the upper
basin States.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BORSKI. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, it is certainly not the intent of the
committee to harm any of the Missouri River interests with this
language.
While the provision was put in response to concerns to several of our
committee members, clearly all Missouri River interests must be
addressed before making significant changes to the management of the
Missouri River system.
I certainly will work with all Missouri River interests to bring this
matter to resolution.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the assurances of the chairman.
This is an important bill to many Members of the body. Many of us were
disappointed when the 1994 Water Resources Development Act stalled in
the Senate, in part over disputes between upstream and downstream
Missouri River interests.
The Senate bill contains no provision to extend Missouri River
navigation. It is my sincere desire that such disputes do not prevent
passage of the 1996 water resources bill.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I
thank him and the other gentlemen who have spoken on this issue for
bringing their concerns to our attention. We will certainly take all of
the interested parties' concerns into consideration as the bill
progresses. Let me assure all of the parties that we intend to resolve
this important issue in a mutually agreeable manner.
Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentleman from Minnesota, [Mr. Oberstar], the ranking
member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Borski] on our side for the splendid work he has done
over many, many months in crafting this bill, and the gentleman from
New York [Mr. Boehlert] for the work that he has contributed, of course
to our full committee chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Shuster], for bringing about a truly inclusive process to bring us to
this point where we can bring this massive bill for the first time in
my recollection on the suspension calendar on the House floor.
I would also like to express great appreciation to the staff members
on both sides, without mentioning names, because I will certainly
forget somebody. They have really worked hard and carried the burden of
this very complex legislation.
Most of the cities, the great cities of our country, are cities
because they were ports. They started out as ports. Seventy-five
percent of the population of our Nation lives along the water. We are a
Nation inextricably tied to the water as a means of transportation, as
a means of commerce, as a means of livelihood, and as a means of
enjoyment.
This legislation dates back to the roots of our history as a Nation
and as a committee. The earliest works of the Congress were the works
that our committee brings to the floor today, those that the gentleman
from Tennessee [Mr. Wamp], I thought so very warmly and touchingly
described in talking about his father's having served in the corps. The
corps has done so much to increase the yield of our Nation by the water
resources development that it undertakes in the navigation, the locks
and dams, the ports, the harbors, the riverways, and we advance that
cause with all of the many provisions that we bring together in this
legislation.
For flood control we raise a minimum non-Federal share from 25 to 35
percent. And to help communities in the transition, we applied the new
minimum only prospectively. I think that is a reasonable and
responsible prudent step to undertake.

{time} 1215

We also deal with the matter of dredged disposal material from the
Great Lakes by providing for cost sharing and confined disposal
facilities vitally important for this one-fifth of all the fresh water
on the face of the Earth to provide this protection. There are many
other provisions in this legislation.
Suffice it to say, this is one of the finest bills our committee has
ever brought forward. I urge its adoption by the House and express my
fervent hope that the other body will concur with us and bring this
legislation to the President's desk for signature as soon as possible.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I particularly want to recognize the staff who made such
a great contribution to this legislation and the senior staff on both
sides of the aisle: Mike Strachn, Lee Forsgren, Ken Kopocis, and Art
Chan, as well as the other staff who really performed in an outstanding
manner.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished
gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], chairman of the Subcommittee on
Water Resources and Environment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The gentleman from New York [Mr.
Boehlert] is recognized for 3\1/2\ minutes.
(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster] and the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr.
Oberstar], ranking minority member, for their significant input into
this legislative process. And, Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Borski], my good friend, the ranking member of the
subcommittee, my special thanks for all that he has done.
Mr. Speaker, this is a product of Members of Congress from all
sections of the country, from different political persuasions coming
together and working together because it makes good sense for America.
I particularly want to thank Mike Strachn of the professional staff.
He came to us from the Corps of Engineers. He had a very distinguished
career and he has lent his expertise to us

[[Page H8732]]

as we fashioned this very important bill. All the staff is good, but
Mike is very special in my heart, and I thank him.
This bill reflects regional, environmental and Political balance.
Every single American will benefit from the water resources
improvements provided for in this legislation.
Our Nation's water infrastructure is critical to both the economic
and environmental health of our Nation and the proposal before us today
provides for continued improvement in both of these areas.
I am particularly proud of the new course that the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 charts on the environment. WRDA '96 is the
``greenest'' Corps bill in the history of the republic. Perhaps since
the original 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act, no Congress has placed a
greater emphasis than the 104th Congress on using the Corps of
Engineers' considerable engineering expertise to improve the
environmental quality of our Nation's lakes, rivers, and harbors.
Nearly 25 percent of all the funding in this bill will go to
environmentally sensitive water infrastructure programs and projects.
The legislation before us also seeks to maximize the amount of flood
protection we receive for our Federal resources by changing the
Federal-local cost share from 75 percent Federal-25 percent local to 65
percent Federal-35 percent local.
This change in cost share is also viewed by members of the
environmental community as a step toward ensuring that the wisest path
for flood control management is pursued. I strongly support this
adjustment and believe it demonstrates this committee's commitment to
sensible fiscal and environmental policies.
The Water Resources Development Act of 1996, beyond its impressive
environmental mission, also ensures that our Nation's ports and rivers
will continue to be efficient conduits for commerce.
Many claim that water transportation is the most efficient form of
transportation in this country, and with the passage of WRDA '96, our
Nation will enjoy this efficient mode of transportation well into the
next century. Though we often take it for granted, most of the fuel we
consume and the food we eat has traveled on our Nation's waterways.
I think it is evident from my remarks I am very proud of the
bipartisan water resources bill, not just because I am privileged to
serve as chairman of the subcommittee of jurisdiction, but because I am
privileged to work with people like the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Shuster], and the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar], and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Borski]; Republicans and Democrats
alike, taking seriously the people's business and the mission of
shaping responsible public policy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to give this bill the overwhelming
and enthusiastic support it deserves for all the right reasons.
Mr. DeFAZIO of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to
thank the members and staff of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee for including language in the Water Resources Development Act
which will help advance an important project in my district known as
the Lower Amazon Creek restoration and protection project.
The project, which received approval previously from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under the Water Resources Development Act section
1135 program, is currently moving into the design and cost estimate
phases. Yet a small portion of the project, which was originally
constructed jointly by the Corps of Engineers and the Soil Conservation
Services, now known as the Natural Resources Conservation Service
[NRCS], had previously been left out of the project because of an
apparent lack of statutory authority by the Corps of Engineers. This
portion of the project is critical to the restoration of the Lower
Amazon Creek and I am encouraged that this language will foster the
necessary cooperation between the Corps and the NRCS to complete this
important project.
Again, I thank my colleagues for their support of this critical
legislation and urge my counterparts in the Senate to support this
provision of the bill.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the work Chairman Shuster and
Chairman Boehlert, and Transportation Committee Ranking Members
Oberstar and Borski have put into this bill, in a bipartisan manner,
and for the excellent support the staff has given us on this bill.
Their expertise on the vital issues contained in this bill is something
of which the citizens of this country should be proud, and this story
of how Congress helps better the lives of every American is too often
untold. I'm proud of the work we're doing here.
As I recently expressed to the majority leader, it is important that
we deliver on promises to our districts in ways that our constituents
tell me are most vital to their everyday health and safety. Poll after
poll tells us that these bread-and-butter issues are far more important
to average Americans than broad, theoretical policy objectives. This
bill accomplishes just that. WRDA will benefit many of our communities.
My district has several pressing needs in flood control, stream bank
protection, inland waterway navigation, basic infrastructure, and
environmental protection. The fundamental mission of the Corps of
Engineers is widely recognized in east Tennessee. Fulifilment of our
commitments to these communities, which are faced with both safety and
economic concerns, can happen if H.R. 3592 gets passed into law
swiftly. Unlike the fate of the WRDA bill from the last Congress, I
believe that this work will get done. The other body is poised and
ready, and today, we take another huge step forward.
I expect that these vital issues will not get bogged down in
Presidential politics or die in conference. Ironically, these are
issues in which the other body has taken the lead and House action will
bring us tangible results. Mr. Speaker, I encourage our colleagues not
to shrink from this task at hand because some may call this bill pork.
Our process here has revolved around sound science and engineering,
authorizing those projects that fit criteria and pass muster from the
Corps of Engineers. My father served in the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers--wore castles on his lapels--and I know the quality of the
work done through their civilian works program.
This bill is about responsibly authorizing needed works in a cost-
effective manner, not simply allowing Congress to appropriate money
without due process. In some cases, this bill will authorize projects
at dollar amounts below original estimates because we worked with the
involved parties to find better solutions than the most expensive plans
out there. We increase local responsibility and expect the Federal
Government to be responsive to local needs.
One final note, Mr. Speaker, You will notice that while the Corps of
Engineers is very active in Tennessee, in my home State, and the six
other Southeastern States served by the Tennessee Valley Authority,
which also falls under the jurisdiction of this committee, we have many
ongoing projects and needs that are not mentioned in this bill. That is
because TVA, in its ongoing mission and existing authorization, carries
out projects every year that have to compete for those same scarce
appropriations dollars coming out of the energy and water bill. We all
know what a squeeze is on for these dollars this year and the situation
may bet worse before it gets better, as we balance the Federal budget.
I want to remind our colleagues that although you will see no TVA
project mentioned in H.R. 3592, the Tennessee Valley region still has
needs that TVA is expected to meet in the coming years. Because TVA has
ongoing authority, I hope that this committee, the Appropriations
Committee, and the Congress will not prejudice any TVA project that
meets the same criteria as these projects listed in this bill when it
comes time to funding just because it is not listed in this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, coming from the beautiful coastal area of
southwest Florida, I know that the protection and proper stewardship of
our coastal resources is vital. The Water Resources Development Act
authorizes funding for the Army Corps of Engineers. The corps is doing
good work in Florida--from its high-profile role in the restoration of
our unique Everglades, to assisting local governments like Captiva
Island with shoreline protection. I would note that the Clinton
administration has tried to end the involvement of the corps in joint
shoreline projects. I am pleased this bill includes legislation
introduced by my Florida colleague Clay Shaw that will overturn the
President's policy and ensure the continued involvement of the corps in
worthwhile beach restoration projects. Overall, this is a responsible
authorization bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the work you, Chairman Boehlert and
ranking Members Oberstar and Borski have put into this bill, in a
bipartisan manner, and for the excellent support the staff has given us
during the hearing process and drafting of this bill. The expertise
within this committee on the vital issues contained in this bill is
something of which the citizens of this country should be proud, and
this story of how Congress helps

[[Page H8733]]

better the lives of every American is too often untold. I'm proud of
the work we're doing here, and it's one of the reasons I asked to serve
on this committee and under your leadership, Chairman Shuster.
As I recently expressed to our House majority leader, it is important
that we deliver on promises to our districts in ways that our
constituents tell me are most vital to their everyday health and
safety. Poll after poll tells us that these bread-and-butter issues are
far more important to average Americans than broad, theoretical policy
objectives. This bill accomplishes just that. WRDA will benefit many of
our communities.
My district has several pressing needs in flood control, stream bank
protection, inland waterway navigation, basic infrastructure, and
environmental protection. The fundamental mission of the Corps of
Engineers is widely recognized in east Tennessee. Fulfillment of our
commitments to these communities, which are faced with both safety and
economic concerns, can happen if H.R. 3592 gets passed into law, and I
hope that this bill will not suffer the same fate of the WRDA bill from
the last Congress. Today, we take another huge step forward.
I hope these vital issues do not get bogged down in Presidential
politics or die in conference. Ironically, these are issues in which
the Senate has taken the lead and House action will bring us tangible
results. Mr. Speaker, I encourage our colleagues not to shrink from
this task at hand because some may call this bill pork. Our process
here has revolved around sound science and engineering, authorizing
those projects that fit criteria and pass muster from the Corps of
Engineers. My father served in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers--wore
castles on his lapels--and I know the quality of the work done through
their civilian works program.
This bill is about responsibly authorizing needed works in a cost-
effective manner, not simply allowing Congress to appropriate money
without due process. In some cases, this bill will authorize projects
at dollar amounts below original estimates because we worked with the
involved parties to find better solutions than the most expensive plans
out there. We increase local responsibility and expect the Federal
Government to be responsive to local needs.
One final note, Mr. Speaker. You will notice that while the Corps of
Engineers is very active in Tennessee, in my home State, and the six
other Southeastern States served by the Tennessee Valley Authority,
which also falls under the jurisdiction of this committee, we have many
ongoing projects and needs that are not mentioned in this bill. That is
because TVA, in its ongoing mission and existing authorization, carries
out projects every year that have to compete for those same scarce
appropriations dollars coming out of the energy and water bill. We all
know what a squeeze is on for these dollars this year and the situation
may get worse before it gets better, as we balance the Federal budget.
I want to remind our colleagues that although you will see no TVA
project mentioned in H.R. 3592, the Tennessee Valley region still has
needs that TVA is expected to meet in the coming years. Because TVA has
ongoing authority, I hope that this committee, the Appropriations
Committee, and the Congress will not prejudice any TVA project that
meets the same criteria as these projects listed in this bill when it
comes time to funding just because it is not listed in this bill.
Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3592, the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996. Chairman Shuster and Water
Resources Subcommittee Chairman Boehlert both deserve credit for the
bipartisan cooperation they have demonstrated in putting this
legislation together. Because of their efforts it is no surprise that
H.R. 3592 was unanimously approved by the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.
H.R. 3592 authorizes the activities of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers through fiscal year 2000. Many provisions in the bill relate
to critical flood control and marine transportation projects that will
save lives and property, protect the environment, and improve commerce
along many of our Nation's great rivers.
One flood control project of critical importance to my central
Illinois district is in the city of Villa Grove. This is the second of
the last 3 years that Villa Grove, and Douglas County, have been placed
on the State and Federal disaster lists because of flooding. The city
faces flooding threats from the Embarras River, which flows north-south
through the city; the Jordan Slough, a tributary of the Embarras River;
and the West Ditch, which collects storm water runoff from farms west
of the city and runs directly though the center of Villa Grove.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has surveyed the latest damage and
agreed that corrective action is appropriate. City officials have
suggested diverting water from the West Ditch by grading certain runoff
areas, installing box culverts in several locations, and possibly
modifying the river's path outside of the city. Clearly, Villa Grove's
flooding problems will only become more frequent and severe if they are
not addressed in the near future.
While the Villa Grove flood control project is only a small portion
of this bill, I believe it is illustrative of the kind of flood relief
that many communities around the United States desperately need. To the
residents of Villa Grove, H.R. 3592 is one of the most important bills
this Congress will act on, and I urge all of my colleagues to support
its adoption.
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3592, the
Water Resources Development Act [WRDA] of 1996. Not only is this bill a
fiscally responsible approach to America's need for inland waterway and
flood control projects, but it will be of substantial benefit to the
environment as well. As a matter of fact, almost one quarter of the
entire bill is devoted to programs and projects of an environmentally
sensitive nature.
An excellent case in point is the 550 acre Des Plaines River Wetlands
Demonstration Project [DPRWDP] in northern Illinois which would be
reauthorized by section 502 of this bill. Originated in 1983 as a
cooperative Federal, State, local, and private venture, the purpose of
this project was to produce significant research information on the
creation, maintenance, and restoration of wetlands. Since then, almost
$9 million has been spent--$1.9 million by the Federal Government,
another $1.8 million by the State of Illinois, nearly $1.7 million by
local government entities, and $3.4 million by the private sector--in
pursuit of that objective. The results speak for themselves, and for
the reauthorization of this project so that the $2.2 million in Federal
money authorized by the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 can be
fully appropriated.
Since its inception 13 years ago, the DPRWDP has become an
internationally recognized wetlands research effort that not only
features 6 experimental wetlands cells but also a pair of wetlands
mitigation banks that are demonstrating just how effectively the
pressures of economic development can be reconciled with the need for
environmental protection. Land that was once devoted to farming and
gravel mining operations has been converted into a carefully monitored
and controlled wetlands laboratory in which no less than 12 research
teams from 14 different organizations, including 9 universities, have
conducted, and continue to conduct, investigations into the way in
which wetlands work and how they can affect such things as flooding,
water quality, and habitat preservation.
As a result of all this work, over 150 articles, reports,
proceedings, book chapters, abstracts, technical papers, theses, and
dissertations have been published, not to mention the 50 plus
newspaper, magazine, and newsletter articles that have written on the
DPRWDP's research and its implications for such important public policy
matters as flood control, species preservation, and water quality
enhancement. For example, the August 25, 1995 New York Times carried a
2 page feature article on the DPRWDP, and a similar project in St.
Charles, IL, which focused on the extent to which the existence of
wetlands could prevent flooding.
So that the significance of these findings is not lost upon my
colleagues, let me mention several of them specifically. One, based on
the determination that a wetland can trap more than 80 percent of the
sediments and nutrients contained in incoming river water, concluded
that water quality in a given watershed could be improved if as little
as 2 to 4 percent of that watershed were converted to wetlands.
Another, evidenced by the return of flora, fauna, and four State-
endangered birds to the DRPWDP site, speaks to the potential of
wetlands for accommodating endangered or threatened species. And then
there is the matter of flooding, the indication being that only 2 to 6
percent of a watershed need be devoted to wetlands in order to
accommodate floodwaters. However, more work needs to be done before the
full benefit of these and other findings can be realized. If we are to
understand more fully how wetlands may best be restored and if a
detailed ``how-to'' manual is to become available by the end of the
century, then the Federal Government needs to invest more money in this
project in the near future.
To achieve those objectives within that timeframe, another $7 million
and perhaps more will be needed, sooner rather than later. Revenues
realized from the wetlands mitigation banks at the DPRWDP site will
account for some of that money and private sources may provide
additional financial support. But the funds generated from those
sources alone is unlikely to be sufficient to get the job done by the
year 2000 unless the remainder of the $2.2 million authorized by the
1988 WRDA is

[[Page H8734]]

actually appropriated. To date, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, whose
good works are authorized by WRDA legislation, has only invested a
small portion of either the $1.9 million spent by the Federal
Government on the DPRWDP or the $1 million earmarked for the project in
the 1992 Energy and Water appropriations measure. Not only that, but of
the $125,000 or so the Corps has invested to date, none has been
devoted to construction work.
Due to that combination of circumstances, the DPRWDP was deauthorized
in 1993, even though it had been the recipient of nearly $2 million in
Federal money over the years and it had received an appropriation as
late as 1992. As a consequence, statutory language reauthorizing the
project became necessary, otherwise it would not be in a position to
compete effectively for subsequent Federal appropriation. WRDA
legislation being the proper place for such language, I was pleased
with, and gratified by, its inclusion in the committee-reported version
of H.R. 3592. My thanks go to the chairman and members of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and especially to the
chairman and members of its Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee, for their consideration in that regard.
In closing, let me just say that enactment of this reauthorization
language will pay big dividends in the future. Not only will the
research data, instruction manuals, and mitigation banks generated by
the DPRWDP enable Americans to conserve, construct, and restore
valuable wetlands, but the insights provided will be of great benefit
to those interested in controlling flooding or in accommodating
necessary economic growth without compromising important environmental
values. In short, the DPRWDP is a winner in every sense of the word and
I urge my colleagues to give it their support by passing the
legislation that contains its statutory reauthorization.
Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to a provision
in the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 which could potentially
cause grave harm to the upper Missouri River basin and at the same time
set a dangerous and far-reaching precedent for water management in this
Nation. I am speaking of section 545 in the bill before us today. This
section proposes to extend the navigation season on the Missouri River
by 1 month from the current 8-month season. While seemingly
insignificant, extension of the navigation season would impact
irrigation, drinking water supplies, hydropower generation, flood
control efforts, recreational activities, and native fisheries.
According to the Army Corps of Engineers, the most severe impacts of
extending the navigation season would be on water supply upstream and
flood control downstream. Extension of navigation service by 1 month
would require draining almost 1 million acre feet of drought reserve
storage from each of the upper basin reservoirs, including Lake
Sakakawea in North Dakota. Under this provision the corps would be
required to release that water regardless of upstream weather
conditions. During a series of drought years, farmers in Montana, North
Dakota, and South Dakota could be caught without needed irrigation
water, cities and towns could be left with insufficient clean drinking
water supplies, hydropower plants could lose generating capacity, and
recreation areas may be left high and dry literally miles from the
water. These upstream uses of the river, which result in over $1
billion in economic activity annually, would be sacrificed in a short-
sighted attempt to support navigation, a minor use of the river,
generating only $10 million each year.
The corps has also indicated that this reckless provision may
actually lead to increased flooding risks throughout the Missouri
basin. Under section 545 the corps would be required to continue
navigation releases throughout December, even after the river freezes
at Bismarck, ND, and Pierre, SD, increasing the risk of ice jam floods
in those cities. The effects downstream, however, could be even worse.
The corps has identified the stretches of the river between northwest
Iowa and central Missouri as areas most heavily prone to ice jam
formation. With the increased water releases expected from extending
the navigation season, floods behind ice jams would be more severe than
under normal flows. The ice chunks would also be larger, damaging
riverbanks, dikes, and possibly even major structures like the Gavins
Point Dam. Clearly, extending the navigation season makes little sense
from a flood control standpoint.
Diverse interests have expressed their extreme dismay over inclusion
of this provision in WRDA. The administration has asked for its removal
from the bill. Eight leading environmental advocacy organizations have
sent a letter to Congress opposing this attempt to hijack Missouri
River management. American Rivers, National Audubon Society, National
Wildlife Federation, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Friends
of the Earth, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, and Bass Anglers
Sportsman Society all agree that lengthening the navigation season will
negatively impact the entire Missouri River basin. The Western
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies oppose inclusion of this
language in the WRDA bill. Even the Governor of Iowa, a downstream
State, recently spoke out against extension of navigation through
legislation.
If the resounding opposition to this provision and the potential
damages from enactment of this provision do not provide enough evidence
for its removal its precedent-setting nature should. Section 545 was
slipped into the manager's amendment of the WRDA bill at the full
committee markup and only subsequently made public. No hearings were
conducted to determine its effect on the Missouri basin and not 1
minute of debate was conducted about the advisability of implementing
such a scheme. Now this bill is brought up under suspension with no
opportunity to have a stand-alone vote on this special-interest perk.
Never before has Congress spelled out specific water management policy
in statute, and it should not be doing so today.
Compare, if you will, that process to the one the corps is currently
completing to review and update the Missouri River master manual. The
corps has spent 6 years and $23 million to conduct a thorough revision
of water management on the Missouri River. Many of us are frustrated by
the continual delays in the release of the master manual but that does
not mean that Congress should circumvent the process. For decades, the
professional engineers of the Army Corps have done their best to manage
the waters of the United States to the benefit of all uses. To turn
water management over to the whim of special interests and political
deal-making should make all members with rivers in their districts
shudder. We cannot allow the corps to be placed in a statutory
straightjacket when it comes to making sound decision about water
management.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind Members that final
consideration of the 1994 WRDA stalled over upstream-downstream
struggles over flood control and navigation. Many Members have
necessary and valuable projects in this bill. We must not allow this
provision on the Missouri River to hold up the passage of this bill
through conference. I urge the chairman and ranking members of the
House and Senate committees to strike this language so this necessary
water bill can be enacted without delay. Upstream and downstream
interests can work together to solve the vexing differences between our
regions over Missouri River management. Local representatives have
already begun to discuss these issues on the local level. I fervently
believe that we should do everything we can to encourage those efforts
and stop trying to direct water policy through congressional fiat.
American Rivers, Bass Anglers Sportsman Society,
Environmental Defense Fund, Friends of the Earth,
National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation,
Sierra Club, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
July 25, 1996.
Dear Member of Congress: The undersigned conservation
groups are deeply concerned that a provision in H.R. 3592,
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, would lead to
the extinction of several fish and wildlife species that
inhabit the Missouri River and reduce opportunities for
recreation. Representatives Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), Tim Johnson
(D-SD), and Pat Williams (D-MT) will offer an amendment to
strip H.R. 3592 of this provision, and we urge you to support
this amendment.
Section 541 of H.R. 3592 would require the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers to release water from the Missouri's six
mainstem dams to support navigation from April 1 to December
15, regardless of the amount of water available to support
other river uses. Dam releases designed solely to support
navigation would not only have devastating environmental
consequence but would also reduce economic benefits from
hydropower, recreation and water supply. These industries--
which generate more than $1 billion in economic benefits
annually--would be sacrificed to support an industry that
generates a mere $10 million each year.
Despite the economic and environmental impacts of the
provision, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
added Sec. 541 during full committee mark-up without hearing
from a single witness. The two-page provision was included in
a 70-page manager's amendment that was released to
conservation groups after the Committee had already acted.
The Missouri River has been dramatically altered to support
navigation. The river's six dams impound the world's largest
reservoir system, blocking fish passage and altering the
movement of sediment. The river between Sioux City and St.
Louis, channelized to one-third of its original width, has
lost more than 90 percent of its wetlands, islands, chutes
and sandbars. Three federally endangered species are already
jeopardized by current water management, according to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Many others species,
including popular sportfish like blue catfish, have fallen to
less than 10 percent of

[[Page H8735]]

their historic populations. This provision would prevent the
Corps of Engineers from taking steps necessary to reverse
their decline and prevent their extinction.
This amendment will prevent the Corps of Engineers from
reducing flood losses. Landowners farming converted side
channels and backwaters are among the most flood-prone in the
nation. In the wake of flooding in 1993 and 1995, federal
programs rebuilt many levees twice, often spending more
federal funds on repairs than the protected land was worth.
Section 541 would prohibit the Corps from using the
conveyance capacity of floodplain lands acquired from willing
sellers to protect other floodplain land owners.
This amendment will also have high economic costs.
Originally forecast to carry 12 to 20 million tons annually,
commercial navigation on the Missouri River peaked at 3.3
million tons in 1977 and has fallen to just 1.5 million tons,
generating $10 million in economic benefits. By contrast,
Missouri River recreation generates $75 million in economic
benefits, water supply generates $450 million, and hydropower
generates $625 million. Missouri River navigation accounts
for just 1 percent of the economic benefits produced by the
river, and is the means of transportation for only one-tenth
of 1 percent of the corn produced in Missouri, Kansas, Iowa
and Nebraska. Just 2 percent of the wheat produced in those
states is shipped by Missouri River barge.
Despite the economic insignificance of Missouri River
navigation, Section 541 would direct the Corps of Engineers
to extend the navigation season at enormous expense to other
river industries. The provision would prevent the Corps from
managing the Missouri's dams to support Mississippi River
navigation during periods of low water. Section 541 would
also require dam releases to support Missouri River
navigation regardless of the amount of water in the system,
potentially exacerbating downstream flooding or wasting
precious water during droughts.
We urge you to support the amendment offered by
Representatives Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), Tim Johnson (D-SD), and
Pat Williams (D-MT) to strip H.r. 3592 of this provision.
Sincerely,
Scott Faber,
American Rivers.
Bruce Shupp,
Bass Anglers Sportsman Society.
Tim Searchinger,
Environmental Defense Fund.
Galwain Kripke,
Friends of the Earth.
John Echeverria,
National Audubon Society.
David Conrad,
National Wildlife Federation.
Jonathan Ela,
Sierra Club.
Amy Mathews-Amos,
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund.
____

State of North Dakota,

Bismarck, ND, July 26, 1996.
Hon. Bud Shuster,
Chairman, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Shuster: I am deeply concerned with the
obviously flawed provision in H.R. 3592, the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996. The bill contains language requiring
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to extend the navigation
season on the Missouri River by one month, regardless of the
amount of water available to support the other authorized
primary uses. This provision would be devastating, especially
during drought periods when system releases are to be reduced
to save and ensure water in storage for all users, including
navigation. This provision is ill-conceived and irresponsibly
allows for abuse of our precious natural resources and is a
license to steal water.
The economic and environmental impacts of Section 541 of
H.R. 3592 would cause severe economic impacts to all Missouri
River Basin states and their stakeholders. The current system
operation is already extremely biased and heavily favors a
minuscule, dwindling, archaic, heavily subsidized and highly
marginal Missouri River navigation. Barge traffic produces
only one percent of the annual net economic benefits derived
from the management of the Missouri River. A decision by the
political winds and pork barrel special interests of
Washington should not destroy sensible water management. The
Missouri River and its reservoirs are under the care of all
of us, not a special interest group. I ask that you strike
this language and leave the complicated matters of reservoir
operations in the hands of the U.S. Corps of Engineers and
the basin states.
Sincerely,
Edward T. Schafer
Governor.
____

Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Resolution,
Opposition to Extended Navigation on the Lower Missouri River

Whereas, the uses of Missouri River water for fish,
wildlife, recreation, and other related beneficial purposes
have been well documented; and
Whereas, the benefits of these fish, wildlife, and water-
based activities have been shown to generate millions of
dollars to the citizens of the United States; and
Whereas, the Corps of Engineers is nearing completion of a
long-term, $20+ million review of its operating criteria and
procedures (Master Manual review process) of six Missouri
River impoundments; and
Whereas, all eight Missouri River basin states and all
basin tribes have supported the Corps Master Manual review
process; and
Whereas, the U.S. Congress is poised to legislatively
require a one-month extension of navigation flow which will
lower water levels in Missouri River mainstream reservoirs
and severely limit the Corps operational flexibility, and
this would be in contradiction to the findings of the Corps
Master Manual review; and
Whereas, the impacts of lowering the water level in these
reservoirs have been shown to be detrimental to fish species
including native and endangered species; and
Whereas, the benefits of retaining water in mainstream
reservoirs have been shown to far exceed the benefits of
moving water downstream for navigation purposes on the lower
Missouri: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, that the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies, at its annual meeting on July 26, 1996, at
Honolulu, Hawaii, supports deletion of Section 541 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (H.R. 3592) which
would require a one-month extension of the navigation season
on the lower Missouri River, despite accelerating the
dewatering of the reservoirs which support fish and wildlife
uses, and would circumvent the Corps own review of their
operating procedures.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of H.R. 3592,
the Water Resources Development Act, which authorizes projects and
programs of the civil works program of the Army Corps of Engineers.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is strongly bipartisan, and places
special emphasis on protecting the environment. In fact, I believe it
should be stressed that passage of this legislation represents an
important environmental accomplishment for this Congress.
Of particular importance to the Hudson Valley, I would like to draw
attention to section 551 of the act, which incorporates the provisions
of legislation that I have introduced, H.R. 3471, the Hudson River
Habitat Restoration Act. The legislation which we are considering today
authorizes $11 million for at least four habitat restoration projects
along the Hudson River basin.
Mr. Speaker, the Hudson River estuary is an important habitat to a
wide range of waterfowl and aquatic species. Many important habitats
along the river--wetlands, marshes, and so forth--have been degraded
over the past century as industry and agriculture grew along the river.
The legislation that I have introduced seeks Federal funding for
critical habitat projects identified by the Corps of Engineers and New
York's Department of Environmental Conservation.
I recently had the pleasure of touring one of the proposed sites, the
Manitou Marsh near Philipstown in my district. Tidal marshes such as
this one represent a very productive ecosystem, a wonderful habitat for
raptors, waterfowl and fish, and serve to clean pollutants from the
river. Road and factory construction dating from the 19th century has
adversely affected the tidal flows in and out of the marsh, a problem
this legislation seeks to correct.
This legislation supports an ongoing and cooperative effort that has
involved various levels of government, including the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the New York Department of Environmental Conservation,
local environmental organizations, such as the Museum of the Hudson
Highlands, Scenic Hudson, and the Audubon Society, as well as private
sector businesses, such as Metro North Railroad.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important and
vital environmental legislation.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster] that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3592, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 640) 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, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows:

S. 640

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

[[Page H8736]]

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Water
Resources Development Act of 1996''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary.

TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

Sec. 101. Project authorizations.
Sec. 102. Project modifications.
Sec. 103. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 104. Studies.

TITLE II--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

Sec. 201. Grand Prairie Region and Bayou Meto Basin, Arkansas.
Sec. 202. Heber Springs, Arkansas.
Sec. 203. Morgan Point, Arkansas.
Sec. 204. White River Basin Lakes, Arkansas and Missouri.
Sec. 205. Central and Southern Florida.
Sec. 206. West Palm Beach, Florida.
Sec. 207. Everglades and South Florida ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 208. Arkansas City and Winfield, Kansas.
Sec. 209. Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, Louisiana.
Sec. 210. Coldwater River Watershed, Mississippi.
Sec. 211. Periodic maintenance dredging for Greenville Inner Harbor
Channel, Mississippi.
Sec. 212. Sardis Lake, Mississippi.
Sec. 213. Yalobusha River Watershed, Mississippi.
Sec. 214. Libby Dam, Montana.
Sec. 215. Small flood control project, Malta, Montana.
Sec. 216. Cliffwood Beach, New Jersey.
Sec. 217. Fire Island Inlet, New York.
Sec. 218. Queens County, New York.
Sec. 219. Buford Trenton Irrigation District, North Dakota and Montana.
Sec. 220. Jamestown Dam and Pipestem Dam, North Dakota.
Sec. 221. Wister Lake project, LeFlore County, Oklahoma.
Sec. 222. Willamette River, McKenzie Subbasin, Oregon.
Sec. 223. Abandoned and wrecked barge removal, Rhode Island.
Sec. 224. Providence River and Harbor, Rhode Island.
Sec. 225. Cooper Lake and Channels, Texas.
Sec. 226. Rudee Inlet, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Sec. 227. Virginia Beach, Virginia.

TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Cost-sharing for environmental projects.
Sec. 302. Collaborative research and development.
Sec. 303. National dam safety program.
Sec. 304. Hydroelectric power project uprating.
Sec. 305. Federal lump-sum payments for Federal operation and
maintenance costs.
Sec. 306. Cost-sharing for removal of existing project features.
Sec. 307. Termination of technical advisory committee.
Sec. 308. Conditions for project deauthorizations.
Sec. 309. Participation in international engineering and scientific
conferences.
Sec. 310. Research and development in support of Army civil works
program.
Sec. 311. Interagency and international support authority.
Sec. 312. Section 1135 program.
Sec. 313. Environmental dredging.
Sec. 314. Feasibility studies.
Sec. 315. Obstruction removal requirement.
Sec. 316. Levee owners manual.
Sec. 317. Risk-based analysis methodology.
Sec. 318. Sediments decontamination technology.
Sec. 319. Melaleuca tree.
Sec. 320. Faulkner Island, Connecticut.
Sec. 321. Designation of lock and dam at the Red River Waterway,
Louisiana.
Sec. 322. Jurisdiction of Mississippi River Commission, Louisiana.
Sec. 323. William Jennings Randolph access road, Garrett County,
Maryland.
Sec. 324. Arkabutla Dam and Lake, Mississippi.
Sec. 325. New York State canal system.
Sec. 326. Quonset Point-Davisville, Rhode Island.
Sec. 327. Clouter Creek disposal area, Charleston, South Carolina.
Sec. 328. Nuisance aquatic vegetation in Lake Gaston, Virginia and
North Carolina.
Sec. 329. Washington Aqueduct.
Sec. 330. Chesapeake Bay environmental restoration and protection
program.
Sec. 331. Research and development program to improve salmon survival.
Sec. 332. Recreational user fees.
Sec. 333. Shore protection.
Sec. 334. Shoreline erosion control demonstration.
Sec. 335. Review period for State and Federal agencies.
Sec. 336. Dredged material disposal facilities.
Sec. 337. Applicability of cost-sharing provisions.
Sec. 338. Section 215 reimbursement limitation per project.
Sec. 339. Waiver of uneconomical cost-sharing requirement.
Sec. 340. Planning assistance to States.
Sec. 341. Recovery of costs for cleanup of hazardous substances.
Sec. 342. City of North Bonneville, Washington.
Sec. 343. Columbia River Treaty Fishing Access.
Sec. 344. Tri-Cities area, Washington.
Sec. 345. Designation of locks and dams on Tennessee-Tombigbee
Waterway.
Sec. 346. Designation of J. Bennett Johnston Waterway.
Sec. 347. Technical corrections.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
the Army.
TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) Projects With Reports.--Except as otherwise provided in
this subsection, the following projects for water resources
development and conservation and other purposes are
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary substantially
in accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions,
recommended in the respective reports designated in this
subsection:
(1) Humboldt harbor and bay, california.--The project for
navigation, Humboldt Harbor and Bay, California: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated October 30, 1995, at a total
cost of $15,180,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$10,116,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,064,000.
(2) Marin county shoreline, san rafael canal, california.--
The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Marin
County Shoreline, San Rafael Canal, California: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated January 28, 1994, at a total cost
of $27,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $17,700,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,500,000.
(3) San lorenzo river, california.--The project for flood
control, San Lorenzo River, California: Report of the Chief
of Engineers, dated June 30, 1994, at a total cost of
$16,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $8,100,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,000,000 and the habitat
restoration, at a total cost of $4,050,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $3,040,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $1,010,000.
(4) Santa barbara harbor, santa barbara county,
california.--The project for navigation, Santa Barbara
Harbor, Santa Barbara, California: Report of the Chief of
Engineers, dated April 26, 1994, at a total cost of
$5,720,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $4,580,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,140,000.
(5) Anacostia river and tributaries, district of columbia
and maryland.--The project for environmental restoration,
Anacostia River and tributaries, District of Columbia and
Maryland: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October
1994, at a total cost of $18,820,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $14,120,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $4,700,000.
(6) Palm valley bridge replacement, st. johns county,
florida.--The project for navigation, Palm Valley Bridge,
County Road 210, over the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in
St. Johns County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated June 24, 1994, at a total Federal cost of $15,312,000.
As a condition of receipt of Federal funds, St. Johns County
shall assume full ownership of the replacement bridge,
including all associated operation, maintenance, repair,
replacement, and rehabilitation costs.
(7) Illinois shoreline storm damage reduction, wilmette to
illinois and indiana state line.--The project for lake level
flooding and storm damage reduction, extending from Wilmette,
Illinois, to the Illinois and Indiana State line: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated April 14, 1994, at a total cost
of $204,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$110,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$94,000,000. The Secretary shall reimburse the non-Federal
interest for the Federal share of any costs that the non-
Federal interest incurs in constructing the breakwater near
the South Water Filtration Plant, Chicago, Illinois.
(8) Kentucky lock addition, kentucky.--The project for
navigation, Kentucky Lock Addition, Kentucky: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated June 1, 1992, at a total cost of
$467,000,000. The construction costs of the project shall be
paid--
(A) 50 percent from amounts appropriated from the general
fund of the Treasury; and
(B) 50 percent from amounts appropriated from the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund established by section 9506 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(9) Pond creek, kentucky.--The project for flood control,
Pond Creek, Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated
June 28, 1994, at a total cost of $16,865,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $11,243,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $5,622,000.
(10) Wolf creek hydropower, cumberland river, kentucky.--
The project for hydropower, Wolf Creek Dam and Lake
Cumberland, Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated
June 28, 1994, at a total cost of $50,230,000. Funds derived
by the Tennessee Valley Authority from the power program of
the Authority and funds derived from any private or public
entity designated by the Southeastern Power Administration
may be used for all or part of any cost-sharing requirements
for the project.

[[Page H8737]]

(11) Port fourchon, louisiana.--The project for navigation,
Port Fourchon, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated April 7, 1995, at a total cost of $2,812,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $2,211,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $601,000.
(12) West bank hurricane protection levee, jefferson
parish, louisiana.--The West Bank Hurricane Protection Levee,
Jefferson Parish, Louisiana project, authorized by section
401(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public
Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4128), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to extend protection to areas east of the Harvey
Canal, including an area east of the Algiers Canal: Report of
the Chief of Engineers, dated May 1, 1995, at a total cost of
$217,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $141,400,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $75,600,000.
(13) Stabilization of natchez bluffs, mississippi.--The
project for bluff stabilization, Natchez Bluffs, Natchez,
Mississippi: Natchez Bluffs Study, dated September 1985,
Natchez Bluffs Study: Supplement I, dated June 1990, and
Natchez Bluffs Study: Supplement II, dated December 1993, in
the portions of the bluffs described in the reports
designated in this paragraph as Clifton Avenue, area 3; Bluff
above Silver Street, area 6; Bluff above Natchez Under-the-
Hill, area 7; and Madison Street to State Street, area 4, at
a total cost of $17,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $12,900,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$4,300,000.
(14) Wood river at grand island, nebraska.--The project for
flood control, Wood River at Grand Island, Nebraska: Report
of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 3, 1994, at a total cost
of $10,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,250,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,250,000.
(15) Atlantic coast of long island, new york.--The project
for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Atlantic Coast of
Long Island from Jones Inlet to East Rockaway Inlet, Long
Beach Island, New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated April 5, 1996, at a total cost of $72,091,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $46,859,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $25,232,000.
(16) Wilmington harbor, cape fear-northeast cape fear
rivers, north carolina.--The project for navigation,
Wilmington Harbor, Cape Fear-Northeast Cape Fear Rivers,
North Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June
24, 1994, at a total cost of $23,290,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $16,955,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $6,335,000.
(17) Duck creek, ohio.--The project for flood control, Duck
Creek, Cincinnati, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers,
dated June 28, 1994, at a total cost of $15,408,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $11,556,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $3,852,000.
(18) Big sioux river and skunk creek at sioux falls, south
dakota.--The project for flood control, Big Sioux River and
Skunk Creek at Sioux Falls, South Dakota: Report of the Chief
of Engineers, dated June 30, 1994, at a total cost of
$31,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $23,600,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,000,000.
(19) Houston-galveston navigation channels, texas.--The
project for navigation and environmental restoration,
Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated May 9, 1996, at a total cost of
$508,757,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $286,141,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $222,616,000.
(20) Atlantic intracoastal waterway bridge replacement at
great bridge, chesapeake, virginia.--The project for
navigation at Great Bridge, Virginia Highway 168, over the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Chesapeake, Virginia:
Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 1, 1994, at a
total cost of $23,680,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$20,341,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,339,000.
The city of Chesapeake shall assume full ownership of the
replacement bridge, including all associated operation,
maintenance, repair, replacement, and rehabilitation costs.
(21) Marmet lock replacement, kanawha river, west
virginia.--The project for navigation, Marmet Lock
Replacement, Marmet Locks and Dam, Kanawha River, West
Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 24,
1994, at a total cost of $229,581,000. The construction costs
of the project shall be paid--
(A) 50 percent from amounts appropriated from the general
fund of the Treasury; and
(B) 50 percent from amounts appropriated from the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund established by section 9506 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(b) Projects Subject to Favorable Report.--The following
projects for water resources development and conservation and
other purposes are authorized to be carried out by the
Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans, and
subject to the conditions, recommended in a favorable final
report (or in the case of the project described in paragraph
(6), a favorable feasibility report) of the Chief of
Engineers, if the report is completed not later than December
31, 1996:
(1) Chignik, alaska.--The project for navigation, Chignik,
Alaska, at a total cost of $10,365,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $4,344,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $6,021,000.
(2) Cook inlet, alaska.--The project for navigation, Cook
Inlet, Alaska, at a total cost of $5,342,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $4,006,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $1,336,000.
(3) American river watershed, california.--
(A) In general.--The project for flood damage reduction,
American and Sacramento Rivers, California: Supplemental
Information Report for the American River Watershed Project,
California, dated March 1996, at a total cost of $57,300,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $42,975,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $14,325,000, consisting of--
(i) approximately 24 miles of slurry wall in the levees
along the lower American River;
(ii) approximately 12 miles of levee modifications along
the east bank of the Sacramento River downstream from the
Natomas Cross Canal;
(iii) 3 telemeter streamflow gauges upstream from the
Folsom Reservoir; and
(iv) modifications to the flood warning system along the
lower American River.
(B) Credit toward non-federal share.--The non-Federal
interest shall receive credit toward the non-Federal share of
project costs for expenses that the non-Federal interest
incurs for design or construction of any of the features
authorized under this paragraph before the date on which
Federal funds are made available for construction of the
project. The amount of the credit shall be determined by the
Secretary.
(C) Interim operation.--Until such time as a comprehensive
flood control plan for the American River watershed has been
implemented, the Secretary of the Interior shall continue to
operate the Folsom Dam and Reservoir to the variable 400,000/
670,000 acre-feet of flood control storage capacity and shall
extend the agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation and
the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency with respect to the
watershed.
(D) Other costs.--The non-Federal interest shall be
responsible for--
(i) all operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and
rehabilitation costs associated with the improvements carried
out under this paragraph; and
(ii) the costs of the variable flood control operation of
the Folsom Dam and Reservoir.
(4) Santa monica breakwater, california.--The project for
hurricane and storm damage reduction, Santa Monica
breakwater, California, at a total cost of $6,440,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $4,220,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $2,220,000.
(5) Lower savannah river basin, savannah river, georgia and
south carolina.--The project for environmental restoration,
Lower Savannah River Basin, Savannah River, Georgia and South
Carolina, at a total cost of $3,419,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $2,551,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $868,000.
(6) New harmony, indiana.--The project for shoreline
erosion protection, Wabash River at New Harmony, Indiana, at
a total cost of $2,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$2,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $700,000.
(7) Chesapeake and delaware canal, maryland and delaware.--
The project for navigation and safety improvements,
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, Baltimore Harbor channels,
Delaware and Maryland, at a total cost of $33,000,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $25,000,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $8,000,000.
(8) Poplar island, maryland.--The project for beneficial
use of clean dredged material in connection with the dredging
of Baltimore Harbor and connecting channels, Poplar Island,
Maryland, at a total cost of $307,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $230,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal
cost of $77,000,000.
(9) Las cruces, new mexico.--The project for flood damage
reduction, Las Cruces, New Mexico, at a total cost of
$8,278,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,494,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,784,000.
(10) Cape fear river, north carolina.--The project for
navigation, Cape Fear River deepening, North Carolina, at a
total cost of $210,264,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$130,159,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$80,105,000.
(11) Charleston harbor, south carolina.--The project for
navigation, Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, at a total
cost of $116,639,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$72,798,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $43,841,000.

SEC. 102. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS.

(a) Mobile Harbor, Alabama.--The undesignated paragraph
under the heading ``mobile harbor, alabama'' in section
201(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public
99-662; 100 Stat. 4090) is amended by striking the first
semicolon and all that follows and inserting a period and the
following: ``In disposing of dredged material from the
project, the Secretary, after compliance with applicable laws
and after opportunity for public review and comment, may
consider alternatives to disposal of such material in the
Gulf of Mexico, including environmentally acceptable
alternatives consisting of beneficial uses of dredged
material and environmental restoration.''.
(b) San Francisco River at Clifton, Arizona.--If a
favorable final report of the Chief of Engineers is issued
not later than December 31, 1996, the project for flood
control on the San Francisco River at Clifton, Arizona,
authorized by section 101(a)(3) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-640; 104 Stat. 4606),
is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the

[[Page H8738]]

project at a total cost of $21,100,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $13,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $7,300,000.
(c) Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, San Pedro Bay,
California.--The project for navigation, Los Angeles and Long
Beach Harbors, San Pedro Bay, California, authorized by
section 201 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4091), is modified to provide
that, for the purpose of section 101(a)(2) of the Act (33
U.S.C. 2211(a)(2)), the sewer outfall relocated over a
distance of 4,458 feet by the Port of Los Angeles at a cost
of approximately $12,000,000 shall be considered to be a
relocation.
(d) Oakland Harbor, California.--The projects for
navigation, Oakland Outer Harbor, California, and Oakland
Inner Harbor, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662;
100 Stat. 4092), are modified to combine the 2 projects into
1 project, to be designated as the Oakland Harbor,
California, project. The Oakland Harbor, California, project
shall be carried out by the Secretary substantially in
accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions
recommended in the reports designated for the projects in the
section, except that the non-Federal share of project cost
and any available credits toward the non-Federal share shall
be calculated on the basis of the total cost of the combined
project. The total cost of the combined project is
$102,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $64,120,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $38,480,000.
(e) Broward County, Florida.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide periodic beach
nourishment for the Broward County, Florida, Hillsborough
Inlet to Port Everglades (Segment II), shore protection
project, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor
Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-298; 79 Stat. 1090), through the
year 2020. The beach nourishment shall be carried out in
accordance with the recommendations of the section 934 study
and reevaluation report for the project carried out under
section 156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976
(42 U.S.C. 1962d-5f) and approved by the Chief of Engineers
by memorandum dated June 9, 1995.
(2) Costs.--The total cost of the activities required under
this subsection shall not exceed $15,457,000, of which the
Federal share shall not exceed $9,846,000.
(f) Canaveral Harbor, Florida.--The project for navigation,
Canaveral Harbor, Florida, authorized by section 101(7) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
580; 106 Stat. 4802), is modified to authorize the Secretary
to reclassify the removal and replacement of stone protection
on both sides of the channel as general navigation features
of the project subject to cost sharing in accordance with
section 101(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 2211(a)). The Secretary may reimburse the non-
Federal interests for such costs incurred by the non-Federal
interests in connection with the removal and replacement as
the Secretary determines are in excess of the non-Federal
share of the costs of the project required under the section.
(g) Fort Pierce, Florida.--The Secretary shall provide
periodic beach nourishment for the Fort Pierce beach erosion
control project, St. Lucie County, Florida, authorized by
section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (Public Law
89-298; 79 Stat. 1092), through the year 2020.
(h) Tybee Island, Georgia.--The Secretary shall provide
periodic beach nourishment for a period of up to 50 years for
the project for beach erosion control, Tybee Island, Georgia,
constructed under section 201 of the Flood Control Act of
1965 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5).
(i) North Branch of Chicago River, Illinois.--The project
for flood control for the North Branch of the Chicago River,
Illinois, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4115),
is modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the
project substantially in accordance with the post
authorization change report for the project dated March 1994,
at a total cost of $34,228,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $20,905,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$13,323,000.
(j) Halstead, Kansas.--The project for flood control,
Halstead, Kansas, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100
Stat. 4116), is modified to authorize the Secretary to
construct the project substantially in accordance with the
post authorization change report for the project dated March
1993, at a total cost of $11,100,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $8,325,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $2,775,000.
(k) Baptiste Collette Bayou, Louisiana.--The project for
navigation, Mississippi River Outlets, Venice, Louisiana,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968
(Public Law 90-483; 82 Stat. 731), is modified to provide for
the extension of the 16-foot deep (mean low gulf) by 250-foot
wide Baptiste Collette Bayou entrance channel to
approximately mile 8 of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet
navigation channel at a total estimated Federal cost of
$80,000, including $4,000 for surveys and $76,000 for Coast
Guard aids to navigation.
(l) Comite River, Louisiana.--If a favorable final report
of the Chief of Engineers is issued not later than December
31, 1996, the Comite River diversion project for flood
control authorized as part of the project for flood control,
Amite River and Tributaries, Louisiana, by section 101(11) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
580; 106 Stat. 4802), is modified to authorize the Secretary
to construct the project at a total cost of $121,600,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $70,577,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $51,023,000.
(m) Mississippi River Ship Channel, Gulf to Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.--The project for navigation, Mississippi River
Ship Channel, Gulf to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, authorized by
the matter under the heading ``Corps of Engineers--Civil''
under the heading ``DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL'' in chapter
IV of title I of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1985
(99 Stat. 313), is modified to require the Secretary, as part
of the operations and maintenance segment of the project, to
assume responsibility for periodic maintenance dredging of
the Chalmette Slip to a depth of minus 33 feet mean low gulf,
if the Secretary determines that the project modification is
economically justified, environmentally acceptable, and
consistent with other Federal policies.
(n) Red River Waterway, Mississippi River to Shreveport,
Louisiana.--The project for navigation, Red River Waterway,
Mississippi River to Shreveport, Louisiana, authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (Public Law
90-483; 82 Stat. 731), is modified to require the Secretary
to dredge and perform other related work as required to
reestablish and maintain access to, and the environmental
value of, the bendway channels designated for preservation in
project documentation prepared before the date of enactment
of this Act. The work shall be carried out in accordance with
the local cooperation requirements for other navigation
features of the project.
(o) Westwego to Harvey Canal, Louisiana.--If a favorable
post authorization change report is issued not later than
December 31, 1996, the project for hurricane damage
prevention and flood control, Westwego to Harvey Canal,
Louisiana, authorized by section 401(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100
Stat. 4128), is modified to include the Lake Cataouatche area
levee as part of the project at a total cost of $14,375,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $9,344,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $5,031,000.
(p) Tolchester Channel, Maryland.--The project for
navigation, Baltimore Harbor and Channels, Maryland,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958
(Public Law 85-500; 72 Stat. 297), is modified to direct the
Secretary--
(1) to expedite review of potential straightening of the
channel at the Tolchester Channel S-Turn; and
(2) if before December 31, 1996, it is determined to be
feasible and necessary for safe and efficient navigation, to
implement the straightening as part of project maintenance.
(q) Stillwater, Minnesota.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare a
design memorandum for the project authorized by section 363
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-580; 106 Stat. 4861). The design memorandum shall include
an evaluation of the Federal interest in construction of that
part of the project that includes the secondary flood wall,
but shall not include an evaluation of the reconstruction and
extension of the levee system for which construction is
scheduled to commence in 1996. If the Secretary determines
that there is such a Federal interest, the Secretary shall
construct the secondary flood wall, or the most feasible
alternative, at a total project cost of not to exceed
$11,600,000. The Federal share of the cost shall be 75
percent.
(r) Cape Girardeau, Missouri.--The project for flood
control, Cape Girardeau, Jackson Metropolitan Area, Missouri,
authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4118-
4119), is modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out
the project, including the implementation of nonstructural
measures, at a total cost of $44,700,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $32,600,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $12,100,000.
(s) Flamingo and Tropicana Washes, Nevada.--The project for
flood control, Las Vegas Wash and Tributaries (Flamingo and
Tropicana Washes), Nevada, authorized by section 101(13) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
580; 106 Stat. 4803), is modified to provide that the
Secretary shall reimburse the non-Federal sponsors (or other
appropriate non-Federal interests) for the Federal share of
any costs that the non-Federal sponsors (or other appropriate
non-Federal interests) incur in carrying out the project
consistent with the project cooperation agreement entered
into with respect to the project.
(t) Newark, New Jersey.--The project for flood control,
Passaic River Main Stem, New Jersey and New York, authorized
by paragraph (18) of section 101(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-640; 104 Stat. 4607)
(as amended by section 102(p) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-580; 106 Stat.
4807)), is modified to separate the project element described
in subparagraph (B) of the paragraph. The project element
shall be considered to be a separate project and shall be
carried out in accordance with the subparagraph.
(u) Acequias Irrigation System, New Mexico.--The second
sentence of section

[[Page H8739]]

1113(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4232) is amended by inserting
before the period at the end the following: ``, except that
the Federal share of scoping and reconnaissance work carried
out by the Secretary under this section shall be 100
percent''.
(v) Wilmington Harbor-Northeast Cape Fear River, North
Carolina.--The project for navigation, Wilmington Harbor-
Northeast Cape Fear River, North Carolina, authorized by
section 202(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4095), is modified to authorize
the Secretary to construct the project substantially in
accordance with the general design memorandum for the project
dated April 1990 and the general design memorandum supplement
for the project dated February 1994, at a total cost of
$50,921,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $25,128,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,793,000.
(w) Broken Bow Lake, Red River Basin, Oklahoma.--The
project for flood control and water supply, Broken Bow Lake,
Red River Basin, Oklahoma, authorized by section 203 of the
Flood Control Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-500; 72 Stat. 309)
and modified by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962
(Public Law 87-874; 76 Stat. 1187) and section 102(v) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-580;
106 Stat. 4808), is further modified to provide for the
reallocation of a sufficient quantity of water supply storage
space in Broken Bow Lake to support the Mountain Fork trout
fishery. Releases of water from Broken Bow Lake for the
Mountain Fork trout fishery as mitigation for the loss of
fish and wildlife resources in the Mountain Fork River shall
be carried out at no expense to the State of Oklahoma.
(x) Columbia River Dredging, Oregon and Washington.--The
project for navigation, Lower Willamette and Columbia Rivers
below Vancouver, Washington and Portland, Oregon, authorized
by the first section of the Act entitled ``An Act making
appropriations for the construction, repair, preservation,
and completion of certain public works on rivers and harbors,
and for other purposes'', approved June 18, 1878 (20 Stat.
157), is modified to direct the Secretary--
(1) to conduct channel simulation and to carry out
improvements to the deep draft channel between the mouth of
the river and river mile 34, at a cost not to exceed
$2,400,000; and
(2) to conduct overdepth and advance maintenance dredging
that is necessary to maintain authorized channel dimensions.
(y) Grays Landing, Lock and Dam 7, Monongahela River,
Pennsylvania.--The project for navigation, Lock and Dam 7
Replacement, Monongahela River, Pennsylvania, authorized by
section 301(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4110), is modified to authorize
the Secretary to carry out the project in accordance with the
post authorization change report for the project dated
September 1, 1995, at a total Federal cost of $181,000,000.
(z) Saw Mill Run, Pennsylvania.--The project for flood
control, Saw Mill Run, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, authorized
by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4124), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to carry out the project
substantially in accordance with the post authorization
change and general reevaluation report for the project, dated
April 1994, at a total cost of $12,780,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $9,585,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $3,195,000.
(aa) Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania.--The project for flood
control, Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania, authorized by section
401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public
Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4124), is modified to authorize the
Secretary--
(1) to include as part of the construction of the project
mechanical and electrical upgrades to stormwater pumping
stations in the Wyoming Valley; and
(2) to carry out mitigation measures that the Secretary is
otherwise authorized to carry out but that the general design
memorandum for phase II of the project, as approved by the
Assistant Secretary of the Army having responsibility for
civil works on February 15, 1996, provides will be carried
out for credit by the non-Federal interest with respect to
the project.
(bb) Allendale Dam, North Providence, Rhode Island.--The
project for reconstruction of the Allendale Dam, North
Providence, Rhode Island, authorized by section 358 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-580;
106 Stat. 4861), is modified to authorize the Secretary to
reconstruct the dam, at a total cost of $350,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $262,500 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $87,500.
(cc) India Point Railroad Bridge, Seekonk River,
Providence, Rhode Island.--The first sentence of section
1166(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4258) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$500,000'' and inserting ``$1,300,000'';
and
(2) by striking ``$250,000'' each place it appears and
inserting ``$650,000''.
(dd) Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Corpus Christi, Texas.--
The project for navigation, Corpus Christi Ship Channel,
Corpus Christi, Texas, authorized by the first section 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 September 22,
1922 (42 Stat. 1039), is modified to include the Rincon Canal
system as a part of the Federal project that shall be
maintained at a depth of 12 feet, if the Secretary determines
that the project modification is economically justified,
environmentally acceptable, and consistent with other Federal
policies.
(ee) Dallas Floodway Extension, Dallas, Texas.--The flood
protection works constructed by the non-Federal interest
along the Trinity River in Dallas, Texas, for Rochester Park
and the Central Wastewater Treatment Plant shall be included
as a part of the plan implemented for the Dallas Floodway
Extension component of the Trinity River, Texas, project
authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965
(Public Law 89-298; 79 Stat. 1091). The cost of the works
shall be credited toward the non-Federal share of project
costs without regard to further economic analysis of the
works.
(ff) Matagorda Ship Channel, Port Lavaca, Texas.--The
project for navigation, Matagorda Ship Channel, Port Lavaca,
Texas, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1958 (Public Law 85-500; 72 Stat. 298), is modified to
require the Secretary to assume responsibility for the
maintenance of the Point Comfort Turning Basin Expansion Area
to a depth of 36 feet, as constructed by the non-Federal
interests. The modification described in the preceding
sentence shall be considered to be in the public interest and
to be economically justified.
(gg) Upper Jordan River, Utah.--The project for flood
control, Upper Jordan River, Utah, authorized by section
101(a)(23) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-640; 104 Stat. 4610), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to carry out the project
substantially in accordance with the general design
memorandum for the project dated March 1994, and the post
authorization change report for the project dated April 1994,
at a total cost of $12,870,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $8,580,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$4,290,000.
(hh) Grundy, Virginia.--The Secretary shall proceed with
planning, engineering, design, and construction of the
Grundy, Virginia, element of the Levisa and Tug Forks of the
Big Sandy River and Upper Cumberland River project,
authorized by section 202 of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriation Act, 1981 (Public Law 96-367; 94 Stat. 1339),
in accordance with Plan 3A as set forth in the preliminary
draft detailed project report of the Huntington District
Commander, dated August 1993.
(ii) Haysi Dam, Virginia and Kentucky.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall construct the Haysi
Dam feature of the project authorized by section 202 of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act, 1981 (Public
Law 96-367; 94 Stat. 1339), substantially in accordance with
Plan A as set forth in the preliminary draft general plan
supplement report of the Huntington District Engineer for the
Levisa Fork Basin, Virginia and Kentucky, dated May 1995.
(2) Recreational component.--The non-Federal interest shall
be responsible for not more than 50 percent of the costs
associated with the construction and implementation of the
recreational component of the Haysi Dam feature.
(3) Operation and maintenance.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), operation and
maintenance of the Haysi Dam feature shall be carried out by
the Secretary.
(B) Payment of costs.--The non-Federal interest shall be
responsible for 100 percent of all costs associated with the
operation and maintenance.
(4) Ability to pay.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary shall apply section 103(m) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) to the
construction of the Haysi Dam feature in the same manner as
section 103(m) of the Act is applied to other projects or
project features constructed under section 202 of the Energy
and Water Development Appropriation Act, 1981 (Public Law 96-
367; 94 Stat. 1339).
(jj) Petersburg, West Virginia.--The project for flood
control, Petersburg, West Virginia, authorized by section
101(a)(26) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-640; 104 Stat. 4611), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total
cost of not to exceed $26,600,000, with an estimated Federal
cost of $19,195,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$7,405,000.
(kk) Teton County, Wyoming.--Section 840 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100
Stat. 4176) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Secretary: Provided, That'' and inserting
the following: ``Secretary. In carrying out this section, the
Secretary may enter into agreements with the non-Federal
sponsors permitting the non-Federal sponsors to provide
operation and maintenance for the project on a cost-
reimbursable basis. The'';
(2) by inserting ``, through providing in-kind services
or'' after ``$35,000''; and
(3) by inserting a comma after ``materials''.

SEC. 103. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) Branford Harbor, Connecticut.--
(1) In general.--The 2,267 square foot portion of the
project for navigation in the Branford River, Branford
Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the Act entitled ``An Act
making appropriations for the construction,

[[Page H8740]]

repair, and preservation of certain public works on rivers
and harbors, and for other purposes'', approved June 13, 1902
(32 Stat. 333), lying shoreward of a line described in
paragraph (2), is deauthorized.
(2) Description of line.--The line referred to in paragraph
(1) is described as follows: beginning at a point on the
authorized Federal navigation channel line the coordinates of
which are N156,181.32, E581,572.38, running thence south 70
degrees, 11 minutes, 8 seconds west a distance of 171.58 feet
to another point on the authorized Federal navigation channel
line the coordinates of which are N156,123.16, E581,410.96.
(b) Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut.--
(1) Anchorage area.--The portion of the project for
navigation, Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (Public Law
85-500; 72 Stat. 297), consisting of a 2-acre anchorage area
with a depth of 6 feet at the head of Johnsons River between
the Federal channel and Hollisters Dam, is deauthorized.
(2) Johnsons river channel.--The portion of the project for
navigation, Johnsons River Channel, Bridgeport Harbor,
Connecticut, authorized by the first section 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 July 24, 1946 (60 Stat.
634), that is northerly of a line across the Federal channel
the coordinates of which are north 123318.35, east 486301.68,
and north 123257.15, east 486380.77, is deauthorized.
(c) Guilford Harbor, Connecticut.--
(1) In general.--The portion of the project for navigation,
Guilford Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by 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.
13), that consists of the 6-foot deep channel in Sluice Creek
and that is not included in the description of the realigned
channel set forth in paragraph (2) is deauthorized.
(2) Description of realigned channel.--The realigned
channel referred to in paragraph (1) is described as follows:
starting at a point where the Sluice Creek Channel intersects
with the main entrance channel, N159194.63, E623201.07,
thence running north 24 degrees, 58 minutes, 15.2 seconds
west 478.40 feet to a point N159628.31, E622999.11, thence
running north 20 degrees, 18 minutes, 31.7 seconds west
351.53 feet to a point N159957.99, E622877.10, thence running
north 69 degrees, 41 minutes, 37.9 seconds east 55.00 feet to
a point N159977.08, E622928.69, thence turning and running
south 20 degrees, 18 minutes, 31.0 seconds east 349.35 feet
to a point N159649.45, E623049.94, thence turning and running
south 24 degrees, 58 minutes, 11.1 seconds east 341.36 feet
to a point N159340.00, E623194.04, thence turning and running
south 90 degrees, 0 minutes, 0 seconds east 78.86 feet to a
point N159340.00, E623272.90.
(d) Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut.--
(1) In general.--The following portions of projects for
navigation, Norwalk Harbor, Connecticut, are deauthorized:
(A) The portion authorized by 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 March 2, 1919 (40 Stat.
1276), that lies northerly of a line across the Federal
channel having coordinates N104199.72, E417774.12 and
N104155.59, E417628.96.
(B) The portions of the 6-foot deep East Norwalk Channel
and Anchorage, authorized by 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. 13), that are
not included in the description of the realigned channel and
anchorage set forth in paragraph (2).
(2) Description of realigned channel and anchorage.--The
realigned 6-foot deep East Norwalk Channel and Anchorage
referred to in paragraph (1)(B) is described as follows:
starting at a point on the East Norwalk Channel, N95743.02,
E419581.37, thence running northwesterly about 463.96 feet to
a point N96197.93, E419490.18, thence running northwesterly
about 549.32 feet to a point N96608.49, E419125.23, thence
running northwesterly about 384.06 feet to a point N96965.94,
E418984.75, thence running northwesterly about 407.26 feet to
a point N97353.87, E418860.78, thence running westerly about
58.26 feet to a point N97336.26, E418805.24, thence running
northwesterly about 70.99 feet to a point N97390.30,
E418759.21, thence running westerly about 71.78 feet to a
point on the anchorage limit N97405.26, E418689.01, thence
running southerly along the western limits of the Federal
anchorage in existence on the date of enactment of this Act
until reaching a point N95893.74, E419449.17, thence running
in a southwesterly direction about 78.74 feet to a point on
the East Norwalk Channel N95815.62, E419439.33.
(3) Designation of realigned channel and anchorage.--All of
the realigned channel shall be redesignated as an anchorage,
with the exception of the portion of the channel that narrows
to a width of 100 feet and terminates at a line the
coordinates of which are N96456.81, E419260.06 and N96390.37,
E419185.32, which shall remain as a channel.
(e) Southport Harbor, Connecticut.--
(1) In general.--The following portions of the project for
navigation, Southport Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the
first section 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 August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1029), are deauthorized:
(A) The 6-foot deep anchorage located at the head of the
project.
(B) The portion of the 9-foot deep channel beginning at a
bend in the channel the coordinates of which are north
109131.16, east 452653.32, running thence in a northeasterly
direction about 943.01 feet to a point the coordinates of
which are north 109635.22, east 453450.31, running thence in
a southeasterly direction about 22.66 feet to a point the
coordinates of which are north 109617.15, east 453463.98,
running thence in a southwesterly direction about 945.18 feet
to the point of beginning.
(2) Remainder.--The portion of the project referred to in
paragraph (1) that is remaining after the deauthorization
made by the paragraph and that is northerly of a line the
coordinates of which are north 108699.15, east 452768.36, and
north 108655.66, east 452858.73, is redesignated as an
anchorage.
(f) Stony Creek, Connecticut.--The following portion of the
project for navigation, Stony Creek, Connecticut, authorized
under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33
U.S.C. 577), located in the 6-foot deep maneuvering basin, is
deauthorized: beginning at coordinates N157,031.91,
E599,030.79, thence running northeasterly about 221.16 feet
to coordinates N157,191.06, E599,184.37, thence running
northerly about 162.60 feet to coordinates N157,353.56,
E599,189.99, thence running southwesterly about 358.90 feet
to the point of beginning.
(g) Thames River, Connecticut.--
(1) Modification.--The project for navigation, Thames
River, Connecticut, authorized by the first section 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 August 30, 1935
(49 Stat. 1029), is modified to reconfigure the turning basin
in accordance with the following alignment: beginning at a
point on the eastern limit of the existing project,
N251052.93, E783934.59, thence running north 5 degrees, 25
minutes, 21.3 seconds east 341.06 feet to a point,
N251392.46, E783966.82, thence running north 47 degrees, 24
minutes, 14.0 seconds west 268.72 feet to a point,
N251574.34, E783769.00, thence running north 88 degrees, 41
minutes, 52.2 seconds west 249.06 feet to a point,
N251580.00, E783520.00, thence running south 46 degrees, 16
minutes, 22.9 seconds west 318.28 feet to a point,
N251360.00, E783290.00, thence running south 19 degrees, 1
minute, 32.2 seconds east 306.76 feet to a point, N251070.00,
E783390.00, thence running south 45 degrees, 0 minutes, 0
seconds, east 155.56 feet to a point, N250960.00, E783500.00
on the existing western limit.
(2) Payment for initial dredging.--Any required initial
dredging of the widened portions identified in paragraph (1)
shall be carried out at no cost to the Federal Government.
(3) Deauthorization.--The portions of the turning basin
that are not included in the reconfigured turning basin
described in paragraph (1) are deauthorized.
(h) East Boothbay Harbor, Maine.--The following portion of
the navigation project for East Boothbay Harbor, Maine,
authorized by the first section of the Act of June 25, 1910
(36 Stat. 631, chapter 382) (commonly referred to as the
``River and Harbor Act of 1910''), containing approximately
1.15 acres and described in accordance with the Maine State
Coordinate System, West Zone, is deauthorized:
Beginning at a point noted as point number 6 and shown as
having plan coordinates of North 9, 722, East 9, 909 on the
plan entitled, ``East Boothbay Harbor, Maine, examination, 8-
foot area'', and dated August 9, 1955, Drawing Number F1251
D-6-2, said point having Maine State Coordinate System, West
Zone coordinates of Northing 74514, Easting 698381; and
Thence, North 58 degrees, 12 minutes, 30 seconds East a
distance of 120.9 feet to a point; and
Thence, South 72 degrees, 21 minutes, 50 seconds East a
distance of 106.2 feet to a point; and
Thence, South 32 degrees, 04 minutes, 55 seconds East a
distance of 218.9 feet to a point; and
Thence, South 61 degrees, 29 minutes, 40 seconds West a
distance of 148.9 feet to a point; and
Thence, North 35 degrees, 14 minutes, 12 seconds West a
distance of 87.5 feet to a point; and
Thence, North 78 degrees, 30 minutes, 58 seconds West a
distance of 68.4 feet to a point; and
Thence, North 27 degrees, 11 minutes, 39 seconds West a
distance of 157.3 feet to the point of beginning.
(i) York Harbor, Maine.--The following portions of the
project for navigation, York Harbor, Maine, authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (Public Law
86-645; 74 Stat. 480), are deauthorized:
(1) The portion located in the 8-foot deep anchorage area
beginning at coordinates N109340.19, E372066.93, thence
running north 65 degrees, 12 minutes, 10.5 seconds east
423.27 feet to a point N109517.71, E372451.17, thence running
north 28 degrees, 42 minutes, 58.3 seconds west 11.68 feet to
a point N109527.95, E372445.56, thence running south 63
degrees, 37 minutes, 24.6 seconds west 422.63 feet to the
point of beginning.
(2) The portion located in the 8-foot deep anchorage area
beginning at coordinates

[[Page H8741]]

N108557.24, E371645.88, thence running south 60 degrees, 41
minutes, 17.2 seconds east 484.51 feet to a point N108320.04,
E372068.36, thence running north 29 degrees, 12 minutes, 53.3
seconds east 15.28 feet to a point N108333.38, E372075.82,
thence running north 62 degrees, 29 minutes, 42.1 seconds
west 484.73 feet to the point of beginning.
(j) Cohasset Harbor, Massachusetts.--The following portions
of the project for navigation, Cohasset Harbor,
Massachusetts, 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.
12), or carried out pursuant to section 107 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), are deauthorized: a 7-
foot deep anchorage and a 6-foot deep anchorage; beginning at
site 1, beginning at a point N453510.15, E792664.63, thence
running south 53 degrees 07 minutes 05.4 seconds west 307.00
feet to a point N453325.90, E792419.07, thence running north
57 degrees 56 minutes 36.8 seconds west 201.00 feet to a
point N453432.58, E792248.72, thence running south 88 degrees
57 minutes 25.6 seconds west 50.00 feet to a point
N453431.67, E792198.73, thence running north 01 degree 02
minutes 52.3 seconds west 66.71 feet to a point N453498.37,
E792197.51, thence running north 69 degrees 12 minutes 52.3
seconds east 332.32 feet to a point N453616.30, E792508.20,
thence running south 55 degrees 50 minutes 24.1 seconds east
189.05 feet to point of origin; then site 2, beginning at a
point, N452886.64, E791287.83, thence running south 00
degrees 00 minutes 00.0 seconds west 56.04 feet to a point,
N452830.60, E791287.83, thence running north 90 degrees 00
minutes 00.0 seconds west 101.92 feet to a point, N452830.60,
E791185.91, thence running north 52 degrees 12 minutes 49.7
seconds east 89.42 feet to a point, N452885.39, E791256.58,
thence running north 87 degrees 42 minutes 33.8 seconds east
31.28 feet to point of origin; and site 3, beginning at a
point, N452261.08, E792040.24, thence running north 89
degrees 07 minutes 19.5 seconds east 118.78 feet to a point,
N452262.90, E792159.01, thence running south 43 degrees 39
minutes 06.8 seconds west 40.27 feet to a point, N452233.76,
E792131.21, thence running north 74 degrees 33 minutes 29.1
seconds west 94.42 feet to a point, N452258.90, E792040.20,
thence running north 01 degree 03 minutes 04.3 seconds east
2.18 feet to point of origin.
(k) Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.--The
project for navigation, Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and
Rhode Island, authorized by section 101 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-483; 82 Stat. 731), is
modified to provide that alteration of the drawspan of the
Brightman Street Bridge to provide a channel width of 300
feet shall not be required after the date of enactment of
this Act.
(l) Cocheco River, New Hampshire.--
(1) In general.--The portion of the project for navigation,
Cocheco River, New Hampshire, 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 September 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 436), and consisting of
a 7-foot deep channel that lies northerly of a line the
coordinates of which are N255292.31, E713095.36, and
N255334.51, E713138.01, is deauthorized.
(2) Maintenance dredging.--Not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
perform maintenance dredging for the remaining authorized
portions of the Federal navigation channel under the project
described in paragraph (1) to restore authorized channel
dimensions.
(m) Morristown Harbor, New York.--The portion of the
project for navigation, Morristown Harbor, New York,
authorized by the first section 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 January 21, 1927 (44 Stat. 1014), that
lies north of the northern boundary of Morris Street extended
is deauthorized.
(n) Oswegatchie River, Ogdensburg, New York.--The portion
of the Federal channel in the Oswegatchie River in
Ogdensburg, New York, from the southernmost alignment of the
Route 68 bridge, upstream to the northernmost alignment of
the Lake Street bridge, is deauthorized.
(o) Apponaug Cove, Rhode Island.--The following portion of
the project for navigation, Apponaug Cove, Rhode Island,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960
(Public Law 86-645; 74 Stat. 480), consisting of the 6-foot
deep channel, is deauthorized: beginning at a point,
N223269.93, E513089.12, thence running northwesterly to a
point N223348.31, E512799.54, thence running southwesterly to
a point N223251.78, E512773.41, thence running southeasterly
to a point N223178.00, E513046.00, thence running
northeasterly to the point of beginning.
(p) Kickapoo River, Wisconsin.--
(1) Project modification.--The project for flood control
and allied purposes, Kickapoo River, Wisconsin, authorized by
section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-
874; 76 Stat. 1190), as modified by section 814 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662; 100
Stat. 4169), is further modified as provided by this
subsection.
(2) Transfers of property.--
(A) Transfer to state of wisconsin.--Subject to the
requirements of this paragraph, the Secretary shall transfer
to the State of Wisconsin, without consideration, all right,
title, and interest of the United States in and to the lands
described in subparagraph (E), including all works,
structures, and other improvements to the lands, but
excluding lands transferred under subparagraph (B).
(B) Transfer to secretary of the interior.--Subject to the
requirements of this paragraph, on the date of the transfer
under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall transfer to the
Secretary of the Interior, without consideration, all right,
title, and interest of the United States in and to lands that
are culturally and religiously significant sites of the Ho-
Chunk Nation (a federally recognized Indian tribe) and are
located within the lands described in subparagraph (E). The
lands shall be described in accordance with subparagraph
(C)(ii)(I) and may not exceed a total of 1,200 acres.
(C) Terms and conditions.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary shall make the transfers
under subparagraphs (A) and (B) only if--

(I) the State of Wisconsin enters into a written agreement
with the Secretary to hold the United States harmless from
all claims arising from or through the operation of lands and
improvements subject to the transfer under subparagraph (A);
and
(II) on or before October 30, 1997, the State of Wisconsin
enters into and submits to the Secretary a memorandum of
understanding, as specified in clause (ii), with the tribal
organization (as defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)
of the Ho-Chunk Nation.

(ii) Memorandum of understanding.--The memorandum of
understanding referred to in clause (i)(II) shall contain, at
a minimum, the following:

(I) A description of sites and associated lands to be
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior under
subparagraph (B).
(II) An agreement specifying that the lands transferred
under subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall be preserved in a
natural state and developed only to the extent necessary to
enhance outdoor recreational and educational opportunities.
(III) An agreement specifying the terms and conditions of a
plan for the management of the lands to be transferred under
subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(IV) A provision requiring a review of the plan referred to
in subclause (III) to be conducted every 10 years under which
the State of Wisconsin, acting through the Kickapoo Valley
Governing Board, and the Ho-Chunk Nation may agree to
revisions of the plan in order to address changed
circumstances on the lands transferred under subparagraphs
(A) and (B). The provision may include a plan for the
transfer to the Secretary of the Interior of any additional
site discovered to be culturally and religiously significant
to the Ho-Chunk Nation.
(V) An agreement preventing or limiting the public
disclosure of the location or existence of each site of
particular cultural or religious significance to the Ho-Chunk
Nation, if public disclosure would jeopardize the cultural or
religious integrity of the site.

(D) Administration of lands.--The lands transferred to the
Secretary of the Interior under subparagraph (B), and any
lands transferred to the Secretary of the Interior under the
memorandum of understanding entered into under subparagraph
(C), or under any revision of the memorandum of understanding
agreed to under subparagraph (C)(ii)(IV), shall be held in
trust by the United States for, and added to and administered
as part of the reservation of, the Ho-Chunk Nation.
(E) Land description.--The lands referred to in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) are the approximately 8,569 acres
of land associated with the LaFarge Dam and Lake portion of
the project referred to in paragraph (1) in Vernon County,
Wisconsin, in the following sections:
(i) Section 31, Township 14 North, Range 1 West of the 4th
Principal Meridian.
(ii) Sections 2 through 11, and 16, 17, 20, and 21,
Township 13 North, Range 2 West of the 4th Principal
Meridian.
(iii) Sections 15, 16, 21 through 24, 26, 27, 31, and 33
through 36, Township 14 North, Range 2 West of the 4th
Principal Meridian.
(3) Transfer of flowage easements.--The Secretary shall
transfer to the owner of the servient estate, without
consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to each flowage easement acquired as part of
the project referred to in paragraph (1) within Township 14
North, Range 2 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Vernon
County, Wisconsin.
(4) Deauthorization.--The LaFarge Dam and Lake portion of
the project referred to in paragraph (1) is not authorized
after the date of the transfers under paragraph (2).
(5) Interim management and maintenance.--The Secretary
shall continue to manage and maintain the LaFarge Dam and
Lake portion of the project referred to in paragraph (1)
until the date of the transfers under paragraph (2).

SEC. 104. STUDIES.

(a) Red River, Arkansas.--The Secretary shall--
(1) conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
carrying out a project to permit navigation on the Red River
in southwest Arkansas; and
(2) in conducting the study, analyze regional economic
benefits that were not included in the limited economic
analysis contained in the reconnaissance report for the
project dated November 1995.
(b) Bear Creek Drainage, San Joaquin County, California.--
The Secretary shall

[[Page H8742]]

conduct a review of the Bear Creek Drainage, San Joaquin
County, California, flood control project, authorized by
section 10 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
December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 901), to develop a comprehensive
plan for additional flood damage reduction measures for the
city of Stockton, California, and surrounding areas.
(c) Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California.--Not later
than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall--
(1) conduct a study of the advisability of modifying, for
the purpose of flood control pursuant to section 205 of the
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), the Lake
Elsinore, Riverside County, California, flood control
project, for water conservation storage up to an elevation of
1,249 feet above mean sea level; and
(2) report to Congress on the study, including making
recommendations concerning the advisability of so modifying
the project.
(d) Long Beach, California.--The Secretary shall review the
feasibility of navigation improvements at Long Beach Harbor,
California, including widening and deepening of the
navigation channel, as provided for in section 201(b) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662;
100 Stat. 4091). The Secretary shall complete the report not
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
(e) Mormon Slough/Calaveras River, California.--The
Secretary shall conduct a review of the Mormon Slough/
Calaveras River, California, flood control project,
authorized by section 10 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 December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 902), to
develop a comprehensive plan for additional flood damage
reduction measures for the city of Stockton, California, and
surrounding areas.
(f) Murrieta Creek, Riverside County, California.--The
Secretary shall review the completed feasibility study of the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, including identified alternatives, concerning
Murrieta Creek from Temecula to Wildomar, Riverside County,
California, to determine the Federal interest in
participating in a project for flood control.
(g) Pine Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration,
California.--The Secretary shall study the feasibility of
fish and wildlife habitat improvement measures identified for
further study by the Pine Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Restoration Investigation Reconnaissance Report.
(h) West Dade, Florida.--The Secretary shall conduct a
reconnaissance study to determine the Federal interest in
using the West Dade, Florida, reuse facility to increase the
supply of surface water to the Everglades in order to enhance
fish and wildlife habitat.
(i) Savannah River Basin Comprehensive Water Resources
Study.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a
comprehensive study to address the current and future needs
for flood damage prevention and reduction, water supply, and
other related water resources needs in the Savannah River
Basin.
(2) Scope.--The scope of the study shall be limited to an
analysis of water resources issues that fall within the
traditional civil works missions of the Army Corps of
Engineers.
(3) Coordination.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2), the
Secretary shall ensure that the study is coordinated with the
Environmental Protection Agency and the ongoing watershed
study by the Agency of the Savannah River Basin.
(j) Bayou Blanc, Crowley, Louisiana.--The Secretary shall
conduct a reconnaissance study to determine the Federal
interest in the construction of a bulkhead system, consisting
of either steel sheet piling with tiebacks or concrete, along
the embankment of Bayou Blanc, Crowley, Louisiana, in order
to alleviate slope failures and erosion problems in a cost-
effective manner.
(k) Hackberry Industrial Ship Channel Park, Louisiana.--The
Secretary shall incorporate the area of Hackberry, Louisiana,
as part of the overall study of the Lake Charles ship
channel, bypass channel, and general anchorage area in
Louisiana, to explore the possibility of constructing
additional anchorage areas.
(l) City of North Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada.--The
Secretary shall conduct a reconnaissance study to determine
the Federal interest in channel improvements in channel A of
the North Las Vegas Wash in the city of North Las Vegas,
Nevada, for the purpose of flood control.
(m) Lower Las Vegas Wash Wetlands, Clark County, Nevada.--
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of the restoration of wetlands in the Lower Las
Vegas Wash, Nevada, for the purposes of erosion control and
environmental restoration.
(n) Northern Nevada.--The Secretary shall conduct
reconnaissance studies, in the State of Nevada, of--
(1) the Humboldt River, and the tributaries and outlets of
the river;
(2) the Truckee River, and the tributaries and outlets of
the river;
(3) the Carson River, and the tributaries and outlets of
the river; and
(4) the Walker River, and the tributaries and outlets of
the river;
in order to determine the Federal interest in flood control,
environmental restoration, conservation of fish and wildlife,
recreation, water conservation, water quality, and toxic and
radioactive waste.
(o) Buffalo Harbor, New York.--The Secretary shall
determine the feasibility of excavating the inner harbor and
constructing the associated bulkheads in Buffalo Harbor, New
York.
(p) Coeymans, New York.--The Secretary shall conduct a
reconnaissance study to determine the Federal interest in
reopening the secondary channel of the Hudson River in the
town of Coeymans, New York, which has been narrowed by silt
as a result of the construction of Coeymans middle dike by
the Army Corps of Engineers.
(q) Shinnecock Inlet, New York.--Not later than 2 years
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
conduct a reconnaissance study in Shinnecock Inlet, New York,
to determine the Federal interest in constructing a sand
bypass system, or other appropriate alternative, for the
purposes of allowing sand to flow in the natural east-to-west
pattern of the sand and preventing the further erosion of the
beaches west of the inlet and the shoaling of the inlet.
(r) Kill Van Kull and Newark Bay Channels, New York and New
Jersey.--The Secretary shall continue engineering and design
in order to complete the navigation project at Kill Van Kull
and Newark Bay Channels, New York and New Jersey, authorized
to be constructed in the Supplemental Appropriations Act,
1985 (Public Law 99-88; 99 Stat. 313), and section 202(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
662; 100 Stat. 4095), described in the general design
memorandum for the project, and approved in the Report of the
Chief of Engineers dated December 14, 1981.
(s) Columbia Slough, Oregon.--Not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
complete a feasibility study for the ecosystem restoration
project at Columbia Slough, Oregon, as reported in the August
1993 Revised Reconnaissance Study. The study shall be a
demonstration study done in coordination with the
Environmental Protection Agency.
(t) Willamette River, Oregon.--The Secretary shall conduct
a study to determine the Federal interest in carrying out a
nonstructural flood control project along the Willamette
River, Oregon, for the purposes of floodplain and ecosystem
restoration.
(u) Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania.--Not later
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall--
(1) review the report entitled ``Report of the Chief of
Engineers: Lackawanna River at Scranton, Pennsylvania'',
dated June 29, 1992, to determine whether changed conditions
in the Diamond Plot and Green Ridge sections, Scranton,
Pennsylvania, would result in an economically justified flood
damage reduction project at those locations; and
(2) submit to Congress a report on the results of the
review.
(v) Charleston, South Carolina.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study of the Charleston, South Carolina, estuary
area located in Charleston, Berkeley, and Dorchester
Counties, South Carolina, for the purpose of evaluating
environmental conditions in the tidal reaches of the Ashley,
Cooper, Stono, and Wando Rivers and the lower portions of
Charleston Harbor.
(w) Oahe Dam to Lake Sharpe, South Dakota.--Not later than
2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall--
(1) conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
sediment removal and control in the area of the Missouri
River downstream of Oahe Dam through the upper reaches of
Lake Sharpe, including the lower portion of the Bad River,
South Dakota;
(2) develop a comprehensive sediment removal and control
plan for the area--
(A) based on the assessment by the study of the dredging,
estimated costs, and time required to remove sediment from
affected areas in Lake Sharpe;
(B)(i) based on the identification by the study of high
erosion areas in the Bad River channel; and
(ii) including recommendations and related costs for such
of the areas as are in need of stabilization and restoration;
and
(C)(i) based on the identification by the study of
shoreline erosion areas along Lake Sharpe; and
(ii) including recommended options for the stabilization
and restoration of the areas;
(3) use other non-Federal engineering analyses and related
studies in determining the feasibility of sediment removal
and control as described in paragraph (1); and
(4) credit the costs of the non-Federal engineering
analyses and studies referred to in paragraphs (2) and (3)
toward the non-Federal share of the feasibility study
conducted under paragraph (1).
(x) Mustang Island, Corpus Christi, Texas.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study of navigation along the south-central
coast of Texas near Corpus Christi for the purpose of
determining the feasibility of constructing and maintaining
the Packery Channel on the southern portion of Mustang
Island.
(y) Ashley Creek, Utah.--The Secretary is authorized to
study the feasibility of undertaking a project for fish and
wildlife restoration at Ashley Creek, near Vernal, Utah.
(z) Prince William County, Virginia.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study of flooding, erosion, and other water
resource problems

[[Page H8743]]

in Prince William County, Virginia, including an assessment
of the wetland protection, erosion control, and flood damage
reduction needs of the county.
(aa) Pacific Region.--The Secretary shall conduct studies
in the interest of navigation in the part of the Pacific
Region that includes American Samoa, Guam, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. For the purpose
of this subsection, the cost-sharing requirements of section
105 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2215) shall apply.
(bb) Morganza, Louisiana to the Gulf of Mexico.--
(1) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the
environmental, flood control and navigational impacts
associated with the construction of a lock structure in the
Houma Navigation Canal as an independent feature of the
overall flood damage prevention study currently being
conducted under the Morganza, Louisiana to the Gulf of Mexico
feasibility study. In preparing such study, the Secretary
shall consult the South Terrebonne Tidewater Management and
Conservation District and consider the District's Preliminary
Design Document, dated February 1994. Further, the Secretary
shall evaluate the findings of the Coastal Wetlands Planning,
Protection and Restoration Federal Task Force, as authorized
by Public Law 101-646, relating to the lock structure.
(2) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit to Congress a
report on the results of the study conducted under paragraph
(1), together with recommendations on immediate
implementation not later than 6 months after the enactment of
this Act.
TITLE II--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

SEC. 201. GRAND PRAIRIE REGION AND BAYOU METO BASIN,
ARKANSAS.

The project for flood control and water supply, Grand
Prairie Region and Bayou Meto Basin, Arkansas, authorized by
section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 174)
and deauthorized under section 1001(b)(1) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(1)), is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary if, not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary submits a report to Congress that--
(1) describes necessary modifications to the project that
are consistent with the functions of the Army Corps of
Engineers; and
(2) contains recommendations concerning which Federal
agencies (such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service,
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of
Reclamation, and the United States Geological Survey) are
most appropriate to have responsibility for carrying out the
project.

SEC. 202. HEBER SPRINGS, ARKANSAS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into an
agreement with the city of Heber Springs, Arkansas, to
provide 3,522 acre-feet of water supply storage in Greers
Ferry Lake, Arkansas, for municipal and industrial purposes,
at no cost to the city.
(b) Necessary Facilities.--The city of Heber Springs shall
be responsible for 100 percent of the costs of construction,
operation, and maintenance of any intake, transmission,
treatment, or distribution facility necessary for utilization
of the water supply.
(c) Additional Water Supply Storage.--Any additional water
supply storage required after the date of enactment of this
Act shall be contracted for and reimbursed by the city of
Heber Springs, Arkansas.

SEC. 203. MORGAN POINT, ARKANSAS.

The Secretary shall accept as in-kind contributions for the
project at Morgan Point, Arkansas--
(1) the items described as fish and wildlife facilities and
land in the Morgan Point Broadway Closure Structure
modification report for the project, dated February 1994; and
(2) fish stocking activities carried out by the non-Federal
interests for the project.

SEC. 204. WHITE RIVER BASIN LAKES, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI.

The project for flood control and power generation at White
River Basin Lakes, Arkansas and Missouri, 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. 1218), shall include recreation and fish
and wildlife mitigation as purposes of the project, to the
extent that the purposes do not adversely impact flood
control, power generation, or other authorized purposes of
the project.

SEC. 205. CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA.

The project for Central and Southern Florida, authorized by
section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-
483; 82 Stat. 740), is modified, subject to the availability
of appropriations, to authorize the Secretary to implement
the recommended plan of improvement contained in a report
entitled ``Central and Southern Florida Project, Final
Integrated General Reevaluation Report and Environmental
Impact Statement, Canal 111 (C-111), South Dade County,
Florida'', dated May 1994 (including acquisition of such
portions of the Frog Pond and Rocky Glades areas as are
needed for the project), at a total cost of $156,000,000. The
Federal share of the cost of implementing the plan of
improvement shall be 50 percent. The Secretary of the
Interior shall pay 25 percent of the cost of acquiring such
portions of the Frog Pond and Rocky Glades areas as are
needed for the project, which amount shall be included in the
Federal share. The non-Federal share of the operation and
maintenance costs of the improvements undertaken pursuant to
this section shall be 100 percent, except that the Federal
Government shall reimburse the non-Federal interest in an
amount equal to 60 percent of the costs of operating and
maintaining pump stations that pump water into Taylor Slough
in Everglades National Park.

SEC. 206. WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA.

The project for flood protection of West Palm Beach,
Florida (C-51), authorized by section 203 of the Flood
Control Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-874; 76 Stat. 1183), is
modified to provide for the construction of an enlarged
stormwater detention area, Storm Water Treatment Area 1 East,
generally in accordance with the plan of improvements
described in the February 15, 1994, report entitled
``Everglades Protection Project, Palm Beach County, Florida,
Conceptual Design'', prepared by Burns and McDonnell, and as
further described in detailed design documents to be approved
by the Secretary. The additional work authorized by this
section shall be accomplished at full Federal cost in
recognition of the water supply benefits accruing to the
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and the Everglades
National Park and in recognition of the statement in support
of the Everglades restoration effort set forth in the
document signed by the Secretary of the Interior and the
Secretary in July 1993. Operation and maintenance of the
stormwater detention area shall be consistent with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary for the Central and
Southern Florida project, with all costs of the operation and
maintenance work borne by non-Federal interests.

SEC. 207. EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Develop.--The term ``develop'' means any
preconstruction or land acquisition planning activity.
(2) South florida ecosystem.--The term ``South Florida
ecosystem'' means the Florida Everglades restoration area
that includes lands and waters within the boundary of the
South Florida Water Management District, the Florida Keys,
and the near-shore coastal waters of South Florida.
(3) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the South
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force established by
subsection (c).
(b) South Florida Ecosystem Restoration.--
(1) Modifications to central and southern florida
project.--
(A) Development.--The Secretary shall, if necessary,
develop modifications to the project for Central and Southern
Florida, authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act
of 1948 (62 Stat. 1176), to restore, preserve, and protect
the South Florida ecosystem and to provide for the water-
related needs of the region.
(B) Conceptual plan.--
(i) In general.--The modifications under subparagraph (A)
shall be set forth in a conceptual plan prepared in
accordance with clause (ii) and adopted by the Task Force
(referred to in this section as the ``conceptual plan'').
(ii) Basis for conceptual plan.--The conceptual plan shall
be based on the recommendations specified in the draft report
entitled ``Conceptual Plan for the Central and Southern
Florida Project Restudy'', published by the Governor's
Commission for a Sustainable South Florida and dated June 4,
1996.
(C) Integration of other activities.--Restoration,
preservation, and protection of the South Florida ecosystem
shall include a comprehensive science-based approach that
integrates ongoing Federal and State efforts, including--
(i) the project for the ecosystem restoration of the
Kissimmee River, Florida, authorized by section 101 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-580;
106 Stat. 4802);
(ii) the project for flood protection, West Palm Beach
Canal, Florida (canal C-51), authorized by section 203 of the
Flood Control Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-874; 76 Stat. 1183),
as modified by section 205 of this Act;
(iii) the project for modifications to improve water
deliveries into Everglades National Park authorized by
section 104 of the Everglades National Park Protection and
Expansion Act of 1989 (16 U.S.C. 410r-8);
(iv) the project for Central and Southern Florida
authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1968
(Public Law 90-483; 82 Stat. 740), as modified by section 204
of this Act;
(v) activities under the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary and Protection Act (Public Law 101-65; 16 U.S.C.
1433 note); and
(vi) the Everglades construction project implemented by the
State of Florida under the Everglades Forever Act of the
State of Florida.
(2) Improvement of water management for ecosystem
restoration.--The improvement of water management, including
improvement of water quality for ecosystem restoration,
preservation, and protection, shall be an authorized purpose
of the Central and Southern Florida project referred to in
paragraph (1)(A). Project features necessary to improve water
management, including features necessary to provide water to
restore, protect, and preserve the South Florida ecosystem,
shall be included in any modifications to be developed for
the project under paragraph (1).
(3) Support projects.--The Secretary may develop support
projects and other facilities

[[Page H8744]]

necessary to promote an adaptive management approach to
implement the modifications authorized to be developed by
paragraphs (1) and (2).
(4) Interim implementation reports.--
(A) In general.--Before the Secretary implements a
component of the conceptual plan, including a support project
or other facility under paragraph (3), the Jacksonville
District Engineer shall submit an interim implementation
report to the Task Force for review.
(B) Contents.--Each interim implementation report shall
document the costs, benefits, impacts, technical feasibility,
and cost-effectiveness of the component and, as appropriate,
shall include documentation of environmental effects prepared
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(C) Endorsement by task force.--
(i) In general.--If the Task Force endorses the interim
implementation report of the Jacksonville District Engineer
for a component, the Secretary shall submit the report to
Congress.
(ii) Coordination requirements.--Endorsement by the Task
Force shall be deemed to fulfill the coordination
requirements under the first section 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 December 22, 1944 (33 U.S.C. 701-1).
(5) Authorization.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall not initiate
construction of a component until such time as a law is
enacted authorizing construction of the component.
(B) Design.--The Secretary may continue to carry out
detailed design of a component after the date of submission
to Congress of the interim implementation report recommending
the component.
(6) Cost sharing.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the Federal share of the costs of preparing interim
implementation reports under paragraph (4) and implementing
the modifications (including the support projects and other
facilities) authorized to be developed by this subsection
shall be 50 percent.
(B) Water quality features.--
(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), the non-Federal
share of the cost of project features necessary to improve
water quality under paragraph (2) shall be 100 percent.
(ii) Critical features.--If the Task Force determines, by
resolution accompanying endorsement of an interim
implementation report under paragraph (4), that the project
features described in clause (i) are critical to ecosystem
restoration, the Federal share of the cost of the features
shall be 50 percent.
(C) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
Federal interests for the Federal share of any reasonable
costs that the non-Federal interests incur in acquiring land
for any component authorized by law under paragraph (5) if
the land acquisition has been endorsed by the Task Force and
supported by the Secretary.
(c) South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force.--
(1) Establishment and membership.--There is established the
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, which shall
consist of the following members (or, in the case of the head
of a Federal agency, a designee at the level of assistant
secretary or an equivalent level):
(A) The Secretary of the Interior, who shall serve as
chairperson of the Task Force.
(B) The Secretary of Commerce.
(C) The Secretary.
(D) The Attorney General.
(E) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency.
(F) The Secretary of Agriculture.
(G) The Secretary of Transportation.
(H) 1 representative of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of
Florida, to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior
from recommendations submitted by the tribal chairman.
(I) 1 representative of the Seminole Tribe of Indians of
Florida, to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior
from recommendations submitted by the tribal chairman.
(J) 3 representatives of the State of Florida, to be
appointed by the Secretary of the Interior from
recommendations submitted by the Governor of the State of
Florida.
(K) 2 representatives of the South Florida Water Management
District, to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior
from recommendations submitted by the Governor of the State
of Florida.
(L) 2 representatives of local governments in the South
Florida ecosystem, to be appointed by the Secretary of the
Interior from recommendations submitted by the Governor of
the State of Florida.
(2) Duties.--
(A) In general.--The Task Force shall--
(i)(I) coordinate the development of consistent policies,
strategies, plans, programs, and priorities for addressing
the restoration, protection, and preservation of the South
Florida ecosystem; and
(II) develop a strategy and priorities for implementing the
components of the conceptual plan;
(ii) review programs, projects, and activities of agencies
and entities represented on the Task Force to promote the
objectives of ecosystem restoration and maintenance;
(iii) refine and provide guidance concerning the
implementation of the conceptual plan;
(iv)(I) periodically review the conceptual plan in light of
current conditions and new information and make appropriate
modifications to the conceptual plan; and
(II) submit to Congress a report on each modification to
the conceptual plan under subclause (I);
(v) establish a Florida-based working group, which shall
include representatives of the agencies and entities
represented on the Task Force and other entities as
appropriate, for the purpose of recommending policies,
strategies, plans, programs, and priorities to the Task
Force;
(vi) prepare an annual cross-cut budget of the funds
proposed to be expended by the agencies, tribes, and
governments represented on the Task Force on the restoration,
preservation, and protection of the South Florida ecosystem;
and
(vii) submit a biennial report to Congress that summarizes
the activities of the Task Force and the projects, policies,
strategies, plans, programs, and priorities planned,
developed, or implemented for restoration of the South
Florida ecosystem and progress made toward the restoration.
(B) Authority to establish advisory subcommittees.--The
Task Force and the working group established under
subparagraph (A)(v) may establish such other advisory
subcommittees as are necessary to assist the Task Force in
carrying out its duties, including duties relating to public
policy and scientific issues.
(3) Decisionmaking.--Each decision of the Task Force shall
be made by majority vote of the members of the Task Force.
(4) Application of the federal advisory committee act.--
(A) Charter; termination.--The Task Force shall not be
subject to sections 9(c) and 14 of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).
(B) Notice of meetings.--The Task Force shall be subject to
section 10(a)(2) of the Act, except that the chairperson of
the Task Force is authorized to use a means other than
publication in the Federal Register to provide notice of a
public meeting and provide an equivalent form of public
notice.
(5) Compensation.--A member of the Task Force shall receive
no compensation for the service of the member on the Task
Force.
(6) Travel expenses.--Travel expenses incurred by a member
of the Task Force in the performance of services for the Task
Force shall be paid by the agency, tribe, or government that
the member represents.

SEC. 208. ARKANSAS CITY AND WINFIELD, KANSAS.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of commencing construction of the project for flood control,
Arkansas City, Kansas, authorized by section 401(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662;
100 Stat. 4116), and the project for flood control, Winfield,
Kansas, authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of
1965 (Public Law 89-298; 79 Stat. 1078), the project
cooperation agreements for the projects, as submitted by the
District Office of the Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa,
Oklahoma, shall be deemed to be approved by the Assistant
Secretary of the Army having responsibility for civil works
and the Tulsa District Commander as of September 30, 1996, if
the approvals have not been granted by that date.

SEC. 209. MISSISSIPPI RIVER-GULF OUTLET, LOUISIANA.

Section 844 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4177) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(c) Community Impact Mitigation Plan.--Using funds made
available under subsection (a), the Secretary shall implement
a comprehensive community impact mitigation plan, as
described in the evaluation report of the New Orleans
District Engineer dated August 1995, that, to the maximum
extent practicable, provides for mitigation or compensation,
or both, for the direct and indirect social and cultural
impacts that the project described in subsection (a) will
have on the affected areas referred to in subsection (b).''.

SEC. 210. COLDWATER RIVER WATERSHED, MISSISSIPPI.

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall initiate all remaining work
associated with the Coldwater River Watershed Demonstration
Erosion Control Project, as authorized by Public Law 98-8 (97
Stat. 13).

SEC. 211. PERIODIC MAINTENANCE DREDGING FOR GREENVILLE INNER
HARBOR CHANNEL, MISSISSIPPI.

The Greenville Inner Harbor Channel, Mississippi, is deemed
to be a portion of the navigable waters of the United States,
and shall be included among the navigable waters for which
the Army Corps of Engineers maintains a 10-foot navigable
channel. The navigable channel for the Greenville Inner
Harbor Channel shall be maintained in a manner that is
consistent with the navigable channel to the Greenville
Harbor and the portion of the Mississippi River adjacent to
the Greenville Harbor that is maintained by the Army Corps of
Engineers, as in existence on the date of enactment of this
Act.

SEC. 212. SARDIS LAKE, MISSISSIPPI.

The Secretary shall work cooperatively with the State of
Mississippi and the city of Sardis to the maximum extent
practicable in the management of existing and proposed leases
of land consistent with the master tourism and recreational
plan for the economic development of the Sardis Lake area
prepared by the city.

[[Page H8745]]

SEC. 213. YALOBUSHA RIVER WATERSHED, MISSISSIPPI.

The project for flood control at Grenada Lake, Mississippi,
shall be extended to include the Yalobusha River Watershed
(including the Toposhaw Creek), at a total cost of not to
exceed $3,800,000. The Federal share of the cost of flood
control on the extended project shall be 75 percent.

SEC. 214. LIBBY DAM, MONTANA.

(a) In General.--In accordance with section 103(c)(1) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2213(c)(1)), the Secretary shall--
(1) complete the construction and installation of
generating units 6 through 8 at Libby Dam, Montana; and
(2) remove the partially constructed haul bridge over the
Kootenai River, Montana.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $16,000,000, to
remain available until expended.

SEC. 215. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT, MALTA, MONTANA.

Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary is authorized to expend such Federal funds
as are necessary to complete the small flood control project
begun at Malta, Montana, pursuant to section 205 of the Flood
Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).

SEC. 216. CLIFFWOOD BEACH, NEW JERSEY.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
or the status of the project authorized by section 203 of the
Flood Control Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-874; 76 Stat. 1180)
for hurricane-flood protection and beach erosion control on
Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, New Jersey, the Secretary
shall undertake a project to provide periodic beach
nourishment for Cliffwood Beach, New Jersey, for a 50-year
period beginning on the date of execution of a project
cooperation agreement by the Secretary and an appropriate
non-Federal interest.
(b) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of the project authorized by this section shall be 35
percent.

SEC. 217. FIRE ISLAND INLET, NEW YORK.

For the purpose of replenishing the beach, the Secretary
shall place sand dredged from the Fire Island Inlet on the
shoreline between Gilgo State Park and Tobay Beach to protect
Ocean Parkway along the Atlantic Ocean shoreline in Suffolk
County, New York.

SEC. 218. QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK.

is declared to be nonnavigable waters of the United States.
(b) Requirement That Area Be Improved.--
(1) In general.--The declaration of nonnavigability under
subsection (a) shall apply only to those portions of the area
described in subsection (a) that are, or will be, bulkheaded,
filled, or otherwise occupied by permanent structures or
other permanent physical improvements (including parkland).
(2) Applicability of federal law.--Improvements described
in paragraph (1) shall be subject to applicable Federal laws,
including--
(A) sections 9 and 10 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 March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 and 403);
(B) section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344); and
(C) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(c) Expiration Date.--The declaration of nonnavigability
under subsection (a) shall expire with respect to a portion
of the area described in subsection (a), if the portion--
(1) is not bulkheaded, filled, or otherwise occupied by a
permanent structure or other permanent physical improvement
(including parkland) in accordance with subsection (b) by the
date that is 20 years after the date of enactment of this
Act; or
(2) requires an improvement described in subsection (b)(2)
that is subject to a permit under an applicable Federal law,
and the improvement is not commenced by the date that is 5
years after the date of issuance of the permit.

SEC. 219. BUFORD TRENTON IRRIGATION DISTRICT, NORTH DAKOTA
AND MONTANA.

(a) Acquisition of Easements.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall acquire, from willing
sellers, permanent flowage and saturation easements over--
(A) the land in Williams County, North Dakota, extending
from the riverward margin of the Buford Trenton Irrigation
District main canal to the north bank of the Missouri River,
beginning at the Buford Trenton Irrigation District pumping
station located in the NE\1/4\ of section 17, T-152-N, R-104-
W, and continuing northeasterly downstream to the land
referred to as the East Bottom; and
(B) any other land outside the boundaries of the land
described in subparagraph (A) within or contiguous to the
boundaries of the Buford-Trenton Irrigation District that has
been affected by rising ground water and the risk of surface
flooding.
(2) Scope.--The easements acquired by the Secretary under
paragraph (1) shall include the right, power, and privilege
of the Federal Government to submerge, overflow, percolate,
and saturate the surface and subsurface of the lands and such
other terms and conditions as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(3) Payment.--In acquiring the easements under paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall pay an amount based on the
unaffected fee value of the lands to be acquired by the
Federal Government. For the purpose of this paragraph, the
unaffected fee value of the lands is the value of the lands
as if the lands had not been affected by rising ground water
and the risk of surface flooding.
(b) Conveyance of Drainage Pumps.--Notwithstanding any
other law, the Secretary shall--
(1) convey to the Buford Trenton Irrigation District all
right, title, and interest of the United States in the
drainage pumps located within the boundaries of the District;
and
(2) provide a lump-sum payment of $60,000 for power
requirements associated with the operation of the drainage
pumps.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $34,000,000, to
remain available until expended.

SEC. 220. JAMESTOWN DAM AND PIPESTEM DAM, NORTH DAKOTA.

(a) Revisions to Water Control Manuals.--In consultation
with the State of South Dakota and the James River Water
Development District, the Secretary shall review and consider
revisions to the water control manuals for the Jamestown Dam
and Pipestem Dam, North Dakota, to modify operation of the
dams so as to reduce the magnitude and duration of flooding
and inundation of land located within the 10-year floodplain
along the James River in South Dakota.
(b) Feasibility Study.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
(A) complete a study to determine the feasibility of
providing flood protection for the land referred to in
subsection (a); and
(B) submit a report on the study to Congress.
(2) Considerations.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall consider all reasonable project-related and
other options.

SEC. 221. WISTER LAKE PROJECT, LEFLORE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA.

The Secretary shall maintain a minimum conservation pool
level of 478 feet at the Wister Lake project in LeFlore
County, Oklahoma, 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. 1218).
Notwithstanding title I of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 et seq.) or any other provision
of law, any increase in water supply yield that results from
the pool level of 478 feet shall be treated as unallocated
water supply until such time as a user enters into a contract
for the supply under such applicable laws concerning cost-
sharing as are in effect on the date of the contract.

SEC. 222. WILLAMETTE RIVER, MCKENZIE SUBBASIN, OREGON.

The Secretary is authorized to carry out a project to
control the water temperature in the Willamette River,
McKenzie Subbasin, Oregon, to mitigate the negative impacts
on fish and wildlife resulting from the operation of the Blue
River and Cougar Lake projects, McKenzie River Basin, Oregon.
The cost of the facilities shall be repaid according to the
allocations among the purposes of the original projects.

SEC. 223. ABANDONED AND WRECKED BARGE REMOVAL, RHODE ISLAND.

Section 361 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(Public Law 102-580; 106 Stat. 4861) is amended by striking
subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``(a) In General.--In order to alleviate a hazard to
navigation and recreational activity, the Secretary shall
remove a sunken barge from waters off the shore of the
Narragansett Town Beach in Narragansett, Rhode Island, at a
total cost of $1,900,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$1,425,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost of $475,000.
The Secretary shall not remove the barge until title to the
barge has been transferred to the United States or the non-
Federal interest. The transfer of title shall be carried out
at no cost to the United States.''.

SEC. 224. PROVIDENCE RIVER AND HARBOR, RHODE ISLAND.

The Secretary shall incorporate a channel extending from
the vicinity of the Fox Point hurricane barrier to the
vicinity of the Francis Street bridge in Providence, Rhode
Island, into the navigation project for Providence River and
Harbor, Rhode Island, authorized by section 301 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-298; 79 Stat. 1089).
The channel shall have a depth of up to 10 feet and a width
of approximately 120 feet and shall be approximately 1.25
miles in length.

SEC. 225. COOPER LAKE AND CHANNELS, TEXAS.

(a) Acceptance of Lands.--The Secretary is authorized to
accept from a non-Federal

[[Page H8746]]

interest additional lands of not to exceed 300 acres that--
(1) are contiguous to the Cooper Lake and Channels Project,
Texas, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1965 (Public Law 89-298; 79 Stat. 1091) and section 601(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law
99-662; 100 Stat. 4145); and
(2) provide habitat value at least equal to the habitat
value provided by the lands authorized to be redesignated
under subsection (b).
(b) Redesignation of Lands to Recreation Purposes.--Upon
the acceptance of lands under subsection (a), the Secretary
is authorized to redesignate mitigation lands of not to
exceed 300 acres to recreation purposes.
(c) Funding.--The cost of all work under this section,
including real estate appraisals, cultural and environmental
surveys, and all development necessary to avoid net
mitigation losses, to the extent required, shall be borne by
the non-Federal interest.

SEC. 226. RUDEE INLET, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA.

Notwithstanding the limitation set forth in section 107(b)
of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577(b)),
Federal participation in the maintenance of the Rudee Inlet,
Virginia Beach, Virginia, project shall continue for the life
of the project. Nothing in this section shall alter or modify
the non-Federal cost sharing responsibility as specified in
the Rudee Inlet, Virginia Beach, Virginia Detailed Project
Report, dated October 1983.

SEC. 227. VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA.

(a) Adjustment of Non-Federal Share.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, the non-Federal share of the costs of
the project for beach erosion control and hurricane
protection, Virginia Beach, Virginia, authorized by section
501(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public
Law 99-662; 100 Stat. 4136), shall be reduced by $3,120,803,
or by such amount as is determined by an audit carried out by
the Department of the Army to be due to the city of Virginia
Beach as reimbursement for beach nourishment activities
carried out by the city between October 1, 1986, and
September 30, 1993, if the Federal Government has not
reimbursed the city for the activities prior to the date on
which a project cooperation agreement is executed for the
project.
(b) Extension of Federal Participation.--
(1) In general.--In accordance with section 156 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5f),
the Secretary shall extend Federal participation in the
periodic nourishment of Virginia Beach as authorized by
section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1954 (68 Stat.
1254) and modified by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1962 (Public Law 87-874; 76 Stat. 1177).
(2) Duration.--Federal participation under paragraph (1)
shall extend until the earlier of--
(A) the end of the 50-year period provided for in section
156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C.
1962d-5f); and
(B) the completion of the project for beach erosion control
and hurricane protection, Virginia Beach, Virginia, as
modified by section 102(cc) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-580; 106 Stat. 4810).
TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 301. COST-SHARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS.

Section 103(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) environmental protection and restoration: 25
percent.''.

SEC. 302. COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

Section 7 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988
(33 U.S.C. 2313) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (e);
(2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Temporary Protection of Technology.--
``(1) Pre-agreement.--If the Secretary determines that
information developed as a result of a research or
development activity conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers
is likely to be subject to a cooperative research and
development agreement within 2 years after the development of
the information, and that the information would be a trade
secret or commercial or financial information that would be
privileged or confidential if the information had been
obtained from a non-Federal party participating in a
cooperative research and development agreement under section
12 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980
(15 U.S.C. 3710a), the Secretary may provide appropriate
protections against the dissemination of the information,
including exemption from subchapter II of chapter 5 of title
5, United States Code, until the earlier of--
``(A) the date on which the Secretary enters into such an
agreement with respect to the information; or
``(B) the last day of the 2-year period beginning on the
date of the determination.
``(2) Post-agreement.--Any information subject to paragraph
(1) that becomes the subject of a cooperative research and
development agreement shall be subject to the protections
provided under section 12(c)(7)(B) of the Act (15 U.S.C.
3710a(c)(7)(B)) as if the information had been developed
under a cooperative research and development agreement.''.

SEC. 303. NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1)(A) dams are an essential part of the national
infrastructure;
(B) dams fail from time to time with catastrophic results;
and
(C) dam safety is a vital public concern;
(2) dam failures have caused, and may cause in the future,
loss of life, injury, destruction of property, and economic
and social disruption;
(3)(A) some dams are at or near the end of their
structural, useful, or operational life; and
(B) the loss, destruction, and disruption resulting from
dam failures can be substantially reduced through the
development and implementation of dam safety hazard reduction
measures, including--
(i) improved design and construction standards and
practices supported by a national dam performance resource
bank located at Stanford University in California;
(ii) safe operation and maintenance procedures;
(iii) early warning systems;
(iv) coordinated emergency preparedness plans; and
(v) public awareness and involvement programs;
(4)(A) dam safety problems persist nationwide;
(B) while dam safety is principally a State responsibility,
the diversity in Federal and State dam safety programs calls
for national leadership in a cooperative effort involving the
Federal Government, State governments, and the private
sector; and
(C) an expertly staffed and adequately financed dam safety
hazard reduction program, based on Federal, State, local, and
private research, planning, decisionmaking, and
contributions, would reduce the risk of the loss,
destruction, and disruption resulting from dam failure by an
amount far greater than the cost of the program;
(5)(A) there is a fundamental need for a national program
for dam safety hazards reduction, and the need will continue;
and
(B) to be effective, such a national program will require
input from, and review by, Federal and non-Federal experts
in--
(i) dam design, construction, operation, and maintenance;
and
(ii) the practical application of dam failure hazard
reduction measures;
(6) as of the date of enactment of this Act--
(A) there is no national dam safety program; and
(B) the coordinating authority for national leadership
concerning dam safety is provided through the dam safety
program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
established under Executive Order 12148 (50 U.S.C. App. 2251
note) in coordination with members of the Interagency
Committee on Dam Safety and with States; and
(7) while the dam safety program of FEMA is a proper
Federal undertaking, should continue, and should provide the
foundation for a national dam safety program, statutory
authority is needed--
(A) to meet increasing needs and to discharge Federal
responsibilities in dam safety;
(B) to strengthen the leadership role of FEMA;
(C) to codify the national dam safety program;
(D) to authorize the Director of FEMA to communicate
directly with Congress on authorizations and appropriations;
and
(E) to build on the hazard reduction aspects of dam safety.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to reduce the
risks to life and property from dam failure in the United
States through the establishment and maintenance of an
effective national dam safety program to bring together the
expertise and resources of the Federal and non-Federal
communities in achieving national dam safety hazard
reduction.
(c) Dam Safety Program.--Public Law 92-367 (33 U.S.C. 467
et seq.) is amended--
(1) by striking the first section and inserting the
following:

``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

``This Act may be cited as the `National Dam Safety Program
Act'.'';
(2) by striking sections 5 and 7 through 14;
(3) by redesignating sections 2, 3, 4, and 6 as sections 3,
4, 5, and 11, respectively;
(4) by inserting after section 1 (as amended by paragraph
(1)) the following:

``SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

``In this Act:
``(1) Board.--The term `Board' means a National Dam Safety
Review Board established under section 8(h).
``(2) Dam.--The term `dam'--
``(A) means any artificial barrier that has the ability to
impound water, wastewater, or any liquid-borne material, for
the purpose of storage or control of water, that--
``(i) is 25 feet or more in height from--

``(I) the natural bed of the stream channel or watercourse
measured at the downstream toe of the barrier; or
``(II) if the barrier is not across a stream channel or
watercourse, from the lowest elevation of the outside limit
of the barrier;

[[Page H8747]]

to the maximum water storage elevation; or
``(ii) has an impounding capacity for maximum storage
elevation of 50 acre-feet or more; but
``(B) does not include--
``(i) a levee; or
``(ii) a barrier described in subparagraph (A) that--

``(I) is 6 feet or less in height regardless of storage
capacity; or
``(II) has a storage capacity at the maximum water storage
elevation that is 15 acre-feet or less regardless of height;

unless the barrier, because of the location of the barrier or
another physical characteristic of the barrier, is likely to
pose a significant threat to human life or property if the
barrier fails (as determined by the Director).
``(3) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director of
FEMA.
``(4) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency' means a
Federal agency that designs, finances, constructs, owns,
operates, maintains, or regulates the construction,
operation, or maintenance of a dam.
``(5) Federal guidelines for dam safety.--The term `Federal
Guidelines for Dam Safety' means the FEMA publication,
numbered 93 and dated June 1979, that defines management
practices for dam safety at all Federal agencies.
``(6) FEMA.--The term `FEMA' means the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
``(7) Hazard reduction.--The term `hazard reduction' means
the reduction in the potential consequences to life and
property of dam failure.
``(8) ICODS.--The term `ICODS' means the Interagency
Committee on Dam Safety established by section 7.
``(9) Program.--The term `Program' means the national dam
safety program established under section 8.
``(10) State.--The term `State' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United
States.
``(11) State dam safety agency.--The term `State dam safety
agency' means a State agency that has regulatory authority
over the safety of non-Federal dams.
``(12) State dam safety program.--The term `State dam
safety program' means a State dam safety program approved and
assisted under section 8(f).
``(13) United states.--The term `United States', when used
in a geographical sense, means all of the States.'';
(5) in section 3 (as redesignated by paragraph (3))--
(A) by striking ``Sec. 3. As'' and inserting the following:

``SEC. 3. INSPECTION OF DAMS.

``(a) In General.--As''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) State Participation.--On request of a State dam
safety agency, with respect to any dam the failure of which
would affect the State, the head of a Federal agency shall--
``(1) provide information to the State dam safety agency on
the construction, operation, or maintenance of the dam; or
``(2) allow any official of the State dam safety agency to
participate in the Federal inspection of the dam.'';
(6) in section 4 (as redesignated by paragraph (3)), by
striking ``Sec. 4. As'' and inserting the following:

``SEC. 4. INVESTIGATION REPORTS TO GOVERNORS.

``As'';
(7) in section 5 (as redesignated by paragraph (3)), by
striking ``Sec. 5. For'' and inserting the following:

``SEC. 5. DETERMINATION OF DANGER TO HUMAN LIFE AND PROPERTY.

``For'';
(8) by inserting after section 5 (as redesignated by
paragraph (3)) the following:

``SEC. 6. NATIONAL DAM INVENTORY.

``The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of
Engineers, may maintain and periodically publish updated
information on the inventory of dams in the United States.

``SEC. 7. INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON DAM SAFETY.

``(a) Establishment.--There is established an Interagency
Committee on Dam Safety--
``(1) comprised of a representative of each of the
Department of Agriculture, the Department of Defense, the
Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior, the
Department of Labor, FEMA, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Tennessee
Valley Authority, and the United States Section of the
International Boundary Commission; and
``(2) chaired by the Director.
``(b) Duties.--ICODS shall encourage the establishment and
maintenance of effective Federal and State programs,
policies, and guidelines intended to enhance dam safety for
the protection of human life and property through--
``(1) coordination and information exchange among Federal
agencies and State dam safety agencies; and
``(2) coordination and information exchange among Federal
agencies concerning implementation of the Federal Guidelines
for Dam Safety.

``SEC. 8. NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.

``(a) In General.--The Director, in consultation with ICODS
and State dam safety agencies, and the Board shall establish
and maintain, in accordance with this section, a coordinated
national dam safety program. The Program shall--
``(1) be administered by FEMA to achieve the objectives set
forth in subsection (c);
``(2) involve, to the extent appropriate, each Federal
agency; and
``(3) include--
``(A) each of the components described in subsection (d);
``(B) the implementation plan described in subsection (e);
and
``(C) assistance for State dam safety programs described in
subsection (f).
``(b) Duties.--The Director shall--
``(1) not later than 270 days after the date of enactment
of this paragraph, develop the implementation plan described
in subsection (e);
``(2) not later than 300 days after the date of enactment
of this paragraph, submit to the appropriate authorizing
committees of Congress the implementation plan described in
subsection (e); and
``(3) by regulation, not later than 360 days after the date
of enactment of this paragraph--
``(A) develop and implement the Program;
``(B) establish goals, priorities, and target dates for
implementation of the Program; and
``(C) to the extent feasible, provide a method for
cooperation and coordination with, and assistance to,
interested governmental entities in all States.
``(c) Objectives.--The objectives of the Program are to--
``(1) ensure that new and existing dams are safe through
the development of technologically and economically feasible
programs and procedures for national dam safety hazard
reduction;
``(2) encourage acceptable engineering policies and
procedures to be used for dam site investigation, design,
construction, operation and maintenance, and emergency
preparedness;
``(3) encourage the establishment and implementation of
effective dam safety programs in each State based on State
standards;
``(4) develop and encourage public awareness projects to
increase public acceptance and support of State dam safety
programs;
``(5) develop technical assistance materials for Federal
and non-Federal dam safety programs; and
``(6) develop mechanisms with which to provide Federal
technical assistance for dam safety to the non-Federal
sector.
``(d) Components.--
``(1) In general.--The Program shall consist of--
``(A) a Federal element and a non-Federal element; and
``(B) leadership activity, technical assistance activity,
and public awareness activity.
``(2) Elements.--
``(A) Federal.--The Federal element shall incorporate the
activities and practices carried out by Federal agencies
under section 7 to implement the Federal Guidelines for Dam
Safety.
``(B) Non-federal.--The non-Federal element shall consist
of--
``(i) the activities and practices carried out by States,
local governments, and the private sector to safely build,
regulate, operate, and maintain dams; and
``(ii) Federal activities that foster State efforts to
develop and implement effective programs for the safety of
dams.
``(3) Functional activities.--
``(A) Leadership.--The leadership activity shall be the
responsibility of FEMA and shall be exercised by chairing
ICODS to coordinate Federal efforts in cooperation with State
dam safety officials.
``(B) Technical assistance.--The technical assistance
activity shall consist of the transfer of knowledge and
technical information among the Federal and non-Federal
elements described in paragraph (2).
``(C) Public awareness.--The public awareness activity
shall provide for the education of the public, including
State and local officials, in the hazards of dam failure,
methods of reducing the adverse consequences of dam failure,
and related matters.
``(e) Implementation Plan.--The Director shall--
``(1) develop an implementation plan for the Program that
shall set, through fiscal year 2001, year-by-year targets
that demonstrate improvements in dam safety; and
``(2) recommend appropriate roles for Federal agencies and
for State and local units of government, individuals, and
private organizations in carrying out the implementation
plan.
``(f) Assistance for State Dam Safety Programs.--
``(1) In general.--To encourage the establishment and
maintenance of effective State programs intended to ensure
dam safety, to protect human life and property, and to
improve State dam safety programs, the Director shall provide
assistance with amounts made available under section 12 to
assist States in establishing and maintaining dam safety
programs--
``(A) in accordance with the criteria specified in
paragraph (2); and
``(B) in accordance with more advanced requirements and
standards established by the Board and the Director with the
assistance of established criteria such as the Model State
Dam Safety Program published by FEMA, numbered 123 and dated
April 1987, and amendments to the Model State Dam Safety
Program.

[[Page H8748]]

``(2) Criteria.--For a State to be eligible for primary
assistance under this subsection, a State dam safety program
must be working toward meeting the following criteria, and
for a State to be eligible for advanced assistance under this
subsection, a State dam safety program must meet the
following criteria and be working toward meeting the advanced
requirements and standards established under paragraph
(1)(B):
``(A) Authorization.--For a State to be eligible for
assistance under this subsection, a State dam safety program
must be authorized by State legislation to include
substantially, at a minimum--
``(i) the authority to review and approve plans and
specifications to construct, enlarge, modify, remove, and
abandon dams;
``(ii) the authority to perform periodic inspections during
dam construction to ensure compliance with approved plans and
specifications;
``(iii) a requirement that, on completion of dam
construction, State approval must be given before operation
of the dam;
``(iv)(I) the authority to require or perform the
inspection, at least once every 5 years, of all dams and
reservoirs that would pose a significant threat to human life
and property in case of failure to determine the continued
safety of the dams and reservoirs; and
``(II) a procedure for more detailed and frequent safety
inspections;
``(v) a requirement that all inspections be performed under
the supervision of a State-registered professional engineer
with related experience in dam design and construction;
``(vi) the authority to issue notices, when appropriate, to
require owners of dams to perform necessary maintenance or
remedial work, revise operating procedures, or take other
actions, including breaching dams when necessary;
``(vii) regulations for carrying out the legislation of the
State described in this subparagraph;
``(viii) provision for necessary funds--

``(I) to ensure timely repairs or other changes to, or
removal of, a dam in order to protect human life and
property; and
``(II) if the owner of the dam does not take action
described in subclause (I), to take appropriate action as
expeditiously as practicable;

``(ix) a system of emergency procedures to be used if a dam
fails or if the failure of a dam is imminent; and
``(x) an identification of--

``(I) each dam the failure of which could be reasonably
expected to endanger human life;
``(II) the maximum area that could be flooded if the dam
failed; and
``(III) necessary public facilities that would be affected
by the flooding.

``(B) Funding.--For a State to be eligible for assistance
under this subsection, State appropriations must be budgeted
to carry out the legislation of the State under subparagraph
(A).
``(3) Work plans.--The Director shall enter into a contract
with each State receiving assistance under paragraph (2) to
develop a work plan necessary for the State dam safety
program of the State to reach a level of program performance
specified in the contract.
``(4) Maintenance of effort.--Assistance may not be
provided to a State under this subsection for a fiscal year
unless the State enters into such agreement with the Director
as the Director requires to ensure that the State will
maintain the aggregate expenditures of the State from all
other sources for programs to ensure dam safety for the
protection of human life and property at or above a level
equal to the average annual level of the expenditures for the
2 fiscal years preceding the fiscal year.
``(5) Approval of programs.--
``(A) Submission.--For a State to be eligible for
assistance under this subsection, a plan for a State dam
safety program shall be submitted to the Director.
``(B) Approval.--A State dam safety program shall be deemed
to be approved 120 days after the date of receipt by the
Director unless the Director determines within the 120-day
period that the State dam safety program fails to
substantially meet the requirements of paragraphs (1) through
(3).
``(C) Notification of disapproval.--If the Director
determines that a State dam safety program does not meet the
requirements for approval, the Director shall immediately
notify the State in writing and provide the reasons for the
determination and the changes that are necessary for the plan
to be approved.
``(6) Review of state dam safety programs.--Using the
expertise of the Board, the Director shall periodically
review State dam safety programs. If the Board finds that a
State dam safety program has proven inadequate to reasonably
protect human life and property, and the Director concurs,
the Director shall revoke approval of the State dam safety
program, and withhold assistance under this subsection, until
the State dam safety program again meets the requirements for
approval.
``(g) Dam Safety Training.--At the request of any State
that has or intends to develop a State dam safety program,
the Director shall provide training for State dam safety
staff and inspectors.
``(h) Board.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Director may establish an
advisory board to be known as the `National Dam Safety Review
Board' to monitor State implementation of this section.
``(2) Authority.--The Board may use the expertise of
Federal agencies and enter into contracts for necessary
studies to carry out this section.
``(3) Membership.--The Board shall consist of 11 members
selected by the Director for expertise in dam safety, of
whom--
``(A) 1 member shall represent the Department of
Agriculture;
``(B) 1 member shall represent the Department of Defense;
``(C) 1 member shall represent the Department of the
Interior;
``(D) 1 member shall represent FEMA;
``(E) 1 member shall represent the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission;
``(F) 5 members shall be selected by the Director from
among dam safety officials of States; and
``(G) 1 member shall be selected by the Director to
represent the United States Committee on Large Dams.
``(4) Compensation of members.--
``(A) Federal employees.--Each member of the Board who is
an officer or employee of the United States shall serve
without compensation in addition to compensation received for
the services of the member as an officer or employee of the
United States.
``(B) Other members.--Each member of the Board who is not
an officer or employee of the United States shall serve
without compensation.
``(5) Travel expenses.--Each member of the Board shall be
allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for an employee of an 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 the performance of services for the Board.
``(6) Applicability of federal advisory committee act.--The
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not
apply to the Board.

``SEC. 9. RESEARCH.

``(a) In General.--The Director, in cooperation with ICODS,
shall carry out a program of technical and archival research
to develop--
``(1) improved techniques, historical experience, and
equipment for rapid and effective dam construction,
rehabilitation, and inspection; and
``(2) devices for the continued monitoring of the safety of
dams.
``(b) Consultation.--The Director shall provide for State
participation in research under subsection (a) and
periodically advise all States and Congress of the results of
the research.

``SEC. 10. REPORTS.

``(a) Report on Dam Insurance.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Director
shall report to Congress on the availability of dam insurance
and make recommendations concerning encouraging greater
availability.
``(b) Biennial Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the
end of each odd-numbered fiscal year, the Director shall
submit a report to Congress that--
``(1) describes the status of the Program;
``(2) describes the progress achieved by Federal agencies
during the 2 preceding fiscal years in implementing the
Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety;
``(3) describes the progress achieved in dam safety by
States participating in the Program; and
``(4) includes any recommendations for legislative and
other action that the Director considers necessary.'';
(9) in section 11 (as redesignated by paragraph (3))--
(A) by striking ``Sec. 11. Nothing'' and inserting the
following:

``SEC. 11. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

``Nothing'';
(B) by striking ``shall be construed (1) to create'' and
inserting the following: ``shall--
``(1) create'';
(C) by striking ``or (2) to relieve'' and inserting the
following:
``(2) relieve''; and
(D) by striking the period at the end and inserting the
following: ``; or
``(3) preempt any other Federal or State law.''; and
(10) by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

``(a) Funding.--
``(1) National dam safety program.--
``(A) Annual amounts.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to FEMA to carry out sections 7, 8, and 10 (in
addition to any amounts made available for similar purposes
included in any other Act and amounts made available under
paragraphs (2) through (5)), $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1997,
$2,000,000 for fiscal year 1998, $4,000,000 for fiscal year
1999, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2000, and $4,000,000 for
fiscal year 2001.
``(B) Allocation.--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), for
each fiscal year, amounts made available under this paragraph
to carry out section 8 shall be allocated among the States as
follows:

``(I) One-third among States that qualify for assistance
under section 8(f).
``(II) Two-thirds among States that qualify for assistance
under section 8(f), to each such State in proportion to--

``(aa) the number of dams in the State that are listed as
State-regulated dams on the inventory of dams maintained
under section 6; as compared to
``(bb) the number of dams in all States that are listed as
State-regulated dams on the inventory of dams maintained
under section 6.

[[Page H8749]]

``(ii) Maximum amount of allocation.--The amount of funds
allocated to a State under this subparagraph may not exceed
50 percent of the reasonable cost of implementing the State
dam safety program.
``(iii) Determination.--The Director and the Board shall
determine the amount allocated to States needing primary
assistance and States needing advanced assistance under
section 8(f).
``(2) National dam inventory.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out section 6 $500,000 for each fiscal
year.
``(3) Dam safety training.--There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out section 8(g) $500,000 for each of
fiscal years 1997 through 2001.
``(4) Research.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out section 9 $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997
through 2001.
``(5) Staff.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
FEMA for the employment of such additional staff personnel as
are necessary to carry out sections 6 through 9 $400,000 for
each of fiscal years 1997 through 2001.
``(b) Limitation on Use of Amounts.--Amounts made available
under this Act may not be used to construct or repair any
Federal or non-Federal dam.''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 3(2) of the Indian Dams
Safety Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 3802(2)) is amended by striking
``the first section of Public Law 92-367 (33 U.S.C. 467)''
and inserting ``section 2 of the National Dam Safety Program
Act''.

SEC. 304. HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT UPRATING.

(a) In General.--In carrying out the maintenance,
rehabilitation, and modernization of a hydroelectric power
generating facility at a water resources project under the
jurisdiction of the Department of the Army, the Secretary is
authorized, to the extent funds are made available in
appropriations Acts, to take such actions as are necessary to
increase the efficiency of energy production or the capacity
of the facility, or both, if, after consulting with the heads
of other appropriate Federal and State agencies, the
Secretary determines that the increase--
(1) is economically justified and financially feasible;
(2) will not result in any significant adverse effect on
the other purposes for which the project is authorized;
(3) will not result in significant adverse environmental
impacts; and
(4) will not involve major structural or operational
changes in the project.
(b) Effect on Other Authority.--This section shall not
affect the authority of the Secretary and the Administrator
of the Bonneville Power Administration under section 2406 of
the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 839d-1).

SEC. 305. FEDERAL LUMP-SUM PAYMENTS FOR FEDERAL OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE COSTS.

(a) In General.--In the case of a water resources project
under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army for
which the non-Federal interests are responsible for
performing the operation, maintenance, replacement, and
rehabilitation of the project, or a separable element (as
defined in section 103(f) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(f)) of the project, and for which
the Federal Government is responsible for paying a portion of
the operation, maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation
costs of the project or separable element, the Secretary may
make, in accordance with this section and under terms and
conditions acceptable to the Secretary, a payment of the
estimated total Federal share of the costs to the non-Federal
interests after completion of construction of the project or
separable element.
(b) Amount of Payment.--The amount that may be paid by the
Secretary under subsection (a) shall be equal to the present
value of the Federal payments over the life of the project,
as estimated by the Federal Government, and shall be computed
using an interest rate determined by the Secretary of the
Treasury taking into consideration current market yields on
outstanding marketable obligations of the United States with
maturities comparable to the remaining life of the project.
(c) Agreement.--The Secretary may make a payment under this
section only if the non-Federal interests have entered into a
binding agreement with the Secretary to perform the
operation, maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation of
the project or separable element. The agreement shall--
(1) meet the requirements of section 221 of the Flood
Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b); and
(2) specify--
(A) the terms and conditions under which a payment may be
made under this section; and
(B) the rights of, and remedies available to, the Federal
Government to recover all or a portion of a payment made
under this section if a non-Federal interest suspends or
terminates the performance by the non-Federal interest of the
operation, maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation of
the project or separable element, or fails to perform the
activities in a manner that is satisfactory to the Secretary.
(d) Effect of Payment.--Except as provided in subsection
(c), a payment provided to the non-Federal interests under
this section shall relieve the Federal Government of any
obligation, after the date of the payment, to pay any of the
operation, maintenance, replacement, or rehabilitation costs
for the project or separable element.

SEC. 306. COST-SHARING FOR REMOVAL OF EXISTING PROJECT
FEATURES.

After the date of enactment of this Act, any proposal
submitted to Congress by the Secretary for modification of an
existing authorized water resources development project (in
existence on the date of the proposal) by removal of one or
more of the project features that would significantly and
adversely impact the authorized project purposes or outputs
shall include the recommendation that the non-Federal
interests shall provide 50 percent of the cost of any such
modification, including the cost of acquiring any additional
interests in lands that become necessary for accomplishing
the modification.

SEC. 307. TERMINATION OF TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Section 310 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(33 U.S.C. 2319) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a); and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``(b) Public Participation.--''; and
(B) by striking ``subsection'' each place it appears and
inserting ``section''.

SEC. 308. CONDITIONS FOR PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

(a) In General.--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, by striking ``10'' and inserting
``5'';
(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``Before'' and
inserting ``Upon official''; and
(3) in the last sentence, by inserting ``the planning,
design, or'' before ``construction''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 52 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-676; 102
Stat. 4044) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a) (33 U.S.C. 579a note);
(2) by redesignating subsections (b) through (e) as
subsections (a) through (d), respectively; and
(3) in subsection (d) (as so redesignated), by striking
``or subsection (a) of this section''.

SEC. 309. PARTICIPATION IN INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING AND
SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES.

Section 211 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (33 U.S.C.
701u) is repealed.

SEC. 310. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL
WORKS PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--In carrying out research and development
in support of the civil works program of the Department of
the Army, the Secretary may utilize contracts, cooperative
research and development agreements, and cooperative
agreements with, and grants to, non-Federal entities,
including State and local governments, colleges and
universities, consortia, professional and technical
societies, public and private scientific and technical
foundations, research institutions, educational
organizations, and nonprofit organizations.
(b) Commercial Application.--In the case of a contract for
research or development, or both, the Secretary may--
(1) require that the research or development, or both, have
potential commercial application; and
(2) use the potential for commercial application as an
evaluation factor, if appropriate.

SEC. 311. INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT AUTHORITY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may engage in activities in
support of other Federal agencies or international
organizations to address problems of national significance to
the United States. The Secretary may engage in activities in
support of international organizations only after consulting
with the Secretary of State. The Secretary may use the
technical and managerial expertise of the Army Corps of
Engineers to address domestic and international problems
related to water resources, infrastructure development, and
environmental protection.
(b) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated
$1,000,000 to carry out this section. The Secretary may
accept and expend additional funds from other Federal
agencies or international organizations to carry this
section.

SEC. 312. SECTION 1135 PROGRAM.

(a) Expansion of Program.--Section 1135 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting before the period at
the end the following: ``and to determine if the operation of
the projects has contributed to the degradation of the
quality of the environment'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking the last two sentences;
(3) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as
subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Measures To Restore Environmental Quality.--If the
Secretary determines under subsection (a) that operation of a
water resources project has contributed to the degradation of
the quality of the environment, the Secretary may carry out,
with respect to the project, measures for the restoration of
environmental quality, if the measures are feasible and
consistent with the authorized purposes of the project.
``(d) Funding.--The non-Federal share of the cost of any
modification or measure carried out pursuant to subsection
(b) or (c)

[[Page H8750]]

shall be 25 percent. Not more than $5,000,000 in Federal
funds may be expended on any 1 such modification or
measure.''.
(b) Pine Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration,
California.--In accordance with section 1135(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(b)), the
Secretary shall carry out the construction of a turbine
bypass at Pine Flat Dam, Kings River, California.
(c) Lower Amazon Creek Restoration, Oregon.--In accordance
with section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), the Secretary may carry out justified
environmental restoration measures with respect to the flood
reduction measures constructed by the Army Corps of
Engineers, and the related flood reduction measures
constructed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, in
the Amazon Creek drainage. The Federal share of the
restoration measures shall be jointly funded by the Army
Corps of Engineers and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service in proportion to the share required to be paid by
each agency of the original costs of the flood reduction
measures.

SEC. 313. ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING.

Section 312 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-640; 33 U.S.C. 1252 note) is amended by
striking subsection (f).

SEC. 314. FEASIBILITY STUDIES.

(a) Non-Federal Share.--Section 105(a)(1) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215(a)(1)) is
amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``during the period
of such study'';
(2) by inserting after the first sentence the following:
``During the period of the study, the non-Federal share of
the cost of the study shall be not more than 50 percent of
the estimate of the cost of the study as contained in the
feasibility cost sharing agreement. The cost estimate may be
amended only by mutual agreement of the Secretary and the
non-Federal interests. The non-Federal share of any costs in
excess of the cost estimate shall, except as otherwise
mutually agreed by the Secretary and the non-Federal
interests, be payable after the project has been authorized
for construction and on the date on which the Secretary and
non-Federal interests enter into an agreement pursuant to
section 101(e) or 103(j).''; and
(3) in the last sentence, by striking ``such non-Federal
contribution'' and inserting ``the non-Federal share required
under this paragraph''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply notwithstanding any feasibility cost sharing
agreement entered into by the Secretary and non-Federal
interests, and the Secretary shall amend any feasibility cost
sharing agreements in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act so as to conform the agreements with the amendments.
Nothing in this section or any amendment made by this section
shall require the Secretary to reimburse the non-Federal
interests for funds previously contributed for a study.

SEC. 315. OBSTRUCTION REMOVAL REQUIREMENT.

(a) Penalty.--Section 16 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 March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C.
411), is amended--
(1) by striking ``sections thirteen, fourteen, and
fifteen'' and inserting ``section 13, 14, 15, 19, or 20'';
and
(2) by striking ``not exceeding twenty-five hundred dollars
nor less than five hundred dollars'' and inserting ``of not
more than $25,000 for each day that the violation
continues''.
(b) General Authority.--Section 20 of the Act (33 U.S.C.
415) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``Under emergency'' and inserting ``Summary
Removal Procedures.--Under emergency''; and
(B) by striking ``expense'' the first place it appears and
inserting ``actual expense, including administrative
expenses,'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``cost'' and inserting ``actual cost,
including administrative costs,''; and
(B) by striking ``(b) The'' and inserting ``(c) Liability
of Owner, Lessee, or Operator.--The''; and
(3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Removal Requirement.--Not later than 24 hours after
the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is
operating issues an order to stop or delay navigation in any
navigable waters of the United States because of conditions
related to the sinking or grounding of a vessel, the owner or
operator of the vessel, with the approval of the Secretary of
the Army, shall begin removal of the vessel using the most
expeditious removal method available or, if appropriate,
secure the vessel pending removal to allow navigation to
resume. If the owner or operator fails to begin removal or to
secure the vessel pending removal in accordance with the
preceding sentence or fails to complete removal as soon as
possible, the Secretary of the Army shall remove or destroy
the vessel using the summary removal procedures under
subsection (a).''.

SEC. 316. LEVEE OWNERS MANUAL.

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), is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(c) Levee Owners Manual.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this subsection, in accordance with chapter 5 of
title 5, United States Code, the Secretary shall prepare a
manual describing the maintenance and upkeep responsibilities
that the Army Corps of Engineers requires of a non-Federal
interest in order for the non-Federal interest to receive
Federal assistance under this section. The Secretary shall
provide a copy of the manual at no cost to each non-Federal
interest that is eligible to receive Federal assistance under
this section.
``(2) Prohibition on delegation.--The preparation of the
manual shall be carried out under the personal direction of
the Secretary.
``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry out this
subsection.
``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Maintenance and upkeep.--The term `maintenance and
upkeep' means all maintenance and general upkeep of a levee
performed on a regular and consistent basis that is not
repair and rehabilitation.
``(B) Repair and rehabilitation.--The term `repair and
rehabilitation'--
``(i) except as provided in clause (ii), means the repair
or rebuilding of a levee or other flood control structure,
after the structure has been damaged by a flood, to the level
of protection provided by the structure before the flood; and
``(ii) does not include--

``(I) any improvement to the structure; or
``(II) repair or rebuilding described in clause (i) if, in
the normal course of usage, the structure becomes
structurally unsound and is no longer fit to provide the
level of protection for which the structure was designed.

``(C) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of the Army.''.

SEC. 317. RISK-BASED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY.

(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall obtain the
services of an independent consultant to evaluate--
(1) the relationship between--
(A) the Risk-Based Analysis for Evaluation of Hydrology/
Hydraulics and Economics in Flood Damage Reduction Studies
established in an Army Corps of Engineers engineering
circular; and
(B) minimum engineering and safety standards;
(2) the validity of results generated by the studies
described in paragraph (1); and
(3) policy impacts related to change in the studies
described in paragraph (1).
(b) Task Force.--
(1) In general.--In carrying out the independent evaluation
under subsection (a), the Secretary, not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, shall establish a
task force to oversee and review the analysis.
(2) Membership.--The task force shall consist of--
(A) the Assistant Secretary of the Army having
responsibility for civil works, who shall serve as
chairperson of the task force;
(B) the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency;
(C) the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service
of the Department of Agriculture;
(D) a State representative appointed by the Secretary from
among individuals recommended by the Association of State
Floodplain Managers;
(E) a local government public works official appointed by
the Secretary from among individuals recommended by a
national organization representing public works officials;
and
(F) an individual from the private sector, who shall be
appointed by the Secretary.
(3) Compensation.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a
member of the task force shall serve without compensation.
(B) Expenses.--Each member of the task force shall be
allowed--
(i) travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies
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 the performance of services for the task
force; and
(ii) other expenses incurred in the performance of services
for the task force, as determined by the Secretary.
(4) Termination.--The task force shall terminate 2 years
after the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Limitation on Use of Methodology.--During the period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending 2
years after that date, if requested by a non-Federal
interest, the Secretary shall refrain from using any risk-
based technique required under the studies described in
subsection (a) for the evaluation and design of a project
carried out in cooperation with the non-Federal interest
unless the Secretary, in consultation with the task force,
has provided direction for use of the technique after
consideration of the independent evaluation required under
subsection (a).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated $500,000 to carry out this section.

SEC. 318. SEDIMENTS DECONTAMINATION TECHNOLOGY.

Section 405 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(Public Law 102-580; 33 U.S.C. 2239 note) is amended--

[[Page H8751]]

(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
``The goal of the program shall be to make possible the
development, on an operational scale, of 1 or more sediment
decontamination technologies, each of which demonstrates a
sediment decontamination capacity of at least 2,500 cubic
yards per day.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Report to congress.--Not later than September 30,
1996, and September 30 of each year thereafter, the
Administrator and the Secretary shall report to Congress on
progress made toward the goal described in paragraph (2).'';
and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting
``$10,000,000''; and
(B) by striking ``1992'' and inserting ``1996''.

SEC. 319. MELALEUCA TREE.

Section 104(a) of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (33
U.S.C. 610(a)) is amended by inserting ``melaleuca tree,''
after ``milfoil,''.

SEC. 320. FAULKNER ISLAND, CONNECTICUT.

In consultation with the Director of the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service, the Secretary shall design and
construct shoreline protection measures for the coastline
adjacent to the Faulkner Island Lighthouse, Connecticut, at a
total cost of $4,500,000.

SEC. 321. DESIGNATION OF LOCK AND DAM AT THE RED RIVER
WATERWAY, LOUISIANA.

(a) Designation.--Lock and Dam numbered 4 of the Red River
Waterway, Louisiana, is designated as the ``Russell B. Long
Lock and Dam''.
(b) Legal References.--A reference in any law, regulation,
document, map, record, or other paper of the United States to
the lock and dam referred to in subsection (a) shall be
deemed to be a reference to the ``Russell B. Long Lock and
Dam''.

SEC. 322. JURISDICTION OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION,
LOUISIANA.

The jurisdiction of the Mississippi River Commission
established by the Act of June 28, 1879 (21 Stat. 37, chapter
43; 33 U.S.C. 641 et seq.), is extended to include all of the
area between the eastern side of the Bayou Lafourche Ridge
from Donaldsonville, Louisiana, to the Gulf of Mexico and the
west guide levee of the Mississippi River from
Donaldsonville, Louisiana, to the Gulf of Mexico.

SEC. 323. WILLIAM JENNINGS RANDOLPH ACCESS ROAD, GARRETT
COUNTY, MARYLAND.

The Secretary shall transfer up to $600,000 from the funds
appropriated for the William Jennings Randolph Lake, Maryland
and West Virginia, project to the State of Maryland for use
by the State in constructing an access road to the William
Jennings Randolph Lake in Garrett County, Maryland.

SEC. 324. ARKABUTLA DAM AND LAKE, MISSISSIPPI.

The Secretary shall repair the access roads to Arkabutla
Dam and Arkabutla Lake in Tate County and DeSoto County,
Mississippi, at a total cost of not to exceed $1,400,000.

SEC. 325. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM.

(a) In General.--In order to make capital improvements to
the New York State canal system, the Secretary, with the
consent of appropriate local and State entities, shall enter
into such arrangements, contracts, and leases with public and
private entities as may be necessary for the purposes of
rehabilitation, renovation, preservation, and maintenance of
the New York State canal system and related facilities,
including trailside facilities and other recreational
projects along the waterways referred to in subsection (c).
(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of
capital improvements under this section shall be 50 percent.
The total cost is $14,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $7,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$7,000,000.
(c) Definition of New York State Canal System.--In this
section, the term ``New York State canal system'' means the
Erie, Oswego, Champlain, and Cayuga-Seneca Canals in New
York.

SEC. 326. QUONSET POINT-DAVISVILLE, RHODE ISLAND.

The Secretary shall replace the bulkhead between piers 1
and 2 at the Quonset Point-Davisville Industrial Park, Rhode
Island, at a total cost of $1,350,000. The estimated Federal
share of the project cost is $1,012,500, and the estimated
non-Federal share of the project cost is $337,500. In
conjunction with this project, the Secretary shall install
high mast lighting at pier 2 at a total cost of $300,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $225,000 and an estimated
non-Federal cost of $75,000.

SEC. 327. CLOUTER CREEK DISPOSAL AREA, CHARLESTON, SOUTH
CAROLINA.

(a) Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction.--
Notwithstanding any other law, the Secretary of the Navy
shall transfer to the Secretary administrative jurisdiction
over the approximately 1,400 acres of land under the
jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy that comprise a
portion of the Clouter Creek disposal area, Charleston, South
Carolina.
(b) Use of Transferred Land.--The land transferred under
subsection (a) shall be used by the Department of the Army as
a dredge material disposal area for dredging activities in
the vicinity of Charleston, South Carolina, including the
Charleston Harbor navigation project.
(c) Cost Sharing.--Nothing in this section modifies any
non-Federal cost-sharing requirement established under title
I of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2211 et seq.).

SEC. 328. NUISANCE AQUATIC VEGETATION IN LAKE GASTON,
VIRGINIA AND NORTH CAROLINA.

Section 339(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (Public Law 102-580; 106 Stat. 4855) is amended by
striking ``1993 and 1994'' and inserting ``1995 and 1996''.

SEC. 329. WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Non-Federal public water supply customer.--The term
``non-Federal public water supply customer'' means--
(A) the District of Columbia;
(B) Arlington County, Virginia; and
(C) the City of Falls Church, Virginia.
(2) Washington aqueduct.--The term ``Washington Aqueduct''
means the Washington Aqueduct facilities and related
facilities owned by the Federal Government as of the date of
enactment of this Act, including--
(A) the dams, intake works, conduits, and pump stations
that capture and transport raw water from the Potomac River
to the Dalecarlia Reservoir;
(B) the infrastructure and appurtenances used to treat
water taken from the Potomac River to potable standards; and
(C) related water distribution facilities.
(b) Regional Entity.--
(1) In general.--Congress encourages and grants consent to
the non-Federal public water supply customers to establish a
public or private entity or to enter into an agreement with
an existing public or private entity to--
(A) receive title to the Washington Aqueduct; and
(B) operate, maintain, and manage the Washington Aqueduct
in a manner that adequately represents all interests of non-
Federal public water supply customers.
(2) Consideration.--An entity receiving title to the
Washington Aqueduct that is not composed entirely of the non-
Federal public water supply customers shall receive
consideration for providing equity for the Aqueduct.
(3) Priority access.--The non-Federal public water supply
customers shall have priority access to any water produced by
the Aqueduct.
(4) Consent of congress.--Congress grants consent to the
non-Federal public water supply customers to enter into any
interstate agreement or compact required to carry out this
section.
(5) Statutory construction.--This section shall not
preclude the non-Federal public water supply customers from
pursuing any option regarding ownership, operation,
maintenance, and management of the Washington Aqueduct.
(c) Progress report and plan.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works in the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
in the House of Representatives on any progress in achieving
a plan for the transfer of ownership, operation, maintenance,
and management of the Washington Aqueduct to a public or
private entity.
(d) Transfer.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (b)(2) and any terms
or conditions the Secretary considers appropriate to protect
the interests of the United States, the Secretary may, with
the consent of the non-Federal public water supply customers
and without consideration to the Federal Government, transfer
all rights, title, and interest of the United States in the
Washington Aqueduct, its real property, facilities, and
personalty, to a public or private entity established or
contracted with pursuant to subsection (b).
(2) Adequate capabilities.--The Secretary shall transfer
ownership to the Washington Aqueduct under paragraph (1) only
if the Secretary determines, after opportunity for public
input, that the entity to receive ownership of the Aqueduct
has the technical, managerial, and financial capability to
operate, maintain, and manage the Aqueduct.
(3) Responsibilities.--The Secretary shall not transfer
title under this subsection unless the entity to receive
title assumes full responsibility for performing and
financing the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement,
rehabilitation, and necessary capital improvements of the
Washington Aqueduct so as to ensure the continued operation
of the Washington Aqueduct consistent with Aqueduct's
intended purpose of providing an uninterrupted supply of
potable water sufficient to meet the current and future needs
of the Aqueduct's service area.
(e) Interim Borrowing Authority.--
(1) Borrowing.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to borrow from
the Treasury of the United States such amounts for fiscal
years 1997 and 1998 as is sufficient to cover any obligations
that the United States Army Corps of Engineers is required to
incur in carrying out capital improvements during fiscal
years 1997 and 1998 for the Washington Aqueduct to ensure
continued operation of the Aqueduct until such time as a
transfer of title of the Aqueduct has taken place.
(B) Limitation.--The amount borrowed by the Secretary under
subparagraph (A) may not exceed $29,000,000 for fiscal year
1997 and $24,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.
(C) Agreement.--Amounts borrowed under subparagraph (A) may
only be used for capital improvements agreed to by the Army

[[Page H8752]]

Corps of Engineers and the non-Federal public water supply
customers.
(D) Terms of borrowing.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
provide the funds borrowed under subparagraph (A) under such
terms and conditions as the Secretary of Treasury determines
to be necessary and in the public interest and subject to the
contracts required in paragraph (2).
(ii) Specified terms.--The term of any amounts borrowed
under subparagraph (A) shall be for a period of not less than
20 years. There shall be no penalty for the prepayment of any
amounts borrowed under subparagraph (A).
(2) Contracts with public water supply customers.--
(A) Contracts to repay corps debt.--To the extent provided
in appropriations Act, and in accordance with paragraph (1),
the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps of Engineers may
enter into a series of contracts with each public water
supply customer under which the customer commits to repay a
pro-rata share (based on water purchase) of the principal and
interest owed by the Secretary to the Secretary of the
Treasury under paragraph (1). Any customer, or customers, may
prepay, at any time, the pro-rata share of the principal and
interest then owed by the customer and outstanding, or any
portion thereof, without penalty. Under each of the
contracts, the customer that enters into the contract shall
commit to pay any additional amount necessary to fully offset
the risk of default on the contract.
(B) Offsetting of risk of default.--Each contract under
subparagraph (A) shall include such additional terms and
conditions as the Secretary of the Treasury may require so
that the value to the Government of the contracts is
estimated to be equal to the obligational authority used by
the Army Corps of Engineers for modernizing the Washington
Aqueduct at the time that each series of contracts is entered
into.
(C) Other conditions.--Each contract entered into under
subparagraph (A) shall--
(i) provide that the public water supply customer pledges
future income only from fees assessed to operate and maintain
the Washington Aqueduct;
(ii) provide the United States priority in regard to income
from fees assessed to operate and maintain the Washington
Aqueduct; and
(iii) include other conditions not inconsistent with this
section that the Secretary of the Treasury determines to be
appropriate.
(3) Extension of borrowing authority.--If no later than 24
months from the date of enactment of this Act, a written
agreement in principle has been reached between the
Secretary, the non-Federal public water supply customers, and
(if one exists) the public or private entity proposed to own,
operate, maintain, and manage the Washington Aqueduct, then
it shall be appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year
1999 borrowing authority, and the Secretary shall borrow,
under the same terms and conditions noted in this subsection,
in an amount sufficient to cover those obligations which the
Army Corps of Engineers is required to incur in carrying out
capital improvements that year for the Washington Aqueduct to
ensure continued operations until the transfer contemplated
in subsection (b) has taken place, provided that this
borrowing shall not exceed $22,000,000 in fiscal year 1999;
provided also that no such borrowings shall occur once such
non-Federal public or private owner shall have been
established and achieved the capacity to borrow on its own.
(4) Impact on improvement program.--Not later than 6 months
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in
consultation with other Federal agencies, shall transmit to
the Committee on Environment and Public Works in the Senate
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in the
House of Representatives a report that assesses the impact of
the borrowing authority referred to in this subsection on the
near term improvement projects in the Washington Aqueduct
Improvement Program, work scheduled during this period and
the financial liability to be incurred.
(f) Delayed Reissuance of NPDES Permit.--In recognition of
more efficient water-facility configurations that might be
achieved through various possible ownership transfers of the
Washington Aqueduct, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency shall delay the reissuance of the NPDES
permit for the Washington Aqueduct until Federal fiscal year
1999.

SEC. 330. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND
PROTECTION PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a pilot
program to provide environmental assistance to non-Federal
interests in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
(2) Form.--The assistance shall be in the form of design
and construction assistance for water-related environmental
infrastructure and resource protection and development
projects affecting the Chesapeake Bay estuary, including
projects for sediment and erosion control, protection of
eroding shorelines, protection of essential public works,
wastewater treatment and related facilities, water supply and
related facilities, and beneficial uses of dredged material,
and other related projects that may enhance the living
resources of the estuary.
(b) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may
provide assistance for a project under this section only if
the project is publicly owned, and will be publicly operated
and maintained.
(c) Local Cooperation Agreement.--
(1) In general.--Before providing assistance under this
section, the Secretary shall enter into a local cooperation
agreement with a non-Federal interest to provide for design
and construction of the project to be carried out with the
assistance.
(2) Requirements.--Each local cooperation agreement entered
into under this subsection shall provide for--
(A) the development by the Secretary, in consultation with
appropriate Federal, State, and local officials, of a
facilities or resource protection and development plan,
including appropriate engineering plans and specifications
and an estimate of expected resource benefits; and
(B) the establishment of such legal and institutional
structures as are necessary to ensure the effective long-term
operation and maintenance of the project by the non-Federal
interest.
(d) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Federal share.--Except as provided in paragraph (2)(B),
the Federal share of the total project costs of each local
cooperation agreement entered into under this section shall
be 75 percent.
(2) Non-federal share.--
(A) Value of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and
relocations.--In determining the non-Federal contribution
toward carrying out a local cooperation agreement entered
into under this section, the Secretary shall provide credit
to a non-Federal interest for the value of lands, easements,
rights-of-way, and relocations provided by the non-Federal
interest, except that the amount of credit provided for a
project under this paragraph may not exceed 25 percent of the
total project costs.
(B) Operation and maintenance costs.--The non-Federal share
of the costs of operation and maintenance of carrying out the
agreement under this section shall be 100 percent.
(e) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws and
Agreements.--
(1) In general.--Nothing in this section waives, limits, or
otherwise affects the applicability of any provision of
Federal or State law that would otherwise apply to a project
carried out with assistance provided under this section.
(2) Cooperation.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary shall cooperate fully with the heads of appropriate
Federal agencies, including--
(A) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency;
(B) the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the
Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration;
(C) the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and
(D) the heads of such other Federal agencies and agencies
of a State or political subdivision of a State as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate.
(f) Demonstration Project.--The Secretary shall establish
at least 1 project under this section in each of the States
of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. A project
established under this section shall be carried out using
such measures as are necessary to protect environmental,
historic, and cultural resources.
(g) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the
Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results
of the program carried out under this section, together with
a recommendation concerning whether or not the program should
be implemented on a national basis.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000, to
remain available until expended.

SEC. 331. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM TO IMPROVE SALMON
SURVIVAL.

(a) Salmon Survival Activities.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall accelerate ongoing
research and development activities, and is authorized to
carry out or participate in additional research and
development activities, for the purpose of developing
innovative methods and technologies for improving the
survival of salmon, especially salmon in the Columbia River
Basin.
(2) Accelerated activities.--Accelerated research and
development activities referred to in paragraph (1) may
include research and development related to--
(A) impacts from water resources projects and other impacts
on salmon life cycles;
(B) juvenile and adult salmon passage;
(C) light and sound guidance systems;
(D) surface-oriented collector systems;
(E) transportation mechanisms; and
(F) dissolved gas monitoring and abatement.
(3) Additional activities.--Additional research and
development activities referred to in paragraph (1) may
include research and development related to--
(A) marine mammal predation on salmon;
(B) studies of juvenile salmon survival in spawning and
rearing areas;
(C) estuary and near-ocean juvenile and adult salmon
survival;
(D) impacts on salmon life cycles from sources other than
water resources projects; and
(E) other innovative technologies and actions intended to
improve fish survival, including the survival of resident
fish.
(4) Coordination.--The Secretary shall coordinate any
activities carried out under this subsection with appropriate
Federal,

[[Page H8753]]

State, and local agencies, affected Indian tribes, and the
Northwest Power Planning Council.
(5) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the research and development activities
carried out under this subsection, including any
recommendations of the Secretary concerning the research and
development activities.
(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out research and
development activities under subparagraphs (A) through (C) of
paragraph (3).
(b) Advanced Turbine Development.--
(1) In general.--In conjunction with the Secretary of
Energy, the Secretary shall accelerate efforts toward
developing innovative, efficient, and environmentally safe
hydropower turbines, including design of ``fish-friendly''
turbines, for use on the Columbia River hydro system.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated $12,000,000 to carry out this subsection.
(c) Implementation.--Nothing in this section affects the
authority of the Secretary to implement the results of the
research and development carried out under this section or
any other law.

SEC. 332. RECREATIONAL USER FEES.

(a) In General.--Section 210(b)(4) of the Flood Control Act
of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d-3(b)(4)) is amended by inserting
before the period at the end the following: ``and, subject to
the availability of appropriations, shall be used for the
purposes specified in section 4(i)(3) of the Act at the water
resources development project at which the fees were
collected''.
(b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare and 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, with respect to
fiscal year 1995, on--
(1) the amount of day-use fees collected under section
210(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d-3(b))
at each water resources development project; and
(2) the administrative costs associated with the collection
of the day-use fees at each water resources development
project.

SEC. 333. SHORE PROTECTION.

(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of the first section of the
Act of August 13, 1946 (60 Stat. 1056, chapter 960; 33 U.S.C.
426e(a)), is amended--
(1) by striking ``damage to the shores'' and inserting
``damage to the shores and beaches''; and
(2) by striking ``the following provisions'' and all that
follows through the period at the end and inserting the
following: ``this Act, to promote shore protection projects
and related research that encourage the protection,
restoration, and enhancement of sandy beaches, including
beach restoration and periodic beach nourishment, on a
comprehensive and coordinated basis by the Federal
Government, States, localities, and private enterprises. In
carrying out this policy, preference shall be given to areas
in which there has been a Federal investment of funds and
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.''.
(b) Definition of Shore Protection Project.--Section 4 of
the Act of August 13, 1946 (60 Stat. 1057, chapter 960; 33
U.S.C. 426h), is amended--
(1) by striking ``Sec. 4. As used in this Act, the word
`shores' includes all the shorelines'' and inserting the
following:

``SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

``In this Act:
``(1) Shore.--The term `shore' includes each shoreline of
each''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Shore protection project.--The term `shore protection
project' includes a project for beach nourishment, including
the replacement of sand.''.

SEC. 334. SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEMONSTRATION.

(a) National Shoreline Erosion Control Development and
Demonstration Program.--The Act of August 13, 1946 (60 Stat.
1056, chapter 960; 33 U.S.C. 426e et seq.), is amended by
adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 5. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Erosion control program.--The term `erosion control
program' means the national shoreline erosion control
development and demonstration program established under this
section.
``(2) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers of the
Army Corps of Engineers.
``(b) Establishment of Erosion Control Program.--The
Secretary shall establish and conduct a national shoreline
erosion control development and demonstration program for a
period of 8 years beginning on the date that funds are made
available to carry out this section.
``(c) Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--The erosion control program shall
include provisions for--
``(A) demonstration projects consisting of planning,
designing, and constructing prototype engineered and
vegetative shoreline erosion control devices and methods
during the first 5 years of the erosion control program;
``(B) adequate monitoring of the prototypes throughout the
duration of the erosion control program;
``(C) detailed engineering and environmental reports on the
results of each demonstration project carried out under the
erosion control program; and
``(D) technology transfers to private property owners and
State and local entities.
``(2) Emphasis.--The demonstration projects carried out
under the erosion control program shall emphasize, to the
extent practicable--
``(A) the development and demonstration of innovative
technologies;
``(B) efficient designs to prevent erosion at a shoreline
site, taking into account the life-cycle cost of the design,
including cleanup, maintenance, and amortization;
``(C) natural designs, including the use of vegetation or
temporary structures that minimize permanent structural
alterations;
``(D) the avoidance of negative impacts to adjacent
shorefront communities;
``(E) in areas with substantial residential or commercial
interests adjacent to the shoreline, designs that do not
impair the aesthetic appeal of the interests;
``(F) the potential for long-term protection afforded by
the technology; and
``(G) recommendations developed from evaluations of the
original 1974 program established under the Shoreline Erosion
Control Demonstration Act of 1974 (section 54 of Public Law
93-251; 42 U.S.C. 1962d-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.
``(3) Sites.--
``(A) In general.--Each demonstration project under the
erosion control program shall be carried out at a privately
owned site with substantial public access, or a publicly
owned site, on open coast or on tidal waters.
``(B) Selection.--The Secretary shall develop criteria for
the selection of sites for the demonstration projects,
including--
``(i) a variety of geographical and climatic conditions;
``(ii) the size of the population that is dependent on the
beaches for recreation, protection of homes, or commercial
interests;
``(iii) the rate of erosion;
``(iv) significant natural resources or habitats and
environmentally sensitive areas; and
``(v) significant threatened historic structures or
landmarks.
``(C) Areas.--Demonstration projects under the erosion
control program shall be carried out at not fewer than 2
sites on each of the shorelines of--
``(i) the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts;
``(ii) the Great Lakes; and
``(iii) the State of Alaska.
``(d) Cooperation.--
``(1) Parties.--The Secretary shall carry out the erosion
control program in cooperation with--
``(A) the Secretary of Agriculture, particularly with
respect to vegetative means of preventing and controlling
shoreline erosion;
``(B) Federal, State, and local agencies;
``(C) private organizations;
``(D) the Coastal Engineering Research Center established
under the first section of Public Law 88-172 (33 U.S.C. 426-
1); and
``(E) university research facilities.
``(2) Agreements.--The cooperation described in paragraph
(1) may include entering into agreements with other Federal,
State, or local agencies or private organizations to carry
out functions described in subsection (c)(1) when
appropriate.
``(e) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the conclusion
of the erosion control program, the Secretary shall prepare
and submit an erosion control program final report to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives. The report shall include a
comprehensive evaluation of the erosion control program and
recommendations regarding the continuation of the erosion
control program.
``(f) Funding.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Federal
share of the cost of a demonstration project under the
erosion control program shall be determined in accordance
with section 3.
``(2) Responsibility.--The cost of and responsibility for
operation and maintenance (excluding monitoring) of a
demonstration project under the erosion control program shall
be borne by non-Federal interests on completion of
construction of the demonstration project.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (e) of the first
section of the Act of August 13, 1946 (60 Stat. 1056, chapter
960; 33 U.S.C. 426e(e)), is amended by striking ``section 3''
and inserting ``section 3 or 5''.

SEC. 335. REVIEW PERIOD FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES.

Paragraph (a) of the first section 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 December 22, 1944 (33 U.S.C. 701-1(a)),
is amended--
(1) in the ninth sentence, by striking ``ninety'' and
inserting ``30''; and

[[Page H8754]]

(2) in the eleventh sentence, by striking ``ninety-day''
and inserting ``30-day''.

SEC. 336. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES.

(a) In General.--Section 101 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(f) Dredged Material Disposal Facilities.--
``(1) In general.--The construction of all dredged material
disposal facilities associated with Federal navigation
projects for harbors and inland harbors, including diking and
other improvements necessary for the proper disposal of
dredged material, shall be considered to be general
navigation features of the projects and shall be cost-shared
in accordance with subsection (a).
``(2) Cost sharing for operation and maintenance.--
``(A) In general.--The Federal share of the cost of
operation and maintenance of each disposal facility to which
paragraph (1) applies shall be determined in accordance with
subsection (b).
``(B) Source of federal share.--The Federal share of the
cost of construction of dredged material disposal facilities
associated with the operation and maintenance of Federal
navigation projects for harbors and inland harbors shall be--
``(i) considered to be eligible operation and maintenance
costs for the purpose of section 210(a); and
``(ii) paid with sums appropriated out of the Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund established by section 9505 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(3) Apportionment of funding.--The Secretary shall
ensure, to the extent practicable, that--
``(A) funding requirements for operation and maintenance
dredging of commercial navigation harbors are considered
fully before Federal funds are obligated for payment of the
Federal share of costs associated with the construction of
dredged material disposal facilities under paragraph (1); and
``(B) funds expended for such construction are equitably
apportioned in accordance with regional needs.
``(4) Applicability.--
``(A) In general.--This subsection shall apply to the
construction of any dredged material disposal facility for
which a contract for construction has not been awarded on or
before the date of enactment of this subsection.
``(B) Amendment of existing agreements.--The Secretary may,
with the consent of the non-Federal interest, amend a project
cooperation agreement executed before the date of enactment
of this subsection to reflect paragraph (1) with respect to
any dredged material disposal facility for which a contract
for construction has not been awarded as of that date.
``(5) Non-federal share of costs.--Nothing in this
subsection shall impose, increase, or result in the increase
of the non-Federal share of the costs of any existing dredged
material disposal facility authorized to be provided before
the date of enactment of this subsection.''.
(b) Definition of Eligible Operations and Maintenance.--
Section 214(2)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2241(2)(A)) is amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``, dredging and
disposal of contaminated sediments that are in or that affect
the maintenance of a Federal navigation channel, mitigation
for storm damage and environmental impacts resulting from a
Federal maintenance activity, and operation and maintenance
of a dredged material disposal facility''.

SEC. 337. APPLICABILITY OF COST-SHARING PROVISIONS.

Section 103(e)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end
the following: ``For the purpose of the preceding sentence,
physical construction shall be considered to be initiated on
the date of the award of a construction contract.''.

SEC. 338. SECTION 215 REIMBURSEMENT LIMITATION PER PROJECT.

(a) In General.--The last sentence of section 215(a) of the
Flood Control Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5a(a)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``$3,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,000,000''; and
(2) by striking the second period at the end.
(b) Modification of Reimbursement Limitation for San
Antonio River Authority.--Notwithstanding the last sentence
of section 215(a) of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
1962d-5a(a)) and the agreement executed on November 7, 1992,
by the Secretary and the San Antonio River Authority, Texas,
the Secretary shall reimburse the San Antonio River Authority
in an amount not to exceed a total of $5,000,000 for the work
carried out by the Authority under the agreement, including
any amounts paid to the Authority under the terms of the
agreement before the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 339. WAIVER OF UNECONOMICAL COST-SHARING REQUIREMENT.

The first sentence of section 221(a) of the Flood Control
Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(a)) is amended by inserting
before the period at the end the following: ``, except that
no such agreement shall be required if the Secretary
determines that the administrative costs associated with
negotiating, executing, or administering the agreement would
exceed the amount of the contribution required from the non-
Federal interest''.

SEC. 340. PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.

Section 22 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974
(42 U.S.C. 1962d-16) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, watersheds, and
ecosystems'' after ``basins'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking paragraph (2); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``$6,000,000'' and inserting
``$10,000,000''; and
(B) by striking ``$300,000'' and inserting ``$500,000''.

SEC. 341. RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR CLEANUP OF HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES.

Any amount recovered under section 107 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) for any response action taken by the
Secretary in support of the civil works program of the Army
Corps of Engineers, and any amount recovered by the Secretary
from a contractor, insurer, surety, or other person to
reimburse the Secretary for any expenditure for environmental
response activities in support of the civil works program,
shall be credited to the trust fund account to which the cost
of the response action has been or will be charged.

SEC. 342. CITY OF NORTH BONNEVILLE, WASHINGTON.

Section 9147 of the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 1993 (Public Law 102-396; 106 Stat. 1940), is amended to
read as follows:

``SEC. 9147. CITY OF NORTH BONNEVILLE, WASHINGTON.

``(a) Conveyances.--
``(1) In general.--The project for Bonneville Lock and Dam,
Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, authorized by the Act
of August 20, 1937 (commonly known as the `Bonneville Project
Act of 1937') (50 Stat. 731, chapter 720; 16 U.S.C. 832 et
seq.), and modified by section 83 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-251; 88 Stat. 35), is
further modified to authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey to the city of North Bonneville, Washington (referred
to in this section as the `city'), at no further cost to the
city, all right, title, and interest of the United States in
and to--
``(A) any municipal facilities, utilities, fixtures, and
equipment for the relocated city, and any remaining lands
designated as open spaces or municipal lots not previously
conveyed to the city, specifically Lots M1 through M15, M16
(known as the `community center lot'), M18, M19, M22, M24,
S42 through S45, and S52 through S60, as shown on the plats
of Skamania County, Washington;
``(B) the lot known as the `school lot' and shown as Lot 2,
Block 5, on the plats of relocated North Bonneville, recorded
in Skamania County, Washington;
``(C) Parcels 2 and C, but only on the completion of any
environmental response activities required under applicable
law;
``(D) that portion of Parcel B lying south of the city
boundary, west of the sewage treatment plant, and north of
the drainage ditch that is located adjacent to the northerly
limit of the Hamilton Island landfill, if the Secretary of
the Army determines, at the time of the proposed conveyance,
that the Department of the Army has taken all actions
necessary to protect human health and the environment;
``(E) such portions of Parcel H as can be conveyed without
a requirement for further investigation, inventory, or other
action by the Secretary of the Army under the National
Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.); and
``(F) such easements as the Secretary of the Army considers
necessary for--
``(i) sewer and water line crossings of relocated
Washington State Highway 14; and
``(ii) reasonable public access to the Columbia River
across such portions of Hamilton Island as remain in the
ownership of the United States.
``(2) Timing of conveyances.--The conveyances described in
subparagraphs (A), (B), (E), and (F)(i) of paragraph (1)
shall be completed not later than 180 days after the United
States receives the release described in subsection (b)(2).
All other conveyances shall be completed expeditiously,
subject to any conditions specified in the applicable
subparagraph of paragraph (1).
``(b) Effect of Conveyances.--
``(1) Congressional intent.--The conveyances authorized by
subsection (a) are intended to resolve all outstanding issues
between the United States and the city.
``(2) Action by city before conveyances.--As prerequisites
to the conveyances, the city shall--
``(A) execute an acknowledgment of payment of just
compensation;
``(B) execute a release of all claims for relief of any
kind against the United States arising from the relocation of
the city or any Federal statute enacted before the date of
enactment of this subparagraph relating to the city; and
``(C) dismiss, with prejudice, any pending litigation
involving matters described in subparagraph (B).
``(3) Action by attorney general.--On receipt of the city's
acknowledgment and release described in paragraph (2), the
Attorney General shall--
``(A) dismiss any pending litigation arising from the
relocation of the city; and
``(B) execute a release of all rights to damages of any
kind (including any interest on the damages) under Town of
North Bonneville, Washington v. United States, 11 Cl. Ct.

[[Page H8755]]

694, aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 833 F.2d 1024 (Fed.
Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1007 (1988).
``(4) Action by city after conveyances.--Not later than 60
days after the conveyances authorized by subparagraphs (A)
through (F)(i) of subsection (a)(1) have been completed, the
city shall--
``(A) execute an acknowledgment that all entitlements to
the city under the subparagraphs have been fulfilled; and
``(B) execute a release of all claims for relief of any
kind against the United States arising from this section.
``(c) Authority of City Over Certain Lands.--Beginning on
the date of enactment of paragraph (1), the city or any
successor in interest to the city--
``(1) shall be precluded from exercising any jurisdiction
over any land owned in whole or in part by the United States
and administered by the Army Corps of Engineers in connection
with the Bonneville project; and
``(2) may change the zoning designations of, sell, or
resell Parcels S35 and S56, which are designated as open
spaces as of the date of enactment of this paragraph.''.

SEC. 343. COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS.

Section 401(a) of Public Law 100-581 (102 Stat. 2944) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``(a) All Federal'' and all that follows
through ``Columbia River Gorge Commission'' and inserting the
following:
``(a) Existing Federal Lands.--
``(1) In general.--All Federal lands that are included
within the 20 recommended treaty fishing access sites set
forth in the publication of the Army Corps of Engineers
entitled `Columbia River Treaty Fishing Access Sites Post
Authorization Change Report', dated April 1995,''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Boundary adjustments.--The Secretary of the Army, in
consultation with affected tribes, may make such minor
boundary adjustments to the lands referred to in paragraph
(1) as the Secretary determines are necessary to carry out
this title.''.

SEC. 344. TRI-CITIES AREA, WASHINGTON.

(a) General Authority.--As soon as practicable after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make the
conveyances to the local governments referred to in
subsection (b) of all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the property described in subsection
(b).
(b) Property Descriptions.--
(1) Benton county, washington.--The property to be conveyed
under subsection (a) to Benton County, Washington, is the
property in the county that is designated ``Area D'' on
Exhibit A to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-81-43.
(2) Franklin county, washington.--The property to be
conveyed under subsection (a) to Franklin County, Washington,
is--
(A) the 105.01 acres of property leased under Army Lease
No. DACW-68-1-77-20 as executed by Franklin County,
Washington, on April 7, 1977;
(B) the 35 acres of property leased under Supplemental
Agreement No. 1 to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-20;
(C) the 20 acres of property commonly known as ``Richland
Bend'' that is designated by the shaded portion of Lot 1,
Section 11, and the shaded portion of Lot 1, Section 12,
Township 9 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on Exhibit D to
Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-
20;
(D) the 7.05 acres of property commonly known as ``Taylor
Flat'' that is designated by the shaded portion of Lot 1,
Section 13, Township 11 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on Exhibit
D to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease No. DACW-68-
1-77-20;
(E) the 14.69 acres of property commonly known as ``Byers
Landing'' that is designated by the shaded portion of Lots 2
and 3, Section 2, Township 10 North, Range 28 East, W.M. on
Exhibit D to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Army Lease No.
DACW-68-1-77-20; and
(F) all levees in Franklin County, Washington, as of the
date of enactment of this Act, and the property on which the
levees are situated.
(3) City of kennewick, washington.--The property to be
conveyed under subsection (a) to the city of Kennewick,
Washington, is the property in the city that is subject to
the Municipal Sublease Agreement entered into on April 6,
1989, between Benton County, Washington, and the cities of
Kennewick and Richland, Washington.
(4) City of richland, washington.--The property to be
conveyed under subsection (a) to the city of Richland,
Washington, is the property in the city that is subject to
the Municipal Sublease Agreement entered into on April 6,
1989, between Benton County, Washington, and the cities of
Kennewick and Richland, Washington.
(5) City of pasco, washington.--The property to be conveyed
under subsection (a) to the city of Pasco, Washington, is--
(A) the property in the city of Pasco, Washington, that is
leased under Army Lease No. DACW-68-1-77-10; and
(B) all levees in the city, as of the date of enactment of
this Act, and the property on which the levees are situated.
(6) Port of pasco, washington.--The property to be conveyed
under subsection (a) to the Port of Pasco, Washington, is--
(A) the property owned by the United States that is south
of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks in Lots 1 and 2,
Section 20, Township 9 North, Range 31 East, W.M.; and
(B) the property owned by the United States that is south
of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks in Lots 1, 2, 3,
and 4, in each of Sections 21, 22, and 23, Township 9 North,
Range 31 East, W.M.
(7) Additional properties.--In addition to properties
described in paragraphs (1) through (6), the Secretary may
convey to a local government referred to in any of paragraphs
(1) through (6) such properties under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary in the Tri-Cities area as the Secretary and the
local government agree are appropriate for conveyance.
(c) Terms and Conditions.--
(1) In general.--The conveyances under subsection (a) shall
be subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary
considers necessary and appropriate to protect the interests
of the United States.
(2) Special rules for franklin county.--The property
described in subsection (b)(2)(F) shall be conveyed only
after Franklin County, Washington, enters into a written
agreement with the Secretary that provides that the United
States shall continue to operate and maintain the flood
control drainage areas and pump stations on the property
conveyed and that the United States shall be provided all
easements and rights necessary to carry out the agreement.
(3) Special rule for city of pasco.--The property described
in subsection (b)(5)(B) shall be conveyed only after the city
of Pasco, Washington, enters into a written agreement with
the Secretary that provides that the United States shall
continue to operate and maintain the flood control drainage
areas and pump stations on the property conveyed and that the
United States shall be provided all easements and rights
necessary to carry out the agreement.
(4) Consideration.--
(A) Administrative costs.--A local government to which
property is conveyed under this section shall pay all
administrative costs associated with the conveyance.
(B) Park and recreation properties.--Properties to be
conveyed under this section that will be retained in public
ownership and used for public park and recreation purposes
shall be conveyed without consideration. If any such property
is no longer used for public park and recreation purposes,
title to the property shall revert to the United States.
(C) Other properties.--Properties to be conveyed under this
section and not described in subparagraph (B) shall be
conveyed at fair market value.
(d) Lake Wallula Levees.--
(1) Determination of minimum safe height.--
(A) Contract.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall contract with a
private entity agreed to under subparagraph (B) to determine,
not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the minimum safe height for the levees of the project
for flood control, Lake Wallula, Washington. The Secretary
shall have final approval of the minimum safe height.
(B) Agreement of local officials.--A contract shall be
entered into under subparagraph (A) only with a private
entity agreed to by the Secretary, appropriate
representatives of Franklin County, Washington, and
appropriate representatives of the city of Pasco, Washington.
(2) Authority.--A local government may reduce, at its cost,
the height of any levee of the project for flood control,
Lake Wallula, Washington, within the boundaries of the area
under the jurisdiction of the local government to a height
not lower than the minimum safe height determined under
paragraph (1).

SEC. 345. DESIGNATION OF LOCKS AND DAMS ON TENNESSEE-
TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY.

(a) In General.--The following locks, and locks and dams,
on the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, located in the States of
Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee, are designated
as follows:
(1) Gainesville Lock and Dam at Mile 266 designated as
Howell Heflin Lock and Dam.
(2) Columbus Lock and Dam at Mile 335 designated as John C.
Stennis Lock and Dam.
(3) The lock and dam at Mile 358 designated as Aberdeen
Lock and Dam.
(4) Lock A at Mile 371 designated as Amory Lock.
(5) Lock B at Mile 376 designated as Glover Wilkins Lock.
(6) Lock C at Mile 391 designated as Fulton Lock.
(7) Lock D at Mile 398 designated as John Rankin Lock.
(8) Lock E at Mile 407 designated as G.V. ``Sonny''
Montgomery Lock.
(9) Bay Springs Lock and Dam at Mile 412 designated as
Jamie Whitten Lock and Dam.
(b) Legal References.--A reference in any law, regulation,
document, map, record, or other paper of the United States to
a lock, or lock and dam, referred to in subsection (a) shall
be deemed to be a reference to the designation for the lock,
or lock and dam, provided in the subsection.

SEC. 346. DESIGNATION OF J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY.

(a) In General.--The portion of the Red River, Louisiana,
from new river mile 0 to new river mile 235 shall be known
and designated as the ``J. Bennett Johnston Waterway''.
(b) References.--Any reference in any law, regulation,
document, map, record, or other paper of the United States to
the portion of the Red River described in subsection

[[Page H8756]]

(a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``J. Bennett
Johnston Waterway''.

SEC. 347. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

(a) Contributions for Environmental and Recreation
Projects.--Section 203(b) of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2325(b)) is amended by striking
``(8662)'' and inserting ``(8862)''.
(b) Challenge Cost-Sharing Program.--The second sentence of
section 225(c) of the Act (33 U.S.C. 2328(c)) is amended by
striking ``(8662)'' and inserting ``(8862)''.

motion offered by mr. shuster

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Shuster moves to strike out all after the enacting
clause of S. 640 and insert the text of H.R. 3592, as passed
the House.

The motion was agreed to.
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the
third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
A similar House bill (H.R. 3592) was laid on the table.

____________________