[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 53 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3874-S3887]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now
proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 72, S. 507.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 507) 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 the rivers and harbors of the United States,
and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Committee on Environment and Public
Works, with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and
inserting in lieu thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Water
Resources Development Act of 1999''.
(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--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Flood hazard mitigation and riverine ecosystem restoration
program.
Sec. 202. Shore protection.
Sec. 203. Small flood control authority.
Sec. 204. Use of non-Federal funds for compiling and disseminating
information on floods and flood damages.
Sec. 205. Aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 206. Beneficial uses of dredged material.
Sec. 207. Voluntary contributions by States and political subdivisions.
Sec. 208. Recreation user fees.
Sec. 209. Water resources development studies for the Pacific region.
Sec. 210. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers enhancement project.
Sec. 211. Outer Continental Shelf.
Sec. 212. Environmental dredging.
Sec. 213. Benefit of primary flood damages avoided included in benefit-
cost analysis.
Sec. 214. Control of aquatic plant growth.
Sec. 215. Environmental infrastructure.
Sec. 216. Watershed management, restoration, and development.
Sec. 217. Lakes program.
Sec. 218. Sediments decontamination policy.
Sec. 219. Disposal of dredged material on beaches.
Sec. 220. Fish and wildlife mitigation.
Sec. 221. Reimbursement of non-Federal interest.
Sec. 222. National Contaminated Sediment Task Force.
Sec. 223. Great Lakes basin program.
Sec. 224. Projects for improvement of the environment.
Sec. 225. Water quality, environmental quality, recreation, fish and
wildlife, flood control, and navigation.
Sec. 226. Irrigation diversion protection and fisheries enhancement
assistance.
Sec. 227. Small storm damage reduction projects.
Sec. 228. Shore damage prevention or mitigation.
Sec. 229. Atlantic coast of New York.
Sec. 230. Accelerated adoption of innovative technologies for
contaminated sediments.
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 301. Dredging of salt ponds in the State of Rhode Island.
Sec. 302. Upper Susquehanna River basin, Pennsylvania and New York.
Sec. 303. Small flood control projects.
Sec. 304. Small navigation projects.
Sec. 305. Streambank protection projects.
Sec. 306. Aquatic ecosystem restoration, Springfield, Oregon.
Sec. 307. Guilford and New Haven, Connecticut.
Sec. 308. Francis Bland Floodway Ditch.
Sec. 309. Caloosahatchee River basin, Florida.
Sec. 310. Cumberland, Maryland, flood project mitigation.
Sec. 311. City of Miami Beach, Florida.
Sec. 312. Sardis Reservoir, Oklahoma.
Sec. 313. Upper Mississippi River and Illinois waterway system
navigation modernization.
Sec. 314. Upper Mississippi River management.
Sec. 315. Research and development program for Columbia and Snake
Rivers salmon survival.
Sec. 316. Nine Mile Run habitat restoration, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 317. Larkspur Ferry Channel, California.
Sec. 318. Comprehensive Flood Impact-Response Modeling System.
Sec. 319. Study regarding innovative financing for small and medium-
sized ports.
Sec. 320. Candy Lake project, Osage County, Oklahoma.
Sec. 321. Salcha River and Piledriver Slough, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Sec. 322. Eyak River, Cordova, Alaska.
Sec. 323. North Padre Island storm damage reduction and environmental
restoration project.
Sec. 324. Kanopolis Lake, Kansas.
Sec. 325. New York City watershed.
Sec. 326. City of Charlevoix reimbursement, Michigan.
Sec. 327. Hamilton Dam flood control project, Michigan.
Sec. 328. Holes Creek flood control project, Ohio.
Sec. 329. Overflow management facility, Rhode Island.
Sec. 330. Anacostia River aquatic ecosystem restoration, District of
Columbia and Maryland.
Sec. 331. Everglades and south Florida ecosystem restoration.
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 Chief's Reports.--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) Sand point harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation,
Sand Point Harbor, Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers
dated October 13, 1998, at a total cost of $11,760,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $6,964,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $4,796,000.
(2) Rio salado (salt river), arizona.--The project for
environmental restoration, Rio Salado (Salt River), Arizona:
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 20, 1998, at a
total cost of $88,048,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$56,355,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $31,693,000.
(3) Tucson drainage area, arizona.--The project for flood
damage reduction, environmental restoration, and recreation,
Tucson drainage area, Arizona: Report of the Chief of
Engineers dated May 20, 1998, at a total cost of $29,900,000,
with an estimated Federal cost of $16,768,000 and an
estimated non-Federal cost of $13,132,000.
(4) American river watershed, california.--
(A) In general.--The project for flood damage reduction
described as the Folsom Stepped Release Plan in the Corps of
Engineers Supplemental Information Report for the American
River Watershed Project, California, dated March 1996, at a
total cost of $505,400,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$329,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$176,100,000.
(B) Implementation.--
(i) In general.--Implementation of the measures by the
Secretary pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be undertaken
after completion of the levee stabilization and strengthening
and flood warning features authorized by section 101(a)(1) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3662).
(ii) Folsom dam and reservoir.--The Secretary may undertake
measures at the Folsom
[[Page S3875]]
Dam and Reservoir authorized under subparagraph (A) only
after reviewing the design of such measures to determine if
modifications are necessary to account for changed hydrologic
conditions and any other changed conditions in the project
area, including operational and construction impacts that
have occurred since completion of the report referred to in
subparagraph (A). The Secretary shall conduct the review and
develop the modifications to the Folsom Dam and Reservoir
with the full participation of the Secretary of the Interior.
(iii) Remaining downstream elements.--
(I) In general.--Implementation of the remaining downstream
elements authorized pursuant to subparagraph (A) may be
undertaken only after the Secretary, in consultation with
affected Federal, State, regional, and local entities, has
reviewed the elements to determine if modifications are
necessary to address changes in the hydrologic conditions,
any other changed conditions in the project area that have
occurred since completion of the report referred to in
subparagraph (A) and any design modifications for the Folsom
Dam and Reservoir made by the Secretary in implementing the
measures referred to in clause (ii), and has issued a report
on the review.
(II) Principles and guidelines.--The review shall be
prepared in accordance with the economic and environmental
principles and guidelines for water and related land
resources implementation studies, and no construction may be
initiated unless the Secretary determines that the remaining
downstream elements are technically sound, environmentally
acceptable, and economically justified.
(5) Llagas creek, california.--The project for completion
of the remaining reaches of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service flood control project at Llagas Creek,
California, undertaken pursuant to section 5 of the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1005),
substantially in accordance with the requirements of local
cooperation as specified in section 4 of that Act (16 U.S.C.
1004) at a total cost of $45,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $21,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $23,200,000.
(6) South sacramento county streams, california.--The
project for flood control, environmental restoration, and
recreation, South Sacramento County streams, California:
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 6, 1998, at a
total cost of $65,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$41,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $24,300,000.
(7) Upper guadalupe river, california.--Construction of the
locally preferred plan for flood damage reduction and
recreation, Upper Guadalupe River, California, described as
the Bypass Channel Plan of the Chief of Engineers dated
August 19, 1998, at a total cost of $137,600,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $44,000,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $93,600,000.
(8) Yuba river basin, california.--The project for flood
damage reduction, Yuba River Basin, California: Report of the
Chief of Engineers dated November 25, 1998, at a total cost
of $26,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $17,350,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,250,000.
(9) Delaware bay coastline: delaware and new jersey-
broadkill beach, delaware.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction and shore protection, Delaware Bay coastline:
Delaware and New Jersey-Broadkill Beach, Delaware, Report of
the Chief of Engineers dated August 17, 1998, at a total cost
of $9,049,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,674,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,375,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $538,200, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $349,800 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$188,400.
(10) Delaware bay coastline: delaware and new jersey-port
mahon, delaware.--
(A) In general.--The project for ecosystem restoration and
shore protection, Delaware Bay coastline: Delaware and New
Jersey-Port Mahon, Delaware: Report of the Chief of Engineers
dated September 28, 1998, at a total cost of $7,644,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $4,969,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $2,675,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $234,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $152,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$82,000.
(11) Hillsboro and okeechobee aquifer storage and recovery
project, florida.--The project for aquifer storage and
recovery described in the Corps of Engineers Central and
Southern Florida Water Supply Study, Florida, dated April
1989, and in House Document 369, dated July 30, 1968, at a
total cost of $27,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$13,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $13,500,000.
(12) Indian river county, florida.--Notwithstanding section
1001(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33
U.S.C. 579a(a)), the project for shoreline protection, Indian
River County, Florida, authorized by section 501(a) of that
Act (100 Stat. 4134), shall remain authorized for
construction through December 31, 2002.
(13) Lido key beach, sarasota, florida.--
(A) In general.--The project for shore protection at Lido
Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida, authorized by section 101 of
the River and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1819) and
deauthorized by operation of section 1001(b) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary at a total cost
of $5,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,380,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,820,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $602,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $391,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$211,000.
(14) Tampa harbor-big bend channel, florida.--The project
for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Florida:
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 13, 1998, at a
total cost of $12,356,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$6,235,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,121,000.
(15) Brunswick harbor, georgia.--The project for
navigation, Brunswick Harbor, Georgia: Report of the Chief of
Engineers dated October 6, 1998, at a total cost of
$50,717,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $32,966,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $17,751,000.
(16) Beargrass creek, kentucky.--The project for flood
damage reduction, Beargrass Creek, Kentucky: Report of the
Chief of Engineers dated May 12, 1998, at a total cost of
$11,172,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,262,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,910,000.
(17) Amite river and tributaries, louisiana, east baton
rouge parish watershed.--The project for flood damage
reduction and recreation, Amite River and Tributaries,
Louisiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Watershed: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated December 23, 1996, at a total cost
of $112,900,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$73,400,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $39,500,000.
(18) Baltimore harbor anchorages and channels, maryland and
virginia.--The project for navigation, Baltimore Harbor
Anchorages and Channels, Maryland and Virginia: Report of the
Chief of Engineers, dated June 8, 1998, at a total cost of
$28,430,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $19,000,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,430,000.
(19) Red lake river at crookston, minnesota.--The project
for flood damage reduction, Red Lake River at Crookston,
Minnesota: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 20,
1998, at a total cost of $8,950,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $5,720,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $3,230,000.
(20) New jersey shore protection, townsends inlet to cape
may inlet, new jersey.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction, ecosystem restoration, and shore protection, New
Jersey coastline, Townsends Inlet to Cape May Inlet, New
Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated September 28,
1998, at a total cost of $56,503,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $36,727,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $19,776,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $2,000,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $1,300,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost
of $700,000.
(21) Park river, north dakota.--
(A) In general.--Subject to the condition stated in
subparagraph (B), the project for flood control, Park River,
Grafton, North Dakota, authorized by section 401(a) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4121) and
deauthorized under section 1001(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a), at a total cost of
$28,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $18,265,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,835,000.
(B) Condition.--No construction may be initiated unless the
Secretary determines through a general reevaluation report
using current data, that the project is technically sound,
environmentally acceptable, and economically justified.
(22) Salt creek, graham, texas.--The project for flood
control, environmental restoration, and recreation, Salt
Creek, Graham, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated
October 6, 1998, at a total cost of $10,080,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $6,560,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $3,520,000.
(b) Projects Subject to a Final 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 final report of
the Chief of Engineers as approved by the Secretary, if a
favorable report of the Chief is completed not later than
December 31, 1999:
(1) Nome harbor improvements, alaska.--The project for
navigation, Nome Harbor Improvements, Alaska, at a total cost
of $24,608,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of
$19,660,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of
$4,948,000.
(2) Seward harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation,
Seward Harbor, Alaska, at a total cost of $12,240,000, with
an estimated first Federal cost of $4,364,000 and an
estimated first non-Federal cost of $7,876,000.
(3) Hamilton airfield wetland restoration, california.--The
project for environmental restoration at Hamilton Airfield,
California, at a total cost of $55,200,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $41,400,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $13,800,000.
(4) Oakland, california.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation and
environmental restoration, Oakland, California, at a total
cost of $214,340,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$143,450,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$70,890,000.
(B) Berthing areas and other local service facilities.--The
non-Federal interests shall provide berthing areas and other
local service facilities necessary for the project at an
estimated cost of $42,310,000.
(5) Delaware bay coastline: delaware and new jersey-
roosevelt inlet-lewes beach, delaware.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation mitigation,
shore protection, and hurricane and
[[Page S3876]]
storm damage reduction, Delaware Bay coastline: Delaware and
New Jersey-Roosevelt Inlet-Lewes Beach, Delaware, at a total
cost of $3,393,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$2,620,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $773,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $196,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $152,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$44,000.
(6) Delaware coast from cape henelopen to fenwick island,
bethany beach/south bethany beach, delaware.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction and shore protection, Delaware Coast from Cape
Henelopen to Fenwick Island, Bethany Beach/South Bethany
Beach, Delaware, at a total cost of $22,205,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $14,433,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $7,772,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $1,584,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $1,030,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost
of $554,000.
(7) Jacksonville harbor, florida.--The project for
navigation, Jacksonville Harbor, Florida, at a total cost of
$26,116,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $9,129,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $16,987,000.
(8) Little talbot island, duval county, florida.--The
project for hurricane and storm damage prevention and shore
protection, Little Talbot Island, Duval County, Florida, at a
total cost of $5,915,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$3,839,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,076,000.
(9) Ponce de leon inlet, volusia county, florida.--The
project for navigation and recreation, Ponce de Leon Inlet,
Volusia County, Florida, at a total cost of $5,454,000, with
an estimated Federal cost of $2,988,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $2,466,000.
(10) Savannah harbor expansion, georgia.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary
may carry out the project for navigation, Savannah Harbor
expansion, Georgia, substantially in accordance with the
plans, and subject to the conditions, recommended in a final
report of the Chief of Engineers, with such modifications as
the Secretary deems appropriate, at a total cost of
$230,174,000 (of which amount a portion is authorized for
implementation of the mitigation plan), with an estimated
Federal cost of $145,160,000 and an estimated non-Federal
cost of $85,014,000.
(B) Conditions.--The project authorized by subparagraph (A)
may be carried out only after--
(i) the Secretary, in consultation with affected Federal,
State, regional, and local entities, has reviewed and
approved an Environmental Impact Statement that includes--
(I) an analysis of the impacts of project depth
alternatives ranging from 42 feet through 48 feet; and
(II) a selected plan for navigation and associated
mitigation plan as required by section 906(a) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283); and
(ii) the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
Commerce, and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, with the Secretary, have approved the
selected plan and have determined that the mitigation plan
adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of
the project.
(C) Mitigation requirements.--The mitigation plan shall be
implemented in advance of or concurrently with construction
of the project.
(11) Turkey creek basin, kansas city, missouri and kansas
city, kansas.--The project for flood damage reduction, Turkey
Creek Basin, Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas City, Kansas,
at a total cost of $42,875,000 with an estimated Federal cost
of $25,596,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$17,279,000.
(12) Delaware bay coastline, oakwood beach, new jersey.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction, Delaware Bay coastline, Oakwood Beach, New Jersey,
at a total cost of $3,380,000, with an estimated Federal cost
of $2,197,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$1,183,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $90,000, with an estimated annual Federal cost
of $58,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$32,000.
(13) Delaware bay coastline, reeds beach and pierces point,
new jersey.--The project for environmental restoration,
Delaware Bay coastline, Reeds Beach and Pierces Point, New
Jersey, at a total cost of $4,057,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $2,637,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $1,420,000.
(14) Delaware bay coastline, villas and vicinity, new
jersey.--The project for environmental restoration, Delaware
Bay coastline, Villas and vicinity, New Jersey, at a total
cost of $7,520,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$4,888,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,632,000.
(15) Lower cape may meadows, cape may point, new jersey.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation mitigation,
ecosystem restoration, shore protection, and hurricane and
storm damage reduction, Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape May
Point, New Jersey, at a total cost of $15,952,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $12,118,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $3,834,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $1,114,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $897,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$217,000.
(16) New jersey shore protection, brigantine inlet to great
egg harbor, brigantine island, new jersey.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction and shore protection, New Jersey Shore protection,
Brigantine Inlet to Great Egg Harbor, Brigantine Island, New
Jersey, at a total cost of $4,970,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $3,230,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $1,740,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $465,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $302,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of
$163,000.
(17) Columbia river channel deepening, oregon and
washington.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation, Columbia River
channel deepening, Oregon and Washington, at a total cost of
$182,423,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $106,132,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $76,291,000.
(B) Berthing areas and other local service facilities.--The
non-Federal interests shall provide berthing areas and other
local service facilities necessary for the project at an
estimated cost of $1,200,000.
(18) Memphis harbor, memphis, tennessee.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the project
for navigation, Memphis Harbor, Memphis, Tennessee,
authorized by section 601(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4145) and deauthorized
under section 1001(a) of that Act (33 U.S.C. 579a(a)) is
authorized to be carried out by the Secretary.
(B) Condition.--No construction may be initiated unless the
Secretary determines through a general reevaluation report
using current data, that the project is technically sound,
environmentally acceptable, and economically justified.
(19) Johnson creek, arlington, texas.--The project for
flood damage reduction, environmental restoration, and
recreation, Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas, at a total cost
of $20,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $12,000,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,300,000.
(20) Howard hanson dam, washington.--The project for water
supply and ecosystem restoration, Howard Hanson Dam,
Washington, at a total cost of $75,600,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $36,900,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $38,700,000.
SEC. 102. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS.
(a) Projects With Reports.--
(1) San lorenzo river, california.--The project for flood
control, San Lorenzo River, California, authorized by section
101(a)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110
Stat. 3663), is modified to authorize the Secretary to
include as a part of the project streambank erosion control
measures to be undertaken substantially in accordance with
the report entitled ``Bank Stabilization Concept, Laurel
Street Extension'', dated April 23, 1998, at a total cost of
$4,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $2,600,000 and
an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,400,000.
(2) St. johns county shore protection, florida.--
(A) In general.--The project for hurricane and storm damage
reduction and shore protection, St. Johns County, Florida,
authorized by section 501(a) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4133) is modified to
authorize the Secretary to include navigation mitigation as a
purpose of the project in accordance with the report of the
Corps of Engineers dated November 18, 1998, at a total cost
of $16,086,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $12,949,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,137,000.
(B) Periodic nourishment.--Periodic nourishment is
authorized for a 50-year period at an estimated average
annual cost of $8,137,000, with an estimated annual Federal
cost of $6,550,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost
of $1,587,000.
(3) Wood river, grand island, nebraska.--The project for
flood control, Wood River, Grand Island, Nebraska, authorized
by section 101(a)(19) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665) is modified to authorize the
Secretary to construct the project in accordance with the
Corps of Engineers report dated June 29, 1998, at a total
cost of $17,039,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$9,730,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,309,000.
(4) Absecon island, new jersey.--The project for Absecon
Island, New Jersey, authorized by section 101(b)(13) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3668) is
amended to authorize the Secretary to reimburse the non-
Federal interests for all work performed, consistent with the
authorized project.
(5) Arthur kill, new york and new jersey.--
(A) In general.--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) and
modified by section 301(b)(11) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3711), is further modified
to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a
total cost of $276,800,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$183,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of
$93,600,000.
(B) Berthing areas and other local service facilities.--The
non-Federal interests shall provide berthing areas and other
local service facilities necessary for the project at an
estimated cost of $38,900,000.
(6) Waurika lake, oklahoma, water conveyance facilities.--
The requirement for the Waurika Project Master Conservancy
District to repay the $2,900,000 in costs (including
interest) resulting from the October 1991 settlement of the
claim of the Travelers Insurance Company before the United
States Claims Court related to
[[Page S3877]]
construction of the water conveyance facilities authorized by
the first section of Public Law 88-253 (77 Stat. 841) is
waived.
(b) Projects Subject to Reports.--The following projects
are modified as follows, except that no funds may be
obligated to carry out work under such modifications until
completion of a final report by the Chief of Engineers, as
approved by the Secretary, finding that such work is
technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and
economically justified, as applicable:
(1) Thornton reservoir, cook county, illinois.--
(A) In general.--The Thornton Reservoir project, an element
of 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 authorize the Secretary to include additional
permanent flood control storage attributable to the Natural
Resources Conservation Service Thornton Reservoir (Structure
84), Little Calumet River Watershed, Illinois, approved under
the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C.
1001 et seq.).
(B) Cost sharing.--Costs for the Thornton Reservoir project
shall be shared in accordance with section 103 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213).
(C) Transitional storage.--The Secretary of Agriculture may
cooperate with non-Federal interests to provide, on a
transitional basis, flood control storage for the Natural
Resources Conservation Service Thornton Reservoir (Structure
84) project in the west lobe of the Thornton quarry.
(D) Crediting.--The Secretary may credit against the non-
Federal share of the Thornton Reservoir project all design
and construction costs incurred by the non-Federal interests
before the date of enactment of this Act.
(E) Reevaluation report.--The Secretary shall determine the
credits authorized by subparagraph (D) that are integral to
the Thornton Reservoir project and the current total project
costs based on a limited reevaluation report.
(2) Wells harbor, wells, maine.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation, Wells Harbor,
Maine, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1960 (74 Stat. 480), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to realign the channel and anchorage areas based on
a harbor design capacity of 150 craft.
(B) Deauthorization of certain portions.--The following
portions of the project are not authorized after the date of
enactment of this Act:
(i) The portion of the 6-foot channel the boundaries of
which begin at a point with coordinates N177,992.00,
E394,831.00, thence running south 83 degrees 58 minutes 14.8
seconds west 10.38 feet to a point N177,990.91, E394,820.68,
thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 47.7 seconds west
991.76 feet to a point N177,020.04, E394,618.21, thence
running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 10.00
feet to a point N177,018.00, E394,628.00, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 22.8 seconds east 994.93 feet to
the point of origin.
(ii) The portion of the 6-foot anchorage the boundaries of
which begin at a point with coordinates N177,778.07,
E394,336.96, thence running south 51 degrees 58 minutes 32.7
seconds west 15.49 feet to a point N177,768.53, E394,324.76,
thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 26.5 seconds west
672.87 feet to a point N177,109.82, E394,187.46, thence
running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 10.00
feet to a point N177,107.78, E394,197.25, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 25.4 seconds east 684.70 feet to
the point of origin.
(iii) The portion of the 10-foot settling basin the
boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates
N177,107.78, E394,197.25, thence running north 78 degrees 13
minutes 45.7 seconds west 10.00 feet to a point N177,109.82,
E394,187.46, thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 15.7
seconds west 300.00 feet to a point N176,816.13, E394,126.26,
thence running south 78 degrees 12 minutes 21.4 seconds east
9.98 feet to a point N176,814.09, E394,136.03, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 29.1 seconds east 300.00 feet to
the point of origin.
(iv) The portion of the 10-foot settling basin the
boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates
N177,018.00, E394,628.00, thence running north 78 degrees 13
minutes 45.7 seconds west 10.00 feet to a point N177,020.04,
E394,618.21, thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 44.0
seconds west 300.00 feet to a point N176,726.36, E394,556.97,
thence running south 78 degrees 12 minutes 30.3 seconds east
10.03 feet to a point N176,724.31, E394,566.79, thence
running north 11 degrees 46 minutes 22.4 seconds east 300.00
feet to the point of origin.
(C) Redesignations.--The following portions of the project
shall be redesignated as part of the 6-foot anchorage:
(i) The portion of the 6-foot channel the boundaries of
which begin at a point with coordinates N177,990.91,
E394,820.68, thence running south 83 degrees 58 minutes 40.8
seconds west 94.65 feet to a point N177,980.98, E394,726.55,
thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 22.4 seconds west
962.83 feet to a point N177,038.40, E394,530.10, thence
running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 90.00
feet to a point N177,020.04, E394,618.21, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 47.7 seconds east 991.76 feet
to the point of origin.
(ii) The portion of the 10-foot inner harbor settling basin
the boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates
N177,020.04, E394,618.21, thence running north 78 degrees 13
minutes 30.5 seconds west 160.00 feet to a point N177,052.69,
E394,461.58, thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 45.4
seconds west 299.99 feet to a point N176,759.02, E394,400.34,
thence running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds east
160 feet to a point N176,726.36, E394,556.97, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 44.0 seconds east 300.00 feet to
the point of origin.
(iii) The portion of the 6-foot anchorage the boundaries of
which begin at a point with coordinates N178,102.26,
E394,751.83, thence running south 51 degrees 59 minutes 42.1
seconds west 526.51 feet to a point N177,778.07, E394,336.96,
thence running south 11 degrees 46 minutes 26.6 seconds west
511.83 feet to a point N177,277.01, E394,232.52, thence
running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds east 80.00
feet to a point N177,260.68, E394,310.84, thence running
north 11 degrees 46 minutes 24.8 seconds east 482.54 feet to
a point N177,733.07, E394,409.30, thence running north 51
degrees 59 minutes 41.0 seconds east 402.63 feet to a point
N177,980.98, E394,726.55, thence running north 11 degrees 46
minutes 27.6 seconds east 123.89 feet to the point of origin.
(D) Realignment.--The 6-foot anchorage area described in
subparagraph (C)(iii) shall be realigned to include the area
located south of the inner harbor settling basin in existence
on the date of enactment of this Act beginning at a point
with coordinates N176,726.36, E394,556.97, thence running
north 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds west 160.00 feet to
a point N176,759.02, E394,400.34, thence running south 11
degrees 47 minutes 03.8 seconds west 45 feet to a point
N176,714.97, E394,391.15, thence running south 78 degrees 13
minutes 17.9 seconds 160.00 feet to a point N176,682.31,
E394,547.78, thence running north 11 degrees 47 minutes 03.8
seconds east 45 feet to the point of origin.
(E) Relocation.--The Secretary may relocate the settling
basin feature of the project to the outer harbor between the
jetties.
(3) New york harbor and adjacent channels, port jersey, new
jersey.--
(A) In general.--The project for navigation, New York
Harbor and adjacent channels, Port Jersey, New Jersey,
authorized by section 201(b) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4091), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total
cost of $102,545,000, with an estimated Federal cost of
$76,909,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,636,000.
(B) Berthing areas and other local facilities.--The non-
Federal interests shall provide berthing areas and other
local service facilities necessary for the project at an
estimated cost of $722,000.
(c) Beaver Lake, Arkansas, Water Supply Storage
Reallocation.--The Secretary shall reallocate approximately
31,000 additional acre-feet at Beaver Lake, Arkansas, to
water supply storage at no cost to the Beaver Water District
or the Carroll-Boone Water District, except that at no time
shall the bottom of the conservation pool be at an elevation
that is less than 1,076 feet, NGVD.
(d) Tolchester Channel S-Turn, Baltimore, 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 to straighten the Tolchester Channel S-turn as part
of project maintenance.
(e) Tropicana Wash and Flamingo Wash, Nevada.--Any Federal
costs associated with the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes,
Nevada, authorized by section 101(13) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4803), incurred by the
non-Federal interest to accelerate or modify construction of
the project, in cooperation with the Corps of Engineers,
shall be considered to be eligible for reimbursement by the
Secretary.
(f) Rediversion Project, Cooper River, Charleston Harbor,
South Carolina.--
(1) In general.--The rediversion project, Cooper River,
Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, authorized by section 101
of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731) and
modified by title I of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act, 1992 (105 Stat. 517), is modified to
authorize the Secretary to pay the State of South Carolina
not more than $3,750,000, if the State enters into an
agreement with the Secretary providing that the State
shall perform all future operation of the St. Stephen,
South Carolina, fish lift (including associated studies to
assess the efficacy of the fish lift).
(2) Contents.--The agreement shall specify the terms and
conditions under which payment will be made and the rights
of, and remedies available to, the Secretary to recover all
or a portion of the payment if the State suspends or
terminates operation of the fish lift or fails to perform the
operation in a manner satisfactory to the Secretary.
(3) Maintenance.--Maintenance of the fish lift shall remain
a Federal responsibility.
(g) Trinity River and Tributaries, Texas.--The project for
flood control and navigation, Trinity River and tributaries,
Texas, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act
of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091), is modified to add environmental
restoration as a project purpose.
(h) Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection,
Virginia Beach, Virginia.--
(1) Acceptance of funds.--In any fiscal year that the Corps
of Engineers does not receive appropriations sufficient to
meet expected project expenditures for that year, the
Secretary shall accept from the city of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, for purposes 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), such funds as the
city may advance for the project.
(2) Repayment.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations, the Secretary shall repay, without interest,
the amount of any advance made under paragraph (1), from
appropriations that may be provided by Congress for river and
harbor, flood control, shore protection, and related
projects.
(i) Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of
[[Page S3878]]
law, after the date of enactment of this Act, the city of
Chesapeake, Virginia, shall not be obligated to make the
annual cash contribution required under paragraph 1(9) of the
Local Cooperation Agreement dated December 12, 1978, between
the Government and the city for the project for navigation,
southern branch of Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia.
(j) Payment Option, Moorefield, West Virginia.--The
Secretary may permit the non-Federal interests for the
project for flood control, Moorefield, West Virginia, to pay
without interest the remaining non-Federal cost over a period
not to exceed 30 years, to be determined by the Secretary.
(k) Miami Dade Agricultural and Rural Land Retention Plan
and South Biscayne, Florida.--Section 528(b)(3) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3768) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Credit and reimbursement of past and future
activities.--The Secretary may afford credit to or reimburse
the non-Federal sponsors (using funds authorized by
subparagraph (C)) for the reasonable costs of any work that
has been performed or will be performed in connection with a
study or activity meeting the requirements of subparagraph
(A) if--
``(i) the Secretary determines that--
``(I) the work performed by the non-Federal sponsors will
substantially expedite completion of a critical restoration
project; and
``(II) the work is necessary for a critical restoration
project; and
``(ii) the credit or reimbursement is granted pursuant to a
project-specific agreement that prescribes the terms and
conditions of the credit or reimbursement.''.
(l) Lake Michigan, Illinois.--
(1) In general.--The project for storm damage reduction and
shoreline protection, Lake Michigan, Illinois, from Wilmette,
Illinois, to the Illinois-Indiana State line, authorized by
section 101(a)(12) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3664), is modified to provide for
reimbursement for additional project work undertaken by the
non-Federal interest.
(2) Credit or reimbursement.--The Secretary shall credit or
reimburse the non-Federal interest for the Federal share of
project costs incurred by the non-Federal interest in
designing, constructing, or reconstructing reach 2F (700 feet
south of Fullerton Avenue and 500 feet north of Fullerton
Avenue), reach 3M (Meigs Field), and segments 7 and 8 of
reach 4 (43rd Street to 57th Street), if the non-Federal
interest carries out the work in accordance with plans
approved by the Secretary, at an estimated total cost of
$83,300,000.
(3) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
Federal interest for the Federal share of project costs
incurred by the non-Federal interest in reconstructing the
revetment structures protecting Solidarity Drive in Chicago,
Illinois, before the signing of the project cooperation
agreement, at an estimated total cost of $7,600,000.
(m) Measurements of Lake Michigan Diversions, Illinois.--
Section 1142(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4253) is amended by striking ``$250,000 per
fiscal year for each fiscal year beginning after September
30, 1986'' and inserting ``a total of $1,250,000 for each of
fiscal years 1999 through 2003''.
(n) Project for Navigation, Dubuque, Iowa.--The project for
navigation at Dubuque, Iowa, authorized by section 101 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 482), is modified to
authorize the development of a wetland demonstration area of
approximately 1.5 acres to be developed and operated by the
Dubuque County Historical Society or a successor nonprofit
organization.
(o) Louisiana State Penitentiary Levee.--The Secretary may
credit against the non-Federal share work performed in the
project area of the Louisiana State Penitentiary Levee,
Mississippi River, Louisiana, authorized by section 401(a) of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4117).
(p) Jackson County, Mississippi.--The project for
environmental infrastructure, Jackson County, Mississippi,
authorized by section 219(c)(5) of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835) and modified by
section 504 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(110 Stat. 3757), is modified to direct the Secretary to
provide a credit, not to exceed $5,000,000, against the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project for the costs
incurred by the Jackson County Board of Supervisors since
February 8, 1994, in constructing the project, if the
Secretary determines that such costs are for work that the
Secretary determines was compatible with and integral to the
project.
(q) Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South Carolina.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
paragraph, the Secretary shall convey to the State of South
Carolina all right, title, and interest of the United States
in the parcels of land described in subparagraph (B) that are
currently being managed by the South Carolina Department of
Natural Resources for fish and wildlife mitigation purposes
for the Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South Carolina,
project authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1966 and
modified by the Water Resources Development Act of 1986.
(2) Land description.--
(A) In general.--The parcels of land to be conveyed are
described in Exhibits A, F, and H of Army Lease No. DACW21-1-
93-0910 and associated supplemental agreements or are
designated in red in Exhibit A of Army License No. DACW21-3-
85-1904, excluding all designated parcels in the license that
are below elevation 346 feet mean sea level or that are less
than 300 feet measured horizontally from the top of the power
pool.
(B) Management of excluded parcels.--Management of the
excluded parcels shall continue in accordance with the terms
of Army License No. DACW21-3-85-1904 until the Secretary and
the State enter into an agreement under subparagraph (F).
(C) Survey.--The exact acreage and legal description of the
land shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the
Secretary, with the cost of the survey borne by the State.
(3) Costs of conveyance.--The State shall be responsible
for all costs, including real estate transaction and
environmental compliance costs, associated with the
conveyance.
(4) Perpetual status.--
(A) In general.--All land conveyed under this paragraph
shall be retained in public ownership and shall be managed in
perpetuity for fish and wildlife mitigation purposes in
accordance with a plan approved by the Secretary.
(B) Reversion.--If any parcel of land is not managed for
fish and wildlife mitigation purposes in accordance with the
plan, title to the parcel shall revert to the United States.
(5) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance as the Secretary considers appropriate to
protect the interests of the United States.
(6) Fish and wildlife mitigation agreement.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may pay the State of South
Carolina not more than $4,850,000 subject to the Secretary
and the State entering into a binding agreement for the State
to manage for fish and wildlife mitigation purposes in
perpetuity the lands conveyed under this paragraph and
excluded parcels designated in Exhibit A of Army License No.
DACW21-3-85-1904.
(B) Failure of performance.--The agreement shall specify
the terms and conditions under which payment will be made and
the rights of, and remedies available to, the Federal
Government to recover all or a portion of the payment if the
State fails to manage any parcel in a manner satisfactory to
the Secretary.
(r) Land Conveyance, Clarkston, Washington.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the Port of
Clarkston, Washington, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to a portion of the land described in
the Department of the Army lease No. DACW68-1-97-22,
consisting of approximately 31 acres, the exact boundaries of
which shall be determined by the Secretary and the Port of
Clarkston.
(2) Additional land.--The Secretary may convey to the Port
of Clarkston, Washington, such additional land located in the
vicinity of Clarkston, Washington, as the Secretary
determines to be excess to the needs of the Columbia River
Project and appropriate for conveyance.
(3) Terms and conditions.--The conveyances made under
paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be subject to such terms and
conditions as the Secretary determines to be necessary to
protect the interests of the United States, including a
requirement that the Port of Clarkston pay all administrative
costs associated with the conveyances, including the cost of
land surveys and appraisals and costs associated with
compliance with applicable environmental laws (including
regulations).
(4) Use of land.--The Port of Clarkston shall be required
to pay the fair market value, as determined by the Secretary,
of any land conveyed pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) that
is not retained in public ownership and used for public park
or recreation purposes, except that the Secretary shall have
a right of reverter to reclaim possession and title to any
such land.
(s) White River, Indiana.--The project for flood control,
Indianapolis on West Fork of the White River, Indiana,
authorized by section 5 of the Act entitled ``An Act
authorizing the construction of certain public works on
rivers and harbors for flood control, and other purposes'',
approved June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1586, chapter 688), as
modified by section 323 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3716), is modified to authorize the
Secretary to undertake the riverfront alterations described
in the Central Indianapolis Waterfront Concept Plan, dated
February 1994, for the Canal Development (Upper Canal
feature) and the Beveridge Paper feature, at a total cost not
to exceed $25,000,000, of which $12,500,000 is the estimated
Federal cost and $12,500,000 is the estimated non-Federal
cost, except that no such alterations may be undertaken
unless the Secretary determines that the alterations
authorized by this subsection, in combination with the
alterations undertaken under section 323 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3716), are
economically justified.
(t) Fox Point Hurricane Barrier, Providence, Rhode
Island.--The project for hurricane-flood protection, Fox
Point, Providence, Rhode Island, authorized by section 203 of
the Flood Control Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 306) is modified to
direct the Secretary to undertake the necessary repairs to
the barrier, as identified in the Condition Survey and
Technical Assessment dated April 1998 with Supplement dated
August 1998, at a total cost of $3,000,000, with an estimated
Federal cost of $1,950,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost
of $1,050,000.
SEC. 103. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.
(a) Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut.--The portion of the
project for navigation, Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut,
authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958
(72 Stat. 297), consisting of a 2.4-acre anchorage area 9
feet deep and an adjacent 0.60-acre anchorage area 6 feet
deep, located on the west side of Johnsons River,
Connecticut, is not authorized after the date of enactment of
this Act.
(b) Bass Harbor, Maine.--
(1) Deauthorization.--The portions of the project for
navigation, Bass Harbor, Maine, authorized on May 7, 1962,
under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33
U.S.C. 577) described in paragraph (2) are not authorized
after the date of enactment of this Act.
[[Page S3879]]
(2) Description.--The portions of the project referred to
in paragraph (1) are described as follows:
(A) Beginning at a bend in the project, N149040.00,
E538505.00, thence running easterly about 50.00 feet along
the northern limit of the project to a point, N149061.55,
E538550.11, thence running southerly about 642.08 feet to a
point, N148477.64, E538817.18, thence running southwesterly
about 156.27 feet to a point on the westerly limit of the
project, N148348.50, E538737.02, thence running northerly
about 149.00 feet along the westerly limit of the project to
a bend in the project, N148489.22, E538768.09, thence running
northwesterly about 610.39 feet along the westerly limit of
the project to the point of origin.
(B) Beginning at a point on the westerly limit of the
project, N148118.55, E538689.05, thence running southeasterly
about 91.92 feet to a point, N148041.43, E538739.07, thence
running southerly about 65.00 feet to a point, N147977.86,
E538725.51, thence running southwesterly about 91.92 feet to
a point on the westerly limit of the project, N147927.84,
E538648.39, thence running northerly about 195.00 feet along
the westerly limit of the project to the point of origin.
(c) Boothbay Harbor, Maine.--The project for navigation,
Boothbay Harbor, Maine, authorized by the Act of July 25,
1912 (37 Stat. 201, chapter 253), is not authorized after the
date of enactment of this Act.
(d) East Boothbay Harbor, Maine.--Section 364 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3731) is amended
by striking paragraph (9) and inserting the following:
``(9) East boothbay harbor, maine.--The project for
navigation, East Boothbay Harbor, Maine, 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 June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 657).''.
SEC. 104. STUDIES.
(a) Caddo Levee, Red River Below Denison Dam, Arizona,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas.--The Secretary shall conduct
a study to determine the feasibility of undertaking a project
for flood control, Caddo Levee, Red River Below Denison Dam,
Arizona, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas, including
incorporating the existing levee, along Twelve Mile Bayou
from its juncture with the existing Red River Below Denison
Dam Levee approximately 26 miles upstream to its terminus at
high ground in the vicinity of Black Bayou, Louisiana.
(b) Fields Landing Channel, Humboldt Harbor, California.--
The Secretary--
(1) shall conduct a study for the project for navigation,
Fields Landing Channel, Humboldt Harbor and Bay, California,
to a depth of minus 35 feet (MLLW), and for that purpose may
use any feasibility report prepared by the non-Federal
sponsor under section 203 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231) for which reimbursement of the
Federal share of the study is authorized subject to the
availability of appropriations; and
(2) may carry out the project under section 107 of the
River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), if the
Secretary determines that the project is feasible.
(c) Strawberry Creek, Berkeley, California.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
restoring Strawberry Creek, Berkeley, California, and the
Federal interest in environmental restoration, conservation
of fish and wildlife resources, recreation, and water
quality.
(d) West Side Storm Water Retention Facility, City of
Lancaster, California.--The Secretary shall conduct a study
to determine the feasibility of undertaking measures to
construct the West Side Storm Water Retention Facility in the
city of Lancaster, California.
(e) Apalachicola River, Florida.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study for the purpose of identifying--
(1) alternatives for the management of material dredged in
connection with operation and maintenance of the Apalachicola
River Navigation Project; and
(2) alternatives that reduce the requirements for such
dredging.
(f) Broward County, Sand Bypassing at Port Everglades,
Florida.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine
the feasibility of constructing a sand bypassing project at
the Port Everglades Inlet, Florida.
(g) City of Destin-Noriega Point Breakwater, Florida.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of--
(1) restoring Noriega Point, Florida, to serve as a
breakwater for Destin Harbor; and
(2) including Noriega Point as part of the East Pass,
Florida, navigation project.
(h) Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, Florida.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of undertaking measures to reduce
the flooding problems in the vicinity of Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Area, Florida.
(2) Studies and reports.--The study shall include a review
and consideration of studies and reports completed by the
non-Federal interests.
(i) City of Plant City, Florida.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of a flood control project in the
city of Plant City, Florida.
(2) Studies and reports.--In conducting the study, the
Secretary shall review and consider studies and reports
completed by the non-Federal interests.
(j) Goose Creek Watershed, Oakley, Idaho.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
undertaking flood damage reduction, water conservation,
ground water recharge, ecosystem restoration, and related
purposes along the Goose Creek watershed near Oakley, Idaho.
(k) Little Wood River, Gooding, Idaho.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of restoring and
repairing the Lava Rock Little Wood River Containment System
to prevent flooding in the city of Gooding, Idaho.
(l) Snake River and Payette River, Idaho.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of a flood
control project along the Snake River and Payette River, in
the vicinity of Payette, Idaho.
(m) Acadiana Navigation Channel, Louisiana.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
assuming operations and maintenance for the Acadiana
Navigation Channel located in Iberia and Vermillion Parishes,
Louisiana.
(n) Cameron Parish West of Calcasieu River, Louisiana.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of a storm damage reduction and ecosystem restoration project
for Cameron Parish west of Calcasieu River, Louisiana.
(o) Beneficial Use of Dredged Material, Coastal
Louisiana.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine
the feasibility of using dredged material from maintenance
activities at Federal navigation projects in coastal
Louisiana to benefit coastal areas in the State.
(p) Contraband Bayou Navigation Channel, Louisiana.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of assuming the maintenance at Contraband Bayou, Calcasieu
River Ship Canal, Louisiana.
(q) Golden Meadow Lock, Louisiana.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of converting
the Golden Meadow floodgate into a navigation lock to be
included in the Larose to Golden Meadow Hurricane Protection
Project, Louisiana.
(r) Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Ecosystem Protection, Chef
Menteur to Sabine River, Louisiana.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of undertaking ecosystem
restoration and protection measures along the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway from Chef Menteur to Sabine River,
Louisiana.
(2) Matters to be addressed.--The study shall address
saltwater intrusion, tidal scour, erosion, and other water
resources related problems in that area.
(s) Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, and Vicinity, St.
Charles Parish Pumps.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of modifying the Lake Pontchartrain
Hurricane Protection Project to include the St. Charles
Parish Pumps and the modification of the seawall fronting
protection along Lake Pontchartrain in Orleans Parish, from
New Basin Canal on the west to the Inner Harbor Navigation
Canal on the east.
(t) Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Seawall Restoration,
Louisiana.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine
the feasibility of undertaking structural modifications of
that portion of the seawall fronting protection along the
south shore of Lake Pontchartrain in Orleans Parish,
Louisiana, extending approximately 5 miles from the new basin
Canal on the west to the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal on the
east as a part of the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity
Hurricane Protection Project, authorized by section 204 of
the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077).
(u) Detroit River, Michigan, Greenway Corridor Study.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of a project for shoreline
protection, frontal erosion, and associated purposes in the
Detroit River shoreline area from the Belle Isle Bridge to
the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, Michigan.
(2) Potential modifications.--As a part of the study, the
Secretary shall review potential project modifications to any
existing Corps projects within the same area.
(v) St. Clair Shores Flood Control, Michigan.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of constructing a flood control project at St. Clair Shores,
Michigan.
(w) Woodtick Peninsula, Michigan, and Toledo Harbor,
Ohio.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of utilizing dredged material from Toledo Harbor,
Ohio, to provide erosion reduction, navigation, and ecosystem
restoration at Woodtick Peninsula, Michigan.
(x) Tunica Lake Weir, Mississippi.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of constructing an outlet weir at
Tunica Lake, Tunica County, Mississippi, and Lee County,
Arkansas, for the purpose of stabilizing water levels in the
Lake.
(2) Economic analysis.--In carrying out the study, the
Secretary shall include as a part of the economic analysis
the benefits derived from recreation uses at the Lake and
economic benefits associated with restoration of fish and
wildlife habitat.
(y) Protective Facilities for the St. Louis, Missouri,
Riverfront Area.--
(1) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the optimal plan to protect facilities that are
located on the Mississippi River riverfront within the
boundaries of St. Louis, Missouri.
(2) Requirements.--In conducting the study, the Secretary
shall--
(A) evaluate alternatives to offer safety and security to
facilities; and
(B) use state-of-the-art techniques to best evaluate the
current situation, probable solutions, and estimated costs.
(3) Report.--Not later than April 15, 1999, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the
study.
(z) Yellowstone River, Montana.--
(1) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive
study of the Yellowstone River from Gardiner, Montana to the
confluence of the Missouri River to determine the hydrologic,
[[Page S3880]]
biological, and socioeconomic cumulative impacts on the
river.
(2) Consultation and coordination.--The Secretary shall
conduct the study in consultation with the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service, the United States Geological Survey,
and the Natural Resources Conservation Service and with the
full participation of the State of Montana and tribal and
local entities, and provide for public participation.
(3) Report.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report to
Congress on the results of the study.
(aa) Las Vegas Valley, Nevada.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a
comprehensive study of water resources located in the Las
Vegas Valley, Nevada.
(2) Objectives.--The study shall identify problems and
opportunities related to ecosystem restoration, water
quality, particularly the quality of surface runoff, water
supply, and flood control.
(bb) Oswego River Basin, New York.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of establishing
a flood forecasting system within the Oswego River basin, New
York.
(cc) Port of New York-New Jersey Navigation Study and
Environmental Restoration Study.--
(1) 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.
(2) Environmental restoration study.--The Secretary, acting
through the Chief of Engineers, shall review the report of
the Chief of Engineers on the New York Harbor, printed in the
House Management Plan of the Harbor Estuary Program, and
other pertinent reports concerning the New York Harbor Region
and the Port of New York-New Jersey, to determine the Federal
interest in advancing harbor environmental restoration.
(3) Report.--The Secretary may use funds from the ongoing
navigation study for New York and New Jersey Harbor to
complete a reconnaissance report for environmental
restoration by December 31, 1999. The navigation study to
deepen New York and New Jersey Harbor shall consider
beneficial use of dredged material.
(dd) Bank Stabilization, Missouri River, North Dakota.--
(1) Study.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of bank stabilization on the
Missouri River between the Garrison Dam and Lake Oahe in
North Dakota.
(B) Elements.--In conducting the study, the Secretary shall
study--
(i) options for stabilizing the erosion sites on the banks
of the Missouri River between the Garrison Dam and Lake Oahe
identified in the report developed by the North Dakota State
Water Commission, dated December 1997, including
stabilization through nontraditional measures;
(ii) the cumulative impact of bank stabilization measures
between the Garrison Dam and Lake Oahe on fish and wildlife
habitat and the potential impact of additional stabilization
measures, including the impact of nontraditional
stabilization measures;
(iii) the current and future effects, including economic
and fish and wildlife habitat effects, that bank erosion is
having on creating the delta at the beginning of Lake Oahe;
and
(iv) the impact of taking no additional measures to
stabilize the banks of the Missouri River between the
Garrison Dam and Lake Oahe.
(C) Interested parties.--In conducting the study, the
Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, seek the
participation and views of interested Federal, State, and
local agencies, landowners, conservation organizations, and
other persons.
(D) Report.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary shall report to Congress on
the results of the study not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act.
(ii) Status.--If the Secretary cannot complete the study
and report to Congress by the day that is 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, by that
day, report to Congress on the status of the study and
report, including an estimate of the date of completion.
(2) Effect on existing projects.--This subsection does not
preclude the Secretary from establishing or carrying out a
stabilization project that is authorized by law.
(ee) Cleveland Harbor, Cleveland, Ohio.--The Secretary
shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of
undertaking repairs and related navigation improvements at
Dike 14, Cleveland, Ohio.
(ff) East Lake, Vermillion and Chagrin, Ohio.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of undertaking flood damage
reduction at East Lake, Vermillion and Chagrin, Ohio.
(2) Ice retention structure.--In conducting the study, the
Secretary may consider construction of an ice retention
structure as a potential means of providing flood damage
reduction.
(gg) Toussaint River, Carroll Township, Ohio.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of undertaking navigation improvements at Toussaint River,
Carroll Township, Ohio.
(hh) Santee Delta Wetland Habitat, South Carolina.--Not
later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary shall complete a comprehensive study of the
ecosystem in the Santee Delta focus area of South Carolina to
determine the feasibility of undertaking measures to enhance
the wetland habitat in the area.
(ii) Waccamaw River, South Carolina.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of a flood
control project for the Waccamaw River in Horry County, South
Carolina.
(jj) Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna, Pennsylvania, Watershed
Management and Restoration Study.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of a comprehensive flood plain
management and watershed restoration project for the Upper
Susquehanna-Lackawanna Watershed, Pennsylvania.
(2) Geographic information system.--In conducting the
study, the Secretary shall use a geographic information
system.
(3) Plans.--The study shall formulate plans for
comprehensive flood plain management and environmental
restoration.
(4) Crediting.--Non-Federal interests may receive credit
for in-kind services and materials that contribute to the
study. The Secretary may credit non-Corps Federal assistance
provided to the non-Federal interest toward the non-Federal
share of study costs to the maximum extent authorized by law.
(kk) Niobrara River and Missouri River Sedimentation Study,
South Dakota.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the
Niobrara River watershed and the operations of Fort Randall
Dam and Gavins Point Dam on the Missouri River to determine
the feasibility of alleviating the bank erosion,
sedimentation, and related problems in the lower Niobrara
River and the Missouri River below Fort Randall Dam.
(ll) Santa Clara River, Utah.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to
determine the feasibility of undertaking measures to
alleviate damage caused by flooding, bank erosion, and
sedimentation along the watershed of the Santa Clara River,
Utah, above the Gunlock Reservoir.
(2) Contents.--The study shall include an analysis of
watershed conditions and water quality, as related to
flooding and bank erosion, along the Santa Clara River in the
vicinity of the town of Gunlock, Utah.
(mm) Agat Small Boat Harbor, Guam.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of undertaking
the repair and reconstruction of Agat Small Boat Harbor,
Guam, including the repair of existing shore protection
measures and construction or a revetment of the breakwater
seawall.
(nn) Apra Harbor Seawall, Guam.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of undertaking
measures to repair, upgrade, and extend the seawall
protecting Apra Harbor, Guam, and to ensure continued access
to the harbor via Route 11B.
(oo) Apra Harbor Fuel Piers, Guam.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of undertaking
measures to upgrade the piers and fuel transmission lines at
the fuel piers in the Apra Harbor, Guam, and measures to
provide for erosion control and protection against storm
damage.
(pp) Maintenance Dredging of Harbor Piers, Guam.--The
Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility
of Federal maintenance of areas adjacent to piers at harbors
in Guam, including Apra Harbor, Agat Harbor, and Agana
Marina.
(qq) Alternative Water Sources Study.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall conduct a study of the water supply
needs of States that are not currently eligible for
assistance under title XVI of the Reclamation Projects
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C. 390h et
seq.).
(2) Requirements.--The study shall--
(A) identify the water supply needs (including potable,
commercial, industrial, recreational and agricultural needs)
of each State described in paragraph (1) through 2020, making
use of such State, regional, and local plans, studies, and
reports as are available;
(B) evaluate the feasibility of various alternative water
source technologies such as reuse and reclamation of
wastewater and stormwater (including indirect potable reuse),
aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination to meet
the anticipated water supply needs of the States; and
(C) assess how alternative water sources technologies can
be utilized to meet the identified needs.
(3) Report.--The Administrator shall report to Congress on
the results of the study not more than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this Act.
TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. FLOOD HAZARD MITIGATION AND RIVERINE ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--
(1) Authorization.--The Secretary may carry out a program
to reduce flood hazards and restore the natural functions and
values of riverine ecosystems throughout the United States.
(2) Studies.--In carrying out the program, the Secretary
shall conduct studies to identify appropriate flood damage
reduction, conservation, and restoration measures and may
design and implement watershed management and restoration
projects.
(3) Participation.--The studies and projects carried out
under the program shall be conducted, to the extent
practicable, with the full participation of the appropriate
Federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture,
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Department of
the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the
Department of Commerce.
[[Page S3881]]
(4) Nonstructural approaches.--The studies and projects
shall, to the extent practicable, emphasize nonstructural
approaches to preventing or reducing flood damages.
(b) Cost-Sharing Requirements.--
(1) Studies.--The cost of studies conducted under
subsection (a) shall be shared in accordance with section 105
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 Stat.
2215).
(2) Projects.--The non-Federal interests shall pay 35
percent of the cost of any project carried out under this
section.
(3) In-kind contributions.--The non-Federal interests shall
provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged material
disposal areas, and relocations necessary for the projects.
The value of the land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged
material disposal areas, and relocations shall be credited
toward the payment required under this subsection.
(4) Responsibilities of the non-federal interests.--The
non-Federal interests shall be responsible for all costs
associated with operating, maintaining, replacing, repairing,
and rehabilitating all projects carried out under this
section.
(c) Project Justification.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may implement a project
under this section if the Secretary determines that the
project--
(A) will significantly reduce potential flood damages;
(B) will improve the quality of the environment; and
(C) is justified considering all costs and beneficial
outputs of the project.
(2) Selection criteria; policies and procedures.--Not later
than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall--
(A) develop criteria for selecting and rating the projects
to be carried out as part of the program authorized by this
section; and
(B) establish policies and procedures for carrying out the
studies and projects undertaken under this section.
(d) Reporting Requirement.--The Secretary may not implement
a project under this section until--
(1) the Secretary provides to the Committee on Environment
and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a written notification describing the project
and the determinations made under subsection (c); and
(2) a period of 21 calendar days has expired following the
date on which the notification was received by the
Committees.
(e) Priority Areas.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary shall examine the potential for flood damage
reductions at appropriate locations, including--
(1) Le May, Missouri;
(2) the upper Delaware River basin, New York;
(3) Mill Creek, Cincinnati, Ohio;
(4) Tillamook County, Oregon;
(5) Willamette River basin, Oregon; and
(6) Providence County, Rhode Island.
(f) Per-Project Limitation.--Not more than $25,000,000 in
Army Civil Works appropriations may be expended on any single
project undertaken under this section.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this section $75,000,000 for the period of fiscal
years 2000 and 2001.
(2) Program funding levels.--All studies and projects
undertaken under this authority from Army Civil Works
appropriations shall be fully funded within the program
funding levels provided in this subsection.
SEC. 202. SHORE PROTECTION.
Section 103(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(d)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Costs of constructing'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) Construction.--Costs of constructing''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Periodic nourishment.--In the case of a project
authorized for construction after December 31, 1999, or for
which a feasibility study is completed after that date, the
non-Federal cost of the periodic nourishment of projects or
measures for shore protection or beach erosion control shall
be 50 percent, except that--
``(A) all costs assigned to benefits to privately owned
shores (where use of such shores is limited to private
interests) or to prevention of losses of private land shall
be borne by non-Federal interests; and
``(B) all costs assigned to the protection of federally
owned shores shall be borne by the United States.''.
SEC. 203. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL AUTHORITY.
Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C.
701s) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``construction of
small projects'' and inserting ``implementation of small
structural and nonstructural projects''; and
(2) in the third sentence, by striking ``$5,000,000'' and
inserting ``$7,000,000''.
SEC. 204. USE OF NON-FEDERAL FUNDS FOR COMPILING AND
DISSEMINATING INFORMATION ON FLOODS AND FLOOD
DAMAGES.
Section 206(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C.
709a(b)) is amended in the third sentence by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``, but the Secretary of
the Army may accept funds voluntarily contributed by such
entities for the purpose of expanding the scope of the
services requested by the entities''.
SEC. 205. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
Section 206(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Construction'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--Construction''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Nonprofit entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), for any
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal
interest may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of
the affected local government.''.
SEC. 206. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.
Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(33 U.S.C. 2326) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(g) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of
the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), for any
project carried out under this section, a non-Federal
interest may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of
the affected local government.''.
SEC. 207. VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS BY STATES AND POLITICAL
SUBDIVISIONS.
Section 5 of the Act of June 22, 1936 (33 U.S.C. 701h), is
amended by inserting ``or environmental restoration'' after
``flood control''.
SEC. 208. RECREATION USER FEES.
(a) Withholding of Amounts.--
(1) In general.--During fiscal years 1999 through 2002, the
Secretary may withhold from the special account established
under section 4(i)(1)(A) of the Land and Water Conservation
Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(i)(1)(A)) 100 percent of
the amount of receipts above a baseline of $34,000,000 per
each fiscal year received from fees imposed at recreation
sites under the administrative jurisdiction of the Department
of the Army under section 4(b) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-
6a(b)).
(2) Use.--The amounts withheld shall be retained by the
Secretary and shall be available, without further Act of
appropriation, for expenditure by the Secretary in accordance
with subsection (b).
(3) Availability.--The amounts withheld shall remain
available until September 30, 2005.
(b) Use of Amounts Withheld.--In order to increase the
quality of the visitor experience at public recreational
areas and to enhance the protection of resources, the amounts
withheld under subsection (a) may be used only for--
(1) repair and maintenance projects (including projects
relating to health and safety);
(2) interpretation;
(3) signage;
(4) habitat or facility enhancement;
(5) resource preservation;
(6) annual operation (including fee collection);
(7) maintenance; and
(8) law enforcement related to public use.
(c) Availability.--Each amount withheld by the Secretary
shall be available for expenditure, without further Act of
appropriation, at the specific project from which the amount,
above baseline, is collected.
SEC. 209. WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT STUDIES FOR THE PACIFIC
REGION.
Section 444 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(110 Stat. 3747) is amended by striking ``interest of
navigation'' and inserting ``interests of water resources
development (including navigation, flood damage reduction,
and environmental restoration)''.
SEC. 210. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT
PROJECT.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Middle mississippi river.--The term ``middle
Mississippi River'' means the reach of the Mississippi River
from the mouth of the Ohio River (river mile 0, upper
Mississippi River) to the mouth of the Missouri River (river
mile 195).
(2) Missouri river.--The term ``Missouri River'' means the
main stem and floodplain of the Missouri River (including
reservoirs) from its confluence with the Mississippi River at
St. Louis, Missouri, to its headwaters near Three Forks,
Montana.
(3) Project.--The term ``project'' means the project
authorized by this section.
(b) Protection and Enhancement Activities.--
(1) Plan.--
(A) Development.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a plan for
a project to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat of
the Missouri River and the middle Mississippi River.
(B) Activities.--
(i) In general.--The plan shall provide for such activities
as are necessary to protect and enhance fish and wildlife
habitat without adversely affecting--
(I) the water-related needs of the region surrounding the
Missouri River and the middle Mississippi River, including
flood control, navigation, recreation, and enhancement of
water supply; and
(II) private property rights.
(ii) Required activities.--The plan shall include--
(I) modification and improvement of navigation training
structures to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat;
(II) modification and creation of side channels to protect
and enhance fish and wildlife habitat;
(III) restoration and creation of island fish and wildlife
habitat;
(IV) creation of riverine fish and wildlife habitat;
(V) establishment of criteria for prioritizing the type and
sequencing of activities based on cost-effectiveness and
likelihood of success; and
(VI) physical and biological monitoring for evaluating the
success of the project, to be performed by the River Studies
Center of the United States Geological Survey in Columbia,
Missouri.
(2) Implementation of activities.--
[[Page S3882]]
(A) In general.--Using funds made available to carry out
this section, the Secretary shall carry out the activities
described in the plan.
(B) Use of existing authority for unconstructed features of
the project.--Using funds made available to the Secretary
under other law, the Secretary shall design and construct any
feature of the project that may be carried out using the
authority of the Secretary to modify an authorized project,
if the Secretary determines that the design and construction
will--
(i) accelerate the completion of activities to protect and
enhance fish and wildlife habitat of the Missouri River or
the middle Mississippi River; and
(ii) be compatible with the project purposes described in
this section.
(c) Integration of Other Activities.--
(1) In general.--In carrying out the activities described
in subsection (b), the Secretary shall integrate the
activities with other Federal, State, and tribal activities.
(2) New authority.--Nothing in this section confers any new
regulatory authority on any Federal or non-Federal entity
that carries out any activity authorized by this section.
(d) Public Participation.--In developing and carrying out
the plan and the activities described in subsection (b), the
Secretary shall provide for public review and comment in
accordance with applicable Federal law, including--
(1) providing advance notice of meetings;
(2) providing adequate opportunity for public input and
comment;
(3) maintaining appropriate records; and
(4) compiling a record of the proceedings of meetings.
(e) Compliance With Applicable Law.--In carrying out the
activities described in subsections (b) and (c), the
Secretary shall comply with any applicable Federal law,
including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(f) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of the project shall be 35 percent.
(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of any 1
activity described in subsection (b) shall not exceed
$5,000,000.
(3) Operation and maintenance.--The operation and
maintenance of the project shall be a non-Federal
responsibility.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to pay the Federal share of the cost of
carrying out activities under this section $30,000,000 for
the period of fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
SEC. 211. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF.
(a) Sand, Gravel, and Shell.--Section 8(k)(2)(B) of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(k)(2)(B))
is amended in the second sentence by inserting before the
period at the end the following: ``or any other non-Federal
interest subject to an agreement entered into under section
221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b)''.
(b) Reimbursement for Local Interests.--Any amounts paid by
non-Federal interests for beach erosion control, hurricane
protection, shore protection, or storm damage reduction
projects as a result of an assessment under section 8(k) of
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(k))
shall be fully reimbursed.
SEC. 212. ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING.
Section 312(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1990 (33 U.S.C. 1272(f)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(6) Snake Creek, Bixby, Oklahoma.
``(7) Willamette River, Oregon.''.
SEC. 213. BENEFIT OF PRIMARY FLOOD DAMAGES AVOIDED INCLUDED
IN BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS.
Section 308 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990
(33 U.S.C. 2318) is amended--
(1) in the heading of subsection (a), by striking
``Benefit-Cost Analysis'' and inserting ``Elements Excluded
From Cost-Benefit Analysis'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (b) through (e) as
subsections (c) through (f), respectively;
(3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Elements Included in Cost-Benefit Analysis.--The
Secretary shall include primary flood damages avoided in the
benefit base for justifying Federal nonstructural flood
damage reduction projects.''; and
(4) in the first sentence of subsection (e) (as
redesignated by paragraph (2)), by striking ``(b)'' and
inserting ``(d)''.
SEC. 214. CONTROL OF AQUATIC PLANT GROWTH.
Section 104(a) of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (33
U.S.C. 610(a)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``Arundo dona,'' after ``water-
hyacinth,''; and
(2) by inserting ``tarmarix'' after ``melaleuca''.
SEC. 215. ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE.
Section 219(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4835) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(19) Lake tahoe, california and nevada.--Regional water
system for Lake Tahoe, California and Nevada.
``(20) Lancaster, california.--Fox Field Industrial
Corridor water facilities, Lancaster, California.
``(21) San ramon, california.--San Ramon Valley recycled
water project, San Ramon, California.''.
SEC. 216. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION, AND DEVELOPMENT.
Section 503 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(110 Stat. 3756) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
``(10) Regional Atlanta Watershed, Atlanta, Georgia, and
Lake Lanier of Forsyth and Hall Counties, Georgia.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(14) Clear Lake watershed, California.
``(15) Fresno Slough watershed, California.
``(16) Hayward Marsh, Southern San Francisco Bay watershed,
California.
``(17) Kaweah River watershed, California.
``(18) Lake Tahoe watershed, California and Nevada.
``(19) Malibu Creek watershed, California.
``(20) Truckee River basin, Nevada.
``(21) Walker River basin, Nevada.
``(22) Bronx River watershed, New York.
``(23) Catawba River watershed, North Carolina.'';
(2) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221(b)
of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for
any project undertaken under this section, with the consent
of the affected local government, a non-Federal interest may
include a nonprofit entity.''.
SEC. 217. LAKES PROGRAM.
Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4148) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (15), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (16), by striking the period at the end;
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(17) Clear Lake, Lake County, California, removal of silt
and aquatic growth and development of a sustainable weed and
algae management program;
``(18) Flints Pond, Hollis, New Hampshire, removal of
excessive aquatic vegetation; and
``(19) Osgood Pond, Milford, New Hampshire, removal of
excessive aquatic vegetation.''.
SEC. 218. SEDIMENTS DECONTAMINATION POLICY.
Section 405 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992
(33 U.S.C. 2239 note; Public Law 102-580) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Practical end-use products.--Technologies selected
for demonstration at the pilot scale shall result in
practical end-use products.
``(5) Assistance by the secretary.--The Secretary shall
assist the project to ensure expeditious completion by
providing sufficient quantities of contaminated dredged
material to conduct the full-scale demonstrations to stated
capacity.''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by striking the first sentence and
inserting the following: ``There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section a total of $22,000,000
to complete technology testing, technology commercialization,
and the development of full scale processing facilities
within the New York/New Jersey Harbor.''.
SEC. 219. DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON BEACHES.
(a) In General.--Section 145 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j) is amended in the
first sentence by striking ``50'' and inserting ``35''.
(b) Great Lakes Basin.--The Secretary shall work with the
State of Ohio, other Great Lakes States, and political
subdivisions of the States to fully implement and maximize
beneficial reuse of dredged material as provided under
section 145 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976
(33 U.S.C. 426j).
SEC. 220. FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION.
Section 906(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(e)) is amended by inserting after the
second sentence the following: ``Not more than 80 percent of
the non-Federal share of such first costs may be in kind,
including a facility, supply, or service that is necessary to
carry out the enhancement project.''.
SEC. 221. REIMBURSEMENT OF NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.
Section 211(e)(2)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 701b-13(e)(2)(A)) is amended by striking
``subject to amounts being made available in advance in
appropriations Acts'' and inserting ``subject to the
availability of appropriations''.
SEC. 222. NATIONAL CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT TASK FORCE.
(a) Definition of Task Force.--In this section, the term
``Task Force'' means the National Contaminated Sediment Task
Force established by section 502 of the National Contaminated
Sediment Assessment and Management Act (33 U.S.C. 1271 note;
Public Law 102-580).
(b) Convening.--The Secretary and the Administrator shall
convene the Task Force not later than 90 days after the date
of enactment of this Act.
(c) Reporting on Remedial Action.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Task Force shall submit to
Congress a report on the status of remedial actions at
aquatic sites in the areas described in paragraph (2).
(2) Areas.--The report under paragraph (1) shall address
remedial actions in--
(A) areas of probable concern identified in the survey of
data regarding aquatic sediment quality required by section
503(a) of the National Contaminated Sediment Assessment and
Management Act (33 U.S.C. 1271);
(B) areas of concern within the Great Lakes, as identified
under section 118(f) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(f));
(C) estuaries of national significance identified under
section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1330);
(D) areas for which remedial action has been authorized
under any of the Water Resources Development Acts; and
(E) as appropriate, any other areas where sediment
contamination is identified by the Task Force.
(3) Activities.--Remedial actions subject to reporting
under this subsection include remedial actions under--
[[Page S3883]]
(A) the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) or other
Federal or State law containing environmental remediation
authority;
(B) any of the Water Resources Development Acts;
(C) section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344); or
(D) section 10 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1151,
chapter 425).
(4) Contents.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
provide, with respect to each remedial action described in
the report, a description of--
(A) the authorities and sources of funding for conducting
the remedial action;
(B) the nature and sources of the sediment contamination,
including volume and concentration, where appropriate;
(C) the testing conducted to determine the nature and
extent of sediment contamination and to determine whether the
remedial action is necessary;
(D) the action levels or other factors used to determine
that the remedial action is necessary;
(E) the nature of the remedial action planned or
undertaken, including the levels of protection of public
health and the environment to be achieved by the remedial
action;
(F) the ultimate disposition of any material dredged as
part of the remedial action;
(G) the status of projects and the obstacles or barriers to
prompt conduct of the remedial action; and
(H) contacts and sources of further information concerning
the remedial action.
SEC. 223. GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM.
(a) Strategic Plans.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the
Secretary shall report to Congress on a plan for programs of
the Corps of Engineers in the Great Lakes basin.
(2) Contents.--The plan shall include details of the
projected environmental and navigational projects in the
Great Lakes basin, including--
(A) navigational maintenance and operations for commercial
and recreational vessels;
(B) environmental restoration activities;
(C) water level maintenance activities;
(D) technical and planning assistance to States and
remedial action planning committees;
(E) sediment transport analysis, sediment management
planning, and activities to support prevention of excess
sediment loadings;
(F) flood damage reduction and shoreline erosion
prevention;
(G) all other activities of the Corps of Engineers; and
(H) an analysis of factors limiting use of programs and
authorities of the Corps of Engineers in existence on the
date of enactment of this Act in the Great Lakes basin,
including the need for new or modified authorities.
(b) Great Lakes Biohydrological Information.--
(1) Inventory.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall request each
Federal agency that may possess information relevant to the
Great Lakes biohydrological system to provide an inventory of
all such information in the possession of the agency.
(B) Relevant information.--For the purpose of subparagraph
(A), relevant information includes information on--
(i) ground and surface water hydrology;
(ii) natural and altered tributary dynamics;
(iii) biological aspects of the system influenced by and
influencing water quantity and water movement;
(iv) meteorological projections and weather impacts on
Great Lakes water levels; and
(v) other Great Lakes biohydrological system data relevant
to sustainable water use management.
(2) Report.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with
the States, Indian tribes, and Federal agencies, and after
requesting information from the provinces and the federal
government of Canada, shall--
(i) compile the inventories of information;
(ii) analyze the information for consistency and gaps; and
(iii) submit to Congress, the International Joint
Commission, and the Great Lakes States a report that includes
recommendations on ways to improve the information base on
the biohydrological dynamics of the Great Lakes ecosystem as
a whole, so as to support environmentally sound decisions
regarding diversions and consumptive uses of Great Lakes
water.
(B) Recommendations.--The recommendations in the report
under subparagraph (A) shall include recommendations relating
to the resources and funds necessary for implementing
improvement of the information base.
(C) Considerations.--In developing the report under
subparagraph (A), the Secretary, in cooperation with the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of Transportation, and
other relevant agencies as appropriate, shall consider and
report on the status of the issues described and
recommendations made in--
(i) the Report of the International Joint Commission to the
Governments of the United States and Canada under the 1977
reference issued in 1985; and
(ii) the 1993 Report of the International Joint Commission
to the Governments of Canada and the United States on Methods
of Alleviating Adverse Consequences of Fluctuating Water
Levels in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Basin.
(c) Great Lakes Recreational Boating.--Not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall, using information and studies in existence on the date
of enactment of this Act to the maximum extent practicable,
and in cooperation with the Great Lakes States, submit to
Congress a report detailing the economic benefits of
recreational boating in the Great Lakes basin, particularly
at harbors benefiting from operation and maintenance projects
of the Corps of Engineers.
(d) Cooperation.--In undertaking activities under this
section, the Secretary shall--
(1) encourage public participation; and
(2) cooperate, and, as appropriate, collaborate, with Great
Lakes States, tribal governments, and Canadian federal,
provincial, tribal governments.
(e) Water Use Activities and Policies.--The Secretary may
provide technical assistance to the Great Lakes States to
develop interstate guidelines to improve the consistency and
efficiency of State-level water use activities and policies
in the Great Lakes basin.
(f) Cost Sharing.--The Secretary may seek and accept funds
from non-Federal entities to be used to pay up to 25 percent
of the cost of carrying out subsections (b), (c), (d), and
(e).
SEC. 224. PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
Section 1135(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Control of sea lamprey.--Congress finds that--
``(A) the Great Lakes navigation system has been
instrumental in the spread of sea lamprey and the associated
impacts to its fishery; and
``(B) the use of the authority under this subsection for
control of sea lamprey at any Great Lakes basin location is
appropriate.''.
SEC. 225. WATER QUALITY, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, RECREATION,
FISH AND WILDLIFE, FLOOD CONTROL, AND
NAVIGATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may investigate, study,
evaluate, and report on--
(1) water quality, environmental quality, recreation, fish
and wildlife, flood control, and navigation in the western
Lake Erie watershed, including the watersheds of the Maumee
River, Ottawa River, and Portage River in the States of
Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan; and
(2) measures to improve water quality, environmental
quality, recreation, fish and wildlife, flood control, and
navigation in the western Lake Erie basin.
(b) Cooperation.--In carrying out studies and
investigations under subsection (a), the Secretary shall
cooperate with Federal, State, and local agencies and
nongovernmental organizations to ensure full consideration of
all views and requirements of all interrelated programs that
those agencies may develop independently or in coordination
with the Corps of Engineers.
SEC. 226. IRRIGATION DIVERSION PROTECTION AND FISHERIES
ENHANCEMENT ASSISTANCE.
The Secretary may provide technical planning and design
assistance to non-Federal interests and may conduct other
site-specific studies to formulate and evaluate fish screens,
fish passages devices, and other measures to decrease the
incidence of juvenile and adult fish inadvertently entering
into irrigation systems. Measures shall be developed in
cooperation with Federal and State resource agencies and not
impair the continued withdrawal of water for irrigation
purposes. In providing such assistance priority shall be
given based on the objectives of the Endangered Species Act,
cost-effectiveness, and the potential for reducing fish
mortality. Non-Federal interests shall agree by contract to
contribute 50 percent of the cost of such assistance. Not
more than one-half of such non-Federal contribution may be
made by the provision of services, materials, supplies, or
other in-kind services. No construction activities are
authorized by this section. Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall report
to Congress on fish mortality caused by irrigation water
intake devices, appropriate measures to reduce mortality, the
extent to which such measures are currently being employed in
the arid States, the construction costs associated with such
measures, and the appropriate Federal role, if any, to
encourage the use of such measures.
SEC. 227. SMALL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECTS.
Section 3 of the Act of August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g),
is amended by striking ``$2,000,000'' and inserting
``$3,000,000''.
SEC. 228. SHORE DAMAGE PREVENTION OR MITIGATION.
Section 111 of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C.
426(i)) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``The Secretary''
and inserting ``(a) In General.--The Secretary'';
(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``The costs'' and
inserting the following:
``(b) Cost Sharing.--The costs'';
(3) in the third sentence--
(A) by striking ``No such'' and inserting the following:
``(c) Requirement for Specific Authorization.--No such'';
and
(B) by striking ``$2,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,000,000''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Coordination.--The Secretary shall--
``(1) coordinate the implementation of the measures under
this section with other Federal and non-Federal shore
protection projects in the same geographic area; and
``(2) to the extent practicable, combine mitigation
projects with other shore protection projects in the same
area into a comprehensive regional project.''.
SEC. 229. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK.
Section 404(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (106 Stat. 4863) is amended by striking ``$1,400,000 for
each of fiscal years 1993,
[[Page S3884]]
1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997'' and inserting ``$2,500,000''.
SEC. 230. ACCELERATED ADOPTION OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES FOR
CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS.
Section 8 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988
(33 U.S.C. 2314) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Accelerated Adoption of Innovative Technologies for
Management of Contaminated Sediments.--
``(1) Test projects.--The Secretary shall approve an
appropriate number of projects to test, under actual field
conditions, innovative technologies for environmentally sound
management of contaminated sediments.
``(2) Demonstration projects.--The Secretary may approve an
appropriate number of projects to demonstrate innovative
technologies that have been pilot tested under paragraph (1).
``(3) Conduct of projects.--Each pilot project under
paragraph (1) and demonstration project under paragraph (2)
shall be conducted by a university with proven expertise in
the research and development of contaminated sediment
treatment technologies and innovative applications using
waste materials.''.
TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. DREDGING OF SALT PONDS IN THE STATE OF RHODE
ISLAND.
The Secretary may acquire for the State of Rhode Island a
dredge and associated equipment with the capacity to dredge
approximately 100 cubic yards per hour for use by the State
in dredging salt ponds in the State.
SEC. 302. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW
YORK.
Section 567(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3787) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(3) The Chemung River watershed, New York, at an
estimated Federal cost of $5,000,000.''.
SEC. 303. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.
Section 102 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(110 Stat. 3668) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (15) through (22) as
paragraphs (16) through (23), respectively;
(2) by inserting after paragraph (14) the following:
``(15) Repaupo creek and delaware river, gloucester county,
new jersey.--Project for tidegate and levee improvements for
Repaupo Creek and the Delaware River, Gloucester County, New
Jersey.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(24) Irondequoit creek, new york.--Project for flood
control, Irondequoit Creek watershed, New York.
``(25) Tioga county, pennsylvania.--Project for flood
control, Tioga River and Cowanesque River and their
tributaries, Tioga County, Pennsylvania.''.
SEC. 304. SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS.
Section 104 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(110 Stat. 3669) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (9) through (12) as
paragraphs (11) through (14), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
``(9) Fortescue inlet, delaware bay, new jersey.--Project
for navigation for Fortescue Inlet, Delaware Bay, New Jersey.
``(10) Braddock bay, greece, new york.--Project for
navigation, Braddock Bay, Greece, New York.''.
SEC. 305. STREAMBANK PROTECTION PROJECTS.
(a) Arctic Ocean, Barrow, Alaska.--The Secretary shall
evaluate and, if justified under section 14 of the Flood
Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), carry out storm damage
reduction and coastal erosion measures at the town of Barrow,
Alaska.
(b) Saginaw River, Bay City, Michigan.--The Secretary may
construct appropriate control structures in areas along the
Saginaw River in the city of Bay City, Michigan, under
authority of section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33
Stat. 701r).
(c) Yellowstone River, Billings, Montana.--The streambank
protection project at Coulson Park, along the Yellowstone
River, Billings, Montana, shall be eligible for assistance
under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C.
701r).
(d) Monongahela River, Point Marion, Pennsylvania.--The
Secretary shall evaluate and, if justified under section 14
of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), carry out
streambank erosion control measures along the Monongahela
River at the borough of Point Marion, Pennsylvania.
SEC. 306. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, SPRINGFIELD, OREGON.
Under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), the Secretary shall conduct measures
to address water quality, water flows, and fish habitat
restoration in the historic Springfield, Oregon, millrace
through the reconfiguration of the existing millpond, if the
Secretary determines that harmful impacts have occurred as
the result of a previously constructed flood control project
by the Corps of Engineers.
SEC. 307. GUILFORD AND NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT.
The Secretary shall expeditiously complete the activities
authorized under section 346 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4858), including
activities associated with Sluice Creek in Guilford,
Connecticut, and Lighthouse Point Park in New Haven,
Connecticut.
SEC. 308. FRANCIS BLAND FLOODWAY DITCH.
(a) Redesignation.--The project for flood control, Eight
Mile Creek, Paragould, Arkansas, authorized by section 401(a)
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat.
4112) and known as ``Eight Mile Creek, Paragould, Arkansas'',
shall be known and designated as the ``Francis Bland Floodway
Ditch''.
(b) Legal References.--Any reference in any law, map,
regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United
States to the project and creek referred to in subsection (a)
shall be deemed to be a reference to the Francis Bland
Floodway Ditch.
SEC. 309. CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER BASIN, FLORIDA.
Section 528(e)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3770) is amended in the first sentence by
inserting before the period at the end the following: ``,
including potential land acquisition in the Caloosahatchee
River basin or other areas''.
SEC. 310. CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND, FLOOD PROJECT MITIGATION.
(a) In General.--The project for flood control and other
purposes, Cumberland, Maryland, authorized by section 5 of
the Act of June 22, 1936 (commonly known as the ``Flood
Control Act of 1936'') (49 Stat. 1574, chapter 688), is
modified to authorize the Secretary to undertake, as a
separate part of the project, restoration of the historic
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal substantially in accordance with
the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historic Park,
Cumberland, Maryland, Rewatering Design Analysis, dated
February 1998, at a total cost of $15,000,000, with an
estimated Federal cost of $9,750,000 and an estimated non-
Federal cost of $5,250,000.
(b) In-Kind Services.--The non-Federal interest for the
restoration project under subsection (a)--
(1) may provide all or a portion of the non-Federal share
of project costs in the form of in-kind services; and
(2) shall receive credit toward the non-Federal share of
project costs for design and construction work performed by
the non-Federal interest before execution of a project
cooperation agreement and for land, easements, and rights-of-
way required for the restoration and acquired by the non-
Federal interest before execution of such an agreement.
(c) Operation and Maintenance.--The operation and
maintenance of the restoration project under subsection (a)
shall be the full responsibility of the National Park
Service.
SEC. 311. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA.
Section 5(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act of August 13, 1946 (33
U.S.C. 426h), is amended by inserting before the semicolon
the following: ``, including the city of Miami Beach,
Florida''.
SEC. 312. SARDIS RESERVOIR, OKLAHOMA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall accept from the State
of Oklahoma or an agent of the State an amount, as determined
under subsection (b), as prepayment of 100 percent of the
water supply cost obligation of the State under Contract No.
DACW56-74-JC-0314 for water supply storage at Sardis
Reservoir, Oklahoma.
(b) Determination of Amount.--The amount to be paid by the
State of Oklahoma under subsection (a) shall be subject to
adjustment in accordance with accepted discount purchase
methods for Government properties as determined by an
independent accounting firm designated by the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget.
(c) Effect.--Nothing in this section shall otherwise affect
any of the rights or obligations of the parties to the
contract referred to in subsection (a).
SEC. 313. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WATERWAY
SYSTEM NAVIGATION MODERNIZATION.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) exports are necessary to ensure job creation and an
improved standard of living for the people of the United
States;
(2) the ability of producers of goods in the United States
to compete in the international marketplace depends on a
modern and efficient transportation network;
(3) a modern and efficient waterway system is a
transportation option necessary to provide United States
shippers a safe, reliable, and competitive means to win
foreign markets in an increasingly competitive
international marketplace;
(4) the need to modernize is heightened because the United
States is at risk of losing its competitive edge as a result
of the priority that foreign competitors are placing on
modernizing their own waterway systems;
(5) growing export demand projected over the coming decades
will force greater demands on the waterway system of the
United States and increase the cost to the economy if the
system proves inadequate to satisfy growing export
opportunities;
(6) the locks and dams on the upper Mississippi River and
Illinois River waterway system were built in the 1930s and
have some of the highest average delays to commercial tows in
the country;
(7) inland barges carry freight at the lowest unit cost
while offering an alternative to truck and rail
transportation that is environmentally sound, is energy
efficient, is safe, causes little congestion, produces little
air or noise pollution, and has minimal social impact; and
(8) it should be the policy of the Corps of Engineers to
pursue aggressively modernization of the waterway system
authorized by Congress to promote the relative competitive
position of the United States in the international
marketplace.
(b) Preconstruction Engineering and Design.--In accordance
with the Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway System
Navigation Study, the Secretary shall proceed immediately to
prepare engineering design, plans, and specifications for
extension of locks 20, 21, 22, 24, 25
[[Page S3885]]
on the Mississippi River and the LaGrange and Peoria Locks on
the Illinois River, to provide lock chambers 110 feet in
width and 1,200 feet in length, so that construction can
proceed immediately upon completion of studies and
authorization of projects by Congress.
SEC. 314. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER MANAGEMENT.
Section 1103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(33 U.S.C. 652) is amended--
(1) in subsection (e)--
(A) by striking ``(e)'' and all that follows through the
end of paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(e) Undertakings.--
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Authority.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of the Interior and the States of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, is authorized to
undertake--
``(i) a program for the planning, construction, and
evaluation of measures for fish and wildlife habitat
rehabilitation and enhancement; and
``(ii) implementation of a program of long-term resource
monitoring, computerized data inventory and analysis, and
applied research.
``(B) Requirements for projects.--Each project carried out
under subparagraph (A)(i) shall--
``(i) to the maximum extent practicable, simulate natural
river processes;
``(ii) include an outreach and education component; and
``(iii) on completion of the assessment under subparagraph
(D), address identified habitat and natural resource needs.
``(C) Advisory committee.--In carrying out subparagraph
(A), the Secretary shall create an independent technical
advisory committee to review projects, monitoring plans, and
habitat and natural resource needs assessments.
``(D) Habitat and natural resource needs assessment.--
``(i) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to undertake
a systemic, river reach, and pool scale assessment of habitat
and natural resource needs to serve as a blueprint to guide
habitat rehabilitation and long-term resource monitoring.
``(ii) Data.--The habitat and natural resource needs
assessment shall, to the maximum extent practicable, use data
in existence at the time of the assessment.
``(iii) Timing.--The Secretary shall complete a habitat and
natural resource needs assessment not later than 3 years
after the date of enactment of this subparagraph.
``(2) Reports.--On December 31, 2005, in consultation with
the Secretary of the Interior and the States of Illinois,
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, the Secretary shall
prepare and submit to Congress a report that--
``(A) contains an evaluation of the programs described in
paragraph (1);
``(B) describes the accomplishments of each program;
``(C) includes results of a habitat and natural resource
needs assessment; and
``(D) identifies any needed adjustments in the
authorization under paragraph (1) or the authorized
appropriations under paragraphs (3), (4), and (5).'';
(B) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by striking ``paragraph (1)(A)'' and inserting
``paragraph (1)(A)(i)''; and
(ii) by striking ``Secretary not to exceed'' and all that
follows and inserting ``Secretary not to exceed $22,750,000
for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2009.'';
(C) in paragraph (4)--
(i) by striking ``paragraph (1)(B)'' and inserting
``paragraph (1)(A)(ii)''; and
(ii) by striking ``$7,680,000'' and all that follows and
inserting ``$10,420,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through
2009.'';
(D) by striking paragraphs (5) and (6) and inserting the
following:
``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out paragraph (1)(C) not to
exceed $350,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2009.
``(6) Transfer of amounts.--
``(A) In general.--For each fiscal year beginning after
September 30, 1992, the Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of the Interior and the States of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, may transfer appropriated
amounts between the programs under clauses (i) and (ii) of
paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (1)(C).
``(B) Apportionment of costs.--In carrying out paragraph
(1)(D), the Secretary may apportion the costs equally between
the programs authorized by paragraph (1)(A).''; and
(E) in paragraph (7)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``paragraph (1)(A)''; and
(II) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``and, in the case of any project requiring non-
Federal cost sharing, the non-Federal share of the cost of
the project shall be 35 percent''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``paragraphs (1)(B)
and (1)(C) of this subsection'' and inserting ``paragraph
(1)(A)(ii)'';
(2) in subsection (f)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``(A)''; and
(B) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(k) St. Louis Area Urban Wildlife Habitat.--The Secretary
shall investigate and, if appropriate, carry out restoration
of urban wildlife habitat, with a special emphasis on the
establishment of greenways in the St. Louis, Missouri, area
and surrounding communities.''.
SEC. 315. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR COLUMBIA AND
SNAKE RIVERS SALMON SURVIVAL.
Section 511 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996
(16 U.S.C. 3301 note; Public Law 104-303) is amended by
striking subsection (a) and all that follows and inserting
the following:
``(a) Salmon Survival Activities.--
``(1) In general.--In conjunction with the Secretary of
Commerce and Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary shall
accelerate ongoing research and development activities, and
may 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/Snake
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) studies of juvenile salmon survival in spawning and
rearing areas;
``(B) estuary and near-ocean juvenile and adult salmon
survival;
``(C) impacts on salmon life cycles from sources other than
water resources projects;
``(D) cryopreservation of fish gametes and formation of a
germ plasm repository for threatened and endangered
populations of native fish; 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, 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 section, the Secretary shall submit 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 is authorized
to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out research and
development activities under paragraph (3).
``(b) Advanced Turbine Development.--
``(1) In general.--In conjunction with the Secretary of
Energy, the Secretary shall accelerate efforts toward
developing and installing in Corps of Engineers-operated dams
innovative, efficient, and environmentally safe hydropower
turbines, including design of fish-friendly turbines, for use
on the Columbia/Snake River hydrosystem.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $35,000,000 to carry out this subsection.
``(c) Management of Predation on Columbia/Snake River
System Native Fishes.--
``(1) Nesting avian predators.--In conjunction with the
Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior, and
consistent with a management plan to be developed by the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Secretary shall
carry out methods to reduce nesting populations of avian
predators on dredge spoil islands in the Columbia River under
the jurisdiction of the Secretary.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry out research and
development activities under this subsection.
``(d) 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. 316. NINE MILE RUN HABITAT RESTORATION, PENNSYLVANIA.
The Secretary may credit against the non-Federal share such
costs as are incurred by the non-Federal interests in
preparing environmental and other preconstruction
documentation for the habitat restoration project, Nine Mile
Run, Pennsylvania, if the Secretary determines that the
documentation is integral to the project.
SEC. 317. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall work with the Secretary of
Transportation on a proposed solution to carry out the
project to maintain the Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur,
California, authorized by section 601(d) of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148).
SEC. 318. COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD IMPACT-RESPONSE MODELING
SYSTEM.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may study and implement a
Comprehensive Flood Impact-Response Modeling System for the
Coralville Reservoir and the Iowa River watershed, Iowa.
(b) Study.--The study shall include--
(1) an evaluation of the combined hydrologic, geomorphic,
environmental, economic, social, and recreational impacts of
operating strategies within the watershed;
(2) creation of an integrated, dynamic flood impact model;
and
(3) the development of a rapid response system to be used
during flood and emergency situations.
(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 5 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit a
report to Congress on the results of the study and modeling
system and such recommendations as the Secretary determines
to be appropriate.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated a total of $2,250,000 to carry out this
section.
[[Page S3886]]
SEC. 319. STUDY REGARDING INNOVATIVE FINANCING FOR SMALL AND
MEDIUM-SIZED PORTS.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall conduct a study and analysis of various alternatives
for innovative financing of future construction, operation,
and maintenance of projects in small and medium-sized ports.
(b) Report.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate and Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives and the results of the study and
any related legislative recommendations for consideration by
Congress.
SEC. 320. CANDY LAKE PROJECT, OSAGE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Fair market value.--The term ``fair market value''
means the amount for which a willing buyer would purchase and
a willing seller would sell a parcel of land, as determined
by a qualified, independent land appraiser.
(2) Previous owner of land.--The term ``previous owner of
land'' means a person (including a corporation) that
conveyed, or a descendant of a deceased individual who
conveyed, land to the Corps of Engineers for use in the Candy
Lake project in Osage County, Oklahoma.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Army.
(b) Land Conveyances.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey, in accordance
with this section, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the land acquired by the United
States for the Candy Lake project in Osage County, Oklahoma.
(2) Previous owners of land.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall give a previous owner
of land first option to purchase the land described in
paragraph (1).
(B) Application.--
(i) In general.--A previous owner of land that desires to
purchase the land described in paragraph (1) that was owned
by the previous owner of land, or by the individual from whom
the previous owner of land is descended, shall file an
application to purchase the land with the Secretary not later
than 180 days after the official date of notice to the
previous owner of land under subsection (c).
(ii) First to file has first option.--If more than 1
application is filed for a parcel of land described in
paragraph (1), first options to purchase the parcel of land
shall be allotted in the order in which applications for the
parcel of land were filed.
(C) Identification of previous owners of land.--As soon as
practicable after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, identify each
previous owner of land.
(D) Consideration.--Consideration for land conveyed under
this subsection shall be the fair market value of the land.
(3) Disposal.--Any land described in paragraph (1) for
which an application has not been filed under paragraph
(2)(B) within the applicable time period shall be disposed of
in accordance with law.
(4) Extinguishment of easements.--All flowage easements
acquired by the United States for use in the Candy Lake
project in Osage County, Oklahoma, are extinguished.
(c) Notice.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall notify--
(A) each person identified as a previous owner of land
under subsection (b)(2)(C), not later than 90 days after
identification, by United States mail; and
(B) the general public, not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, by publication in the Federal
Register.
(2) Contents of notice.--Notice under this subsection shall
include--
(A) a copy of this section;
(B) information sufficient to separately identify each
parcel of land subject to this section; and
(C) specification of the fair market value of each parcel
of land subject to this section.
(3) Official date of notice.--The official date of notice
under this subsection shall be the later of--
(A) the date on which actual notice is mailed; or
(B) the date of publication of the notice in the Federal
Register.
SEC. 321. SALCHA RIVER AND PILEDRIVER SLOUGH, FAIRBANKS,
ALASKA.
The Secretary shall evaluate and, if justified under
section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C.
701s), carry out flood damage reduction measures along the
lower Salcha River and on Piledriver Slough, from its
headwaters at the mouth of the Salcha River to the Chena
Lakes Flood Control Project, in the vicinity of Fairbanks,
Alaska, to protect against surface water flooding.
SEC. 322. EYAK RIVER, CORDOVA, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall evaluate and, if justified under
section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C.
701s), carry out flood damage reduction measures along the
Eyak River at the town of Cordova, Alaska.
SEC. 323. NORTH PADRE ISLAND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROJECT.
The Secretary shall carry out a project for ecosystem
restoration and storm damage reduction at North Padre Island,
Corpus Christi Bay, Texas, at a total estimated cost of
$30,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $19,500,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $10,500,000, if the
Secretary finds that the work is technically sound,
environmentally acceptable, and economically justified. The
Secretary shall make such a finding not later than 270 days
after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 324. KANOPOLIS LAKE, KANSAS.
(a) Water Supply.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in cooperation with the
State of Kansas or another non-Federal interest, shall
complete a water supply reallocation study at the project for
flood control, Kanopolis Lake, Kansas, as a basis on which
the Secretary shall enter into negotiations with the State of
Kansas or another non-Federal interest for the terms and
conditions of a reallocation of the water supply.
(2) Options.--The negotiations for storage reallocation
shall include the following options for evaluation by all
parties:
(A) Financial terms of storage reallocation.
(B) Protection of future Federal water releases from
Kanopolis Dam, consistent with State water law, to ensure
that the benefits expected from releases are provided.
(C) Potential establishment of a water assurance district
consistent with other such districts established by the State
of Kansas.
(D) Protection of existing project purposes at Kanopolis
Dam to include flood control, recreation, and fish and
wildlife.
(b) In-Kind Credit.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may negotiate a credit for a
portion of the financial repayment to the Federal Government
for work performed by the State of Kansas, or another non-
Federal interest, on land adjacent or in close proximity to
the project, if the work provides a benefit to the project.
(2) Work included.--The work for which credit may be
granted may include watershed protection and enhancement,
including wetland construction and ecosystem restoration.
SEC. 325. NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED.
Section 552(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3780) is amended by striking ``for the
project to be carried out with such assistance'' and
inserting ``, or a public entity designated by the State
director, to carry out the project with such assistance,
subject to the project's meeting the certification
requirement of subsection (c)(1)''.
SEC. 326. CITY OF CHARLEVOIX REIMBURSEMENT, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary shall review and, if consistent with
authorized project purposes, reimburse the city of
Charlevoix, Michigan, for the Federal share of costs
associated with construction of the new revetment connection
to the Federal navigation project at Charlevoix Harbor,
Michigan.
SEC. 327. HAMILTON DAM FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary may construct the Hamilton Dam flood control
project, Michigan, under authority of section 205 of the
Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).
SEC. 328. HOLES CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT, OHIO.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the non-Federal share of project costs for the project
for flood control, Holes Creek, Ohio, shall not exceed the
sum of--
(1) the total amount projected as the non-Federal share as
of September 30, 1996, in the Project Cooperation Agreement
executed on that date; and
(2) 100 percent of the amount of any increases in the cost
of the locally preferred plan over the cost estimated in the
Project Cooperation Agreement.
(b) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
Federal interest any amount paid by the non-Federal interest
in excess of the non-Federal share.
SEC. 329. OVERFLOW MANAGEMENT FACILITY, RHODE ISLAND.
Section 585(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of
1996 (110 Stat. 3791) is amended by striking ``river'' and
inserting ``sewer''.
SEC. 330. ANACOSTIA RIVER AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MARYLAND.
The Secretary may use the balance of funds appropriated for
the improvement of the environment as part of the Anacostia
River Flood Control and Navigation Project under section 1135
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.
2309a) to construct aquatic ecosystem restoration projects in
the Anacostia River watershed under section 206 of the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330).
SEC. 331. EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
Subparagraphs (B) and (C)(i) of section 528(b)(3) of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769) are
amended by striking ``1999'' and inserting ``2003''.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I join my chairman, Senator Chafee, in
support of the legislation before us today, S. 507, the Water Resources
Development Act of 1999. I also want to recognize the new Chairman of
the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, Senator Voinovich,
for his hard work on this bill, along with last year's Chairman,
Senator Warner.
As we all know, the Water Resources Development Act of 1998 passed
this chamber last year, but was never enacted. It is our hope that
early action in this session will help us wrap up the unfinished
business from the 105th Congress. It will also set us on course to
develop a Water Resources Development Act for 2000.
S. 507 authorizes more than 40 projects for flood control,
navigation, shore protection, environmental restoration, water supply
storage and
[[Page S3887]]
recreation. Twenty-seven projects are modified and the Corps is
directed to conduct 43 separate studies throughout the Nation. The
projects have the support of a local sponsor willing to share the cost
of the project. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the
total Federal cost of this bill will be $2.3 billion over the next 10
years.
Many of the projects contained in this bill are necessary to protect
the nation's shorelines, along oceans, lakes and rivers. Several of the
navigation projects need timely authorization in order to keep our
ports competitive in the global marketplace. Furthermore, the study
authorizations, including a comprehensive, cumulative impact study of
the Yellowstone River in my home state of Montana, need to get started
to help us make informed decisions about the future use and management
of these precious resources.
The projects in this bill have been reviewed by the Army Corps of
Engineers and have been found to be in the Federal interest,
technologically feasible, economically justified and environmentally
sound. In other words, these are projects worthy of our support.
I am pleased to bring this bill to the floor and urge my colleagues
to approve it.
Amendment No. 253
(Purpose: To make managers' amendments)
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, there is a managers' amendment at the desk.
I ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Idaho [Mr. Craig], for Mr. Chafee,
proposes an amendment numbered 253.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.'')
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the amendment be
considered as read and agreed to, the committee substitute be agreed
to, as amended, the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to
reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to
the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 253) was agreed to.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading was read the
third time, and passed, as follows:
[The bill was not available for printing. It will appear in a future
issue of the Record.]
____________________