[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 132 (Thursday, October 19, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H10290-H10365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF S. 2796, WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT 
                                OF 2000

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 639 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 639

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 
     to consider in the House the bill (S. 2796) to provide for 
     the conservation and development of water and related 
     resources, to authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
     construct various projects for improvements to rivers and 
     harbors of the United States, and for other purposes. The 
     bill shall be considered as read for amendment. The amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute printed in the Congressional 
     Record and numbered 2 pursuant to clause 8 of rule XVIII 
     shall be considered as adopted. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate on the bill, as amended, equally divided and 
     controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; and (2) one 
     motion to recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. If the Senate bill, as amended, is passed, then it 
     shall be in order to move that the House insist on its 
     amendment to S. 2796 and request a conference with the Senate 
     thereon.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Frost) pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  H. Res. 639 provides for consideration of S. 2796, better known as 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000. This closed rule waives 
all points of order against consideration of the bill. It provides for 
1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
ranking member of the Committee on Transportation.
  Further, the rule provides that the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the Congressional Record and numbered 2 shall be 
considered as adopted. The rule provides for one motion to recommit 
with or without instructions.
  Finally, the rule provides that, should the Senate bill, as amended, 
pass the House, it then shall be in order to move that the House insist 
on its amendment to S. 2796 and request a conference with the Senate.
  I believe it is a very fair rule under the circumstances.
  Mr. Speaker, as we know, the clock on the 106th Congress is running 
out, and we do need to move quickly. In view of the strong bipartisan 
support this bill enjoys and the constraints associated with the 
calendar, I believe this is a very sensible way to proceed today and, 
as I have said, extremely fair under the circumstances. I definitely 
encourage my colleagues to support this rule so we can get on with this 
very important legislation.
  The WRDA bill is a critically important piece of environmental 
legislation. Of particular note is that this year's WRDA bill contains 
an initial authorization for a plan to restore the Florida Everglades, 
unquestionably a unique national treasure of which we are very proud. 
The Everglades Restoration Project represents the largest, most 
comprehensive environmental restoration ever attempted.
  Florida Governor Jeb Bush recently termed the Everglades restoration 
effort ``perhaps the defining environmental issue of this new 
century.'' Governor Bush is absolutely correct.
  It should be noted that the State of Florida has already set aside 
funds from its budget to meet its entire cost share of the restoration 
effort for the next 10 years, an unprecedented step and an unmistakable 
display of commitment. I am proud of the State of Florida for taking 
that step.
  The Everglades has always been a nonpartisan effort. Every Member of 
the Florida delegation has been united in support of this treasure. Our 
delegation has been especially well led on the Everglades issue by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), the chairman of the Florida 
delegation and the extremely capable man who has kept us in an 
effective fighting team from Florida to bring attention to this.
  The Clinton administration has also done quite an excellent job here 
and deserves praise. I said this was a bipartisan effort. Even so, I 
must say now that I have been somewhat disturbed at recent efforts to 
drag the Everglades into presidential politics. It does not belong 
there. I hope Vice President Gore will reverse course and recognize 
what all of us do, that the Everglades is far too important to be 
manipulated for short-term political gain.
  Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, after months of negotiations, the 
Senate crafted an initial authorization plan embodied in their version 
of the WRDA bill. The Senate's plan was widely supported by all 
stakeholders involved, quite a feat.
  When the House began its work on its version of the WRDA bill, we 
were cautioned not to tamper with the delicate balance of the Senate 
Everglades proposal. While in the end, the Senate Transportation 
Committee did make a number of changes to the Senate bill, changes 
everyone enthusiastically supports and acknowledges improve on the 
Senate product. So I am extremely grateful for the hard work and the 
very responsible stewardship of the Everglades authorization by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) and his Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
  Mr. Speaker, the challenge we have always faced is to put together a 
restoration plan that will get it right, undoing years of neglect and 
misunderstanding that have brought the Florida Everglades to the brink 
of disaster. In my view, the Everglades provisions in the WRDA bill 
will do just that, putting us now on solid footing for the next 10 
years.
  The Everglades is a national treasure, and the House action today to 
implement a comprehensive plan to restore it is, indeed, historic, as 
Governor Bush has said.
  I hope all of my colleagues will support the water resources bill and 
the restoration of the Everglades. Furthermore, I strongly urge support 
of this rule so we can get on with this important debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule expedites moving the Senate bill S. 2796 to 
conference and thus one step closer to being passed by the Congress and 
sent to the President before the adjournment of the 106th Congress. 
While this is a closed rule, it is supported by the majority of the 
Democratic Members of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure; and for that reason, I will support it.
  The rule provides that the text of an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to S. 2796, which was developed by the chairman and ranking 
member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, shall be 
considered as adopted. The substitute contains authorizations for 
important water resources projects. It provides Army Corps of Engineers 
policy and procedure reforms and the first increment of the important 
comprehensive restoration of the Everglades plan, which I know is of 
special importance to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss).
  The rule also provides for 1 hour of general debate and for one 
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
  I should note, Mr. Speaker, this rule is not without controversy. The 
Committee on Rules did not make in order several amendments offered by 
other Members, including two offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Sanford) and one by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Kind) and one by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer). While all 
of these amendments may be worthy of consideration, I believe, given 
the late hour of this Congress, these issues might best be left to the 
next Congress so as to expedite the consideration of the important 
projects contained in the substitute.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule and the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley), who has participated 
in every way in this arrangement for a number of years and is, indeed, 
one of the leaders and champions of the Everglades.

[[Page H10291]]

  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate certainly the leadership of the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), serving our west coast and working 
so consistently on protecting our great natural treasure and national 
treasure, the Everglades.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bipartisan 
legislation and urge all of my colleagues to support it. The 
Everglades, as I just said, is a national treasure of benefit to the 
entire country, and I applaud the leadership for scheduling this 
important bill for consideration.
  The legislation before us today represents a historic partnership 
reached between all stakeholders in this debate. Agricultural 
interests, the administration, utilities, environmentalists, the State 
of Florida, our Native American Indian tribes came together in an 
unprecedented show of cooperation to work out the agreement before us 
today. It truly represents a balanced approach reached with equal input 
from all these stakeholders in the public and one that we can all 
support.
  The Everglades ecosystem has been in steady decline over the past 50 
years. In fact, back in the 1930s people ran for public office saying, 
if you elect me governor, we will drain that swamp and make room for 
development. How wrong they were, and how right we are to start anew to 
correct the problems.
  The population in south Florida has grown rapidly, and with the 
growth come problems of water supply, flood control, and species and 
habitat protection. This agreement will allow the Army Corps to help 
provide for water needs of this population while protecting and 
preserving the needs of the ecosystem.
  Congress must pass this legislation this year. The Senate has acted. 
It is now our turn in the House to send this bill speedily to the 
President for signature.
  The Water Resource Development Acts of 1992 and 1996 gave the Army 
Corps of Engineers the authority to review the problems within the 
Everglades and to recommend solutions from which evolve the 
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, or CERP. Those 
recommendations form the basis for this legislation and will 
incorporate a number of restoration projects already under way.
  The legislation before us today calls for a series of water system 
improvements over 30 years, the cost of which will be shared equally 
between the Federal Government and the State of Florida.
  We have today a great opportunity to save a national treasure, 
protect the environment, and ensure water quality and safety for the 
residents of Florida. I urge my colleagues to join together in this 
historic opportunity and thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), 
thank former Governor Chiles, Governor Jeb Bush, Senator Connie Mack, 
Senator Bob Graham, and all the Members of the Florida delegation who 
have put aside partisanship at this rare and unique opportunity to join 
together to commit the Federal Government in a partnership with the 
State government in restoring the Everglades to the pristine wilderness 
and wonderment that it is and hope at the end of the week that we will 
all, again, join together at the White House for signature of this 
very, very important environmental restoration effort.
  Again, I want to single out the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), as 
was mentioned by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss). He, as chairman 
from the delegation, has remained persistent, vigilant to see that this 
is accomplished.

                              {time}  1015

  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding me 
this time. While I am prepared to support the rule and the underlying 
bill, I am disappointed that our proposed amendments were not ruled in 
order. While more progress is possible on this bill, at this late date 
in this session it may well be unrealistic, and there is, in fact, much 
to celebrate.
  The inclusion in the legislation of almost $8 billion to save the 
Florida Everglades is symbolic of our changing attitudes towards water 
resource management. It is also important to remember that we are 
simply paying to undo our own bad decisions. This Congress told the 
Corps of Engineers to drain the swamp in 1948, and drain it they did, 
all too well, without comprehensive planning and environmental 
assessment of its impact. We must do what we can to make sure that we 
do not repeat those mistakes of the past.
  Akin to the Everglades, the Columbia Slough, in my district, was cut 
off from the Columbia River by a Corps project decades ago and today it 
is stagnant and heavily polluted. This legislation directs the Corps to 
work with the City of Portland to fix the problems associated with the 
old Corps project. I am pleased that the bill incorporates my proposal 
for $40 million in funding to protect and restore the lower Columbia 
River and Tillamook estuaries, critical nurseries for endangered 
salmon.
  While there are some reform measures included in the bill, I would 
hope that we can continue going further. I have enjoyed working with 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) on legislation which would 
increase the Corps' transparency and accountability that would guaranty 
more citizen participation and lead to a better balance between 
economic and environmental considerations. This is an effort that I 
will continue to pursue.
  One particular area of Corps reform that I think we in this body need 
to look at very carefully is the contentious beach nourishment program. 
In too many cases, the program is washing taxpayer dollars out to sea 
while actually hurting the environment. One simple change that we tried 
to make in order would require communities with beaches to at least pay 
full costs for any prospective Corps beach nourishment project if there 
is no public access.
  But the major reform of the Corps of Engineers is to be found on the 
floor of this Congress. We need to be more careful of what we 
authorize, what we require, and how all the complex pieces of our 
waterways fit together. This bill can help start the process. I support 
the rule and the underlying bill.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), the chairman of the Florida 
delegation; and I would simply say that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Shaw) has a very long history of careful and persistent work in dealing 
with all parties interested in the Everglades, both as a Florida 
resident, at the local government level, as a businessman and 
interested citizen, in every way, shape, and form. For people who care 
about the Everglades, it would be useful for them to give thanks to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time and for his kind remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, this is an extraordinary time, and I think this is an 
extraordinary moment. We are in now what is sometimes called the 
``goofy season,'' the period of time when I think partisan politics 
reaches its peak, and sometimes in not very constructive ways. But 
today is an extraordinary day. And today we have bipartisan and true 
leadership on display here in the House regarding this bill that we are 
able to consider, a Water Resources Development Act containing historic 
provisions to restore America's Everglades, which has always been 
referred to as Florida's Everglades, but it is America's Everglades. We 
all recognize the importance of this legacy, not only on the lands and 
water but for the people who live in Florida and visit this national 
treasure, and we want to make sure that it is there for all future 
generations.
  How we got to this point is what is so remarkable, and it is the 
reason that we are bringing up a closed rule for debate as time grows 
short in the waning days of this 106th Congress. Normally, the minority 
party abhors closed rules. I know that, because I did in the 14 years 
that I served in the Republican minority. But today we have a 
bipartisan agreement on a bill and a process that helps us streamline 
the consideration of this important landmark legislation.
  Another passion of mine, besides the number of the intricacies of tax 
and budget policy, has been the environment. In fact, I served on the 
Committee on Public Works earlier in my House career. I have authored 
several bills on the environment, but none makes me more proud to have 
my

[[Page H10292]]

name on it than the comprehensive Everglades restoration bill. And 
working with my colleagues in the Florida delegation, such as the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and I see the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Mrs. Meek) on the other side of the aisle, who has been a 
great crusader for the Everglades, we have seen all of the Florida 
delegation gather together in support of this landmark legislation.
  But our work is not over. We have little time left, but we have much 
left to do. The tremendous effort that got us to this point of near 
unanimous consensus is threatened by the clock. We must pass water 
resources development legislation containing Everglades restoration 
today. We need time to work out project differences with the Senate, 
not only on the Everglades portion but on other portions of this bill.
  In that regard, Mr. Speaker, I would like to compliment both of 
Florida's Senators, Senator Bob Graham and Senator Connie Mack, as well 
as Senator Bob Smith, the chairman of the committee, for the wonderful 
work that they have done in bringing this together; and I might also 
say the administration, which was extraordinarily cooperative with all 
in structuring this bill.
  Organizations, from the environmental community, agricultural, 
business, Native American tribes, both the Miccosukee and the 
Seminoles, recreational users, the State, local and Federal 
governments, all have had a hand in crafting the Everglades 
legislation. And the delicate balance achieved in the other Chamber has 
been enhanced by the work done here in this House. I must compliment 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and our chairman, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), for seeing that this comes 
through and that this is done. As we know, there were some differences 
early on; but they worked to get them straightened out and that has 
brought us to where we are today.
  This bill is the product of constant and consistent hours of 
negotiation between the interested parties to reach a consensus on the 
key points of this legislation. I am honored that those serving in the 
other Chamber allowed me this rare opportunity to be a part of the 
crafting of their bill prior to my introducing the companion bill in 
this House, H.R. 5121. This helped us save precious time in arriving at 
a compatible bill in the House and the Senate, and avoiding major 
divisions in the few remaining days of this session. Now the House must 
put this legislation to a vote so that we can resolve the remaining 
differences in the other parts of the WRDA bill that the Senate has 
already passed.
  I also want to recognize the tremendous efforts of our previous 
governor, Governor Childs, and of course our existing governor, Jeb 
Bush, who has been so active in bringing this about. I was with him in 
Fort Lauderdale yesterday, and that is all he wanted to talk about was 
the status of this bill and where we are going.
  So we are seeing a rare moment in the closing days of this Congress; 
both great political parties coming together and doing the right thing. 
I urge passage of this resolution and passage of the bill.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. McDermott).
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, but I 
think that it is important for people to understand what is going on 
here.
  The leadership in the Republican Party has got us in a slow dance 
here. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) has gone out and said that 
he does not intend to negotiate with the President of the United States 
about education or anything else. So today, a little later, we will 
work on a continuing resolution. This continuing resolution takes us 
until next Wednesday. That is 13 days before the election. Now, we 
slowly waltz out of here with Everglades in our arms and everybody goes 
home tonight sometime and goes to campaigning. And we will show up next 
Wednesday, and we will have another continuing resolution for another 
week so that we are here 6 days before the election.
  Because the leadership of the Republican Party does not want to 
negotiate with the President, these bills are going to be vetoed. We 
are never going to see the Health and Human Services budget out here 
because it has education at the center of it and the Republican Party 
does not want to do anything about education. They do not want to deal 
with the President because they know his proposal is right, and so we 
are softly being slow danced out of here.
  Now, some people may like that. They may think that they can go home 
and, if they have got the Everglades in their arms they can get 
reelected. They can say, well, I did this. But if we do not deal with 
issues like the balanced budget amendments give-backs, that issue is 
still there. Our hospitals are out there waiting to figure out what is 
going to happen.
  The President has said the bill that is on the table is going to be 
vetoed because it is wrong and it is bad public policy. But the 
Republican leadership does not care. If they did, they would bring it 
out here, get the veto, then sit down and start negotiating. But they 
do not want to do that. They want it as a campaign issue. The same is 
true with education. They want to wait and sort of slow dance education 
out of here and then say that they would have given us all this for 
education, but the President would not do it.
  So I would say that people today ought to vote ``no'' on the 
continuing resolution.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume just 
to relieve any confusion there might be. This is actually the rule on 
the WRDA bill. There will be an opportunity to talk about the 
continuing resolution later. It is the normal routine business in the 
House. And we will be doing 1-minutes later in the day for matters of 
appropriate discussion under 1-minutes as well.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I yield 
back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the 
resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the Senate 
bill (S. 2796) to provide for the conservation and development of water 
and related resources, to authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
construct various projects for improvements to rivers and harbors of 
the United States, and for other purposes, and ask for its unanimous 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 639, the Senate 
bill is considered as having been read for amendment.
  The text of S. 2796 is as follows:

                                S. 2796

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2000''.
       (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. Small shore protection projects.
Sec. 103. Small navigation projects.
Sec. 104. Removal of snags and clearing and straightening of channels 
              in navigable waters.
Sec. 105. Small bank stabilization projects.
Sec. 106. Small flood control projects.
Sec. 107. Small projects for improvement of the quality of the 
              environment.
Sec. 108. Beneficial uses of dredged material.
Sec. 109. Small aquatic ecosystem restoration projects.
Sec. 110. Flood mitigation and riverine restoration.
Sec. 111. Disposal of dredged material on beaches.

                      TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 201. Cooperation agreements with counties.
Sec. 202. Watershed and river basin assessments.
Sec. 203. Tribal partnership program.
Sec. 204. Ability to pay.
Sec. 205. Property protection program.
Sec. 206. National Recreation Reservation Service.
Sec. 207. Operation and maintenance of hydroelectric facilities.
Sec. 208. Interagency and international support.
Sec. 209. Reburial and conveyance authority.

[[Page H10293]]

Sec. 210. Approval of construction of dams and dikes.
Sec. 211. Project deauthorization authority.
Sec. 212. Floodplain management requirements.
Sec. 213. Environmental dredging.
Sec. 214. Regulatory analysis and management systems data.
Sec. 215. Performance of specialized or technical services.
Sec. 216. Hydroelectric power project funding.
Sec. 217. Assistance programs.
Sec. 218. Funding to process permits.
Sec. 219. Program to market dredged material.
Sec. 220. National Academy of Sciences studies.

                 TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Wildlife Mitigation Project, 
              Alabama and Mississippi.
Sec. 302. Boydsville, Arkansas.
Sec. 303. White River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri.
Sec. 304. Petaluma, California.
Sec. 305. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Florida.
Sec. 306. Illinois River basin restoration, Illinois.
Sec. 307. Upper Des Plaines River and tributaries, Illinois.
Sec. 308. Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana.
Sec. 309. Red River Waterway, Louisiana.
Sec. 310. Narraguagus River, Milbridge, Maine.
Sec. 311. William Jennings Randolph Lake, Maryland.
Sec. 312. Breckenridge, Minnesota.
Sec. 313. Missouri River Valley, Missouri.
Sec. 314. New Madrid County, Missouri.
Sec. 315. Pemiscot County Harbor, Missouri.
Sec. 316. Pike County, Missouri.
Sec. 317. Fort Peck fish hatchery, Montana.
Sec. 318. Sagamore Creek, New Hampshire.
Sec. 319. Passaic River Basin flood management, New Jersey.
Sec. 320. Rockaway Inlet to Norton Point, New York.
Sec. 321. John Day Pool, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 322. Fox Point hurricane barrier, Providence, Rhode Island.
Sec. 323. Charleston Harbor, South Carolina.
Sec. 324. Savannah River, South Carolina.
Sec. 325. Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas.
Sec. 326. Joe Pool Lake, Trinity River basin, Texas.
Sec. 327. Lake Champlain watershed, Vermont and New York.
Sec. 328. Mount St. Helens, Washington.
Sec. 329. Puget Sound and adjacent waters restoration, Washington.
Sec. 330. Fox River System, Wisconsin.
Sec. 331. Chesapeake Bay oyster restoration.
Sec. 332. Great Lakes dredging levels adjustment.
Sec. 333. Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 334. Great Lakes remedial action plans and sediment remediation.
Sec. 335. Great Lakes tributary model.
Sec. 336. Treatment of dredged material from Long Island Sound.
Sec. 337. New England water resources and ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 338. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 339. Bogue Banks, Carteret County, North Carolina.

                           TITLE IV--STUDIES

Sec. 401. Baldwin County, Alabama.
Sec. 402. Bono, Arkansas.
Sec. 403. Cache Creek Basin, California.
Sec. 404. Estudillo Canal watershed, California.
Sec. 405. Laguna Creek watershed, California.
Sec. 406. Oceanside, California.
Sec. 407. San Jacinto watershed, California.
Sec. 408. Choctawhatchee River, Florida.
Sec. 409. Egmont Key, Florida.
Sec. 410. Fernandina Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 411. Upper Ocklawaha River and Apopka/Palatlakaha River basins, 
              Florida.
Sec. 412. Boise River, Idaho.
Sec. 413. Wood River, Idaho.
Sec. 414. Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 415. Boeuf and Black, Louisiana.
Sec. 416. Port of Iberia, Louisiana.
Sec. 417. South Louisiana.
Sec. 418. St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 419. Portland Harbor, Maine.
Sec. 420. Portsmouth Harbor and Piscataqua River, Maine and New 
              Hampshire.
Sec. 421. Searsport Harbor, Maine.
Sec. 422. Merrimack River basin, Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
Sec. 423. Port of Gulfport, Mississippi.
Sec. 424. Upland disposal sites in New Hampshire.
Sec. 425. Southwest Valley, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Sec. 426. Cuyahoga River, Ohio.
Sec. 427. Duck Creek Watershed, Ohio.
Sec. 428. Fremont, Ohio.
Sec. 429. Grand Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 430. Dredged material disposal site, Rhode Island.
Sec. 431. Chickamauga Lock and Dam, Tennessee.
Sec. 432. Germantown, Tennessee.
Sec. 433. Horn Lake Creek and Tributaries, Tennessee and Mississippi.
Sec. 434. Cedar Bayou, Texas.
Sec. 435. Houston Ship Channel, Texas.
Sec. 436. San Antonio Channel, Texas.
Sec. 437. Vermont dams remediation.
Sec. 438. White River watershed below Mud Mountain Dam, Washington.
Sec. 439. Willapa Bay, Washington.
Sec. 440. Upper Mississippi River basin sediment and nutrient study.
Sec. 441. Cliff Walk in Newport, Rhode Island.
Sec. 442. Quonset Point Channel reconnaissance study.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Visitors centers.
Sec. 502. CALFED Bay-Delta Program assistance, California.
Sec. 503. Lake Sidney Lanier, Georgia, home preservation.
Sec. 504. Conveyance of lighthouse, Ontonagon, Michigan.
Sec. 505. Land conveyance, Candy Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 506. Land conveyance, Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South 
              Carolina.
Sec. 507. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and 
              State of South Dakota terrestrial wildlife habitat 
              restoration.
Sec. 508. Export of water from Great Lakes.

          TITLE VI--COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN

Sec. 601. Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
Sec. 602. Sense of the Senate concerning Homestead Air Force Base.

          TITLE VII--MISSOURI RIVER PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT

Sec. 701. Short title.
Sec. 702. Findings and purposes.
Sec. 703. Definitions.
Sec. 704. Missouri River Trust.
Sec. 705. Missouri River Task Force.
Sec. 706. Administration.
Sec. 707. Authorization of appropriations.

                TITLE VIII--WILDLIFE REFUGE ENHANCEMENT

Sec. 801. Short title.
Sec. 802. Purpose.
Sec. 803. Definitions.
Sec. 804. Conveyance of cabin sites.
Sec. 805. Rights of nonparticipating lessees.
Sec. 806. Conveyance to third parties.
Sec. 807. Use of proceeds.
Sec. 808. Administrative costs.
Sec. 809. Termination of wildlife designation.
Sec. 810. Authorization of appropriations.

                  TITLE IX--MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION

Sec. 901. Short title.
Sec. 902. Findings and purposes.
Sec. 903. Definitions.
Sec. 904. Missouri River Trust.
Sec. 905. Missouri River Task Force.
Sec. 906. Administration.
Sec. 907. Authorization of appropriations.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

       In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
     the Army.

                   TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

     SEC. 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 subsection:
       (1) Barnegat inlet to little egg inlet, new jersey.--The 
     project for shore protection, Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg 
     Inlet, New Jersey, at a total cost of $51,203,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $33,282,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $17,921,000, and at an estimated average 
     annual cost of $1,751,000 for periodic nourishment over the 
     50-year life of the project, with an estimated annual Federal 
     cost of $1,138,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost 
     of $613,000.
       (2) New york-new jersey harbor.--The project for 
     navigation, New York-New Jersey Harbor: Report of the Chief 
     of Engineers dated May 2, 2000, at a total cost of 
     $1,781,234,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $743,954,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $1,037,280,000.
       (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 if a favorable report of the Chief is 
     completed not later than December 31, 2000:
       (1) False pass harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation, 
     False Pass Harbor, Alaska, at a total cost of $15,164,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $8,238,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $6,926,000.
       (2) Unalaska harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation, 
     Unalaska Harbor, Alaska, at a total cost of $20,000,000, with 
     an estimated Federal cost of $12,000,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $8,000,000.
       (3) Rio de flag, arizona.--The project for flood damage 
     reduction, Rio de Flag, Arizona, at a total cost of 
     $24,072,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $15,576,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,496,000.
       (4) Tres rios, arizona.--The project for environmental 
     restoration, Tres Rios, Arizona, at a total cost of 
     $99,320,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $62,755,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $36,565,000.
       (5) Los angeles harbor, california.--The project for 
     navigation, Los Angeles Harbor, California, at a total cost 
     of $153,313,000, with

[[Page H10294]]

     an estimated Federal cost of $43,735,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $109,578,000.
       (6) Murrieta creek, california.--The project for flood 
     control, Murrieta Creek, California, at a total cost of 
     $90,865,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $25,555,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $65,310,000.
       (7) Pine flat dam, california.--The project for fish and 
     wildlife restoration, Pine Flat Dam, California, at a total 
     cost of $34,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $22,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $12,000,000.
       (8) Ranchos palos verdes, california.--The project for 
     environmental restoration, Ranchos Palos Verdes, California, 
     at a total cost of $18,100,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $11,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $6,300,000.
       (9) Santa barbara streams, california.--The project for 
     flood damage reduction, Santa Barbara Streams, Lower Mission 
     Creek, California, at a total cost of $18,300,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $9,200,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $9,100,000.
       (10) Upper newport bay harbor, california.--The project for 
     environmental restoration, Upper Newport Bay Harbor, 
     California, at a total cost of $32,475,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $21,109,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $11,366,000.
       (11) Whitewater river basin, california.--The project for 
     flood damage reduction, Whitewater River basin, California, 
     at a total cost of $27,570,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $17,920,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $9,650,000.
       (12) Delaware coast from cape henlopen to fenwick island, 
     delaware.--The project for shore protection, Delaware Coast 
     from Cape Henlopen to Fenwick Island, Delaware, at a total 
     cost of $5,633,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $3,661,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,972,000, 
     and at an estimated average annual cost of $920,000 for 
     periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, 
     with an estimated annual Federal cost of $460,000 and an 
     estimated annual non-Federal cost of $460,000.
       (13) Tampa harbor, florida.--Modification of the project 
     for navigation, Tampa Harbor, Florida, authorized by section 
     4 of the Act of September 22, 1922 (42 Stat. 1042, chapter 
     427), to deepen the Port Sutton Channel, at a total cost of 
     $6,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $4,000,000 and 
     an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,000,000.
       (14) John t. myers lock and dam, indiana and kentucky.--The 
     project for navigation, John T. Myers Lock and Dam, Ohio 
     River, Indiana and Kentucky, at a total cost of $182,000,000. 
     The costs of construction of the project shall be paid \1/2\ 
     from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the 
     Treasury and \1/2\ from amounts appropriated from the Inland 
     Waterways Trust Fund.
       (15) Greenup lock and dam, kentucky.--The project for 
     navigation, Greenup Lock and Dam, Ohio River, Kentucky, at a 
     total cost of $175,500,000. The costs of construction of the 
     project shall be paid \1/2\ from amounts appropriated from 
     the general fund of the Treasury and \1/2\ from amounts 
     appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
       (16) Morganza, louisiana, to gulf of mexico.--
       (A) In general.--The project for hurricane protection, 
     Morganza, Louisiana, to the Gulf of Mexico, at a total cost 
     of $550,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $358,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $192,000,000.
       (B) Credit.--The non-Federal interests shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of project costs for the costs 
     of any work carried out by the non-Federal interests for 
     interim flood protection after March 31, 1989, if the 
     Secretary finds that the work is compatible with, and 
     integral to, the project.
       (17) Chesterfield, missouri.--The project to implement 
     structural and nonstructural measures to prevent flood damage 
     to Chesterfield, Missouri, and the surrounding area, at a 
     total cost of $67,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $44,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $23,700,000.
       (18) Raritan bay and sandy hook bay, port monmouth, new 
     jersey.--The project for shore protection, Raritan Bay and 
     Sandy Hook Bay, Port Monmouth, New Jersey, at a total cost of 
     $32,064,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $20,842,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,222,000, and at an 
     estimated average annual cost of $2,468,000 for periodic 
     nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an 
     estimated annual Federal cost of $1,234,000 and an estimated 
     annual non-Federal cost of $1,234,000.
       (19) Memphis, tennessee.--The project for ecosystem 
     restoration, Wolf River, Memphis, Tennessee, at a total cost 
     of $10,933,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,106,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,827,000.
       (20) Jackson hole, wyoming.--
       (A) In general.--The project for environmental restoration, 
     Jackson Hole, Wyoming, at a total cost of $52,242,000, with 
     an estimated Federal cost of $33,957,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $18,285,000.
       (B) Non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--The non-Federal share of the costs of the 
     project may be provided in cash or in the form of in-kind 
     services or materials.
       (ii) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of project costs for design and 
     construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of execution of a project cooperation 
     agreement for the project, if the Secretary finds that the 
     work is integral to the project.
       (21) Ohio river.--
       (A) In general.--The program for protection and restoration 
     of fish and wildlife habitat in and along the main stem of 
     the Ohio River, consisting of projects described in a 
     comprehensive plan, at a total cost of $307,700,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $200,000,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $107,700,000.
       (B) Non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--The non-Federal share of the costs of any 
     project under the program may be provided in cash or in the 
     form of in-kind services or materials.
       (ii) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of project costs for design and 
     construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of execution of a project cooperation 
     agreement for the project, if the Secretary finds that the 
     work is integral to the project.

     SEC. 102. SMALL SHORE PROTECTION PROJECTS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects, and if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     3 of the Act of August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g):
       (1) Lake palourde, louisiana.--Project for beach 
     restoration and protection, Highway 70, Lake Palourde, St. 
     Mary and St. Martin Parishes, Louisiana.
       (2) St. bernard, louisiana.--Project for beach restoration 
     and protection, Bayou Road, St. Bernard, Louisiana.

     SEC. 103. SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577):
       (1) Cape coral south spreader waterway, florida.--Project 
     for navigation, Cape Coral South Spreader Waterway, Lee 
     County, Florida.
       (2) Houma navigation canal, louisiana.--Project for 
     navigation, Houma Navigation Canal, Terrebonne Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (3) Vidalia port, louisiana.--Project for navigation, 
     Vidalia Port, Louisiana.

     SEC. 104. REMOVAL OF SNAGS AND CLEARING AND STRAIGHTENING OF 
                   CHANNELS IN NAVIGABLE WATERS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is appropriate, may carry out the project under 
     section 3 of the Act of March 2, 1945 (33 U.S.C. 604):
       (1) Bayou manchac, louisiana.--Project for removal of snags 
     and clearing and straightening of channels for flood control, 
     Bayou Manchac, Ascension Parish, Louisiana.
       (2) Black bayou and hippolyte coulee, louisiana.--Project 
     for removal of snags and clearing and straightening of 
     channels for flood control, Black Bayou and Hippolyte Coulee, 
     Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.

     SEC. 105. SMALL BANK STABILIZATION PROJECTS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r):
       (1) Bayou des glaises, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Bayou des Glaises (Lee Chatelain 
     Road), Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana.
       (2) Bayou plaquemine, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Highway 77, Bayou Plaquemine, 
     Iberville Parish, Louisiana.
       (3) Hammond, louisiana.--Project for emergency streambank 
     protection, Fagan Drive Bridge, Hammond, Louisiana.
       (4) Iberville parish, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Iberville Parish, Louisiana.
       (5) Lake arthur, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Parish Road 120 at Lake Arthur, 
     Louisiana.
       (6) Lake charles, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Pithon Coulee, Lake Charles, Calcasieu 
     Parish, Louisiana.
       (7) Loggy bayou, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Loggy Bayou, Bienville Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (8) Scotlandville bluff, louisiana.--Project for emergency 
     streambank protection, Scotlandville Bluff, East Baton Rouge 
     Parish, Louisiana.

     SEC. 106. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s):
       (1) Weiser river, idaho.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Weiser River, Idaho.
       (2) Bayou tete l'ours, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Bayou Tete L'Ours, Louisiana.
       (3) Bossier city, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Red Chute Bayou levee, Bossier City, Louisiana.
       (4) Braithwaite park, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Braithwaite Park, Louisiana.
       (5) Cane bend subdivision, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Cane Bend Subdivision, Bossier Parish, Louisiana.
       (6) Crown point, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Crown Point, Louisiana.
       (7) Donaldsonville canals, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Donaldsonville Canals, Louisiana.

[[Page H10295]]

       (8) Goose bayou, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Goose Bayou, Louisiana.
       (9) Gumby dam, louisiana.--Project for flood control, Gumby 
     Dam, Richland Parish, Louisiana.
       (10) Hope canal, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Hope Canal, Louisiana.
       (11) Jean lafitte, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Jean Lafitte, Louisiana.
       (12) Lockport to larose, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Lockport to Larose, Louisiana.
       (13) Lower lafitte basin, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Lower Lafitte Basin, Louisiana.
       (14) Oakville to lareussite, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Oakville to LaReussite, Louisiana.
       (15) Pailet basin, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Pailet Basin, Louisiana.
       (16) Pochitolawa creek, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Pochitolawa Creek, Louisiana.
       (17) Rosethorn basin, louisiana.--Project for flood 
     control, Rosethorn Basin, Louisiana.
       (18) Shreveport, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Twelve Mile Bayou, Shreveport, Louisiana.
       (19) Stephensville, louisiana.--Project for flood control, 
     Stephensville, Louisiana.
       (20) St. john the baptist parish, louisiana.--Project for 
     flood control, St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana.
       (21) Magby creek and vernon branch, mississippi.--Project 
     for flood control, Magby Creek and Vernon Branch, Lowndes 
     County, Mississippi.
       (22) Fritz landing, tennessee.--Project for flood control, 
     Fritz Landing, Tennessee.

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

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is appropriate, may carry out the project under 
     section 1135(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(a)):
       (1) Bayou sauvage national wildlife refuge, louisiana.--
     Project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
     Bayou Sauvage National Wildlife Refuge, Orleans Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (2) Gulf intracoastal waterway, bayou plaquemine, 
     louisiana.--Project for improvement of the quality of the 
     environment, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Bayou Plaquemine, 
     Iberville Parish, Louisiana.
       (3) Gulf intracoastal waterway, miles 220 to 222.5, 
     louisiana.--Project for improvement of the quality of the 
     environment, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, miles 220 to 222.5, 
     Vermilion Parish, Louisiana.
       (4) Gulf intracoastal waterway, weeks bay, louisiana.--
     Project for improvement of the quality of the environment, 
     Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Weeks Bay, Iberia Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (5) Lake fausse point, louisiana.--Project for improvement 
     of the quality of the environment, Lake Fausse Point, 
     Louisiana.
       (6) Lake providence, louisiana.--Project for improvement of 
     the quality of the environment, Old River, Lake Providence, 
     Louisiana.
       (7) New river, louisiana.--Project for improvement of the 
     quality of the environment, New River, Ascension Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (8) Erie county, ohio.--Project for improvement of the 
     quality of the environment, Sheldon's Marsh State Nature 
     Preserve, Erie County, Ohio.
       (9) Mushingum county, ohio.--Project for improvement of the 
     quality of the environment, Dillon Reservoir watershed, 
     Licking River, Mushingum County, Ohio.

     SEC. 108. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.

       The Secretary may carry out the following projects under 
     section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (33 U.S.C. 2326):
       (1) Houma navigation canal, louisiana.--Project to make 
     beneficial use of dredged material from a Federal navigation 
     project that includes barrier island restoration at the Houma 
     Navigation Canal, Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana.
       (2) Mississippi river gulf outlet, mile -3 to mile -9, 
     louisiana.--Project to make beneficial use of dredged 
     material from a Federal navigation project that includes 
     dredging of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, mile -3 to 
     mile -9, St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana.
       (3) Mississippi river gulf outlet, mile 11 to mile 4, 
     louisiana.--Project to make beneficial use of dredged 
     material from a Federal navigation project that includes 
     dredging of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, mile 11 to 
     mile 4, St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana.
       (4) Plaquemines parish, louisiana.--Project to make 
     beneficial use of dredged material from a Federal navigation 
     project that includes marsh creation at the contained 
     submarine maintenance dredge sediment trap, Plaquemines 
     Parish, Louisiana.
       (5) Ottawa county, ohio.--Project to protect, restore, and 
     create aquatic and related habitat using dredged material, 
     East Harbor State Park, Ottawa County, Ohio.

     SEC. 109. SMALL AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may carry out the following 
     projects under section 206 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330):
       (1) Braud bayou, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Braud Bayou, Spanish Lake, Ascension Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (2) Buras marina, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Buras Marina, Buras, Plaquemines Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (3) Comite river, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Comite River at Hooper Road, Louisiana.
       (4) Department of energy 21-inch pipeline canal, 
     louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, 
     Department of Energy 21-inch Pipeline Canal, St. Martin 
     Parish, Louisiana.
       (5) Lake borgne, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, southern shores of Lake Borgne, Louisiana.
       (6) Lake martin, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Lake Martin, Louisiana.
       (7) Luling, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Luling Oxidation Pond, St. Charles Parish, 
     Louisiana.
       (8) Mandeville, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Mandeville, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana.
       (9) St. james, louisiana.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, St. James, Louisiana.
       (10) Mines falls park, new hampshire.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Mines Falls Park, New Hampshire.
       (11) North hampton, new hampshire.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Little River Salt Marsh, North 
     Hampton, New Hampshire.
       (12) Highland county, ohio.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Rocky Fork Lake, Clear Creek floodplain, 
     Highland County, Ohio.
       (13) Hocking county, ohio.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Long Hollow Mine, Hocking County, Ohio.
       (14) Tuscarawas county, ohio.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Huff Run, Tuscarawas County, Ohio.
       (15) Central amazon creek, oregon.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Central Amazon Creek, Oregon.
       (16) Delta ponds, oregon.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Delta Ponds, Oregon.
       (17) Eugene millrace, oregon.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Eugene Millrace, Oregon.
       (18) Medford, oregon.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Bear Creek watershed, Medford, Oregon.
       (19) Roslyn lake, oregon.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Roslyn Lake, Oregon.
       (b) Salmon River, Idaho.--
       (1) Credit.--The non-Federal interests with respect to the 
     proposed project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Salmon 
     River, Idaho, may receive credit toward the non-Federal share 
     of project costs for work, consisting of surveys, studies, 
     and development of technical data, that is carried out by the 
     non-Federal interests in connection with the project, if the 
     Secretary finds that the work is integral to the project.
       (2) Maximum amount of credit.--The amount of the credit 
     under paragraph (1), together with other credit afforded, 
     shall not exceed the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     project under section 206 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330).

     SEC. 110. FLOOD MITIGATION AND RIVERINE RESTORATION.

       Section 212(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332(e)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (22), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (23), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(24) Perry Creek, Iowa.''.

     SEC. 111. DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON BEACHES.

       Section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 294) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(f) Fort Canby State Park, Benson Beach, Washington.--The 
     Secretary may design and construct a shore protection project 
     at Fort Canby State Park, Benson Beach, Washington, including 
     beneficial use of dredged material from Federal navigation 
     projects as provided under section 145 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j).''.

                      TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 201. COOPERATION AGREEMENTS WITH COUNTIES.

       Section 221(a) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
     1962d-5b(a)) is amended in the second sentence--
       (1) by striking ``State legislative''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``of the State or a body politic of the State''.

     SEC. 202. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.

       Section 729 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (100 Stat. 4164) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 729. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary may assess the water 
     resources needs of river basins and watersheds of the United 
     States, including needs relating to--
       ``(1) ecosystem protection and restoration;
       ``(2) flood damage reduction;
       ``(3) navigation and ports;
       ``(4) watershed protection;
       ``(5) water supply; and
       ``(6) drought preparedness.
       ``(b) Cooperation.--An assessment under subsection (a) 
     shall be carried out in cooperation and coordination with--

[[Page H10296]]

       ``(1) the Secretary of the Interior;
       ``(2) the Secretary of Agriculture;
       ``(3) the Secretary of Commerce;
       ``(4) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency; and
       ``(5) the heads of other appropriate agencies.
       ``(c) Consultation.--In carrying out an assessment under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with Federal, 
     tribal, State, interstate, and local governmental entities.
       ``(d) Priority River Basins and Watersheds.--In selecting 
     river basins and watersheds for assessment under this 
     section, the Secretary shall give priority to--
       ``(1) the Delaware River basin; and
       ``(2) the Willamette River basin, Oregon.
       ``(e) Acceptance of Contributions.--In carrying out an 
     assessment under subsection (a), the Secretary may accept 
     contributions, in cash or in kind, from Federal, tribal, 
     State, interstate, and local governmental entities to the 
     extent that the Secretary determines that the contributions 
     will facilitate completion of the assessment.
       ``(f) Cost-Sharing Requirements.--
       ``(1) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the 
     costs of an assessment carried out under this section shall 
     be 50 percent.
       ``(2) Credit.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the non-
     Federal interests may receive credit toward the non-Federal 
     share required under paragraph (1) for the provision of 
     services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       ``(B) Maximum amount of credit.--Credit under subparagraph 
     (A) shall not exceed an amount equal to 25 percent of the 
     costs of the assessment.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.''.

     SEC. 203. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) Definition of Indian Tribe.--In this section, the term 
     ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning given the term in section 4 
     of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (b) Program.--
       (1) In general.--In cooperation with Indian tribes and the 
     heads of other Federal agencies, the Secretary may study and 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out water resources 
     development projects that--
       (A) will substantially benefit Indian tribes; and
       (B) are located primarily within Indian country (as defined 
     in section 1151 of title 18, United States Code) or in 
     proximity to Alaska Native villages.
       (2) Matters to be studied.--A study conducted under 
     paragraph (1) may address--
       (A) projects for flood damage reduction, environmental 
     restoration and protection, and preservation of cultural and 
     natural resources; and
       (B) such other projects as the Secretary, in cooperation 
     with Indian tribes and the heads of other Federal agencies, 
     determines to be appropriate.
       (c) Consultation and Coordination With Secretary of the 
     Interior.--
       (1) In general.--In recognition of the unique role of the 
     Secretary of the Interior concerning trust responsibilities 
     with Indian tribes, and in recognition of mutual trust 
     responsibilities, the Secretary shall consult with the 
     Secretary of the Interior concerning studies conducted under 
     subsection (b).
       (2) Integration of activities.--The Secretary shall--
       (A) integrate civil works activities of the Department of 
     the Army with activities of the Department of the Interior to 
     avoid conflicts, duplications of effort, or unanticipated 
     adverse effects on Indian tribes; and
       (B) consider the authorities and programs of the Department 
     of the Interior and other Federal agencies in any 
     recommendations concerning carrying out projects studied 
     under subsection (b).
       (d) Priority Projects.--In selecting water resources 
     development projects for study under this section, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to the project for the Tribal 
     Reservation of the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe on Willapa 
     Bay, Washington, authorized by section 439(b).
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Ability to pay.--
       (A) In general.--Any cost-sharing agreement for a study 
     under subsection (b) shall be subject to the ability of the 
     non-Federal interest to pay.
       (B) Use of procedures.--The ability of a non-Federal 
     interest to pay shall be determined by the Secretary in 
     accordance with procedures established by the Secretary.
       (2) Credit.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), in conducting 
     studies of projects under subsection (b), the Secretary may 
     provide credit to the non-Federal interest for the provision 
     of services, studies, supplies, or other in-kind 
     contributions to the extent that the Secretary determines 
     that the services, studies, supplies, and other in-kind 
     contributions will facilitate completion of the project.
       (B) Maximum amount of credit.--Credit under subparagraph 
     (A) shall not exceed an amount equal to the non-Federal share 
     of the costs of the study.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out subsection (b) $5,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006, of which not more 
     than $1,000,000 may be used with respect to any 1 Indian 
     tribe.

     SEC. 204. ABILITY TO PAY.

       Section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--Any cost-sharing agreement under this 
     section for a feasibility study, or for construction of an 
     environmental protection and restoration project, a flood 
     control project, a project for navigation, storm damage 
     protection, shoreline erosion, hurricane protection, or 
     recreation, or an agricultural water supply project, shall be 
     subject to the ability of the non-Federal interest to pay.
       ``(2) Criteria and procedures.--
       ``(A) In general.--The ability of a non-Federal interest to 
     pay shall be determined by the Secretary in accordance with--
       ``(i) during the period ending on the date on which revised 
     criteria and procedures are promulgated under subparagraph 
     (B), criteria and procedures in effect on the day before the 
     date of enactment of this subparagraph; and
       ``(ii) after the date on which revised criteria and 
     procedures are promulgated under subparagraph (B), the 
     revised criteria and procedures promulgated under 
     subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Revised criteria and procedures.--Not later than 18 
     months after the date of enactment of this subparagraph, in 
     accordance with paragraph (3), the Secretary shall promulgate 
     revised criteria and procedures governing the ability of a 
     non-Federal interest to pay.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by adding ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (B) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) may consider additional criteria relating to--
       ``(i) the financial ability of the non-Federal interest to 
     carry out its cost-sharing responsibilities; or
       ``(ii) additional assistance that may be available from 
     other Federal or State sources.''.

     SEC. 205. PROPERTY PROTECTION PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may carry out a program to 
     reduce vandalism and destruction of property at water 
     resources development projects under the jurisdiction of the 
     Department of the Army.
       (b) Provision of Rewards.--In carrying out the program, the 
     Secretary may provide rewards (including cash rewards) to 
     individuals who provide information or evidence leading to 
     the arrest and prosecution of individuals causing damage to 
     Federal property.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $500,000 for 
     each fiscal year.

     SEC. 206. NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVATION SERVICE.

       Notwithstanding section 611 of the Treasury and General 
     Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 105-277; 112 
     Stat. 2681-515), the Secretary may--
       (1) participate in the National Recreation Reservation 
     Service on an interagency basis; and
       (2) pay the Department of the Army's share of the 
     activities required to implement, operate, and maintain the 
     Service.

     SEC. 207. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF HYDROELECTRIC 
                   FACILITIES.

       Section 314 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2321) is amended in the first sentence by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``in 
     cases in which the activities require specialized training 
     relating to hydroelectric power generation''.

     SEC. 208. INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.

       Section 234(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (33 U.S.C. 2323a(d)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``$1,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$2,000,000''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting ``out'' after 
     ``carry''.

     SEC. 209. REBURIAL AND CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY.

       (a) Definition of Indian Tribe.--In this section, the term 
     ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning given the term in section 4 
     of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (b) Reburial.--
       (1) Reburial areas.--In consultation with affected Indian 
     tribes, the Secretary may identify and set aside areas at 
     civil works projects of the Department of the Army that may 
     be used to rebury Native American remains that--
       (A) have been discovered on project land; and
       (B) have been rightfully claimed by a lineal descendant or 
     Indian tribe in accordance with applicable Federal law.
       (2) Reburial.--In consultation with and with the consent of 
     the lineal descendant or the affected Indian tribe, the 
     Secretary may recover and rebury, at full Federal expense, 
     the remains at the areas identified and set aside under 
     subsection (b)(1).
       (c) Conveyance Authority.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, the Secretary may convey to an 
     Indian tribe for use as a cemetery an area at a civil works 
     project that is identified and set aside by the Secretary 
     under subsection (b)(1).
       (2) Retention of necessary property interests.--In carrying 
     out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall retain any necessary 
     right-

[[Page H10297]]

     of-way, easement, or other property interest that the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out the 
     authorized purposes of the project.

     SEC. 210. APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION OF DAMS AND DIKES.

       Section 9 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401), is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``It shall'';
       (2) by striking ``However, such structures'' and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(b) Waterways Within a Single State.--Notwithstanding 
     subsection (a), structures described in subsection (a)'';
       (3) by striking ``When plans'' and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Modification of Plans.--When plans'';
       (4) by striking ``The approval'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(d) Applicability.--
       ``(1) Bridges and causeways.--The approval''; and
       (5) in subsection (d) (as designated by paragraph (4)), by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Dams and dikes.--
       ``(A) In general.--The approval required by this section of 
     the location and plans, or any modification of plans, of any 
     dam or dike, applies only to a dam or dike that, if 
     constructed, would completely span a waterway used to 
     transport interstate or foreign commerce, in such a manner 
     that actual, existing interstate or foreign commerce could be 
     adversely affected.
       ``(B) Other dams and dikes.--Any dam or dike (other than a 
     dam or dike described in subparagraph (A)) that is proposed 
     to be built in any other navigable water of the United 
     States--
       ``(i) shall be subject to section 10; and
       ``(ii) shall not be subject to the approval requirements of 
     this section.''.

     SEC. 211. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATION AUTHORITY.

       Section 1001 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 579a) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1001. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Construction.--The term `construction', with respect 
     to a project or separable element, means--
       ``(A) in the case of--
       ``(i) a nonstructural flood control project, the 
     acquisition of land, an easement, or a right-of-way primarily 
     to relocate a structure; and
       ``(ii) in the case of any other nonstructural measure, the 
     performance of physical work under a construction contract;
       ``(B) in the case of an environmental protection and 
     restoration project--
       ``(i) the acquisition of land, an easement, or a right-of-
     way primarily to facilitate the restoration of wetland or a 
     similar habitat; or
       ``(ii) the performance of physical work under a 
     construction contract to modify an existing project facility 
     or to construct a new environmental protection and 
     restoration measure; and
       ``(C) in the case of any other water resources project, the 
     performance of physical work under a construction contract.
       ``(2) Physical work under a construction contract.--The 
     term `physical work under a construction contract' does not 
     include any activity related to project planning, engineering 
     and design, relocation, or the acquisition of land, an 
     easement, or a right-of-way.
       ``(b) Projects Never Under Construction.--
       ``(1) List of projects.--The Secretary shall annually 
     submit to Congress a list of projects and separable elements 
     of projects that--
       ``(A) are authorized for construction; and
       ``(B) for which no Federal funds were obligated for 
     construction during the 4 full fiscal years preceding the 
     date of submission of the list.
       ``(2) Deauthorization.--Any water resources project, or 
     separable element of a water resources project, authorized 
     for construction shall be deauthorized effective at the end 
     of the 7-year period beginning on the date of the most recent 
     authorization or reauthorization of the project or separable 
     element unless Federal funds have been obligated for 
     preconstruction engineering and design or for construction of 
     the project or separable element by the end of that period.
       ``(c) Projects for Which Construction Has Been Suspended.--
       ``(1) List of projects.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall annually submit to 
     Congress a list of projects and separable elements of 
     projects--
       ``(i) that are authorized for construction;
       ``(ii) for which Federal funds have been obligated for 
     construction of the project or separable element; and
       ``(iii) for which no Federal funds have been obligated for 
     construction of the project or separable element during the 2 
     full fiscal years preceding the date of submission of the 
     list.
       ``(B) Projects with initial placement of fill.--The 
     Secretary shall not include on a list submitted under 
     subparagraph (A) any shore protection project with respect to 
     which there has been, before the date of submission of the 
     list, any placement of fill unless the Secretary determines 
     that the project no longer has a willing and financially 
     capable non-Federal interest.
       ``(2) Deauthorization.--Any water resources project, or 
     separable element of a water resources project, for which 
     Federal funds have been obligated for construction shall be 
     deauthorized effective at the end of any 5-fiscal year period 
     during which Federal funds specifically identified for 
     construction of the project or separable element (in an Act 
     of Congress or in the accompanying legislative report 
     language) have not been obligated for construction.
       ``(d) Congressional Notifications.--Upon submission of the 
     lists under subsections (b)(1) and (c)(1), the Secretary 
     shall notify each Senator in whose State, and each Member of 
     the House of Representatives in whose district, the affected 
     project or separable element is or would be located.
       ``(e) Final Deauthorization List.--The Secretary shall 
     publish annually in the Federal Register a list of all 
     projects and separable elements deauthorized under subsection 
     (b)(2) or (c)(2).
       ``(f) Effective Date.--Subsections (b)(2) and (c)(2) take 
     effect 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection.''.

     SEC. 212. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 402(c) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 701b-12(c)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``Within 6 months after the date of the enactment of this 
     subsection, the'' and inserting ``The'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (3) by striking ``Such guidelines shall address'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Required elements.--The guidelines developed under 
     paragraph (1) shall--
       ``(A) address''; and
       (4) in paragraph (2) (as designated by paragraph (3))--
       (A) by inserting ``that non-Federal interests shall adopt 
     and enforce'' after ``policies'';
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) require non-Federal interests to take measures to 
     preserve the level of flood protection provided by a project 
     to which subsection (a) applies.''.
       (b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to any project or separable element of a project 
     with respect to which the Secretary and the non-Federal 
     interest have not entered a project cooperation agreement on 
     or before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Technical Amendments.--Section 402(b) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 701b-12(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Flood Plain'' 
     and inserting ``Floodplain''; and
       (2) in the first sentence, by striking ``flood plain'' and 
     inserting ``floodplain''.

     SEC. 213. ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING.

       Section 312 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 1272) 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 sponsor 
     may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the 
     affected local government.''.

     SEC. 214. REGULATORY ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS DATA.

       (a) In General.--Beginning October 1, 2000, the Secretary, 
     acting through the Chief of Engineers, shall publish, on the 
     Army Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program website, 
     quarterly reports that include all Regulatory Analysis and 
     Management Systems (RAMS) data.
       (b) Data.--Such RAMS data shall include--
       (1) the date on which an individual or nationwide permit 
     application under section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) is first received by the Corps;
       (2) the date on which the application is considered 
     complete;
       (3) the date on which the Corps either grants (with or 
     without conditions) or denies the permit; and
       (4) if the application is not considered complete when 
     first received by the Corps, a description of the reason the 
     application was not considered complete.

     SEC. 215. PERFORMANCE OF SPECIALIZED OR TECHNICAL SERVICES.

       (a) Definition of State.--In this section, the term 
     ``State'' has the meaning given the term in section 6501 of 
     title 31, United States Code.
       (b) Authority.--The Corps of Engineers may provide 
     specialized or technical services to a Federal agency (other 
     than a Department of Defense agency), State, or local 
     government of the United States under section 6505 of title 
     31, United States Code, only if the chief executive of the 
     requesting entity submits to the Secretary--
       (1) a written request describing the scope of the services 
     to be performed and agreeing to reimburse the Corps for all 
     costs associated with the performance of the services; and
       (2) a certification that includes adequate facts to 
     establish that the services requested are not reasonably and 
     quickly available through ordinary business channels.
       (c) Corps Agreement To Perform Services.--The Secretary, 
     after receiving a request described in subsection (b) to 
     provide specialized or technical services, shall, before 
     entering into an agreement to perform the services--

[[Page H10298]]

       (1) ensure that the requirements of subsection (b) are met 
     with regard to the request for services; and
       (2) execute a certification that includes adequate facts to 
     establish that the Corps is uniquely equipped to perform such 
     services.
       (d) Annual Report to Congress.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than the end of each calendar 
     year, the Secretary shall provide to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate a report identifying any request 
     submitted by a Federal agency (other than a Department of 
     Defense agency), State, or local government of the United 
     States to the Corps to provide specialized or technical 
     services.
       (2) Contents of report.--The report shall include, with 
     respect to each request described in paragraph (1)--
       (A) a description of the scope of services requested;
       (B) the certifications required under subsection (b) and 
     (c);
       (C) the status of the request;
       (D) the estimated and final cost of the services;
       (E) the status of reimbursement;
       (F) a description of the scope of services performed; and
       (G) copies of all certifications in support of the request.

     SEC. 216. HYDROELECTRIC POWER PROJECT FUNDING.

       Section 216 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (33 U.S.C. 2321a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``In carrying out'' and 
     all that follows through ``(1) is'' and inserting the 
     following: ``In carrying out the operation, maintenance, 
     rehabilitation, and modernization of a hydroelectric power 
     generating facility at a water resources project under the 
     jurisdiction of the Department of the Army, the Secretary 
     may, to the extent funds are made available in appropriations 
     Acts or in accordance with subsection (c), take such actions 
     as are necessary to optimize the efficiency of energy 
     production or increase the capacity of the facility, or both, 
     if, after consulting with the heads of other appropriate 
     Federal and State agencies, the Secretary determines that 
     such actions--
       ``(1) are'';
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by striking 
     ``the proposed uprating'' and inserting ``any proposed 
     uprating'';
       (3) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (e); and
       (4) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) Use of Funds Provided by Preference Customers.--In 
     carrying out this section, the Secretary may accept and 
     expend funds provided by preference customers under Federal 
     law relating to the marketing of power.
       ``(d) Application.--This section does not apply to any 
     facility of the Department of the Army that is authorized to 
     be funded under section 2406 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 
     (16 U.S.C. 839d-1).''.

     SEC. 217. ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

       (a) Conservation and Recreation Management.--To further 
     training and educational opportunities at water resources 
     development projects under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, 
     the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with non-
     Federal public and nonprofit entities for services relating 
     to natural resources conservation or recreation management.
       (b) Rural Community Assistance.--In carrying out studies 
     and projects under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, the 
     Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with 
     multistate regional private nonprofit rural community 
     assistance entities for services, including water resource 
     assessment, community participation, planning, development, 
     and management activities.
       (c) Cooperative Agreements.--A cooperative agreement 
     entered into under this section shall not be considered to 
     be, or treated as being, a cooperative agreement to which 
     chapter 63 of title 31, United States Code, applies.

     SEC. 218. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.

       (a) The Secretary, after public notice, may accept and 
     expend funds contributed by non-Federal public entities to 
     expedite the evaluation of permits under the jurisdiction of 
     the Department of the Army.
       (b) In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall 
     ensure that the use of such funds as authorized in subsection 
     (a) will result in improved efficiencies in permit evaluation 
     and will not impact impartial decisionmaking in the 
     permitting process.

     SEC. 219. PROGRAM TO MARKET DREDGED MATERIAL.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Dredged Material Reuse Act''.
       (b) Finding.--Congress finds that the Secretary of the Army 
     should establish a program to reuse dredged material--
       (1) to ensure the long-term viability of disposal capacity 
     for dredged material; and
       (2) to encourage the reuse of dredged material for 
     environmental and economic purposes.
       (c) Definition.--In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means 
     the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of 
     Engineers.
       (d) Program for Reuse of Dredged Material.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a 
     program to allow the direct marketing of dredged material to 
     public agencies and private entities.
       (2) Limitations.--The Secretary shall not establish the 
     program under subsection (a) unless a determination is made 
     that such program is in the interest of the United States and 
     is economically justified, equitable, and environmentally 
     acceptable.
       (3) Regional responsibility.--The program described in 
     subsection (a) may authorize each of the 8 division offices 
     of the Corps of Engineers to market to public agencies and 
     private entities any dredged material from projects under the 
     jurisdiction of the regional office. Any revenues generated 
     from any sale of dredged material to such entities shall be 
     deposited in the United States Treasury.
       (4) Reports.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for a period 
     of 4 years, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report 
     on the program established under subsection (a).
       (5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this Act $2,000,000 for each 
     fiscal year.

     SEC. 220. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDIES.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Academy.--The term ``Academy'' means the National 
     Academy of Sciences.
       (2) Method.--The term ``method'' means a method, model, 
     assumption, or other pertinent planning tool used in 
     conducting an economic or environmental analysis of a water 
     resources project, including the formulation of a feasibility 
     report.
       (3) Feasibility report.--The term ``feasibility report'' 
     means each feasibility report, and each associated 
     environmental impact statement and mitigation plan, prepared 
     by the Corps of Engineers for a water resources project.
       (4) Water resources project.--The term ``water resources 
     project'' means a project for navigation, a project for flood 
     control, a project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
     a project for emergency streambank and shore protection, a 
     project for ecosystem restoration and protection, and a water 
     resources project of any other type carried out by the Corps 
     of Engineers.
       (b) Independent Peer Review of Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall contract with the 
     Academy to study, and make recommendations relating to, the 
     independent peer review of feasibility reports.
       (2) Study elements.--In carrying out a contract under 
     paragraph (1), the Academy shall study the practicality and 
     efficacy of the independent peer review of the feasibility 
     reports, including--
       (A) the cost, time requirements, and other considerations 
     relating to the implementation of independent peer review; 
     and
       (B) objective criteria that may be used to determine the 
     most effective application of independent peer review to 
     feasibility reports for each type of water resources project.
       (3) Academy report.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of a contract under paragraph (1), the Academy shall submit 
     to the Secretary, the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 
     report that includes--
       (A) the results of the study conducted under paragraphs (1) 
     and (2); and
       (B) in light of the results of the study, specific 
     recommendations, if any, on a program for implementing 
     independent peer review of feasibility reports.
       (4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $1,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended.
       (c) Independent Peer Review of Methods for Project 
     Analysis.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall contract with the 
     Academy to conduct a study that includes--
       (A) a review of state-of-the-art methods;
       (B) a review of the methods currently used by the 
     Secretary;
       (C) a review of a sample of instances in which the 
     Secretary has applied the methods identified under 
     subparagraph (B) in the analysis of each type of water 
     resources project; and
       (D) a comparative evaluation of the basis and validity of 
     state-of-the-art methods identified under subparagraph (A) 
     and the methods identified under subparagraphs (B) and (C).
       (2) Academy report.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of a contract under paragraph (1), the Academy shall submit 
     to the Secretary, the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 
     report that includes--
       (A) the results of the study conducted under paragraph (1); 
     and
       (B) in light of the results of the study, specific 
     recommendations for modifying any of the methods currently 
     used by the Secretary for conducting economic and 
     environmental analyses of water resources projects.
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $2,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended.

[[Page H10299]]

                 TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION 
                   PROJECT, ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI.

       (a) General.--The Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Wildlife 
     Mitigation Project, Alabama and Mississippi, authorized by 
     section 601(a) of Public Law 99-662 (100 Stat. 4138) is 
     modified to authorize the Secretary to--
       (1) remove the wildlife mitigation purpose designation from 
     up to 3,000 acres of land as necessary over the life of the 
     project from lands originally acquired for water resource 
     development projects included in the Mitigation Project in 
     accordance with the Report of the Chief of Engineers dated 
     August 31, 1985;
       (2) sell or exchange such lands in accordance with 
     subsection (c)(1) and under such conditions as the Secretary 
     determines to be necessary to protect the interests of the 
     United States, utilize such lands as the Secretary determines 
     to be appropriate in connection with development, operation, 
     maintenance, or modification of the water resource 
     development projects, or grant such other interests as the 
     Secretary may determine to be reasonable in the public 
     interest; and
       (3) acquire, in accordance with subsections (c) and (d), 
     lands from willing sellers to offset the removal of any lands 
     from the Mitigation Project for the purposes listed in 
     subsection (a)(2) of this section.
       (b) Removal Process.--From the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the locations of these lands to be removed will be 
     determined at appropriate time intervals at the discretion of 
     the Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal and 
     State fish and wildlife agencies, to facilitate the operation 
     of the water resource development projects and to respond to 
     regional needs related to the project. Removals under this 
     subsection shall be restricted to Project Lands designated 
     for mitigation and shall not include lands purchased 
     exclusively for mitigation purposes (known as Separable 
     Mitigation Lands). Parcel identification, removal, and sale 
     may occur assuming acreage acquisitions pursuant to 
     subsection (d) are at least equal to the total acreage of the 
     lands removed.
       (c) Lands To Be Sold.--
       (1) Lands to be sold or exchanged pursuant to subsection 
     (a)(2) shall be made available for related uses consistent 
     with other uses of the water resource development project 
     lands (including port, industry, transportation, recreation, 
     and other regional needs for the project).
       (2) Any valuation of land sold or exchanged pursuant to 
     this section shall be at fair market value as determined by 
     the Secretary.
       (3) The Secretary is authorized to accept monetary 
     consideration and to use such funds without further 
     appropriation to carry out subsection (a)(3). All monetary 
     considerations made available to the Secretary under 
     subsection (a)(2) from the sale of lands shall be used for 
     and in support of acquisitions pursuant to subsection (d). 
     The Secretary is further authorized for purposes of this 
     section to purchase up to 1,000 acres from funds otherwise 
     available.
       (d) Criteria for Land To Be Acquired.--The Secretary shall 
     consult with the appropriate Federal and State fish and 
     wildlife agencies in selecting the lands to be acquired 
     pursuant to subsection (a)(3). In selecting the lands to be 
     acquired, bottomland hardwood and associated habitats will 
     receive primary consideration. The lands shall be adjacent to 
     lands already in the Mitigation Project unless otherwise 
     agreed to by the Secretary and the fish and wildlife 
     agencies.
       (e) Dredged Material Disposal Sites.--The Secretary shall 
     utilize dredge material disposal areas in such a manner as to 
     maximize their reuse by disposal and removal of dredged 
     materials, in order to conserve undisturbed disposal areas 
     for wildlife habitat to the maximum extent practicable. Where 
     the habitat value loss due to reuse of disposal areas cannot 
     be offset by the reduced need for other unused disposal 
     sites, the Secretary shall determine, in consultation with 
     Federal and State fish and wildlife agencies, and ensure full 
     mitigation for any habitat value lost as a result of such 
     reuse.
       (f) Other Mitigation Lands.--The Secretary is also 
     authorized to outgrant by lease, easement, license, or permit 
     lands acquired for the Wildlife Mitigation Project pursuant 
     to section 601(a) of Public Law 99-662, in consultation with 
     Federal and State fish and wildlife agencies, when such 
     outgrants are necessary to address transportation, utility, 
     and related activities. The Secretary shall insure full 
     mitigation for any wildlife habitat value lost as a result of 
     such sale or outgrant. Habitat value replacement requirements 
     shall be determined by the Secretary in consultation with the 
     appropriate fish and wildlife agencies.
       (g) Repeal.--Section 102 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4804) is amended by striking 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 302. BOYDSVILLE, ARKANSAS.

       The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of 
     the costs of the study to determine the feasibility of the 
     reservoir and associated improvements in the vicinity of 
     Boydsville, Arkansas, authorized by section 402 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 322), not more 
     than $250,000 of the costs of the relevant planning and 
     engineering investigations carried out by State and local 
     agencies, if the Secretary finds that the investigations are 
     integral to the scope of the feasibility study.

     SEC. 303. WHITE RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the project for 
     flood control, power generation, and other purposes at the 
     White River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri, authorized by 
     section 4 of the Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1218, chapter 
     795), and modified by House Document 917, 76th Congress, 3d 
     Session, and House Document 290, 77th Congress, 1st Session, 
     approved August 18, 1941, and House Document 499, 83d 
     Congress, 2d Session, approved September 3, 1954, and by 
     section 304 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (110 Stat. 3711), is further modified to authorize the 
     Secretary to provide minimum flows necessary to sustain tail 
     water trout fisheries by reallocating the following 
     recommended amounts of project storage:
       (1) Beaver Lake, 1.5 feet.
       (2) Table Rock, 2 feet.
       (3) Bull Shoals Lake, 5 feet.
       (4) Norfolk Lake, 3.5 feet.
       (5) Greers Ferry Lake, 3 feet.
       (b) Report.--
       (1) In general.--No funds may be obligated to carry out 
     work on the modification under subsection (a) until the Chief 
     of Engineers, through completion of a final report, 
     determines that the work is technically sound, 
     environmentally acceptable, and economically justified.
       (2) Timing.--Not later than January 1, 2002, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress the final report referred to in 
     paragraph (1).
       (3) Contents.--The report shall include determinations 
     concerning whether--
       (A) the modification under subsection (a) adversely affects 
     other authorized project purposes; and
       (B) Federal costs will be incurred in connection with the 
     modification.

     SEC. 304. PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may complete the project for 
     flood damage reduction, Petaluma River, Petaluma, California, 
     substantially in accordance with the Detailed Project Report 
     approved March 1995, at a total cost of $32,226,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $20,647,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $11,579,000.
       (b) In-Kind Services.--The non-Federal interest may provide 
     its share of project costs in cash or in the form of in-kind 
     services or materials.
       (c) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of project costs for design and 
     construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of modification of the existing project 
     cooperation agreement or execution of a new project 
     cooperation agreement, if the Secretary determines that the 
     work is integral to the project.

     SEC. 305. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA.

       The project for shore protection, Gasparilla and Estero 
     Island segments, Lee County, Florida, authorized under 
     section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073), 
     by Senate Resolution dated December 17, 1970, and by House 
     Resolution dated December 15, 1970, is modified to authorize 
     the Secretary to enter into an agreement with the non-Federal 
     interest to carry out the project in accordance with section 
     206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 
     426i-1), if the Secretary determines that the project is 
     technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified.

     SEC. 306. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, ILLINOIS.

       (a) Definition of Illinois River Basin.--In this section, 
     the term ``Illinois River basin'' means the Illinois River, 
     Illinois, its backwaters, side channels, and all tributaries, 
     including their watersheds, draining into the Illinois River.
       (b) Comprehensive Plan.--
       (1) Development.--As expeditiously as practicable, the 
     Secretary shall develop a proposed comprehensive plan for the 
     purpose of restoring, preserving, and protecting the Illinois 
     River basin.
       (2) Technologies and innovative approaches.--The 
     comprehensive plan shall provide for the development of new 
     technologies and innovative approaches--
       (A) to enhance the Illinois River as a vital transportation 
     corridor;
       (B) to improve water quality within the entire Illinois 
     River basin;
       (C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habitat for plants 
     and wildlife; and
       (D) to increase economic opportunity for agriculture and 
     business communities.
       (3) Specific components.--The comprehensive plan shall 
     include such features as are necessary to provide for--
       (A) the development and implementation of a program for 
     sediment removal technology, sediment characterization, 
     sediment transport, and beneficial uses of sediment;
       (B) the development and implementation of a program for the 
     planning, conservation, evaluation, and construction of 
     measures for fish and wildlife habitat conservation and 
     rehabilitation, and stabilization and enhancement of land and 
     water resources in the Illinois River basin;
       (C) the development and implementation of a long-term 
     resource monitoring program; and
       (D) the development and implementation of a computerized 
     inventory and analysis system.
       (4) Consultation.--The comprehensive plan shall be 
     developed by the Secretary in consultation with appropriate 
     Federal agencies and the State of Illinois.
       (5) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this

[[Page H10300]]

     Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing the comprehensive plan.
       (6) Additional studies and analyses.--After submission of 
     the report under paragraph (5), the Secretary shall continue 
     to conduct such studies and analyses related to the 
     comprehensive plan as are necessary, consistent with this 
     subsection.
       (c) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--If the Secretary, in cooperation with 
     appropriate Federal agencies and the State of Illinois, 
     determines that a restoration project for the Illinois River 
     basin will produce independent, immediate, and substantial 
     restoration, preservation, and protection benefits, the 
     Secretary shall proceed expeditiously with the implementation 
     of the project.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out projects under this 
     subsection $20,000,000.
       (3) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out any project under this subsection shall not 
     exceed $5,000,000.
       (d) General Provisions.--
       (1) Water quality.--In carrying out projects and activities 
     under this section, the Secretary shall take into account the 
     protection of water quality by considering applicable State 
     water quality standards.
       (2) Public participation.--In developing the comprehensive 
     plan under subsection (b) and carrying out projects under 
     subsection (c), the Secretary shall implement procedures to 
     facilitate public participation, including--
       (A) providing advance notice of meetings;
       (B) providing adequate opportunity for public input and 
     comment;
       (C) maintaining appropriate records; and
       (D) making a record of the proceedings of meetings 
     available for public inspection.
       (e) Coordination.--The Secretary shall integrate and 
     coordinate projects and activities carried out under this 
     section with ongoing Federal and State programs, projects, 
     and activities, including the following:
       (1) Upper Mississippi River System-Environmental Management 
     Program authorized under section 1103 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652).
       (2) Upper Mississippi River Illinois Waterway System Study.
       (3) Kankakee River Basin General Investigation.
       (4) Peoria Riverfront Development General Investigation.
       (5) Illinois River Ecosystem Restoration General 
     Investigation.
       (6) Conservation reserve program and other farm programs of 
     the Department of Agriculture.
       (7) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (State) and 
     Conservation 2000, Ecosystem Program of the Illinois 
     Department of Natural Resources.
       (8) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices Program and 
     the Livestock Management Facilities Act administered by the 
     Department of Agriculture of the State of Illinois.
       (9) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service.
       (10) Nonpoint source grant program administered by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency of the State of Illinois.
       (f) Justification.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 209 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2) or any other provision 
     of law, in carrying out activities to restore, preserve, and 
     protect the Illinois River basin under this section, the 
     Secretary may determine that the activities--
       (A) are justified by the environmental benefits derived by 
     the Illinois River basin; and
       (B) shall not need further economic justification if the 
     Secretary determines that the activities are cost-effective.
       (2) Applicability.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any 
     separable element intended to produce benefits that are 
     predominantly unrelated to the restoration, preservation, and 
     protection of the Illinois River basin.
       (g) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of 
     projects and activities carried out under this section shall 
     be 35 percent.
       (2) Operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and 
     replacement.--The operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and 
     replacement of projects carried out under this section shall 
     be a non-Federal responsibility.
       (3) In-kind services.--
       (A) In general.--The value of in-kind services provided by 
     the non-Federal interest for a project or activity carried 
     out under this section may be credited toward not more than 
     80 percent of the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     project or activity.
       (B) Items included.--In-kind services shall include all 
     State funds expended on programs and projects that accomplish 
     the goals of this section, as determined by the Secretary, 
     including the Illinois River Conservation Reserve Program, 
     the Illinois Conservation 2000 Program, the Open Lands Trust 
     Fund, and other appropriate programs carried out in the 
     Illinois River basin.
       (4) Credit.--
       (A) Value of land.--If the Secretary determines that land 
     or an interest in land acquired by a non-Federal interest, 
     regardless of the date of acquisition, is integral to a 
     project or activity carried out under this section, the 
     Secretary may credit the value of the land or interest in 
     land toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
     or activity, as determined by the Secretary.
       (B) Work.--If the Secretary determines that any work 
     completed by a non-Federal interest, regardless of the date 
     of completion, is integral to a project or activity carried 
     out under this section, the Secretary may credit the value of 
     the work toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     project or activity, as determined by the Secretary.

     SEC. 307. UPPER DES PLAINES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ILLINOIS.

       The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of 
     the costs of the study to determine the feasibility of 
     improvements to the upper Des Plaines River and tributaries, 
     phase 2, Illinois and Wisconsin, authorized by section 419 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 324), 
     the costs of work carried out by the non-Federal interests in 
     Lake County, Illinois, before the date of execution of the 
     feasibility study cost-sharing agreement, if--
       (1) the Secretary and the non-Federal interests enter into 
     a feasibility study cost-sharing agreement; and
       (2) the Secretary finds that the work is integral to the 
     scope of the feasibility study.

     SEC. 308. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the Report of the Chief of 
     Engineers, dated February 28, 1983, for the project for flood 
     control, Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana, 
     authorized by section 601(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142), which report refers 
     to recreational development in the Lower Atchafalaya Basin 
     Floodway, the Secretary--
       (1) shall, in collaboration with the State of Louisiana, 
     initiate construction of the visitors center, authorized as 
     part of the project, at or near Lake End Park in Morgan City, 
     Louisiana; and
       (2) shall construct other recreational features, authorized 
     as part of the project, within, and in the vicinity of, the 
     Lower Atchafalaya Basin protection levees.
       (b) Authorities.--The Secretary shall carry out subsection 
     (a) in accordance with--
       (1) the feasibility study for the Atchafalaya Basin 
     Floodway System, Louisiana, dated January 1982; and
       (2) the recreation cost-sharing requirements under section 
     103(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 
     U.S.C. 2213(c)).

     SEC. 309. RED RIVER WATERWAY, LOUISIANA.

       The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Red 
     River Waterway, Louisiana, authorized by section 601(a) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142) 
     and modified by section 4(h) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4016), section 102(p) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4613), 
     and section 301(b)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1996 (110 Stat. 3710), is further modified to authorize 
     the purchase of mitigation land from willing sellers in any 
     of the parishes that comprise the Red River Waterway 
     District, consisting of Avoyelles, Bossier, Caddo, Grant, 
     Natchitoches, Rapides, and Red River Parishes.

     SEC. 310. NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, MILBRIDGE, MAINE.

       (a) Redesignation.--The project for navigation, Narraguagus 
     River, Milbridge, Maine, authorized by section 101 of the 
     River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173), is modified to 
     redesignate as anchorage the portion of the 11-foot channel 
     described as follows: beginning at a point with coordinates 
     N248,413.92, E668,000.24, thence running south 20 degrees 09 
     minutes 57.8 seconds east 1325.205 feet to a point 
     N247,169.95, E668,457.09, thence running north 51 degrees 30 
     minutes 05.7 seconds west 562.33 feet to a point N247,520.00, 
     E668,017.00, thence running north 01 degrees 04 minutes 26.8 
     seconds west 894.077 feet to the point of origin.
       (b) Reauthorization.--The Secretary shall maintain as 
     anchorage the portions of the project for navigation, 
     Narraguagus River, Milbridge, Maine, authorized by section 2 
     of the Act of June 14, 1880 (21 Stat. 195, chapter 211), that 
     lie adjacent to and outside the limits of the 11-foot and 9-
     foot channels and that are described as follows:
       (1) The area located east of the 11-foot channel beginning 
     at a point with coordinates N248,060.52, E668,236.56, thence 
     running south 36 degrees 20 minutes 52.3 seconds east 
     1567.242 feet to a point N246,798.21, E669,165.44, thence 
     running north 51 degrees 30 minutes 06.2 seconds west 839.855 
     feet to a point N247,321.01, E668,508.15, thence running 
     north 20 degrees 09 minutes 58.1 seconds west 787.801 feet to 
     the point of origin.
       (2) The area located west of the 9-foot channel beginning 
     at a point with coordinates N249,673.29, E667,537.73, thence 
     running south 20 degrees 09 minutes 57.8 seconds east 
     1341.616 feet to a point N248,413.92, E668,000.24, thence 
     running south 01 degrees 04 minutes 26.8 seconds east 371.688 
     feet to a point N248,042.30, E668,007.21, thence running 
     north 22 degrees 21 minutes 20.8 seconds west 474.096 feet to 
     a point N248,480.76, E667,826.88, thence running north 79 
     degrees 09 minutes 31.6 seconds east 100.872 feet to a point 
     N248,499.73, E667,925.95, thence running north 13 degrees 47 
     minutes 27.6 seconds west 95.126 feet to a point N248,592.12, 
     E667,903.28, thence running south 79 degrees 09 minutes 31.6 
     seconds west 115.330 feet to a point N248,570.42, 
     E667,790.01, thence running north 22 degrees 21 minutes 20.8 
     seconds west 816.885 feet to a point N249,325.91, 
     E667,479.30, thence running north 07 degrees 03 minutes 00.3 
     seconds west 305.680 feet to a point N249,629.28, 
     E667,441.78, thence running north 65 degrees 21 minutes

[[Page H10301]]

     33.8 seconds east 105.561 feet to the point of origin.

     SEC. 311. WILLIAM JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MARYLAND.

       The Secretary--
       (1) may provide design and construction assistance for 
     recreational facilities in the State of Maryland at the 
     William Jennings Randolph Lake (Bloomington Dam), Maryland 
     and West Virginia, project authorized by section 203 of the 
     Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1182); and
       (2) shall require the non-Federal interest to provide 50 
     percent of the costs of designing and constructing the 
     recreational facilities.

     SEC. 312. BRECKENRIDGE, MINNESOTA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may complete the project for 
     flood damage reduction, Breckenridge, Minnesota, 
     substantially in accordance with the Detailed Project Report 
     dated September 2000, at a total cost of $21,000,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $13,650,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $7,350,000.
       (b) In-Kind Services.--The non-Federal interest may provide 
     its share of project costs in cash or in the form of in-kind 
     services or materials.
       (c) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of project costs for design and 
     construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of modification of the existing project 
     cooperation agreement or execution of a new project 
     cooperation agreement, if the Secretary determines that the 
     work is integral to the project.

     SEC. 313. MISSOURI RIVER VALLEY, MISSOURI.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Missouri River Valley Improvement Act''.
       (b) Findings and Purposes.--
       (1) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (A) Lewis and Clark were pioneering naturalists that 
     recorded dozens of species previously unknown to science 
     while ascending the Missouri River in 1804;
       (B) the Missouri River, which is 2,321 miles long, drains 
     \1/6\ of the United States, is home to approximately 
     10,000,000 people in 10 States and 28 Native American tribes, 
     and is a resource of incalculable value to the United States;
       (C) the construction of dams, levees, and river training 
     structures in the past 150 years has aided navigation, flood 
     control, and water supply along the Missouri River, but has 
     reduced habitat for native river fish and wildlife;
       (D) river organizations, including the Missouri River Basin 
     Association, support habitat restoration, riverfront 
     revitalization, and improved operational flexibility so long 
     as those efforts do not significantly interfere with uses of 
     the Missouri River; and
       (E) restoring a string of natural places by the year 2004 
     would aid native river fish and wildlife, reduce flood 
     losses, enhance recreation and tourism, and celebrate the 
     bicentennial of Lewis and Clark's voyage.
       (2) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       (A) to protect, restore, and enhance the fish, wildlife, 
     and plants, and the associated habitats on which they depend, 
     of the Missouri River;
       (B) to restore a string of natural places that aid native 
     river fish and wildlife, reduce flood losses, and enhance 
     recreation and tourism;
       (C) to revitalize historic riverfronts to improve quality 
     of life in riverside communities and attract recreation and 
     tourism;
       (D) to monitor the health of the Missouri River and measure 
     biological, chemical, geological, and hydrological responses 
     to changes in Missouri River management;
       (E) to allow the Corps of Engineers increased authority to 
     restore and protect fish and wildlife habitat on the Missouri 
     River;
       (F) to protect and replenish cottonwoods, and their 
     associated riparian woodland communities, along the upper 
     Missouri River; and
       (G) to educate the public about the economic, 
     environmental, and cultural importance of the Missouri River 
     and the scientific and cultural discoveries of Lewis and 
     Clark.
       (c) Definition of Missouri River.--In this section, the 
     term ``Missouri River'' means the Missouri River and the 
     adjacent floodplain that extends from the mouth of the 
     Missouri River (RM 0) to the confluence of the Jefferson, 
     Madison, and Gallatin Rivers (RM 2341) in the State of 
     Montana.
       (d) Authority To Protect, Enhance, and Restore Fish and 
     Wildlife Habitat.--Section 9(b) of the Act of December 22, 
     1944 (58 Stat. 891, chapter 665), is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(b) The general'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(b) Comprehensive Plan.--
       ``(1) In general.--The general'';
       (2) by striking ``paragraph'' and inserting ``subsection''; 
     and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Fish and wildlife habitat.--In addition to carrying 
     out the duties under the comprehensive plan described in 
     paragraph (1), the Chief of Engineers shall protect, enhance, 
     and restore fish and wildlife habitat on the Missouri River 
     to the extent consistent with other authorized project 
     purposes.''.
       (e) Integration of Activities.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out this section and in 
     accordance with paragraph (2), the Secretary shall provide 
     for such activities as are necessary to protect and enhance 
     fish and wildlife habitat without adversely affecting--
       (A) the water-related needs of the Missouri River basin, 
     including flood control, navigation, hydropower, water 
     supply, and recreation; and
       (B) private property rights.
       (2) New authority.--Nothing in this section confers any new 
     regulatory authority on any Federal or non-Federal entity 
     that carries out any activity under this section.
       (f) Missouri River Mitigation Project.--The matter under 
     the heading ``missouri river mitigation, missouri, kansas, 
     iowa, and nebraska'' of section 601(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following: ``There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out this paragraph $20,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2001 through 2010, contingent on the 
     completion by December 31, 2000, of the study under this 
     heading.''.
       (g) Upper Missouri River Aquatic and Riparian Habitat 
     Mitigation Program.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Study.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary, through an interagency 
     agreement with the Director of the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service and in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife 
     Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 2901 et seq.), shall 
     complete a study that--
       (i) analyzes any adverse effects on aquatic and riparian-
     dependent fish and wildlife resulting from the operation of 
     the Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir Project in the States 
     of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana;
       (ii) recommends measures appropriate to mitigate the 
     adverse effects described in clause (i); and
       (iii) develops baseline geologic and hydrologic data 
     relating to aquatic and riparian habitat.
       (B) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report describing the results of the study under 
     subparagraph (A).
       (2) Pilot program.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and 
     the affected State fish and wildlife agencies, shall develop 
     and administer a pilot mitigation program that--
       (A) involves the experimental releases of warm water from 
     the spillways at Fort Peck Dam during the appropriate 
     spawning periods for native fish;
       (B) involves the monitoring of the response of fish to and 
     the effectiveness of the preservation of native fish and 
     wildlife habitat of the releases described in subparagraph 
     (A); and
       (C) shall not adversely impact a use of the reservoir 
     existing on the date on which the pilot program is 
     implemented.
       (3) Reservoir fish loss study.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the North Dakota Game and Fish Department and the South 
     Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, shall complete a 
     study to analyze and recommend measures to avoid or reduce 
     the loss of fish, including rainbow smelt, through Garrison 
     Dam in North Dakota and Oahe Dam in South Dakota.
       (B) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report describing the results of the study under 
     subparagraph (A).
       (4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary--
       (A) to complete the study required under paragraph (3), 
     $200,000; and
       (B) to carry out the other provisions of this subsection, 
     $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010.
       (h) Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers Enhancement 
     Project.--Section 514 of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1999 (113 Stat. 342) is amended by striking subsection (g) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(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 $5,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2001 through 2004.''.

     SEC. 314. NEW MADRID COUNTY, MISSOURI.

       (a) In General.--The project for navigation, New Madrid 
     County Harbor, New Madrid County, Missouri, authorized under 
     section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
     577), is authorized as described in the feasibility report 
     for the project, including both phase 1 and phase 2 of the 
     project.
       (b) Credit.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide credit to the 
     non-Federal interests for the costs incurred by the non-
     Federal interests in carrying out construction work for phase 
     1 of the project, if the Secretary finds that the 
     construction work is integral to phase 2 of the project.
       (2) Maximum amount of credit.--The amount of the credit 
     under paragraph (1) shall not exceed the required non-Federal 
     share for the project.

     SEC. 315. PEMISCOT COUNTY HARBOR, MISSOURI.

       (a) Credit.--With respect to the project for navigation, 
     Pemiscot County Harbor, Missouri, authorized under section 
     107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), the 
     Secretary shall provide credit to the Pemiscot County Port 
     Authority, or an agent of the authority, for the costs 
     incurred by the Authority or agent in carrying out 
     construction work for the project after December 31, 1997, if 
     the Secretary finds that

[[Page H10302]]

     the construction work is integral to the project.
       (b) Maximum Amount of Credit.--The amount of the credit 
     under subsection (a) shall not exceed the required non-
     Federal share for the project, estimated as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act to be $222,000.

     SEC. 316. PIKE COUNTY, MISSOURI.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsections (c) and (d), at 
     such time as S.S.S., Inc. conveys all right, title, and 
     interest in and to the parcel of land described in subsection 
     (b)(1) to the United States, the Secretary shall convey all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the 
     parcel of land described in subsection (b)(2) to S.S.S., Inc.
       (b) Land Description.--The parcels of land referred to in 
     subsection (a) are the following:
       (1) Non-federal land.--8.99 acres with existing flowage 
     easements, located in Pike County, Missouri, adjacent to land 
     being acquired from Holnam, Inc. by the Corps of Engineers.
       (2) Federal land.--8.99 acres located in Pike County, 
     Missouri, known as ``Government Tract Numbers FM-46 and FM-
     47'', administered by the Corps of Engineers.
       (c) Conditions.--The land exchange under subsection (a) 
     shall be subject to the following conditions:
       (1) Deeds.--
       (A) Non-federal land.--The conveyance of the parcel of land 
     described in subsection (b)(1) to the Secretary shall be by a 
     warranty deed acceptable to the Secretary.
       (B) Federal land.--The instrument of conveyance used to 
     convey the parcel of land described in subsection (b)(2) to 
     S.S.S., Inc. shall contain such reservations, terms, and 
     conditions as the Secretary considers necessary to allow the 
     United States to operate and maintain the Mississippi River 
     9-Foot Navigation Project.
       (2) Removal of improvements.--
       (A) In general.--S.S.S., Inc. may remove, and the Secretary 
     may require S.S.S., Inc. to remove, any improvements on the 
     parcel of land described in subsection (b)(1).
       (B) No liability.--If S.S.S., Inc., voluntarily or under 
     direction from the Secretary, removes an improvement on the 
     parcel of land described in subsection (b)(1)--
       (i) S.S.S., Inc. shall have no claim against the United 
     States for liability; and
       (ii) the United States shall not incur or be liable for any 
     cost associated with the removal or relocation of the 
     improvement.
       (3) Time limit for land exchange.--Not later than 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the land exchange 
     under subsection (a) shall be completed.
       (4) Legal description.--The Secretary shall provide legal 
     descriptions of the parcels of land described in subsection 
     (b), which shall be used in the instruments of conveyance of 
     the parcels.
       (5) Administrative costs.--The Secretary shall require 
     S.S.S., Inc. to pay reasonable administrative costs 
     associated with the land exchange under subsection (a).
       (d) Value of Properties.--If the appraised fair market 
     value, as determined by the Secretary, of the parcel of land 
     conveyed to S.S.S., Inc. by the Secretary under subsection 
     (a) exceeds the appraised fair market value, as determined by 
     the Secretary, of the parcel of land conveyed to the United 
     States by S.S.S., Inc. under that subsection, S.S.S., Inc. 
     shall pay to the United States, in cash or a cash equivalent, 
     an amount equal to the difference between the 2 values.

     SEC. 317. FORT PECK FISH HATCHERY, MONTANA.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) Fort Peck Lake, Montana, is in need of a multispecies 
     fish hatchery;
       (2) the burden of carrying out efforts to raise and stock 
     fish species in Fort Peck Lake has been disproportionately 
     borne by the State of Montana despite the existence of a 
     Federal project at Fort Peck Lake;
       (3)(A) as of the date of enactment of this Act, eastern 
     Montana has only 1 warm water fish hatchery, which is 
     inadequate to meet the demands of the region; and
       (B) a disease or infrastructure failure at that hatchery 
     could imperil fish populations throughout the region;
       (4) although the multipurpose project at Fort Peck, 
     Montana, authorized by the first section of the Act of August 
     30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1034, chapter 831), was intended to 
     include irrigation projects and other activities designed to 
     promote economic growth, many of those projects were never 
     completed, to the detriment of the local communities flooded 
     by the Fort Peck Dam;
       (5) the process of developing an environmental impact 
     statement for the update of the Corps of Engineers Master 
     Manual for the operation of the Missouri River recognized the 
     need for greater support of recreation activities and other 
     authorized purposes of the Fort Peck project;
       (6)(A) although fish stocking is included among the 
     authorized purposes of the Fort Peck project, the State of 
     Montana has funded the stocking of Fort Peck Lake since 1947; 
     and
       (B) the obligation to fund the stocking constitutes an 
     undue burden on the State; and
       (7) a viable multispecies fishery would spur economic 
     development in the region.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       (1) to authorize and provide funding for the design and 
     construction of a multispecies fish hatchery at Fort Peck 
     Lake, Montana; and
       (2) to ensure stable operation and maintenance of the fish 
     hatchery.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Fort peck lake.--The term ``Fort Peck Lake'' means the 
     reservoir created by the damming of the upper Missouri River 
     in northeastern Montana.
       (2) Hatchery project.--The term ``hatchery project'' means 
     the project authorized by subsection (d).
       (d) Authorization.--The Secretary shall carry out a project 
     at Fort Peck Lake, Montana, for the design and construction 
     of a fish hatchery and such associated facilities as are 
     necessary to sustain a multispecies fishery.
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Design and construction.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the costs of 
     design and construction of the hatchery project shall be 75 
     percent.
       (B) Form of non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--The non-Federal share of the costs of the 
     hatchery project may be provided in the form of cash or in 
     the form of land, easements, rights-of-way, services, roads, 
     or any other form of in-kind contribution determined by the 
     Secretary to be appropriate.
       (ii) Required crediting.--The Secretary shall credit toward 
     the non-Federal share of the costs of the hatchery project--

       (I) the costs to the State of Montana of stocking Fort Peck 
     Lake during the period beginning January 1, 1947; and
       (II) the costs to the State of Montana and the counties 
     having jurisdiction over land surrounding Fort Peck Lake of 
     construction of local access roads to the lake.

       (2) Operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement.--
       (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) 
     and (C), the operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement 
     of the hatchery project shall be a non-Federal 
     responsibility.
       (B) Costs associated with threatened and endangered 
     species.--The costs of operation and maintenance associated 
     with raising threatened or endangered species shall be a 
     Federal responsibility.
       (C) Power.--The Secretary shall offer to the hatchery 
     project low-cost project power for all hatchery operations.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this section--
       (A) $20,000,000; and
       (B) such sums as are necessary to carry out subsection 
     (e)(2)(B).
       (2) Availability of funds.--Sums made available under 
     paragraph (1) shall remain available until expended.

     SEC. 318. SAGAMORE CREEK, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

       The Secretary shall carry out maintenance dredging of the 
     Sagamore Creek Channel, New Hampshire.

     SEC. 319. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NEW JERSEY.

       (a) In General.--The project for flood control, Passaic 
     River, New Jersey and New York, authorized by section 
     101(a)(18) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (104 Stat. 4607), is modified to emphasize nonstructural 
     approaches for flood control as alternatives to the 
     construction of the Passaic River tunnel element, while 
     maintaining the integrity of other separable mainstream 
     project elements, wetland banks, and other independent 
     projects that were authorized to be carried out in the 
     Passaic River Basin before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Reevaluation of Floodway Study.--The Secretary shall 
     review the Passaic River Floodway Buyout Study, dated October 
     1995, to calculate the benefits of a buyout and environmental 
     restoration using the method used to calculate the benefits 
     of structural projects under section 308(b) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2318(b)).
       (c) Reevaluation of 10-Year Floodplain Study.--The 
     Secretary shall review the Passaic River Buyout Study of the 
     10-year floodplain beyond the floodway of the Central Passaic 
     River Basin, dated September 1995, to calculate the benefits 
     of a buyout and environmental restoration using the method 
     used to calculate the benefits of structural projects under 
     section 308(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2318(b)).
       (d) Preservation of Natural Storage Areas.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall reevaluate the 
     acquisition, from willing sellers, for flood protection 
     purposes, of wetlands in the Central Passaic River Basin to 
     supplement the wetland acquisition authorized by section 
     101(a)(18)(C)(vi) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1990 (104 Stat. 4609).
       (2) Purchase.--If the Secretary determines that the 
     acquisition of wetlands evaluated under paragraph (1) is 
     economically justified, the Secretary shall purchase the 
     wetlands, with the goal of purchasing not more than 8,200 
     acres.
       (e) Streambank Erosion Control Study.--The Secretary shall 
     review relevant reports and conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental 
     restoration, erosion control, and streambank restoration 
     along the Passaic River, from Dundee Dam to Kearny Point, New 
     Jersey.
       (f) Passaic River Flood Management Task Force.--
       (1) Establishment.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
     non-Federal interest, shall establish a task force, to be 
     known as the ``Passaic River Flood Management Task Force'', 
     to provide advice to the Secretary

[[Page H10303]]

     concerning all aspects of the Passaic River flood management 
     project.
       (2) Membership.--The task force shall be composed of 20 
     members, appointed as follows:
       (A) Appointment by secretary.--The Secretary shall appoint 
     1 member to represent the Corps of Engineers and to provide 
     technical advice to the task force.
       (B) Appointments by governor of new jersey.--The Governor 
     of New Jersey shall appoint 18 members to the task force, as 
     follows:
       (i) 2 representatives of the New Jersey legislature who are 
     members of different political parties.
       (ii) 1 representative of the State of New Jersey.
       (iii) 1 representative of each of Bergen, Essex, Morris, 
     and Passaic Counties, New Jersey.
       (iv) 6 representatives of governments of municipalities 
     affected by flooding within the Passaic River Basin.
       (v) 1 representative of the Palisades Interstate Park 
     Commission.
       (vi) 1 representative of the North Jersey District Water 
     Supply Commission.
       (vii) 1 representative of each of--

       (I) the Association of New Jersey Environmental 
     Commissions;
       (II) the Passaic River Coalition; and
       (III) the Sierra Club.

       (C) Appointment by governor of new york.--The Governor of 
     New York shall appoint 1 representative of the State of New 
     York to the task force.
       (3) Meetings.--
       (A) Regular meetings.--The task force shall hold regular 
     meetings.
       (B) Open meetings.--The meetings of the task force shall be 
     open to the public.
       (4) Annual report.--The task force shall submit annually to 
     the Secretary and to the non-Federal interest a report 
     describing the achievements of the Passaic River flood 
     management project in preventing flooding and any impediments 
     to completion of the project.
       (5) Expenditure of funds.--The Secretary may use funds made 
     available to carry out the Passaic River Basin flood 
     management project to pay the administrative expenses of the 
     task force.
       (6) Termination.--The task force shall terminate on the 
     date on which the Passaic River flood management project is 
     completed.
       (g) Acquisition of Lands in the Floodway.--Section 1148 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4254; 
     110 Stat. 3718), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(e) Consistency With New Jersey Blue Acres Program.--The 
     Secretary shall carry out this section in a manner that is 
     consistent with the Blue Acres Program of the State of New 
     Jersey.''.
       (h) Study of Highlands Land Conservation.--The Secretary, 
     in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     State of New Jersey, may study the feasibility of conserving 
     land in the Highlands region of New Jersey and New York to 
     provide additional flood protection for residents of the 
     Passaic River Basin in accordance with section 212 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332).
       (i) Restriction on Use of Funds.--The Secretary shall not 
     obligate any funds to carry out design or construction of the 
     tunnel element of the Passaic River flood control project, as 
     authorized by section 101(a)(18)(A) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607).
       (j) Conforming Amendment.--Section 101(a)(18) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607) is amended 
     in the paragraph heading by striking ``main stem,'' and 
     inserting ``flood management project,''.

     SEC. 320. ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NEW YORK.

       (a) In General.--The project for shoreline protection, 
     Atlantic Coast of New York City from Rockaway Inlet to Norton 
     Point (Coney Island Area), New York, authorized by section 
     501(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
     Stat. 4135) is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
     construct T-groins to improve sand retention down drift of 
     the West 37th Street groin, in the Sea Gate area of Coney 
     Island, New York, as identified in the March 1998 report 
     prepared for the Corps of Engineers, entitled ``Field Data 
     Gathering Project Performance Analysis and Design Alternative 
     Solutions to Improve Sandfill Retention'', at a total cost of 
     $9,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,850,000 and 
     an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,150,000.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the costs of 
     constructing the T-groins under subsection (a) shall be 35 
     percent.

     SEC. 321. JOHN DAY POOL, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.

       (a) Extinguishment of Reversionary Interests and Use 
     Restrictions.--With respect to the land described in each 
     deed specified in subsection (b)--
       (1) the reversionary interests and the use restrictions 
     relating to port or industrial purposes are extinguished;
       (2) the human habitation or other building structure use 
     restriction is extinguished in each area where the elevation 
     is above the standard project flood elevation; and
       (3) the use of fill material to raise low areas above the 
     standard project flood elevation is authorized, except in any 
     low area constituting wetland for which a permit under 
     section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1344) would be required.
       (b) Affected Deeds.--Subsection (a) applies to deeds with 
     the following county auditors' numbers:
       (1) Auditor's Microfilm Numbers 229 and 16226 of Morrow 
     County, Oregon, executed by the United States.
       (2) The portion of the land conveyed in a deed executed by 
     the United States and bearing Benton County, Washington, 
     Auditor's File Number 601766, described as a tract of land 
     lying in sec. 7, T. 5 N., R. 28 E., Willamette meridian, 
     Benton County, Washington, being more particularly described 
     by the following boundaries:
       (A) Commencing at the point of intersection of the 
     centerlines of Plymouth Street and Third Avenue in the First 
     Addition to the Town of Plymouth (according to the duly 
     recorded plat thereof).
       (B) Thence west along the centerline of Third Avenue, a 
     distance of 565 feet.
       (C) Thence south 54 deg. 10' west, to a point on the west 
     line of Tract 18 of that Addition and the true point of 
     beginning.
       (D) Thence north, parallel with the west line of that sec. 
     7, to a point on the north line of that sec. 7.
       (E) Thence west along the north line thereof to the 
     northwest corner of that sec. 7.
       (F) Thence south along the west line of that sec. 7 to a 
     point on the ordinary high water line of the Columbia River.
       (G) Thence northeast along that high water line to a point 
     on the north and south coordinate line of the Oregon 
     Coordinate System, North Zone, that coordinate line being 
     east 2,291,000 feet.
       (H) Thence north along that line to a point on the south 
     line of First Avenue of that Addition.
       (I) Thence west along First Avenue to a point on the 
     southerly extension of the west line of T. 18.
       (J) Thence north along that west line of T. 18 to the point 
     of beginning.

     SEC. 322. FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, PROVIDENCE, RHODE 
                   ISLAND.

       Section 352 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 310) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Credit Toward Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal 
     interest shall receive credit toward the non-Federal share of 
     project costs, or reimbursement, for the Federal share of the 
     costs of repairs authorized under subsection (a) that are 
     incurred by the non-Federal interest before the date of 
     execution of the project cooperation agreement.''.

     SEC. 323. CHARLESTON HARBOR, SOUTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Estuary Restoration.--
       (1) Support plan.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a plan for 
     activities of the Corps of Engineers to support the 
     restoration of the ecosystem of the Charleston Harbor 
     estuary, South Carolina.
       (B) Cooperation.--The Secretary shall develop the plan in 
     cooperation with--
       (i) the State of South Carolina; and
       (ii) other affected Federal and non-Federal interests.
       (2) Projects.--The Secretary shall plan, design, and 
     construct projects to support the restoration of the 
     ecosystem of the Charleston Harbor estuary.
       (3) Evaluation program.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a program to 
     evaluate the success of the projects carried out under 
     paragraph (2) in meeting ecosystem restoration goals.
       (B) Studies.--Evaluations under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     conducted in consultation with the appropriate Federal, 
     State, and local agencies.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Development of plan.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     development of the plan under subsection (a)(1) shall be 65 
     percent.
       (2) Project planning, design, construction, and 
     evaluation.--The Federal share of the cost of planning, 
     design, construction, and evaluation of a project under 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (a) shall be 65 percent.
       (3) Non-federal share.--
       (A) Credit for land, easements, and rights-of-way.--The 
     non-Federal interest shall receive credit for the value of 
     any land, easement, right-of-way, relocation, or dredged 
     material disposal area provided for carrying out a project 
     under subsection (a)(2).
       (B) Form.--The non-Federal interest may provide up to 50 
     percent of the non-Federal share in the form of services, 
     materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
       (4) Operation and maintenance.--The operation, maintenance, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of projects carried 
     out under this section shall be a non-Federal responsibility.
       (5) Non-federal interests.--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 private interest and a nonprofit 
     entity.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) Development of plan.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out subsection (a)(1) $300,000.

[[Page H10304]]

       (2) Other activities.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out paragraphs (2) and (3) of 
     subsection (a) $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 
     through 2004.

     SEC. 324. SAVANNAH RIVER, SOUTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Definition of New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.--In this 
     section, the term ``New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam'' means--
       (1) the lock and dam at New Savannah Bluff, Savannah River, 
     Georgia and South Carolina; and
       (2) the appurtenant features to the lock and dam, 
     including--
       (A) the adjacent approximately 50-acre park and recreation 
     area with improvements made under the project for navigation, 
     Savannah River below Augusta, Georgia, authorized by the 
     first section of the Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 924, 
     chapter 847) and the first section of the Act of August 30, 
     1935 (49 Stat. 1032, chapter 831); and
       (B) other land that is part of the project and that the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate for conveyance under 
     this section.
       (b) Repair and Conveyance.--After execution of an agreement 
     between the Secretary and the city of North Augusta and Aiken 
     County, South Carolina, the Secretary--
       (1) shall repair and rehabilitate the New Savannah Bluff 
     Lock and Dam, at full Federal expense estimated at 
     $5,300,000; and
       (2) after repair and rehabilitation, may convey the New 
     Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam, without consideration, to the 
     city of North Augusta and Aiken County, South Carolina.
       (c) Treatment of New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.--The New 
     Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam shall not be considered to be 
     part of any Federal project after the conveyance under 
     subsection (b).
       (d) Operation and Maintenance.--
       (1) Before conveyance.--Before the conveyance under 
     subsection (b), the Secretary shall continue to operate and 
     maintain the New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.
       (2) After conveyance.--After the conveyance under 
     subsection (b), operation and maintenance of all features of 
     the project for navigation, Savannah River below Augusta, 
     Georgia, described in subsection (a)(2)(A), other than the 
     New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam, shall continue to be a 
     Federal responsibility.

     SEC. 325. HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TEXAS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to the completion, not later than 
     December 31, 2000, of a favorable report by the Chief of 
     Engineers, the project for navigation and environmental 
     restoration, Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas, 
     authorized by section 101(a)(30) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3666), is modified to 
     authorize the Secretary to design and construct barge lanes 
     adjacent to both sides of the Houston Ship Channel from 
     Redfish Reef to Morgan Point, a distance of approximately 15 
     miles, to a depth of 12 feet, at a total cost of $34,000,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $30,600,000 and an 
     estimated non-Federal cost of $3,400,000.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal interest shall pay a 
     portion of the costs of construction of the barge lanes under 
     subsection (a) in accordance with section 101 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211).
       (c) Federal Interest.--If the modification under subsection 
     (a) is in compliance with all applicable environmental 
     requirements, the modification shall be considered to be in 
     the Federal interest.
       (d) No Authorization of Maintenance.--No maintenance is 
     authorized to be carried out for the modification under 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 326. JOE POOL LAKE, TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TEXAS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into an 
     agreement with the city of Grand Prairie, Texas, under which 
     the city agrees to assume all responsibilities of the Trinity 
     River Authority of the State of Texas under Contract No. 
     DACW63-76-C-0166, other than financial responsibilities, 
     except the responsibility described in subsection (d).
       (b) Responsibilities of Trinity River Authority.--The 
     Trinity River Authority shall be relieved of all financial 
     responsibilities under the contract described in subsection 
     (a) as of the date on which the Secretary enters into the 
     agreement with the city under that subsection.
       (c) Payments by City.--In consideration of the agreement 
     entered into under subsection (a), the city shall pay the 
     Federal Government $4,290,000 in 2 installments--
       (1) 1 installment in the amount of $2,150,000, which shall 
     be due and payable not later than December 1, 2000; and
       (2) 1 installment in the amount of $2,140,000, which shall 
     be due and payable not later than December 1, 2003.
       (d) Operation and Maintenance Costs.--The agreement entered 
     into under subsection (a) shall include a provision requiring 
     the city to assume responsibility for all costs associated 
     with operation and maintenance of the recreation facilities 
     included in the contract described in that subsection.

     SEC. 327. LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED, VERMONT AND NEW YORK.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Critical restoration project.--The term ``critical 
     restoration project'' means a project that will produce, 
     consistent with Federal programs, projects, and activities, 
     immediate and substantial ecosystem restoration, 
     preservation, and protection benefits.
       (2) Lake champlain watershed.--The term ``Lake Champlain 
     watershed'' means--
       (A) the land areas within Addison, Bennington, Caledonia, 
     Chittenden, Franklin, Grand Isle, Lamoille, Orange, Orleans, 
     Rutland, and Washington Counties in the State of Vermont; and
       (B)(i) the land areas that drain into Lake Champlain and 
     that are located within Essex, Clinton, Franklin, Warren, and 
     Washington Counties in the State of New York; and
       (ii) the near-shore areas of Lake Champlain within the 
     counties referred to in clause (i).
       (b) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may participate in critical 
     restoration projects in the Lake Champlain watershed.
       (2) Types of projects.--A critical restoration project 
     shall be eligible for assistance under this section if the 
     critical restoration project consists of--
       (A) implementation of an intergovernmental agreement for 
     coordinating regulatory and management responsibilities with 
     respect to the Lake Champlain watershed;
       (B) acceleration of whole farm planning to implement best 
     management practices to maintain or enhance water quality and 
     to promote agricultural land use in the Lake Champlain 
     watershed;
       (C) acceleration of whole community planning to promote 
     intergovernmental cooperation in the regulation and 
     management of activities consistent with the goal of 
     maintaining or enhancing water quality in the Lake Champlain 
     watershed;
       (D) natural resource stewardship activities on public or 
     private land to promote land uses that--
       (i) preserve and enhance the economic and social character 
     of the communities in the Lake Champlain watershed; and
       (ii) protect and enhance water quality; or
       (E) any other activity determined by the Secretary to be 
     appropriate.
       (c) Public Ownership Requirement.--The Secretary may 
     provide assistance for a critical restoration project under 
     this section only if--
       (1) the critical restoration project is publicly owned; or
       (2) the non-Federal interest with respect to the critical 
     restoration project demonstrates that the critical 
     restoration project will provide a substantial public benefit 
     in the form of water quality improvement.
       (d) Project Selection.--
       (1) In general.--In consultation with the Lake Champlain 
     Basin Program and the heads of other appropriate Federal, 
     State, tribal, and local agencies, the Secretary may--
       (A) identify critical restoration projects in the Lake 
     Champlain watershed; and
       (B) carry out the critical restoration projects after 
     entering into an agreement with an appropriate non-Federal 
     interest in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control 
     Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) and this section.
       (2) Certification.--
       (A) In general.--A critical restoration project shall be 
     eligible for financial assistance under this section only if 
     the State director for the critical restoration project 
     certifies to the Secretary that the critical restoration 
     project will contribute to the protection and enhancement of 
     the quality or quantity of the water resources of the Lake 
     Champlain watershed.
       (B) Special consideration.--In certifying critical 
     restoration projects to the Secretary, State directors shall 
     give special consideration to projects that implement plans, 
     agreements, and measures that preserve and enhance the 
     economic and social character of the communities in the Lake 
     Champlain watershed.
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--Before providing assistance under this 
     section with respect to a critical restoration project, the 
     Secretary shall enter into a project cooperation agreement 
     that shall require the non-Federal interest--
       (A) to pay 35 percent of the total costs of the critical 
     restoration project;
       (B) to acquire any land, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas necessary to 
     carry out the critical restoration project;
       (C) to pay 100 percent of the operation, maintenance, 
     repair, replacement, and rehabilitation costs associated with 
     the critical restoration project; and
       (D) to hold the United States harmless from any claim or 
     damage that may arise from carrying out the critical 
     restoration project, except any claim or damage that may 
     arise from the negligence of the Federal Government or a 
     contractor of the Federal Government.
       (2) Non-federal share.--
       (A) Credit for design work.--The non-Federal interest shall 
     receive credit for the reasonable costs of design work 
     carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of 
     execution of a project cooperation agreement for the critical 
     restoration project, if the Secretary finds that the design 
     work is integral to the critical restoration project.
       (B) Credit for land, easements, and rights-of-way.--The 
     non-Federal interest shall receive credit for the value of 
     any land, easement, right-of-way, relocation, or dredged 
     material disposal area provided for carrying out the critical 
     restoration project.
       (C) Form.--The non-Federal interest may provide up to 50 
     percent of the non-Federal

[[Page H10305]]

     share in the form of services, materials, supplies, or other 
     in-kind contributions.
       (f) Applicability of Other Federal and State Laws.--Nothing 
     in this section waives, limits, or otherwise affects the 
     applicability of Federal or State law with respect to a 
     critical restoration project carried out with assistance 
     provided under this section.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended.

     SEC. 328. MOUNT ST. HELENS, WASHINGTON.

       The project for sediment control, Mount St. Helens, 
     Washington, authorized by the matter under the heading 
     ``transfer of federal townsites'' in chapter IV of title I of 
     the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1985 (99 Stat. 318), is 
     modified to authorize the Secretary to maintain, for 
     Longview, Kelso, Lexington, and Castle Rock on the Cowlitz 
     River, Washington, the flood protection levels specified in 
     the October 1985 report entitled ``Mount St. Helens, 
     Washington, Decision Document (Toutle, Cowlitz, and Columbia 
     Rivers)'', published as House Document No. 135, 99th 
     Congress, signed by the Chief of Engineers, and endorsed and 
     submitted to Congress by the Acting Assistant Secretary of 
     the Army.

     SEC. 329. PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, 
                   WASHINGTON.

       (a) Definition of Critical Restoration Project.--In this 
     section, the term ``critical restoration project'' means a 
     project that will produce, consistent with Federal programs, 
     projects, and activities, immediate and substantial ecosystem 
     restoration, preservation, and protection benefits.
       (b) Critical Restoration Projects.--The Secretary may 
     participate in critical restoration projects in the area of 
     Puget Sound, Washington, and adjacent waters, including--
       (1) the watersheds that drain directly into Puget Sound;
       (2) Admiralty Inlet;
       (3) Hood Canal;
       (4) Rosario Strait; and
       (5) the Strait of Juan de Fuca to Cape Flattery.
       (c) Project Selection.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may identify critical 
     restoration projects in the area described in subsection (b) 
     based on--
       (A) studies to determine the feasibility of carrying out 
     the critical restoration projects; and
       (B) analyses conducted before the date of enactment of this 
     Act by non-Federal interests.
       (2) Criteria and procedures for review and approval.--
       (A) In general.--In consultation with the Secretary of 
     Commerce, the Secretary of the Interior, the Governor of the 
     State of Washington, tribal governments, and the heads of 
     other appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, the 
     Secretary may develop criteria and procedures for 
     prioritizing critical restoration projects identified under 
     paragraph (1).
       (B) Consistency with fish restoration goals.--The criteria 
     and procedures developed under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     consistent with fish restoration goals of the National Marine 
     Fisheries Service and the State of Washington.
       (C) Use of existing studies and plans.--In carrying out 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall use, to the maximum 
     extent practicable, studies and plans in existence on the 
     date of enactment of this Act to identify project needs and 
     priorities.
       (3) Local participation.--In prioritizing critical 
     restoration projects for implementation under this section, 
     the Secretary shall consult with, and give full consideration 
     to the priorities of, public and private entities that are 
     active in watershed planning and ecosystem restoration in 
     Puget Sound watersheds, including--
       (A) the Salmon Recovery Funding Board;
       (B) the Northwest Straits Commission;
       (C) the Hood Canal Coordinating Council;
       (D) county watershed planning councils; and
       (E) salmon enhancement groups.
       (d) Implementation.--The Secretary may carry out critical 
     restoration projects identified under subsection (c) after 
     entering into an agreement with an appropriate non-Federal 
     interest in accordance with section 221 of the Flood Control 
     Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) and this section.
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--Before carrying out any critical 
     restoration project under this section, the Secretary shall 
     enter into a binding agreement with the non-Federal interest 
     that shall require the non-Federal interest--
       (A) to pay 35 percent of the total costs of the critical 
     restoration project;
       (B) to acquire any land, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas necessary to 
     carry out the critical restoration project;
       (C) to pay 100 percent of the operation, maintenance, 
     repair, replacement, and rehabilitation costs associated with 
     the critical restoration project; and
       (D) to hold the United States harmless from any claim or 
     damage that may arise from carrying out the critical 
     restoration project, except any claim or damage that may 
     arise from the negligence of the Federal Government or a 
     contractor of the Federal Government.
       (2) Credit.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal interest shall receive 
     credit for the value of any land, easement, right-of-way, 
     relocation, or dredged material disposal area provided for 
     carrying out the critical restoration project.
       (B) Form.--The non-Federal interest may provide up to 50 
     percent of the non-Federal share in the form of services, 
     materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000, of 
     which not more than $5,000,000 may be used to carry out any 1 
     critical restoration project.

     SEC. 330. FOX RIVER SYSTEM, WISCONSIN.

       Section 332(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4852) 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) Payments to state.--The terms and conditions may 
     include 1 or more payments to the State of Wisconsin to 
     assist the State in paying the costs of repair and 
     rehabilitation of the transferred locks and appurtenant 
     features.''.

     SEC. 331. CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RESTORATION.

       Section 704(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2263(b)) is amended--
       (1) in the second sentence, by striking ``$7,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$20,000,000''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
       ``(4) the construction of reefs and related clean shell 
     substrate for fish habitat, including manmade 3-dimensional 
     oyster reefs, in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries in 
     Maryland and Virginia--
       ``(A) which reefs shall be preserved as permanent 
     sanctuaries by the non-Federal interests, consistent with the 
     recommendations of the scientific consensus document on 
     Chesapeake Bay oyster restoration dated June 1999; and
       ``(B) for assistance in the construction of which reefs the 
     Chief of Engineers shall solicit participation by and the 
     services of commercial watermen.''.

     SEC. 332. GREAT LAKES DREDGING LEVELS ADJUSTMENT.

       (a) Definition of Great Lake.--In this section, the term 
     ``Great Lake'' means Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron 
     (including Lake St. Clair), Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario 
     (including the St. Lawrence River to the 45th parallel of 
     latitude).
       (b) Dredging Levels.--In operating and maintaining Federal 
     channels and harbors of, and the connecting channels between, 
     the Great Lakes, the Secretary shall conduct such dredging as 
     is necessary to ensure minimal operation depths consistent 
     with the original authorized depths of the channels and 
     harbors when water levels in the Great Lakes are, or are 
     forecast to be, below the International Great Lakes Datum of 
     1985.

     SEC. 333. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Great Lakes comprise a nationally and 
     internationally significant fishery and ecosystem;
       (2) the Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem should be 
     developed and enhanced in a coordinated manner; and
       (3) the Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem provides a 
     diversity of opportunities, experiences, and beneficial uses.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Great lake.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Great Lake'' means Lake 
     Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron (including Lake St. 
     Clair), Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario (including the St. 
     Lawrence River to the 45th parallel of latitude).
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``Great Lake'' includes any 
     connecting channel, historically connected tributary, and 
     basin of a lake specified in subparagraph (A).
       (2) Great lakes commission.--The term ``Great Lakes 
     Commission'' means The Great Lakes Commission established by 
     the Great Lakes Basin Compact (82 Stat. 414).
       (3) Great lakes fishery commission.--The term ``Great Lakes 
     Fishery Commission'' has the meaning given the term 
     ``Commission'' in section 2 of the Great Lakes Fishery Act of 
     1956 (16 U.S.C. 931).
       (4) Great lakes state.--The term ``Great Lakes State'' 
     means each of the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, 
     Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, and Wisconsin.
       (c) Great Lakes Fishery and Ecosystem Restoration.--
       (1) Support plan.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a plan for 
     activities of the Corps of Engineers that support the 
     management of Great Lakes fisheries.
       (B) Use of existing documents.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, the plan shall make use of and incorporate 
     documents that relate to the Great Lakes and are in existence 
     on the date of enactment of this Act, such as lakewide 
     management plans and remedial action plans.
       (C) Cooperation.--The Secretary shall develop the plan in 
     cooperation with--
       (i) the signatories to the Joint Strategic Plan for 
     Management of the Great Lakes Fisheries; and
       (ii) other affected interests.
       (2) Projects.--The Secretary shall plan, design, and 
     construct projects to support the restoration of the fishery, 
     ecosystem, and beneficial uses of the Great Lakes.
       (3) Evaluation program.--

[[Page H10306]]

       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a program to 
     evaluate the success of the projects carried out under 
     paragraph (2) in meeting fishery and ecosystem restoration 
     goals.
       (B) Studies.--Evaluations under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     conducted in consultation with the Great Lakes Fishery 
     Commission and appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     agencies.
       (d) Cooperative Agreements.--In carrying out this section, 
     the Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement with the 
     Great Lakes Commission or any other agency established to 
     facilitate active State participation in management of the 
     Great Lakes.
       (e) Relationship to Other Great Lakes Activities.--No 
     activity under this section shall affect the date of 
     completion of any other activity relating to the Great Lakes 
     that is authorized under other law.
       (f) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Development of plan.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     development of the plan under subsection (c)(1) shall be 65 
     percent.
       (2) Project planning, design, construction, and 
     evaluation.--The Federal share of the cost of planning, 
     design, construction, and evaluation of a project under 
     paragraph (2) or (3) of subsection (c) shall be 65 percent.
       (3) Non-federal share.--
       (A) Credit for land, easements, and rights-of-way.--The 
     non-Federal interest shall receive credit for the value of 
     any land, easement, right-of-way, relocation, or dredged 
     material disposal area provided for carrying out a project 
     under subsection (c)(2).
       (B) Form.--The non-Federal interest may provide up to 50 
     percent of the non-Federal share required under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) in the form of services, materials, supplies, or 
     other in-kind contributions.
       (4) Operation and maintenance.--The operation, maintenance, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of projects carried 
     out under this section shall be a non-Federal responsibility.
       (5) Non-federal interests.--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 private interest and a nonprofit 
     entity.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) Development of plan.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated for development of the plan under subsection 
     (c)(1) $300,000.
       (2) Other activities.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out paragraphs (2) and (3) of 
     subsection (c) $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 
     through 2006.

     SEC. 334. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT 
                   REMEDIATION.

       Section 401 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 1268 note; 104 Stat. 4644; 110 Stat. 3763; 113 
     Stat. 338) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by striking ``50 percent'' and 
     inserting ``35 percent'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (3);
       (B) in the first sentence of paragraph (4), by striking 
     ``50 percent'' and inserting ``35 percent''; and
       (C) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3); and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``$5,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 1998 through 2000.'' and inserting ``$10,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010.''.

     SEC. 335. GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODEL.

       Section 516 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (33 U.S.C. 2326b) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Cost sharing.--The non-Federal share of the costs of 
     developing a tributary sediment transport model under this 
     subsection shall be 50 percent.''; and
       (2) in subsection (g)--
       (A) by striking ``There is authorized'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Great lakes tributary model.--In addition to amounts 
     made available under paragraph (1), there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out subsection (e) $5,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2001 through 2008.''.

     SEC. 336. TREATMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL FROM LONG ISLAND 
                   SOUND.

       (a) In General.--Not later than December 31, 2002, the 
     Secretary shall carry out a demonstration project for the use 
     of innovative sediment treatment technologies for the 
     treatment of dredged material from Long Island Sound.
       (b) Project Considerations.--In carrying out subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
       (1) encourage partnerships between the public and private 
     sectors;
       (2) build on treatment technologies that have been used 
     successfully in demonstration or full-scale projects (such as 
     projects carried out in the State of New York, New Jersey, or 
     Illinois), such as technologies described in--
       (A) section 405 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (33 U.S.C. 2239 note; 106 Stat. 4863); or
       (B) section 503 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (33 U.S.C. 2314 note; 113 Stat. 337);
       (3) ensure that dredged material from Long Island Sound 
     that is treated under the demonstration project is disposed 
     of by beneficial reuse, by open water disposal, or at a 
     licensed waste facility, as appropriate; and
       (4) ensure that the demonstration project is consistent 
     with the findings and requirements of any draft environmental 
     impact statement on the designation of 1 or more dredged 
     material disposal sites in Long Island Sound that is 
     scheduled for completion in 2001.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $20,000,000.

     SEC. 337. NEW ENGLAND WATER RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEM 
                   RESTORATION.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Critical restoration project.--The term ``critical 
     restoration project'' means a project that will produce, 
     consistent with Federal programs, projects, and activities, 
     immediate and substantial ecosystem restoration, 
     preservation, and protection benefits.
       (2) New england.--The term ``New England'' means all 
     watersheds, estuaries, and related coastal areas in the 
     States of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 
     Rhode Island, and Vermont.
       (b) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in coordination with 
     appropriate Federal, State, tribal, regional, and local 
     agencies, shall perform an assessment of the condition of 
     water resources and related ecosystems in New England to 
     identify problems and needs for restoring, preserving, and 
     protecting water resources, ecosystems, wildlife, and 
     fisheries.
       (2) Matters to be addressed.--The assessment shall 
     include--
       (A) development of criteria for identifying and 
     prioritizing the most critical problems and needs; and
       (B) a framework for development of watershed or regional 
     restoration plans.
       (3) Use of existing information.--In performing the 
     assessment, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, use--
       (A) information that is available on the date of enactment 
     of this Act; and
       (B) ongoing efforts of all participating agencies.
       (4) Criteria; framework.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop and make 
     available for public review and comment--
       (i) criteria for identifying and prioritizing critical 
     problems and needs; and
       (ii) a framework for development of watershed or regional 
     restoration plans.
       (B) Use of resources.--In developing the criteria and 
     framework, the Secretary shall make full use of all available 
     Federal, State, tribal, regional, and local resources.
       (5) Report.--Not later than October l, 2002, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the assessment.
       (c) Restoration Plans.--
       (1) In general.--After the report is submitted under 
     subsection (b)(5), the Secretary, in coordination with 
     appropriate Federal, State, tribal, regional, and local 
     agencies, shall--
       (A) develop a comprehensive plan for restoring, preserving, 
     and protecting the water resources and ecosystem in each 
     watershed and region in New England; and
       (B) submit the plan to Congress.
       (2) Contents.--Each restoration plan shall include--
       (A) a feasibility report; and
       (B) a programmatic environmental impact statement covering 
     the proposed Federal action.
       (d) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--After the restoration plans are submitted 
     under subsection (c)(1)(B), the Secretary, in coordination 
     with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, regional, and local 
     agencies, shall identify critical restoration projects that 
     will produce independent, immediate, and substantial 
     restoration, preservation, and protection benefits.
       (2) Agreements.--The Secretary may carry out a critical 
     restoration project after entering into an agreement with an 
     appropriate non-Federal interest in accordance with section 
     221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) and 
     this section.
       (3) Project justification.--Notwithstanding section 209 of 
     the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2) or any other 
     provision of law, in carrying out a critical restoration 
     project under this subsection, the Secretary may determine 
     that the project--
       (A) is justified by the environmental benefits derived from 
     the ecosystem; and
       (B) shall not need further economic justification if the 
     Secretary determines that the project is cost effective.
       (4) Time limitation.--No critical restoration project may 
     be initiated under this subsection after September 30, 2005.
       (5) Cost limitation.--Not more than $5,000,000 in Federal 
     funds may be used to carry out a critical restoration project 
     under this subsection.
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Assessment.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     assessment under subsection (b) shall be 25 percent.
       (B) In-kind contributions.--The non-Federal share may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (2) Restoration plans.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of 
     developing the restoration plans under subsection (c) shall 
     be 35 percent.

[[Page H10307]]

       (B) In-kind contributions.--Up to 50 percent of the non-
     Federal share may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, or other in-kind contributions.
       (3) Critical restoration projects.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a critical restoration project under subsection 
     (d) shall be 35 percent.
       (B) In-kind contributions.--Up to 50 percent of the non-
     Federal share may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, or other in-kind contributions.
       (C) Required non-federal contribution.--For any critical 
     restoration project, the non-Federal interest shall--
       (i) provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged 
     material disposal areas, and relocations;
       (ii) pay all operation, maintenance, replacement, repair, 
     and rehabilitation costs; and
       (iii) hold the United States harmless from all claims 
     arising from the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
     the project.
       (D) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     for the value of the land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged 
     material disposal areas, and relocations provided under 
     subparagraph (C).
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) Assessment and restoration plans.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out subsections (b) and (c) 
     $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.
       (2) Critical restoration projects.--There is authorized to 
     be appropriated to carry out subsection (d) $30,000,000.

     SEC. 338. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

       The following projects or portions of projects are not 
     authorized after the date of enactment of this Act:
       (1) Kennebunk river, kennebunk and kennebunkport, maine.--
     The following portion of the project for navigation, 
     Kennebunk River, Maine, authorized by section 101 of the 
     River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173), is not 
     authorized after the date of enactment of this Act: the 
     portion of the northernmost 6-foot deep anchorage the 
     boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates 
     N1904693.6500, E418084.2700, thence running south 01 degree 
     04 minutes 50.3 seconds 35 feet to a point with coordinates 
     N190434.6562, E418084.9301, thence running south 15 degrees 
     53 minutes 45.5 seconds 416.962 feet to a point with 
     coordinates N190033.6386, E418199.1325, thence running north 
     03 degrees 11 minutes 30.4 seconds 70 feet to a point with 
     coordinates N190103.5300, E418203.0300, thence running north 
     17 degrees 58 minutes 18.3 seconds west 384.900 feet to the 
     point of origin.
       (2) Wallabout channel, brooklyn, new york.--
       (A) In general.--The northeastern portion of the project 
     for navigation, Wallabout Channel, Brooklyn, New York, 
     authorized by the Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1124, 
     chapter 425), beginning at a point N682,307.40, E638,918.10, 
     thence running along the courses and distances described in 
     subparagraph (B).
       (B) Courses and distances.--The courses and distances 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) are the following:
       (i) South 85 degrees, 44 minutes, 13 seconds East 87.94 
     feet (coordinate: N682,300.86, E639,005.80).
       (ii) North 74 degrees, 41 minutes, 30 seconds East 271.54 
     feet (coordinate: N682,372.55, E639,267.71).
       (iii) South 4 degrees, 46 minutes, 02 seconds West 170.95 
     feet (coordinate: N682,202.20, E639,253.50).
       (iv) South 4 degrees, 46 minutes, 02 seconds West 239.97 
     feet (coordinate: N681,963.06, E639,233.56).
       (v) North 50 degrees, 48 minutes, 26 seconds West 305.48 
     feet (coordinate: N682,156.10, E638,996.80).
       (vi) North 3 degrees, 33 minutes, 25 seconds East 145.04 
     feet (coordinate: N682,300.86, E639,005.80).
       (3) New york and new jersey channels, new york and new 
     jersey.--The portion of the project for navigation, New York 
     and New Jersey Channels, New York and New Jersey, authorized 
     by the first section of the Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 
     1030, chapter 831), and modified by section 101 of the River 
     and Harbor Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 164), consisting of a 35-
     foot-deep channel beginning at a point along the western 
     limit of the authorized project, N644100.411, E2129256.91, 
     thence running southeast about 38.25 feet to a point 
     N644068.885, E2129278.565, thence running south about 1163.86 
     feet to a point N642912.127, E2129150.209, thence running 
     southwest about 56.9 feet to a point N642864.09, 
     E2129119.725, thence running north along the western limit of 
     the project to the point of origin.
       (4) Warwick cove, rhode island.--The portion of the project 
     for navigation, Warwick Cove, Rhode Island, authorized under 
     section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
     577), which is located within the 5-acre, 6-foot anchorage 
     area west of the channel: beginning at a point with 
     coordinates N221,150.027, E528,960.028, thence running 
     southerly about 257.39 feet to a point with coordinates 
     N220,892.638, E528,960.028, thence running northwesterly 
     about 346.41 feet to a point with coordinates N221,025.270, 
     E528,885.780, thence running northeasterly about 145.18 feet 
     to the point of origin.

     SEC. 339. BOGUE BANKS, CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Definition of Beaches.--In this section, the term 
     ``beaches'' means the following beaches located in Carteret 
     County, North Carolina:
       (1) Atlantic Beach.
       (2) Pine Knoll Shores Beach.
       (3) Salter Path Beach.
       (4) Indian Beach.
       (5) Emerald Isle Beach.
       (b) Renourishment Study.--The Secretary shall expedite 
     completion of a study under section 145 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j) on the 
     expedited renourishment, through sharing of the costs of 
     deposition of sand and other material used for beach 
     renourishment, of the beaches of Bogue Banks in Carteret 
     County, North Carolina.

                           TITLE IV--STUDIES

     SEC. 401. BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out beach erosion control, storm 
     damage reduction, and other measures along the shores of 
     Baldwin County, Alabama.

     SEC. 402. BONO, ARKANSAS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of, and need for, a reservoir and associated 
     improvements to provide for flood control, recreation, water 
     quality, and fish and wildlife in the vicinity of Bono, 
     Arkansas.

     SEC. 403. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of modifying the project for flood 
     control, Cache Creek Basin, California, authorized by section 
     401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
     Stat. 4112), to authorize construction of features to 
     mitigate impacts of the project on the storm drainage system 
     of the city of Woodland, California, that have been caused by 
     construction of a new south levee of the Cache Creek Settling 
     Basin.
       (b) Required Elements.--The study shall include 
     consideration of--
       (1) an outlet works through the Yolo Bypass capable of 
     receiving up to 1,600 cubic feet per second of storm drainage 
     from the city of Woodland and Yolo County;
       (2) a low-flow cross-channel across the Yolo Bypass, 
     including all appurtenant features, that is sufficient to 
     route storm flows of 1,600 cubic feet per second between the 
     old and new south levees of the Cache Creek Settling Basin, 
     across the Yolo Bypass, and into the Tule Canal; and
       (3) such other features as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate.

     SEC. 404. ESTUDILLO CANAL WATERSHED, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing flood control measures in the 
     Estudillo Canal watershed, San Leandro, Calfornia.

     SEC. 405. LAGUNA CREEK WATERSHED, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing flood control measures in the 
     Laguna Creek watershed, Fremont, California, to provide a 
     100-year level of flood protection.

     SEC. 406. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA.

       Not later than 32 months after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall conduct a special study, at 
     full Federal expense, of plans--
       (1) to mitigate for the erosion and other impacts resulting 
     from the construction of Camp Pendleton Harbor, Oceanside, 
     California, as a wartime measure; and
       (2) to restore beach conditions along the affected public 
     and private shores to the conditions that existed before the 
     construction of Camp Pendleton Harbor.

     SEC. 407. SAN JACINTO WATERSHED, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a watershed 
     study for the San Jacinto watershed, California.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $250,000.

     SEC. 408. CHOCTAWHATCHEE RIVER, FLORIDA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a reconnaissance study to 
     determine the Federal interest in dredging the mouth of the 
     Choctawhatchee River, Florida, to remove the sand plug.

     SEC. 409. EGMONT KEY, FLORIDA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of stabilizing the historic fortifications and 
     beach areas of Egmont Key, Florida, that are threatened by 
     erosion.

     SEC. 410. FERNANDINA HARBOR, FLORIDA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of realigning the access channel in the vicinity 
     of the Fernandina Beach Municipal Marina as part of project 
     for navigation, Fernandina, Florida, authorized by the first 
     section of the Act of June 14, 1880 (21 Stat. 186, chapter 
     211).

     SEC. 411. UPPER OCKLAWAHA RIVER AND APOPKA/PALATLAKAHA RIVER 
                   BASINS, FLORIDA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a restudy of 
     flooding and water quality issues in--
       (1) the upper Ocklawaha River basin, south of the Silver 
     River; and
       (2) the Apopka River and Palatlakaha River basins.
       (b) Required Elements.--In carrying out subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall review the report of the Chief of Engineers 
     on the Four River Basins, Florida, project, published as 
     House Document No. 585, 87th Congress, and

[[Page H10308]]

     other pertinent reports to determine the feasibility of 
     measures relating to comprehensive watershed planning for 
     water conservation, flood control, environmental restoration 
     and protection, and other issues relating to water resources 
     in the river basins described in subsection (a).

     SEC. 412. BOISE RIVER, IDAHO.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out multi-objective flood control 
     activities along the Boise River, Idaho.

     SEC. 413. WOOD RIVER, IDAHO.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out multi-objective flood control and 
     flood mitigation planning projects along the Wood River in 
     Blaine County, Idaho.

     SEC. 414. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out projects for water-
     related urban improvements, including infrastructure 
     development and improvements, in Chicago, Illinois.
       (b) Sites.--Under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     study--
       (1) the USX/Southworks site;
       (2) Calumet Lake and River;
       (3) the Canal Origins Heritage Corridor; and
       (4) Ping Tom Park.
       (c) Use of Information; Consultation.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary shall use available information from, 
     and consult with, appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     agencies.

     SEC. 415. BOEUF AND BLACK, LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of deepening the navigation channel of the 
     Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Boeuf and Black, 
     Louisiana, from 20 feet to 35 feet.

     SEC. 416. PORT OF IBERIA, LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing navigation improvements for 
     ingress and egress between the Port of Iberia, Louisiana, and 
     the Gulf of Mexico, including channel widening and deepening.

     SEC. 417. SOUTH LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing projects for hurricane protection 
     in the coastal area of the State of Louisiana between Morgan 
     City and the Pearl River.

     SEC. 418. ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST PARISH, LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing urban flood control measures on 
     the east bank of the Mississippi River in St. John the 
     Baptist Parish, Louisiana.

     SEC. 419. PORTLAND HARBOR, MAINE.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     adequacy of the channel depth at Portland Harbor, Maine.

     SEC. 420. PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, MAINE AND 
                   NEW HAMPSHIRE.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of modifying the project for navigation, 
     Portsmouth Harbor and Piscataqua River, Maine and New 
     Hampshire, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor 
     Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173) and modified by section 202(a) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4095), 
     to increase the authorized width of turning basins in the 
     Piscataqua River to 1,000 feet.

     SEC. 421. SEARSPORT HARBOR, MAINE.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     adequacy of the channel depth at Searsport Harbor, Maine.

     SEC. 422. MERRIMACK RIVER BASIN, MASSACHUSETTS AND NEW 
                   HAMPSHIRE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a 
     comprehensive study of the water resources needs of the 
     Merrimack River basin, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in 
     the manner described in section 729 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4164).
       (b) Consideration of Other Studies.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary may take into consideration any 
     studies conducted by the University of New Hampshire on 
     environmental restoration of the Merrimack River System.

     SEC. 423. PORT OF GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of modifying the project for navigation, Gulfport 
     Harbor, Mississippi, authorized by section 202(a) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4094) and 
     modified by section 4(n) of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4017)--
       (1) to widen the channel from 300 feet to 450 feet; and
       (2) to deepen the South Harbor channel from 36 feet to 42 
     feet and the North Harbor channel from 32 feet to 36 feet.

     SEC. 424. UPLAND DISPOSAL SITES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.

       In conjunction with the State of New Hampshire, the 
     Secretary shall conduct a study to identify and evaluate 
     potential upland disposal sites for dredged material 
     originating from harbor areas located within the State.

     SEC. 425. SOUTHWEST VALLEY, ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO.

       Section 433 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 327) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Evaluation of Flood Damage Reduction Measures.--In 
     conducting the study, the Secretary shall evaluate flood 
     damage reduction measures that would otherwise be excluded 
     from the feasibility analysis based on policies of the Corps 
     of Engineers concerning the frequency of flooding, the 
     drainage area, and the amount of runoff.''.

     SEC. 426. CUYAHOGA RIVER, OHIO.

       Section 438 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (110 Stat. 3746) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 438. CUYAHOGA RIVER, OHIO.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall--
       ``(1) conduct a study to evaluate the structural integrity 
     of the bulkhead system located on the Federal navigation 
     channel along the Cuyahoga River near Cleveland, Ohio; and
       ``(2) provide to the non-Federal interest design analysis, 
     plans and specifications, and cost estimates for repair or 
     replacement of the bulkhead system.
       ``(b) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of 
     the study shall be 35 percent.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $500,000.''.

     SEC. 427. DUCK CREEK WATERSHED, OHIO.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out flood control, environmental 
     restoration, and aquatic ecosystem restoration measures in 
     the Duck Creek watershed, Ohio.

     SEC. 428. FREMONT, OHIO.

       In consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     agencies, the Secretary shall conduct a study to determine 
     the feasibility of carrying out projects for water supply and 
     environmental restoration at the Ballville Dam, on the 
     Sandusky River at Fremont, Ohio.

     SEC. 429. GRAND LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

       (a) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) evaluate the backwater effects specifically due to 
     flood control operations on land around Grand Lake, Oklahoma; 
     and
       (2) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, submit to Congress a report on whether Federal 
     actions have been a significant cause of the backwater 
     effects.
       (b) Feasibility Study.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of--
       (A) addressing the backwater effects of the operation of 
     the Pensacola Dam, Grand/Neosho River basin; and
       (B) purchasing easements for any land that has been 
     adversely affected by backwater flooding in the Grand/Neosho 
     River basin.
       (2) Cost sharing.--If the Secretary determines under 
     subsection (a)(2) that Federal actions have been a 
     significant cause of the backwater effects, the Federal share 
     of the costs of the feasibility study under paragraph (1) 
     shall be 100 percent.

     SEC. 430. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE, RHODE ISLAND.

       In consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, the Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of designating a permanent site in 
     the State of Rhode Island for the disposal of dredged 
     material.

     SEC. 431. CHICKAMAUGA LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $200,000, from 
     funds transferred from the Tennessee Valley Authority, to 
     prepare a report of the Chief of Engineers for a replacement 
     lock at Chickamauga Lock and Dam, Tennessee.
       (b) Funding.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Tennessee Valley Authority shall 
     transfer the funds described in subsection (a) to the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 432. GERMANTOWN, TENNESSEE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood 
     control and related purposes along Miller Farms Ditch, Howard 
     Road Drainage, and Wolf River Lateral D, Germantown, 
     Tennessee.
       (b) Justification Analysis.--The Secretary shall include 
     environmental and water quality benefits in the justification 
     analysis for the project.
       (c) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the costs of the 
     feasibility study under subsection (a) shall not exceed 25 
     percent.
       (2) Non-federal share.--The Secretary--
       (A) shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the costs 
     of the feasibility study the value of the in-kind services 
     provided by the non-Federal interests relating to the 
     planning, engineering, and design of the project, whether 
     carried out before or after execution of the feasibility 
     study cost-sharing agreement; and
       (B) for the purposes of subparagraph (A), shall consider 
     the feasibility study to be conducted as part of the Memphis 
     Metro Tennessee and Mississippi study authorized by 
     resolution of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure, dated March 7, 1996.

     SEC. 433. HORN LAKE CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, TENNESSEE AND 
                   MISSISSIPPI.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of modifying the project for flood 
     control, Horn Lake Creek and Tributaries, Tennessee and 
     Mississippi, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), to 
     provide a high level of urban flood protection to development 
     along Horn Lake Creek.

[[Page H10309]]

       (b) Required Element.--The study shall include a limited 
     reevaluation of the project to determine the appropriate 
     design, as desired by the non-Federal interests.

     SEC. 434. CEDAR BAYOU, TEXAS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing a 12-foot-deep and 125-foot-wide 
     channel from the Houston Ship Channel to Cedar Bayou, mile 
     marker 11, Texas.

     SEC. 435. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TEXAS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing barge lanes adjacent to both 
     sides of the Houston Ship Channel from Bolivar Roads to 
     Morgan Point, Texas, to a depth of 12 feet.

     SEC. 436. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, TEXAS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of modifying the project for San Antonio Channel 
     improvement, Texas, authorized by section 203 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1259), and modified by section 
     103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 
     2921), to add environmental restoration and recreation as 
     project purposes.

     SEC. 437. VERMONT DAMS REMEDIATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) conduct a study to evaluate the structural integrity 
     and need for modification or removal of each dam located in 
     the State of Vermont and described in subsection (b); and
       (2) provide to the non-Federal interest design analysis, 
     plans and specifications, and cost estimates for repair, 
     restoration, modification, and removal of each dam described 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Dams To Be Evaluated.--The dams referred to in 
     subsection (a) are the following:
       (1) East Barre Dam, Barre Town.
       (2) Wrightsville Dam, Middlesex-Montpelier.
       (3) Lake Sadawga Dam, Whitingham.
       (4) Dufresne Pond Dam, Manchester.
       (5) Knapp Brook Site 1 Dam, Cavendish.
       (6) Lake Bomoseen Dam, Castleton.
       (7) Little Hosmer Dam, Craftsbury.
       (8) Colby Pond Dam, Plymouth.
       (9) Silver Lake Dam, Barnard.
       (10) Gale Meadows Dam, Londonderry.
       (c) Cost Sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     study under subsection (a) shall be 35 percent.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $500,000.

     SEC. 438. WHITE RIVER WATERSHED BELOW MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, 
                   WASHINGTON.

       (a) Review.--The Secretary shall review the report of the 
     Chief of Engineers on the Upper Puyallup River, Washington, 
     dated 1936, authorized by section 5 of the Act of June 22, 
     1936 (49 Stat. 1591, chapter 688), the Puget Sound and 
     adjacent waters report authorized by section 209 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1197), and other pertinent 
     reports, to determine whether modifications to the 
     recommendations contained in the reports are advisable to 
     provide improvements to the water resources and watershed of 
     the White River watershed downstream of Mud Mountain Dam, 
     Washington.
       (b) Issues.--In conducting the review under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall review, with respect to the Lake Tapps 
     community and other parts of the watershed--
       (1) constructed and natural environs;
       (2) capital improvements;
       (3) water resource infrastructure;
       (4) ecosystem restoration;
       (5) flood control;
       (6) fish passage;
       (7) collaboration by, and the interests of, regional 
     stakeholders;
       (8) recreational and socioeconomic interests; and
       (9) other issues determined by the Secretary.

     SEC. 439. WILLAPA BAY, WASHINGTON.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of providing coastal erosion 
     protection for the Tribal Reservation of the Shoalwater Bay 
     Indian Tribe on Willapa Bay, Washington.
       (b) Project.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     (including any requirement for economic justification), the 
     Secretary may construct and maintain a project to provide 
     coastal erosion protection for the Tribal Reservation of the 
     Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe on Willapa Bay, Washington, at 
     full Federal expense, if the Secretary determines that the 
     project--
       (A) is a cost-effective means of providing erosion 
     protection;
       (B) is environmentally acceptable and technically feasible; 
     and
       (C) will improve the economic and social conditions of the 
     Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe.
       (2) Land, easements, and rights-of-way.--As a condition of 
     the project described in paragraph (1), the Shoalwater Bay 
     Indian Tribe shall provide land, easements, rights-of-way, 
     and dredged material disposal areas necessary for the 
     implementation of the project.

     SEC. 440. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENT 
                   STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in conjunction with the 
     Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior, 
     shall conduct a study to--
       (1) identify and evaluate significant sources of sediment 
     and nutrients in the upper Mississippi River basin;
       (2) quantify the processes affecting mobilization, 
     transport, and fate of those sediments and nutrients on land 
     and in water; and
       (3) quantify the transport of those sediments and nutrients 
     to the upper Mississippi River and the tributaries of the 
     upper Mississippi River.
       (b) Study Components.--
       (1) Computer modeling.--In carrying out the study under 
     this section, the Secretary shall develop computer models of 
     the upper Mississippi River basin, at the subwatershed and 
     basin scales, to--
       (A) identify and quantify sources of sediment and 
     nutrients; and
       (B) examine the effectiveness of alternative management 
     measures.
       (2) Research.--In carrying out the study under this 
     section, the Secretary shall conduct research to improve the 
     understanding of--
       (A) fate processes and processes affecting sediment and 
     nutrient transport, with emphasis on nitrogen and phosphorus 
     cycling and dynamics;
       (B) the influences on sediment and nutrient losses of soil 
     type, slope, climate, vegetation cover, and modifications to 
     the stream drainage network; and
       (C) river hydrodynamics, in relation to sediment and 
     nutrient transformations, retention, and transport.
       (c) Use of Information.--On request of a relevant Federal 
     agency, the Secretary may provide information for use in 
     applying sediment and nutrient reduction programs associated 
     with land-use improvements and land management practices.
       (d) Reports.--
       (1) Preliminary report.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress a preliminary report that outlines work being 
     conducted on the study components described in subsection 
     (b).
       (2) Final report.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report describing the results of the study under this 
     section, including any findings and recommendations of the 
     study.
       (e) Funding.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.
       (2) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out this section shall be 50 percent.

     SEC. 441. CLIFF WALK IN NEWPORT, RHODE ISLAND.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     project deficiencies and identify the necessary measures to 
     restore the project for Cliff Walk in Newport, Rhode Island 
     to meet its authorized purpose.

     SEC. 442. QUONSET POINT CHANNEL RECONNAISSANCE STUDY.

       The Secretary shall conduct a reconnaissance study to 
     determine the Federal interest in dredging the Quonset Point 
     navigation channel in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 501. VISITORS CENTERS.

       (a) John Paul Hammerschmidt Visitors Center, Arkansas.--
     Section 103(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (106 Stat. 4813) is amended by striking ``Arkansas River, 
     Arkansas.'' and inserting ``at Fort Smith, Arkansas, on land 
     provided by the city of Fort Smith.''.
       (b) Lower Mississippi River Museum and Riverfront 
     Interpretive Site, Mississippi.--Section 103(c)(2) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4811) is 
     amended in the first sentence by striking ``in the vicinity 
     of the Mississippi River Bridge in Vicksburg, Mississippi.'' 
     and inserting ``between the Mississippi River Bridge and the 
     waterfront in downtown Vicksburg, Mississippi.''.

     SEC. 502. CALFED BAY-DELTA PROGRAM ASSISTANCE, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary--
       (1) may participate with the appropriate Federal and State 
     agencies in the planning and management activities associated 
     with the CALFED Bay-Delta Program referred to in the 
     California Bay-Delta Environmental Enhancement and Water 
     Security Act (division E of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 
     3009-748); and
       (2) shall, to the maximum extent practicable and in 
     accordance with applicable law, integrate the activities of 
     the Corps of Engineers in the San Joaquin and Sacramento 
     River basins with the long-term goals of the CALFED Bay-Delta 
     Program.
       (b) Cooperative Activities.--In participating in the CALFED 
     Bay-Delta Program under subsection (a), the Secretary may--
       (1) accept and expend funds from other Federal agencies and 
     from non-Federal public, private, and nonprofit entities to 
     carry out ecosystem restoration projects and activities 
     associated with the CALFED Bay-Delta Program; and
       (2) in carrying out the projects and activities, enter into 
     contracts, cooperative research and development agreements, 
     and cooperative agreements with Federal and non-Federal 
     private, public, and nonprofit entities.
       (c) Area Covered by Program.--For the purposes of this 
     section, the area covered by the CALFED Bay-Delta Program 
     shall be the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 
     Estuary and its watershed (known as the ``Bay-Delta 
     Estuary''), as identified in the Framework Agreement Between 
     the Governor's Water Policy Council of the State of 
     California and the Federal Ecosystem Directorate.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to

[[Page H10310]]

     carry out this section $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     2002 through 2005.

     SEC. 503. LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GEORGIA, HOME PRESERVATION.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Easement prohibition.--The term ``easement 
     prohibition'' means the rights acquired by the United States 
     in the flowage easements to prohibit structures for human 
     habitation.
       (2) Eligible property owner.--The term ``eligible property 
     owner'' means a person that owns a structure for human 
     habitation that was constructed before January 1, 2000, and 
     is located on fee land or in violation of the flowage 
     easement.
       (3) Fee land.--The term ``fee land'' means the land 
     acquired in fee title by the United States for the Lake.
       (4) Flowage easement.--The term ``flowage easement'' means 
     an interest in land that the United States acquired that 
     provides the right to flood, to the elevation of 1,085 feet 
     above mean sea level (among other rights), land surrounding 
     the Lake.
       (5) Lake.--The term ``Lake'' means the Lake Sidney Lanier, 
     Georgia, project of the Corps of Engineers authorized by the 
     first section of the Act of July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 635, 
     chapter 595).
       (b) Establishment of Program.--Not later than 120 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     establish, and provide public notice of, a program--
       (1) to convey to eligible property owners the right to 
     maintain existing structures for human habitation on fee 
     land; or
       (2) to release eligible property owners from the easement 
     prohibition as it applies to existing structures for human 
     habitation on the flowage easements (if the floor elevation 
     of the human habitation area is above the elevation of 1,085 
     feet above mean sea level).
       (c) Regulations.--To carry out subsection (b), the 
     Secretary shall promulgate regulations that--
       (1) require the Corps of Engineers to suspend any 
     activities to require eligible property owners to remove 
     structures for human habitation that encroach on fee land or 
     flowage easements;
       (2) provide that a person that owns a structure for human 
     habitation on land adjacent to the Lake shall have a period 
     of 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act--
       (A) to request that the Corps of Engineers resurvey the 
     property of the person to determine if the person is an 
     eligible property owner under this section; and
       (B) to pay the costs of the resurvey to the Secretary for 
     deposit in the Corps of Engineers account in accordance with 
     section 2695 of title 10, United States Code;
       (3) provide that when a determination is made, through a 
     private survey or through a boundary line maintenance survey 
     conducted by the Federal Government, that a structure for 
     human habitation is located on the fee land or a flowage 
     easement--
       (A) the Corps of Engineers shall immediately notify the 
     property owner by certified mail; and
       (B) the property owner shall have a period of 90 days from 
     receipt of the notice in which to establish that the 
     structure was constructed prior to January 1, 2000, and that 
     the property owner is an eligible property owner under this 
     section;
       (4) provide that any private survey shall be subject to 
     review and approval by the Corps of Engineers to ensure that 
     the private survey conforms to the boundary line established 
     by the Federal Government;
       (5) require the Corps of Engineers to offer to an eligible 
     property owner a conveyance or release that--
       (A) on fee land, conveys by quitclaim deed the minimum land 
     required to maintain the human habitation structure, 
     reserving the right to flood to the elevation of 1,085 feet 
     above mean sea level, if applicable;
       (B) in a flowage easement, releases by quitclaim deed the 
     easement prohibition;
       (C) provides that--
       (i) the existing structure shall not be extended further 
     onto fee land or into the flowage easement; and
       (ii) additional structures for human habitation shall not 
     be placed on fee land or in a flowage easement; and
       (D) provides that--
       (i)(I) the United States shall not be liable or responsible 
     for damage to property or injury to persons caused by 
     operation of the Lake; and
       (II) no claim to compensation shall accrue from the 
     exercise of the flowage easement rights; and
       (ii) the waiver described in clause (i) of any and all 
     claims against the United States shall be a covenant running 
     with the land and shall be fully binding on heirs, 
     successors, assigns, and purchasers of the property subject 
     to the waiver; and
       (6) provide that the eligible property owner shall--
       (A) agree to an offer under paragraph (5) not later than 90 
     days after the offer is made by the Corps of Engineers; or
       (B) comply with the real property rights of the United 
     States and remove the structure for human habitation and any 
     other unauthorized real or personal property.
       (d) Option To Purchase Insurance.--Nothing in this section 
     precludes a property owner from purchasing flood insurance to 
     which the property owner may be eligible.
       (e) Prior Encroachment Resolutions.--Nothing in this 
     section affects any resolution, before the date of enactment 
     of this Act, of an encroachment at the Lake, whether the 
     resolution was effected through sale, exchange, voluntary 
     removal, or alteration or removal through litigation.
       (f) Prior Real Property Rights.--Nothing in this section--
       (1) takes away, diminishes, or eliminates any other real 
     property rights acquired by the United States at the Lake; or
       (2) affects the ability of the United States to require the 
     removal of any and all encroachments that are constructed or 
     placed on United States real property or flowage easements at 
     the Lake after December 31, 1999.

     SEC. 504. CONVEYANCE OF LIGHTHOUSE, ONTONAGON, MICHIGAN.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may convey to the Ontonagon 
     County Historical Society, at full Federal expense--
       (1) the lighthouse at Ontonagon, Michigan; and
       (2) the land underlying and adjacent to the lighthouse 
     (including any improvements on the land) that is under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary.
       (b) Map.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) determine--
       (A) the extent of the land conveyance under this section; 
     and
       (B) the exact acreage and legal description of the land to 
     be conveyed under this section; and
       (2) prepare a map that clearly identifies any land to be 
     conveyed.
       (c) Conditions.--The Secretary may--
       (1) obtain all necessary easements and rights-of-way; and
       (2) impose such terms, conditions, reservations, and 
     restrictions on the conveyance;
     as the Secretary determines to be necessary to protect the 
     public interest.
       (d) Environmental Response.--To the extent required under 
     any applicable law, the Secretary shall be responsible for 
     any necessary environmental response required as a result of 
     the prior Federal use or ownership of the land and 
     improvements conveyed under this section.
       (e) Responsibilities After Conveyance.--After the 
     conveyance of land under this section, the Ontonagon County 
     Historical Society shall be responsible for any additional 
     operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, or 
     replacement costs associated with--
       (1) the lighthouse; or
       (2) the conveyed land and improvements.
       (f) Applicability of Environmental Law.--Nothing in this 
     section affects the potential liability of any person under 
     any applicable environmental law.

     SEC. 505. LAND CONVEYANCE, CANDY LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

       Section 563(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 357) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``a deceased'' and 
     inserting ``an''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Costs of nepa compliance.--The Federal Government 
     shall assume the costs of any Federal action under this 
     subsection that is carried out for the purpose of section 102 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4332).
       ``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this subsection.''.

     SEC. 506. LAND CONVEYANCE, RICHARD B. RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, 
                   SOUTH CAROLINA.

       Section 563 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 355) is amended by striking subsection (i) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(i) Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South Carolina.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the State 
     of South Carolina all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the parcels of land described in 
     paragraph (2)(A) that are being managed, as of August 17, 
     1999, 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 
     section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 1420).
       ``(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.
       ``(B) 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 subsection 
     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 under this subsection as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.
       ``(6) Fish and wildlife mitigation agreement.--

[[Page H10311]]

       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall pay the State of 
     South Carolina $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 parcels of land conveyed under this 
     subsection.
       ``(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.''.

     SEC. 507. CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX 
                   TRIBE, AND STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA TERRESTRIAL 
                   WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORATION.

       (a) Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration.--Section 602 
     of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 
     385) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(4)(C)(i), by striking subclause (I) 
     and inserting the following:

       ``(I) fund, from funds made available for operation and 
     maintenance under the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin program 
     and through grants to the State of South Dakota, the Cheyenne 
     River Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe--

       ``(aa) the terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration 
     programs being carried out as of August 17, 1999, on Oahe and 
     Big Bend project land at a level that does not exceed the 
     greatest amount of funding that was provided for the programs 
     during a previous fiscal year; and
       ``(bb) the carrying out of plans developed under this 
     section; and''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(4)(B), by striking ``section 
     604(d)(3)(A)(iii)'' and inserting ``section 604(d)(3)(A)''.
       (b) South Dakota Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration 
     Trust Fund.--Section 603 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 388) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``The'' and inserting 
     ``In consultation with the State of South Dakota, the''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``Department of Game, 
     Fish and Parks of the'' before ``State of''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)(A)(ii)--
       (i) in subclause (I), by striking ``transferred'' and 
     inserting ``transferred, or to be transferred,''; and
       (ii) by striking subclause (II) and inserting the 
     following:

       ``(II) fund all costs associated with the lease, ownership, 
     management, operation, administration, maintenance, or 
     development of recreation areas and other land that are 
     transferred, or to be transferred, to the State of South 
     Dakota by the Secretary;''.

       (c) Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Lower Brule Sioux Tribe 
     Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Trust Funds.--
     Section 604 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 389) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``The'' and inserting 
     ``In consultation with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and 
     Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, the''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``as tribal funds'' 
     after ``for use''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)(A)(ii)--
       (i) in subclause (I), by striking ``transferred'' and 
     inserting ``transferred, or to be transferred,''; and
       (ii) by striking subclause (II) and inserting the 
     following:

       ``(II) fund all costs associated with the lease, ownership, 
     management, operation, administration, maintenance, or 
     development of recreation areas and other land that are 
     transferred, or to be transferred, to the respective affected 
     Indian Tribe by the Secretary;''.

       (d) Transfer of Federal Land to State of South Dakota.--
     Section 605 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 390) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``in perpetuity'' and 
     inserting ``for the life of the Mni Wiconi project'';
       (B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) Deadline for transfer of recreation areas.--Under 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall transfer recreation 
     areas not later than January 1, 2002.'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (1) as paragraph (1)(A);
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4) as 
     subparagraphs (B) through (D), respectively, of paragraph 
     (1);
       (C) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (C), (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B)), by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (D) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B)), by striking ``and'' and inserting ``or''; and
       (D) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (2);
       (3) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Structures.--
       ``(A) In general.--The map shall identify all land and 
     structures to be retained as necessary for continuation of 
     the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, 
     rehabilitation, and structural integrity of the dams and 
     related flood control and hydropower structures.
       ``(B) Lease of recreation areas.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall lease to the State 
     of South Dakota in perpetuity all or part of the following 
     recreation areas, within the boundaries determined under 
     clause (ii), that are adjacent to land received by the State 
     of South Dakota under this title:

       ``(I) Oahe dam and lake.--

       ``(aa) Downstream Recreation Area.
       ``(bb) West Shore Recreation Area.
       ``(cc) East Shore Recreation Area.
       ``(dd) Tailrace Recreation Area.

       ``(II) Fort randall dam and lake francis case.--

       ``(aa) Randall Creek Recreation Area.
       ``(bb) South Shore Recreation Area.
       ``(cc) Spillway Recreation Area.

       ``(III) Gavins point dam and lewis and clark lake.--Pierson 
     Ranch Recreation Area.

       ``(ii) Lease boundaries.--The Secretary shall determine the 
     boundaries of the recreation areas in consultation with the 
     State of South Dakota.'';
       (4) in subsection (f)(1), by striking ``Federal law'' and 
     inserting ``a Federal law specified in section 607(a)(6) or 
     any other Federal law'';
       (5) in subsection (g), by striking paragraph (3) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(3) Easements and access.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after a request 
     by the State of South Dakota, the Secretary shall provide to 
     the State of South Dakota easements and access on land and 
     water below the level of the exclusive flood pool outside 
     Indian reservations in the State of South Dakota for 
     recreational and other purposes (including for boat docks, 
     boat ramps, and related structures).
       ``(B) No effect on mission.--The easements and access 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) shall not prevent the Corps 
     from carrying out its mission under the Act entitled `An Act 
     authorizing the construction of certain public works on 
     rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
     purposes', approved December 22, 1944 (commonly known as the 
     `Flood Control Act of 1944') (58 Stat. 887)).'';
       (6) in subsection (h), by striking ``of this Act'' and 
     inserting ``of law''; and
       (7) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Cleanup of Land and Recreation Areas.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall clean up 
     each open dump and hazardous waste site identified by the 
     Secretary and located on the land and recreation areas 
     described in subsections (b) and (c).
       ``(2) Funding.--Cleanup activities under paragraph (1) 
     shall be funded solely from funds made available for 
     operation and maintenance under the Pick-Sloan Missouri River 
     Basin program.
       ``(k) Cultural Resources Advisory Commission.--
       ``(1) In general.--The State of South Dakota, the Cheyenne 
     River Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe may 
     establish an advisory commission to be known as the `Cultural 
     Resources Advisory Commission' (referred to in this 
     subsection as the `Commission').
       ``(2) Membership.--The Commission shall be composed of--
       ``(A) 1 member representing the State of South Dakota;
       ``(B) 1 member representing the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe;
       ``(C) 1 member representing the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe; 
     and
       ``(D) upon unanimous vote of the members of the Commission 
     described in subparagraphs (A) through (C), a member 
     representing a federally recognized Indian Tribe located in 
     the State of North Dakota or South Dakota that is 
     historically or traditionally affiliated with the Missouri 
     River Basin in South Dakota.
       ``(3) Duty.--The duty of the Commission shall be to provide 
     advice on the identification, protection, and preservation of 
     cultural resources on the land and recreation areas described 
     in subsections (b) and (c) of this section and subsections 
     (b) and (c) of section 606.
       ``(4) Responsibilities, powers, and administration.--The 
     Governor of the State of South Dakota, the Chairman of the 
     Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, and the Chairman of the Lower 
     Brule Sioux Tribe are encouraged to unanimously enter into a 
     formal written agreement, not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, to establish the role, 
     responsibilities, powers, and administration of the 
     Commission.
       ``(l) Inventory and Stabilization of Cultural and Historic 
     Sites.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary, through 
     contracts entered into with the State of South Dakota, the 
     affected Indian Tribes, and other Indian Tribes in the States 
     of North Dakota and South Dakota, shall inventory and 
     stabilize each cultural site and historic site located on the 
     land and recreation areas described in subsections (b) and 
     (c).
       ``(2) Funding.--Inventory and stabilization activities 
     under paragraph (1) shall be funded solely from funds made 
     available for operation and maintenance under the Pick-Sloan 
     Missouri River Basin program.''.
       (e) Transfer of Corps of Engineers Land for Affected Indian 
     Tribes.--Section 606 of

[[Page H10312]]

     the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 393) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``The Secretary'' and 
     inserting ``Not later than January 1, 2002, the Secretary'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``Big Bend and Oahe'' 
     and inserting ``Oahe, Big Bend, and Fort Randall'';
       (3) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Structures.--
       ``(A) In general.--The map shall identify all land and 
     structures to be retained as necessary for continuation of 
     the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, 
     rehabilitation, and structural integrity of the dams and 
     related flood control and hydropower structures.
       ``(B) Lease of recreation areas.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall lease to the Lower 
     Brule Sioux Tribe in perpetuity all or part of the following 
     recreation areas at Big Bend Dam and Lake Sharpe:

       ``(I) Left Tailrace Recreation Area.
       ``(II) Right Tailrace Recreation Area.
       ``(III) Good Soldier Creek Recreation Area.

       ``(ii) Lease boundaries.--The Secretary shall determine the 
     boundaries of the recreation areas in consultation with the 
     Lower Brule Sioux Tribe.'';
       (4) in subsection (f)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Federal law'' and 
     inserting ``a Federal law specified in section 607(a)(6) or 
     any other Federal law'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (C) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(C) Easements and access.--
       ``(i) In general.--Not later than 180 days after a request 
     by an affected Indian Tribe, the Secretary shall provide to 
     the affected Indian Tribe easements and access on land and 
     water below the level of the exclusive flood pool inside the 
     Indian reservation of the affected Indian Tribe for 
     recreational and other purposes (including for boat docks, 
     boat ramps, and related structures).
       ``(ii) No effect on mission.--The easements and access 
     referred to in clause (i) shall not prevent the Corps from 
     carrying out its mission under the Act entitled `An Act 
     authorizing the construction of certain public works on 
     rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other 
     purposes', approved December 22, 1944 (commonly known as the 
     `Flood Control Act of 1944') (58 Stat. 887)).''; and
       (C) in paragraph (3)(B), by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``that were administered by the Corps 
     of Engineers as of the date of the land transfer.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Cleanup of Land and Recreation Areas.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall clean up 
     each open dump and hazardous waste site identified by the 
     Secretary and located on the land and recreation areas 
     described in subsections (b) and (c).
       ``(2) Funding.--Cleanup activities under paragraph (1) 
     shall be funded solely from funds made available for 
     operation and maintenance under the Pick-Sloan Missouri River 
     Basin program.
       ``(i) Inventory and Stabilization of Cultural and Historic 
     Sites.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Cultural Resources Advisory Commission 
     established under section 605(k) and through contracts 
     entered into with the State of South Dakota, the affected 
     Indian Tribes, and other Indian Tribes in the States of North 
     Dakota and South Dakota, shall inventory and stabilize each 
     cultural site and historic site located on the land and 
     recreation areas described in subsections (b) and (c).
       ``(2) Funding.--Inventory and stabilization activities 
     under paragraph (1) shall be funded solely from funds made 
     available for operation and maintenance under the Pick-Sloan 
     Missouri River Basin program.
       ``(j) Sediment Contamination.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) complete a study of sediment contamination in the 
     Cheyenne River; and
       ``(B) take appropriate remedial action to eliminate any 
     public health and environmental risk posed by the 
     contaminated sediment.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out paragraph (1).''.
       (f) Budget Considerations.--Section 607 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 395) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Budget Considerations.--
       ``(1) In general.--In developing an annual budget to carry 
     out this title, the Corps of Engineers shall consult with the 
     State of South Dakota and the affected Indian Tribes.
       ``(2) Inclusions; availability.--The budget referred to in 
     paragraph (1) shall--
       ``(A) be detailed;
       ``(B) include all necessary tasks and associated costs; and
       ``(C) be made available to the State of South Dakota and 
     the affected Indian Tribes at the time at which the Corps of 
     Engineers submits the budget to Congress.''.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 609 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 396) is 
     amended by striking subsection (a) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(a) Secretary.--
       ``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Secretary for each fiscal year such sums as are 
     necessary--
       ``(A) to pay the administrative expenses incurred by the 
     Secretary in carrying out this title;
       ``(B) to fund the implementation of terrestrial wildlife 
     habitat restoration plans under section 602(a);
       ``(C) to fund activities described in sections 603(d)(3) 
     and 604(d)(3) with respect to land and recreation areas 
     transferred, or to be transferred, to an affected Indian 
     Tribe or the State of South Dakota under section 605 or 606; 
     and
       ``(D) to fund the annual expenses (not to exceed the 
     Federal cost as of August 17, 1999) of operating recreation 
     areas transferred, or to be transferred, under sections 
     605(c) and 606(c) to, or leased by, the State of South Dakota 
     or an affected Indian Tribe, until such time as the trust 
     funds under sections 603 and 604 are fully capitalized.
       ``(2) Allocations.--
       ``(A) In general.--For each fiscal year, the Secretary 
     shall allocate the amounts made available under subparagraphs 
     (B), (C), and (D) of paragraph (1) as follows:
       ``(i) $1,000,000 (or, if a lesser amount is so made 
     available for the fiscal year, the lesser amount) shall be 
     allocated equally among the State of South Dakota, the 
     Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, 
     for use in accordance with paragraph (1).
       ``(ii) Any amounts remaining after the allocation under 
     clause (i) shall be allocated as follows:

       ``(I) 65 percent to the State of South Dakota.
       ``(II) 26 percent to the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe.
       ``(III) 9 percent to the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe.

       ``(B) Use of allocations.--Amounts allocated under 
     subparagraph (A) may be used at the option of the recipient 
     for any purpose described in subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) of 
     paragraph (1).''.
       (h) Clarification of References to Indian Tribes.--
       (1) Definitions.--Section 601 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 385) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Affected indian tribe.--The term `affected Indian 
     Tribe' means each of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the 
     Lower Brule Sioux Tribe.''.
       (2) Terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration.--Section 
     602(b)(4)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 388) is amended by striking ``the Tribe'' and 
     inserting ``the affected Indian Tribe''.
       (3) Cheyenne river sioux tribe and lower brule sioux tribe 
     terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration trust funds.--
     Section 604(d)(3)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1999 (113 Stat. 390) is amended by striking ``the 
     respective Tribe'' each place it appears and inserting ``the 
     respective affected Indian Tribe''.
       (4) Transfer of federal land to state of south dakota.--
     Section 605 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 390) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b)(3), by striking ``an Indian Tribe'' 
     and inserting ``any Indian Tribe''; and
       (B) in subsection (c)(1)(B) (as redesignated by subsection 
     (d)(2)(B)), by striking ``an Indian Tribe'' and inserting 
     ``any Indian Tribe''.
       (5) Transfer of corps of engineers land for affected indian 
     tribes.--Section 606 of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1999 (113 Stat. 393) is amended--
       (A) in the section heading, by striking ``INDIAN TRIBES'' 
     and inserting ``AFFECTED INDIAN TRIBES'';
       (B) in paragraphs (1) and (4) of subsection (a), by 
     striking ``the Indian Tribes'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``the affected Indian Tribes'';
       (C) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``an Indian Tribe'' 
     and inserting ``any Indian Tribe'';
       (D) in subsection (f)(2)(B)(i)--
       (i) by striking ``the respective tribes'' and inserting 
     ``the respective affected Indian Tribes''; and
       (ii) by striking ``the respective Tribe's'' and inserting 
     ``the respective affected Indian Tribe's''; and
       (E) in subsection (g), by striking ``an Indian Tribe'' and 
     inserting ``any Indian Tribe''.
       (6) Administration.--Section 607(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 395) is amended by 
     striking ``an Indian Tribe'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``any Indian Tribe''.

     SEC. 508. EXPORT OF WATER FROM GREAT LAKES.

       (a) Additional Finding.--Section 1109(b) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-20(b)) is 
     amended by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), and by inserting after paragraph (1) the 
     following:
       ``(2) to encourage the Great Lakes States, in consultation 
     with the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec, to develop and 
     implement a mechanism that provides a common conservation 
     standard embodying the principles of water conservation and 
     resource improvement for making decisions concerning the 
     withdrawal and use of water from the Great Lakes Basin;''.

[[Page H10313]]

       (b) Approval of Governors for Export of Water.--Section 
     1109(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (42 
     U.S.C. 1962d-20(d)) is amended by--
       (1) inserting ``or exported'' after ``diverted''; and
       (2) inserting ``or export'' after ``diversion''.
       (c) Sense of the Congress.--It is the Sense of the Congress 
     that the Secretary of State should work with the Canadian 
     Government to encourage and support the Provinces in the 
     development and implementation of a mechanism and standard 
     concerning the withdrawal and use of water from the Great 
     Lakes Basin consistent with those mechanisms and standards 
     developed by the Great Lakes States.

          TITLE VI--COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN

     SEC. 601. COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Central and southern florida project.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Central and Southern Florida 
     Project'' means the project for Central and Southern Florida 
     authorized under the heading ``central and southern florida'' 
     in section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (62 Stat. 
     1176).
       (B) Inclusion.--The term ``Central and Southern Florida 
     Project'' includes any modification to the project authorized 
     by this section or any other provision of law.
       (2) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor of 
     the State of Florida.
       (3) Natural system.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``natural system'' means all land 
     and water managed by the Federal Government or the State 
     within the South Florida ecosystem.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``natural system'' includes--
       (i) water conservation areas;
       (ii) sovereign submerged land;
       (iii) Everglades National Park;
       (iv) Biscayne National Park;
       (v) Big Cypress National Preserve;
       (vi) other Federal or State (including a political 
     subdivision of a State) land that is designated and managed 
     for conservation purposes; and
       (vii) any tribal land that is designated and managed for 
     conservation purposes, as approved by the tribe.
       (4) Plan.--The term ``Plan'' means the Comprehensive 
     Everglades Restoration Plan contained in the ``Final 
     Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental 
     Impact Statement'', dated April 1, 1999, as modified by this 
     section.
       (5) South florida ecosystem.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``South Florida ecosystem'' means 
     the area consisting of the land and water within the boundary 
     of the South Florida Water Management District in effect on 
     July 1, 1999.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``South Florida ecosystem'' 
     includes--
       (i) the Everglades;
       (ii) the Florida Keys; and
       (iii) the contiguous near-shore coastal water of South 
     Florida.
       (6) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Florida.
       (b) Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.--
       (1) Approval.--
       (A) In general.--Except as modified by this section, the 
     Plan is approved as a framework for modifications and 
     operational changes to the Central and Southern Florida 
     Project that are needed to restore, preserve, and protect the 
     South Florida ecosystem while providing for other water-
     related needs of the region, including water supply and flood 
     protection. The Plan shall be implemented to ensure the 
     protection of water quality in, the reduction of the loss of 
     fresh water from, and the improvement of the environment of 
     the South Florida ecosystem and to achieve and maintain the 
     benefits to the natural system and human environment 
     described in the Plan, and required pursuant to this section, 
     for as long as the project is authorized.
       (B) Integration.--In carrying out the Plan, the Secretary 
     shall integrate the activities described in subparagraph (A) 
     with ongoing Federal and State projects and activities in 
     accordance with section 528(c) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769). Unless specifically 
     provided herein, nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to modify any existing cost share or responsibility for 
     projects as listed in subsection (c) or (e) of section 528 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769).
       (2) Specific authorizations.--
       (A) In general.--
       (i) Projects.--The Secretary shall carry out the projects 
     included in the Plan in accordance with subparagraphs (B), 
     (C), (D) and (E).
       (ii) Considerations.--In carrying out activities described 
     in the Plan, the Secretary shall--

       (I) take into account the protection of water quality by 
     considering applicable State water quality standards; and
       (II) include such features as the Secretary determines are 
     necessary to ensure that all ground water and surface water 
     discharges from any project feature authorized by this 
     subsection will meet all applicable water quality standards 
     and applicable water quality permitting requirements.

       (iii) Review and comment.--In developing the projects 
     authorized under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall 
     provide for public review and comment in accordance with 
     applicable Federal law.
       (B) Pilot projects.--The following pilot projects are 
     authorized for implementation, after review and approval by 
     the Secretary, at a total cost of $69,000,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $34,500,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $34,500,000:
       (i) Caloosahatchee River (C-43) Basin ASR, at a total cost 
     of $6,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,000,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,000,000.
       (ii) Lake Belt In-Ground Reservoir Technology, at a total 
     cost of $23,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $11,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,500,000.
       (iii) L-31N Seepage Management, at a total cost of 
     $10,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,000,000 and 
     an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,000,000.
       (iv) Wastewater Reuse Technology, at a total cost of 
     $30,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $15,000,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,000,000.
       (C) Initial projects.--The following projects are 
     authorized for implementation, after review and approval by 
     the Secretary, subject to the conditions stated in 
     subparagraph (D), at a total cost of $1,100,918,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $550,459,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $550,459,000:
       (i) C-44 Basin Storage Reservoir, at a total cost of 
     $112,562,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $56,281,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $56,281,000.
       (ii) Everglades Agricultural Area Storage Reservoirs--Phase 
     I, at a total cost of $233,408,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $116,704,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $116,704,000.
       (iii) Site 1 Impoundment, at a total cost of $38,535,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $19,267,500 and an 
     estimated non-Federal cost of $19,267,500.
       (iv) Water Conservation Areas 3A/3B Levee Seepage 
     Management, at a total cost of $100,335,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $50,167,500 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $50,167,500.
       (v) C-11 Impoundment and Stormwater Treatment Area, at a 
     total cost of $124,837,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $62,418,500 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $62,418,500.
       (vi) C-9 Impoundment and Stormwater Treatment Area, at a 
     total cost of $89,146,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $44,573,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $44,573,000.
       (vii) Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough Storage and Treatment 
     Area, at a total cost of $104,027,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $52,013,500 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $52,013,500.
       (viii) Raise and Bridge East Portion of Tamiami Trail and 
     Fill Miami Canal within Water Conservation Area 3, at a total 
     cost of $26,946,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $13,473,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $13,473,000.
       (ix) North New River Improvements, at a total cost of 
     $77,087,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $38,543,500 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $38,543,500.
       (x) C-111 Spreader Canal, at a total cost of $94,035,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $47,017,500 and an 
     estimated non-Federal cost of $47,017,500.
       (xi) Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring Program, at a total 
     cost of $100,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $50,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $50,000,000.
       (D) Conditions.--
       (i) Project implementation reports.--Before implementation 
     of a project described in any of clauses (i) through (x) of 
     subparagraph (C), the Secretary shall review and approve for 
     the project a project implementation report prepared in 
     accordance with subsections (f) and (h).
       (ii) Submission of report.--The Secretary shall submit to 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate the project implementation report 
     required by subsections (f) and (h) for each project under 
     this paragraph (including all relevant data and information 
     on all costs).
       (iii) Funding contingent on approval.--No appropriation 
     shall be made to construct any project under this paragraph 
     if the project implementation report for the project has not 
     been approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate.
       (iv) Modified water delivery.--No appropriation shall be 
     made to construct the Water Conservation Area 3 
     Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement Project 
     (including component AA, Additional S-345 Structures; 
     component QQ Phase 1, Raise and Bridge East Portion of 
     Tamiami Trail and Fill Miami Canal within WCA 3; component QQ 
     Phase 2, WCA 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow 
     Enhancement; and component SS, North New River Improvements) 
     or the Central Lakebelt Storage Project (including components 
     S and EEE, Central Lake Belt Storage Area) until the 
     completion of the project to improve water deliveries to 
     Everglades National Park authorized by section 104 of the 
     Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 
     (16 U.S.C. 410r-8).
       (E) Maximum cost of projects.--Section 902 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2280) shall 
     apply to each

[[Page H10314]]

     project feature authorized under this subsection.
       (c) Additional Program Authority.--
       (1) In general.--To expedite implementation of the Plan, 
     the Secretary may implement modifications to the Central and 
     Southern Florida Project that--
       (A) are described in the Plan; and
       (B) will produce a substantial benefit to the restoration, 
     preservation and protection of the South Florida ecosystem.
       (2) Project implementation reports.--Before implementation 
     of any project feature authorized under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall review and approve for the project feature a 
     project implementation report prepared in accordance with 
     subsections (f) and (h).
       (3) Funding.--
       (A) Individual project funding.--
       (i) Federal cost.--The total Federal cost of each project 
     carried out under this subsection shall not exceed 
     $12,500,000.
       (ii) Overall cost.--The total cost of each project carried 
     out under this subsection shall not exceed $25,000,000.
       (B) Aggregate cost.--The total cost of all projects carried 
     out under this subsection shall not exceed $206,000,000, with 
     an estimated Federal cost of $103,000,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $103,000,000.
       (d) Authorization of Future Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Except for a project authorized by 
     subsection (b) or (c), any project included in the Plan shall 
     require a specific authorization by Congress.
       (2) Submission of report.--Before seeking congressional 
     authorization for a project under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall submit to Congress--
       (A) a description of the project; and
       (B) a project implementation report for the project 
     prepared in accordance with subsections (f) and (h).
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a project authorized by subsection (b), (c), or 
     (d) shall be 50 percent.
       (2) Non-federal responsibilities.--The non-Federal sponsor 
     with respect to a project described in subsection (b), (c), 
     or (d), shall be--
       (A) responsible for all land, easements, rights-of-way, and 
     relocations necessary to implement the Plan; and
       (B) afforded credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
     cost of carrying out the project in accordance with paragraph 
     (5)(A).
       (3) Federal assistance.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal sponsor with respect to a 
     project authorized by subsection (b), (c), or (d) may use 
     Federal funds for the purchase of any land, easement, rights-
     of-way, or relocation that is necessary to carry out the 
     project if any funds so used are credited toward the Federal 
     share of the cost of the project.
       (B) Agriculture funds.--Funds provided to the non-Federal 
     sponsor under the Conservation Restoration and Enhancement 
     Program (CREP) and the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) for 
     projects in the Plan shall be credited toward the non-Federal 
     share of the cost of the Plan if the Secretary of Agriculture 
     certifies that the funds provided may be used for that 
     purpose. Funds to be credited do not include funds provided 
     under section 390 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 1022).
       (4) Operation and maintenance.--Notwithstanding section 
     528(e)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
     Stat. 3770), the non-Federal sponsor shall be responsible for 
     50 percent of the cost of operation, maintenance, repair, 
     replacement, and rehabilitation activities authorized under 
     this section.
       (5) Credit.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding section 528(e)(4) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3770), and 
     regardless of the date of acquisition, the value of lands or 
     interests in lands and incidental costs for land acquired by 
     a non-Federal sponsor in accordance with a project 
     implementation report for any project included in the Plan 
     and authorized by Congress shall be--
       (i) included in the total cost of the project; and
       (ii) credited toward the non-Federal share of the cost of 
     the project.
       (B) Work.--The Secretary may provide credit, including in-
     kind credit, toward the non-Federal share for the reasonable 
     cost of any work performed in connection with a study, 
     preconstruction engineering and design, or construction that 
     is necessary for the implementation of the Plan, if--
       (i)(I) the credit is provided for work completed during the 
     period of design, as defined in a design agreement between 
     the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor; or
       (II) the credit is provided for work completed during the 
     period of construction, as defined in a project cooperation 
     agreement for an authorized project between the Secretary and 
     the non-Federal sponsor;
       (ii) the design agreement or the project cooperation 
     agreement prescribes the terms and conditions of the credit; 
     and
       (iii) the Secretary determines that the work performed by 
     the non-Federal sponsor is integral to the project.
       (C) Treatment of credit between projects.--Any credit 
     provided under this paragraph may be carried over between 
     authorized projects in accordance with subparagraph (D).
       (D) Periodic monitoring.--
       (i) In general.--To ensure that the contributions of the 
     non-Federal sponsor equal 50 percent proportionate share for 
     projects in the Plan, during each 5-year period, beginning 
     with commencement of design of the Plan, the Secretary shall, 
     for each project--

       (I) monitor the non-Federal provision of cash, in-kind 
     services, and land; and
       (II) manage, to the maximum extent practicable, the 
     requirement of the non-Federal sponsor to provide cash, in-
     kind services, and land.

       (ii) Other monitoring.--The Secretary shall conduct 
     monitoring under clause (i) separately for--

       (I) the preconstruction engineering and design phase; and
       (II) the construction phase.

       (E) Audits.--Credit for land (including land value and 
     incidental costs) or work provided under this subsection 
     shall be subject to audit by the Secretary.
       (f) Evaluation of Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Before implementation of a project 
     authorized by subsection (c) or (d) or any of clauses (i) 
     through (x) of subsection (b)(2)(C), the Secretary, in 
     cooperation with the non-Federal sponsor, shall, after notice 
     and opportunity for public comment and in accordance with 
     subsection (h), complete a project implementation report for 
     the project.
       (2) Project justification.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding section 209 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2) or any other provision 
     of law, in carrying out any activity authorized under this 
     section or any other provision of law to restore, preserve, 
     or protect the South Florida ecosystem, the Secretary may 
     determine that--
       (i) the activity is justified by the environmental benefits 
     derived by the South Florida ecosystem; and
       (ii) no further economic justification for the activity is 
     required, if the Secretary determines that the activity is 
     cost-effective.
       (B) Applicability.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any 
     separable element intended to produce benefits that are 
     predominantly unrelated to the restoration, preservation, and 
     protection of the natural system.
       (g) Exclusions and Limitations.--The following Plan 
     components are not approved for implementation:
       (1) Water included in the plan.--
       (A) In general.--Any project that is designed to implement 
     the capture and use of the approximately 245,000 acre-feet of 
     water described in section 7.7.2 of the Plan shall not be 
     implemented until such time as--
       (i) the project-specific feasibility study described in 
     subparagraph (B) on the need for and physical delivery of the 
     approximately 245,000 acre-feet of water, conducted by the 
     Secretary, in cooperation with the non-Federal sponsor, is 
     completed;
       (ii) the project is favorably recommended in a final report 
     of the Chief of Engineers; and
       (iii) the project is authorized by Act of Congress.
       (B) Project-specific feasibility study.--The project-
     specific feasibility study referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     shall include--
       (i) a comprehensive analysis of the structural facilities 
     proposed to deliver the approximately 245,000 acre-feet of 
     water to the natural system;
       (ii) an assessment of the requirements to divert and treat 
     the water;
       (iii) an assessment of delivery alternatives;
       (iv) an assessment of the feasibility of delivering the 
     water downstream while maintaining current levels of flood 
     protection to affected property; and
       (v) any other assessments that are determined by the 
     Secretary to be necessary to complete the study.
       (2) Wastewater reuse.--
       (A) In general.--On completion and evaluation of the 
     wastewater reuse pilot project described in subsection 
     (b)(2)(B)(iv), the Secretary, in an appropriately timed 5-
     year report, shall describe the results of the evaluation of 
     advanced wastewater reuse in meeting, in a cost-effective 
     manner, the requirements of restoration of the natural 
     system.
       (B) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress the 
     report described in subparagraph (A) before congressional 
     authorization for advanced wastewater reuse is sought.
       (3) Projects approved with limitations.--The following 
     projects in the Plan are approved for implementation with 
     limitations:
       (A) Loxahatchee national wildlife refuge.--The Federal 
     share for land acquisition in the project to enhance existing 
     wetland systems along the Loxahatchee National Wildlife 
     Refuge, including the Stazzulla tract, should be funded 
     through the budget of the Department of the Interior.
       (B) Southern corkscrew regional ecosystem.--The Southern 
     Corkscrew regional ecosystem watershed addition should be 
     accomplished outside the scope of the Plan.
       (h) Assurance of Project Benefits.--
       (1) In general.--The overarching objective of the Plan is 
     the restoration, preservation, and protection of the South 
     Florida Ecosystem while providing for other water-related 
     needs of the region, including water supply and flood 
     protection. The Plan shall be implemented to ensure the 
     protection of water quality in, the reduction of the loss of 
     fresh water from, the improvement of the environment of the 
     South Florida Ecosystem and to achieve and maintain the 
     benefits to the natural system and human environment 
     described in the Plan, and required pursuant

[[Page H10315]]

     to this section, for as long as the project is authorized.
       (2) Agreement.--
       (A) In general.--In order to ensure that water generated by 
     the Plan will be made available for the restoration of the 
     natural system, no appropriations, except for any pilot 
     project described in subsection (b)(2)(B), shall be made for 
     the construction of a project contained in the Plan until the 
     President and the Governor enter into a binding agreement 
     under which the State shall ensure, by regulation or other 
     appropriate means, that water made available by each project 
     in the Plan shall not be permitted for a consumptive use or 
     otherwise made unavailable by the State until such time as 
     sufficient reservations of water for the restoration of the 
     natural system are made under State law in accordance with 
     the project implementation report for that project and 
     consistent with the Plan.
       (B) Enforcement.--
       (i) In general.--Any person or entity that is aggrieved by 
     a failure of the United States or any other Federal 
     Government instrumentality or agency, or the Governor or any 
     other officer of a State instrumentality or agency, to comply 
     with any provision of the agreement entered into under 
     subparagraph (A) may bring a civil action in United States 
     district court for an injunction directing the United States 
     or any other Federal Government instrumentality or agency or 
     the Governor or any other officer of a State instrumentality 
     or agency, as the case may be, to comply with the agreement.
       (ii) Limitations on commencement of civil action.--No civil 
     action may be commenced under clause (i)--

       (I) before the date that is 60 days after the Secretary 
     receives written notice of a failure to comply with the 
     agreement; or
       (II) if the United States has commenced and is diligently 
     prosecuting an action in a court of the United States or a 
     State to redress a failure to comply with the agreement.

       (C) Trust responsibilities.--In carrying out his 
     responsibilities under this subsection with respect to the 
     restoration of the South Florida ecosystem, the Secretary of 
     the Interior shall fulfill his obligations to the Indian 
     tribes in South Florida under the Indian Trust Doctrine as 
     well as other applicable legal obligations.
       (3) Programmatic regulations.--
       (A) Issuance.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, after notice and 
     opportunity for public comment--
       (i) with the concurrence of--

       (I) the Governor; and
       (II) the Secretary of the Interior; and

       (ii) in consultation with--

       (I) the Seminole Tribe of Florida;
       (II) the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida;
       (III) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency;
       (IV) the Secretary of Commerce; and
       (V) other Federal, State, and local agencies;

     promulgate programmatic regulations to ensure that the goals 
     and purposes of the Plan are achieved.
       (B) Concurrency statement.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     and the Governor shall, not later than 180 days from the end 
     of the public comment period on proposed programmatic 
     regulations, provide the Secretary with a written statement 
     of concurrence or nonconcurrence. A failure to provide a 
     written statement of concurrence or nonconcurrence within 
     such time frame will be deemed as meeting the concurrency 
     requirements of subparagraph (A)(i). A copy of any 
     concurrency or nonconcurrency statements shall be made a part 
     of the administrative record and referenced in the final 
     programmatic regulations. Any nonconcurrency statement shall 
     specifically detail the reason or reasons for the 
     nonconcurrence.
       (C) Content of regulations.--Programmatic regulations 
     promulgated under this paragraph shall establish a process--
       (i) for the development of project implementation reports, 
     project cooperation agreements, and operating manuals that 
     ensure that the goals and objectives of the Plan are 
     achieved;
       (ii) to ensure that new information resulting from changed 
     or unforeseen circumstances, new scientific or technical 
     information or information that is developed through the 
     principles of adaptive management contained in the Plan, or 
     future authorized changes to the Plan are integrated into the 
     implementation of the Plan; and
       (iii) to ensure the protection of the natural system 
     consistent with the goals and purposes of the Plan, including 
     the establishment of interim goals to provide a means by 
     which the restoration success of the Plan may be evaluated 
     throughout the implementation process.
       (D) Schedule and transition rule.--
       (i) In general.--All project implementation reports 
     approved before the date of promulgation of the programmatic 
     regulations shall be consistent with the Plan.
       (ii) Preamble.--The preamble of the programmatic 
     regulations shall include a statement concerning the 
     consistency with the programmatic regulations of any project 
     implementation reports that were approved before the date of 
     promulgation of the regulations.
       (E) Review of programmatic regulations.--Whenever necessary 
     to attain Plan goals and purposes, but not less often than 
     every 5 years, the Secretary, in accordance with subparagraph 
     (A), shall review the programmatic regulations promulgated 
     under this paragraph.
       (4) Project-specific assurances.--
       (A) Project implementation reports.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall develop project implementation reports in accordance 
     with section 10.3.1 of the Plan.
       (ii) Coordination.--In developing a project implementation 
     report, the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor shall 
     coordinate with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and local 
     governments.
       (iii) Requirements.--A project implementation report 
     shall--

       (I) be consistent with the Plan and the programmatic 
     regulations promulgated under paragraph (3);
       (II) describe how each of the requirements stated in 
     paragraph (3)(B) is satisfied;
       (III) comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
     1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
       (IV) identify the appropriate quantity, timing, and 
     distribution of water dedicated and managed for the natural 
     system;
       (V) identify the amount of water to be reserved or 
     allocated for the natural system necessary to implement, 
     under State law, subclauses (IV) and (VI);
       (VI) comply with applicable water quality standards and 
     applicable water quality permitting requirements under 
     subsection (b)(2)(A)(ii);
       (VII) be based on the best available science; and
       (VIII) include an analysis concerning the cost-
     effectiveness and engineering feasibility of the project.

       (B) Project cooperation agreements.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall execute project cooperation agreements in accordance 
     with section 10 of the Plan.
       (ii) Condition.--The Secretary shall not execute a project 
     cooperation agreement until any reservation or allocation of 
     water for the natural system identified in the project 
     implementation report is executed under State law.
       (C) Operating manuals.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall develop and issue, for each project or group of 
     projects, an operating manual that is consistent with the 
     water reservation or allocation for the natural system 
     described in the project implementation report and the 
     project cooperation agreement for the project or group of 
     projects.
       (ii) Modifications.--Any significant modification by the 
     Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor to an operating manual 
     after the operating manual is issued shall only be carried 
     out subject to notice and opportunity for public comment.
       (5) Savings clause.--
       (A) No elimination or transfer.--Until a new source of 
     water supply of comparable quantity and quality as that 
     available on the date of enactment of this Act is available 
     to replace the water to be lost as a result of implementation 
     of the Plan, the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor shall 
     not eliminate or transfer existing legal sources of water, 
     including those for--
       (i) an agricultural or urban water supply;
       (ii) allocation or entitlement to the Seminole Indian Tribe 
     of Florida under section 7 of the Seminole Indian Land Claims 
     Settlement Act of 1987 (25 U.S.C. 1772e);
       (iii) the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida;
       (iv) water supply for Everglades National Park; or
       (v) water supply for fish and wildlife.
       (B) Maintenance of flood protection.--Implementation of the 
     Plan shall not reduce levels of service for flood protection 
     that are--
       (i) in existence on the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (ii) in accordance with applicable law.
       (C) No effect on tribal compact.--Nothing in this section 
     amends, alters, prevents, or otherwise abrogates rights of 
     the Seminole Indian Tribe of Florida under the compact among 
     the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the State, and the South 
     Florida Water Management District, defining the scope and use 
     of water rights of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, as codified 
     by section 7 of the Seminole Indian Land Claims Settlement 
     Act of 1987 (25 U.S.C. 1772e).
       (i) Dispute Resolution.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary and the Governor shall 
     within 180 days from the date of enactment of this Act 
     develop an agreement for resolving disputes between the Corps 
     of Engineers and the State associated with the implementation 
     of the Plan. Such agreement shall establish a mechanism for 
     the timely and efficient resolution of disputes, including--
       (A) a preference for the resolution of disputes between the 
     Jacksonville District of the Corps of Engineers and the South 
     Florida Water Management District;
       (B) a mechanism for the Jacksonville District of the Corps 
     of Engineers or the South Florida Water Management District 
     to initiate the dispute resolution process for unresolved 
     issues;
       (C) the establishment of appropriate timeframes and 
     intermediate steps for the elevation of disputes to the 
     Governor and the Secretary; and
       (D) a mechanism for the final resolution of disputes, 
     within 180 days from the date that

[[Page H10316]]

     the dispute resolution process is initiated under 
     subparagraph (B).
       (2) Condition for report approval.--The Secretary shall not 
     approve a project implementation report under this section 
     until the agreement established under this subsection has 
     been executed.
       (3) No effect on law.--Nothing in the agreement established 
     under this subsection shall alter or amend any existing 
     Federal or State law, or the responsibility of any party to 
     the agreement to comply with any Federal or State law.
       (j) Independent Scientific Review.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, and the Governor, in consultation with the South 
     Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, shall establish an 
     independent scientific review panel convened by a body, such 
     as the National Academy of Sciences, to review the Plan's 
     progress toward achieving the natural system restoration 
     goals of the Plan.
       (2) Report.--The panel described in paragraph (1) shall 
     produce a biennial report to Congress, the Secretary, the 
     Secretary of the Interior, and the Governor that includes an 
     assessment of ecological indicators and other measures of 
     progress in restoring the ecology of the natural system, 
     based on the Plan.
       (k) Outreach and Assistance.--
       (1) Small business concerns owned and operated by socially 
     and economically disadvantaged individuals.--In executing the 
     Plan, the Secretary shall ensure that small business concerns 
     owned and controlled by socially and economically 
     disadvantaged individuals are provided opportunities to 
     participate under section 15(g) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 644(g)).
       (2) Community outreach and education.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall ensure that impacts on 
     socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, 
     including individuals with limited English proficiency, and 
     communities are considered during implementation of the Plan, 
     and that such individuals have opportunities to review and 
     comment on its implementation.
       (B) Provision of opportunities.--The Secretary shall 
     ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that public 
     outreach and educational opportunities are provided, during 
     implementation of the Plan, to the individuals of South 
     Florida, including individuals with limited English 
     proficiency, and in particular for socially and economically 
     disadvantaged communities.
       (l) Report to Congress.--Beginning on October 1, 2005, and 
     periodically thereafter until October 1, 2036, the Secretary 
     and the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Commerce, 
     and the State of Florida, shall jointly submit to Congress a 
     report on the implementation of the Plan. Such reports shall 
     be completed not less often than every 5 years. Such reports 
     shall include a description of planning, design, and 
     construction work completed, the amount of funds expended 
     during the period covered by the report (including a detailed 
     analysis of the funds expended for adaptive assessment under 
     subsection (b)(2)(C)(xi)), and the work anticipated over the 
     next 5-year period. In addition, each report shall include--
       (1) the determination of each Secretary, and the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     concerning the benefits to the natural system and the human 
     environment achieved as of the date of the report and whether 
     the completed projects of the Plan are being operated in a 
     manner that is consistent with the requirements of subsection 
     (h);
       (2) progress toward interim goals established in accordance 
     with subsection (h)(3)(B); and
       (3) a review of the activities performed by the Secretary 
     under subsection (k) as they relate to socially and 
     economically disadvantaged individuals and individuals with 
     limited English proficiency.
       (m) Severability.--If any provision or remedy provided by 
     this section is found to be unconstitutional or unenforceable 
     by any court of competent jurisdiction, any remaining 
     provisions in this section shall remain valid and 
     enforceable.

     SEC. 602. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE 
                   BASE.

       (a) In General.--(1) The Everglades is an American treasure 
     and includes uniquely-important and diverse wildlife 
     resources and recreational opportunities;
       (2) the preservation of the pristine and natural character 
     of the South Florida ecosystem is critical to the regional 
     economy;
       (3) as this legislation demonstrates, the Senate believes 
     it to be a vital national mission to restore and preserve 
     this ecosystem and accordingly is authorizing a significant 
     Federal investment to do so;
       (4) the Senate seeks to have the remaining property at the 
     former Homestead Air Base conveyed and reused as 
     expeditiously as possible, and several options for base reuse 
     are being considered, including as a commercial airport; and
       (5) the Senate is aware that the Homestead site is located 
     in a sensitive environmental location, and that Biscayne 
     National Park is only approximately 1.5 miles to the east, 
     Everglades National Park approximately 8 miles to the west, 
     and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary approximately 
     10 miles to the south.
       (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate 
     that--
       (1) development at the Homestead site could potentially 
     cause significant air, water, and noise pollution and result 
     in the degradation of adjacent national parks and other 
     protected Federal resources;
       (2) in their decisionmaking, the Federal agencies charged 
     with determining the reuse of the remaining property at the 
     Homestead base should carefully consider and weigh all 
     available information concerning potential environmental 
     impacts of various reuse options;
       (3) the redevelopment of the former base should be 
     consistent with restoration goals, provide desirable numbers 
     of jobs and economic redevelopment for the community, and be 
     consistent with other applicable laws;
       (4) consistent with applicable laws, the Secretary of the 
     Air Force should proceed as quickly as practicable to issue a 
     final SEIS and Record of Decision so that reuse of the former 
     air base can proceed expeditiously;
       (5) following conveyance of the remaining surplus property, 
     the Secretary, as part of his oversight for Everglades 
     restoration, should cooperate with the entities to which the 
     various parcels of surplus property were conveyed so that the 
     planned use of those properties is implemented in such a 
     manner as to remain consistent with the goals of the 
     Everglades restoration plan; and
       (6) by August 1, 2002, the Secretary should submit a report 
     to the appropriate committees of Congress on actions taken 
     and make any recommendations for consideration by Congress.

          TITLE VII--MISSOURI RIVER PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT

     SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE.

       This title shall be known as the ``Missouri River 
     Protection and Improvement Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 702. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Missouri River is--
       (A) an invaluable economic, environmental, recreational, 
     and cultural resource to the people of the United States; and
       (B) a critical source of water for drinking and irrigation;
       (2) millions of people fish, hunt, and camp along the 
     Missouri River each year;
       (3) thousands of sites of spiritual importance to Native 
     Americans line the shores of the Missouri River;
       (4) the Missouri River provides critical wildlife habitat 
     for threatened and endangered species;
       (5) in 1944, Congress approved the Pick-Sloan program--
       (A) to promote the general economic development of the 
     United States;
       (B) to provide for irrigation above Sioux City, Iowa;
       (C) to protect urban and rural areas from devastating 
     floods of the Missouri River; and
       (D) for other purposes;
       (6) the Garrison Dam was constructed on the Missouri River 
     in North Dakota and the Oahe Dam was constructed in South 
     Dakota under the Pick-Sloan program;
       (7) the dams referred to in paragraph (6)--
       (A) generate low-cost electricity for millions of people in 
     the United States;
       (B) provide revenue to the Treasury; and
       (C) provide flood control that has prevented billions of 
     dollars of damage;
       (8) the Garrison and Oahe Dams have reduced the ability of 
     the Missouri River to carry sediment downstream, resulting in 
     the accumulation of sediment in the reservoirs known as Lake 
     Sakakawea and Lake Oahe;
       (9) the sediment depositions--
       (A) cause shoreline flooding;
       (B) destroy wildlife habitat;
       (C) limit recreational opportunities;
       (D) threaten the long-term ability of dams to provide 
     hydropower and flood control under the Pick-Sloan program;
       (E) reduce water quality; and
       (F) threaten intakes for drinking water and irrigation; and
       (10) to meet the objectives established by Congress for the 
     Pick-Sloan program, it is necessary to establish a Missouri 
     River Restoration Program--
       (A) to improve conservation;
       (B) to reduce the deposition of sediment; and
       (C) to take other steps necessary for proper management of 
     the Missouri River.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this title are--
       (1) to reduce the siltation of the Missouri River in the 
     State of North Dakota;
       (2) to meet the objectives of the Pick-Sloan program by 
     developing and implementing a long-term strategy--
       (A) to improve conservation in the Missouri River 
     watershed;
       (B) to protect recreation on the Missouri River from 
     sedimentation;
       (C) to improve water quality in the Missouri River;
       (D) to improve erosion control along the Missouri River; 
     and
       (E) to protect Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River from erosion; and
       (3) to meet the objectives described in paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) by developing and financing new programs in accordance 
     with the plan.

     SEC. 703. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Pick-sloan program.--The term ``Pick-Sloan program'' 
     means the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program authorized 
     by section 9 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 891, 
     chapter 665).
       (2) Plan.--The term ``plan'' means the plan for the use of 
     funds made available by this

[[Page H10317]]

     title that is required to be prepared under section 705(e).
       (3) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of North 
     Dakota.
       (4) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the North 
     Dakota Missouri River Task Force established by section 
     705(a).
       (5) Trust.--The term ``Trust'' means the North Dakota 
     Missouri River Trust established by section 704(a).

     SEC. 704. MISSOURI RIVER TRUST.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a committee to be 
     known as the North Dakota Missouri River Trust.
       (b) Membership.--The Trust shall be composed of 16 members 
     to be appointed by the Secretary, including--
       (1) 12 members recommended by the Governor of North Dakota 
     that--
       (A) represent equally the various interests of the public; 
     and
       (B) include representatives of--
       (i) the North Dakota Department of Health;
       (ii) the North Dakota Department of Parks and Recreation;
       (iii) the North Dakota Department of Game and Fish;
       (iv) the North Dakota State Water Commission;
       (v) the North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission;
       (vi) agriculture groups;
       (vii) environmental or conservation organizations;
       (viii) the hydroelectric power industry;
       (ix) recreation user groups;
       (x) local governments; and
       (xi) other appropriate interests;
       (2) 4 members representing each of the 4 Indian tribes in 
     the State of North Dakota.

     SEC. 705. MISSOURI RIVER TASK FORCE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established the Missouri River 
     Task Force.
       (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of--
       (1) the Secretary (or a designee), who shall serve as 
     Chairperson;
       (2) the Secretary of Agriculture (or a designee);
       (3) the Secretary of Energy (or a designee);
       (4) the Secretary of the Interior (or a designee); and
       (5) the Trust.
       (c) Duties.--The Task Force shall--
       (1) meet at least twice each year;
       (2) vote on approval of the plan, with approval requiring 
     votes in favor of the plan by a majority of the members;
       (3) review projects to meet the goals of the plan; and
       (4) recommend to the Secretary critical projects for 
     implementation.
       (d) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Secretary shall submit to the other members of the Task 
     Force a report on--
       (A) the impact of the siltation of the Missouri River in 
     the State, including the impact on--
       (i) the Federal, State, and regional economies;
       (ii) recreation;
       (iii) hydropower generation;
       (iv) fish and wildlife; and
       (v) flood control;
       (B) the status of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River;
       (C) the extent of erosion along the Missouri River 
     (including tributaries of the Missouri River) in the State; 
     and
       (D) other issues, as requested by the Task Force.
       (2) Consultation.--In preparing the report under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall consult with--
       (A) the Secretary of Energy;
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior;
       (C) the Secretary of Agriculture;
       (D) the State; and
       (E) Indian tribes in the State.
       (e) Plan for Use of Funds Made Available by This Title.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Task Force shall prepare a plan for the use of funds made 
     available under this title.
       (2) Contents of plan.--The plan shall provide for the 
     manner in which the Task Force shall develop and recommend 
     critical restoration projects to promote--
       (A) conservation practices in the Missouri River watershed;
       (B) the general control and removal of sediment from the 
     Missouri River;
       (C) the protection of recreation on the Missouri River from 
     sedimentation;
       (D) the protection of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River from erosion;
       (E) erosion control along the Missouri River; or
       (F) any combination of the activities described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (E).
       (3) Plan review and revision.--
       (A) In general.--The Task Force shall make a copy of the 
     plan available for public review and comment before the plan 
     becomes final, in accordance with procedures established by 
     the Task Force.
       (B) Revision of plan.--
       (i) In general.--The Task Force may, on an annual basis, 
     revise the plan.
       (ii) Public review and comment.--In revising the plan, the 
     Task Force shall provide the public the opportunity to review 
     and comment on any proposed revision to the plan.
       (f) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--After the plan is approved by the Task 
     Force under subsection (c)(2), the Secretary, in coordination 
     with the Task Force, shall identify critical restoration 
     projects to carry out the plan.
       (2) Agreement.--The Secretary may carry out a critical 
     restoration project after entering into an agreement with an 
     appropriate non-Federal interest in accordance with--
       (A) section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
     1962d-5b); and
       (B) this section.
       (3) Indian projects.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     the Secretary shall ensure that not less than 30 percent of 
     the funds made available for critical restoration projects 
     under this title shall be used exclusively for projects that 
     are--
       (A) within the boundary of an Indian reservation; or
       (B) administered by an Indian tribe.
       (g) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Assessment.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) shall be 75 
     percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (2) Plan.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     preparing the plan under subsection (e) shall be 75 percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--Not more than 50 percent of the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of preparing the plan under 
     subsection (e) may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, or other in-kind contributions.
       (3) Critical restoration projects.--
       (A) In general.--A non-Federal cost share shall be required 
     to carry out any critical restoration project under 
     subsection (f) that does not primarily benefit the Federal 
     Government, as determined by the Task Force.
       (B) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a critical restoration project under subsection 
     (f) for which the Task Force requires a non-Federal cost 
     share under subparagraph (A) shall be 65 percent, not to 
     exceed $5,000,000 for any critical restoration project.
       (C) Non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--Not more than 50 percent of the non-
     Federal share of the cost of carrying out a critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (ii) Required non-federal contributions.--For any critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B), the non-
     Federal interest shall--

       (I) provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged 
     material disposal areas, and relocations;
       (II) pay all operation, maintenance, replacement, repair, 
     and rehabilitation costs; and
       (III) hold the United States harmless from all claims 
     arising from the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
     the project.

       (iii) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive 
     credit for all contributions provided under clause (ii)(I).

     SEC. 706. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this title diminishes or 
     affects--
       (1) any water right of an Indian tribe;
       (2) any other right of an Indian tribe, except as 
     specifically provided in another provision of this title;
       (3) any treaty right that is in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act;
       (4) any external boundary of an Indian reservation of an 
     Indian tribe;
       (5) any authority of the State that relates to the 
     protection, regulation, or management of fish, terrestrial 
     wildlife, and cultural and archaeological resources, except 
     as specifically provided in this title; or
       (6) any authority of the Secretary, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, or the head of any other Federal agency under a law 
     in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, including--
       (A) the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 
     et seq.);
       (B) the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 
     U.S.C. 470aa et seq.);
       (C) the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 
     et seq.);
       (D) the Act entitled ``An Act for the protection of the 
     bald eagle'', approved June 8, 1940 (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.);
       (E) the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.);
       (F) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.);
       (G) the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       (H) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
     et seq.);
       (I) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.); 
     and
       (J) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
       (b) Federal Liability for Damage.--Nothing in this title 
     relieves the Federal Government of liability for damage to 
     private property caused by the operation of the Pick-Sloan 
     program.
       (c) Flood Control.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this title, the Secretary shall retain the authority to 
     operate the Pick-Sloan program for the purposes of

[[Page H10318]]

     meeting the requirements of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 
     Stat. 887, chapter 665; 33 U.S.C. 701-1 et seq.).
       (d) Use of Funds.--Funds transferred to the Trust may be 
     used to pay the non-Federal share required under Federal 
     programs.

     SEC. 707. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Initial Funding.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this title 
     $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2004, to 
     remain available until expended.
       (b) Existing Programs.--The Secretary shall fund programs 
     authorized under the Pick-Sloan program in existence on the 
     date of enactment of this Act at levels that are not less 
     than funding levels for those programs as of that date.

                TITLE VIII--WILDLIFE REFUGE ENHANCEMENT

     SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Charles M. Russell 
     National Wildlife Refuge Enhancement Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 802. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this title is to direct the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, to convey 
     cabin sites at Fort Peck Lake, Montana, and to acquire land 
     with greater wildlife and other public value for the Charles 
     M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, to--
       (1) better achieve the wildlife conservation purposes for 
     which the Refuge was established;
       (2) protect additional fish and wildlife habitat in and 
     adjacent to the Refuge;
       (3) enhance public opportunities for hunting, fishing, and 
     other wildlife-dependent activities;
       (4) improve management of the Refuge; and
       (5) reduce Federal expenditures associated with the 
     administration of cabin site leases.

     SEC. 803. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Association.--The term ``Association'' means the Fort 
     Peck Lake Association.
       (2) Cabin site.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``cabin site'' means a parcel of 
     property within the Fort Peck, Hell Creek, Pines, or Rock 
     Creek Cabin areas that is--
       (i) managed by the Army Corps of Engineers;
       (ii) located in or near the eastern portion of Fort Peck 
     Lake, Montana; and
       (iii) leased for individual use or occupancy.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``cabin site'' includes all 
     right, title and interest of the United States in and to the 
     property, including--
       (i) any permanent easement that is necessary to provide 
     vehicular access to the cabin site; and
       (ii) the right to reconstruct, operate, and maintain an 
     easement described in clause (i).
       (3) Cabin site area.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``cabin site area'' means a 
     portion of the Fort Peck, Hell Creek, Pines, or Rock Creek 
     Cabin Areas referred to in paragraph (2) that is occupied by 
     1 or more cabin sites.
       (B) Inclusion.--The term ``cabin site area'' includes such 
     immediately adjacent land, if any, as is needed for the cabin 
     site area to exist as a generally contiguous parcel of land, 
     as determined by the Secretary with the concurrence of the 
     Secretary of the Interior.
       (4) Lessee.--The term ``lessee'' means a person that is 
     leasing a cabin site.
       (5) Refuge.--The term ``Refuge'' means the Charles M. 
     Russell National Wildlife Refuge in Montana.

     SEC. 804. CONVEYANCE OF CABIN SITES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Prohibition.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prohibit the 
     issuance of new cabin site leases within the Refuge, except 
     as is necessary to consolidate with, or substitute for, an 
     existing cabin lease site under paragraph (2).
       (2) Determination; notice.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, and before proceeding with any 
     exchange under this title, the Secretary shall--
       (A) with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior, 
     determine individual cabin sites that are not suitable for 
     conveyance to a lessee--
       (i) because the sites are isolated so that conveyance of 1 
     or more of the sites would create an inholding that would 
     impair management of the Refuge; or
       (ii) for any other reason that adversely impacts the future 
     habitability of the sites; and
       (B) provide written notice to each lessee that specifies 
     any requirements concerning the form of a notice of interest 
     in acquiring a cabin site that the lessee may submit under 
     subsection (b)(1)(A) and the portion of administrative costs 
     that would be paid to the Secretary under section 808(b), 
     to--
       (i) determine whether the lessee is interested in acquiring 
     the cabin site area of the lessee; and
       (ii) inform each lessee of the rights of the lessee under 
     this title.
       (3) Offer of comparable cabin site.--If the Secretary 
     determines that a cabin site is not suitable for conveyance 
     to a lessee under paragraph (2)(A), the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall offer 
     to the lessee the opportunity to acquire a comparable cabin 
     site within another cabin site area.
       (b) Response.--
       (1) Notice of interest.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than July 1, 2003, a lessee 
     shall notify the Secretary in writing of an interest in 
     acquiring the cabin site of the lessee.
       (B) Form.--The notice under this paragraph shall be 
     submitted in such form as is required by the Secretary under 
     subsection (a)(2)(B).
       (2) Unpurchased cabin sites.--If the Secretary receives no 
     notice of interest or offer to purchase a cabin site from the 
     lessee under paragraph (1) or the lessee declines an 
     opportunity to purchase a comparable cabin site under 
     subsection (a)(3), the cabin site shall be subject to 
     sections 805 and 806.
       (c) Process.--After providing notice to a lessee under 
     subsection (a)(2)(B), the Secretary shall--
       (1) determine whether any small parcel of land contiguous 
     to any cabin site (not including shoreline or land needed to 
     provide public access to the shoreline of Fort Peck Lake) 
     should be conveyed as part of the cabin site to--
       (A) protect water quality;
       (B) eliminate an inholding; or
       (C) facilitate administration of the land remaining in 
     Federal ownership;
       (2) if the Secretary determines that a conveyance should be 
     completed under paragraph (1), provide notice of the intent 
     of the Secretary to complete the conveyance to the lessee of 
     each affected cabin site;
       (3) survey each cabin site to determine the acreage and 
     legal description of the cabin site area, including land 
     identified under paragraph (1);
       (4) take such actions as are necessary to ensure compliance 
     with all applicable environmental laws;
       (5) with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior, 
     determine which covenants or deed restrictions, if any, 
     should be placed on a cabin site before conveyance out of 
     Federal ownership, including any covenant or deed restriction 
     that is required to comply with--
       (A) the Act of May 18, 1938 (16 U.S.C. 833 et seq.);
       (B) laws (including regulations) applicable to management 
     of the Refuge; and
       (C) any other laws (including regulations) for which 
     compliance is necessary to--
       (i) ensure the maintenance of existing and adequate public 
     access to and along Fort Peck Lake; and
       (ii) limit future uses of a cabin site to--

       (I) noncommercial, single-family use; and
       (II) the type and intensity of use of the cabin site made 
     on the date of enactment of this Act, as limited by terms of 
     any lease applicable to the cabin site in effect on that 
     date; and

       (6) conduct an appraisal of each cabin site (including any 
     expansion of the cabin site under paragraph (1)) that--
       (A) is carried out in accordance with the Uniform Appraisal 
     Standards for Federal Land Acquisition;
       (B) excludes the value of any private improvement to the 
     cabin sites; and
       (C) takes into consideration any covenant or other 
     restriction determined to be necessary under paragraph (5) 
     and subsection (h).
       (d) Consultation and Public Involvement.--The Secretary 
     shall--
       (1) carry out subsections (b) and (c) in consultation 
     with--
       (A) the Secretary of the Interior;
       (B) affected lessees;
       (C) affected counties in the State of Montana; and
       (D) the Association; and
       (2) hold public hearings, and provide all interested 
     parties with notice and an opportunity to comment, on the 
     activities carried out under this section.
       (e) Conveyance.--Subject to subsections (h) and (i) and 
     section 808(b), the Secretary shall convey a cabin site by 
     individual patent or deed to the lessee under this title--
       (1) if each cabin site complies with Federal, State, and 
     county septic and water quality laws (including regulations);
       (2) if the lessee complies with other requirements of this 
     section; and
       (3) after receipt of the payment for the cabin site from 
     the lessee in an amount equal to the appraised fair market 
     value of the cabin site as determined in accordance with 
     subsection (c)(6).
       (f) Vehicular Access.--
       (1) In general.--Nothing in this title authorizes any 
     addition to or improvement of vehicular access to a cabin 
     site.
       (2) Construction.--The Secretary--
       (A) shall not construct any road for the sole purpose of 
     providing access to land sold under this section; and
       (B) shall be under no obligation to service or maintain any 
     existing road used primarily for access to that land (or to a 
     cabin site).
       (3) Offer to convey.--The Secretary may offer to convey to 
     the State of Montana, any political subdivision of the State 
     of Montana, or the Association, any road determined by the 
     Secretary to primarily service the land sold under this 
     section.
       (g) Utilities and Infrastructure.--
       (1) In general.--The purchaser of a cabin site shall be 
     responsible for the acquisition of all utilities and 
     infrastructure necessary to support the cabin site.
       (2) No federal assistance.--The Secretary shall not provide 
     any utilities or infrastructure to the cabin site.
       (h) Covenants and Deed Restrictions.--
       (1) In general.--Before conveying any cabin site under 
     subsection (e), the Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of the Interior, shall ensure that the title to the 
     cabin site includes such covenants and

[[Page H10319]]

     deed restrictions as are determined, under subsection (c), to 
     be necessary to make binding on all subsequent purchasers of 
     the cabin site any other covenants or deed restrictions in 
     the title to the cabin site.
       (2) Reservation of rights.--The Secretary may reserve the 
     perpetual right, power, privilege, and easement to 
     permanently overflow, flood, submerge, saturate, percolate, 
     or erode a cabin site (or any portion of a cabin site) that 
     the Secretary determines is necessary in the operation of the 
     Fort Peck Dam.
       (i) No Conveyance of Unsuitable Cabin Sites.--A cabin site 
     that is determined to be unsuitable for conveyance under 
     subsection (a)(2) shall not be conveyed by the Secretary 
     under this section.
       (j) Identification of Land for Exchange.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     identify land that may be acquired that meets the purposes of 
     paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 802 and for which a 
     willing seller exists.
       (2) Appraisal.--On a request by a willing seller, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall appraise the land identified 
     under paragraph (1).
       (3) Acquisition.--If the Secretary of the Interior 
     determines that the acquisition of the land would meet the 
     purposes of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 802, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall cooperate with the willing 
     seller to facilitate the acquisition of the property in 
     accordance with section 807.
       (4) Public participation.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     shall hold public hearings, and provide all interested 
     parties with notice and an opportunity to comment, on the 
     activities carried out under this section.

     SEC. 805. RIGHTS OF NONPARTICIPATING LESSEES.

       (a) Continuation of Lease.--
       (1) In general.--A lessee that does not provide the 
     Secretary with an offer to acquire the cabin site of the 
     lessee under section 804 (including a lessee who declines an 
     offer of a comparable cabin site under section 804(a)(3)) may 
     elect to continue to lease the cabin site for the remainder 
     of the current term of the lease, which, except as provided 
     in paragraph (2), shall not be renewed or otherwise extended.
       (2) Expiration before 2010.--If the current term of a 
     lessee described in paragraph (1) expires or is scheduled to 
     expire before 2010, the Secretary shall offer to extend or 
     renew the lease through 2010.
       (b) Improvements.--Any improvements and personal property 
     of the lessee that are not removed from the cabin site before 
     the termination of the lease shall be considered property of 
     the United States in accordance with the provisions of the 
     lease.
       (c) Option To Purchase.--Subject to subsections (d) and (e) 
     and section 808(b), if at any time before termination of the 
     lease, a lessee described in subsection (a)(1)--
       (1) notifies the Secretary of the intent of the lessee to 
     purchase the cabin site of the lessee; and
       (2) pays for an updated appraisal of the site in accordance 
     with section 804(c)(6);
     the Secretary shall convey the cabin site to the lessee, by 
     individual patent or deed, on receipt of payment for the site 
     from the lessee in an amount equal to the appraised fair 
     market value of the cabin site as determined by the updated 
     appraisal.
       (d) Covenants and Deed Restrictions.--Before conveying any 
     cabin site under subsection (c), the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall ensure 
     that the title to the cabin site includes such covenants and 
     deed restrictions as are determined, under section 804(c), to 
     be necessary to make binding on all subsequent purchasers of 
     the cabin site any other covenants or deed restrictions in 
     the title to the cabin site.
       (e) No Conveyance of Unsuitable Cabin Sites.--A cabin site 
     that is determined to be unsuitable for conveyance under 
     subsection 804(a)(2) shall not be conveyed by the Secretary 
     under this section.
       (f) Report.--Not later than July 1, 2003, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report that--
       (1) describes progress made in implementing this Act; and
       (2) identifies cabin owners that have filed a notice of 
     interest under section 804(b) and have declined an 
     opportunity to acquire a comparable cabin site under section 
     804(a)(3).

     SEC. 806. CONVEYANCE TO THIRD PARTIES.

       (a) Conveyances to Third Parties.--As soon as practicable 
     after the expiration or surrender of a lease, the Secretary, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, may offer 
     for sale, by public auction, written invitation, or other 
     competitive sales procedure, and at the fair market value of 
     the cabin site determined under section 804(c)(6), any cabin 
     site that--
       (1) is not conveyed to a lessee under this title; and
       (2) has not been determined to be unsuitable for conveyance 
     under section 804(a)(2).
       (b) Covenants and Deed Restrictions.--Before conveying any 
     cabin site under subsection (a), the Secretary shall ensure 
     that the title to the cabin site includes such covenants and 
     deed restrictions as are determined, under section 804(c), to 
     be necessary to make binding on all subsequent purchasers of 
     the cabin site any other covenants or deed restrictions 
     contained in the title to the cabin site.
       (c) Conveyance to Association.--On the completion of all 
     individual conveyances of cabin sites under this title (or at 
     such prior time as the Secretary determines would be 
     practicable based on the location of property to be 
     conveyed), the Secretary shall convey to the Association all 
     land within the outer boundaries of cabin site areas that are 
     not conveyed to lessees under this title at fair market value 
     based on an appraisal carried out in accordance with the 
     Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition.

     SEC. 807. USE OF PROCEEDS.

       (a) Proceeds.--All payments for the conveyance of cabin 
     sites under this title, except costs collected by the 
     Secretary under section 808(b), shall be deposited in a 
     special fund in the Treasury for use by the Secretary of the 
     Interior, acting through the Director of the United States 
     Fish and Wildlife Service and without further Act of 
     appropriation, solely for the acquisition from willing 
     sellers of property that--
       (1) is within or adjacent to the Refuge;
       (2) would be suitable to carry out the purposes of this Act 
     described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 802; and
       (3) on acquisition by the Secretary of the Interior, would 
     be accessible to the general public for use in conducting 
     activities consistent with approved uses of the Refuge.
       (b) Limitation.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     acquisitions under this title shall be of land within the 
     Refuge boundary.

     SEC. 808. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     Secretary shall pay all administrative costs incurred in 
     carrying out this title.
       (b) Reimbursement.--As a condition of the conveyance of any 
     cabin site area under this title, the Secretary--
       (1) may require the party to whom the property is conveyed 
     to reimburse the Secretary for a reasonable portion, as 
     determined by the Secretary, of the administrative costs 
     (including survey costs), incurred in carrying out this 
     title, with such portion to be described in the notice 
     provided to the Association and lessees under section 
     804(a)(2); and
       (2) shall require the party to whom the property is 
     conveyed to reimburse the Association for a proportionate 
     share of the costs (including interest) incurred by the 
     Association in carrying out transactions under this Act.

     SEC. 809. TERMINATION OF WILDLIFE DESIGNATION.

       None of the land conveyed under this title shall be 
     designated, or shall remain designated as, part of the 
     National Wildlife Refuge System.

     SEC. 810. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this title.

                  TITLE IX--MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION

     SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.

       This title shall be known as the ``Missouri River 
     Restoration Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 902. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Missouri River is--
       (A) an invaluable economic, environmental, recreational, 
     and cultural resource to the people of the United States; and
       (B) a critical source of water for drinking and irrigation;
       (2) millions of people fish, hunt, and camp along the 
     Missouri River each year;
       (3) thousands of sites of spiritual importance to Native 
     Americans line the shores of the Missouri River;
       (4) the Missouri River provides critical wildlife habitat 
     for threatened and endangered species;
       (5) in 1944, Congress approved the Pick-Sloan program--
       (A) to promote the general economic development of the 
     United States;
       (B) to provide for irrigation above Sioux City, Iowa;
       (C) to protect urban and rural areas from devastating 
     floods of the Missouri River; and
       (D) for other purposes;
       (6) the Oahe, Big Bend, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point Dams 
     were constructed on the Missouri River in South Dakota under 
     the Pick-Sloan program;
       (7) the dams referred to in paragraph (6)--
       (A) generate low-cost electricity for millions of people in 
     the United States;
       (B) provide revenue to the Treasury; and
       (C) provide flood control that has prevented billions of 
     dollars of damage;
       (8) the Oahe, Big Bend, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point Dams 
     have reduced the ability of the Missouri River to carry 
     sediment downstream, resulting in the accumulation of 
     sediment in the reservoirs known as Lake Oahe, Lake Sharpe, 
     Lake Francis Case, and Lewis and Clark Lake;
       (9) the sediment depositions--
       (A) cause shoreline flooding;
       (B) destroy wildlife habitat;
       (C) limit recreational opportunities;
       (D) threaten the long-term ability of dams to provide 
     hydropower and flood control under the Pick-Sloan program;
       (E) reduce water quality; and
       (F) threaten intakes for drinking water and irrigation; and
       (10) to meet the objectives established by Congress for the 
     Pick-Sloan program, it is necessary to establish a Missouri 
     River Restoration Program--
       (A) to improve conservation;
       (B) to reduce the deposition of sediment; and

[[Page H10320]]

       (C) to take other steps necessary for proper management of 
     the Missouri River.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this title are--
       (1) to reduce the siltation of the Missouri River in the 
     State of South Dakota;
       (2) to meet the objectives of the Pick-Sloan program by 
     developing and implementing a long-term strategy--
       (A) to improve conservation in the Missouri River 
     watershed;
       (B) to protect recreation on the Missouri River from 
     sedimentation;
       (C) to improve water quality in the Missouri River;
       (D) to improve erosion control along the Missouri River; 
     and
       (E) to protect Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River from erosion; and
       (3) to meet the objectives described in paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) by developing and financing new programs in accordance 
     with the plan.

     SEC. 903. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Committee.--The term ``Committee'' means the Executive 
     Committee appointed under section 904(d).
       (2) Pick-sloan program.--The term ``Pick-Sloan program'' 
     means the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program authorized 
     by section 9 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 891, 
     chapter 665).
       (3) Plan.--The term ``plan'' means the plan for the use of 
     funds made available by this title that is required to be 
     prepared under section 905(e).
       (4) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of South 
     Dakota.
       (5) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the Missouri 
     River Task Force established by section 905(a).
       (6) Trust.--The term ``Trust'' means the Missouri River 
     Trust established by section 904(a).

     SEC. 904. MISSOURI RIVER TRUST.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a committee to be 
     known as the Missouri River Trust.
       (b) Membership.--The Trust shall be composed of 25 members 
     to be appointed by the Secretary, including--
       (1) 15 members recommended by the Governor of South Dakota 
     that--
       (A) represent equally the various interests of the public; 
     and
       (B) include representatives of--
       (i) the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural 
     Resources;
       (ii) the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks;
       (iii) environmental groups;
       (iv) the hydroelectric power industry;
       (v) local governments;
       (vi) recreation user groups;
       (vii) agricultural groups; and
       (viii) other appropriate interests;
       (2) 9 members, 1 of each of whom shall be recommended by 
     each of the 9 Indian tribes in the State of South Dakota; and
       (3) 1 member recommended by the organization known as the 
     ``Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota'' (composed of the 
     Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara tribes).

     SEC. 905. MISSOURI RIVER TASK FORCE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established the Missouri River 
     Task Force.
       (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of--
       (1) the Secretary (or a designee), who shall serve as 
     Chairperson;
       (2) the Secretary of Agriculture (or a designee);
       (3) the Secretary of Energy (or a designee);
       (4) the Secretary of the Interior (or a designee); and
       (5) the Trust.
       (c) Duties.--The Task Force shall--
       (1) meet at least twice each year;
       (2) vote on approval of the plan, with approval requiring 
     votes in favor of the plan by a majority of the members;
       (3) review projects to meet the goals of the plan; and
       (4) recommend to the Secretary critical projects for 
     implementation.
       (d) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Secretary shall submit to the other members of the Task 
     Force a report on--
       (A) the impact of the siltation of the Missouri River in 
     the State, including the impact on--
       (i) the Federal, State, and regional economies;
       (ii) recreation;
       (iii) hydropower generation;
       (iv) fish and wildlife; and
       (v) flood control;
       (B) the status of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River;
       (C) the extent of erosion along the Missouri River 
     (including tributaries of the Missouri River) in the State; 
     and
       (D) other issues, as requested by the Task Force.
       (2) Consultation.--In preparing the report under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall consult with--
       (A) the Secretary of Energy;
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior;
       (C) the Secretary of Agriculture;
       (D) the State; and
       (E) Indian tribes in the State.
       (e) Plan for Use of Funds Made Available by This Title.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Task Force shall prepare a plan for the use of funds made 
     available under this title.
       (2) Contents of plan.--The plan shall provide for the 
     manner in which the Task Force shall develop and recommend 
     critical restoration projects to promote--
       (A) conservation practices in the Missouri River watershed;
       (B) the general control and removal of sediment from the 
     Missouri River;
       (C) the protection of recreation on the Missouri River from 
     sedimentation;
       (D) the protection of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River from erosion;
       (E) erosion control along the Missouri River; or
       (F) any combination of the activities described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (E).
       (3) Plan review and revision.--
       (A) In general.--The Task Force shall make a copy of the 
     plan available for public review and comment before the plan 
     becomes final, in accordance with procedures established by 
     the Task Force.
       (B) Revision of plan.--
       (i) In general.--The Task Force may, on an annual basis, 
     revise the plan.
       (ii) Public review and comment.--In revising the plan, the 
     Task Force shall provide the public the opportunity to review 
     and comment on any proposed revision to the plan.
       (f) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--After the plan is approved by the Task 
     Force under subsection (c)(2), the Secretary, in coordination 
     with the Task Force, shall identify critical restoration 
     projects to carry out the plan.
       (2) Agreement.--The Secretary may carry out a critical 
     restoration project after entering into an agreement with an 
     appropriate non-Federal interest in accordance with--
       (A) section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
     1962d-5b); and
       (B) this section.
       (3) Indian projects.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     the Secretary shall ensure that not less than 30 percent of 
     the funds made available for critical restoration projects 
     under this title shall be used exclusively for projects that 
     are--
       (A) within the boundary of an Indian reservation; or
       (B) administered by an Indian tribe.
       (g) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Assessment.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) shall be 75 
     percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (2) Plan.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     preparing the plan under subsection (e) shall be 75 percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--Not more than 50 percent of the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of preparing the plan under 
     subsection (e) may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, or other in-kind contributions.
       (3) Critical restoration projects.--
       (A) In general.--A non-Federal cost share shall be required 
     to carry out any critical restoration project under 
     subsection (f) that does not primarily benefit the Federal 
     Government, as determined by the Task Force.
       (B) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a critical restoration project under subsection 
     (f) for which the Task Force requires a non-Federal cost 
     share under subparagraph (A) shall be 65 percent, not to 
     exceed $5,000,000 for any critical restoration project.
       (C) Non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--Not more than 50 percent of the non-
     Federal share of the cost of carrying out a critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (ii) Required non-federal contributions.--For any critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B), the non-
     Federal interest shall--

       (I) provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged 
     material disposal areas, and relocations;
       (II) pay all operation, maintenance, replacement, repair, 
     and rehabilitation costs; and
       (III) hold the United States harmless from all claims 
     arising from the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
     the project.

       (iii) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive 
     credit for all contributions provided under clause (ii)(I).

     SEC. 906. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this title diminishes or 
     affects--
       (1) any water right of an Indian tribe;
       (2) any other right of an Indian tribe, except as 
     specifically provided in another provision of this title;
       (3) any treaty right that is in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act;
       (4) any external boundary of an Indian reservation of an 
     Indian tribe;
       (5) any authority of the State that relates to the 
     protection, regulation, or management of fish, terrestrial 
     wildlife, and cultural and archaeological resources, except 
     as specifically provided in this title; or
       (6) any authority of the Secretary, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, or the head of any

[[Page H10321]]

     other Federal agency under a law in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, including--
       (A) the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 
     et seq.);
       (B) the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 
     U.S.C. 470aa et seq.);
       (C) the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 
     et seq.);
       (D) the Act entitled ``An Act for the protection of the 
     bald eagle'', approved June 8, 1940 (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.);
       (E) the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.);
       (F) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.);
       (G) the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       (H) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
     et seq.);
       (I) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.); 
     and
       (J) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
       (b) Federal Liability for Damage.--Nothing in this title 
     relieves the Federal Government of liability for damage to 
     private property caused by the operation of the Pick-Sloan 
     program.
       (c) Flood Control.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this title, the Secretary shall retain the authority to 
     operate the Pick-Sloan program for the purposes of meeting 
     the requirements of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 
     887, chapter 665; 33 U.S.C. 701-1 et seq.).
       (d) Use of Funds.--Funds transferred to the Trust may be 
     used to pay the non-Federal share required under Federal 
     programs.

     SEC. 907. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Initial Funding.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this title 
     $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010, to 
     remain available until expended.
       (b) Existing Programs.--The Secretary shall fund programs 
     authorized under the Pick-Sloan program in existence on the 
     date of enactment of this Act at levels that are not less 
     than funding levels for those programs as of that date.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment printed in the Congressional 
Record and numbered 2 is considered adopted.
  The text of S. 2796, as amended pursuant to House Resolution 639, is 
as follows:
       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2000''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--

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

                   TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

Sec. 101. Project authorization.
Sec. 102. Small projects for flood damage reduction.
Sec. 103. Small project for bank stabilization.
Sec. 104. Small projects for navigation.
Sec. 105. Small project for improvement of the quality of the 
              environment.
Sec. 106. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 107. Small project for shoreline protection.
Sec. 108. Small project for snagging and sediment removal.
Sec. 109. Petaluma River, Petaluma, California.

                      TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 201. Cost sharing of certain flood damage reduction projects.
Sec. 202. Harbor cost sharing.
Sec. 203. Nonprofit entities.
Sec. 204. Rehabilitation of Federal flood control levees.
Sec. 205. Flood mitigation and riverine restoration program.
Sec. 206. Tribal partnership program.
Sec. 207. Native American reburial and transfer authority.
Sec. 208. Ability to pay.
Sec. 209. Interagency and international support authority.
Sec. 210. Property protection program.
Sec. 211. Engineering consulting services.
Sec. 212. Beach recreation.
Sec. 213. Performance of specialized or technical services.
Sec. 214. Design-build contracting.
Sec. 215. Independent review pilot program.
Sec. 216. Enhanced public participation.
Sec. 217. Monitoring.
Sec. 218. Reconnaissance studies.
Sec. 219. Fish and wildlife mitigation.
Sec. 220. Wetlands mitigation.
Sec. 221. Credit toward non-Federal share of navigation projects.
Sec. 222. Maximum program expenditures for small flood control 
              projects.
Sec. 223. Feasibility studies and planning, engineering, and design.
Sec. 224. Administrative costs of land conveyances.
Sec. 225. Dam safety.

                 TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Nogales Wash and Tributaries, Nogales, Arizona.
Sec. 302. John Paul Hammerschmidt Visitor Center, Fort Smith, Arkansas.
Sec. 303. Greers Ferry Lake, Arkansas.
Sec. 304. Ten- and Fifteen-Mile Bayous, Arkansas.
Sec. 305. Cache Creek basin, California.
Sec. 306. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California.
Sec. 307. Norco Bluffs, Riverside County, California.
Sec. 308. Sacramento deep water ship channel, California.
Sec. 309. Sacramento River, Glenn-Colusa, California.
Sec. 310. Upper Guadalupe River, California.
Sec. 311. Brevard County, Florida.
Sec. 312. Fernandina Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 313. Tampa Harbor, Florida.
Sec. 314. East Saint Louis and vicinity, Illinois.
Sec. 315. Kaskaskia River, Kaskaskia, Illinois.
Sec. 316. Waukegan Harbor, Illinois.
Sec. 317. Cumberland, Kentucky.
Sec. 318. Lock and Dam 10, Kentucky River, Kentucky.
Sec. 319. Saint Joseph River, South Bend, Indiana.
Sec. 320. Mayfield Creek and tributaries, Kentucky.
Sec. 321. Amite River and tributaries, East Baton Rouge Parish, 
              Louisiana.
Sec. 322. Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana.
Sec. 323. Atchafalaya River, Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and Black Louisiana.
Sec. 324. Red River Waterway, Louisiana.
Sec. 325. Thomaston Harbor, Georges River, Maine.
Sec. 326. Breckenridge, Minnesota.
Sec. 327. Duluth Harbor, Minnesota.
Sec. 328. Little Falls, Minnesota.
Sec. 329. Poplar Island, Maryland.
Sec. 330. Green Brook Sub-Basin, Raritan River basin, New Jersey.
Sec. 331. New York Harbor and adjacent channels, Port Jersey, New 
              Jersey.
Sec. 332. Passaic River basin flood management, New Jersey.
Sec. 333. Times Beach nature preserve, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 334. Garrison Dam, North Dakota.
Sec. 335. Duck Creek, Ohio.
Sec. 336. Astoria, Columbia River, Oregon.
Sec. 337. Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee and Mississippi.
Sec. 338. Bowie County levee, Texas.
Sec. 339. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Texas.
Sec. 340. Buchanan and Dickenson Counties, Virginia.
Sec. 341. Buchanan, Dickenson, and Russell Counties, Virginia.
Sec. 342. Sandbridge Beach, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Sec. 343. Wallops Island, Virginia.
Sec. 344. Columbia River, Washington.
Sec. 345. Mount St. Helens sediment control, Washington.
Sec. 346. Renton, Washington.
Sec. 347. Greenbrier Basin, West Virginia.
Sec. 348. Lower Mud River, Milton, West Virginia.
Sec. 349. Water quality projects.
Sec. 350. Project reauthorizations.
Sec. 351. Continuation of project authorizations.
Sec. 352. Declaration of nonnavigability for Lake Erie, New York.
Sec. 353. Project deauthorizations.
Sec. 354. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 355. Rehoboth Beach and Dewey Beach, Delaware.

                           TITLE IV--STUDIES

Sec. 401. Studies of completed projects.
Sec. 402. Watershed and river basin assessments.
Sec. 403. Lower Mississippi River resource assessment.
Sec. 404. Upper Mississippi River basin sediment and nutrient study.
Sec. 405. Upper Mississippi River comprehensive plan.
Sec. 406. Ohio River System.
Sec. 407. Eastern Arkansas.
Sec. 408. Russell, Arkansas.
Sec. 409. Estudillo Canal, San Leandro, California.
Sec. 410. Laguna Creek, Fremont, California.
Sec. 411. Lake Merritt, Oakland, California.
Sec. 412. Lancaster, California.
Sec. 413. Napa County, California.
Sec. 414. Oceanside, California.
Sec. 415. Suisun Marsh, California.
Sec. 416. Lake Allatoona Watershed, Georgia.
Sec. 417. Chicago River, Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 418. Chicago sanitary and ship canal system, Chicago, Illinois.
Sec. 419. Long Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 420. Brush and Rock Creeks, Mission Hills and Fairway, Kansas.
Sec. 421. Coastal areas of Louisiana.
Sec. 422. Iberia Port, Louisiana.
Sec. 423. Lake Pontchartrain seawall, Louisiana.
Sec. 424. Lower Atchafalaya basin, Louisiana.
Sec. 425. St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana.
Sec. 426. Las Vegas Valley, Nevada.
Sec. 427. Southwest Valley, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Sec. 428. Buffalo Harbor, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 429. Hudson River, Manhattan, New York.
Sec. 430. Jamesville Reservoir, Onondaga County, New York.
Sec. 431. Steubenviille, Ohio.
Sec. 432. Grand Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 433. Columbia Slough, Oregon.
Sec. 434. Reedy River, Greenville, South Carolina.
Sec. 435. Germantown, Tennessee.
Sec. 436. Houston ship channel, Galveston, Texas.

[[Page H10322]]

Sec. 437. Park City, Utah.
Sec. 438. Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Sec. 439. Upper Des Plaines River and tributaries, Illinois and 
              Wisconsin.
Sec. 440. Delaware River watershed.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Bridgeport, Alabama.
Sec. 502. Duck River, Cullman, Alabama.
Sec. 503. Seward, Alaska.
Sec. 504. Augusta and Devalls Bluff, Arkansas.
Sec. 505. Beaver Lake, Arkansas.
Sec. 506. McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation system, Arkansas and 
              Oklahoma.
Sec. 507. Calfed Bay Delta program assistance, California.
Sec. 508. Clear Lake basin, California.
Sec. 509. Contra Costa Canal, Oakley and Knightsen, California.
Sec. 510. Huntington Beach, California.
Sec. 511. Mallard Slough, Pittsburg, California.
Sec. 512. Penn Mine, Calaveras County, California.
Sec. 513. Port of San Francisco, California.
Sec. 514. San Gabriel basin, California.
Sec. 515. Stockton, California.
Sec. 516. Port Everglades, Florida.
Sec. 517. Florida Keys water quality improvements.
Sec. 518. Ballard's Island, La Salle County, Illinois.
Sec. 519. Lake Michigan Diversion, Illinois.
Sec. 520. Koontz Lake, Indiana.
Sec. 521. Campbellsville Lake, Kentucky.
Sec. 522. West View Shores, Cecil County, Maryland.
Sec. 523. Conservation of fish and wildlife, Chesapeake Bay, Maryland 
              and Virginia.
Sec. 524. Muddy River, Brookline and Boston, Massachusetts.
Sec. 525. Soo Locks, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.
Sec. 526. Duluth, Minnesota, alternative technology project.
Sec. 527. Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Sec. 528. St. Louis County, Minnesota.
Sec. 529. Wild Rice River, Minnesota.
Sec. 530. Coastal Mississippi wetlands restoration projects.
Sec. 531. Missouri River Valley improvements.
Sec. 532. New Madrid County, Missouri.
Sec. 533. Pemiscot County, Missouri.
Sec. 534. Las Vegas, Nevada.
Sec. 535. Newark, New Jersey.
Sec. 536. Urbanized peak flood management research, New Jersey.
Sec. 537. Black Rock Canal, Buffalo, New York.
Sec. 538. Hamburg, New York.
Sec. 539. Nepperhan River, Yonkers, New York.
Sec. 540. Rochester, New York.
Sec. 541. Upper Mohawk River basin, New York.
Sec. 542. Eastern North Carolina flood protection.
Sec. 543. Cuyahoga River, Ohio.
Sec. 544. Crowder Point, Crowder, Oklahoma.
Sec. 545. Oklahoma-tribal commission.
Sec. 546. Columbia River, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 547. John Day Pool, Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 548. Lower Columbia River and Tillamook Bay estuary program, 
              Oregon and Washington.
Sec. 549. Skinner Butte Park, Eugene, Oregon.
Sec. 550. Willamette River basin, Oregon.
Sec. 551. Lackawanna River, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 552. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 553. Access improvements, Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Sec. 554. Upper Susquehanna River basin, Pennsylvania and New York.
Sec. 555. Chickamauga Lock, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Sec. 556. Joe Pool Lake, Texas.
Sec. 557. Benson Beach, Fort Canby State Park, Washington.
Sec. 558. Puget Sound and adjacent waters restoration, Washington.
Sec. 559. Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe, Willapa Bay, Washington.
Sec. 560. Wynoochee Lake, Wynoochee River, Washington.
Sec. 561. Snohomish River, Washington.
Sec. 562. Bluestone, West Virginia.
Sec. 563. Lesage/Greenbottom Swamp, West Virginia.
Sec. 564. Tug Fork River, West Virginia.
Sec. 565. Virginia Point Riverfront Park, West Virginia.
Sec. 566. Southern West Virginia.
Sec. 567. Fox River system, Wisconsin.
Sec. 568. Surfside/Sunset and Newport Beach, California.
Sec. 569. Illinois River basin restoration.
Sec. 570. Great Lakes.
Sec. 571. Great Lakes remedial action plans and sediment remediation.
Sec. 572. Great Lakes dredging levels adjustment.
Sec. 573. Dredged material recyling.
Sec. 574. Watershed management, restoration, and development.
Sec. 575. Maintenance of navigation channels.
Sec. 576. Support of Army civil works program.
Sec. 577. National recreation reservation service.
Sec. 578. Hydrographic survey.
Sec. 579. Lakes program.
Sec. 580. Perchlorate.
Sec. 581. Abandoned and inactive noncoal mine restoration.
Sec. 582. Release of use restriction.
Sec. 583. Comprehensive environmental resources protection.
Sec. 584. Modification of authorizations for environmental projects.
Sec. 585. Land transfers.
Sec. 586. Bruce F. Vento Unit of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area 
              Wilderness, Minnesota.
Sec. 587. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma.
Sec. 588. Columbia River Treaty fishing access.
Sec. 589. Devils Lake, North Dakota.

             TITLE VI--COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION

Sec. 601. Comprehensive Everglades restoration plan.
Sec. 602. Sense of Congress concerning Homestead Air Force Base.

                 TITLE VIII--MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION

Sec. 701. Definitions.
Sec. 702. Missouri River Trust.
Sec. 703. Missouri River Task Force.
Sec. 704. Administration.
Sec. 705. Authorization of appropriations.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

       In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
     the Army.

                   TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

     SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.

       (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 subsection:
       (1) Barnegat inlet to little egg inlet, new jersey.--The 
     project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Barnegat 
     Inlet to Little Egg Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of 
     Engineers dated July 26, 2000, at a total cost of 
     $51,203,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $33,282,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $17,921,000.
       (2) Port of new york and new jersey, new york and new 
     jersey.--
       (A) In general.--The project for navigation, Port of New 
     York and New Jersey, New York and New Jersey: Report of the 
     Chief of Engineers dated May 2, 2000, at a total cost of 
     $1,781,235,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $738,631,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $1,042,604,000.
       (B) Credit.--The Secretary may provide the non-Federal 
     interests credit toward cash contributions required--
       (i) before, during, and after construction for planning, 
     engineering and design, and construction management work that 
     is performed by the non-Federal interests and that the 
     Secretary determines is necessary to implement the project; 
     and
       (ii) during and after construction for the costs of the 
     construction that the non-Federal interests carry out on 
     behalf of the Secretary and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to implement the project.
       (b) Projects Subject to 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 the conditions, recommended in a final report of the 
     Chief of Engineers if a favorable report of the Chief is 
     completed not later than December 31, 2000:
       (1) False pass harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation, 
     False Pass Harbor, Alaska, at a total cost of $15,164,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $8,238,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $6,926,000.
       (2) Unalaska harbor, alaska.--The project for navigation, 
     Unalska Harbor, Alaska, at a total cost of $20,000,000, with 
     an estimated Federal cost of $12,000,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $8,000,000.
       (3) Rio de flag, flagstaff, arizona.--The project for flood 
     damage reduction, Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona, at a total 
     cost of $24,072,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $15,576,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,496,000.
       (4) Tres rios, arizona.--The project ecosystem restoration, 
     Tres Rios, Arizona, at a total cost of $99,320,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $62,755,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $36,565,000.
       (5) Los angeles harbor, california.--The project for 
     navigation, Los Angeles Harbor, California, at a total cost 
     of $153,313,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $43,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $109,578,000.
       (6) Murrietta creek, california.--The project for flood 
     damage reduction and ecosystem restoration, Murrietta Creek, 
     California, described as alternative 6, based on the District 
     Engineer's Murrietta Creek feasibility report and 
     environmental impact statement dated October 2000, at a total 
     cost of $89,850,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $57,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $32,115,000. 
     The locally preferred plan described as alternative 6 shall 
     be treated as a final favorable report of the Chief 
     Engineer's for purposes of this subsection.
       (7) Santa barbara streams, lower mission creek, 
     california.--The project for flood damage reduction, Santa 
     Barbara streams, Lower Mission Creek, California, at a total 
     cost of $18,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $9,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,100,000.
       (8) Upper newport bay, california.--The project for 
     ecosystem restoration, Upper Newport Bay, California, at a 
     total cost of $32,475,000, with an estimated Federal cost of

[[Page H10323]]

     $21,109,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,366,000.
       (9) Whitewater river basin, california.--The project for 
     flood damage reduction, Whitewater River basin, California, 
     at a total cost of $27,570,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $17,920,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $9,650,000.
       (10) Delaware coast from cape henlopen to fenwick island.--
     The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
     Delaware Coast from Cape Henlopen to Fenwick Island, at a 
     total cost of $5,633,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $3,661,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,972,000.
       (11) Port sutton, florida.--The project for navigation, 
     Port Sutton, Florida, at a total cost of $6,000,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $4,000,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $2,000,000.
       (12) Barbers point harbor, hawaii.--The project for 
     navigation, Barbers Point Harbor, Hawaii, at a total cost of 
     $30,003,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $18,524,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,479,000.
       (13) John myers lock and dam, indiana and kentucky.--The 
     project for navigation, John Myers Lock and Dam, Indiana and 
     Kentucky, at a total cost of $182,000,000. The costs of 
     construction of the project shall be paid \1/2\ from amounts 
     appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and \1/2\ 
     from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust 
     Fund.
       (14) Greenup lock and dam, kentucky and ohio.--The project 
     for navigation, Greenup Lock and Dam, Kentucky and Ohio, at a 
     total cost of $175,000,000. The costs of construction of the 
     project shall be paid \1/2\ from amounts appropriated from 
     the general fund of the Treasury and \1/2\ from amounts 
     appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
       (15) Ohio river mainstem, kentucky, illinois, indiana, 
     ohio, pennsylvania, and west virginia.--Projects for 
     ecosystem restoration, Ohio River Mainstem, Kentucky, 
     Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, at 
     a total cost of $307,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
     of $200,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $107,700,000.
       (16) Monarch-chesterfield, missouri.--The project for flood 
     damage reduction, Monarch-Chesterfield, Missouri, at a total 
     cost of $67,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $44,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $23,700,000.
       (17) Antelope creek, lincoln, nebraska.--The project for 
     flood damage reduction, Antelope Creek, Lincoln, Nebraska, at 
     a total cost of $49,788,000, with an estimated Federal cost 
     of $24,894,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $24,894,000.
       (18) Sand creek watershed, wahoo, nebraska.--The project 
     for ecosystem restoration and flood damage reduction, Sand 
     Creek watershed, Wahoo, Nebraska, at a total cost of 
     $29,212,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $17,586,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,626,000.
       (19) Western sarpy and clear creek, nebraska.--The project 
     for flood damage reduction, Western Sarpy and Clear Creek, 
     Nebraska, at a total cost of $20,600,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $13,390,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $7,210,000.
       (20) Raritan bay and sandy hook bay, cliffwood beach, new 
     jersey.--The project for hurricane and storm damage 
     reduction, Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Cliffwood Beach, 
     New Jersey, at a total cost of $5,219,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $3,392,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $1,827,000.
       (21) Raritan bay and sandy hook bay, port monmouth, new 
     jersey.--The project for hurricane and storm damage 
     reduction, Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Port Monmouth, New 
     Jersey, at a total cost of $32,064,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $20,842,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $11,222,000.
       (22) Dare county beaches, north carolina.--The project for 
     hurricane and storm damage reduction, Dare County beaches, 
     North Carolina, at a total cost of $69,518,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $49,846,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $19,672,000.
       (23) Wolf river, tennessee.--The project for ecosystem 
     restoration, Wolf River, Tennessee, at a total cost of 
     $10,933,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,106,000 and 
     an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,827,000.
       (24) Duwamish/green, washington.--The project for ecosystem 
     restoration, Duwamish/Green, Washington, at a total cost of 
     $115,879,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $75,322,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $40,557,000.
       (25) Stillagumaish river basin, washington.--The project 
     for ecosystem restoration, Stillagumaish River basin, 
     Washington, at a total cost of $24,223,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $16,097,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $8,126,000.
       (26) Jackson hole, wyoming.--The project for ecosystem 
     restoration, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, at a total cost of 
     $52,242,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $33,957,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $18,285,000.

     SEC. 102. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study for 
     each of the following projects and, if the Secretary 
     determines that a project is feasible, may carry out the 
     project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
     (33 U.S.C. 701s):
       (1) Buffalo island, arkansas.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Buffalo Island, Arkansas.
       (2) Anaverde creek, palmdale, california.--Project for 
     flood damage reduction, Anaverde Creek, Palmdale, California.
       (3) Castaic creek, old road bridge, santa clarita, 
     california.--Project for flood damage reduction, Castaic 
     Creek, Old Road bridge, Santa Clarita, California.
       (4) Santa clara river, old road bridge, santa clarita, 
     california.--Project for flood damage reduction, Santa Clara 
     River, Old Road bridge, Santa Clarita, California.
       (5) Columbia levee, columbia, illinois.--Project for flood 
     damage reduction, Columbia Levee, Columbia, Illinois.
       (6) East-west creek, riverton, illinois.--Project for flood 
     damage reduction, East-West Creek, Riverton, Illinois.
       (7) Prairie du pont, illinois.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Prairie Du Pont, Illinois.
       (8) Monroe county, illinois.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Monroe County, Illinois.
       (9) Willow creek, meredosia, illinois.--Project for flood 
     damage reduction, Willow Creek, Meredosia, Illinois.
       (10) Dykes branch channel, leawood, kansas.--Project for 
     flood damage reduction, Dykes Branch channel improvements, 
     Leawood, Kansas.
       (11) Dykes branch tributaries, leawood, kansas.--Project 
     for flood damage reduction, Dykes Branch tributary 
     improvements, Leawood, Kansas.
       (12) Kentucky river, frankfort, kentucky.--Project for 
     flood damage reduction, Kentucky River, Frankfort, Kentucky.
       (13) Lakes maurepas and pontchartrain canals, st. john the 
     baptist parish, louisiana.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain Canals, St. John 
     the Baptist Parish, Louisiana.
       (14) Pennsville township, salem county, new jersey.--The 
     project for flood damage reduction, Pennsville Township, 
     Salem County, New Jersey.
       (15) Hempstead, new york.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Hempstead, New York.
       (16) Highland brook, highland falls, new york.--Project for 
     flood damage reduction, Highland Brook, Highland Falls, New 
     York.
       (17) Lafayette township, ohio.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, Lafayette Township, Ohio.
       (18) West lafayette, ohio.--Project for flood damage 
     reduction, West LaFayette, Ohio.
       (19) Bear creek and tributaries, medford, oregon.--Project 
     for flood damage reduction, Bear Creek and tributaries, 
     Medford, Oregon.
       (20) Delaware canal and brock creek, yardley borough, 
     pennsylvania.--Project for flood damage reduction, Delaware 
     Canal and Brock Creek, Yardley Borough, Pennsylvania.
       (21) First creek, fountain city, knoxville, tennessee.--
     Project for flood damage reduction, First Creek, Fountain 
     City, Knoxville, Tennessee.
       (22) Mississippi river, ridgely, tennessee.--Project for 
     flood damage reduction, Mississippi River, Ridgely, 
     Tennessee.
       (b) Magpie Creek, Sacramento County, California.--In 
     formulating the project for Magpie Creek, California, 
     authorized by section 102(a)(4) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 281) to be carried out 
     under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 
     701s), the Secretary shall consider benefits from the full 
     utilization of existing improvements at McClellan Air Force 
     Base that would result from the project after conversion of 
     the base to civilian use.

     SEC. 103. SMALL PROJECTS FOR BANK STABILIZATION.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r):
       (1) Maumee river, fort wayne, indiana.--Project for bank 
     stabilization, Maumee River, Fort Wayne, Indiana.
       (2) Bayou sorrell, iberville parish, louisiana.--Project 
     for bank stabilization, Bayou Sorrell, Iberville Parish, 
     Louisiana.

     SEC. 104. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 
     107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577):
       (1) Whittier, alaska.--Project for navigation, Whittier, 
     Alaska.
       (2) Cape coral, florida.--Project for navigation, Cape 
     Coral, Florida.
       (3) East two lakes, tower, minnesota.--Project for 
     navigation, East Two Lakes, Tower, Minnesota.
       (4) Erie basin marina, buffalo, new york.--Project for 
     navigation, Erie Basin marina, Buffalo, New York.
       (5) Lake michigan, lakeshore state park, milwaukee, 
     wisconsin.--Project for navigation, Lake Michigan, Lakeshore 
     State Park, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
       (6) Saxon harbor, francis, wisconsin.--Project for 
     navigation, Saxon Harbor, Francis, Wisconsin.

     SEC. 105. SMALL PROJECT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE 
                   ENVIRONMENT.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for a project for 
     improvement of the quality of the environment, Nahant Marsh, 
     Davenport, Iowa, and, if the Secretary determines that the 
     project is appropriate, may carry out the

[[Page H10324]]

     project under section 1135(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(a)).

     SEC. 106. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the 
     following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a 
     project is appropriate, may carry out the project under 
     section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (33 U.S.C. 2330):
       (1) Arkansas river, pueblo, colorado.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Arkansas River, Pueblo, Colorado.
       (2) Hayden diversion project, yampa river, colorado.--
     Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Hayden Diversion 
     Project, Yampa River, Colorado.
       (3) Little econlockhatchee river basin, florida.--Project 
     for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Little Econlockhatchee 
     River basin, Florida.
       (4) Loxahatchee slough, palm beach county, florida.--
     Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Loxahatchee 
     Slough, Palm Beach County, Florida.
       (5) Stevenson creek estuary, florida.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Stevenson Creek estuary, Florida.
       (6) Chouteau island, madison county, illinois.--Project for 
     aquatic ecosystem restoration, Chouteau Island, Madison 
     County, Illinois.
       (7) Saginaw bay, bay city, michigan.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Saginaw Bay, Bay City, Michigan.
       (8) Rainwater basin, nebraska.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Rainwater Basin, Nebraska.
       (9) Cazenovia lake, madison county, new york.--Project for 
     aquatic ecosystem restoration, Cazenovia Lake, Madison 
     County, New York, including efforts to address aquatic 
     invasive plant species.
       (10) Chenango lake, chenango county, new york.--Project for 
     aquatic ecosystem restoration, Chenango Lake, Chenango 
     County, New York, including efforts to address aquatic 
     invasive plant species.
       (11) Eagle lake, new york.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Eagle Lake, New York.
       (12) Ossining, new york.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Ossining, New York.
       (13) Saratoga lake, new york.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Saratoga Lake, New York.
       (14) Schroon lake, new york.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Schroon Lake, New York.
       (15) Middle cuyahoga river.--Project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Middle Cuyahoga River, Kent, Ohio.
       (16) Central amazon creek, eugene, oregon.--Project for 
     aquatic ecosystem restoration, Central Amazon Creek, Eugene, 
     Oregon.
       (17) Eugene millrace, eugene, oregon.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Eugene Millrace, Eugene, Oregon.
       (18) Lone pine and lazy creeks, medford, oregon.--Project 
     for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Lone Pine and Lazy Creeks, 
     Medford, Oregon.
       (19) Tullytown borough, pennsylvania.--Project for aquatic 
     ecosystem restoration, Tullytown Borough, Pennsylvania.

     SEC. 107. SMALL PROJECT FOR SHORELINE PROTECTION.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for a project for 
     shoreline protection, Hudson River, Dutchess County, New 
     York, and, if the Secretary determines that the project is 
     feasible, may carry out the project under section 3 of the 
     Act entitled ``An Act authorizing Federal participation in 
     the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned 
     property'', approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g; 60 
     Stat. 1056).

     SEC. 108. SMALL PROJECT FOR SNAGGING AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study for a project for 
     clearing, snagging, and sediment removal, Sangamon River and 
     tributaries, Riverton, Illinois. If the Secretary determines 
     that the project is feasible, the Secretary may carry out the 
     project under section 2 of the Flood Control Act of August 
     28, 1937 (50 Stat. 177).

     SEC. 109. PETALUMA RIVER, PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall carry out the Petaluma 
     River project, at the city of Petaluma, Sonoma County, 
     California, to provide a 100-year level of flood protection 
     to the city in accordance with the detailed project report of 
     the San Francisco District Engineer, dated March 1995, at a 
     total cost of $32,227,000.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--Cost sharing for the project shall be 
     determined in accordance with section 103(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(a)), as in 
     effect on October 11, 1996.
       (c) Reimbursement.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
     Federal sponsor for any project costs that the non-Federal 
     sponsor has incurred in excess of the non-Federal share of 
     project costs, regardless of the date such costs were 
     incurred.

                      TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 201. COST SHARING OF CERTAIN FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION 
                   PROJECTS.

       Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2213) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(n) Level of Flood Protection.--If the Secretary 
     determines that it is technically sound, environmentally 
     acceptable, and economically justified, to construct a flood 
     control project for an area using an alternative that will 
     afford a level of flood protection sufficient for the area 
     not to qualify as an area having special flood hazards for 
     the purposes of the national flood insurance program under 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et 
     seq.), the Secretary, at the request of the non-Federal 
     interest, shall recommend the project using the alternative. 
     The non-Federal share of the cost of the project assigned to 
     providing the minimum amount of flood protection required for 
     the area not to qualify as an area having special flood 
     hazards shall be determined under subsections (a) and (b).''.

     SEC. 202. HARBOR COST SHARING.

       (a) In General.--Sections 101 and 214 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 and 2241; 
     100 Stat. 4082-4084 and 4108-4109) are each amended by 
     striking ``45 feet'' each place it appears and inserting ``53 
     feet''.
       (b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply only to a project, or separable element of a 
     project, on which a contract for physical construction has 
     not been awarded before the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 203. NONPROFIT ENTITIES.

       (a) Environmental Dredging.--Section 312 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1272) 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), a non-
     Federal sponsor for any project carried out under this 
     section may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of 
     the affected local government.''.
       (b) Project Modifications for Improvement of Environment.--
     Section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2309a) is amended by redesignating subsection (e) 
     as subsection (f) and by inserting after subsection (d) the 
     following:
       ``(e) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of 
     the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), a non-
     Federal sponsor for any project carried out under this 
     section may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of 
     the affected local government.''.
       (c) Lakes Program.--Section 602 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148-4149) is amended by 
     redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e) and by 
     inserting after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Nonprofit Entities.--Notwithstanding section 221 of 
     the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), a non-
     Federal sponsor for any project carried out under this 
     section may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of 
     the affected local government.''.

     SEC. 204. REHABILITATION OF FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL LEVEES.

       Section 110(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1990 (104 Stat. 4622) is amended by striking ``1992,'' and 
     all that follows through ``1996'' and inserting ``2001 
     through 2005''.

     SEC. 205. FLOOD MITIGATION AND RIVERINE RESTORATION PROGRAM.

       Section 212(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332(e)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (22);
       (2) by striking the period at end of paragraph (23) and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(24) Lester, St. Louis, East Savanna, and Floodwood 
     Rivers, Duluth, Minnesota;
       ``(25) Lower Hudson River and tributaries, New York;
       ``(26) Susquehanna River watershed, Bradford County, 
     Pennsylvania; and
       ``(27) Clear Creek, Harris, Galveston, and Brazoria 
     Counties, Texas.''.

     SEC. 206. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized, in 
     cooperation with Indian tribes and other Federal agencies, to 
     study and determine the feasibility of implementing water 
     resources development projects that will substantially 
     benefit Indian tribes, and are located primarily within 
     Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18, 
     United States Code), or in proximity to an Alaska Native 
     village (as defined in, or established pursuant to, the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et 
     seq.)).
       (b) Consultation and Coordination.--The Secretary shall 
     consult with the Secretary of the Interior on studies 
     conducted under this section.
       (c) Credits.--For any study conducted under this section, 
     the Secretary may provide credit to the Indian tribe for 
     services, studies, supplies, and other in-kind consideration 
     where the Secretary determines that such services, studies, 
     supplies, and other in-kind consideration will facilitate 
     completion of the study. In no event shall such credit exceed 
     the Indian tribe's required share of the cost of the study.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006. Not more than 
     $1,000,000 appropriated to carry out this section for a 
     fiscal year may be used to substantially benefit any one 
     Indian tribe.
       (e) Indian Tribe Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``Indian tribe'' means any tribe, band, nation, or other 
     organized group or community of Indians, including any Alaska

[[Page H10325]]

     Native village, which is recognized as eligible for the 
     special programs and services provided by the United States 
     to Indians because of their status as Indians.

     SEC. 207. NATIVE AMERICAN REBURIAL AND TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with 
     appropriate Indian tribes, may identify and set aside land at 
     civil works projects managed by the Secretary for use as a 
     cemetery for the remains of Native Americans that have been 
     discovered on project lands and that have been rightfully 
     claimed by a lineal descendant or Indian tribe in accordance 
     with applicable Federal law. The Secretary, in consultation 
     with and with the consent of the lineal descendant or Indian 
     tribe, may recover and rebury the remains at such cemetery at 
     Federal expense.
       (b) Transfer Authority.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Secretary may transfer to an Indian 
     tribe land identified and set aside by the Secretary under 
     subsection (a) for use as a cemetery. The Secretary shall 
     retain any necessary rights-of-way, easements, or other 
     property interests that the Secretary determines necessary to 
     carry out the purpose of the project.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``Indian 
     tribe'' and ``Native American'' have the meaning such terms 
     have under section 2 of the Native American Graves Protection 
     and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001).

     SEC. 208. ABILITY TO PAY.

       Section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--Any cost-sharing agreement under this 
     section for construction of an environmental protection and 
     restoration, flood control, or agricultural water supply 
     project shall be subject to the ability of a non-Federal 
     interest to pay.
       ``(2) Criteria and procedures.--The ability of a non-
     Federal interest to pay shall be determined by the Secretary 
     in accordance with criteria and procedures in effect under 
     paragraph (3) on the day before the date of enactment of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 2000; except that such 
     criteria and procedures shall be revised, and new criteria 
     and procedures shall be developed, within 180 days after such 
     date of enactment to reflect the requirements of such 
     paragraph (3).''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of 
     subparagraph (A)(ii);
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).

     SEC. 209. INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT AUTHORITY.

       The first sentence of section 234(d) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2323a(d)) is amended to 
     read as follows: ``There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this section $250,000 per fiscal year for fiscal 
     years beginning after September 30, 2000.''.

     SEC. 210. PROPERTY PROTECTION PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to implement a 
     program to reduce vandalism and destruction of property at 
     water resources development projects under the jurisdiction 
     of the Department of the Army. In carrying out the program, 
     the Secretary may provide rewards to individuals who provide 
     information or evidence leading to the arrest and prosecution 
     of individuals causing damage to Federal property, including 
     the payment of cash rewards.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the results of the program.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $500,000 per 
     fiscal year for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     2000.

     SEC. 211. ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES.

       In conducting a feasibility study for a water resources 
     project, the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     should not employ a person for engineering and consulting 
     services if the same person is also employed by the non-
     Federal interest for such services unless there is only 1 
     qualified and responsive bidder for such services.

     SEC. 212. BEACH RECREATION.

       (a) In General.--In studying the feasibility of and making 
     recommendations concerning potential beach restoration 
     projects, the Secretary may not implement any policy that has 
     the effect of disadvantaging any such project solely because 
     50 percent or more of its benefits are recreational in 
     nature.
       (b) Procedures for Consideration and Reporting of 
     Benefits.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall develop and implement 
     procedures to ensure that all of the benefits of a beach 
     restoration project, including those benefits attributable to 
     recreation, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and 
     environmental protection and restoration, are adequately 
     considered and displayed in reports for such projects.

     SEC. 213. PERFORMANCE OF SPECIALIZED OR TECHNICAL SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Before entering into an agreement to 
     perform specialized or technical services for a State 
     (including the District of Columbia), a territory, or a local 
     government of a State or territory under section 6505 of 
     title 31, United States Code, the Secretary shall certify 
     that--
       (1) the services requested are not reasonably and 
     expeditiously available through ordinary business channels; 
     and
       (2) the Corps of Engineers is especially equipped to 
     perform such services.
       (b) Supporting Materials.--The Secretary shall develop 
     materials supporting such certification under subsection (a).
       (c) Annual Report to Congress.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than December 31 of each 
     calendar year, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate a report on the requests described in 
     subsection (a) that the Secretary received during such 
     calendar year.
       (2) Contents.--With respect to each request, the report 
     transmitted under paragraph (1) shall include a copy of the 
     certification and supporting materials developed under this 
     section and information on each of the following:
       (A) The scope of services requested.
       (B) The status of the request.
       (C) The estimated and final cost of the requested services.
       (D) Each district and division office of the Corps of 
     Engineers that has supplied or will supply the requested 
     services.
       (E) The number of personnel of the Corps of Engineers that 
     have performed or will perform any of the requested services.
       (F) The status of any reimbursement.

     SEC. 214. DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTING.

       (a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary may conduct a pilot 
     program consisting of not more than 5 projects to test the 
     design-build method of project delivery on various civil 
     engineering projects of the Corps of Engineers, including 
     levees, pumping plants, revetments, dikes, dredging, weirs, 
     dams, retaining walls, generation facilities, mattress 
     laying, recreation facilities, and other water resources 
     facilities.
       (b) Design-Build Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``design-build'' means an agreement between the Federal 
     Government and a contractor that provides for both the design 
     and construction of a project by a single contract.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall report on the 
     results of the pilot program.

     SEC. 215. INDEPENDENT REVIEW PILOT PROGRAM.

       Title IX of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (100 Stat. 4183 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 952. INDEPENDENT REVIEW PILOT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Projects Subject to Independent Review.--The 
     Secretary shall undertake a pilot program in fiscal years 
     2001 through 2003 to determine the practicality and efficacy 
     of having feasibility reports of the Corps of Engineers for 
     eligible projects reviewed by an independent panel of 
     experts. The pilot program shall be limited to the 
     establishment of panels for not to exceed 5 eligible 
     projects.
       ``(b) Establishment of Panels.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a panel of 
     experts for an eligible project under this section upon 
     identification of a preferred alternative in the development 
     of the feasibility report.
       ``(2) Membership.--A panel established under this section 
     shall be composed of not less than 5 and not more than 9 
     independent experts who represent a balance of areas of 
     expertise, including biologists, engineers, and economists.
       ``(3) Limitation on appointments.--The Secretary shall not 
     appoint an individual to serve on a panel of experts for a 
     project under this section if the individual has a financial 
     interest in the project or has with any organization a 
     professional relationship that the Secretary determines may 
     constitute a conflict of interest or the appearance of 
     impropriety.
       ``(4) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult the 
     National Academy of Sciences in developing lists of 
     individuals to serve on panels of experts under this section.
       ``(5) Compensation.--An individual serving on a panel of 
     experts under this section may not be compensated but may 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of 
     title 5, United States Code.
       ``(c) Duties of Panels.--A panel of experts established for 
     a project under this section shall--
       ``(1) review feasibility reports prepared for the project 
     after the identification of a preferred alternative;
       ``(2) receive written and oral comments of a technical 
     nature concerning the project from the public; and
       ``(3) transmit to the Secretary an evaluation containing 
     the panel's economic, engineering, and environmental analyses 
     of the project, including the panel's conclusions on the 
     feasibility report, with particular emphasis on areas of 
     public controversy.
       ``(d) Duration of Project Reviews.--A panel of experts 
     shall complete its review of a feasibility report for an 
     eligible project and transmit a report containing its 
     evaluation of the project to the Secretary not later than 180 
     days after the date of establishment of the panel.
       ``(e) Recommendations of Panel.--After receiving a timely 
     report on a project from a panel of experts under this 
     section, the Secretary shall--

[[Page H10326]]

       ``(1) consider any recommendations contained in the 
     evaluation;
       ``(2) make the evaluation available for public review; and
       ``(3) include a copy of the evaluation in any report 
     transmitted to Congress concerning the project.
       ``(f) Costs.--The cost of conducting a review of a project 
     under this section shall not exceed $250,000 and shall be a 
     Federal expense.
       ``(g) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2003, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the pilot program together with the recommendations of the 
     Secretary regarding continuation, expansion, and modification 
     of the pilot program, including an assessment of the impact 
     that a peer review program would have on the overall cost and 
     length of project analyses and reviews associated with 
     feasibility reports and an assessment of the benefits of peer 
     review.
       ``(h) Eligible Project Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `eligible project' means--
       ``(1) a water resources project that has an estimated total 
     cost of more than $25,000,000, including mitigation costs; 
     and
       ``(2) a water resources project--
       ``(A) that has an estimated total cost of $25,000,000 or 
     less, including mitigation costs; and
       ``(B)(i) that the Secretary determines is subject to a 
     substantial degree of public controversy; or
       ``(ii) to which an affected State objects.''.

     SEC. 216. ENHANCED PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 905 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(e) Enhanced Public Participation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish procedures 
     to enhance public participation in the development of each 
     feasibility study under subsection (a), including, if 
     appropriate, establishment of a stakeholder advisory group to 
     assist the Secretary with the development of the study.
       ``(2) Membership.--If the Secretary provides for the 
     establishment of a stakeholder advisory group under this 
     subsection, the membership of the advisory group shall 
     include balanced representation of social, economic, and 
     environmental interest groups, and such members shall serve 
     on a voluntary, uncompensated basis.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Procedures established under this 
     subsection shall not delay development of any feasibility 
     study under subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 217. MONITORING.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a monitoring 
     program of the economic and environmental results of up to 5 
     eligible projects selected by the Secretary.
       (b) Duration.--The monitoring of a project selected by the 
     Secretary under this section shall be for a period of not 
     less than 12 years beginning on the date of its selection.
       (c) Reports.--The Secretary shall transmit to Congress 
     every 3 years a report on the performance of each project 
     selected under this section.
       (d) Eligible Water Resources Project Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``eligible project'' means a water 
     resources project, or separable element thereof--
       (1) for which a contract for physical construction has not 
     been awarded before the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) that has a total cost of more than $25,000,000; and
       (3)(A) that has as a benefit-to-cost ratio of less than 1.5 
     to 1; or
       (B) that has significant environmental benefits or 
     significant environmental mitigation components.
       (e) Costs.--The cost of conducting monitoring under this 
     section shall be a Federal expense.

     SEC. 218. RECONNAISSANCE STUDIES.

       Section 905(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282(b)) is amended--
       (1) in the second sentence by inserting after 
     ``environmental impacts'' the following: ``(including whether 
     a proposed project is likely to have environmental impacts 
     that cannot be successfully or cost-effectively mitigated)''; 
     and
       (2) by inserting after the second sentence the following: 
     ``The Secretary shall not recommend that a feasibility study 
     be conducted for a project based on a reconnaissance study if 
     the Secretary determines that the project is likely to have 
     environmental impacts that cannot be successfully or cost-
     effectively mitigated.''.

     SEC. 219. FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION.

       (a) Design of Mitigation Projects.--Section 906(d) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(1)'' and inserting ``(A)''; and
       (2) by striking ``(2)'' and inserting ``(B)'';
       (3) by striking ``(d) After the date'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(d) Mitigation Plans as Part of Project Proposals.--
       ``(1) In general.--After the date'';
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Design of mitigation projects.--The Secretary shall 
     design mitigation projects to reflect contemporary 
     understanding of the science of mitigating the adverse 
     environmental impacts of water resources projects.
       ``(3) Recommendation of projects.--The Secretary shall not 
     recommend a water resources project unless the Secretary 
     determines that the adverse impacts of the project on aquatic 
     resources and fish and wildlife can be cost-effectively and 
     successfully mitigated.''; and
       (5) by aligning the remainder of the text of paragraph (1) 
     (as designated by paragraph (3) of this subsection) with 
     paragraph (2) (as added by paragraph (4) of this subsection).
       (b) Concurrent Mitigation.--
       (1) Investigation.--The Comptroller General shall conduct 
     an investigation of the effectiveness of the concurrent 
     mitigation requirements of section 906 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283). In conducting the 
     investigation, the Comptroller General shall determine 
     whether or not there are instances in which less than 50 
     percent of required mitigation is completed before initiation 
     of project construction and the number of such instances.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall transmit 
     to Congress a report on the results of the investigation.

     SEC. 220. WETLANDS MITIGATION.

       In carrying out a water resources project that involves 
     wetlands mitigation and that has an impact that occurs within 
     the service area of a mitigation bank, the Secretary, to the 
     maximum extent practicable and where appropriate, shall give 
     preference to the use of the mitigation bank if the bank 
     contains sufficient available credits to offset the impact 
     and the bank is approved in accordance with the Federal 
     Guidance for the Establishment, Use and Operation of 
     Mitigation Banks (60 Fed. Reg. 58605 (November 28, 1995)) or 
     other applicable Federal law (including regulations).

     SEC. 221. CREDIT TOWARD NON-FEDERAL SHARE OF NAVIGATION 
                   PROJECTS.

       The second sentence of section 101(a)(2) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211(a)(2)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``paragraph (3) and'' and inserting 
     ``paragraph (3),''; and
       (2) by striking ``paragraph (4)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (4), and the costs borne by the non-Federal interests in 
     providing additional capacity at dredged material disposal 
     areas, providing community access to the project (including 
     such disposal areas), and meeting applicable beautification 
     requirements''.

     SEC. 222. MAXIMUM PROGRAM EXPENDITURES FOR SMALL FLOOD 
                   CONTROL PROJECTS.

       Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 
     701s) is amended by striking ``$40,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$50,000,000''.

     SEC. 223. FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND 
                   DESIGN.

       Section 105(a)(1)(E) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215(a)(1)(E)) is amended by striking 
     ``Not more than \1/2\ of the'' and inserting ``The''.

     SEC. 224. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OF LAND CONVEYANCES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the administrative costs associated with the conveyance 
     of property to a non-Federal governmental or nonprofit entity 
     shall be limited to not more than 5 percent of the value of 
     the property to be conveyed to such entity if the Secretary 
     determines, based on the entity's ability to pay, that such 
     limitation is necessary to complete the conveyance. The 
     Federal cost associated with such limitation shall not exceed 
     $70,000 for any one conveyance.
       (b) Specific Conveyance.--In carrying out subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall give priority consideration to the 
     conveyance of 10 acres of Wister Lake project land to the 
     Summerfield Cemetery Association, Wister, Oklahoma, 
     authorized by section 563(f) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 359-360).
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $150,000 for 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2003.

     SEC. 225. DAM SAFETY.

       (a) Inventory and Assessment of Other Dams.--
       (1) Inventory.--The Secretary shall establish an inventory 
     of dams constructed by and using funds made available through 
     the Works Progress Administration, the Works Projects 
     Administration, and the Civilian Conservation Corps.
       (2) Assessment of rehabilitation needs.--In establishing 
     the inventory required under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall also assess the condition of the dams on such inventory 
     and the need for rehabilitation or modification of the dams.
       (b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit 
     to Congress a report containing the inventory and assessment 
     required by this section.
       (c) Interim Actions.--
       (1) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a dam 
     referred to in subsection (a) presents an imminent and 
     substantial risk to public safety, the Secretary is 
     authorized to carry out measures to prevent or mitigate 
     against such risk.
       (2) Exclusion.--The assistance authorized under paragraph 
     (1) shall not be available to dams under the jurisdiction of 
     the Department of the Interior.
       (3) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     assistance provided under this subsection shall be 65 percent 
     of such cost.
       (d) Coordination.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary shall coordinate with the appropriate State dam 
     safety officials and the Director of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency.

[[Page H10327]]

       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section a total of 
     $25,000,000 for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1999, of which not more than $5,000,000 may be expended on 
     any one dam.

                 TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. NOGALES WASH AND TRIBUTARIES, NOGALES, ARIZONA.

       The project for flood control, Nogales Wash and 
     Tributaries, Nogales, Arizona, authorized by section 
     101(a)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 
     Stat. 4606), and modified by section 303 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3711), is 
     further modified to provide that the Federal share of the 
     costs associated with addressing flood control problems in 
     Nogales, Arizona, arising from floodwater flows originating 
     in Mexico shall be 100 percent.

     SEC. 302. JOHN PAUL HAMMERSCHMIDT VISITOR CENTER, FORT SMITH, 
                   ARKANSAS.

       Section 103(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4813) is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading by striking ``Lake'' and 
     inserting ``Visitor Center''; and
       (2) in paragraph (1) by striking ``at the John Paul 
     Hammerschmidt Lake, Arkansas River, Arkansas'' and inserting 
     ``on property provided by the city of Fort Smith, Arkansas, 
     in such city''.

     SEC. 303. GREERS FERRY LAKE, ARKANSAS.

       The project for flood control, Greers Ferry Lake, Arkansas, 
     authorized by the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the 
     construction of certain public works on rivers and harbors 
     for flood control, and other purposes'', approved June 28, 
     1938 (52 Stat. 1218), is modified to authorize the Secretary 
     to construct water intake facilities for the benefit of 
     Lonoke and White Counties, Arkansas.

     SEC. 304. TEN- AND FIFTEEN-MILE BAYOUS, ARKANSAS.

       The project for flood control, Saint Francis River Basin, 
     Missouri and Arkansas, authorized by section 204 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 172), is modified to expand the 
     boundaries of the project to include Ten- and Fifteen-Mile 
     Bayous near West Memphis, Arkansas. Notwithstanding section 
     103(f) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
     Stat. 4086), the flood control work at Ten- and Fifteen-Mile 
     Bayous shall not be considered separable elements of the 
     project.

     SEC. 305. CACHE CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

       The project for flood control, Cache Creek Basin, 
     California, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4112), is 
     modified to direct the Secretary to evaluate the impacts of 
     the new south levee of the Cache Creek settling basin on the 
     city of Woodland's storm drainage system and to mitigate such 
     impacts at Federal expense and a total cost of $2,800,000.

     SEC. 306. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA.

       The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry Channel, 
     Larkspur, California, authorized by section 601(d) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is 
     modified to direct the Secretary to prepare a limited 
     reevaluation report to determine whether maintenance of the 
     project is technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified. If the Secretary determines that 
     maintenance of the project is technically sound, 
     environmentally acceptable, and economically justified, the 
     Secretary shall carry out the maintenance.

     SEC. 307. NORCO BLUFFS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

       Section 101(b)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3667) is amended by striking ``$8,600,000'' 
     and all that follows through ``$2,150,000'' and inserting 
     ``$15,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,250,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,750,000''.

     SEC. 308. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.

       The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water Ship 
     Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is 
     modified to authorize the Secretary to provide credit to the 
     non-Federal interest toward the non-Federal share of the cost 
     of the project for the value of dredged material from the 
     project that is purchased by public agencies or nonprofit 
     entities for environmental restoration or other beneficial 
     uses.

     SEC. 309. SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA, CALIFORNIA.

       The project for flood control, Sacramento River, 
     California, authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An 
     Act to provide for the control of the floods of the 
     Mississippi River and of the Sacramento River, California, 
     and for other purposes'', approved March 1, 1917 (39 Stat. 
     949), and modified by section 102 of the Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 649), section 
     301(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
     Stat. 3110), title I of the Energy and Water Development 
     Appropriations Act, 1999 (112 Stat. 1841), and section 305 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 299), 
     is further modified to direct the Secretary to provide the 
     non-Federal interest a credit of up to $4,000,000 toward the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project for direct and 
     indirect costs incurred by the non-Federal interest in 
     carrying out activities (including the provision of lands, 
     easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged material 
     disposal areas) associated with environmental compliance for 
     the project if the Secretary determines that the activities 
     are integral to the project. If any of such costs were 
     incurred by the non-Federal interests before execution of the 
     project cooperation agreement, the Secretary may reimburse 
     the non-Federal interest for such pre-agreement costs instead 
     of providing a credit for such pre-agreement costs to the 
     extent that the amount of the credit exceeds the remaining 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project.

     SEC. 310. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA.

       The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, 
     Upper Guadalupe River, California, authorized by section 
     101(a)(9) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 
     Stat. 275), is modified to provide that the non-Federal share 
     of the cost of the project shall be 50 percent, with an 
     estimated Federal cost and non-Federal cost of $70,164,000 
     each.

     SEC. 311. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA.

       (a) Inclusion of Reach.--The project for shoreline 
     protection, Brevard County, Florida, authorized by section 
     101(b)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
     Stat. 3667), is modified to provide that, notwithstanding 
     section 902 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, 
     the Secretary may incorporate in the project any or all of 
     the 7.1-mile reach of the project that was deleted from the 
     south reach of the project, as described in paragraph (5) of 
     the Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 23, 
     1996, if the Secretary determines, in coordination with 
     appropriate local, State, and Federal agencies, that the 
     project as modified is technically sound, environmentally 
     acceptable, and economically justified.
       (b) Clarification.--Section 310(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301) is amended by 
     inserting ``shoreline associated with the'' after ``damage to 
     the''.

     SEC. 312. FERNANDINA HARBOR, FLORIDA.

       The project for navigation, Fernandina Harbor, Florida, 
     authorized by the first section of the Act entitled ``An Act 
     making appropriations for the construction, repair, 
     completion, and preservation of certain works on rivers and 
     harbors, and for other purposes'', approved June 14, 1880 (21 
     Stat. 186), is modified to authorize the Secretary to realign 
     the access channel in the vicinity of the Fernandina Beach 
     Municipal Marina 100 feet to the west. The cost of the 
     realignment, including acquisition of lands, easements, 
     rights-of-way, and dredged material disposal areas and 
     relocations, shall be a non-Federal expense.

     SEC. 313. TAMPA HARBOR, FLORIDA.

       The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor, Florida, 
     authorized by section 4 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 
     September 22, 1922 (42 Stat. 1042), is modified to authorize 
     the Secretary to deepen and widen the Alafia Channel in 
     accordance with the plans described in the Draft Feasibility 
     Report, Alafia River, Tampa Harbor, Florida, dated May 2000, 
     at a total cost of $61,592,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $39,621,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $21,971,000.

     SEC. 314. EAST SAINT LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS.

       The project for flood protection, East Saint Louis and 
     vicinity, Illinois (East Side levee and sanitary district), 
     authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 
     (79 Stat. 1082), is modified to include ecosystem restoration 
     as a project purpose.

     SEC. 315. KASKASKIA RIVER, KASKASKIA, ILLINOIS.

       The project for navigation, Kaskaskia River, Kaskaskia, 
     Illinois, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor 
     Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1175), is modified to include 
     recreation as a project purpose.

     SEC. 316. WAUKEGAN HARBOR, ILLINOIS.

       The project for navigation, Waukegan Harbor, Illinois, 
     authorized by the first section of the Act entitled ``An Act 
     making appropriations for the construction, repair, 
     completion, and preservation of certain works on rivers and 
     harbors, and for other purposes'', approved June 14, 1880 (21 
     Stat. 192), is modified to authorize the Secretary to extend 
     the upstream limit of the project 275 feet to the north at a 
     width of 375 feet if the Secretary determines that the 
     extension is feasible.

     SEC. 317. CUMBERLAND, KENTUCKY.

       Using continuing contracts, the Secretary shall initiate 
     construction of the flood control project, Cumberland, 
     Kentucky, authorized by section 202(a) of the Energy and 
     Water Development Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339), 
     in accordance with option 4 contained in the draft detailed 
     project report of the Nashville District, dated September 
     1998, to provide flood protection from the 100-year frequency 
     flood event and to share all costs in accordance with section 
     103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
     2213).

     SEC. 318. LOCK AND DAM 10, KENTUCKY RIVER, KENTUCKY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may take all necessary 
     measures to further stabilize and renovate Lock and Dam 10 at 
     Boonesborough, Kentucky, with the purpose of extending the 
     design life of the structure by an additional 50 years, at a 
     total cost of $24,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $12,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $12,000,000.
       (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``stabilize and renovate'' includes the following activities: 
     stabilization

[[Page H10328]]

     of the main dam, auxiliary dam and lock; renovation of all 
     operational aspects of the lock; and elevation of the main 
     and auxiliary dams.

     SEC. 319. SAINT JOSEPH RIVER, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA.

       Section 321(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 303) is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading by striking ``Total'' and 
     inserting ``Federal''; and
       (2) by striking ``total'' and inserting ``Federal''.

     SEC. 320. MAYFIELD CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, KENTUCKY.

       The project for flood control, Mayfield Creek and 
     tributaries, Kentucky, carried out under section 205 of the 
     Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to 
     provide that the non-Federal interest shall not be required 
     to pay the unpaid balance, including interest, of the non-
     Federal share of the cost of the project.

     SEC. 321. AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, EAST BATON ROUGE 
                   PARISH, LOUISIANA.

       The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, 
     Amite River and Tributaries, East Baton Rouge Parish, 
     Louisiana, authorized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 277), is 
     modified to provide that cost sharing for the project shall 
     be determined in accordance with section 103(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213), as in 
     effect on October 11, 1996.

     SEC. 322. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LOUISIANA.

       The Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System project, authorized 
     by section 601 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (100 Stat. 4142), is modified to authorize the Secretary to 
     construct the visitor center and other recreational features 
     identified in the 1982 project feasibility report of the 
     Corps of Engineers at or near the Lake End Park in Morgan 
     City, Louisiana.

     SEC. 323. ATCHAFALAYA RIVER, BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF, AND BLACK, 
                   LOUISIANA.

       The project for navigation Atchafalaya River and Bayous 
     Chene, Boeuf, and Black, Louisiana, authorized by section 101 
     of the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731), is 
     modified to direct the Secretary to investigate the problems 
     associated with the mixture of freshwater, saltwater, and 
     fine river silt in the channel and to develop and carry out a 
     solution to the problem if the Secretary determines that the 
     work is technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified.

     SEC. 324. RED RIVER WATERWAY, LOUISIANA.

       The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife loses, Red 
     River Waterway, Louisiana, authorized by section 601(a) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142) 
     and modified by section 4(h) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4016), section 102(p) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4613), 
     and section 301(b)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1996 (110 Stat. 3710), is further modified to authorize 
     the Secretary to purchase mitigation lands in any of the 7 
     parishes that make up the Red River Waterway District, 
     including the parishes of Caddo, Bossier, Red River, 
     Natchitoches, Grant, Rapides, and Avoyelles.

     SEC. 325. THOMASTON HARBOR, GEORGES RIVER, MAINE.

       The project for navigation, Georges River, Maine (Thomaston 
     Harbor), 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 3, 1896 (29 
     Stat. 215), is modified to redesignate the following portion 
     of the project as an anchorage area: The portion lying 
     northwesterly of a line commencing at point N86,946.770, 
     E321,303.830 thence running northeasterly about 203.67 feet 
     to a point N86,994.750, E321,501.770.

     SEC. 326. BRECKENRIDGE, MINNESOTA.

       (a) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of 
     Federal funds that may be expended for the project for flood 
     control, Breckenridge, Minnesota, carried out under section 
     205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), shall 
     be $10,500,000.
       (b) Revision of Project Cooperation Agreement.--The 
     Secretary shall revise the project cooperation agreement for 
     the project described in subsection (a) to take into account 
     the change in the Federal participation in the project in 
     accordance with this section.

     SEC. 327. DULUTH HARBOR, MINNESOTA.

       The project for navigation, Duluth Harbor, Minnesota, 
     carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 
     1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to include the relocation 
     of Scenic Highway 61, including any required bridge 
     construction.

     SEC. 328. LITTLE FALLS, MINNESOTA.

       The project for clearing, snagging, and sediment removal, 
     East Bank of the Mississippi River, Little Falls, Minnesota, 
     authorized under section 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act 
     authorizing the construction, repair, and preservation of 
     certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other 
     purposes'', approved March 2, 1945 (33 U.S.C. 603a), is 
     modified to direct the Secretary to construct the project 
     substantially in accordance with the plans contained in the 
     feasibility report of the District Engineer, dated June 2000.

     SEC. 329. POPLAR ISLAND, MARYLAND.

       (a) In General.--The project for beneficial use of dredged 
     material at Poplar Island, Maryland, authorized by section 
     537 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
     3776), is modified to authorize the Secretary to provide the 
     non-Federal interest credit toward cash contributions 
     required--
       (1) before and during construction of the project, for the 
     costs of planning, engineering, and design and for 
     construction management work that is performed by the non-
     Federal interest and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to implement the project; and
       (2) during construction of the project, for the costs of 
     the construction that the non-Federal interest carries out on 
     behalf of the Secretary and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to carry out the project.
       (b) Reduction.--The private sector performance goals for 
     engineering work of the Baltimore District of the Corps of 
     Engineers shall be reduced by the amount of the credit under 
     paragraph (1).

     SEC. 330. GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NEW 
                   JERSEY.

       The project for flood control, Green Brook Sub-Basin, 
     Raritan River Basin, New Jersey, authorized by section 401(a) 
     of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 
     4119), is modified to direct the Secretary to prepare a 
     limited reevaluation report to determine the feasibility of 
     carrying out a nonstructural flood damage reduction project 
     at the Green Brook Sub-Basin. If the Secretary determines 
     that the nonstructural project is feasible, the Secretary may 
     carry out the nonstructural project.

     SEC. 331. NEW YORK HARBOR AND ADJACENT CHANNELS, PORT JERSEY, 
                   NEW JERSEY.

       The project for navigation, New York Harbor and adjacent 
     channels, Port Jersey, New Jersey, authorized by section 
     202(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 
     Stat. 4098) and modified by section 337 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 306-307), is 
     further modified to authorize the Secretary to provide the 
     non-Federal interests credit toward cash contributions 
     required--
       (1) before, during, and after construction for planning, 
     engineering and design, and construction management work that 
     is performed by the non-Federal interests and that the 
     Secretary determines is necessary to implement the project; 
     and
       (2) during and after construction for the costs of 
     construction that the non-Federal interests carry out on 
     behalf of the Secretary and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to implement the project.

     SEC. 332. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NEW JERSEY.

       (a) Reevaluation of Floodway Study.--The Secretary shall 
     review the Passaic River Floodway Buyout Study, dated October 
     1995, conducted as part of the project for flood control, 
     Passaic River Main Stem, New Jersey and New York, authorized 
     by section 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607-4610), to calculate the benefits of a 
     buyout and environmental restoration using the method used to 
     calculate the benefits of structural projects under section 
     308(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2318(b)).
       (b) Reevaluation of 10-Year Floodplain Study.--The 
     Secretary shall review the Passaic River Buyout Study of the 
     10-year floodplain beyond the floodway of the Central Passaic 
     River Basin, dated September 1995, conducted as part of the 
     Passaic River Main Stem project to calculate the benefits of 
     a buyout and environmental restoration using the method used 
     to calculate the benefits of structural projects under 
     section 308(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2318(b)).
       (c) Preservation of Natural Storage Areas.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall reevaluate the 
     acquisition of wetlands in the Central Passaic River Basin 
     for flood protection purposes to supplement the wetland 
     acquisition authorized by section 101(a)(18)(C)(vi) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4609).
       (2) Purchase.--If the Secretary determines that the 
     acquisition of wetlands evaluated under paragraph (1) is 
     cost-effective, the Secretary shall purchase the wetlands, 
     with the goal of purchasing not more than 8,200 acres.
       (d) Streambank Erosion Control Study.--The Secretary shall 
     review relevant reports and conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental 
     restoration, erosion control, and streambank restoration 
     along the Passaic River, from Dundee Dam to Kearny Point, New 
     Jersey.
       (e) Passaic River Flood Management Task Force.--
       (1) Establishment.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
     non-Federal interest, shall establish a task force, to be 
     known as the ``Passaic River Flood Management Task Force'', 
     to provide advice to the Secretary concerning reevaluation of 
     the Passaic River Main Stem project.
       (2) Membership.--The task force shall be composed of 22 
     members, appointed as follows:
       (A) Appointment by secretary.--The Secretary shall appoint 
     1 member to represent the Corps of Engineers and to provide 
     technical advice to the task force.
       (B) Appointments by governor of new jersey.--The Governor 
     of New Jersey shall appoint 20 members to the task force, as 
     follows:
       (i) 2 representatives of the New Jersey legislature who are 
     members of different political parties.

[[Page H10329]]

       (ii) 3 representatives of the State of New Jersey.
       (iii) 1 representative of each of Bergen, Essex, Morris, 
     and Passaic Counties, New Jersey.
       (iv) 6 representatives of governments of municipalities 
     affected by flooding within the Passaic River Basin.
       (v) 1 representative of the Palisades Interstate Park 
     Commission.
       (vi) 1 representative of the North Jersey District Water 
     Supply Commission.
       (vii) 1 representative of each of--

       (I) the Association of New Jersey Environmental 
     Commissions;
       (II) the Passaic River Coalition; and
       (III) the Sierra Club.

       (C) Appointment by governor of new york.--The Governor of 
     New York shall appoint 1 representative of the State of New 
     York to the task force.
       (3) Meetings.--
       (A) Regular meetings.--The task force shall hold regular 
     meetings.
       (B) Open meetings.--The meetings of the task force shall be 
     open to the public.
       (4) Annual report.--The task force shall submit annually to 
     the Secretary and to the non-Federal interest a report 
     describing the achievements of the Passaic River flood 
     management project in preventing flooding and any impediments 
     to completion of the project.
       (5) Expenditure of funds.--The Secretary may use funds made 
     available to carry out the Passaic River Basin flood 
     management project to pay the administrative expenses of the 
     task force.
       (6) Termination.--The task force shall terminate on the 
     date on which the Passaic River flood management project is 
     completed.
       (f) Acquisition of Lands in the Floodway.--Section 1148 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4254; 
     110 Stat. 3718-3719), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(e) Consistency With New Jersey Blue Acres Program.--The 
     Secretary shall carry out this section in a manner that is 
     consistent with the Blue Acres Program of the State of New 
     Jersey.''.
       (g) Study of Highlands Land Conservation.--The Secretary, 
     in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     State of New Jersey, may study the feasibility of conserving 
     land in the Highlands region of New Jersey and New York to 
     provide additional flood protection for residents of the 
     Passaic River Basin in accordance with section 212 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332).
       (h) Restriction on Use of Funds.--The Secretary shall not 
     obligate any funds to carry out design or construction of the 
     tunnel element of the Passaic River Main Stem project.

     SEC. 333. TIMES BEACH NATURE PRESERVE, BUFFALO, NEW YORK.

       The project for improving the quality of the environment, 
     Times Beach Nature Preserve, Buffalo, New York, carried out 
     under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to include recreation as 
     a project purpose.

     SEC. 334. GARRISON DAM, NORTH DAKOTA.

       The Garrison Dam, North Dakota, feature of the project for 
     flood control, Missouri River Basin, authorized by section 
     9(a) of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 
     891), is modified to direct the Secretary to mitigate damage 
     to the water transmission line for Williston, North Dakota, 
     at Federal expense and a total cost of $3,900,000.

     SEC. 335. DUCK CREEK, OHIO.

       The project for flood control, Duck Creek, Ohio, authorized 
     by section 101(a)(24) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), is modified to authorize the 
     Secretary carry out the project at a total cost of 
     $36,323,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $27,242,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $9,081,000.

     SEC. 336. ASTORIA, OREGON.

       The project for navigation, Columbia River, Astoria, 
     Oregon, authorized by the first section of the Act entitled 
     ``An Act authorizing the construction, repair, and 
     preservation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, 
     and for other purposes'', approved July 24, 1946 (60 Stat. 
     637), is modified to provide that the Federal share of the 
     cost of relocating causeway and mooring facilities located at 
     the Astoria East Boat Basin shall be 100 percent but shall 
     not exceed $500,000.

     SEC. 337. NONCONNAH CREEK, TENNESSEE AND MISSISSIPPI.

       The project for flood control, Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee 
     and Mississippi, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), is 
     modified to authorize the Secretary, if the Secretary 
     determines that it is feasible--
       (1) to extend the area protected by the flood control 
     element of the project upstream approximately 5 miles to 
     Reynolds Road; and
       (2) to extend the hiking and biking trails of the 
     recreational element of the project from 8.8 to 27 miles.

     SEC. 338. BOWIE COUNTY LEVEE, TEXAS.

       The project for flood control, Red River below Denison Dam, 
     Texas and Oklahoma, authorized by section 10 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 647), is modified to direct the 
     Secretary to implement the Bowie County levee feature of the 
     project in accordance with the plan described as Alternative 
     B in the draft document entitled ``Bowie County Local Flood 
     Protection, Red River, Texas Project Design Memorandum No. 1, 
     Bowie County Levee'', dated April 1997. In evaluating and 
     implementing the modification, the Secretary shall allow the 
     non-Federal interest to participate in the financing of the 
     project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the 
     extent that the Secretary's evaluation of the modification 
     indicates that applying such section is necessary to 
     implement the modification.

     SEC. 339. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.

       The project for flood control, San Antonio channel, Texas, 
     authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 
     (68 Stat. 1259) as part of the comprehensive plan for flood 
     protection on the Guadalupe and San Antonio Rivers in Texas, 
     and modified by section 103 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2921), is further modified 
     to include environmental restoration and recreation as 
     project purposes.

     SEC. 340. BUCHANAN AND DICKENSON COUNTIES, VIRGINIA.

       The project for flood control, Levisa and Tug Forks of the 
     Big Sandy River and Upper Cumberland River, authorized by 
     section 202 of the Energy and Water Development 
     Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339), and modified by 
     section 352 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (110 Stat. 3724-3725), is further modified to direct the 
     Secretary to determine the ability of Buchanan and Dickenson 
     Counties, Virginia, to pay the non-Federal share of the cost 
     of the project based solely on the criteria specified in 
     section 103(m)(3)(A)(i) of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)(3)(A)(i)).

     SEC. 341. BUCHANAN, DICKENSON, AND RUSSELL COUNTIES, 
                   VIRGINIA.

       At the request of the John Flannagan Water Authority, 
     Dickenson County, Virginia, the Secretary may reallocate, 
     under section 322 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1990 (104 Stat. 4643-4644), water supply storage space in the 
     John Flannagan Reservoir, Dickenson County, Virginia, 
     sufficient to yield water withdrawals in amounts not to 
     exceed 3,000,000 gallons per day in order to provide water 
     for the communities in Buchanan, Dickenson, and Russell 
     Counties, Virginia, notwithstanding the limitation in section 
     322(b) of such Act.

     SEC. 342. SANDBRIDGE BEACH, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA.

       The project for beach erosion control and hurricane 
     protection, Sandbridge Beach, Virginia Beach, Virginia, 
     authorized by section 101(22) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4804), is modified to 
     direct the Secretary to provide 50 years of periodic beach 
     nourishment beginning on the date on which construction of 
     the project was initiated in 1998.

     SEC. 343. WALLOPS ISLAND, VIRGINIA.

       Section 567(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 367) is amended by striking ``$8,000,000'' 
     and inserting ``$20,000,000''.

     SEC. 344. COLUMBIA RIVER, WASHINGTON.

       (a) In General.--The project for navigation, Columbia 
     River, Washington, 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 13, 1902 
     (32 Stat. 369), is modified to direct the Secretary, in the 
     operation and maintenance of the project, to mitigate damages 
     to the shoreline of Puget Island, at a total cost of 
     $1,000,000.
       (b) Allocation.--The cost of the mitigation shall be 
     allocated as an operation and maintenance cost of the Federal 
     navigation project.

     SEC. 345. MOUNT ST. HELENS, WASHINGTON.

       The project for sediment control, Mount St. Helens, 
     Washington, authorized by chapter IV of title I of the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1985 (99 Stat. 318-319), is 
     modified to authorize the Secretary to provide such cost-
     effective, environmentally acceptable measures as are 
     necessary to maintain the flood protection levels for 
     Longview, Kelso, Lexington, and Castle Rock on the Cowlitz 
     River, Washington, identified in the October 1985 report of 
     the Chief of Engineers entitled ``Mount St. Helens, 
     Washington, Decision Document (Toutle, Cowlitz, and Columbia 
     Rivers)'', printed as House Document number 99-135.

     SEC. 346. RENTON, WASHINGTON.

       (a) Maximum Federal Expenditure.--The maximum amount of 
     Federal funds that may be expended for the project for flood 
     control, Renton, Washington, carried out under section 205 of 
     the Flood Control Act of 1948, shall be $5,300,000.
       (b) Revision of Project Cooperation Agreement.--The 
     Secretary shall revise the project cooperation agreement for 
     the project described in subsection (a) to take into account 
     the change in the Federal participation in the project in 
     accordance with this section.
       (c) Reimbursement.--The Secretary may reimburse the non-
     Federal interest for the project described in subsection (a) 
     for costs incurred to mitigate overdredging.

     SEC. 347. GREENBRIER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.

       Section 579(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3790) is amended by striking ``$12,000,000'' 
     and inserting ``$73,000,000''.

     SEC. 348. LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WEST VIRGINIA.

       The project for flood damage reduction, Lower Mud River, 
     Milton, West Virginia, authorized by section 580 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat.

[[Page H10330]]

     3790), is modified to direct the Secretary to carry out the 
     project substantially in accordance with the plans, and 
     subject to the conditions, described in the watershed plan 
     prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service for 
     the project, dated 1992.

     SEC. 349. WATER QUALITY PROJECTS.

       Section 307(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4841) is amended by striking ``Jefferson and 
     Orleans Parishes'' and inserting ``Jefferson, Orleans, and 
     St. Tammany Parishes''.

     SEC. 350. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Each of the following projects may be 
     carried out by the Secretary, and no construction on any such 
     project may be initiated until the Secretary determines that 
     the project is technically sound, environmentally acceptable, 
     and economically justified, as appropriate:
       (1) Narraguagus river, milbridge, maine.--Only for the 
     purpose of maintenance as anchorage, those portions of the 
     project for navigation, Narraguagus River, Milbridge, Maine, 
     authorized by section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act making 
     appropriations for the construction, repair, completion, and 
     preservation of certain works on rivers and harbors, and for 
     other purposes'', approved June 14, 1880 (21 Stat. 195), and 
     deauthorized under section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 
     1962 (75 Stat. 1173), lying adjacent to and outside the 
     limits of the 11-foot and 9-foot channel authorized as part 
     of the project for navigation, authorized by such section 
     101, as follows:
       (A) An area located east of the 11-foot channel starting at 
     a point with coordinates N248,060.52, E668,236.56, thence 
     running south 36 degrees 20 minutes 52.3 seconds east 
     1567.242 feet to a point N246,798.21, E669,165.44, thence 
     running north 51 degrees 30 minutes 06.2 seconds west 839.855 
     feet to a point N247,321.01, E668,508.15, thence running 
     north 20 degrees 09 minutes 58.1 seconds west 787.801 feet to 
     the point of origin.
       (B) An area located west of the 9-foot channel starting at 
     a point with coordinates N249,673.29, E667,537.73, thence 
     running south 20 degrees 09 minutes 57.8 seconds east 
     1341.616 feet to a point N248,413.92, E668,000.24, thence 
     running south 01 degrees 04 minutes 26.8 seconds east 371.688 
     feet to a point N248,042.30, E668,007.21, thence running 
     north 22 degrees 21 minutes 20.8 seconds west 474.096 feet to 
     a point N248,480.76, E667,826.88, thence running north 79 
     degrees 09 minutes 31.6 seconds east 100.872 feet to a point 
     N248,499.73, E667,925.95, thence running north 13 degrees 47 
     minutes 27.6 seconds west 95.126 feet to a point N248,592.12, 
     E667,903.28, thence running south 79 degrees 09 minutes 31.6 
     seconds west 115.330 feet to a point N248,570.42, 
     E667,790.01, thence running north 22 degrees 21 minutes 20.8 
     seconds west 816.885 feet to a point N249,325.91, 
     E667,479.30, thence running north 07 degrees 03 minutes 00.3 
     seconds west 305.680 feet to a point N249,629.28, 
     E667,441.78, thence running north 65 degrees 21 minutes 33.8 
     seconds east 105.561 feet to the point of origin.
       (2) Cedar bayou, texas.--The project for navigation, Cedar 
     Bayou, Texas, authorized by the first section of the Act 
     entitled ``An Act making appropriations for the construction, 
     repair, and preservation of certain public works on rivers 
     and harbors, and for other purposes'', approved September 19, 
     1890 (26 Stat. 444), and modified by the first section of the 
     Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the construction, repair, 
     and preservation of certain public works on rivers and 
     harbors, and for other purposes'', approved July 3, 1930 (46 
     Stat. 926), and deauthorized by section 1002 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4219), except 
     that the project is authorized only for construction of a 
     navigation channel 12 feet deep by 125 feet wide from mile 
     -2.5 (at the junction with the Houston Ship Channel) to mile 
     11.0 on Cedar Bayou.
       (b) Redesignation.--The following portion of the 11-foot 
     channel of the project for navigation, Narraguagus River, 
     Milbridge, Maine, referred to in subsection (a)(1) is 
     redesignated as anchorage: starting at a point with 
     coordinates N248,413.92, E668,000.24, thence running south 20 
     degrees 09 minutes 57.8 seconds east 1325.205 feet to a point 
     N247,169.95, E668,457.09, thence running north 51 degrees 30 
     minutes 05.7 seconds west 562.33 feet to a point N247,520.00, 
     E668,017.00, thence running north 01 degrees 04 minutes 26.8 
     seconds west 894.077 feet to the point of origin.

     SEC. 351. CONTINUATION OF PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 1001(b)(2) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
     579a(b)(2)), the following projects shall remain authorized 
     to be carried out by the Secretary:
       (1) The projects for flood control, Sacramento River, 
     California, modified by section 10 of the Flood Control Act 
     of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 900-901).
       (2) The project for flood protection, Sacramento River from 
     Chico Landing to Red Bluff, California, authorized by section 
     203 of the Flood Control Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 314).
       (b) Limitation.--A project described in subsection (a) 
     shall not be authorized for construction after the last day 
     of the 7-year period beginning on the date of enactment of 
     this Act, unless, during such period, funds have been 
     obligated for the construction (including planning and 
     design) of the project.

     SEC. 352. DECLARATION OF NONNAVIGABILITY FOR LAKE ERIE, NEW 
                   YORK.

       (a) Area To Be Declared Nonnavigable; Public Interest.--
     Unless the Secretary finds, after consultation with local and 
     regional public officials (including local and regional 
     public planning organizations), that the proposed projects to 
     be undertaken within the boundaries in the portions of Erie 
     County, New York, described in subsection (b), are not in the 
     public interest then, subject to subsection (c), those 
     portions of such county that were once part of Lake Erie and 
     are now filled are declared to be nonnavigable waters of the 
     United States.
       (b) Boundaries.--The portion of Erie County, New York, 
     referred to in subsection (a) are all that tract or parcel of 
     land, situate in the Town of Hamburg and the City of 
     Lackawanna, County of Erie, State of New York, being part of 
     Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 
     25 of the Ogden Gore Tract and part of Lots 23, 24, and 36 of 
     the Buffalo Creek Reservation, Township 10, Range 8 of the 
     Holland Land Company's Survey and more particularly bounded 
     and described as follows:
       Beginning at a point on the westerly highway boundary of 
     Hamburg Turnpike (66.0 feet wide), said point being 547.89 
     feet South 19 deg.36'46'' East from the intersection of the 
     westerly highway boundary of Hamburg Turnpike (66.0 feet 
     wide) and the northerly line of the City of Lackawanna (also 
     being the southerly line of the City of Buffalo); thence 
     South 19 deg.36'46'' East along the westerly highway boundary 
     of Hamburg Turnpike (66.0 feet wide) a distance of 628.41 
     feet; thence along the westerly highway boundary of Hamburg 
     Turnpike as appropriated by the New York State Department of 
     Public Works as shown on Map No. 40-R2, Parcel No. 44 the 
     following 20 courses and distances:
       (1) South 10 deg.00'07'' East a distance of 164.30 feet;
       (2) South 18 deg.40'45'' East a distance of 355.00 feet;
       (3) South 71 deg.23'35'' West a distance of 2.00 feet;
       (4) South 18 deg.40'45'' East a distance of 223.00 feet;
       (5) South 22 deg.29'36'' East a distance of 150.35 feet;
       (6) South 18 deg.40'45'' East a distance of 512.00 feet;
       (7) South 16 deg.49'53'' East a distance of 260.12 feet;
       (8) South 18 deg.34'20'' East a distance of 793.00 feet;
       (9) South 71 deg.23'35'' West a distance of 4.00 feet;
       (10) South 18 deg.13'24'' East a distance of 132.00 feet;
       (11) North 71 deg.23'35'' East a distance of 4.67 feet;
       (12) South 18 deg.30'00'' East a distance of 38.00 feet;
       (13) South 71 deg.23'35'' West a distance of 4.86 feet;
       (14) South 18 deg.13'24'' East a distance of 160.00 feet;
       (15) South 71 deg.23'35'' East a distance of 9.80 feet;
       (16) South 18 deg.36'25'' East a distance of 159.00 feet;
       (17) South 71 deg.23'35'' West a distance of 3.89 feet;
       (18) South 18 deg.34'20'' East a distance of 180.00 feet;
       (19) South 20 deg.56'05'' East a distance of 138.11 feet;
       (20) South 22 deg.53'55'' East a distance of 272.45 feet to 
     a point on the westerly highway boundary of Hamburg Turnpike.
     Thence southerly along the westerly highway boundary of 
     Hamburg Turnpike, South 18 deg.36'25'' East, a distance of 
     2228.31 feet; thence along the westerly highway boundary of 
     Hamburg Turnpike as appropriated by the New York State 
     Department of Public Works as shown on Map No. 27 Parcel No. 
     31 the following 2 courses and distances:
       (1) South 16 deg.17'25'' East a distance of 74.93 feet;
       (2) along a curve to the right having a radius of 1004.74 
     feet; a chord distance of 228.48 feet along a chord bearing 
     of South 08 deg.12'16'' East, a distance of 228.97 feet to a 
     point on the westerly highway boundary of Hamburg Turnpike.
     Thence southerly along the westerly highway boundary of 
     Hamburg Turnpike, South 4 deg.35'35'' West a distance of 
     940.87 feet; thence along the westerly highway boundary of 
     Hamburg Turnpike as appropriated by the New York State 
     Department of Public Works as shown on Map No. 1 Parcel No. 1 
     and Map No. 5 Parcel No. 7 the following 18 courses and 
     distances:
       (1) North 85 deg.24'25'' West a distance of 1.00 feet;
       (2) South 7 deg.01'17'' West a distance of 170.15 feet;
       (3) South 5 deg.02'54'' West a distance of 180.00 feet;
       (4) North 85 deg.24'25'' West a distance of 3.00 feet;
       (5) South 5 deg.02'54'' West a distance of 260.00 feet;
       (6) South 5 deg.09'11'' West a distance of 110.00 feet;
       (7) South 0 deg.34'35'' West a distance of 110.27 feet;
       (8) South 4 deg.50'37'' West a distance of 220.00 feet;
       (9) South 4 deg.50'37'' West a distance of 365.00 feet;
       (10) South 85 deg.24'25'' East a distance of 5.00 feet;
       (11) South 4 deg.06'20'' West a distance of 67.00 feet;
       (12) South 6 deg.04'35'' West a distance of 248.08 feet;
       (13) South 3 deg.18'27'' West a distance of 52.01 feet;
       (14) South 4 deg.55'58'' West a distance of 133.00 feet;

[[Page H10331]]

       (15) North 85 deg.24'25'' West a distance of 1.00 feet;
       (16) South 4 deg.55'58'' West a distance of 45.00 feet;
       (17) North 85 deg.24'25'' West a distance of 7.00 feet;
       (18) South 4 deg.56'12'' West a distance of 90.00 feet.
     Thence continuing along the westerly highway boundary of Lake 
     Shore Road as appropriated by the New York State Department 
     of Public Works as shown on Map No. 7, Parcel No. 7 the 
     following 2 courses and distances:
       (1) South 4 deg.55'58'' West a distance of 127.00 feet;
       (2) South 2 deg.29'25'' East a distance of 151.15 feet to a 
     point on the westerly former highway boundary of Lake Shore 
     Road.
     Thence southerly along the westerly formerly highway boundary 
     of Lake Shore Road, South 4 deg.35'35'' West a distance of 
     148.90 feet; thence along the westerly highway boundary of 
     Lake Shore Road as appropriated by the New York State 
     Department of Public Works as shown on Map No. 7, Parcel No. 
     8 the following 3 courses and distances:
       (1) South 55 deg.34'35'' West a distance of 12.55 feet;
       (2) South 4 deg.35'35'' West a distance of 118.50 feet;
       (3) South 3 deg.04'00'' West a distance of 62.95 feet to a 
     point on the south line of the lands of South Buffalo Railway 
     Company.
     Thence southerly and easterly along the lands of South 
     Buffalo Railway Company the following 5 courses and 
     distances:
       (1) North 89 deg.25'14'' West a distance of 697.64 feet;
       (2) along a curve to the left having a radius of 645.0 
     feet; a chord distance of 214.38 feet along a chord bearing 
     of South 40 deg.16'48'' West, a distance of 215.38 feet;
       (3) South 30 deg.42'49'' West a distance of 76.96 feet;
       (4) South 22 deg.06'03'' West a distance of 689.43 feet;
       (5) South 36 deg.09'23'' West a distance of 30.93 feet to 
     the northerly line of the lands of Buffalo Crushed Stone, 
     Inc.
     Thence North 87 deg.13'38'' West a distance of 2452.08 feet 
     to the shore line of Lake Erie; thence northerly along the 
     shore of Lake Erie the following 43 courses and distances:
       (1) North 16 deg.29'53'' West a distance of 267.84 feet;
       (2) North 24 deg.25'00'' West a distance of 195.01 feet;
       (3) North 26 deg.45'00'' West a distance of 250.00 feet;
       (4) North 31 deg.15'00'' West a distance of 205.00 feet;
       (5) North 21 deg.35'00'' West a distance of 110.00 feet;
       (6) North 44 deg.00'53'' West a distance of 26.38 feet;
       (7) North 33 deg.49'18'' West a distance of 74.86 feet;
       (8) North 34 deg.26'26'' West a distance of 12.00 feet;
       (9) North 31 deg.06'16'' West a distance of 72.06 feet;
       (10) North 22 deg.35'00'' West a distance of 150.00 feet;
       (11) North 16 deg.35'00'' West a distance of 420.00 feet;
       (12) North 21 deg.l0'00'' West a distance of 440.00 feet;
       (13) North 17 deg.55'00'' West a distance of 340.00 feet;
       (14) North 28 deg.05'00'' West a distance of 375.00 feet;
       (15) North 16 deg.25'00'' West a distance of 585.00 feet;
       (16) North 22 deg.10'00'' West a distance of 160.00 feet;
       (17) North 2 deg.46'36'' West a distance of 65.54 feet;
       (18) North 16 deg.01'08'' West a distance of 70.04 feet;
       (19) North 49 deg.07'00'' West a distance of 79.00 feet;
       (20) North 19 deg.16'00'' West a distance of 425.00 feet;
       (21) North 16 deg.37'00'' West a distance of 285.00 feet;
       (22) North 25 deg.20'00'' West a distance of 360.00 feet;
       (23) North 33 deg.00'00'' West a distance of 230.00 feet;
       (24) North 32 deg.40'00'' West a distance of 310.00 feet;
       (25) North 27 deg.10'00'' West a distance of 130.00 feet;
       (26) North 23 deg.20'00'' West a distance of 315.00 feet;
       (27) North 18 deg.20'04'' West a distance of 302.92 feet;
       (28) North 20 deg.15'48'' West a distance of 387.18 feet;
       (29) North 14 deg.20'00'' West a distance of 530.00 feet;
       (30) North 16 deg.40'00'' West a distance of 260.00 feet;
       (31) North 28 deg.35'00'' West a distance of 195.00 feet;
       (32) North 18 deg.30'00'' West a distance of 170.00 feet;
       (33) North 26 deg.30'00'' West a distance of 340.00 feet;
       (34) North 32 deg.07'52'' West a distance of 232.38 feet;
       (35) North 30 deg.04'26'' West a distance of 17.96 feet;
       (36) North 23 deg.19'13'' West a distance of 111.23 feet;
       (37) North 7 deg.07'58'' West a distance of 63.90 feet;
       (38) North 8 deg.11'02'' West a distance of 378.90 feet;
       (39) North 15 deg.01'02'' West a distance of 190.64 feet;
       (40) North 2 deg.55'00'' West a distance of 170.00 feet;
       (41) North 6 deg.45'00'' West a distance of 240.00 feet;
       (42) North 0 deg.10'00'' East a distance of 465.00 feet;
       (43) North 2 deg.00'38'' West a distance of 378.58 feet to 
     the northerly line of Letters Patent dated February 21, 1968 
     and recorded in the Erie County Clerk's Office under Liber 
     7453 of Deeds at Page 45.
     Thence North 71 deg.23'35'' East along the north line of the 
     aforementioned Letters Patent a distance of 154.95 feet to 
     the shore line; thence along the shore line the following 6 
     courses and distances:
       (1) South 80 deg.14'01'' East a distance of 119.30 feet;
       (2) North 46 deg.15'13'' East a distance of 47.83 feet;
       (3) North 59 deg.53'02'' East a distance of 53.32 feet;
       (4) North 38 deg.20'43'' East a distance of 27.31 feet;
       (5) North 68 deg.12'46'' East a distance of 48.67 feet;
       (6) North 26 deg.11'47'' East a distance of 11.48 feet to 
     the northerly line of the aforementioned Letters Patent.
     Thence along the northerly line of said Letters Patent, North 
     71 deg.23'35'' East a distance of 1755.19 feet; thence South 
     35 deg.27'25'' East a distance of 35.83 feet to a point on 
     the U.S. Harbor Line; thence, North 54 deg.02'35'' East along 
     the U.S. Harbor Line a distance of 200.00 feet; thence 
     continuing along the U.S. Harbor Line, North 50 deg.01'45'' 
     East a distance of 379.54 feet to the westerly line of the 
     lands of Gateway Trade Center, Inc.; thence along the lands 
     of Gateway Trade Center, Inc. the following 27 courses and 
     distances:
       (1) South 18 deg.44'53'' East a distance of 623.56 feet;
       (2) South 34 deg.33'00'' East a distance of 200.00 feet;
       (3) South 26 deg.18'55'' East a distance of 500.00 feet;
       (4) South 19 deg.06'40'' East a distance of 1074.29 feet;
       (5) South 28 deg.03'18'' East a distance of 242.44 feet;
       (6) South 18 deg.38'50'' East a distance of 1010.95 feet;
       (7) North 71 deg.20'51'' East a distance of 90.42 feet;
       (8) South 18 deg.49'20'' East a distance of 158.61 feet;
       (9) South 80 deg.55'10'' East a distance of 45.14 feet;
       (10) South 18 deg.04'45'' East a distance of 52.13 feet;
       (11) North 71 deg.07'23'' East a distance of 102.59 feet;
       (12) South 18 deg.41'40'' East a distance of 63.00 feet;
       (13) South 71 deg.07'23'' West a distance of 240.62 feet;
       (14) South 18 deg.38'50'' East a distance of 668.13 feet;
       (15) North 71 deg.28'46'' East a distance of 958.68 feet;
       (16) North 18 deg.42'31'' West a distance of 1001.28 feet;
       (17) South 71 deg.17'29'' West a distance of 168.48 feet;
       (18) North 18 deg.42'31'' West a distance of 642.00 feet;
       (19) North 71 deg.17'37'' East a distance of 17.30 feet;
       (20) North 18 deg.42'31'' West a distance of 574.67 feet;
       (21) North 71 deg.17'29'' East a distance of 151.18 feet;
       (22) North 18 deg.42'31''West a distance of 1156.43 feet;
       (23) North 71 deg.29'21'' East a distance of 569.24 feet;
       (24) North 18 deg.30'39'' West a distance of 314.71 feet;
       (25) North 70 deg.59'36'' East a distance of 386.47 feet;
       (26) North 18 deg.30'39'' West a distance of 70.00 feet;
       (27) North 70 deg.59'36'' East a distance of 400.00 feet to 
     the place or point of beginning.
     Containing 1,142.958 acres.
       (c) Limits on Applicability; Regulatory Requirements.--The 
     declaration under subsection (a) shall apply to those parts 
     of the areas described in subsection (b) which are filled 
     portions of Lake Erie. Any work on these filled portions is 
     subject to all applicable Federal statutes and regulations, 
     including sections 9 and 10 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (30 
     Stat. 1151; 33 U.S.C. 401 and 403), commonly known as the 
     River and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899, section 404 of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and 
     the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
       (d) Expiration Date.--If, 20 years from the date of 
     enactment of this Act, any area or part thereof described in 
     subsection (a) of this section is not occupied by permanent 
     structures in accordance with the requirements set out in 
     subsection (c) of this section, or if work in connection with 
     any activity permitted in subsection (c) is not commenced 
     within 5 years after issuance of such permits, then the 
     declaration of nonnavigability for such area or part thereof 
     shall expire.

     SEC. 353. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a) In General.--The following projects or portions of 
     projects are not authorized after the date of enactment of 
     this Act:
       (1) Black warrior and tombigbee rivers, jackson, alabama.--
     The project for navigation, Black Warrior and Tombigbee 
     Rivers,

[[Page H10332]]

     vicinity of Jackson, Alabama, authorized by section 106 of 
     the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1987 
     (100 Stat. 3341-199).
       (2) Sacramento deep water ship channel, california.--The 
     portion of the project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water 
     Ship Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), 
     beginning from the confluence of the Sacramento River and the 
     Barge Canal to a point 3,300 feet west of the William G. 
     Stone Lock western gate (including the William G. Stone Lock 
     and the Bascule Bridge and Barge Canal). All waters within 
     such portion of the project are declared to be nonnavigable 
     waters of the United States solely for purposes of the 
     General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 525 et seq.) and 
     section 9 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401), 
     commonly known as the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 
     1899.
       (3) Bay island channel, quincy, illinois.--The access 
     channel across Bay Island into Quincy Bay at Quincy, 
     Illinois, constructed under section 107 of the River and 
     Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577).
       (4) Warsaw boat harbor, illinois.--The portion of the 
     project for navigation, Illinois Waterway, Illinois and 
     Indiana, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor 
     Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1175), known as the Warsaw Boat Harbor, 
     Illinois.
       (5) Rockport harbor, rockport, massachusetts.--The 
     following portions of the project for navigation, Rockport 
     Harbor, Massachusetts, carried out under section 107 of the 
     River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577):
       (A) The portion of the 10-foot harbor channel the 
     boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates 
     N605,741.948, E838,031.378, thence running north 36 degrees 
     04 minutes 40.9 seconds east 123.386 feet to a point 
     N605,642.226, E838,104.039, thence running south 05 degrees 
     08 minutes 35.1 seconds east 24.223 feet to a point 
     N605,618.100, E838,106.210, thence running north 41 degrees 
     05 minutes 10.9 seconds west 141.830 feet to a point 
     N605,725.000, E838,013.000, thence running north 47 degrees 
     19 minutes 04.1 seconds east 25.000 feet to the point of 
     origin.
       (B) The portion of the 8-foot north basin entrance channel 
     the boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates 
     N605,742.699, E837,977.129, thence running south 89 degrees 
     12 minutes 27.1 seconds east 54.255 feet to a point 
     N605,741.948, E838,031.378, thence running south 47 degrees 
     19 minutes 04.1 seconds west 25.000 feet to a point 
     N605,725.000, E838,013.000, thence running north 63 degrees 
     44 minutes 19.0 seconds west 40.000 feet to the point of 
     origin.
       (C) The portion of the 8-foot south basin anchorage the 
     boundaries of which begin at a point with coordinates 
     N605,563.770, E838,111.100, thence running south 05 degrees 
     08 minutes 35.1 seconds east 53.460 feet to a point 
     N605,510.525, E838,115.892, thence running south 52 degrees 
     10 minutes 55.5 seconds west 145.000 feet to a point 
     N605,421.618, E838,001.348, thence running north 37 degrees 
     49 minutes 04.5 seconds west feet to a point N605,480.960, 
     E837,955.287, thence running south 64 degrees 52 minutes 33.9 
     seconds east 33.823 feet to a point N605,466.600, 
     E837,985.910, thence running north 52 degrees 10 minutes 55.5 
     seconds east 158.476 feet to the point of origin.
       (6) Scituate harbor, massachusetts.--The portion of the 
     project for navigation, Scituate Harbor, Massachusetts, 
     authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1954 
     (68 Stat. 1249), consisting of an 8-foot anchorage basin and 
     described as follows: Beginning at a point with coordinates 
     N438,739.53, E810,354.75, thence running northwesterly about 
     200.00 feet to coordinates N438,874.02, E810,206.72, thence 
     running northeasterly about 400.00 feet to coordinates 
     N439,170.07, E810,475,70, thence running southwesterly about 
     447.21 feet to the point of origin.
       (7) Duluth-superior harbor, minnesota and wisconsin.--The 
     portion of the project for navigation, Duluth-Superior 
     Harbor, Minnesota and Wisconsin, 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 3, 1896 (29 Stat. 212), known as the 21st 
     Avenue West Channel, beginning at the most southeasterly 
     point of the channel N423074.09, E2871635.43 thence running 
     north-northwest about 1854.83 feet along the easterly limit 
     of the project to a point N424706.69, E2870755.48, thence 
     running northwesterly about 111.07 feet to a point on the 
     northerly limit of the project N424777.27, E2870669.46, 
     thence west-southwest 157.88 feet along the north limit of 
     the project to a point N424703.04, E2870530.38, thence south-
     southeast 1978.27 feet to the most southwesterly point 
     N422961.45, E2871469.07, thence northeasterly 201.00 feet 
     along the southern limit of the project to the point of 
     origin.
       (8) Tremley point, new jersey.--The portion of the Federal 
     navigation channel, New York and New Jersey Channels, New 
     York and New Jersey, authorized by the first section of the 
     Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the construction, repair, 
     and preservation of certain public works on rivers and 
     harbors, and for other purposes'', approved August 30, 1935 
     (49 Stat. 1028), and modified by section 101 of the River and 
     Harbor Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 164), that consists of a 35-foot 
     deep channel beginning at a point along the western limit of 
     the authorized project, N644100.411, E129256.91, thence 
     running southeasterly about 38.25 feet to a point 
     N644068.885, E129278.565, thence running southerly about 
     1,163.86 feet to a point N642912.127, E129150.209, thence 
     running southwesterly about 56.89 feet to a point N642864.09, 
     E2129119.725, thence running northerly along the existing 
     western limit of the existing project to the point of origin.
       (9) Angola, new york.--The project for erosion protection, 
     Angola Water Treatment Plant, Angola, New York, constructed 
     under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 
     701r).
       (10) Wallabout channel, brooklyn, new york.--The portion of 
     the project for navigation, Wallabout Channel, Brooklyn, New 
     York, 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 March 3, 1899 (30 
     Stat. 1124), that is located at the northeast corner of the 
     project and is described as follows:
       Beginning at a point forming the northeast corner of the 
     project and designated with the coordinate of North N 
     682,307.40; East 638,918.10; thence along the following 6 
     courses and distances:
       (A) South 85 degrees, 44 minutes, 13 seconds East 87.94 
     feet (coordinate: N 682,300.86 E 639,005.80).
       (B) North 74 degrees, 41 minutes, 30 seconds East 271.54 
     feet (coordinate: N 682,372.55 E 639,267.71).
       (C) South 4 degrees, 46 minutes, 02 seconds West 170.95 
     feet (coordinate: N 682,202.20 E 639,253.50).
       (D) South 4 degrees, 46 minutes, 02 seconds West 239.97 
     feet (coordinate: N 681,963.06 E 639,233.56).
       (E) North 50 degrees, 48 minutes, 26 seconds West 305.48 
     feet (coordinate: N 682,156.10 E 638,996.80).
       (F) North 3 degrees, 33 minutes, 25 seconds East 145.04 
     feet (coordinate: N 682,300.86 E 639,005.80).
       (b) Rockport Harbor, Massachusetts.--The project for 
     navigation, Rockport Harbor, Massachusetts, carried out under 
     section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
     577), is modified--
       (1) to redesignate a portion of the 8-foot north outer 
     anchorage as part of the 8-foot approach channel to the north 
     inner basin described as follows: the perimeter of the area 
     starts at a point with coordinates N605,792.110, 
     E838,020.009, thence running south 89 degrees 12 minutes 27.1 
     seconds east 64.794 feet to a point N605,791.214, 
     E838,084.797, thence running south 47 degrees 18 minutes 54.0 
     seconds west 40.495 feet to a point N605,763.760, 
     E838,055.030, thence running north 68 degrees 26 minutes 49.0 
     seconds west 43.533 feet to a point N605,779.750, 
     E838,014.540, thence running north 23 degrees 52 minutes 08.4 
     seconds east 13.514 feet to the point of origin; and
       (2) to realign a portion of the 8-foot north inner basin 
     approach channel by adding an area described as follows: the 
     perimeter of the area starts at a point with coordinates 
     N605,792.637, E837,981.920, thence running south 89 degrees 
     12 minutes 27.1 seconds east 38.093 feet to a point 
     N605,792.110, E838,020.009, thence running south 23 degrees 
     52 minutes 08.4 seconds west 13.514 feet to a point 
     N605,779.752, E838,014.541, thence running north 68 degrees 
     26 minutes 49.0 seconds west 35.074 feet to the point of 
     origin.

     SEC. 354. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.

       (a) In General.--The project for flood control, Wyoming 
     Valley, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124) is 
     modified as provided in this section.
       (b) Additional Project Elements.--The Secretary shall 
     construct each of the following additional elements of the 
     project to the extent that the Secretary determines that the 
     element is technically feasible, environmentally acceptable, 
     and economically justified:
       (1) The River Commons plan developed by the non-Federal 
     sponsor for both sides of the Susquehanna River beside 
     historic downtown Wilkes-Barre.
       (2) Necessary portal modifications to the project to allow 
     at grade access from Wilkes-Barre to the Susquehanna River to 
     facilitate operation, maintenance, replacement, repair, and 
     rehabilitation of the project and to restore access to the 
     Susquehanna River for the public.
       (3) A concrete capped sheet pile wall in lieu of raising an 
     earthen embankment to reduce the disturbance to the Historic 
     River Commons area.
       (4) All necessary modifications to the Stormwater Pump 
     Stations in Wyoming Valley.
       (5) All necessary evaluations and modifications to all 
     elements of the existing flood control projects to include 
     Coal Creek, Toby Creek, Abrahams Creek, and various relief 
     culverts and penetrations through the levee.
       (c) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit the Luzerne County 
     Flood Protection Authority toward the non-Federal share of 
     the cost of the project for the value of the Forty-Fort 
     ponding basin area purchased after June 1, 1972, by Luzerne 
     County, Pennsylvania, for an estimated cost of $500,000 under 
     section 102(w) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (102 Stat. 508) to the extent that the Secretary determines 
     that the area purchased is integral to the project.
       (d) Modification of Mitigation Plan and Project Cooperation 
     Agreement.--
       (1) Modification of mitigation plan.--The Secretary shall 
     provide for the deletion,

[[Page H10333]]

     from the Mitigation Plan for the Wyoming Valley Levees, 
     approved by the Secretary on February 15, 1996, the proposal 
     to remove the abandoned Bloomsburg Railroad Bridge.
       (2) Modification of project cooperation agreement.--The 
     Secretary shall modify the project cooperation agreement, 
     executed in October 1996, to reflect removal of the railroad 
     bridge and its $1,800,000 total cost from the mitigation plan 
     under paragraph (1).
       (e) Maximum Project Cost.--The total cost of the project, 
     as modified by this section, shall not exceed the amount 
     authorized in section 401(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), with increases 
     authorized by section 902 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4183).

     SEC. 355. REHOBOTH BEACH AND DEWEY BEACH, DELAWARE.

       The project for storm damage reduction and shoreline 
     protection, Rehoboth Beach and Dewey Beach, Delaware, 
     authorized by section 101(b)(6) of the Water Resources 
     development Act of 1996, is modified to authorize the project 
     at a total cost of $13,997,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $9,098,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $4,899,000, and an estimated average annual cost of 
     $1,320,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of 
     the project, with an estimated annual Federal cost of 
     $858,000 and an estimated annual non-Federal cost of 
     $462,000.

                           TITLE IV--STUDIES

     SEC. 401. STUDIES OF COMPLETED PROJECTS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study under section 216 of 
     the Flood Control Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1830) of each of the 
     following completed projects:
       (1) Escambia bay and river, florida.--Project for 
     navigation, Escambia Bay and River, Florida.
       (2) Illinois river, havana, illinois.--Project for flood 
     control, Illinois River, Havana, Illinois, authorized by 
     section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 
     1583).
       (3) Spring lake, illinois.--Project for flood control, 
     Spring Lake, Illinois, authorized by section 5 of the Flood 
     Control Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1584).
       (4) Port orford, oregon.--Project for flood control, Port 
     Orford, Oregon, authorized by section 301 of River and Harbor 
     Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1092).

     SEC. 402. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.

       Section 729 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (100 Stat. 4164) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 729. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary may assess the water 
     resources needs of interstate river basins and watersheds of 
     the United States. The assessments shall be undertaken in 
     cooperation and coordination with the Departments of the 
     Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce, the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, and other appropriate agencies, and may 
     include an evaluation of ecosystem protection and 
     restoration, flood damage reduction, navigation and port 
     needs, watershed protection, water supply, and drought 
     preparedness.
       ``(b) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with 
     Federal, tribal, State, interstate, and local governmental 
     entities in carrying out the assessments authorized by this 
     section. In conducting the assessments, the Secretary may 
     accept contributions of services, materials, supplies and 
     cash from Federal, tribal, State, interstate, and local 
     governmental entities where the Secretary determines that 
     such contributions will facilitate completion of the 
     assessments.
       ``(c) Priority Consideration.--The Secretary shall give 
     priority consideration to the following interstate river 
     basins and watersheds:
       ``(1) Delaware River.
       ``(2) Potomac River.
       ``(3) Susquehanna River.
       ``(4) Kentucky River.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.''.

     SEC. 403. LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT.

       (a) Assessments.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
     Secretary of the Interior and the States of Arkansas, 
     Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and 
     Tennessee, shall undertake, at Federal expense, for the Lower 
     Mississippi River system--
       (1) an assessment of information needed for river-related 
     management;
       (2) an assessment of natural resource habitat needs; and
       (3) an assessment of the need for river-related recreation 
     and access.
       (b) Period.--Each assessment referred to in subsection (a) 
     shall be carried out for 2 years.
       (c) Reports.--Before the last day of the second year of an 
     assessment under subsection (a), the Secretary, in 
     cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior and the States 
     of Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, 
     Missouri, and Tennessee, shall transmit to Congress a report 
     on the results of the assessment to Congress. The report 
     shall contain recommendations for--
       (1) the collection, availability, and use of information 
     needed for river-related management;
       (2) the planning, construction, and evaluation of potential 
     restoration, protection, and enhancement measures to meet 
     identified habitat needs; and
       (3) potential projects to meet identified river access and 
     recreation needs.
       (d) Lower Mississippi River System Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``Lower Mississippi River system'' means 
     those river reaches and adjacent floodplains within the Lower 
     Mississippi River alluvial valley having commercial 
     navigation channels on the Mississippi mainstem and 
     tributaries south of Cairo, Illinois, and the Atchafalaya 
     basin floodway system.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $1,750,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 404. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENT 
                   STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal 
     expense, a study--
       (1) to identify significant sources of sediment and 
     nutrients in the Upper Mississippi River basin; and
       (2) to describe and evaluate the processes by which the 
     sediments and nutrients move, on land and in water, from 
     their sources to the Upper Mississippi River and its 
     tributaries.
       (b) Consultation.--In conducting the study, the Secretary 
     shall consult the Departments of Agriculture and the 
     Interior.
       (c) Components of the Study.--
       (1) Computer modeling.--As part of the study, the Secretary 
     shall develop computer models at the subwatershed and basin 
     level to identify and quantify the sources of sediment and 
     nutrients and to examine the effectiveness of alternative 
     management measures.
       (2) Research.--As part of the study, the Secretary shall 
     conduct research to improve understanding of--
       (A) the processes affecting sediment and nutrient (with 
     emphasis on nitrogen and phosphorus) movement;
       (B) the influences of soil type, slope, climate, vegetation 
     cover, and modifications to the stream drainage network on 
     sediment and nutrient losses; and
       (C) river hydrodynamics in relation to sediment and 
     nutrient transformations, retention, and movement.
       (d) Use of Information.--Upon request of a Federal agency, 
     the Secretary may provide information to the agency for use 
     in sediment and nutrient reduction programs associated with 
     land use and land management practices.
       (e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 3 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit 
     to Congress a report on the results of the study, including 
     findings and recommendations.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000.

     SEC. 405. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

       Section 459(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 333) is amended by striking ``date of 
     enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``first date on which 
     funds are appropriated to carry out this section.''.

     SEC. 406. OHIO RIVER SYSTEM.

       The Secretary may conduct a study of commodity flows on the 
     Ohio River system at Federal expense. The study shall include 
     an analysis of the commodities transported on the Ohio River 
     system, including information on the origins and destinations 
     of these commodities and market trends, both national and 
     international.

     SEC. 407. EASTERN ARKANSAS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall reevaluate the 
     recommendations in the Eastern Arkansas Region Comprehensive 
     Study of the Memphis District Engineer, dated August 1990, to 
     determine whether the plans outlined in the study for 
     agricultural water supply from the Little Red River, 
     Arkansas, are feasible and in the Federal interest.
       (b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2001, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the reevaluation.

     SEC. 408. RUSSELL, ARKANSAS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall evaluate the 
     preliminary investigation report for agricultural water 
     supply, Russell, Arkansas, entitled ``Preliminary 
     Investigation: Lone Star Management Project'', prepared for 
     the Lone Star Water Irrigation District, to determine whether 
     the plans contained in the report are feasible and in the 
     Federal interest.
       (b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2001, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the evaluation.

     SEC. 409. ESTUDILLO CANAL, SAN LEANDRO, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
     reduction along the Estudillo Canal, San Leandro, California.

     SEC. 410. LAGUNA CREEK, FREMONT, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
     reduction in the Laguna Creek watershed, Fremont, California.

     SEC. 411. LAKE MERRITT, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for ecosystem 
     restoration, flood damage reduction, and recreation at Lake 
     Merritt, Oakland, California.

     SEC. 412. LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall evaluate the report of 
     the city of Lancaster,

[[Page H10334]]

     California, entitled ``Master Plan of Drainage'', to 
     determine whether the plans contained in the report are 
     feasible and in the Federal interest, including plans 
     relating to drainage corridors located at 52nd Street West, 
     35th Street West, North Armargosa, and 20th Street East.
       (b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2001, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the evaluation.

     SEC. 413. NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out a project to 
     address water supply, water quality, and groundwater problems 
     at Miliken, Sarco, and Tulocay Creeks in Napa County, 
     California.
       (b) Use of Existing Data.--In conducting the study, the 
     Secretary shall use data and information developed by the 
     United States Geological Survey in the report entitled 
     ``Geohydrologic Framework and Hydrologic Budget of the Lower 
     Miliken-Sarco-Tulocay Creeks Area of Napa, California''.

     SEC. 414. OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study, at Federal expense, to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for 
     shoreline protection at Oceanside, California. In conducting 
     the study, the Secretary shall determine the portion of beach 
     erosion that is the result of a Navy navigation project at 
     Camp Pendleton Harbor, California.

     SEC. 415. SUISUN MARSH, CALIFORNIA.

       The investigation for Suisun Marsh, California, authorized 
     under the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 
     2000 (Public Law 106-60), shall be limited to evaluating the 
     feasibility of the levee enhancement and managed wetlands 
     protection program for Suisun Marsh, California.

     SEC. 416. LAKE ALLATOONA WATERSHED, GEORGIA.

       Section 413 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 324) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 413. LAKE ALLATOONA WATERSHED, GEORGIA.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a 
     comprehensive study of the Lake Allatoona watershed, Georgia, 
     to determine the feasibility of undertaking ecosystem 
     restoration and resource protection measures.
       ``(b) Matters To Be Addressed.--The study shall address 
     streambank and shoreline erosion, sedimentation, water 
     quality, fish and wildlife habitat degradation and other 
     problems relating to ecosystem restoration and resource 
     protection in the Lake Allatoona watershed.''.

     SEC. 417. CHICAGO RIVER, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for 
     shoreline protection along the Chicago River, Chicago, 
     Illinois.
       (b) Consultation.--In conducting the study, the Secretary 
     shall consult, and incorporate information available from, 
     appropriate Federal, State, and local government agencies.

     SEC. 418. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL SYSTEM, CHICAGO, 
                   ILLINOIS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     advisability of reducing the use of the waters of Lake 
     Michigan to support navigation in the Chicago sanitary and 
     ship canal system, Chicago, Illinois.

     SEC. 419. LONG LAKE, INDIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental 
     restoration and protection, Long Lake, Indiana.

     SEC. 420. BRUSH AND ROCK CREEKS, MISSION HILLS AND FAIRWAY, 
                   KANSAS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall evaluate the 
     preliminary engineering report for the project for flood 
     control, Mission Hills and Fairway, Kansas, entitled 
     ``Preliminary Engineering Report: Brush Creek/Rock Creek 
     Drainage Improvements, 66th Street to State Line Road'', to 
     determine whether the plans contained in the report are 
     feasible and in the Federal interest.
       (b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2001, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the evaluation.

     SEC. 421. COASTAL AREAS OF LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of developing measures to floodproof major 
     hurricane evacuation routes in the coastal areas of 
     Louisiana.

     SEC. 422. IBERIA PORT, LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for navigation, Iberia 
     Port, Louisiana.

     SEC. 423. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN SEAWALL, LOUISIANA.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall complete a post-authorization change 
     report on the project for hurricane-flood protection, Lake 
     Pontchartrain, Louisiana, authorized by section 204 of the 
     Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077), to incorporate and 
     accomplish structural modifications to the seawall providing 
     protection along the south shore of Lake Pontchartrain from 
     the New Basin Canal on the west to the Inner Harbor 
     Navigation Canal on the east.

     SEC. 424. LOWER ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA.

       As part of the Lower Atchafalaya basin reevaluation study, 
     the Secretary shall determine the feasibility of carrying out 
     a project for flood damage reduction, Stephensville, 
     Louisiana.

     SEC. 425. ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST PARISH, LOUISIANA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage 
     reduction on the east bank of the Mississippi River in St. 
     John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana.

     SEC. 426. LAS VEGAS VALLEY, NEVADA.

       Section 432(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 327) is amended by inserting ``recreation,'' 
     after ``runoff),''.

     SEC. 427. SOUTHWEST VALLEY, ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO.

       Section 433 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 327) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Evaluation of Flood Damage Reduction Measures.--In 
     conducting the study, the Secretary shall evaluate flood 
     damage reduction measures that would otherwise be excluded 
     from the feasibility analysis based on policies of the Corps 
     of Engineers concerning the frequency of flooding, the 
     drainage area, and the amount of runoff.''.

     SEC. 428. BUFFALO HARBOR, BUFFALO, NEW YORK.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the advisability and potential impacts of declaring 
     as nonnavigable a portion of the channel at Control Point 
     Draw, Buffalo Harbor, Buffalo New York.
       (b) Contents.--The study conducted under this section shall 
     include an examination of other options to meet intermodal 
     transportation needs in the area.

     SEC. 429. HUDSON RIVER, MANHATTAN, NEW YORK.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of establishing a Hudson River Park 
     in Manhattan, New York City, New York. The study shall 
     address the issues of shoreline protection, environmental 
     protection and restoration, recreation, waterfront access, 
     and open space for the area between Battery Place and West 
     59th Street.
       (b) Consultation.--In conducting the study under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall consult the Hudson River Park Trust.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the result of the study, including a 
     master plan for the park.

     SEC. 430. JAMESVILLE RESERVOIR, ONONDAGA COUNTY, NEW YORK.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, flood damage reduction, and water quality, 
     Jamesville Reservoir, Onondaga County, New York.

     SEC. 431. STEUBENVIILLE, OHIO.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of developing a public port along the Ohio River 
     in the vicinity of Steubenville, Ohio.

     SEC. 432. GRAND LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

       Section 560(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3783) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``date of enactment of this Act'' and 
     inserting ``date of enactment of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2000''; and
       (2) by inserting ``and Miami'' after ``Pensacola Dam''.

     SEC. 433. COLUMBIA SLOUGH, OREGON.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall complete under section 1135 of the 
     Water Resource Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a) a 
     feasiblility study for the ecosystem restoration project at 
     Columbia Slough, Oregon. If the Secretary determines that the 
     project is feasible, the Secretary may carry out the project 
     on an expedited basis under such section.

     SEC. 434. REEDY RIVER, GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, flood damage reduction, and streambank 
     stabilization on the Reedy River, Cleveland Park West, 
     Greenville, South Carolina.

     SEC. 435. GERMANTOWN, TENNESSEE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood 
     control and related purposes along Miller Farms Ditch, Howard 
     Road Drainage, and Wolf River Lateral D, Germantown, 
     Tennessee.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--The Secretary--
       (1) shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the costs 
     of the feasibility study the value of the in-kind services 
     provided by the non-Federal interests relating to the 
     planning, engineering, and design of the project, whether 
     carried out before or after execution of the feasibility 
     study cost-sharing agreement if the Secretary determines the 
     work is necessary for completion of the study; and
       (2) for the purposes of paragraph (1), shall consider the 
     feasibility study to be conducted as part of the Memphis 
     Metro Tennessee and Mississippi study authorized by 
     resolution of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure, dated March 7, 1996.
       (c) Limitation.--The Secretary may not reject the project 
     under the feasibility study based solely on a minimum amount 
     of stream runoff.

     SEC. 436. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, GALVESTON, TEXAS.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of constructing barge

[[Page H10335]]

     lanes adjacent to the Houston Ship Channel from Redfish Reef 
     to Morgan Point in Galveston, Texas.

     SEC. 437. PARK CITY, UTAH.

       The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the 
     feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply, Park 
     City, Utah.

     SEC. 438. MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall evaluate the report 
     for the project for flood damage reduction and environmental 
     restoration, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, entitled ``Interim 
     Executive Summary: Menominee River Flood Management Plan'', 
     dated September 1999, to determine whether the plans 
     contained in the report are cost-effective, technically 
     sound, environmentally acceptable, and in the Federal 
     interest.
       (b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2001, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results 
     of the evaluation.

     SEC. 439. UPPER DES PLAINES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ILLINOIS 
                   AND WISCONSIN.

       Section 419 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 324-325) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Credit.--The Secretary shall provide the non-Federal 
     interest credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of 
     the study for work performed by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of the study's feasibility cost-share 
     agreement if the Secretary determines that the work is 
     integral to the study.''.

     SEC. 440. DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct studies and 
     assessments to analyze the sources and impacts of sediment 
     contamination in the Delaware River watershed.
       (b) Activities.--Activities authorized under this section 
     shall be conducted by a university with expertise in research 
     in contaminated sediment sciences.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section 
     $5,000,000. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
       (2) Corps of engineers expenses.--10 percent of the amounts 
     appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the 
     Corps of Engineers district offices to administer and 
     implement studies and assessments under this section.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 501. BRIDGEPORT, ALABAMA.

       (a) Determination.--The Secretary shall review the 
     construction of a channel performed by the non-Federal 
     interest at the project for navigation, Tennessee River, 
     Bridgeport, Alabama, to determine the Federal navigation 
     interest in such work.
       (b) Reimbursement.--If the Secretary determines under 
     subsection (a) that the work performed by the non-Federal 
     interest is consistent with the Federal navigation interest, 
     the Secretary shall reimburse the non-Federal interest an 
     amount equal to the Federal share of the cost of construction 
     of the channel.

     SEC. 502. DUCK RIVER, CULLMAN, ALABAMA.

       The Secretary shall provide technical assistance to the 
     city of Cullman, Alabama, in the management of construction 
     contracts for the reservoir project on the Duck River.

     SEC. 503. SEWARD, ALASKA.

       The Secretary shall carry out, on an emergency one-time 
     basis, necessary repairs of the Lowell Creek Tunnel in 
     Seward, Alaska, at Federal expense and a total cost of 
     $3,000,000.

     SEC. 504. AUGUSTA AND DEVALLS BLUFF, ARKANSAS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may operate, maintain, and 
     rehabilitate 37 miles of levees in and around Augusta and 
     Devalls Bluff, Arkansas.
       (b) Reimbursement.--After incurring any cost for operation, 
     maintenance, or rehabilitation under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary may seek reimbursement from the Secretary of the 
     Interior of an amount equal to the portion of such cost that 
     the Secretary determines is a benefit to a Federal wildlife 
     refuge.

     SEC. 505. BEAVER LAKE, ARKANSAS.

       The contract price for additional storage for the Carroll-
     Boone Water District beyond that which is provided for in 
     section 521 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 345) shall be based on the original construction 
     cost of Beaver Lake and adjusted to the 2000 price level net 
     of inflation between the date of initiation of construction 
     and the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 506. MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, 
                   ARKANSAS AND OKLAHOMA.

       Taking into account the need to realize the total economic 
     potential of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation 
     system, the Secretary shall expedite completion of the 
     Arkansas River navigation study, including the feasibility of 
     increasing the authorized channel from 9 feet to 12 feet and, 
     if justified, proceed directly to project preconstruction 
     engineering and design.

     SEC. 507. CALFED BAY DELTA PROGRAM ASSISTANCE, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may participate with 
     appropriate Federal and State agencies in planning and 
     management activities associated with the CALFED Bay Delta 
     Program (in this section referred to as the ``Program'') and 
     shall, to the maximum extent practicable and in accordance 
     with all applicable laws, integrate the activities of the 
     Corps of Engineers in the San Joaquin and Sacramento River 
     basins with the long-term goals of the Program.
       (b) Cooperative Activities.--In carrying out this section, 
     the Secretary--
       (1) may accept and expend funds from other Federal agencies 
     and from public, private, and non-profit entities to carry 
     out ecosystem restoration projects and activities associated 
     with the Program; and
       (2) may enter into contracts, cooperative research and 
     development agreements, and cooperative agreements, with 
     Federal and public, private, and non-profit entities to carry 
     out such projects and activities.
       (c) Geographic Scope.--For the purposes of the 
     participation of the Secretary under this section, the 
     geographic scope of the Program shall be the San Francisco 
     Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary and their 
     watershed (also known as the ``Bay-Delta Estuary''), as 
     identified in the agreement entitled the ``Framework 
     Agreement Between the Governor's Water Policy Council of the 
     State of California and the Federal Ecosystem Directorate''.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2005.

     SEC. 508. CLEAR LAKE BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

       Amounts made available to the Secretary by the Energy and 
     Water Appropriations Act, 2000 (113 Stat. 483 et seq.) for 
     the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Clear Lake 
     basin, California, to be carried out under section 206 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), may 
     only be used for the wetlands restoration and creation 
     elements of the project.

     SEC. 509. CONTRA COSTA CANAL, OAKLEY AND KNIGHTSEN, 
                   CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall carry out a project for flood damage 
     reduction under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 
     (33 U.S.C. 701s) at the Contra Costa Canal, Oakley and 
     Knightsen, California, if the Secretary determines that the 
     project is technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified.

     SEC. 510. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall carry out under section 205 of the 
     Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) a project for 
     flood damage reduction in Huntington Beach, California, if 
     the Secretary determines that the project is technically 
     sound, environmentally acceptable, and economically 
     justified.

     SEC. 511. MALLARD SLOUGH, PITTSBURG, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall carry out under section 205 of the 
     Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) a project for 
     flood damage reduction in Mallard Slough, Pittsburg, 
     California, if the Secretary determines that the project is 
     technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified.

     SEC. 512. PENN MINE, CALAVERAS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall reimburse the non-
     Federal interest for the project for aquatic ecosystem 
     restoration, Penn Mine, Calaveras County, California, carried 
     out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), $4,100,000 for the Federal share of 
     costs incurred by the non-Federal interest for work carried 
     out by the non-Federal interest for the project.
       (b) Source of Funding.--Reimbursement under subsection (a) 
     shall be from amounts appropriated before the date of 
     enactment of this Act for the project described in subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 513. PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Emergency Measures.--The Secretary shall carry out, on 
     an emergency basis, measures to address health, safety, and 
     environmental risks posed by floatables and floating debris 
     originating from Piers 24 and 64 in the Port of San 
     Francisco, California, by removing such floatables and 
     debris.
       (b) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the risk to navigation posed by floatables and 
     floating debris originating from Piers 24 and 64 in the Port 
     of San Francisco, California, and the cost of removing such 
     floatables and debris.
       (c) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     $3,000,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 514. SAN GABRIEL BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) San Gabriel Basin Restoration.--
       (1) Establishment of fund.--There shall be established 
     within the Treasury of the United States an interest bearing 
     account to be known as the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund 
     (in this section referred to as the ``Restoration Fund'').
       (2) Administration of fund.--The Restoration Fund shall be 
     administered by the Secretary, in cooperation with the San 
     Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority or its successor 
     agency.
       (3) Purposes of fund.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the amounts 
     in the Restoration Fund, including interest accrued, shall be 
     utilized by the Secretary--
       (i) to design and construct water quality projects to be 
     administered by the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority 
     and the Central Basin Water Quality Project to be 
     administered by the Central Basin Municipal Water District; 
     and
       (ii) to operate and maintain any project constructed under 
     this section for such period as the Secretary determines, but 
     not to exceed 10 years, following the initial date of 
     operation of the project.
       (B) Cost-sharing limitation.--The Secretary may not 
     obligate any funds appropriated to the Restoration Fund in a 
     fiscal

[[Page H10336]]

     year until the Secretary has deposited in the Fund an 
     amount provided by non-Federal interests sufficient to 
     ensure that at least 35 percent of any funds obligated by 
     the Secretary are from funds provided to the Secretary by 
     the non-Federal interests. The San Gabriel Basin Water 
     Quality Authority shall be responsible for providing the 
     non-Federal amount required by the preceding sentence. The 
     State of California, local government agencies, and 
     private entities may provide all or any portion of such 
     amount.
       (b) Compliance With Applicable Law.--In carrying out the 
     activities described in this section, the Secretary shall 
     comply with any applicable Federal and State laws.
       (c) Relationship to Other Activities.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be construed to affect other Federal or State 
     authorities that are being used or may be used to facilitate 
     the cleanup and protection of the San Gabriel and Central 
     groundwater basins. In carrying out the activities described 
     in this section, the Secretary shall integrate such 
     activities with ongoing Federal and State projects and 
     activities. None of the funds made available for such 
     activities pursuant to this section shall be counted against 
     any Federal authorization ceiling established for any 
     previously authorized Federal projects or activities.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Restoration Fund established under subsection (a) 
     $85,000,000. Such funds shall remain available until 
     expended.
       (2) Set-aside.--Of the amounts appropriated under paragraph 
     (1), no more than $10,000,000 shall be available to carry out 
     the Central Basin Water Quality Project.
       (e) Adjustment.--Of the $25,000,000 made available for San 
     Gabriel Basin Groundwater Restoration, California, under the 
     heading ``Construction, General'' in title I of the Energy 
     and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2001--
       (1) $2,000,000 shall be available only for studies and 
     other investigative activities and planning and design of 
     projects determined by the Secretary to offer a long-term 
     solution to the problem of groundwater contamination caused 
     by perchlorates at sites located in the city of Santa 
     Clarita, California; and
       (2) $23,000,000 shall be deposited in the Restoration Fund, 
     of which $4,000,000 shall be used for remediation in the 
     Central Basin, California.

     SEC. 515. STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall evaluate the feasibility of the Lower 
     Mosher Slough element and the levee extensions on the Upper 
     Calaveras River element of the project for flood control, 
     Stockton Metropolitan Area, California, carried out under 
     section 211(f)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3683), to determine the eligibility of such 
     elements for reimbursement under section 211 of such Act (33 
     U.S.C. 701b-13). If the Secretary determines that such 
     elements are technically sound, environmentally acceptable, 
     and economically justified, the Secretary shall reimburse 
     under section 211 of such Act the non-Federal interest for 
     the Federal share of the cost of such elements.

     SEC. 516. PORT EVERGLADES, FLORIDA.

       Notwithstanding the absence of a project cooperation 
     agreement, the Secretary shall reimburse the non-Federal 
     interest for the project for navigation, Port Everglades 
     Harbor, Florida, $15,003,000 for the Federal share of costs 
     incurred by the non-Federal interest in carrying out the 
     project and determined by the Secretary to be eligible for 
     reimbursement under the limited reevaluation report of the 
     Corps of Engineers, dated April 1998.

     SEC. 517. FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--In coordination with the Florida Keys 
     Aqueduct Authority, appropriate agencies of municipalities of 
     Monroe County, Florida, and other appropriate public agencies 
     of the State of Florida or Monroe County, the Secretary may 
     provide technical and financial assistance to carry out 
     projects for the planning, design, and construction of 
     treatment works to improve water quality in the Florida Keys 
     National Marine Sanctuary.
       (b) Criteria for Projects.--Before entering into a 
     cooperation agreement to provide assistance with respect to a 
     project under this section, the Secretary shall ensure that--
       (1) the non-Federal sponsor has completed adequate planning 
     and design activities, as applicable;
       (2) the non-Federal sponsor has completed a financial plan 
     identifying sources of non-Federal funding for the project;
       (3) the project complies with--
       (A) applicable growth management ordinances of Monroe 
     County, Florida;
       (B) applicable agreements between Monroe County, Florida, 
     and the State of Florida to manage growth in Monroe County, 
     Florida; and
       (C) applicable water quality standards; and
       (4) the project is consistent with the master wastewater 
     and stormwater plans for Monroe County, Florida.
       (c) Consideration.--In selecting projects under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall consider whether a project will have 
     substantial water quality benefits relative to other projects 
     under consideration.
       (d) Consultation.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary shall consult with--
       (1) the Water Quality Steering Committee established under 
     section 8(d)(2)(A) of the Florida Keys National Marine 
     Sanctuary and Protection Act (106 Stat. 5054);
       (2) the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force 
     established by section 528(f) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3771-3773);
       (3) the Commission on the Everglades established by 
     executive order of the Governor of the State of Florida; and
       (4) other appropriate State and local government officials.
       (e) Non-Federal Share.--
       (1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of a 
     project carried out under this section shall be 35 percent.
       (2) Credit.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary may provide the non-Federal 
     interest credit toward cash contributions required--
       (i) before and during the construction of the project, for 
     the costs of planning, engineering, and design, and for the 
     construction management work that is performed by the non-
     Federal interest and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to implement the project; and
       (ii) during the construction of the project, for the 
     construction that the non-Federal interest carries out on 
     behalf of the Secretary and that the Secretary determines is 
     necessary to carry out the project.
       (B) Treatment of credit between projects.--Any credit 
     provided under this paragraph may be carried over between 
     authorized projects.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $100,000,000. 
     Such sums shall remain available until expended.

     SEC. 518. BALLARD'S ISLAND, LASALLE COUNTY, ILLINOIS.

       The Secretary may provide the non-Federal interest for the 
     project for the improvement of the quality of the 
     environment, Ballard's Island, LaSalle County, Illinois, 
     carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C 2309a), credit toward the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project for work 
     performed by the non-Federal interest after July 1, 1999, if 
     the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the 
     project.

     SEC. 519. LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, ILLINOIS.

       Section 1142(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (110 Stat. 4253; 113 Stat. 339) is amended by inserting 
     after ``2003'' the following: ``and $800,000 for each fiscal 
     year beginning after September 30, 2003,''.

     SEC. 520. KOONTZ LAKE, INDIANA.

       The Secretary shall provide the non-Federal interest for 
     the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Koontz Lake, 
     Indiana, carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 2330), credit toward the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project for work 
     performed by the non-Federal interest before the date of 
     execution of the project cooperation agreement if the 
     Secretary determines that the work is integral to the 
     project.

     SEC. 521. CAMPBELLSVILLE LAKE, KENTUCKY.

       The Secretary shall repair the retaining wall and dam at 
     Campbellsville Lake, Kentucky, to protect the public road on 
     top of the dam at Federal expense and a total cost of 
     $200,000.

     SEC. 522. WEST VIEW SHORES, CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall carry out an investigation of the 
     contamination of the well system in West View Shores, Cecil 
     County, Maryland. If the Secretary determines that a disposal 
     site for a Federal navigation project has contributed to the 
     contamination of the well system, the Secretary may provide 
     alternative water supplies, including replacement of wells, 
     at Federal expense.

     SEC. 523. CONSERVATION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE, CHESAPEAKE BAY, 
                   MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA.

       Section 704(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2263(b)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``In addition, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated $20,000,000 to carry out paragraph (4).''.

     SEC. 524. MUDDY RIVER, BROOKLINE AND BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS.

       The Secretary shall carry out the project for flood damage 
     reduction and environmental restoration, Muddy River, 
     Brookline and Boston, Massachusetts, substantially in 
     accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions, 
     described in the draft evaluation report of the New England 
     District Engineer entitled ``Phase I Muddy River Master 
     Plan'', dated June 2000.

     SEC. 525. SOO LOCKS, SAULT STE. MARIE, MICHIGAN.

       The Secretary may not require a cargo vessel equipped with 
     bow thrusters and friction winches that is transiting the Soo 
     Locks in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, to provide more than 2 
     crew members to serve as line handlers on the pier of a lock, 
     except in adverse weather conditions or if there is a 
     mechanical failure on the vessel.

     SEC. 526. DULUTH, MINNESOTA, ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT.

       (a) Project Authorization.--Section 541(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3777) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``implement'' and inserting ``conduct full 
     scale demonstrations of''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period the following: ``, 
     including technologies evaluated for the New York/New Jersey 
     Harbor under

[[Page H10337]]

     section 405 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (33 U.S.C. 2239 note; 106 Stat. 4863)''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 541(b) of 
     such Act is amended by striking ``$1,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$3,000,000''.

     SEC. 527. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
     State of Minnesota, shall design and construct the project 
     for environmental restoration and recreation, Minneapolis, 
     Minnesota, substantially in accordance with the plans 
     described in the report entitled ``Feasibility Study for 
     Mississippi Whitewater Park, Minneapolis, Minnesota'', 
     prepared for the Minnesota department of natural resources, 
     dated June 30, 1999.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     project shall be determined in accordance with title I of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 et 
     seq.).
       (2) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way.--The non-Federal 
     interest shall provide all lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas necessary 
     for construction of the project and shall receive credit for 
     the cost of providing such lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas toward the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project.
       (3) Operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     replacement.--The operation, maintenance, repair, 
     rehabilitation, and replacement of the project shall be a 
     non-Federal responsibility.
       (4) Credit for non-federal work.--The non-Federal interest 
     shall receive credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost 
     of the project for work performed by the non-Federal interest 
     before the date of execution of the project cooperation 
     agreement if the Secretary determines that the work is 
     integral to the project.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 528. ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MINNESOTA.

       The Secretary shall carry out under section 204 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326) a 
     project in St. Louis County, Minnesota, by making beneficial 
     use of dredged material from a Federal navigation project.

     SEC. 529. WILD RICE RIVER, MINNESOTA.

       The Secretary shall prepare a general reevaluation report 
     on the project for flood control, Wild Rice River, Minnesota, 
     authorized by section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
     (84 Stat. 1825), and, if the Secretary determines that the 
     project is technically sound, environmentally acceptable, and 
     economically justified, shall carry out the project. In 
     carrying out the reevaluation, the Secretary shall include 
     river dredging as a component of the study.

     SEC. 530. COASTAL MISSISSIPPI WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--In order to further the purposes of 
     section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (33 U.S.C. 2326) and section 206 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), the Secretary shall 
     participate in restoration projects for critical coastal 
     wetlands and coastal barrier islands in the State of 
     Mississippi that will produce, consistent with existing 
     Federal programs, projects, and activities, immediate and 
     substantial restoration, preservation, and ecosystem 
     protection benefits, including the beneficial use of dredged 
     material if such use is a cost-effective means of disposal of 
     such material.
       (b) Project Selection.--The Secretary, in coordination with 
     other Federal, tribal, State, and local agencies, may 
     identify and implement projects described in subsection (a) 
     after entering into an agreement with an appropriate non-
     Federal interest in accordance with this section.
       (c) Cost Sharing.--Before implementing any project under 
     this section, the Secretary shall enter into a binding 
     agreement with the non-Federal interests. The agreement shall 
     provide that the non-Federal responsibility for the project 
     shall be as follows:
       (1) To acquire any lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas necessary 
     for implementation of the project.
       (2) To hold and save harmless the United States free from 
     claims or damages due to implementation of the project, 
     except for the negligence of the Federal Government or its 
     contractors.
       (3) To pay 35 percent of project costs.
       (d) Nonprofit Entity.--For any project undertaken under 
     this section, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit 
     entity with the consent of the affected local government.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000.

     SEC. 531. MISSOURI RIVER VALLEY IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) Missouri River Mitigation Project.--The project for 
     mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Missouri River Bank 
     Stabilization and Navigation Project, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, 
     and Nebraska authorized by section 601(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143) and 
     modified by section 334 of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 306), is further modified to authorize 
     $200,000,000 for fiscal years 2001 through 2010 to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary for acquisition of 118,650 
     acres of land and interests in land for the project.
       (b) Upper Missouri River Aquatic and Riparian Habitat 
     Mitigation Program.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Study.--The Secretary shall complete a study that 
     analyzes the need for additional measures for mitigation of 
     losses of aquatic and terrestrial habitat from Fort Peck Dam 
     to Sioux City, Iowa, resulting from the operation of the 
     Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir project in the States of 
     Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana.
       (B) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report describing the results of the study.
       (2) Pilot program.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and 
     the affected State fish and wildlife agencies, shall develop 
     and administer a pilot mitigation program that--
       (A) involves the experimental releases of warm water from 
     the spillways at Fort Peck Dam during the appropriate 
     spawning periods for native fish;
       (B) involves the monitoring of the response of fish to, and 
     the effectiveness toward the preservation of native fish and 
     wildlife habitat as a result of, such releases; and
       (C) requires the Secretary to provide compensation for any 
     loss of hydropower at Fort Peck Dam resulting from 
     implementation of the pilot program; and
       (D) does not effect a change in the Missouri River Master 
     Water Control Manual.
       (3) Reservoir fish loss study.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     North Dakota Game and Fish Department and the South Dakota 
     Department of Game, Fish and Parks, shall complete a study to 
     analyze and recommend measures to avoid or reduce the loss of 
     fish, including rainbow smelt, through Garrison Dam in North 
     Dakota and Oahe Dam in South Dakota.
       (B) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report describing the results of the study.
       (4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated--
       (A) to complete the study under paragraph (3) $200,000; and
       (B) to carry out the other provisions of this subsection 
     $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010.
       (c) Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers Enhancement 
     Project.--Section 514(g) of the Water Resources Development 
     Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 342) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(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 $5,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010.''.

     SEC. 532. NEW MADRID COUNTY, MISSOURI.

       For purposes of determining the non-Federal share for the 
     project for navigation, New Madrid County Harbor, Missouri, 
     carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 
     1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), the Secretary shall consider Phases 1 
     and 2 as described in the report of the District Engineer, 
     dated February 2000, as one project and provide credit to the 
     non-Federal interest toward the non-Federal share of the 
     combined project for work performed by the non-Federal 
     interest on Phase 1 of the project.

     SEC. 533. PEMISCOT COUNTY, MISSOURI.

       The Secretary shall provide the non-Federal interest for 
     the project for navigation, Caruthersville Harbor, Pemiscot 
     County, Missouri, carried out under section 107 of the River 
     and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), credit toward the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the project for in-kind work 
     performed by the non-Federal interest after December 1, 1997, 
     if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the 
     project.

     SEC. 534. LAS VEGAS, NEVADA.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section, the following 
     definitions apply:
       (1) Committee.--The term ``Committee'' means the Las Vegas 
     Wash Coordinating Committee.
       (2) Plan.--The term ``Plan'' means the Las Vegas Wash 
     comprehensive adaptive management plan, developed by the 
     Committee and dated January 20, 2000.
       (3) Project.--The term ``Project'' means the Las Vegas Wash 
     wetlands restoration and Lake Mead water quality improvement 
     project and includes the programs, features, components, 
     projects, and activities identified in the Plan.
       (b) Participation in Project.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in conjunction with the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of the Interior 
     and in partnership with the Committee, shall participate in 
     the implementation of the Project to restore wetlands at Las 
     Vegas Wash and to improve water quality in Lake Mead in 
     accordance with the Plan.
       (2) Cost sharing requirements.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal interests shall pay 35 
     percent of the cost of any project carried out under this 
     section.
       (B) Operation and maintenance.--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) Federal lands.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, the Federal share of the cost of a project 
     carried out under this section on Federal lands shall be 100 
     percent, including the costs of operation and maintenance.

[[Page H10338]]

       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 535. NEWARK, NEW JERSEY.

       (a) In General.--Using authorities under law in effect on 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, the 
     Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and the 
     heads of other appropriate Federal agencies shall assist the 
     State of New Jersey in developing and implementing a 
     comprehensive basinwide strategy in the Passaic, Hackensack, 
     Raritan, and Atlantic Coast floodplain areas for coordinated 
     and integrated management of land and water resources to 
     improve water quality, reduce flood hazards, and ensure 
     sustainable economic activity.
       (b) Technical Assistance, Staff, and Financial Support.--
     The heads of the Federal agencies referred to in subsection 
     (a) may provide technical assistance, staff, and financial 
     support for the development of the floodplain management 
     strategy.
       (c) Flexibility.--The heads of the Federal agencies 
     referred to in subsection (a) shall exercise flexibility to 
     reduce barriers to efficient and effective implementation of 
     the floodplain management strategy.
       (d) Research.--In coordination with academic and research 
     institutions for support, the Secretary may conduct a study 
     to carry out this section.

     SEC. 536. URBANIZED PEAK FLOOD MANAGEMENT RESEARCH, NEW 
                   JERSEY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall develop and implement 
     a research program to evaluate opportunities to manage peak 
     flood flows in urbanized watersheds located in the State of 
     New Jersey.
       (b) Scope of Research.--The research program authorized by 
     subsection (a) shall be accomplished through the New York 
     District of Corps of Engineers. The research shall include 
     the following:
       (1) Identification of key factors in the development of an 
     urbanized watershed that affect peak flows in the watershed 
     and downstream.
       (2) Development of peak flow management models for 4 to 6 
     watersheds in urbanized areas with widely differing geology, 
     shapes, and soil types that can be used to determine optimal 
     flow reduction factors for individual watersheds.
       (c) Location.--The activities authorized by this section 
     shall be carried out at the facility authorized by section 
     103(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 106 
     Stat. 4812-4813, which may be located on the campus of the 
     New Jersey Institute of Technology.
       (d) Report to Congress.--The Secretary shall evaluate 
     policy changes in the planning process for flood damage 
     reduction projects based on the results of the research under 
     this section and transmit to Congress a report on such 
     results not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $11,000,000 for 
     fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2000.

     SEC. 537. BLACK ROCK CANAL, BUFFALO, NEW YORK.

       The Secretary shall provide technical assistance in support 
     of activities of non-Federal interests related to the 
     dredging of Black Rock Canal in the area between the Ferry 
     Street Overpass and the Peace Bridge Overpass in Buffalo, New 
     York.

     SEC. 538. HAMBURG, NEW YORK.

       The Secretary shall complete the study of a project for 
     shoreline erosion, Old Lake Shore Road, Hamburg, New York, 
     and, if the Secretary determines that the project is 
     feasible, the Secretary shall carry out the project.

     SEC. 539. NEPPERHAN RIVER, YONKERS, NEW YORK.

       The Secretary shall provide technical assistance to the 
     city of Yonkers, New York, in support of activities relating 
     to the dredging of the Nepperhan River outlet, New York.

     SEC. 540. ROCHESTER, NEW YORK.

       The Secretary shall complete the study of a project for 
     navigation, Rochester Harbor, Rochester, New York, and, if 
     the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, the 
     Secretary shall carry out the project.

     SEC. 541. UPPER MOHAWK RIVER BASIN, NEW YORK.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
     Secretary of Agriculture and the State of New York, shall 
     conduct a study, develop a strategy, and implement a project 
     to reduce flood damages, improve water quality, and create 
     wildlife habitat through wetlands restoration, soil and water 
     conservation practices, nonstructural measures, and other 
     appropriate means in the Upper Mohawk River Basin, at an 
     estimated Federal cost of $10,000,000.
       (b) Implementation of Strategy.--The Secretary shall 
     implement the strategy under this section in cooperation with 
     local landowners and local government. Projects to implement 
     the strategy shall be designed to take advantage of ongoing 
     or planned actions by other agencies, local municipalities, 
     or nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations with expertise in 
     wetlands restoration that would increase the effectiveness or 
     decrease the overall cost of implementing recommended 
     projects and may include the acquisition of wetlands, from 
     willing sellers, that contribute to the Upper Mohawk River 
     basin ecosystem.
       (c) Cooperation Agreements.--In carrying out activities 
     under this section, the Secretary shall enter into 
     cooperation agreements to provide financial assistance to 
     appropriate Federal, State, and local government agencies as 
     well as appropriate nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations 
     with expertise in wetlands restoration, with the consent of 
     the affected local government. Financial assistance provided 
     may include activities for the implementation of wetlands 
     restoration projects and soil and water conservation 
     measures.
       (d) Non-Federal Share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of activities carried out under this section shall be 25 
     percent and may be provided through in-kind services and 
     materials.
       (e) Upper Mohawk River Basin Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``Upper Mohawk River basin'' means the Mohawk River, its 
     tributaries, and associated lands upstream of the confluence 
     of the Mohawk River and Canajoharie Creek, and including 
     Canajoharie Creek, New York.

     SEC. 542. EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA FLOOD PROTECTION.

       (a) In General.--In order to assist the State of North 
     Carolina and local governments in mitigating damages 
     resulting from a major disaster, the Secretary shall carry 
     out flood damage reduction projects in eastern North Carolina 
     by protecting, clearing, and restoring channel dimensions 
     (including removing accumulated snags and other debris) in 
     the following rivers and tributaries:
       (1) New River and tributaries.
       (2) White Oak River and tributaries.
       (3) Neuse River and tributaries.
       (4) Pamlico River and tributaries.
       (b) Cost Share.--The non-Federal interest for a project 
     under this section shall--
       (1) pay 35 percent of the cost of the project; and
       (2) provide any lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and material disposal areas necessary for 
     implementation of the project.
       (c) Conditions.--The Secretary may not reject a project 
     based solely on a minimum amount of stream runoff.
       (d) Major Disaster Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``major disaster'' means a major disaster declared under 
     title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170 et seq.) and 
     includes any major disaster declared before the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000 for 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2003.

     SEC. 543. CUYAHOGA RIVER, OHIO.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall provide technical 
     assistance to non-Federal interests for an evaluation of the 
     structural integrity of the bulkhead system located along the 
     Cuyahoga River in the vicinity of Cleveland, Ohio, at a total 
     cost of $500,000.
       (b) Evaluation.--The evaluation described in subsection (a) 
     shall include design analysis, plans and specifications, and 
     cost estimates for repair or replacement of the bulkhead 
     system.

     SEC. 544. CROWDER POINT, CROWDER, OKLAHOMA.

       At the request of the city of Crowder, Oklahoma, the 
     Secretary shall enter into a long-term lease, not to exceed 
     99 years, with the city under which the city may develop, 
     operate, and maintain as a public park all or a portion of 
     approximately 260 acres of land known as Crowder Point on 
     Lake Eufaula, Oklahoma. The lease shall include such terms 
     and conditions as the Secretary determines are necessary to 
     protect the interest of the United States and project 
     purposes and shall be made without consideration to the 
     United States.

     SEC. 545. OKLAHOMA-TRIBAL COMMISSION.

       (a) Findings.--The House of Representatives makes the 
     following findings:
       (1) The unemployment rate in southeastern Oklahoma is 23 
     percent greater than the national average.
       (2) The per capita income in southeastern Oklahoma is 62 
     percent of the national average.
       (3) Reflecting the inadequate job opportunities and 
     dwindling resources in poor rural communities, southeastern 
     Oklahoma is experiencing an out-migration of people.
       (4) Water represents a vitally important resource in 
     southeastern Oklahoma. Its abundance offers an opportunity 
     for the residents to benefit from their natural resources.
       (5) Trends as described in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) are 
     not conducive to local economic development, and efforts to 
     improve the management of water in the region would have a 
     positive outside influence on the local economy, help reverse 
     these trends, and improve the lives of local residents.
       (b) Sense of House of Representatives.--In view of the 
     findings described in subsection (a), and in order to assist 
     communities in southeastern Oklahoma in benefiting from their 
     local resources, it is the sense of the House of 
     Representatives that--
       (1) the State of Oklahoma and the Choctaw Nation of 
     Oklahoma and the Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma, should establish 
     a State-tribal commission composed equally of representatives 
     of such Nations and residents of the water basins within the 
     boundaries of such Nations for the purpose of administering 
     and distributing from the sale of water any benefits and net 
     revenues to the tribes and local entities within the 
     respective basins;
       (2) any sale of water to entities outside the basins should 
     be consistent with the procedures and requirements 
     established by the commission; and
       (3) if requested, the Secretary should provide technical 
     assistance, as appropriate, to facilitate the efforts of the 
     commission.

[[Page H10339]]

     SEC. 546. COLUMBIA RIVER, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.

       (a) Modeling and Forecasting System.--The Secretary shall 
     develop and implement a modeling and forecasting system for 
     the Columbia River estuary, Oregon and Washington, to provide 
     real-time information on existing and future wave, current, 
     tide, and wind conditions.
       (b) Use of Contracts and Grants.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary is encouraged to use contracts, 
     cooperative agreements, and grants with colleges and 
     universities and other non-Federal entities.

     SEC. 547. JOHN DAY POOL, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.

       (a) Extinguishment of Reversionary Interests and Use 
     Restrictions.--With respect to the lands described in each 
     deed listed in subsection (b)--
       (1) the reversionary interests and the use restrictions 
     relating to port or industrial purposes are extinguished;
       (2) the human habitation or other building structure use 
     restriction is extinguished in each area where the elevation 
     is above the standard project flood elevation; and
       (3) the use of fill material to raise areas above the 
     standard project flood elevation, without increasing the risk 
     of flooding in or outside of the floodplain, is authorized, 
     except in any area constituting wetland for which a permit 
     under section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1344) would be required.
       (b) Affected Deeds.--The following deeds are referred to in 
     subsection (a):
       (1) The deeds executed by the United States and bearing 
     Morrow County, Oregon, Auditor's Microfilm Numbers 229 and 
     16226.
       (2) The deed executed by the United States and bearing 
     Benton County, Washington, Auditor's File Number 601766, but 
     only as that deed applies to the following portion of lands 
     conveyed by that deed:
       A tract of land lying in Section 7, Township 5 north, Range 
     28 east of the Willamette meridian, Benton County, 
     Washington, said tract being more particularly described as 
     follows:
       Commencing at the point of intersection of the centerlines 
     of Plymouth Street and Third Avenue in the First Addition to 
     the Town of Plymouth (according to the duly recorded Plat 
     thereof);
       thence westerly along the said centerline of Third Avenue, 
     a distance of 565 feet;
       thence south 54 deg. 10' west, to a point on the west line 
     of Tract 18 of said Addition and the true point of beginning;
       thence north, parallel with the west line of said Section 
     7, to a point on the north line of said Section 7;
       thence west along the north line thereof to the northwest 
     corner of said Section 7;
       thence south along the west line of said Section 7 to a 
     point on the ordinary high water line of the Columbia River;
       thence northeasterly along said high water line to a point 
     on the north and south coordinate line of the Oregon 
     Coordinate System, North Zone, said coordinate line being 
     east 2,291,000 feet;
       thence north along said line to a point on the south line 
     of First Avenue of said Addition;
       thence westerly along First Avenue to a point on southerly 
     extension of the west line of Tract 18;
       thence northerly along said west line of Tract 18 to the 
     point of beginning.
       (3) The deed recorded October 17, 1967, in book 291, page 
     148, Deed of Records of Umatilla County, Oregon, executed by 
     the United States.
       (c) No Effect on Other Needs.--Nothing in this section 
     affects the remaining rights and interests of the Corps of 
     Engineers for authorized project purposes.

     SEC. 548. LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER AND TILLAMOOK BAY ESTUARY 
                   PROGRAM, OREGON AND WASHINGTON.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct studies and 
     ecosystem restoration projects for the lower Columbia River 
     and Tillamook Bay estuaries, Oregon and Washington.
       (b) Use of Management Plans.--
       (1) Lower columbia river estuary.--
       (A) In general.--In carrying out ecosystem restoration 
     projects under this section, the Secretary shall use as a 
     guide the Lower Columbia River estuary program's 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan developed 
     under section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1330).
       (B) Consultation.--The Secretary shall carry out ecosystem 
     restoration projects under this section for the lower 
     Columbia River estuary in consultation with the States of 
     Oregon and Washington, the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National 
     Marine Fisheries Service, and the Forest Service.
       (2) Tillamook bay estuary.--
       (A) In general.--In carrying out ecosystem restoration 
     projects under this section, the Secretary shall use as a 
     guide the Tillamook Bay national estuary project's 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan developed 
     under section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1330).
       (B) Consultation.--The Secretary shall carry out ecosystem 
     restoration projects under this section for the Tillamook Bay 
     estuary in consultation with the State of Oregon, the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and 
     the Forest Service.
       (c) Authorized Activities.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out ecosystem restoration 
     projects under this section, the Secretary shall undertake 
     activities necessary to protect, monitor, and restore fish 
     and wildlife habitat.
       (2) Limitations.--The Secretary may not carry out any 
     activity under this section that adversely affects--
       (A) the water-related needs of the lower Columbia River 
     estuary or the Tillamook Bay estuary, including navigation, 
     recreation, and water supply needs; or
       (B) private property rights.
       (d) Priority.--In determining the priority of projects to 
     be carried out under this section, the Secretary shall 
     consult with the Implementation Committee of the Lower 
     Columbia River Estuary Program and the Performance 
     Partnership Council of the Tillamook Bay National Estuary 
     Project, and shall consider the recommendations of such 
     entities.
       (e) Cost-Sharing Requirements.--
       (1) Studies.--Studies conducted under this section shall be 
     subject to cost sharing in accordance with section 105 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215).
       (2) Ecosystem restoration projects.--
       (A) In general.--Non-Federal interests shall pay 35 percent 
     of the cost of any ecosystem restoration project carried out 
     under this section.
       (B) Items provided by non-federal interests.--Non-Federal 
     interests shall provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, 
     dredged material disposal areas, and relocations necessary 
     for ecosystem restoration projects to be carried out under 
     this section. The value of such land, easements, rights-of-
     way, dredged material disposal areas, and relocations shall 
     be credited toward the payment required under this paragraph.
       (C) In-kind contributions.--Not more than 50 percent of the 
     non-Federal share required under this subsection may be 
     satisfied by the provision of in-kind services.
       (3) Operation and maintenance.--Non-Federal interests shall 
     be responsible for all costs associated with operating, 
     maintaining, replacing, repairing, and rehabilitating all 
     projects carried out under this section.
       (4) Federal lands.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, the Federal share of the cost of a project 
     carried out under this section on Federal lands shall be 100 
     percent, including costs of operation and maintenance.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section, the following 
     definitions apply:
       (1) Lower columbia river estuary.--The term ``lower 
     Columbia River estuary'' means those river reaches having 
     navigation channels on the mainstem of the Columbia River in 
     Oregon and Washington west of Bonneville Dam, and the 
     tributaries of such reaches to the extent such tributaries 
     are tidally influenced.
       (2) Tillamook bay estuary.--The term ``Tillamook Bay 
     estuary'' means those waters of Tillamook Bay in Oregon and 
     its tributaries that are tidally influenced.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000.

     SEC. 549. SKINNER BUTTE PARK, EUGENE, OREGON.

       Section 546(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999 (113 Stat. 351) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``If the Secretary participates in the project, 
     the Secretary shall carry out a monitoring program for 3 
     years after construction to evaluate the ecological and 
     engineering effectiveness of the project and its 
     applicability to other sites in the Willamette Valley.''

     SEC. 550. WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREGON.

       Section 547 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 351-352) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Research.--In coordination with academic and research 
     institutions for support, the Secretary may conduct a study 
     to carry out this section.''.

     SEC. 551. LACKAWANNA RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA.

       (a) In General.--Section 539(a) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3776) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1)(A);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (1)(B) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) the Lackawanna River, Pennsylvania.''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 539(d) of 
     such Act (110 Stat. 3776-3777) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(a)(1)(A) and'' and inserting 
     ``(a)(1)(A),''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, and $5,000,000 for projects undertaken 
     under subsection (a)(1)(C)'' before the period at the end.

     SEC. 552. PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall provide assistance to 
     the Delaware River Port Authority to deepen the Delaware 
     River at Pier 122 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 553. ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS, RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA.

       The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania may transfer any 
     unobligated funds made available to the Commonwealth for item 
     number 1278 of the table contained in section 1602 of Public 
     Law 105-178, to the Secretary for access improvements at the 
     Raystown Lake project, Pennsylvania.

[[Page H10340]]

     SEC. 554. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW 
                   YORK.

       Section 567 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (110 Stat. 3787-3788) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a)(2) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) The Susquehanna River watershed upstream of the 
     Chemung River, New York, at an estimated Federal cost of 
     $10,000,000.''; and
       (2) by striking subsections (c) and (d) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(c) Cooperation Agreements.--In conducting the study and 
     developing the strategy under this section, the Secretary 
     shall enter into cooperation agreements to provide financial 
     assistance to appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     government agencies as well as appropriate nonprofit, 
     nongovernmental organizations with expertise in wetlands 
     restoration, with the consent of the affected local 
     government. Financial assistance provided may include 
     activities for the implementation of wetlands restoration 
     projects and soil and water conservation measures.
       ``(d) Implementation of Strategy.--The Secretary shall 
     undertake development and implementation of the strategy 
     under this section in cooperation with local landowners and 
     local government officials. Projects to implement the 
     strategy shall be designed to take advantage of ongoing or 
     planned actions by other agencies, local municipalities, or 
     nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations with expertise in 
     wetlands restoration that would increase the effectiveness or 
     decrease the overall cost of implementing recommended 
     projects and may include the acquisition of wetlands, from 
     willing sellers, that contribute to the Upper Susquehanna 
     River basin ecosystem.''.

     SEC. 555. CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE.

       (a) Transfer From TVA.--The Tennessee Valley Authority 
     shall transfer $200,000 to the Secretary for the preparation 
     of a report of the Chief of Engineers for a replacement lock 
     at Chickamauga Lock and Dam, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall accept and use the funds 
     transferred under subsection (a) to prepare the report 
     referred to in subsection (a).

     SEC. 556. JOE POOL LAKE, TEXAS.

       If the city of Grand Prairie, Texas, enters into a binding 
     agreement with the Secretary under which--
       (1) the city agrees to assume all of the responsibilities 
     (other than financial responsibilities) of the Trinity River 
     Authority of Texas under Corps of Engineers contract #DACW63-
     76-C-0166, including operation and maintenance of the 
     recreation facilities included in the contract; and
       (2) to pay the Federal Government a total of $4,290,000 in 
     2 installments, 1 in the amount of $2,150,000, which shall be 
     due and payable no later than December 1, 2000, and 1 in the 
     amount of $2,140,000, which shall be due and payable no later 
     than December 1, 2003,
     the Trinity River Authority shall be relieved of all of its 
     financial responsibilities under the contract as of the date 
     the Secretary enters into the agreement with the city.

     SEC. 557. BENSON BEACH, FORT CANBY STATE PARK, WASHINGTON.

       The Secretary shall place dredged material at Benson Beach, 
     Fort Canby State Park, Washington, in accordance with section 
     204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 
     2326).

     SEC. 558. PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, 
                   WASHINGTON.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may participate in critical 
     restoration projects in the area of the Puget Sound and its 
     adjacent waters, including the watersheds that drain directly 
     into Puget Sound, Admiralty Inlet, Hood Canal, Rosario 
     Strait, and the eastern portion of the Strait of Juan de 
     Fuca.
       (b) Project Selection.--The Secretary, in consultation with 
     appropriate Federal, tribal, State, and local agencies, 
     (including the Salmon Recovery Funding Board, Northwest 
     Straits Commission, Hood Canal Coordinating Council, county 
     watershed planning councils, and salmon enhancement groups) 
     may identify critical restoration projects and may implement 
     those projects after entering into an agreement with an 
     appropriate non-Federal interest in accordance with the 
     requirements of section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
     (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) and this section.
       (c) Project Cost Limitation.--Of amounts appropriated to 
     carry out this section, not more than $2,500,000 may be 
     allocated to carry out any project.
       (d) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--The non-Federal interest for a critical 
     restoration project under this section shall--
       (A) pay 35 percent of the cost of the project;
       (B) provide any lands, easements, rights-of-way, 
     relocations, and dredged material disposal areas necessary 
     for implementation of the project;
       (C) pay 100 percent of the operation, maintenance, repair, 
     replacement, and rehabilitation costs associated with the 
     project; and
       (D) hold the United States harmless from liability due to 
     implementation of the project, except for the negligence of 
     the Federal Government or its contractors.
       (2) Credit.--The Secretary shall provide credit to the non-
     Federal interest for a critical restoration project under 
     this section for the value of any lands, easements, rights-
     of-way, relocations, and dredged material disposal areas 
     provided by the non-Federal interest for the project.
       (3) Meeting non-federal cost share.--The non-Federal 
     interest may provide up to 50 percent of the non-Federal 
     share of the cost of a project under this section through the 
     provision of services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind 
     services.
       (e) Critical Restoration Project Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``critical restoration project'' means a water 
     resource project that will produce, consistent with existing 
     Federal programs, projects, and activities, immediate and 
     substantial environmental protection and restoration 
     benefits.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $40,000,000.

     SEC. 559. SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE, WILLAPA BAY, 
                   WASHINGTON.

       (a) Placement of Dredged Material on Shore.--For the 
     purpose of addressing coastal erosion, the Secretary shall 
     place, on an emergency one-time basis, dredged material from 
     a Federal navigation project on the shore of the tribal 
     reservation of the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe, Willapa Bay, 
     Washington, at Federal expense.
       (b) Placement of Dredged Material on Protective Dunes.--The 
     Secretary shall place dredged material from Willapa Bay on 
     the remaining protective dunes on the tribal reservation of 
     the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe, at Federal expense.
       (c) Study of Coastal Erosion.--The Secretary shall conduct 
     a study to develop long-term solutions to coastal erosion 
     problems at the tribal reservation of the Shoalwater Bay 
     Indian Tribe at Federal expense.

     SEC. 560. WYNOOCHEE LAKE, WYNOOCHEE RIVER, WASHINGTON.

       (a) In General.--The city of Aberdeen, Washington, may 
     transfer its rights, interests, and title in the land 
     transferred to the city under section 203 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4632) to the 
     city of Tacoma, Washington.
       (b) Conditions.--The transfer under this section shall be 
     subject to the conditions set forth in section 203(b) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4632); 
     except that the condition set forth in paragraph (1) of such 
     section shall apply to the city of Tacoma only for so long as 
     the city of Tacoma has a valid license with the Federal 
     Energy Regulatory Commission relating to operation of the 
     Wynoochee Dam, Washington.
       (c) Limitation.--The transfer under subsection (a) may be 
     made only after the Secretary determines that the city of 
     Tacoma will be able to operate, maintain, repair, replace, 
     and rehabilitate the project for Wynoochee Lake, Wynoochee 
     River, Washington, authorized by section 203 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1193), in accordance with such 
     regulations as the Secretary may issue to ensure that such 
     operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and 
     rehabilitation is consistent with project purposes.
       (d) Water Supply Contract.--The water supply contract 
     designated as DACWD 67-68-C-0024 shall be null and void if 
     the Secretary exercises the reversionary right set forth in 
     section 203(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1990 (104 Stat. 4632).

     SEC. 561. SNOHOMISH RIVER, WASHINGTON.

       In coordination with appropriate Federal, tribal, and State 
     agencies, the Secretary may carry out a project to address 
     data needs regarding the outmigration of juvenile chinook 
     salmon in the Snohomish River, Washington.

     SEC. 562. BLUESTONE, WEST VIRGINIA.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Tri-Cities Power Authority of West Virginia is 
     authorized to design and construct hydroelectric generating 
     facilities at the Bluestone Lake facility, West Virginia, 
     under the terms and conditions of the agreement referred to 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Agreement.--
       (1) Agreement terms.--Conditioned upon the parties agreeing 
     to mutually acceptable terms and conditions, the Secretary 
     and the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Southeastern 
     Power Administration, may enter into a binding agreement with 
     the Tri-Cities Power Authority under which the Tri-Cities 
     Power Authority agrees to each of the following:
       (A) To design and construct the generating facilities 
     referred to in subsection (a) within 4 years after the date 
     of such agreement.
       (B) To reimburse the Secretary for--
       (i) the cost of approving such design and inspecting such 
     construction;
       (ii) the cost of providing any assistance authorized under 
     subsection (c)(2); and
       (iii) the redistributed costs associated with the original 
     construction of the dam and dam safety if all parties agree 
     with the method of the development of the chargeable amounts 
     associated with hydropower at the facility.
       (C) To release and indemnify the United States from any 
     claims, causes of action, or liabilities which may arise from 
     such design and construction of the facilities referred to in 
     subsection (a), including any liability that may arise out of 
     the removal of the facility if directed by the Secretary.
       (2) Additional terms.--The agreement shall also specify 
     each of the following:
       (A) The procedures and requirements for approval and 
     acceptance of design, construction, and operation and 
     maintenance of the facilities referred in subsection (a).

[[Page H10341]]

       (B) The rights, responsibilities, and liabilities of each 
     party to the agreement.
       (C) The amount of the payments under subsection (f) of this 
     section and the procedures under which such payments are to 
     be made.
       (c) Other Requirements.--
       (1) Prohibition.--No Federal funds may be expended for the 
     design, construction, and operation and maintenance of the 
     facilities referred to in subsection (a) prior to the date on 
     which such facilities are accepted by the Secretary under 
     subsection (d).
       (2) Reimbursement.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, if requested by the Tri-Cities Power Authority, the 
     Secretary may provide, on a reimbursable basis, assistance in 
     connection with the design and construction of the generating 
     facilities referred to in subsection (a).
       (d) Completion of Construction.--
       (1) Transfer of facilities.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, upon completion of the construction of the 
     facilities referred to in subsection (a) and final approval 
     of such facility by the Secretary, the Tri-Cities Power 
     Authority shall transfer without consideration title to such 
     facilities to the United States, and the Secretary shall--
       (A) accept the transfer of title to such facilities on 
     behalf of the United States; and
       (B) operate and maintain the facilities referred to in 
     subsection (a).
       (2) Certification.--The Secretary is authorized to accept 
     title to the facilities pursuant to paragraph (1) only after 
     certifying that the quality of the construction meets all 
     standards established for similar facilities constructed by 
     the Secretary.
       (3) Authorized project purposes.--The operation and 
     maintenance of the facilities shall be conducted in a manner 
     that is consistent with other authorized project purposes of 
     the Bluestone Lake facility.
       (e) Excess Power.--Pursuant to any agreement under 
     subsection (b), the Southeastern Power Administration shall 
     market the excess power produced by the facilities referred 
     to in subsection (a) in accordance with section 5 of the 
     Rivers and Harbors Act of December 22, 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s; 
     58 Stat. 890).
       (f) Payments.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Southeastern 
     Power Administration, is authorized to pay in accordance with 
     the terms of the agreement entered into under subsection (b) 
     out of the revenues from the sale of power produced by the 
     generating facility of the interconnected systems of 
     reservoirs operated by the Secretary and marketed by the 
     Southeastern Power Administration--
       (1) to the Tri-Cities Power Authority all reasonable costs 
     incurred by the Tri-Cities Power Authority in the design and 
     construction of the facilities referred to in subsection (a), 
     including the capital investment in such facilities and a 
     reasonable rate of return on such capital investment; and
       (2) to the Secretary, in accordance with the terms of the 
     agreement entered into under subsection (b) out of the 
     revenues from the sale of power produced by the generating 
     facility of the interconnected systems of reservoirs operated 
     by the Secretary and marketed by the Southeastern Power 
     Administration, all reasonable costs incurred by the 
     Secretary in the operation and maintenance of facilities 
     referred to in subsection (a).
       (g) Authority of Secretary of Energy.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, the Secretary of Energy, acting 
     through the Southeastern Power Administration, is 
     authorized--
       (1) to construct such transmission facilities as necessary 
     to market the power produced at the facilities referred to in 
     subsection (a) with funds contributed by the Tri-Cities Power 
     Authority; and
       (2) to repay those funds, including interest and any 
     administrative expenses, directly from the revenues from the 
     sale of power produced by such facilities of the 
     interconnected systems of reservoirs operated by the 
     Secretary and marketed by the Southeastern Power 
     Administration.
       (h) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section affects any 
     requirement under Federal or State environmental law relating 
     to the licensing or operation of such facilities.

     SEC. 563. LESAGE/GREENBOTTOM SWAMP, WEST VIRGINIA.

       Section 30 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 
     (102 Stat. 4030) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Historic Structure.--The Secretary shall ensure the 
     stabilization and preservation of the structure known as the 
     Jenkins House located within the Lesage/Greenbottom Swamp in 
     accordance with standards for sites listed on the National 
     Register of Historic Places.''.

     SEC. 564. TUG FORK RIVER, WEST VIRGINIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may provide planning, 
     design, and construction assistance to non-Federal interests 
     for projects located along the Tug Fork River in West 
     Virginia and identified by the master plan developed pursuant 
     to section 114(t) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4820).
       (b) Priorities.--In providing assistance under this 
     section, the Secretary shall give priority to the primary 
     development demonstration sites in West Virginia identified 
     by the master plan referred to in subsection (a).
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000.

     SEC. 565. VIRGINIA POINT RIVERFRONT PARK, WEST VIRGINIA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may provide planning, 
     design, and construction assistance to non-Federal interests 
     for the project at Virginia Point, located at the confluence 
     of the Ohio and Big Sandy Rivers in West Virginia, identified 
     by the preferred plan set forth in the feasibility study 
     dated September 1999, and carried out under the West 
     Virginia-Ohio River Comprehensive Study authorized by a 
     resolution dated September 8, 1988, by the Committee on 
     Public Works and Transportation of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,100,000.

     SEC. 566. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.

       Section 340(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4856) is amended by inserting ``environmental 
     restoration,'' after ``distribution facilities,''.

     SEC. 567. FOX RIVER SYSTEM, WISCONSIN.

       Section 332(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1992 (106 Stat. 4852) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``Such terms and conditions may include a payment 
     or payments to the State of Wisconsin to be used toward the 
     repair and rehabilitation of the locks and appurtenant 
     features to be transferred.''.

     SEC. 568. SURFSIDE/SUNSET AND NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA.

       The Secretary shall treat the Surfside/Sunset Newport Beach 
     element of the project for beach erosion, Orange County, 
     California, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor 
     Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1177), as continuing construction.

     SEC. 569. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.

       (a) Illinois River Basin Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``Illinois River basin'' means the Illinois River, 
     Illinois, its backwaters, side channels, and all tributaries, 
     including their watersheds, draining into the Illinois River.
       (b) Comprehensive Plan.--
       (1) Development.--The Secretary shall develop, as 
     expeditiously as practicable, a proposed comprehensive plan 
     for the purpose of restoring, preserving, and protecting the 
     Illinois River basin.
       (2) Technologies and innovative approaches.--The 
     comprehensive plan shall provide for the development of new 
     technologies and innovative approaches--
       (A) to enhance the Illinois River as a vital transportation 
     corridor;
       (B) to improve water quality within the entire Illinois 
     River basin;
       (C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habitat for plants 
     and wildlife; and
       (D) to increase economic opportunity for agriculture and 
     business communities.
       (3) Specific components.--The comprehensive plan shall 
     include such features as are necessary to provide for--
       (A) the development and implementation of a program for 
     sediment removal technology, sediment characterization, 
     sediment transport, and beneficial uses of sediment;
       (B) the development and implementation of a program for the 
     planning, conservation, evaluation, and construction of 
     measures for fish and wildlife habitat conservation and 
     rehabilitation, and stabilization and enhancement of land and 
     water resources in the basin;
       (C) the development and implementation of a long-term 
     resource monitoring program; and
       (D) the development and implementation of a computerized 
     inventory and analysis system.
       (4) Consultation.--The comprehensive plan shall be 
     developed by the Secretary in consultation with appropriate 
     Federal agencies, the State of Illinois, and the Illinois 
     River Coordinating Council.
       (5) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit 
     to Congress a report containing the comprehensive plan.
       (6) Additional studies and analyses.--After transmission of 
     a report under paragraph (5), the Secretary shall continue to 
     conduct such studies and analyses related to the 
     comprehensive plan as are necessary, consistent with this 
     subsection.
       (c) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--If the Secretary, in cooperation with 
     appropriate Federal agencies and the State of Illinois, 
     determines that a restoration project for the Illinois River 
     basin will produce independent, immediate, and substantial 
     restoration, preservation, and protection benefits, the 
     Secretary shall proceed expeditiously with the implementation 
     of the project.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out projects under this 
     subsection $100,000,000 for fiscal years 2001 through 2004.
       (3) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out any project under this subsection shall not 
     exceed $5,000,000.
       (d) General Provisions.--
       (1) Water quality.--In carrying out projects and activities 
     under this section, the Secretary shall take into account the 
     protection of water quality by considering applicable State 
     water quality standards.
       (2) Public participation.--In developing the comprehensive 
     plan under subsection (b) and carrying out projects under 
     subsection (c), the Secretary shall implement procedures to 
     facilitate public participation, including providing advance 
     notice of meetings, providing adequate opportunity for public 
     input and comment, maintaining appropriate records, and 
     making a record of

[[Page H10342]]

     the proceedings of meetings available for public inspection.
       (e) Coordination.--The Secretary shall integrate and 
     coordinate projects and activities carried out under this 
     section with ongoing Federal and State programs, projects, 
     and activities, including the following:
       (1) Upper Mississippi River System-Environmental Management 
     Program authorized under section 1103 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652).
       (2) Upper Mississippi River Illinois Waterway System Study.
       (3) Kankakee River Basin General Investigation.
       (4) Peoria Riverfront Development General Investigation.
       (5) Illinois River Ecosystem Restoration General 
     Investigation.
       (6) Conservation Reserve Program and other farm programs of 
     the Department of Agriculture.
       (7) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (State) and 
     Conservation 2000, Ecosystem Program of the Illinois 
     Department of Natural Resources.
       (8) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices Program and 
     the Livestock Management Facilities Act administered by the 
     Illinois Department of Agriculture.
       (9) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service.
       (10) Nonpoint source grant program administered by the 
     Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
       (f) Justification.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 209 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2) or any other provision 
     of law, in carrying out activities to restore, preserve, and 
     protect the Illinois River basin under this section, the 
     Secretary may determine that the activities--
       (A) are justified by the environmental benefits derived by 
     the Illinois River basin; and
       (B) shall not need further economic justification if the 
     Secretary determines that the activities are cost-effective.
       (2) Applicability.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any 
     separable element intended to produce benefits that are 
     predominantly unrelated to the restoration, preservation, and 
     protection of the Illinois River basin.
       (g) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--The non-Federal share of the cost of 
     projects and activities carried out under this section shall 
     be 35 percent.
       (2) Operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and 
     replacement.--The operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and 
     replacement of projects carried out under this section shall 
     be a non-Federal responsibility.
       (3) In-kind services.--The value of in-kind services 
     provided by the non-Federal interest for a project or 
     activity carried out under this section may be credited 
     toward not more than 80 percent of the non-Federal share of 
     the cost of the project or activity. In-kind services shall 
     include all State funds expended on programs and projects 
     which accomplish the goals of this section, as determined by 
     the Secretary. Such programs and projects may include the 
     Illinois River Conservation Reserve Program, the Illinois 
     Conservation 2000 Program, the Open Lands Trust Fund, and 
     other appropriate programs carried out in the Illinois River 
     basin.
       (4) Credit.--
       (A) Value of lands.--If the Secretary determines that lands 
     or interests in land acquired by a non-Federal interest, 
     regardless of the date of acquisition, are integral to a 
     project or activity carried out under this section, the 
     Secretary may credit the value of the lands or interests in 
     land toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project 
     or activity. Such value shall be determined by the Secretary.
       (B) Work.--If the Secretary determines that any work 
     completed by a non-Federal interest, regardless of the date 
     of completion, is integral to a project or activity carried 
     out under this section, the Secretary may credit the value of 
     the work toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     project or activity. Such value shall be determined by the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 570. GREAT LAKES.

       (a) Great Lakes Tributary Model.--Section 516 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326b) is 
     amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of subsection (e) the following:
       ``(3) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2003, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the 
     Secretary's activities under this subsection.''; and
       (2) in subsection (g)--
       (A) by striking ``There is authorized'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized'';
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Great lakes tributary model.--In addition to amounts 
     made available under paragraph (1), there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out subsection (e) $5,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.''; and
       (C) by aligning the remainder of the text of paragraph (1) 
     (as designated by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph) with 
     paragraph (2) (as added by subparagraph (B) of this 
     paragraph).
       (b) Alternative Engineering Technologies.--
       (1) Development of plan.--The Secretary shall develop and 
     transmit to Congress a plan to enhance the application of 
     ecological principles and practices to traditional 
     engineering problems at Great Lakes shores.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $200,000. 
     Activities under this subsection shall be carried out at 
     Federal expense.
       (c) Fisheries and Ecosystem Restoration.--
       (1) Development of plan.--The Secretary shall develop and 
     transmit to Congress a plan for implementing Corps of 
     Engineers activities, including ecosystem restoration, to 
     enhance the management of Great Lakes fisheries.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $300,000. 
     Activities under this subsection shall be carried out at 
     Federal expense.

     SEC. 571. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT 
                   REMEDIATION.

       Section 401 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 1268 note; 110 Stat. 3763; 113 Stat. 338) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A) by striking ``50 percent'' and 
     inserting ``35 percent'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (3);
       (B) in the first sentence of paragraph (4) by striking ``50 
     percent'' and inserting ``35 percent''; and
       (C) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3); and
       (3) in subsection (c) by striking ``$5,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 1998 through 2000.'' and inserting ``$10,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.''.

     SEC. 572. GREAT LAKES DREDGING LEVELS ADJUSTMENT.

       (a) Definition of Great Lake.--In this section, the term 
     ``Great Lake'' means Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron 
     (including Lake St. Clair), Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario 
     (including the St. Lawrence River to the 45th parallel of 
     latitude).
       (b) Dredging Levels.--In operating and maintaining Federal 
     channels and harbors of, and the connecting channels between, 
     the Great Lakes, the Secretary shall conduct such dredging as 
     is necessary to ensure minimal operation depths consistent 
     with the original authorized depths of the channels and 
     harbors when water levels in the Great Lakes are, or are 
     forecast to be, below the International Great Lakes Datum of 
     1985.

     SEC. 573. DREDGED MATERIAL RECYCLING.

       (a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary shall conduct a pilot 
     program to provide incentives for the removal of dredged 
     material from a confined disposal facility associated with a 
     harbor on the Great Lakes or the Saint Lawrence River and a 
     harbor on the Delaware River in Pennsylvania for the purpose 
     of recycling the dredged material and extending the life of 
     the confined disposal facility.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     completion of the pilot program, the Secretary shall transmit 
     to Congress a report on the results of the program.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,000,000.

     SEC. 574. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION, AND DEVELOPMENT.

       Section 503(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3756-3757; 113 Stat. 288) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(28) Tomales Bay watershed, California.
       ``(29) Kaskaskia River watershed, Illinois.
       ``(30) Sangamon River watershed, Illinois.
       ``(31) Lackawanna River watershed, Pennsylvania.
       ``(32) Upper Charles River watershed, Massachusetts.
       ``(33) Brazos River watershed, Texas.''.

     SEC. 575. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS.

       Section 509(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1996 (110 Stat. 3759; 113 Stat. 339) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(16) Cameron Loop, Louisiana, as part of the Calcasieu 
     River and Pass Ship Channel.
       ``(17) Morehead City Harbor, North Carolina.''.

     SEC. 576. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM.

       The requirements of section 2361 of title 10, United States 
     Code, shall not apply to any contract, cooperative research 
     and development agreement, cooperative agreement, or grant 
     entered into under section 229 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3703) between the 
     Secretary and Marshall University or entered into under 
     section 350 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 310) between the Secretary and Juniata College.

     SEC. 577. NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVATION SERVICE.

       Notwithstanding section 611 of the Treasury and General 
     Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (112 Stat. 2861-515), the 
     Secretary may participate in the National Recreation 
     Reservation Service on an interagency basis and fund the 
     Department of the Army's share of the cost of activities 
     required for implementing, operating, and maintaining the 
     Service.

     SEC. 578. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY.

       The Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the 
     Administrator of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric 
     Administration to require the Secretary, not later than 60 
     days after the Corps of Engineers completes a project 
     involving dredging of a channel, to provide data to the 
     Administration in a standard digital format on the results of 
     a hydrographic survey of the channel conducted by the Corps 
     of Engineers.

[[Page H10343]]

     SEC. 579. PERCHLORATE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with 
     Federal, State, and local government agencies, may 
     participate in studies and other investigative activities and 
     in the planning and design of projects determined by the 
     Secretary to offer a long-term solution to the problem of 
     groundwater contamination caused by perchlorates.
       (b) Investigations and Projects.--
       (1) Bosque and leon rivers.--The Secretary, in coordination 
     with other Federal agencies and the Brazos River Authority, 
     shall participate under subsection (a) in investigations and 
     projects in the Bosque and Leon River watersheds in Texas to 
     assess the impact of the perchlorate associated with the 
     former Naval ``Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant'' at 
     McGregor, Texas.
       (2) Caddo lake.--The Secretary, in coordination with other 
     Federal agencies and the Northeast Texas Municipal Water 
     District, shall participate under subsection (a) in 
     investigations and projects relating to perchlorate 
     contamination in Caddo Lake, Texas.
       (3) Eastern santa clara basin.--The Secretary, in 
     coordination with other Federal, State, and local government 
     agencies, shall participate under subsection (a) in 
     investigations and projects related to sites that are sources 
     of perchlorates and that are located in the city of Santa 
     Clarita, California.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purposes of 
     carrying out this section, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary $25,000,000, of which not to 
     exceed $8,000,000 shall be available to carry out subsection 
     (b)(1), not to exceed $3,000,000 shall be available to carry 
     out subsection (b)(2), and not to exceed $7,000,000 shall be 
     available to carry out subsection (b)(3).

     SEC. 580. ABANDONED AND INACTIVE NONCOAL MINE RESTORATION.

       Section 560 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (33 USC 2336; 113 Stat. 354-355) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``and design'' and 
     inserting ``design, and construction'';
       (2) in subsection (c) by striking ``50'' and inserting 
     ``35'';
       (3) in subsection (e) by inserting ``and colleges and 
     universities, including the members of the Western 
     Universities Mine-Land Reclamation and Restoration 
     Consortium, for the purposes of assisting in the reclamation 
     of abandoned noncoal mines and'' after ``entities''; and
       (4) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
       ``(f) Non-Federal Interests.--In this section, the term 
     `non-Federal interests' includes, with the consent of the 
     affected local government, nonprofit entities, 
     notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
     (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b).
       ``(g) Operation and Maintenance.--The non-Federal share of 
     the costs of operation and maintenance for a project carried 
     out under this section shall be 100 percent.
       ``(h) Credit.--A non-Federal interest shall receive credit 
     toward the non-Federal share of the cost of a project under 
     this section for design and construction services and other 
     in-kind consideration provided by the non-Federal interest if 
     the Secretary determines that such design and construction 
     services and other in-kind consideration are integral to the 
     project.
       ``(i) Cost Limitation.--Not more than $10,000,000 of the 
     amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be 
     allotted for projects in a single locality, but the Secretary 
     may accept funds voluntarily contributed by a non-Federal or 
     Federal entity for the purpose of expanding the scope of the 
     services requested by the non-Federal or Federal entity.
       ``(j) No Effect on Liability.--The provision of assistance 
     under this section shall not relieve from liability any 
     person that would otherwise be liable under Federal or State 
     law for damages, response costs, natural resource damages, 
     restitution, equitable relief, or any other relief.
       ``(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $45,000,000. 
     Such sums shall remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 581. LAKES PROGRAM.

       Section 602 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (100 Stat. 4148-4149) is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (b) by inserting ``and activity'' after 
     ``project'';
       (2) in subsection (c) by inserting ``and activities under 
     subsection (f)'' before the comma; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(f) Center for Lake Education and Research, Otsego Lake, 
     New York.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall construct an 
     environmental education and research facility at Otsego Lake, 
     New York. The purpose of the Center shall be to--
       ``(A) conduct nationwide research on the impacts of water 
     quality and water quantity on lake hydrology and the 
     hydrologic cycle;
       ``(B) develop technologies and strategies for monitoring 
     and improving water quality in the Nation's lakes; and
       ``(C) provide public education regarding the biological, 
     economic, recreational, and aesthetic value of the Nation's 
     lakes.
       ``(2) Use of research.--The results of research and 
     education activities carried out at the Center shall be 
     applied to the program under subsection (a) and to other 
     Federal programs, projects, and activities that are intended 
     to improve or otherwise affect lakes.
       ``(3) Biological monitoring station.--A central function of 
     the Center shall be to research, develop, test, and evaluate 
     biological monitoring technologies and techniques for 
     potential use at lakes listed in subsection (a) and 
     throughout the Nation.
       ``(4) Credit.--The non-Federal sponsor shall receive credit 
     for lands, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations toward 
     its share of project costs.
       ``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to sums 
     authorized by subsection (d), there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out this subsection $6,000,000. Such 
     sums shall remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 582. RELEASE OF USE RESTRICTION.

       (a) Release.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Tennessee Valley Authority shall grant a release or 
     releases, without monetary consideration, from the 
     restriction covenant which requires that property described 
     in subsection (b) shall at all times be used solely for the 
     purpose of erecting docks and buildings for shipbuilding 
     purposes or for the manufacture or storage of products for 
     the purpose of trading or shipping in transportation.
       (b) Description of Property.--This section shall apply only 
     to those lands situated in the city of Decatur, Morgan 
     County, Alabama, and running along the easterly boundary of a 
     tract of land described in an indenture conveying such lands 
     to the Ingalls Shipbuilding Corporation dated July 29, 1954, 
     and recorded in deed book 535 at page 6 in the office of the 
     Probate Judge of Morgan County, Alabama, which are owned or 
     may hereafter be acquired by the Alabama Farmers Cooperative, 
     Inc.

     SEC. 583. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES PROTECTION.

       (a) In General.--Under section 219(a) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835), the 
     Secretary may provide technical, planning, and design 
     assistance to non-Federal interests to carry out water-
     related projects described in this section.
       (b) Non-Federal Share.--Notwithstanding section 219(b) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835), 
     the non-Federal share of the cost of each project assisted in 
     accordance with this section shall be 25 percent.
       (c) Project Descriptions.--The Secretary may provide 
     assistance in accordance with subsection (a) to each of the 
     following projects:
       (1)  Marana, arizona.--Wastewater treatment and 
     distribution infrastructure, Marana, Arizona.
       (2) Eastern arkansas enterprise community, arkansas.--
     Water-related infrastructure, Eastern Arkansas Enterprise 
     Community, Cross, Lee, Monroe, and St. Francis Counties, 
     Arkansas.
       (3) Chino hills, california.--Storm water and sewage 
     collection infrastructure, Chino Hills, California.
       (4) Clear lake basin, california.--Water-related 
     infrastructure and resource protection, Clear Lake Basin, 
     California.
       (5) Desert hot springs, california.--Resource protection 
     and wastewater infrastructure, Desert Hot Springs, 
     California.
       (6) Eastern municipal water district, california.--Regional 
     water-related infrastructure, Eastern Municipal Water 
     District, California.
       (7) Huntington beach, california.--Water supply and 
     wastewater infrastructure, Huntington Beach, California.
       (8) Inglewood, california.--Water infrastructure, 
     Inglewood, California.
       (9) Los osos community service district, california.--
     Wastewater infrastructure, Los Osos Community Service 
     District, California.
       (10) Norwalk, california.--Water-related infrastructure, 
     Norwalk, California.
       (11) Key biscayne, florida.--Sanitary sewer infrastructure, 
     Key Biscayne, Florida.
       (12) South tampa, florida.--Water supply and aquifer 
     storage and recovery infrastructure, South Tampa, Florida.
       (13) Fort wayne, indiana.--Combined sewer overflow 
     infrastructure and wetlands protection, Fort Wayne, Indiana.
       (14) Indianapolis, indiana.--Combined sewer overflow 
     infrastructure, Indianapolis, Indiana.
       (15) St. charles, st. bernard, and plaquemines parishes, 
     louisiana.--Water and wastewater infrastructure, St. Charles, 
     St. Bernard, and Plaquemines Parishes, Louisiana.
       (16) St. john the baptist and st. james parishes, 
     louisiana.--Water and sewer improvements, St. John the 
     Baptist and St. James Parishes, Louisiana.
       (17) Union county, north carolina.--Water infrastructure, 
     Union County, North Carolina.
       (18) Hood river, oregon.--Water transmission 
     infrastructure, Hood River, Oregon.
       (19) Medford, oregon.--Sewer collection infrastructure, 
     Medford, Oregon.
       (20) Portland, oregon.--Water infrastructure and resource 
     protection, Portland, Oregon.
       (21) Coudersport, pennsylvania.--Sewer system extensions 
     and improvements, Coudersport, Pennsylvania.
       (22) Park city, utah.--Water supply infrastructure, Park 
     City, Utah.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     $25,000,000 for providing assistance in accordance with 
     subsection (a) to the projects described in subsection (c).

[[Page H10344]]

       (2) Availability.--Sums authorized to be appropriated under 
     this subsection shall remain available until expended.
       (e) Additional Assistance for Critical Resource Projects.--
     The Secretary may provide assistance in accordance with 
     subsection (a) and assistance for construction for each the 
     following projects:
       (1) Duck river, cullman, alabama.--$5,000,000 for water 
     supply infrastructure, Duck River, Cullman, Alabama.
       (2) Union county, arkansas.--$52,000,000 for water supply 
     infrastructure, including facilities for withdrawal, 
     treatment, and distribution, Union County, Arkansas.
       (3) Cambria, california.--$10,300,000 for desalination 
     infrastructure, Cambria, California.
       (4) Los angeles harbor/terminal island, california.--
     $6,500,000 for wastewater recycling infrastructure, Los 
     Angeles Harbor/Terminal Island, California.
       (5) North valley region, lancaster, california.--
     $14,500,000 for water infrastructure, North Valley Region, 
     Lancaster, California.
       (6) San diego county, california.--$10,000,000 for water-
     related infrastructure, San Diego County, California.
       (7) South perris, california.--$25,000,000 for water supply 
     desalination infrastructure, South Perris, California.
       (8) Aurora, illinois.--$8,000,000 for wastewater 
     infrastructure to reduce or eliminate combined sewer 
     overflows, Aurora, Illinois.
       (9) Cook county, illinois.--$35,000,000 for water-related 
     infrastructure and resource protection and development, Cook 
     County, Illinois.
       (10) Madison and st. clair counties, illinois.--$10,000,000 
     for water and wastewater assistance, Madison and St. Clair 
     Counties, Illinois.
       (11) Iberia parish, louisiana.--$5,000,000 for water and 
     wastewater infrastructure, Iberia Parish, Louisiana.
       (12) Kenner, louisiana.--$5,000,000 for wastewater 
     infrastructure, Kenner, Louisiana.
       (13) Garrison and kathio township, minnesota.--$11,000,000 
     for a wastewater infrastructure project for the city of 
     Garrison and Kathio Township, Minnesota.
       (14) Newton, new jersey.--$7,000,000 for water filtration 
     infrastructure, Newton, New Jersey.
       (15) Liverpool, new york.--$2,000,000 for water 
     infrastructure, including a pump station, Liverpool, New 
     York.
       (16) Stanly county, north carolina.--$8,900,000 for 
     wastewater infrastructure, Stanly County, North Carolina.
       (17) Yukon, oklahoma.--$5,500,000 for water-related 
     infrastructure, including wells, booster stations, storage 
     tanks, and transmission lines, Yukon, Oklahoma.
       (18) Allegheny county, pennsylvania.--$20,000,000 for 
     water-related environmental infrastructure, Allegheny County, 
     Pennsylvania.
       (19) Mount joy township and conewago township, 
     pennsylvania.--$8,300,000 for water and wastewater 
     infrastructure, Mount Joy Township and Conewago Township, 
     Pennsylvania.
       (20) Phoenixville borough, chester county, pennsylvania.--
     $2,400,000 for water and sewer infrastructure, Phoenixville 
     Borough, Chester County, Pennsylvania.
       (21) Titusville, pennsylvania.--$7,300,000 for storm water 
     separation and treatment plant upgrades, Titusville, 
     Pennsylvania.
       (22) Washington, greene, westmoreland, and fayette 
     counties, pennsylvania.--$8,000,000 for water and wastewater 
     infrastructure, Washington, Greene, Westmoreland, and Fayette 
     Counties, Pennsylvania.

     SEC. 584. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 
                   PROJECTS.

       Section 219 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (106 Stat. 4835, 4836) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)(6) by striking ``$20,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$30,000,000'';
       (2) in subsection (f)(4) by striking ``$15,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$35,000,000'';
       (3) in subsection (f)(21) by striking ``$10,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$20,000,000'';
       (4) in subsection (f)(25) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$15,000,000'';
       (5) in subsection (f)(30) by striking ``$10,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$20,000,000'';
       (6) in subsection (f)(43) by striking ``$15,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$35,000,000''; and
       (7) in subsection (f) by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(44) Washington, d.c., and maryland.--$15,000,000 for the 
     project described in subsection (c)(1), modified to include 
     measures to eliminate or control combined sewer overflows in 
     the Anacostia River watershed.''.

     SEC. 585. LAND CONVEYANCES.

       (a) Thompson, Connecticut.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
     deed without consideration to the town of Thompson, 
     Connecticut, all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to the approximately 1.36-acre parcel of land 
     described in paragraph (2) for public ownership and use by 
     the town for fire fighting and related emergency services 
     purposes.
       (2) Land description.--The parcel of land referred to in 
     paragraph (1) is in the town of Thompson, county of Windham, 
     State of Connecticut, on the northerly side of West Thompson 
     Road owned by the United States and shown as Parcel A on a 
     plan by Provost, Rovero, Fitzback entitled ``Property Survey 
     Prepared for West Thompson Independent Firemen Association 
     #1'' dated August 24, 1998, bounded and described as follows:
       Beginning at a bound labeled WT-276 on the northerly side 
     line of West Thompson Road, so called, at the most south 
     corner of the Parcel herein described and at land now or 
     formerly of West Thompson Independent Firemen Association No. 
     1;
       Thence in a generally westerly direction by said northerly 
     side line of West Thompson Road, by a curve to the left, 
     having a radius of 640.00 feet a distance of 169.30 feet to a 
     point;
       Thence North 13 degrees, 08 minutes, 37 seconds East by the 
     side line of said West Thompson Road a distance of 10.00 feet 
     to a point;
       Thence in a generally westerly direction by the northerly 
     side line of said West Thompson Road, by a curve to the left 
     having a radius of 650.00 feet a distance of 109.88 feet to a 
     bound labeled WT-123, at land now or formerly of the United 
     States of America;
       Thence North 44 degrees, 43 minutes, 07 seconds East by 
     said land now or formerly of the United States of America a 
     distance of 185.00 feet to a point;
       Thence North 67 degrees, 34 minutes, 13 seconds East by 
     said land now or formerly of the United States of America a 
     distance of 200.19 feet to a point in a stonewall;
       Thence South 20 degrees, 49 minutes, 17 seconds East by a 
     stonewall and by said land now or formerly of the United 
     States of America a distance of 253.10 feet to a point at 
     land now or formerly of West Thompson Independent Firemen 
     Association No. 1;
       Thence North 57 degrees, 45 minutes, 25 seconds West by 
     land now or formerly of said West Thompson Independent 
     Firemen Association No. 1 a distance of 89.04 feet to a bound 
     labeled WT-277;
       Thence South 32 degrees, 14 minutes, 35 seconds West by 
     land now or formerly of said West Thompson Independent 
     Firemen Association No. 1 a distance of 123.06 feet to the 
     point of beginning.
       (3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the parcel 
     described in paragraph (2) ceases to be held in public 
     ownership or used for fire fighting and related emergency 
     services, all right, title, and interest in and to the parcel 
     shall revert to the United States.
       (b) Sibley Memorial Hospital, Washington, District of 
     Columbia.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the Lucy 
     Webb Hayes National Training School for Deaconesses and 
     Missionaries Conducting Sibley Memorial Hospital (in this 
     subsection referred to as the ``Hospital'') by quitclaim deed 
     under the terms of a negotiated sale, all right, title, and 
     interest of the United States in and to the 8.864-acre parcel 
     of land described in paragraph (2) for medical care and 
     parking purposes. The consideration paid under such 
     negotiated sale shall reflect the value of the parcel, taking 
     into consideration the terms and conditions of the conveyance 
     imposed under this subsection.
       (2) Land description.--The parcel of land referred to in 
     paragraph (1) is the parcel described as follows: Beginning 
     at a point on the westerly right-of-way line of Dalecarlia 
     Parkway, said point also being on the southerly division line 
     of part of Square N1448, A&T Lot 801 as recorded in A&T 2387 
     and part of the property of the United States Government, 
     thence with said southerly division line now described:
       (A) North 35 deg. 05' 40'' West--436.31 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (B) South 89 deg. 59' 30'' West--550 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (C) South 53 deg. 48' 00'' West--361.08 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (D) South 89 deg. 59' 30'' West--466.76 feet to a point at 
     the southwesterly corner of the aforesaid A&T Lot 801, said 
     point also being on the easterly right-of-way line of 
     MacArthur Boulevard, thence with a portion of the westerly 
     division line of said A&T Lot 801 and the easterly right-of-
     way line of MacArthur Boulevard, as now described.
       (E) 78.62 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having 
     a radius of 650.98 feet, chord bearing and distance of North 
     06 deg. 17' 20'' West--78.57 feet to a point, thence crossing 
     to include a portion of aforesaid A&T Lot 801 and a portion 
     of the aforesaid Dalecarlia Reservoir Grounds, as now 
     described
       (F) North 87 deg. 18' 21'' East--258.85 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (G) North 02 deg. 49' 16'' West--214.18 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (H) South 87 deg. 09' 00'' West--238.95 feet to a point on 
     the aforesaid easterly right-of-way line of MacArthur 
     Boulevard, thence with said easterly right-of-way line, as 
     now described
       (I) North 08 deg. 41' 30'' East--30.62 feet to a point, 
     thence crossing to include a portion of aforesaid A&T Lot 801 
     and a portion of the aforesaid Dalecarlia Reservoir Grounds, 
     as now described
       (J) North 87 deg. 09' 00'' East--373.96 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (K) North 88 deg. 42' 48'' East--374.92 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (L) North 56 deg. 53' 40'' East--53.16 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (M) North 86 deg. 00' 15'' East--26.17 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (N) South 87 deg. 24' 50'' East--464.01 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (O) North 83 deg. 34' 31'' East--212.62 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (P) South 30 deg. 16' 12'' East--108.97 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (Q) South 38 deg. 30' 23'' East--287.46 feet to a point, 
     thence

[[Page H10345]]

       (R) South 09 deg. 03' 38'' West--92.74 feet to the point on 
     the aforesaid westerly right-of-way line of Dalecarlia 
     Parkway, thence with said westerly right-of-way line, as now 
     described
       (S) 197.74 feet along the arc of a curve to the right 
     having a radius of 916.00 feet, chord bearing and distance of 
     South 53 deg. 54' 43'' West--197.35 feet to the place of 
     beginning.
       (3) Terms and conditions.--The conveyance under this 
     subsection shall be subject to the following terms and 
     conditions:
       (A) Limitation on the use of certain portions of the 
     parcel.--The Secretary shall include in any deed conveying 
     the parcel under this section a restriction to prevent the 
     Hospital, and its successors and assigns, from constructing 
     any structure, other than a structure used exclusively for 
     the parking of motor vehicles, on the portion of the parcel 
     that lies between the Washington Aqueduct and Little Falls 
     Road.
       (B) Limitation on certain legal challenges.--The Secretary 
     shall require the Hospital, and its successors and assigns, 
     to refrain from raising any legal challenge to the operations 
     of the Washington Aqueduct arising from any impact such 
     operations may have on the activities conducted by the 
     Hospital on the parcel.
       (C) Easement.--The Secretary shall require that the 
     conveyance be subject to the retention of an easement 
     permitting the United States, and its successors and assigns, 
     to use and maintain the portion of the parcel described as 
     follows: Beginning at a point on the easterly or South 
     35 deg. 05' 40'' East--436.31 foot plat line of Lot 25 as 
     shown on a subdivision plat recorded in book 175 page 102 
     among the records of the Office of the Surveyor of the 
     District of Columbia, said point also being on the northerly 
     right-of-way line of Dalecarlia Parkway, thence running with 
     said easterly line of Lot 25 and crossing to include a 
     portion of the aforsaid Dalecarlia Reservoir Grounds as now 
     described:
       (i) North 35 deg. 05' 40'' West--495.13 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (ii) North 87 deg. 24' 50'' West--414.43 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (iii) South 81 deg. 08' 00'' West--69.56 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (iv) South 88 deg. 42' 48'' West--367.50 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (v) South 87 deg. 09' 00'' West--379.68 feet to a point on 
     the easterly right-of-way line of MacArthur Boulevard, thence 
     with said easterly right-of-way line, as now described
       (vi) North 08 deg. 41' 30'' East--30.62 feet to a point, 
     thence crossing to include a portion of the aforesaid 
     Dalecarlia Reservoir Grounds, as now described
       (vii) North 87 deg. 09' 00'' East--373.96 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (viii) North 88 deg. 42' 48'' East--374.92 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (ix) North 56 deg. 53' 40'' East--53.16 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (x) North 86 deg. 00' 15'' East--26.17 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (xi) South 87 deg. 24' 50'' East--464.01 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (xii) North 83 deg. 34' 31'' East--50.62 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (xiii) South 02 deg. 35' 10'' West--46.46 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (xiv) South 13 deg. 38' 12'' East--107.83 feet to a point, 
     thence
       (xv) South 35 deg. 05' 40'' East--347.97 feet to a point on 
     the aforesaid northerly right-of-way line of Dalecarlia 
     Parkway, thence with said right-of-way line, as now described
       (xvi) 44.12 feet along the arc of a curve to the right 
     having a radius of 855.00 feet, chord bearing and distance of 
     South 58 deg. 59' 22'' West--44.11 feet to the place of 
     beginning containing 1.7157 acres of land more or less as now 
     described by Maddox Engineers and Surveyors, Inc., June 2000, 
     Job #00015.
       (4) Appraisal.--Before conveying any right, title, or 
     interest under this subsection, the Secretary shall obtain an 
     appraisal of the fair market value of the parcel.
       (c) Ontonagon, Michigan.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
     deed without consideration to the Ontonagon County Historical 
     Society all right, title, and interest of the United States 
     in and to the parcel of land underlying and immediately 
     surrounding the lighthouse at Ontonagon, Michigan, consisting 
     of approximately 1.8 acres, together with any improvements 
     thereon, for public ownership and for public purposes.
       (2) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage 
     and the legal description of the real property described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is 
     satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the real 
     property described in paragraph (1) ceases to be held in 
     public ownership or used for public purposes, all right, 
     title, and interest in and to the property shall revert to 
     the United States.
       (d) Pike County, Missouri.--
       (1) Land exchange.--Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), at 
     such time as S.S.S., Inc. conveys all right, title, and 
     interest in and to the parcel of land described in paragraph 
     (2)(A) to the United States, the Secretary shall convey by 
     quitclaim deed all right, title, and interest in the parcel 
     of land described in paragraph (2)(B) to S.S.S., Inc.
       (2) Land description.--The parcels of land referred to in 
     paragraph (1) are the following:
       (A) Non-federal land.--8.99 acres with existing flowage 
     easements situated in Pike County, Missouri, adjacent to land 
     being acquired from Holnam, Inc. by the Corps of Engineers.
       (B) Federal land.--8.99 acres situated in Pike County, 
     Missouri, known as Government Tract Numbers FM-46 and FM-47, 
     administered by the Corps of Engineers.
       (3) Conditions.--The exchange of land under paragraph (1) 
     shall be subject to the following conditions:
       (A) Deeds.--
       (i) Non-federal land.--The conveyance of the land described 
     in paragraph (2)(A) to the Secretary shall be by a quitclaim 
     deed acceptable to the Secretary.
       (ii) Federal land.--The instrument of conveyance used to 
     convey the land described in paragraph (2)(B) to S.S.S., Inc. 
     shall contain such reservations, terms, and conditions as the 
     Secretary considers necessary to allow the United States to 
     operate and maintain the Mississippi River 9-Foot Navigation 
     Project.
       (B) Removal of improvements.--S.S.S., Inc. may remove any 
     improvements on the land described in paragraph (2)(A). The 
     Secretary may require S.S.S., Inc. to remove any improvements 
     on the land described in paragraph (2)(A). In either case, 
     S.S.S., Inc. shall hold the United States harmless from 
     liability, and the United States shall not incur costs 
     associated with the removal or relocation of any of the 
     improvements.
       (C) Time limit for exchange.--The land exchange under 
     paragraph (1) shall be completed not later than 2 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (D) Legal description.--The Secretary shall provide the 
     legal description of the lands described in paragraph (2). 
     The legal description shall be used in the instruments of 
     conveyance of the lands.
       (4) Value of properties.--If the appraised fair market 
     value, as determined by the Secretary, of the land conveyed 
     to S.S.S., Inc. by the Secretary under paragraph (1) exceeds 
     the appraised fair market value, as determined by the 
     Secretary, of the land conveyed to the United States by 
     S.S.S., Inc. under paragraph (1), S.S.S., Inc. shall make a 
     payment equal to the excess in cash or a cash equivalent to 
     the United States.
       (e) Candy Lake Project, Osage County, Oklahoma.--Section 
     563(c)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 357) is amended by striking ``a deceased 
     individual'' and inserting ``an individual''.
       (f) Manor Township, Pennsylvania.--
       (1) In general.--In accordance with this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall convey by quitclaim deed to the township of 
     Manor, Pennsylvania, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the approximately 113 acres of real 
     property located at Crooked Creek Lake, together with any 
     improvements on the land.
       (2) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage 
     and the legal description of the real property described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is 
     satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (3) Consideration.--The Secretary may convey under this 
     subsection without consideration any portion of the real 
     property described in paragraph (1) if the portion is to be 
     retained in public ownership and be used for public park and 
     recreation or other public purposes.
       (4) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that any 
     portion of the property conveyed under paragraph (3) ceases 
     to be held in public ownership or to be used for public park 
     and recreation or other public purposes, all right, title, 
     and interest in and to such portion of property shall revert 
     to the Secretary.
       (5) Payment of costs.--The township of Manor, Pennsylvania 
     shall be responsible for all costs associated with a 
     conveyance under this subsection, including the cost of 
     conducting the survey referred to in paragraph (2).
       (g) New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam, Savannah River, South 
     Carolina, Below Augusta.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
     deed to the city of North Augusta and Aiken County, South 
     Carolina, the lock, dam, and appurtenant features at New 
     Savannah Bluff, including the adjacent approximately 50-acre 
     park and recreation area with improvements of the navigation 
     project, Savannah River Below Augusta, Georgia, authorized by 
     the first section of the River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 
     (46 Stat. 924), subject to the execution of an agreement by 
     the Secretary and the city of North Augusta and Aiken County, 
     South Carolina, that specifies the terms and conditions for 
     such conveyance.
       (2) Treatment of lock, dam, appurtenant features, and park 
     and recreation area.--The lock, dam, appurtenant features, 
     adjacent park and recreation area, and other project lands, 
     to be conveyed under paragraph (1) shall not be treated as 
     part of any Federal water resources project after the 
     effective date of the transfer.
       (3) Operation and maintenance.--Operation and maintenance 
     of all features of the navigation project, other than the 
     lock, dam, appurtenant features, adjacent park and recreation 
     area, and other project lands to be conveyed under paragraph 
     (1), shall continue to be a Federal responsibility after the 
     effective date of the transfer under paragraph (1).
       (h) Tri-Cities Area, Washington.--Section 501(i) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3752-3753) 
     is amended--
       (1) by inserting before the period at the end of paragraph 
     (1) the following: ``; except that any of such local 
     governments, with the agreement of the appropriate district 
     engineer, may exempt from the conveyance to the local 
     government all or any part of the

[[Page H10346]]

     lands to be conveyed to the local government''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end of paragraph 
     (2)(C) the following: ``; except that approximately 7.4 acres 
     in Columbia Park, Kennewick, Washington, consisting of the 
     historic site located in the Park and known and referred to 
     as the Kennewick Man Site and such adjacent wooded areas as 
     the Secretary determines are necessary to protect the 
     historic site, shall remain in Federal ownership''.
       (i) Bayou Teche, Louisiana.--
       (1) In general.--After renovations of the Keystone Lock 
     facility have been completed, the Secretary may convey by 
     quitclaim deed without consideration to St. Martin Parish, 
     Louisiana, all rights, interests, and title of the United 
     States in the approximately 12.03 acres of land under the 
     administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary in Bayou Teche, 
     Louisiana, together with improvements thereon. The dam and 
     the authority to retain upstream pool elevations shall remain 
     under the jurisdiction of the Secretary. The Secretary shall 
     relinquish all operations and maintenance of the lock to St. 
     Martin Parish.
       (2) Conditions.--The following conditions apply to the 
     transfer under paragraph (1):
       (A) St. Martin Parish shall operate, maintain, repair, 
     replace, and rehabilitate the lock in accordance with 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary which are consistent 
     with the project's authorized purposes.
       (B) The Parish shall provide the Secretary access to the 
     dam whenever the Secretary notifies the Parish of a need for 
     access to the dam.
       (C) If the Parish fails to comply with subparagraph (A), 
     the Secretary shall notify the Parish of such failure. If the 
     parish does not correct such failure during the 1-year period 
     beginning on the date of such notification, the Secretary 
     shall have a right of reverter to reclaim possession and 
     title to the land and improvements conveyed under this 
     section or, in the case of a failure to make necessary 
     repairs, the Secretary may effect the repairs and require 
     payment from the Parish for the repairs made by the 
     Secretary.
       (j) Joliet, Illinois.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey by quitclaim 
     deed without consideration to the Joliet Park District in 
     Joliet, Illinois, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the parcel of real property located 
     at 622 Railroad Street in the city of Joliet, consisting of 
     approximately 2 acres, together with any improvements 
     thereon, for public ownership and use as the site of the 
     headquarters of the park district.
       (2) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage 
     and the legal description of the real property described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is 
     satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the 
     property conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in 
     public ownership or to be used as headquarters of the park 
     district or for other purposes, all right, title, and 
     interest in and to such property shall revert to the United 
     States.
       (k) Ottawa, Illinois.--
       (1) Conveyance of property.--Subject to the terms, 
     conditions, and reservations of paragraph (2), the Secretary 
     shall convey by quitclaim deed to the Young Men's Christian 
     Association of Ottawa, Illinois (in this subsection referred 
     to as the ``YMCA''), all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a portion of the easements acquired 
     for the improvement of the Illinois Waterway project over a 
     parcel of real property owned by the YMCA, known as the 
     ``Ottawa, Illinois YMCA Site'', and located at 201 E. Jackson 
     Street, Ottawa, La Salle County, Illinois (portion of NE \1/
     4\, S11, T33N, R3E 3PM), except that portion lying below the 
     elevation of 461 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
       (2) Conditions.--The following conditions apply to the 
     conveyance under paragraph (1):
       (A) The exact acreage and the legal description of the real 
     property described in paragraph (1) shall be determined by a 
     survey that is satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (B) The YMCA shall agree to hold and save the United States 
     harmless from liability associated with the operation and 
     maintenance of the Illinois Waterway project on the property 
     desscribed in paragraph (1).
       (C) If the Secretary determines that any portion of the 
     property that is the subject of the easement conveyed under 
     paragraph (1) ceases to be used as the YMCA, all right, 
     title, and interest in and to such easement shall revert to 
     the Secretary.
       (l) St. Clair and Benton Counties, Missouri.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall convey to the Iconium 
     Fire Protection District, St. Clair and Benton counties, 
     Missouri, by quitclaim deed and without consideration, all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the 
     parcel of land described in paragraph (2).
       (2) Land description.--The parcel of land to be conveyed 
     under paragraph (1) is the tract of land located in the 
     Southeast \1/4\ of Section 13, Township 39 North, Range 25 
     West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, St. Clair County, 
     Missouri, more particularly described as follows: Commencing 
     at the Southwest corner of Section 18, as designated by Corps 
     survey marker AP 18-1, thence northerly 11.22 feet to the 
     southeast corner of Section 13, thence 657.22 feet north 
     along the east line of Section 13 to Corps monument 18 1-C 
     lying within the right-of-way of State Highway C, being the 
     point of beginning of the tract of land herein described; 
     thence westerly approximately 210 feet, thence northerly 150 
     feet, thence easterly approximately 210 feet to the east line 
     of Section 13, thence southerly along said east line, 150 
     feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.723 acres, more 
     or less.
       (3) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines that the 
     property conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be held in 
     public ownership or to be used as a site for a fire station, 
     all right, title, and interest in and to such property shall 
     revert to the United States.
       (m) Generally Applicable Provisions.--
       (1) Applicability of property screening provisions.--
     Section 2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply 
     to any conveyance under this section.
       (2) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require that any conveyance under this section be subject to 
     such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate and necessary to protect the interests 
     of the United States.
       (3) Costs of conveyance.--An entity to which a conveyance 
     is made under this section shall be responsible for all 
     reasonable and necessary costs, including real estate 
     transaction and environmental compliance costs, associated 
     with the conveyance.
       (4) Liability.--An entity to which a conveyance is made 
     under this section shall hold the United States harmless from 
     any liability with respect to activities carried out, on or 
     after the date of the conveyance, on the real property 
     conveyed. The United States shall remain responsible for any 
     liability with respect to activities carried out, before such 
     date, on the real property conveyed.

     SEC. 586. BRUCE F. VENTO UNIT OF THE BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE 
                   AREA WILDERNESS, MINNESOTA.

       (a) Designation.--The portion of the Boundary Waters Canoe 
     Area Wilderness, Minnesota, situated north and cast of the 
     Gunflint Corridor and that is bounded by the United States 
     border with Canada to the north shall be known and designated 
     as the ``Bruce F. Vento Unit of the Boundary Waters Canoe 
     Area Wilderness''.
       (b) Legal Reference.--Any reference in a law, map, 
     regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 
     States to the area referred to in paragraph (1) shall be 
     deemed to be a reference to the ``Bruce F. Vento Unit of the 
     Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness''.

     SEC. 587. WAURIKA LAKE, OKLAHOMA.

       The remaining obligation of the Waurika Project Master 
     Conservancy District payable to the United States Government 
     in the amounts, rates of interest, and payment schedules is 
     set at the amounts, rates of interest, and payment schedules 
     that existed, and that both parties agreed to, on June 3, 
     1986, and may not be adjusted, altered, or changed without a 
     specific, separate, and written agreement between the 
     District and the United States Government.

     SEC. 588. COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS.

       Section 401(d) of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish 
     procedures for review of tribal constitutions and bylaws or 
     amendments thereto pursuant to the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 
     Stat. 987)'', approved November 1, 1988 (102 Stat. 2944), is 
     amended by striking ``$2,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$4,000,000''.

     SEC. 589. DEVILS LAKE, NORTH DAKOTA.

       No appropriation shall be made to construct an emergency 
     outlet from Devils Lake, North Dakota, to the Sheyenne River 
     if the final plans for the emergency outlet have not been 
     approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate.

             TITLE VI--COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION

     SEC. 601. COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section, the following 
     definitions apply:
       (1) Central and southern florida project.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Central and Southern Florida 
     Project'' means the project for Central and Southern Florida 
     authorized under the heading ``central and southern florida'' 
     in section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (62 Stat. 
     1176).
       (B) Inclusion.--The term ``Central and Southern Florida 
     Project'' includes any modification to the project authorized 
     by this section or any other provision of law.
       (2) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor of 
     the State of Florida.
       (3) Natural system.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``natural system'' means all land 
     and water managed by the Federal Government or the State 
     within the South Florida ecosystem.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``natural system'' includes--
       (i) water conservation areas;
       (ii) sovereign submerged land;
       (iii) Everglades National Park;
       (iv) Biscayne National Park;
       (v) Big Cypress National Preserve;
       (vi) other Federal or State (including a political 
     subdivision of a State) land that is designated and managed 
     for conservation purposes; and
       (vii) any tribal land that is designated and managed for 
     conservation purposes, as approved by the tribe.

[[Page H10347]]

       (4) Plan.--The term ``Plan'' means the Comprehensive 
     Everglades Restoration Plan contained in the ``Final 
     Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental 
     Impact Statement'', dated April 1, 1999, as modified by this 
     section.
       (5) South florida ecosystem.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``South Florida ecosystem'' means 
     the area consisting of the land and water within the boundary 
     of the South Florida Water Management District in effect on 
     July 1, 1999.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``South Florida ecosystem'' 
     includes--
       (i) the Everglades;
       (ii) the Florida Keys; and
       (iii) the contiguous near-shore coastal water of South 
     Florida.
       (6) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Florida.
       (b) Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.--
       (1) Approval.--
       (A) In general.--Except as modified by this section, the 
     Plan is approved as a framework for modifications and 
     operational changes to the Central and Southern Florida 
     Project that are needed to restore, preserve, and protect the 
     South Florida ecosystem while providing for other water-
     related needs of the region, including water supply and flood 
     protection. The Plan shall be implemented to ensure the 
     protection of water quality in, the reduction of the loss of 
     fresh water from, and the improvement of the environment of 
     the South Florida ecosystem and to achieve and maintain the 
     benefits to the natural system and human environment 
     described in the Plan, and required pursuant to this section, 
     for as long as the project is authorized.
       (B) Integration.--In carrying out the Plan, the Secretary 
     shall integrate the activities described in subparagraph (A) 
     with ongoing Federal and State projects and activities in 
     accordance with section 528(c) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769). Unless specifically 
     provided herein, nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to modify any existing cost share or responsibility for 
     projects as listed in subsection (c) or (e) of section 528 of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769).
       (2) Specific authorizations.--
       (A) In general.--
       (i) Projects.--The Secretary shall carry out the projects 
     included in the Plan in accordance with subparagraphs (B), 
     (C), (D), and (E).
       (ii) Considerations.--In carrying out activities described 
     in the Plan, the Secretary shall--

       (I) take into account the protection of water quality by 
     considering applicable State water quality standards; and
       (II) include such features as the Secretary determines are 
     necessary to ensure that all ground water and surface water 
     discharges from any project feature authorized by this 
     subsection will meet all applicable water quality standards 
     and applicable water quality permitting requirements.

       (iii) Review and comment.--In developing the projects 
     authorized under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall 
     provide for public review and comment in accordance with 
     applicable Federal law.
       (B) Pilot projects.--The following pilot projects are 
     authorized for implementation, after review and approval by 
     the Secretary, at a total cost of $69,000,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $34,500,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $34,500,000:
       (i) Caloosahatchee River (C-43) Basin ASR, at a total cost 
     of $6,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,000,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,000,000.
       (ii) Lake Belt In-Ground Reservoir Technology, at a total 
     cost of $23,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $11,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,500,000.
       (iii) L-31N Seepage Management, at a total cost of 
     $10,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,000,000 and 
     an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,000,000.
       (iv) Wastewater Reuse Technology, at a total cost of 
     $30,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $15,000,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,000,000.
       (C) Initial projects.--The following projects are 
     authorized for implementation, after review and approval by 
     the Secretary, subject to the conditions stated in 
     subparagraph (D), at a total cost of $1,100,918,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $550,459,000 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $550,459,000:
       (i) C-44 Basin Storage Reservoir, at a total cost of 
     $112,562,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $56,281,000 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $56,281,000.
       (ii) Everglades Agricultural Area Storage Reservoirs--Phase 
     I, at a total cost of $233,408,000, with an estimated Federal 
     cost of $116,704,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 
     $116,704,000.
       (iii) Site 1 Impoundment, at a total cost of $38,535,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $19,267,500 and an 
     estimated non-Federal cost of $19,267,500.
       (iv) Water Conservation Areas 3A/3B Levee Seepage 
     Management, at a total cost of $100,335,000, with an 
     estimated Federal cost of $50,167,500 and an estimated non-
     Federal cost of $50,167,500.
       (v) C-11 Impoundment and Stormwater Treatment Area, at a 
     total cost of $124,837,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $62,418,500 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $62,418,500.
       (vi) C-9 Impoundment and Stormwater Treatment Area, at a 
     total cost of $89,146,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $44,573,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $44,573,000.
       (vii) Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough Storage and Treatment 
     Area, at a total cost of $104,027,000, with an estimated 
     Federal cost of $52,013,500 and an estimated non-Federal cost 
     of $52,013,500.
       (viii) Raise and Bridge East Portion of Tamiami Trail and 
     Fill Miami Canal within Water Conservation Area 3, at a total 
     cost of $26,946,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $13,473,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $13,473,000.
       (ix) North New River Improvements, at a total cost of 
     $77,087,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $38,543,500 
     and an estimated non-Federal cost of $38,543,500.
       (x) C-111 Spreader Canal, at a total cost of $94,035,000, 
     with an estimated Federal cost of $47,017,500 and an 
     estimated non-Federal cost of $47,017,500.
       (xi) Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring Program, at a total 
     cost of $100,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of 
     $50,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $50,000,000.
       (D) Conditions.--
       (i) Project implementation reports.--Before implementation 
     of a project described in any of clauses (i) through (x) of 
     subparagraph (C), the Secretary shall review and approve for 
     the project a project implementation report prepared in 
     accordance with subsections (f) and (h).
       (ii) Submission of report.--The Secretary shall submit to 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate the project implementation report 
     required by subsections (f) and (h) for each project under 
     this paragraph (including all relevant data and information 
     on all costs).
       (iii) Funding contingent on approval.--No appropriation 
     shall be made to construct any project under this paragraph 
     if the project implementation report for the project has not 
     been approved by resolutions adopted by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate.
       (iv) Modified water delivery.--No appropriation shall be 
     made to construct the Water Conservation Area 3 
     Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement Project 
     (including component AA, Additional S-345 Structures; 
     component QQ Phase 1, Raise and Bridge East Portion of 
     Tamiami Trail and Fill Miami Canal within WCA 3; component QQ 
     Phase 2, WCA 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow 
     Enhancement; and component SS, North New River Improvements) 
     or the Central Lakebelt Storage Project (including components 
     S and EEE, Central Lake Belt Storage Area) until the 
     completion of the project to improve water deliveries to 
     Everglades National Park authorized by section 104 of the 
     Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 
     (16 U.S.C. 410r-8).
       (E) Maximum cost of projects.--Section 902 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2280) shall 
     apply to each project feature authorized under this 
     subsection.
       (c) Additional Program Authority.--
       (1) In general.--To expedite implementation of the Plan, 
     the Secretary may implement modifications to the Central and 
     Southern Florida Project that--
       (A) are described in the Plan; and
       (B) will produce a substantial benefit to the restoration, 
     preservation and protection of the South Florida ecosystem.
       (2) Project implementation reports.--Before implementation 
     of any project feature authorized under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall review and approve for the project feature a 
     project implementation report prepared in accordance with 
     subsections (f) and (h).
       (3) Funding.--
       (A) Individual project funding.--
       (i) Federal cost.--The total Federal cost of each project 
     carried out under this subsection shall not exceed 
     $12,500,000.
       (ii) Overall cost.--The total cost of each project carried 
     out under this subsection shall not exceed $25,000,000.
       (B) Aggregate cost.--The total cost of all projects carried 
     out under this subsection shall not exceed $206,000,000, with 
     an estimated Federal cost of $103,000,000 and an estimated 
     non-Federal cost of $103,000,000.
       (d) Authorization of Future Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Except for a project authorized by 
     subsection (b) or (c), any project included in the Plan shall 
     require a specific authorization by Congress.
       (2) Submission of report.--Before seeking congressional 
     authorization for a project under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall submit to Congress--
       (A) a description of the project; and
       (B) a project implementation report for the project 
     prepared in accordance with subsections (f) and (h).
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a project authorized by subsection (b), (c), or 
     (d) shall be 50 percent.
       (2) Non-federal responsibilities.--The non-Federal sponsor 
     with respect to a project described in subsection (b), (c), 
     or (d), shall be--
       (A) responsible for all land, easements, rights-of-way, and 
     relocations necessary to implement the Plan; and

[[Page H10348]]

       (B) afforded credit toward the non-Federal share of the 
     cost of carrying out the project in accordance with paragraph 
     (5)(A).
       (3) Federal assistance.--
       (A) In general.--The non-Federal sponsor with respect to a 
     project authorized by subsection (b), (c), or (d) may use 
     Federal funds for the purchase of any land, easement, rights-
     of-way, or relocation that is necessary to carry out the 
     project if any funds so used are credited toward the Federal 
     share of the cost of the project.
       (B) Agriculture funds.--Funds provided to the non-Federal 
     sponsor under the Conservation Restoration and Enhancement 
     Program (CREP) and the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) for 
     projects in the Plan shall be credited toward the non-Federal 
     share of the cost of the Plan if the Secretary of Agriculture 
     certifies that the funds provided may be used for that 
     purpose. Funds to be credited do not include funds provided 
     under section 390 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 1022).
       (4) Operation and maintenance.--Notwithstanding section 
     528(e)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 
     Stat. 3770), the non-Federal sponsor shall be responsible for 
     50 percent of the cost of operation, maintenance, repair, 
     replacement, and rehabilitation activities authorized under 
     this section. Furthermore, the Seminole Tribe of Florida 
     shall be responsible for 50 percent of the cost of operation, 
     maintenance, repair, replacement, and rehabilitation 
     activities for the Big Cypress Seminole Reservation Water 
     Conservation Plan Project.
       (5) Credit.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding section 528(e)(4) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3770) and 
     regardless of the date of acquisition, the value of lands or 
     interests in lands and incidental costs for land acquired by 
     a non-Federal sponsor in accordance with a project 
     implementation report for any project included in the Plan 
     and authorized by Congress shall be--
       (i) included in the total cost of the project; and
       (ii) credited toward the non-Federal share of the cost of 
     the project.
       (B) Work.--The Secretary may provide credit, including in-
     kind credit, toward the non-Federal share for the reasonable 
     cost of any work performed in connection with a study, 
     preconstruction engineering and design, or construction that 
     is necessary for the implementation of the Plan if--
       (i)(I) the credit is provided for work completed during the 
     period of design, as defined in a design agreement between 
     the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor; or
       (II) the credit is provided for work completed during the 
     period of construction, as defined in a project cooperation 
     agreement for an authorized project between the Secretary and 
     the non-Federal sponsor;
       (ii) the design agreement or the project cooperation 
     agreement prescribes the terms and conditions of the credit; 
     and
       (iii) the Secretary determines that the work performed by 
     the non-Federal sponsor is integral to the project.
       (C) Treatment of credit between projects.--Any credit 
     provided under this paragraph may be carried over between 
     authorized projects in accordance with subparagraph (D).
       (D) Periodic monitoring.--
       (i) In general.--To ensure that the contributions of the 
     non-Federal sponsor equal 50 percent proportionate share for 
     projects in the Plan, during each 5-year period, beginning 
     with commencement of design of the Plan, the Secretary shall, 
     for each project--

       (I) monitor the non-Federal provision of cash, in-kind 
     services, and land; and
       (II) manage, to the maximum extent practicable, the 
     requirement of the non-Federal sponsor to provide cash, in-
     kind services, and land.

       (ii) Other monitoring.--The Secretary shall conduct 
     monitoring under clause (i) separately for the 
     preconstruction engineering and design phase and the 
     construction phase.
       (E) Audits.--Credit for land (including land value and 
     incidental costs) or work provided under this subsection 
     shall be subject to audit by the Secretary.
       (f) Evaluation of Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Before implementation of a project 
     authorized by subsection (c) or (d) or any of clauses (i) 
     through (x) of subsection (b)(2)(C), the Secretary, in 
     cooperation with the non-Federal sponsor, shall complete, 
     after notice and opportunity for public comment and in 
     accordance with subsection (h), a project implementation 
     report for the project.
       (2) Project justification.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding section 209 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962-2) or any other provision 
     of law, in carrying out any activity authorized under this 
     section or any other provision of law to restore, preserve, 
     or protect the South Florida ecosystem, the Secretary may 
     determine that--
       (i) the activity is justified by the environmental benefits 
     derived by the South Florida ecosystem; and
       (ii) no further economic justification for the activity is 
     required, if the Secretary determines that the activity is 
     cost-effective.
       (B) Applicability.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any 
     separable element intended to produce benefits that are 
     predominantly unrelated to the restoration, preservation, and 
     protection of the natural system.
       (g) Exclusions and Limitations.--The following Plan 
     components are not approved for implementation:
       (1) Water included in the plan.--
       (A) In general.--Any project that is designed to implement 
     the capture and use of the approximately 245,000 acre-feet of 
     water described in section 7.7.2 of the Plan shall not be 
     implemented until such time as--
       (i) the project-specific feasibility study described in 
     subparagraph (B) on the need for and physical delivery of the 
     approximately 245,000 acre-feet of water, conducted by the 
     Secretary, in cooperation with the non-Federal sponsor, is 
     completed;
       (ii) the project is favorably recommended in a final report 
     of the Chief of Engineers; and
       (iii) the project is authorized by Act of Congress.
       (B) Project-specific feasibility study.--The project-
     specific feasibility study referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     shall include--
       (i) a comprehensive analysis of the structural facilities 
     proposed to deliver the approximately 245,000 acre-feet of 
     water to the natural system;
       (ii) an assessment of the requirements to divert and treat 
     the water;
       (iii) an assessment of delivery alternatives;
       (iv) an assessment of the feasibility of delivering the 
     water downstream while maintaining current levels of flood 
     protection to affected property; and
       (v) any other assessments that are determined by the 
     Secretary to be necessary to complete the study.
       (2) Wastewater reuse.--
       (A) In general.--On completion and evaluation of the 
     wastewater reuse pilot project described in subsection 
     (b)(2)(B)(iv), the Secretary, in an appropriately timed 5-
     year report, shall describe the results of the evaluation of 
     advanced wastewater reuse in meeting, in a cost-effective 
     manner, the requirements of restoration of the natural 
     system.
       (B) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress the 
     report described in subparagraph (A) before congressional 
     authorization for advanced wastewater reuse is sought.
       (3) Projects approved with limitations.--The following 
     projects in the Plan are approved for implementation with 
     limitations:
       (A) Loxahatchee national wildlife refuge.--The Federal 
     share for land acquisition in the project to enhance existing 
     wetland systems along the Loxahatchee National Wildlife 
     Refuge, including the Stazzulla tract, should be funded 
     through the budget of the Department of the Interior.
       (B) Southern corkscrew regional ecosystem.--The Southern 
     Corkscrew regional ecosystem watershed addition should be 
     accomplished outside the scope of the Plan.
       (h) Assurance of Project Benefits.--
       (1) In general.--The overarching objective of the Plan is 
     the restoration, preservation, and protection of the South 
     Florida Ecosystem while providing for other water-related 
     needs of the region, including water supply and flood 
     protection. The Plan shall be implemented to ensure the 
     protection of water quality in, the reduction of the loss of 
     fresh water from, the improvement of the environment of the 
     South Florida Ecosystem and to achieve and maintain the 
     benefits to the natural system and human environment 
     described in the Plan, and required pursuant to this section, 
     for as long as the project is authorized.
       (2) Agreement.--
       (A) In general.--In order to ensure that water generated by 
     the Plan will be made available for the restoration of the 
     natural system, no appropriations, except for any pilot 
     project described in subsection (b)(2)(B), shall be made 
     for the construction of a project contained in the Plan 
     until the President and the Governor enter into a binding 
     agreement under which the State shall ensure, by 
     regulation or other appropriate means, that water made 
     available by each project in the Plan shall not be 
     permitted for a consumptive use or otherwise made 
     unavailable by the State until such time as sufficient 
     reservations of water for the restoration of the natural 
     system are made under State law in accordance with the 
     project implementation report for that project and 
     consistent with the Plan.
       (B) Enforcement.--
       (i) In general.--Any person or entity that is aggrieved by 
     a failure of the United States or any other Federal 
     Government instrumentality or agency, or the Governor or any 
     other officer of a State instrumentality or agency, to comply 
     with any provision of the agreement entered into under 
     subparagraph (A) may bring a civil action in United States 
     district court for an injunction directing the United States 
     or any other Federal Government instrumentality or agency or 
     the Governor or any other officer of a State instrumentality 
     or agency, as the case may be, to comply with the agreement.
       (ii) Limitations on commencement of civil action.--No civil 
     action may be commenced under clause (i)--

       (I) before the date that is 60 days after the Secretary and 
     the Governor receive written notice of a failure to comply 
     with the agreement; or
       (II) if the United States has commenced and is diligently 
     prosecuting an action in a court of the United States or a 
     State to redress a failure to comply with the agreement.

       (C) Trust responsibilities.--In carrying out his 
     responsibilities under this subsection with respect to the 
     restoration of the South

[[Page H10349]]

     Florida ecosystem, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     fulfill his obligations to the Indian tribes in South Florida 
     under the Indian trust doctrine as well as other applicable 
     legal obligations.
       (3) Programmatic regulations.--
       (A) Issuance.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, after notice and 
     opportunity for public comment, with the concurrence of the 
     Governor and the Secretary of the Interior, and in 
     consultation with the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the 
     Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of 
     Commerce, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, 
     promulgate programmatic regulations to ensure that the goals 
     and purposes of the Plan are achieved.
       (B) Concurrency statement.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     and the Governor shall, not later than 180 days from the end 
     of the public comment period on proposed programmatic 
     regulations, provide the Secretary with a written statement 
     of concurrence or nonconcurrence. A failure to provide a 
     written statement of concurrence or nonconcurrence within 
     such time frame will be deemed as meeting the concurrency 
     requirements of subparagraph (A)(i). A copy of any 
     concurrency or nonconcurrency statements shall be made a part 
     of the administrative record and referenced in the final 
     programmatic regulations. Any nonconcurrency statement shall 
     specifically detail the reason or reasons for the 
     nonconcurrence.
       (C) Content of regulations.--
       (i) In general.--Programmatic regulations promulgated under 
     this paragraph shall establish a process--

       (I) for the development of project implementation reports, 
     project cooperation agreements, and operating manuals that 
     ensure that the goals and objectives of the Plan are 
     achieved;
       (II) to ensure that new information resulting from changed 
     or unforeseen circumstances, new scientific or technical 
     information or information that is developed through the 
     principles of adaptive management contained in the Plan, or 
     future authorized changes to the Plan are integrated into the 
     implementation of the Plan; and
       (III) to ensure the protection of the natural system 
     consistent with the goals and purposes of the Plan, including 
     the establishment of interim goals to provide a means by 
     which the restoration success of the Plan may be evaluated 
     throughout the implementation process.

       (ii) Limitation on applicability of programmatic 
     regulations.--Programmatic regulations promulgated under this 
     paragraph shall expressly prohibit the requirement for 
     concurrence by the Secretary of the Interior or the Governor 
     on project implementation reports, project cooperation 
     agreements, operating manuals for individual projects 
     undertaken in the Plan, and any other documents relating to 
     the development, implementation, and management of individual 
     features of the Plan, unless such concurrence is provided for 
     in other Federal or State laws.
       (D) Schedule and transition rule.--
       (i) In general.--All project implementation reports 
     approved before the date of promulgation of the programmatic 
     regulations shall be consistent with the Plan.
       (ii) Preamble.--The preamble of the programmatic 
     regulations shall include a statement concerning the 
     consistency with the programmatic regulations of any project 
     implementation reports that were approved before the date of 
     promulgation of the regulations.
       (E) Review of programmatic regulations.--Whenever necessary 
     to attain Plan goals and purposes, but not less often than 
     every 5 years, the Secretary, in accordance with subparagraph 
     (A), shall review the programmatic regulations promulgated 
     under this paragraph.
       (4) Project-specific assurances.--
       (A) Project implementation reports.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall develop project implementation reports in accordance 
     with section 10.3.1 of the Plan.
       (ii) Coordination.--In developing a project implementation 
     report, the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor shall 
     coordinate with appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and local 
     governments.
       (iii) Requirements.--A project implementation report 
     shall--

       (I) be consistent with the Plan and the programmatic 
     regulations promulgated under paragraph (3);
       (II) describe how each of the requirements stated in 
     paragraph (3)(B) is satisfied;
       (III) comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
     1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
       (IV) identify the appropriate quantity, timing, and 
     distribution of water dedicated and managed for the natural 
     system;
       (V) identify the amount of water to be reserved or 
     allocated for the natural system necessary to implement, 
     under State law, subclauses (IV) and (VI);
       (VI) comply with applicable water quality standards and 
     applicable water quality permitting requirements under 
     subsection (b)(2)(A)(ii);
       (VII) be based on the best available science; and
       (VIII) include an analysis concerning the cost-
     effectiveness and engineering feasibility of the project.

       (B) Project cooperation agreements.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall execute project cooperation agreements in accordance 
     with section 10 of the Plan.
       (ii) Condition.--The Secretary shall not execute a project 
     cooperation agreement until any reservation or allocation of 
     water for the natural system identified in the project 
     implementation report is executed under State law.
       (C) Operating manuals.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor 
     shall develop and issue, for each project or group of 
     projects, an operating manual that is consistent with the 
     water reservation or allocation for the natural system 
     described in the project implementation report and the 
     project cooperation agreement for the project or group of 
     projects.
       (ii) Modifications.--Any significant modification by the 
     Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor to an operating manual 
     after the operating manual is issued shall only be carried 
     out subject to notice and opportunity for public comment.
       (5) Savings clause.--
       (A) No elimination or transfer.--Until a new source of 
     water supply of comparable quantity and quality as that 
     available on the date of enactment of this Act is available 
     to replace the water to be lost as a result of implementation 
     of the Plan, the Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor shall 
     not eliminate or transfer existing legal sources of water, 
     including those for--
       (i) an agricultural or urban water supply;
       (ii) allocation or entitlement to the Seminole Indian Tribe 
     of Florida under section 7 of the Seminole Indian Land Claims 
     Settlement Act of 1987 (25 U.S.C. 1772e);
       (iii) the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida;
       (iv) water supply for Everglades National Park; or
       (v) water supply for fish and wildlife.
       (B) Maintenance of flood protection.--Implementation of the 
     Plan shall not reduce levels of service for flood protection 
     that are--
       (i) in existence on the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (ii) in accordance with applicable law.
       (C) No effect on tribal compact.--Nothing in this section 
     amends, alters, prevents, or otherwise abrogates rights of 
     the Seminole Indian Tribe of Florida under the compact among 
     the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the State, and the South 
     Florida Water Management District, defining the scope and use 
     of water rights of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, as codified 
     by section 7 of the Seminole Indian Land Claims Settlement 
     Act of 1987 (25 U.S.C. 1772e).
       (i) Dispute Resolution.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary and the Governor shall 
     within 180 days from the date of enactment of this Act 
     develop an agreement for resolving disputes between the Corps 
     of Engineers and the State associated with the implementation 
     of the Plan. Such agreement shall establish a mechanism for 
     the timely and efficient resolution of disputes, including--
       (A) a preference for the resolution of disputes between the 
     Jacksonville District of the Corps of Engineers and the South 
     Florida Water Management District;
       (B) a mechanism for the Jacksonville District of the Corps 
     of Engineers or the South Florida Water Management District 
     to initiate the dispute resolution process for unresolved 
     issues;
       (C) the establishment of appropriate timeframes and 
     intermediate steps for the elevation of disputes to the 
     Governor and the Secretary; and
       (D) a mechanism for the final resolution of disputes, 
     within 180 days from the date that the dispute resolution 
     process is initiated under subparagraph (B).
       (2) Condition for report approval.--The Secretary shall not 
     approve a project implementation report under this section 
     until the agreement established under this subsection has 
     been executed.
       (3) No effect on law.--Nothing in the agreement established 
     under this subsection shall alter or amend any existing 
     Federal or State law, or the responsibility of any party to 
     the agreement to comply with any Federal or State law.
       (j) Independent Scientific Review.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, and the Governor, in consultation with the South 
     Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, shall establish an 
     independent scientific review panel convened by a body, such 
     as the National Academy of Sciences, to review the Plan's 
     progress toward achieving the natural system restoration 
     goals of the Plan.
       (2) Report.--The panel described in paragraph (1) shall 
     produce a biennial report to Congress, the Secretary, the 
     Secretary of the Interior, and the Governor that includes an 
     assessment of ecological indicators and other measures of 
     progress in restoring the ecology of the natural system, 
     based on the Plan.
       (k) Outreach and Assistance.--
       (1) Small business concerns owned and operated by socially 
     and economically disadvantaged individuals.--In executing the 
     Plan, the Secretary shall ensure that small business concerns 
     owned and controlled by socially and economically 
     disadvantaged individuals are provided opportunities to 
     participate under section 15(g) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 644(g)).
       (2) Community outreach and education.--

[[Page H10350]]

       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall ensure that impacts on 
     socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, 
     including individuals with limited English proficiency, and 
     communities are considered during implementation of the Plan, 
     and that such individuals have opportunities to review and 
     comment on its implementation.
       (B) Provision of opportunities.--The Secretary shall 
     ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that public 
     outreach and educational opportunities are provided, during 
     implementation of the Plan, to the individuals of South 
     Florida, including individuals with limited English 
     proficiency, and in particular for socially and economically 
     disadvantaged communities.
       (l) Report to Congress.--Beginning on October 1, 2005, and 
     periodically thereafter until October 1, 2036, the Secretary 
     and the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Commerce, 
     and the State of Florida, shall jointly submit to Congress a 
     report on the implementation of the Plan. Such reports shall 
     be completed not less often than every 5 years. Such reports 
     shall include a description of planning, design, and 
     construction work completed, the amount of funds expended 
     during the period covered by the report (including a detailed 
     analysis of the funds expended for adaptive assessment under 
     subsection (b)(2)(C)(xi)), and the work anticipated over the 
     next 5-year period. In addition, each report shall include--
       (1) the determination of each Secretary, and the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     concerning the benefits to the natural system and the human 
     environment achieved as of the date of the report and whether 
     the completed projects of the Plan are being operated in a 
     manner that is consistent with the requirements of subsection 
     (h);
       (2) progress toward interim goals established in accordance 
     with subsection (h)(3)(B); and
       (3) a review of the activities performed by the Secretary 
     under subsection (k) as they relate to socially and 
     economically disadvantaged individuals and individuals with 
     limited English proficiency.
       (m) Report on Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.--Not 
     later than 180 after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report containing a 
     determination as to whether the ongoing Biscayne Aquifer 
     Storage and Recovery Program located in Miami-Dade County has 
     a substantial benefit to the restoration, preservation, and 
     protection of the South Florida ecosystem.
       (n) Full Disclosure of Proposed Funding.--
       (1) Funding from all sources.--The President, as part of 
     the annual budget of the United States Government, shall 
     display under the heading ``Everglades Restoration'' all 
     proposed funding for the Plan for all agency programs.
       (2) Funding from corps of engineers civil works program.--
     The President, as part of the annual budget of the United 
     States Government, shall display under the accounts 
     ``Construction, General'' and ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     General'' of the title ``Department of Defense--Civil, 
     Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers--Civil'', the 
     total proposed funding level for each account for the Plan 
     and the percentage such level represents of the overall 
     levels in such accounts. The President shall also include an 
     assessment of the impact such funding levels for the Plan 
     would have on the budget year and long-term funding levels 
     for the overall Corps of Engineers civil works program.
       (o) Surplus Federal Lands.--Section 390(f)(2)(A)(i) of the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (110 
     Stat. 1023) is amended by inserting after ``on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act'' the following: ``and before 
     the date of enactment of the Water Resource Development Act 
     of 2000''.
       (p) Severability.--If any provision or remedy provided by 
     this section is found to be unconstitutional or unenforceable 
     by any court of competent jurisdiction, any remaining 
     provisions in this section shall remain valid and 
     enforceable.

     SEC. 602. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE 
                   BASE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Everglades is an American treasure and includes 
     uniquely-important and diverse wildlife resources and 
     recreational opportunities;
       (2) the preservation of the pristine and natural character 
     of the South Florida ecosystem is critical to the regional 
     economy;
       (3) as this legislation demonstrates, Congress believes it 
     to be a vital national mission to restore and preserve this 
     ecosystem and accordingly is authorizing a significant 
     Federal investment to do so;
       (4) Congress seeks to have the remaining property at the 
     former Homestead Air Base conveyed and reused as 
     expeditiously as possible, and several options for base reuse 
     are being considered, including as a commercial airport; and
       (5) Congress is aware that the Homestead site is located in 
     a sensitive environmental location, and that Biscayne 
     National Park is only approximately 1.5 miles to the east, 
     Everglades National Park approximately 8 miles to the west, 
     and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary approximately 
     10 miles to the south.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) development at the Homestead site could potentially 
     cause significant air, water, and noise pollution and result 
     in the degradation of adjacent national parks and other 
     protected Federal resources;
       (2) in their decisionmaking, the Federal agencies charged 
     with determining the reuse of the remaining property at the 
     Homestead base should carefully consider and weigh all 
     available information concerning potential environmental 
     impacts of various reuse options;
       (3) the redevelopment of the former base should be 
     consistent with restoration goals, provide desirable numbers 
     of jobs and economic redevelopment for the community, and be 
     consistent with other applicable laws;
       (4) consistent with applicable laws, the Secretary of the 
     Air Force should proceed as quickly as practicable to issue a 
     final SEIS and Record of Decision so that reuse of the former 
     air base can proceed expeditiously;
       (5) following conveyance of the remaining surplus property, 
     the Secretary, as part of his oversight for Everglades 
     restoration, should cooperate with the entities to which the 
     various parcels of surplus property were conveyed so that the 
     planned use of those properties is implemented in such a 
     manner as to remain consistent with the goals of the 
     Everglades restoration plan; and
       (6) by August 1, 2002, the Secretary should submit a report 
     to the appropriate committees of Congress on actions taken 
     and make any recommendations for consideration by Congress.

                 TITLE VII--MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION

     SEC. 701. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title, the following definitions apply:
       (1) Pick-sloan program.--The term ``Pick-Sloan program'' 
     means the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program authorized 
     by section 9 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 891).
       (2) Plan.--The term ``plan'' means the plan for the use of 
     funds made available by this title that is required to be 
     prepared under section 705(e).
       (3) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of South 
     Dakota.
       (4) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the Missouri 
     River Task Force established by section 705(a).
       (6) Trust.--The term ``Trust'' means the Missouri River 
     Trust established by section 704(a).

     SEC. 702. MISSOURI RIVER TRUST.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a committee to be 
     known as the Missouri River Trust.
       (b) Membership.--The Trust shall be composed of 25 members 
     to be appointed by the Secretary, including--
       (1) 15 members recommended by the Governor of South Dakota 
     that--
       (A) represent equally the various interests of the public; 
     and
       (B) include representatives of--
       (i) the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural 
     Resources;
       (ii) the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks;
       (iii) environmental groups;
       (iv) the hydroelectric power industry;
       (v) local governments;
       (vi) recreation user groups;
       (vii) agricultural groups; and
       (viii) other appropriate interests;
       (2) 9 members, 1 of each of whom shall be recommended by 
     each of the 9 Indian tribes in the State of South Dakota; and
       (3) 1 member recommended by the organization known as the 
     ``Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota'' (composed of the 
     Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara tribes).

     SEC. 703. MISSOURI RIVER TASK FORCE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established the Missouri River 
     Task Force.
       (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of--
       (1) the Secretary (or a designee), who shall serve as 
     Chairperson;
       (2) the Secretary of Agriculture (or a designee);
       (3) the Secretary of Energy (or a designee);
       (4) the Secretary of the Interior (or a designee); and
       (5) the Trust.
       (c) Duties.--The Task Force shall--
       (1) meet at least twice each year;
       (2) vote on approval of the plan, with approval requiring 
     votes in favor of the plan by a majority of the members;
       (3) review projects to meet the goals of the plan; and
       (4) recommend to the Secretary critical projects for 
     implementation.
       (d) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Secretary shall submit to the other members of the Task 
     Force a report on--
       (A) the impact of the siltation of the Missouri River in 
     the State, including the impact on the Federal, State, and 
     regional economies, recreation, hydropower generation, fish 
     and wildlife, and flood control;
       (B) the status of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River;
       (C) the extent of erosion along the Missouri River 
     (including tributaries of the Missouri River) in the State; 
     and
       (D) other issues, as requested by the Task Force.

[[Page H10351]]

       (2) Consultation.--In preparing the report under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of 
     Energy, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture, the State, and Indian tribes in the State.
       (e) Plan for Use of Funds Made Available by This Title.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which funding authorized under this title becomes available, 
     the Task Force shall prepare a plan for the use of funds made 
     available under this title.
       (2) Contents of plan.--The plan shall provide for the 
     manner in which the Task Force shall develop and recommend 
     critical restoration projects to promote--
       (A) conservation practices in the Missouri River watershed;
       (B) the general control and removal of sediment from the 
     Missouri River;
       (C) the protection of recreation on the Missouri River from 
     sedimentation;
       (D) the protection of Indian and non-Indian historical and 
     cultural sites along the Missouri River from erosion;
       (E) erosion control along the Missouri River; or
       (F) any combination of the activities described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (E).
       (3) Plan review and revision.--
       (A) In general.--The Task Force shall make a copy of the 
     plan available for public review and comment before the plan 
     becomes final, in accordance with procedures established by 
     the Task Force.
       (B) Revision of plan.--
       (i) In general.--The Task Force may, on an annual basis, 
     revise the plan.
       (ii) Public review and comment.--In revising the plan, the 
     Task Force shall provide the public the opportunity to review 
     and comment on any proposed revision to the plan.
       (f) Critical Restoration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--After the plan is approved by the Task 
     Force under subsection (c)(2), the Secretary, in coordination 
     with the Task Force, shall identify critical restoration 
     projects to carry out the plan.
       (2) Agreement.--The Secretary may carry out a critical 
     restoration project after entering into an agreement with an 
     appropriate non-Federal interest in accordance with section 
     221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b).
       (3) Indian projects.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     the Secretary shall ensure that not less than 30 percent of 
     the funds made available for critical restoration projects 
     under this title shall be used exclusively for projects that 
     are--
       (A) within the boundary of an Indian reservation; or
       (B) administered by an Indian tribe.
       (g) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Assessment.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) shall be 50 
     percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of carrying out the assessment under subsection (d) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (2) Plan.--
       (A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     preparing the plan under subsection (e) shall be 50 percent.
       (B) Non-federal share.--Not more than 50 percent of the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of preparing the plan under 
     subsection (e) may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, or other in-kind contributions.
       (3) Critical restoration projects.--
       (A) In general.--A non-Federal cost share shall be required 
     to carry out any critical restoration project under 
     subsection (f) that does not primarily benefit the Federal 
     Government, as determined by the Task Force.
       (B) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out a critical restoration project under subsection 
     (f) for which the Task Force requires a non-Federal cost 
     share under subparagraph (A) shall be 65 percent, not to 
     exceed $5,000,000 for any critical restoration project.
       (C) Non-federal share.--
       (i) In general.--Not more than 50 percent of the non-
     Federal share of the cost of carrying out a critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B) may be 
     provided in the form of services, materials, or other in-kind 
     contributions.
       (ii) Required non-federal contributions.--For any critical 
     restoration project described in subparagraph (B), the non-
     Federal interest shall--

       (I) provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged 
     material disposal areas, and relocations;
       (II) pay all operation, maintenance, replacement, repair, 
     and rehabilitation costs; and
       (III) hold the United States harmless from all claims 
     arising from the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
     the project.

       (iii) Credit.--The non-Federal interest shall receive 
     credit for all contributions provided under clause (ii)(I).

     SEC. 704. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this title diminishes or 
     affects--
       (1) any water right of an Indian tribe;
       (2) any other right of an Indian tribe, except as 
     specifically provided in another provision of this title;
       (3) any treaty right that is in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act;
       (4) any external boundary of an Indian reservation of an 
     Indian tribe;
       (5) any authority of the State that relates to the 
     protection, regulation, or management of fish, terrestrial 
     wildlife, and cultural and archaeological resources, except 
     as specifically provided in this title; or
       (6) any authority of the Secretary, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, or the head of any other Federal agency under a law 
     in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, including--
       (A) the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 
     et seq.);
       (B) the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 
     U.S.C. 470aa et seq.);
       (C) the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 
     et seq.);
       (D) the Act entitled ``An Act for the protection of the 
     bald eagle'', approved June 8, 1940 (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.);
       (E) the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.);
       (F) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.);
       (G) the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       (H) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
     et seq.);
       (I) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.); 
     and
       (J) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
       (b) Federal Liability for Damage.--Nothing in this title 
     relieves the Federal Government of liability for damage to 
     private property caused by the operation of the Pick-Sloan 
     program.
       (c) Flood Control.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this title, the Secretary shall retain the authority to 
     operate the Pick-Sloan program for the purposes of meeting 
     the requirements of the Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 
     887, 33 U.S.C. 701-1 et seq.).

     SEC. 705. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 
     carry out this title $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 
     through 2005, $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 
     through 2009, and $10,000,000 in fiscal year 2010. Such funds 
     shall remain available until expended.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 639, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The Water Resources Development Act of 2000, as amended, addresses 
the civil works program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, 
providing water-related engineering services to the Nation. It 
authorizes new water resource projects that are receiving favorable 
review by the Army Corps of Engineers. It modifies existing water 
resources projects to reflect changed conditions. It directs that new 
studies be conducted to determine the feasibility and the Federal 
interest in addressing water-related issues at various locations.
  WRDA 2000 approves and authorizes the first increment of the 
comprehensive Everglades restoration plan. The text is based on the 
Senate-passed Everglades provision, with minor amendments which have 
been made and which are acceptable to the Senate, to the Florida 
Members of Congress, to the State of Florida, and to the 
administration.
  The bill modifies authorities and directives of the Army Corps of 
Engineers to reform existing policies and procedures enhancing public 
participation in feasibility studies, monitoring of completed projects, 
and mitigation of environmental impacts.

                              {time}  1030

  The bill authorizes and modifies environmental restoration and 
environmental infrastructure projects and programs that address 
national needs at several locations, including the lower Columbia River 
Estuary, Puget Sound, San Gabriel Basin, as well as the Illinois, 
Missouri, Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. The estimated Federal cost of 
these provisions is $5 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a fair, balanced, bipartisan bill. It addresses 
the water resources needs across the Nation. I certainly want to thank 
my colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), for his 
cooperation and leadership in developing this amendment. I also want to 
thank the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Boehlert), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski), the 
ranking member of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, 
for their leadership in this legislation.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important bill, which invests in 
America's environmental future.

[[Page H10352]]

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, at the outset I want to express my great appreciation to 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) for the cooperation 
that we have had and the close working relationship again on this 
legislation, as on all the other bills that we have moved through this 
body. It again shows that at a time when there is dispute and rancor in 
the body politic in the broad public that in this body, where there is 
respect and mutual understanding and openness, the Congress can work 
and do the work of the public.
  This committee has demonstrated time and again that we can do the 
work of the public because of the mutual respect, the understanding, 
cooperation and the consensus that the work that we do is for the 
greater good of the country. And that is what this Water Resources 
Development Act is all about.
  It is among the best things we do in our committee and in this 
Congress: invest in the well-being of our fellow citizens and future 
growth and development of this country.
  Since the landmark Water Resources Development Act of 1986, the 
former Committee on Public Works and Transportation, now renamed the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, has worked to maintain 
a 2-year authorization schedule for the Corps. In fact, that has been 
the history since the reorganization of the Congress in 1946, to 
maintain a 2-year cycle, to provide continuity for the program and 
certainty to the non-Federal and local sponsors for these Corps 
projects.
  It also gives us in the Congress the opportunity to conduct oversight 
over the Corps programs, to make fine-tuning adjustments as necessary 
on individual projects, and to revisit major issues in a periodic 
fashion.
  This bill authorizes projects for the entirety of the Corps' civil 
works program: navigation, flood control, shoreline protection, 
environmental restoration and protection, and authorizations to restore 
the Nation's environmental infrastructure, especially for smaller and, 
in many cases, economically disadvantaged communities.
  It builds and rebuilds the Nation's infrastructure. It allows us to 
expand international trade through projects to improve our coastal 
ports and our inland river navigation system. Through flood control and 
hurricane and storm damage reduction measures, this legislation and the 
general work of the Corps will again help to meet critical needs to 
protect lives and property.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the able 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski), the ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, who has my great 
admiration for the splendid, scholarly way in which he approaches these 
issues, thorough grasp of the subject matter, and painstaking work to 
bring us to this point.
  Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill. This bill 
represents what we do best in the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. We invest in America's future by providing critical 
infrastructure while working to restore and enhance and protect the 
environment.
  Mr. Speaker, I am particularly honored that we are considering this 
bill today under the leadership of the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Chairman Shuster) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the 
ranking member. This may be the last opportunity that many of us have 
to pay tribute to the strong bipartisan leadership that the chairman 
and ranking member have demonstrated over the past 6 years.
  As a committee colleague and a fellow Pennsylvanian, I have often 
sought the chairman's advice and counsel. Even on those few occasions 
when we have disagreed, I have always been treated fair and with a 
mutual respect for doing what each of us believes is right.
  Even though the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) must 
step down as chairman, I know that he will continue to be a leader on 
the issues related to the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, and I look forward to continuing to work closely with 
him doing what is best for the Nation and for our great Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania.
  I would also like to acknowledge my close relationship with our 
subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert). We 
have worked closely together for the past 6 years in the great 
tradition of this committee. We have had a few tough disputes, but we 
always managed to retain the proper decorum and respect for each other. 
I have greatly enjoyed working with the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Boehlert).
  Many of the speakers today will describe the various projects that 
are at the heart of this bill. I represent one of the Nation's great 
seaports on the East Coast. The Corps is currently working to allow the 
Port of Philadelphia to compete in the 21st century. Other Members 
benefit from the efficient transportation system that allows barges to 
move on the inland waters.
  These projects form the water-based infrastructure that is such a key 
component of the Nation's transportation system. The projects in this 
and previous water resources bills protect lives and property from 
floods and hurricanes, and they provide drinking water and electricity 
to our cities and factories.
  These projects are the more visible aspect of the bill, but there are 
more important provisions of this bill that will improve the way in 
which the Corps implements its program.
  The bill will require the Corps to be more aware earlier in the study 
process of whether adverse environmental effects can be successfully 
and cost-effectively mitigated. Too often we can see the caution signs 
before us, but we fail to heed their warning. While the Corps is 
generally successful at mitigating potential environmental harm, it 
cannot always be successful. And we can be aware of this early in the 
study process.
  This is why I support language in the bill that will require the 
Corps to determine whether mitigation is likely to be successful and, 
if it cannot be successful, to stop the Corps from recommending a 
project for further study or authorization.
  Additional areas of the bill that I would like to emphasize are two 
pilot programs addressing independent review of proposed projects and 
monitoring of completed projects.
  On independent review, the bill requires the Secretary of the Army to 
establish a 3-year program of independent peer review of up to five 
projects. This review would apply to projects over $25 million and 
projects with a substantial degree of public controversy. While some 
have argued for a permanent peer review program, I believe that this 
pilot program will allow the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure and the House to evaluate its effectiveness and to make 
it permanent if it is warranted.
  I also strongly support the requirement to monitor the performance of 
up to five projects for 12 years. This will allow for the economic and 
environmental results of projects to be evaluated following their 
completion. Today, we authorize and construct projects, but we do not 
adequately follow up on whether the expected benefits are ever 
realized. The monitoring will be an important tool in helping the Corps 
and the Congress produce a more effective civil works program.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to mention that this bill requires the 
Corps to establish procedures to enhance public participation in the 
development of feasibility studies. While the Corps already engages in 
public meetings and public notice concerning its proposed projects, I 
believe there is always room for improvement. By examining its current 
procedures and making improvements where possible, the role of the 
public will be enhanced; and I believe the Corps will recommend better, 
more acceptable projects to the Congress.
  Without a doubt, the program to restore the Everglades is the 
centerpiece of this year's legislation. Responding to severe flooding 
that devastated Florida, Congress in 1948 authorized the Corps to carry 
out the Central and Southern Florida Project, with the aim of 
controlling floods and providing water supply for urban and 
agricultural uses. The project was a spectacular success in achieving 
its purpose.

[[Page H10353]]

 Along the way, however, the fragile ecosystem of the historic 
Everglades was seriously damaged.
  During the 1990's, the State of Florida and the Federal Government 
have undertaken a number of projects designed to mitigate some of the 
adverse environmental impacts. The Water Resources Development Act of 
1996 directed development of a comprehensive Everglades restoration 
plan. It is an ambitious plan supported by an unlikely coalition of 
stakeholders that includes Federal, State, regional and local agencies, 
sugar and agricultural interests, Indian tribes, environment groups, 
utilities, developers, and homeowners, and, I may add, from the entire 
bipartisan Florida delegation.
  The plan approved by the Chief of Engineers would cost at least $7.8 
billion and take 36 years to construct.
  The bill will approve the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan 
as a framework for modification and operational changes to the Central 
and South Florida Project to restore, reserve, and protect the 
Everglades ecosystem. It would also authorize the first installment of 
the plan.
  Since 1986, Congress has tried to maintain a 2-year cycle to enact 
water resources legislation. Such a cycle is important to providing 
certainty and stability to the programs. This bill is a continuation of 
that process and should receive strong bipartisan support today in the 
House.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in support of the bill.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the chairman of 
our Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the amendment to S. 2796, 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000.
  This comprehensive, bipartisan legislation will help save the 
Everglades, restore rivers and watersheds throughout the country, keep 
communities safe from floods and hurricanes, and repair and improve 
America's water transportation infrastructure, the lifeblood of our 
domestic and global economy.
  First let me commend the chairman of the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster); the 
ranking Democrat, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar); and the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski), the ranking Democrat on the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. Through their 
leadership, and I might say inspired leadership and cooperation, we are 
able to bring this broadly supported package to the House floor today.
  As chairman of the subcommittee, I can tell my colleagues this 
legislation has been long in the making. The subcommittee held hearings 
throughout the year, as well as last year, on this bill's key issues 
and provisions. We have, on a bipartisan basis, reviewed hundreds of 
project requests and scores of important and timely water policies.
  While no one is ever perfectly happy with every provision, I think 
the committee leadership has done a good job balancing competing 
interests and treating Members and their constituents fairly.
  Mr. Speaker, this is truly landmark legislation. It is our best hope 
to save the Everglades, to protect the egrets and alligators, and to 
restore the balance between the human environment and the natural 
system in south Florida.
  The world is watching, and I am proud of what this institution has 
produced at this critical moment.
  Senator Bob Smith and his colleagues on and off the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works on the other side and the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw) and his colleagues in the House are to be 
congratulated. They have provided leadership where leadership has been 
needed. Through their efforts, we are able to move forward with a 
consensus package that gives overall approval to the 36-year, $7.8 
billion plan and specifically authorizes $1.4 billion in projects to 
get the water right. That is very important.
  I want to emphasize, as the bill itself does, that the primary 
purpose of this landmark, unprecedented activity in the Everglades is 
to restore the natural system.

                              {time}  1045

  We are going to have to monitor this project closely and continue to 
review the science to ensure that it accomplishes this fundamental 
goal. Indeed, as the project moves forward, more legislative safeguards 
may be necessary to ensure that the intent of this bill is met, 
safeguards such as requiring explicitly that 50 percent of the 
restoration benefits are achieved by the time that 50 percent of the 
funds are spent.
  For now, this bill sets us on the right path, sets clear goals, gives 
needed authority to the Department of Interior and allows for 
continuing scientific review. It is our best chance of reversing the 
havoc which was inadvertently wreaked on the Everglades without 
damaging the prosperity of Florida.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is about more than saving the Everglades. It 
authorizes and directs the Army Corps of Engineers to restore and 
protect scores of rivers throughout the country from the Upper 
Susquehanna and the Ohio to the Mississippi and the Missouri and the 
Columbia. The bill also restores watersheds and wetlands, cleans up 
acid mine drainage, and remediates contaminated settlement in the Great 
Lakes and groundwater in California. In short, it is environmentally 
friendly, as it should be.
  This bill is also about saving lives, protecting property, and 
opening the gateways of commerce. New flood control and navigation 
projects are authorized and existing projects are modified and 
improved. For example, this legislation authorizes a critically 
important project for the Ports of New York and New Jersey.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill also takes the first important steps toward 
reforming the Corps of Engineers. Our committee, particularly my 
subcommittee, has looked into the various allegations leveled at the 
Corps over the last year. These are serious allegations with serious 
repercussions for the Nation's largest water resources program. This 
legislation takes an important step in responding to those concerns.
  For example, the bill authorizes an important pilot program for 
independent peer review of proposed projects. I strongly support this 
concept. The Corps needs to take this process seriously and to submit 
to peer review of significant controversial projects that will truly 
test this concept. I look forward to reviewing the results and working 
with my colleagues to further improve the procedures and methodologies 
for project development and selection.
  This is a good bill put together by a good bipartisan team, and I 
thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski) for his great work 
for these past 6 years. I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster). This is an 
effective team that produces for America.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my great appreciation to the very 
diligent, thoughtful, hard-working, energetic, forward, progressive 
Member, chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment, who has led that subcommittee through some very, very 
difficult issues in the past several years, especially in the past 2 
years, in Superfund and now on the Water Resources Development Act. The 
gentleman has been very cooperative. We really appreciate the 
bipartisanship that he has always demonstrated.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Deutsch).
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I too want to just thank the chairman of 
the committee and the ranking member and the chairman of the 
subcommittee and the ranking member. This is a great day, not just for 
the Everglades in South Florida but really for Florida and America and 
truly the entire country. This is Congress at its best, really doing 
the work of the American people in creating legislation that really is 
protecting our future for ourselves, our children, and our 
grandchildren.
  I am going to focus on what this bill does for the Florida 
Everglades. This bill is truly historic. This is one of the historic 
days over the 200-year history of this country and of this Congress. We 
are about to pass the largest ecosystem restoration project in the 
history of the world, in the history of the

[[Page H10354]]

world. It is a $7.8 billion restoration project for the Florida 
Everglades. It is doing what needs to be done.
  There is only one Everglades in the world. It happens to be in South 
Florida. It is the Everglades; it is the River of Grass. It is a 100-
mile wide river that is only about a foot deep that flows, that is just 
absolutely spectacular. I urge all of my colleagues to try to spend not 
just an hour, not just a day but maybe a week traveling through the 
Everglades to really appreciate the unique place on the planet Earth 
that it is.
  Unfortunately, sometimes people make mistakes, and the truth is the 
United States, through Corps projects, made mistakes, and other 
projects. The State of Florida made mistakes in terms of doing things 
that have done damage to the Everglades over a long period of time. We 
have shifted that around over the last couple of years, but this is the 
bill that is putting into paper literally about a 30-year restoration 
project and it is being done smart, it is being done right; it is 
bipartisan without exception.
  I also want to thank my colleague, who is in the chair now, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), in a neighboring district of mine. 
He and I have worked very closely in terms of this, and both Republican 
and governors of the State of Florida have worked very closely. 
Governor Bush, Governor Graham before him, Governor Chiles, Governor 
Martinez as well.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support it. I look forward to working 
with them every year into the future to make sure the implementation is 
done correctly.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).
  Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Shuster) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chairman engaging me in a colloquy with 
an issue in my district that has been ongoing for a number of years, 
and many of us that live in the First Congressional District of 
Maryland, which is the main stem of the Chesapeake watershed, for 
discussing this issue. The previous speaker talked about the Corps of 
Engineers restoring a rather unique body of water on the planet called 
the Everglades, and the effort that our committee and this Congress has 
done to restore the waters and the ecosystem for that magnificent 
place.
  What we are trying to do in the Chesapeake Bay is very similar. The 
Chesapeake Bay has had a program to restore this estuary for about 20 
years now, and we continue to make pretty good progress.
  The Corps of Engineers, to a large extent, has been very helpful in 
that effort. One of the problems in our area is, however, that there 
are bits and pieces of human activity that continues to degrade our 
watershed, our estuary, that marine ecosystem. One of those pieces that 
will have an adverse effect on the Chesapeake Bay is the deepening 
activity by the Corps of Engineers to an area called the Chesapeake and 
Delaware Canal, or the northern approach to the Port of Baltimore. The 
Corps of Engineers has conducted a feasibility study on whether or not 
this will benefit the taxpayers, or even the port, since 1988.
  From 1996 to this point, the Corps of Engineers has, through its own 
numbers, recognized that the benefit to cost ratio or the benefit to 
the taxpayers is not there; the financial justification for deepening 
this canal has not met the Federal criteria, which means that there 
will be no increase in commerce due to the deepening of the C&D Canal.
  So, in my judgment, since there is some adverse environmental 
degradation because of the deepening, there is no increase in commerce 
based on the Corps' own numbers, we should not spend $100 million, and 
that is the actual cost of this project to go forward. If we are going 
to spend $100 million, it should have some justification or we should 
have some value to that amount of money.
  So I appreciate the chairman's concern over this issue, and we will 
continue to work on this.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GILCHREST. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Gilchrest) for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say he has indeed shed some light on these 
issues, and while I have concerns with some of the legislative 
proposals that have been offered, I do, I believe, appreciate the 
underlying concerns; and I look forward to working with the gentleman 
to deal with this issue.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the very 
distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek).
  (Mrs. MEEK of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful and privileged 
to rise in strong support of the Water Resources Development Act, in 
particular the section on the Everglades. Those of us in Florida, and 
those of us throughout this country who cherish what we have in natural 
resources, we owe a debt of gratitude to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), for their hard and diligent work in bringing 
this important legislation to the floor and their strong support for 
Everglades restoration.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), my chairman, has inspired each 
member of the delegation to see the worth of this project and we are 
very happy that the Congress has seen fit to include the Everglades in 
their plans.
  Mr. Speaker, the Everglades are dying and all of us know that we must 
act now. We lose what is left of the Everglades within a year. We have 
a lot of people to be thankful for it that worked on this, that we have 
heard about this morning, including the administration, the State of 
Florida administration, Senators Graham and Smith and others, and all 
of the environmental community throughout this country.
  We owe a great deal to the late Marjorie Stoneham Douglas as she 
mentioned the Everglades as a ``river of grass,'' and now we have 
sought to have it the way Marjorie would have liked it to be with 
water.
  No one disputes that the Federal Government was pretty much 
responsible for what has happened in the Everglades. Fifty years ago, 
the government decided it would establish the Everglades National Park, 
but simultaneously they also set up a series of canals. I used to run 
around those canals over in South Bay and Belle Glade and Immokalee and 
all of those counties over there that they call on the muck, but as a 
series of these levees and other flood control methods were put in, it 
kind of disrupted the lifeblood of the Everglades.
  So as a result of these 50 years of neglect, we now have to look at 
the State of Florida that we have lost 46 percent of its wetlands and 
50 percent of its historic Everglades ecosystem. If we look at this 
chart here, we will see the Federal Government has a very clear 
interest in restoring the ecosystem. Since a large part of the portions 
of the lands are owned or managed by the Federal Government, they will 
receive the benefits of the restoration. There are four national parks, 
as we see here, belonging to the Federal Government; 16 national 
wildlife refuges, which make up half of the remaining Everglades. So 
this is an Everglades system that is pretty much in Florida, but the 
interest of the Nation is here on the restoration of the Everglades. 
The need for action is very clear. The legislation before us today, 
thanks to this excellent committee, they present an unprecedented 
compromise supported by the administration, State of Florida, 
environmental groups and, thanks to the Congress, a bipartisan 
Congress. They represent every major constituency, and here we will see 
the departments of the agencies in Florida that are responsible. The 
State of Florida has committed $2 billion to the restoration plan. Now 
it is our turn to respond.
  We need this bill, Mr. Speaker, and I know that they are monitoring 
very closely what we do here. It is extremely important, and I urge all 
of my colleagues to join me to preserve America's Everglades and ensure 
that one of the world's most endangered ecosystems is not lost. We do 
not need to lose the Everglades, because it is stability for the people 
of Florida and for the Nation.

[[Page H10355]]

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mica).
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, this morning we are really going to pass what 
I consider the most significant environmental legislation of a 
generation. This is really a historic occasion because we have replaced 
talk with action. We have replaced rhetoric with hard cash. In 1976, I 
was elected to the Florida legislature and they talked about restoring 
the Everglades; and I heard talk for more than 2 decades but finally we 
are taking action to restore the Everglades.
  I want to thank personally a gentleman who is not in Congress, a 
former majority leader, Bob Dole, who just down the hall from here 
helped to make a decision that launched this effort. I want to thank 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and also the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Shaw), the gentleman who is presiding now, who helped 
make this legislation possible; and also Governor Bush, who made a 
State commitment, replaced talk with action.

                              {time}  1100

  I was raised in south Florida, and I saw what they did to the 
Everglades. This is my district. It is to the north of the Everglades, 
north of Orlando.
  Just for the record, I am pleased that we have a balance, that areas 
like the St. John's River, like north Florida, central Florida and the 
Keys will also be protected and preserved, and also restored, so we do 
not make the same mistakes we made in south Florida.
  This bill has a balance. It is a great piece of legislation. I thank 
those involved again for this historic occasion and also for listening 
to our concerns in the north part of Florida, the central part of 
Florida, the south part of Florida and the rest of the country; and I 
urge passage of this historic measure.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
  (Mr. KIND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. KIND. I want to thank my ranking member for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2796, WRDA 2000. I 
especially want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman 
Shuster), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Boehlert), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Borski) and their entire staffs for taking a step to address the 
serious issue of reforming the Corps of Engineers in this legislation.
  Despite its historic reputation for professionalism and integrity, 
the Corps of Engineers is at present an embattled agency. Frequent 
litigation and investigations into claims that Corps projects lack 
sound economic justification or contain inadequate environmental 
provisions point to deficiencies in the Corps process for planning and 
approving water resources projects.
  I am particularly pleased that this legislation takes the first step 
in providing for an independent review of large or controversial water 
development projects.
  The language in the House version of WRDA 2000 is modeled after 
legislation that I introduced earlier this year, H.R. 4879. The central 
provision of that legislation was to create an independent panel of 
water resource experts to review projects that would cost in excess of 
$25 million or are subject to a substantial degree of public 
controversy.
  The House-worded bill creates a 3-year pilot program of the 
independent review process. It was my hope that stronger provisions 
than the pilot program would have been included in the bill before the 
House today. However, due to the closed rule, an amendment that was 
offered by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and myself 
obviously was not made in order.
  But the central purpose of the independent review is to lift the 
cloud currently hanging over the Corps and to enable the Corps to get 
on with its important work on our Nation's rivers, lakes, coastlines, 
and harbors. The best way to achieve this goal is to increase the level 
of transparency and accountability in the Corps planning process and to 
establish guidelines that strike a genuine balance between economic 
development and other social and environmental priorities. I cannot 
help but think if this pilot project or my legislation had been 
included in the Corps' authorizing language 50 years ago, we may not be 
here today talking about a big Florida Everglades restoration project.
  I also want to thank Members and the committee staff for working with 
me to include in this legislation a scientific modeling program for the 
Upper Mississippi River Basin, so we can do a better job of protecting 
and preserving one of America's greatest natural resources, the 
Mississippi River. It is a small provision, but it is a very important 
provision if we are to maintain the multiple uses of the Mississippi 
River, recreation, tourism and commercial.
  So, again, I want to thank the ranking members on the committee, the 
staff for the assistance we received; and I would urge my colleagues to 
support the House version of WRDA, given the important language and the 
important pilot project that is included to reform the Corps of 
Engineers.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
legislation.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster); 
the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert); the ranking member, 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar); and the ranking member, 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski), for their excellent work.
  Mr. Speaker, as a first term Member of this committee, I am impressed 
with the efficiency and the bipartisan cooperation and the outstanding 
staff.
  I want to thank the members for considering and authorizing on a 
contingent basis the Antelope Creek Project, for the four-state 
Missouri River Mitigation Project, and particularly for helping the 
taxpayer by the coordination of flood control and highway construction 
related to the Sand Creek Reservoir. It is an outstanding opportunity 
to coordinate this. It was time-urgent, and, therefore, very much 
appreciated that this legislation was moved forward.
  I urge my colleagues to strongly support this legislation.
  This Member is especially appreciative that he has had the 
opportunity in the 106th Congress to serve on the Transportation 
Committee and the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee. 
Clearly, it has been one of the highlights of the 106th Congress for 
this Member.
  This important legislation presents a tremendous opportunity to 
improve flood control, navigation, shore protection and environmental 
protection. This Member is pleased that the bill we are considering 
today includes contingent approval for the Sand Creek watershed project 
in Saunders County, Nebraska. This proposed project, which is a result 
of the Lower Platte River and Tributaries Flood Control Study, is 
designed to meet Federal environmental restoration goals, help provide 
state recreation needs, solve local flooding problems and preserve 
water quality. It is sponsored jointly by the Lower Platte North NRD, 
the City of Wahoo and Saunders County.
  The plans for the project include a nearly 640-acre reservoir, known 
as Lake Wanahoo, wetlands restoration and seven upstream sediment 
nutrient traps. The Sand Creek watershed project would result in 
important environmental and recreational benefits for the area and has 
attracted widespread support. It is especially crucial that the Sand 
Creek project is included in WRDA this year as the Nebraska Department 
of Roads is ready to begin design of a freeway in that area that will 
be routed across the top of a dam if the project is approved. If the 
Sand Creek project is not included in WRDA, a new bridge will have to 
be planned and built, which would make the project not economically 
feasible. With this authorization, contingent because of facts yet to 
be checked and planning study elements yet to be resolved, the way is 
clear to save the taxpayers funds, secure mutual project benefits in 
highway construction and flood control.
  This Member is also very pleased that contingent authorization of the 
Antelope Creek project is included in WRDA 2000. Antelope Creek runs 
through the heart of Nebraska's capital city of Lincoln. The purpose of 
the project is to solve multi-faceted problems involving the flood 
control and drainage problems in Antelope Creek as well as existing 
transportation and safety problems all within the context of broad land 
use issues. This Member continues to have a strong interest in

[[Page H10356]]

this project since he was responsible for stimulating the city of 
Lincoln, the Lower Platte South Natural Resources District, and the 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln to work jointly and cooperatively with 
the Army Corps of Engineers to identify an effective flood control 
system for Antelope Creek in the downtown area of Lincoln.
  Antelope Creek, which was originally a small meandering stream, 
became a straightened urban drainage channel as Lincoln grew and 
urbanized. Resulting erosion has deepened and widened the channel and 
created an unstable situation. A ten-foot-by-twenty-foot (height and 
width) closed underground conduit that was constructed between 1911 and 
1916 now requires significant maintenance and major rehabilitation. A 
dangerous flood threat to adjacent public and private facilities 
exists.
  The goals of the project are to construct a flood overflow conveyance 
channel which would narrow the flood plain from up to seven blocks wide 
to the 150-foot wide channel. The project will include trails and 
bridges and improve bikeway and pedestrian systems.
  Another Nebraska project was included on the contingent authorization 
list is for Western Sarpy and Clear Creek for flood damage reduction. 
Frankly, this Member must say he has substantial reservations about the 
Clear Creek project in light of concerns expressed by constituents in 
adjacent Saunders County and the lack of enthusiasm by relevant State 
officials. This Member reserves judgment whether the benefits outweigh 
costs and dislocation of property owners in the area.
  This Member is pleased that at least part of the language regarding 
the Missouri River Valley Improvement Act that he originally prepared 
to be offered as an amendment during Subcommittee consideration of WRDA 
is included in today's bill. Last year's WRDA legislation included a 
provision this Member promoted which helps to ensure that the Missouri 
River Mitigation Project can be implemented as envisioned. In 1986, 
Congress authorized over $50 million (more than $79 million in today's 
dollars if adjusted for inflation) to fund the Missouri River 
Mitigation Project to restore fish and wildlife habitat that were lost 
due to the construction of structures to implement the Pick-Sloan plan. 
At that time the Corps did not choose to include funding requests for 
implementing that Act in their budgeting process. That is why this 
Member, with assistance from other Members who represent the four 
states bordering the channelized Missouri River (Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas 
and Missouri), has taken the lead in providing funding to implement the 
Missouri River Mitigation Project which has just begun to become a 
reality during the last few years.

  This project is specifically needed to restore fish and wildlife 
habitat lost due to the Federally sponsored channelization and 
stabilization projects of the Pick-Sloan era. The islands, wetlands, 
and flat floodplains that are needed to support the wildlife and 
waterfowl that once lived along the river are dramatically reduced. An 
estimated 475,000 acres of habitat in Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri and 
Kansas have been lost because of Federal action in creating the flood 
control projects and channelization of the Missouri River. Today's 
fishery resources are estimated to be only one-fifth of those which 
existed in pre-development days.
  The success of the project has resulted in a concern related to the 
original study that outlined habitat needs. Under this study, acreage 
goals for each state were listed and these goals are generally 
considered to be an acreage limitation for each state. Nebraska and 
Kansas have already reached their acreage limits and Missouri is fast 
approaching its ceiling. Before long, Iowa will also reach its acreage 
limit.
  To correct this problem, the WRDA legislation enacted last year 
authorized provisions initiated by this Member to increase mitigation 
lands in the four states of 25% of the lands lost, or 118,650 acres. In 
addition, the Corps of Engineers--in conjunction with the four states--
was directed to study the amount of funds that would need to be 
authorized to achieve that acreage goal.
  The study has been completed and it appears that cost estimates for 
restoring the acreage authorized in last year's WRDA will amount to 
more than $700 million over the next 30-35 years. This Member greatly 
appreciates the inclusion of an increased authorization level of 
funding for the Missouri River Mitigation Project of $20,000,000 for 
each fiscal year from FY2001 through FY2010.
  This increase would allow the project to better balance the needs of 
nature, recreation and navigation. It will also benefit communities 
preparing for the bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark Expedition 
beginning in 2003. Until funding authorization is increased, the Corps 
and the states cannot finalize plans to add habitat restoration, 
identify and prioritize sites for restoration, respond to willing 
sellers, or engage in construction or maintenance activities. It is 
important to note that many frequently flooded landowners along the 
Missouri River have asked the Corps to buy their land to avoid annual 
flood losses. However, in most years, the Corps has had insufficient 
funds to meet the needs of these struggling landowners.
  Finally, the WRDA bill also includes legislative language initiated 
by this Member to authorize a pilot program to test the design-build 
method of project delivery on a maximum of five civil engineering 
projects. Such a program will provide significant benefits and yield 
useful information.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to support 
this important bill. In the short time left in the 106th Congress, we 
must work to ensure WRDA becomes law this year.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on Rules.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. I should 
state for the record that he was willing to offer me 1 minute during 
this debate, until I told him I was going to extend compliments to him, 
and that is how I got the 2 minutes of time here.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to say how much I appreciate the great work 
of the chairman of the committee, the chairman of the subcommittee and, 
of course, the ranking members of both the full committee and the 
subcommittee on this issue. As we look at the wide range of issues that 
have been discussed over the last few minutes, reform of the Corps, 
this important work in the Everglades, I am even more enthusiastic in 
my support of this legislation.
  But I rise to again extend compliments for the fact that this 
committee chose to take and include the authorization on a very 
important piece of legislation that is impacting not just the area 
which I am privileged to represent in Los Angeles, but in fact the 
entire country. In the middle part of the last decade, the discovery of 
perchlorate in the groundwater was something that came to the forefront 
in Southern California. Mr. Speaker, this came from the fact that 
during the 1950s and 1960s, during the Cold War buildup, that companies 
were in fact disposing of spent rocket fuel, legally, I should 
underscore.
  Well, since that time, some of the companies that were involved in 
that buildup during the Cold War are still in existence, but many of 
them are not in existence. I believe that those companies that are 
responsible, obviously, should shoulder the burden of this. But we 
obviously have potential legal problems, and this could be drawn out in 
the courts for many, many years. During that period of time, 
perchlorate will continues to seep into the groundwater.
  That is why this legislation is so important to move forward, because 
cleaning up the groundwater that has the potential of impacting 7 
million people in Southern California, but also trying to figure out 
how we will effectively address this in the future and for other parts 
of country, is an important part of this measure.
  So I again compliment my colleagues for their vision and for 
including this very important measure, and I urge all to vote in favor 
of this very important legislation.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that no bill is all good or all bad, 
and we have certainly heard about the attributes of this bill. But I 
come down on the side of this being a bad bill, for the simple reason 
that if you care about Corps reform, or if you care about reform to the 
agencies basically underlying this bill, this bill is a very bad bill.
  I say that, first of all, if you look at the bill itself, we have in 
place a somewhat bizarre process, and that is for weeks now we have 
been sort of in the military mode of ``hurry up and wait'' and ``hurry 
up and wait'' as we have been waiting for conference reports. Yet, when 
this bill comes along, it basically speeds through the process with a 
closed rule, despite the fact it has not been marked up in committee, 
and the question is why? Why does this speed through this way? Why do 
we not deal with reform right now? I think the answer, very clearly, is 
in the way that this bill has spiralled out of control. It spiralled 
from basically being a $2 billion bill to a $6 billion bill.

[[Page H10357]]

  To me, this bill is similarly nothing more than a feeding frenzy. 
Sharks are supposedly the ones that feed; but this is a piggy feeding 
frenzy, when I think about this bill.
  I will give an example of that. There is a long list of projects that 
I have here on several sheets. But an example of one would be a $15 
million navigation project in False Pass Harbor, Alaska, that would 
serve a grand total of 86 boats; $15 million for 86 boats.
  The other thing that I think is wrong with this bill from the 
standpoint of reform is that it is dessert before dinner. Consistently 
in the legislative process what we try and do is couple good with bad; 
and if we can get enough of that together, we send the bill forward, 
because reform is hard. Passing appropriations, passing $6 billion 
worth of spending in terms of authorization, is very easy; but we need 
to couple that with reform. That is not done in this bill.
  There have been a number of very interesting articles within the 
Washington Post talking about how the Corps of Engineers desperately 
needs to be reformed, and we basically skip that, talking about how 
there is, for lack of a better term, waste, fraud and abuse in the 
Corps, and how the Corps has become something akin to or nothing more 
than a ``water boy'' for the U.S. Congress.
  This bill had in it the chance to deal with the Corps, and, 
unfortunately, it does not. I would give an example of this. Right now 
if you look at the benefit-to-cost ratio with Corps projects, it is 
simply one-to-one. If you pass that threshold, it is something that can 
be authorized. To me, that does not make sense, because what that means 
fundamentally is if you put $10 into a project, you will get $10 back 
out. You may get more. That is the minimum threshold. That is the 
minimum threshold, one-to-one.
  What that means to the United States taxpayer is he gets no return on 
his investment on a one-to-one ratio. It may be good, if it is in South 
Carolina, if it is in Alaska, if it is in California, for the 
Congressman or the Senator in that local district or in that local 
State; but it is not at all good for the United States taxpayer as a 
whole.
  If you look on the back of any penny, what you see are the words ``E 
Pluribus Unum,'' from the many, one. This bill, unfortunately, does not 
incorporate that.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 40 seconds to the very 
distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge).
  Mr. MINGE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the ranking member for 
yielding me time. I would also like to expression my appreciation to 
the members of the committee and the chairman and the ranking member 
for their work on this and other legislation.
  I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) with respect to the scientific modeling that 
is necessary with respect to the Upper Mississippi. We certainly need 
to better understand our rivers and ensure that as we proceed with 
projects and initiatives that affect these rivers, we implement 
policies and the Corps implements legislation in a way that is 
beneficial in the long term. We do have major proposals that are facing 
us here in Congress with respect to the Upper Mississippi lock and dam 
system.
  The topic that I would like to address for the balance of my time has 
to do with the Corps' administration of section 404 of the Clean Water 
Act. I recognize that it is not in this bill, but I hope that before 
long we are able to take this up and modernize the work of our Federal 
agencies.
  One of the most embarrassing experiences that I have had as a Member 
of Congress occurred last summer when I hosted a meeting between the 
Natural Resources and Conservation Service and the Army Corps of 
Engineers at a location within my congressional district to explore 
ways that we could better cooperate so that we could administer Federal 
programs in a coordinated way, rather than having an adversarial 
relationship between two Federal agencies.
  I found, to my amazement and my embarrassment, that the Army Corps of 
Engineers in particular was cavalier and was hostile to the concept of 
trying to work with another agency. This, in my opinion, is 
unacceptable; and it is unbecoming to the Federal Government, to have a 
clash of agencies and a lack of interest in trying to identify a way to 
work this clash out.
  Mr. Speaker, whether this problem occurs at the national level or at 
the St. Paul office of the Army Corps of Engineers, I do not know; but 
I believe it is absolutely critical that we get to the bottom of it, 
and that we end this type of bickering between Federal agencies.
  We have hundreds of farmers that are being told, ``Our agency has 
decided this. We have another agency, and we do not know what they will 
do or when they will do it.'' This is what leads to cries for an 
abolition, whether it is of the Corps or a variety of other programs.
  I would like to simply ask my colleagues, the Chair of the committee 
and the ranking member, if we could work together in the next year to 
try to identify a way to solve this type of problem.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds to say it is a 
matter of concern to me that the gentleman brings this matter to the 
floor. Certainly that should not have occurred, and we will work with 
the gentleman in the future to address that matter and bring about 
comity between the Corps and sister Federal agencies.

                              {time}  1115

  Yes, we did have a memorandum of agreement earlier between these 
agencies. I thought this had been worked out and, unfortunately, that 
memorandum of agreement is now treated as if it is irrelevant.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge) 
that I certainly want to work with him as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
California (Mr. Ose).
  Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Chairman Shuster) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his 
leadership in bringing this bill to the floor and the hard work put in 
by the gentleman and his staff to include the many projects needed to 
provide critical flood control for so many.
  Mr. Speaker, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency has been 
working with the Army Corps of Engineers to implement the historic 
flood control project for the Sacramento region known as the Common 
Elements. The Common Elements Project was authorized in the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1999, and I thank the gentleman for his 
work on that bill as well.
  Unfortunately, recent analysis of the geology along the East Levee of 
the Sacramento River has shown an extremely porous condition exists. 
This condition can lead to seepage under the levee which will degrade 
the levee foundation and weaken the levee's structural integrity.
  In order to compensate for this serious problem, the Corps of 
Engineers will need to significantly alter the design and construction 
along this portion of the East Levee than was originally anticipated, 
thus leading to significantly higher costs than authorized in WRDA in 
1999.
  I understand the reluctance of the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Chairman Shuster) to increase the authorized spending levels by $80 
million. This is a significant cost increase, and Congress is entitled 
to have specific information that justifies such a large additional 
expenditure. While this additional cost may very well be justified, the 
information given to date by both the Sacramento Area Flood Control 
Agency and the Corps of Engineers to Congress is very minimal, and it 
did not come until the committee was almost ready to bring the bill to 
the floor.
  In fact, the Corps of Engineers Sacramento District did not release 
the increased cost estimate until August 16 of this year. The report 
makes no mention of how the money would be spent, nor does it give any 
specifics on the necessary changes. I look forward to working with the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) on getting more specific 
information and accountability from the Sacramento

[[Page H10358]]

Area Flood Control Agency and the Corps of Engineers Sacramento 
Division office on how this money will be spent before Congress 
approves the increased costs. I thank the gentleman for his 
consideration and cooperation.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OSE. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman he certainly 
is correct that we have had little time to review this proposal. 
Indeed, we still do not have enough information to make a sound 
judgment on it; and hopefully over the coming days, the local sponsor 
and the Corps will provide additional information which will be helpful 
in evaluating the proposal.
  I certainly agree that we should take every reasonable action to 
assure that the water resources needs of the area are addressed.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OSE. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I concur in the gentleman's concern. I 
make many visits to the Sacramento area to see my family there, my son 
and daughter-in-law.
  Mr. OSE. The gentleman is always welcome.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I have bicycled over those levies and 
talked to the orchardmen on the other side, who can testify to the 
seepage under those levies, and that is a matter that we need to 
address and the Corps should be working on. And I concur in the 
gentleman's concern and look forward to working with him on this 
matter.
  Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would tell the gentleman 
from Minnesota he is always welcome in Sacramento.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. There is great bicycling out there.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Brown), our distinguished colleague on the Committee on Transportation.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank very 
much the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for bringing this bill to the floor.
  The Everglades project is very important to the State of Florida and, 
in fact, to the entire country. But I do have a concern, and I thank 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for working with me on my 
concerns.
  This is the largest project in the history of the United States, and 
it is important that this project is one of inclusion and that there is 
minority and female participation, not only in contracting, but in 
employment and in training. So I am very concerned that we have a 
policy statement, the same kind of policy statement that we had when we 
did the transportation TEA21.
  Florida does not have a great history of inclusion and, in fact, with 
our Governor Jeb Bush and his one Florida plan, we have gotten rid of 
affirmative action, so there will not be opportunities to participate 
in this project with taxpayers' dollars unless the policy is stated 
from the Federal Government status.
  This is very important. This is taxpayers' money. This project is 
over 20 years, and we must have a public policy statement in this bill 
as to how these taxpayers' dollars are going to be used.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Minnesota 
(Mr. Oberstar), our distinguished ranking member, and the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), our distinguished chairman, not only 
for their leadership in this matter but all other matters that come 
before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the great 
job that they do.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to engage the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster), as well as the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson) for 
the purpose of a colloquy. I also rise to ask for the gentleman's 
consideration in including the authorization language in this 
legislation to benefit the lower Mississippi valley region.
  As the gentleman may know, I have introduced bipartisan legislation, 
H.R. 2911, that would create the Delta Regional Authority, an economic 
development tool similar to the Appalachian Regional Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to call the Arkansas portion of the Delta 
my home, but the Delta region consistently ranks as one of the poorest 
and most underdeveloped areas in the country.
  This legislation would provide funds and resources specifically to 
this region.
  Due to the efforts of the representatives of this region, we have 
been fortunate to receive $20 million in energy and water development 
appropriations.
  We simply wish to include the necessary authorization language in 
this bill so we may begin to provide substantial assistance to the 
Delta region.
  As the bill before the House today, WRDA 2000, continues through the 
legislative process, I hope the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster) will consider including the authorizing language for the Delta 
Regional Authority in this bill.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BERRY. I yield to the gentlewoman from Missouri.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Arkansas for his yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Chairman Shuster) for the hard work and leadership the gentleman has 
provided on this important piece of legislation and ask, along with the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry), for the gentleman's consideration 
of including authorizing language for the Delta Regional Authority as 
WRDA 2000 moves towards a conference committee with the Senate.
  As the gentleman knows, the Mississippi Delta is home to remarkable 
history, culture and natural resources, and I am sure proud to 
represent the wonderful people of this region; however, our Delta 
communities have not shared in America's prospering economy of the last 
few years and have historically faced unique economic challenges.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) 
has led a bipartisan effort to establish the Delta Regional Authority 
and refocus our efforts on promoting jobs and economic development in 
the region. His bipartisan proposal is contained in H.R. 2911 and is 
supported by 21 Republicans and Democrats in the region, including our 
colleagues, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Dickey) and the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), among others.
  As WRDA 2000 continues through the legislative process, I hope the 
gentleman will consider including the urgently needed authorizing 
language for the Delta Regional Authority.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I, of course, have greatly sympathized with the concerns 
of the Mississippi Delta Region counties and the area's Members of 
Congress who are working on ways to address the economic distress this 
area has experienced far beyond that of Appalachia.
  President Clinton, while he was Governor of Arkansas, served as chair 
of the Lower Mississippi Development Commission to study the needs of 
the economically distressed area. There are some ways that we can help 
establish the Mississippi Delta Commission in the course of further 
work on this WRDA legislation as it moves through conference.
  I know that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) is 
sympathetic and I certainly am and we will see what we can do.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Emerson) that representing part of Appalachia myself in 
Pennsylvania, I sometimes feel as if I know more about the need for 
economic development and the problems with lack of economic development 
than I wish I knew. It is a terrible problem, and so I want to be very 
helpful as we move forward. I hope we can do something.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H10359]]

  Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers, but I will close for our 
side.
  Mr. Speaker, it has been widely reported that the issue or one of the 
issues certainly that delayed this bill from floor consideration was 
the applicability of the Davis-Bacon Act to the non-Federal 
contributions to Corps projects. It has always been my belief and 
experience that Davis-Bacon applies to all aspects of Federal public 
works projects, regardless of whether the Corps is doing the work, or a 
non-Federal sponsor is contributing to the work. These are Federal 
public works projects. Davis-Bacon should apply.
  The Corps was not consistently applying Davis-Bacon wage protections 
to the non-Federal contribution for Corps projects, and I was prepared 
to offer legislative language to remedy the situation. Such action is 
not necessary now that the Corps, the Department of the Army, the 
Department of Labor and the White House itself got together, reviewed 
the matter in a meeting in my office and have come to an agreement that 
Davis-Bacon does apply.
  The wage provisions apply to non-Federal contributions to Corps of 
Engineer projects and an appropriate statement of policy on this matter 
is being formulated to make this matter very clear.
  Mr. Speaker, the Corps of Engineers even in some debate here on the 
floor, but also in news accounts widely distributed across the country 
has come under assault. I would like to pay tribute to the Corps of 
Engineers as they celebrate their 225th anniversary. During that 2\1/4\ 
centuries, it has established itself as the Nation's oldest, largest, 
most experienced government organization in water and related land 
engineering matters, extraordinary, competent, life-saving, economic-
development enhancing service has been provided to this country and its 
people by the Corps of Engineers during these 2\1/4\ centuries.
  Few people know that the Corps of Engineers once had jurisdiction 
over Yellowstone Park and over Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks, 
until the National Park Service was established in 1916. Lieutenant Dan 
Kingman of the Corps in 1883, and later Kingman would become the Chief 
of Engineers, wrote of the corps' work on Yellowstone, quote, ``The 
plan of development which I have submitted is given upon the 
supposition and in the earnest hope that it will preserve as nearly as 
may be as the hand of nature left it, a source of pleasure to all who 
visit and a source of wealth to none.''
  A few years later, John Muir, the founder of the Sierra Club said, 
quote, ``The best service in forest protection, almost the only 
efficient service, is that rendered by the military. For many years, 
they have guarded the great Yellowstone Park, and now they are guarding 
Yosemite. They found it a desert, as far as underbrush, grass and 
flowers are concerned. But in 2 years, the skin of the mountains is 
healthy again; blessings on Uncle Sam's soldiers, as they have done the 
job well, and every pine tree is waving its arms for joy.''

                              {time}  1130

  Another great American said, ``The military engineers are taking upon 
their shoulders the job of making the Mississippi River over again, a 
job transcended in size only by the original job of creating it.'' That 
was Mark Twain.
  Together, those statements say a lot about the Corps of Engineers and 
pay tribute to its work, to its legacy for all Americans: protecting 
people, protecting cities against flood, enhancing river navigation, 
America's most efficient means of transportation of goods; and, for me, 
protection of the Great Lakes, one-fifth of all the fresh water on the 
entire face of the Earth.
  The Corps of Engineers deserves recognition, which it does not 
sufficiently receive, for all of these works and the great contribution 
it makes to the economic well-being, to the environmental enhancement 
of this country.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention that there is a 
provision in here that names a unit of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area 
Wilderness in my district as the Bruce F. Vento Unit of the Boundary 
Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
  Bruce Vento understood the great oration of Chief Seattle at the 
signing of the treaty of 1854 when he said, ``The Earth does not belong 
to man, man belongs to the Earth.'' Bruce Vento dedicated his career to 
man's responsibility to the earth, to environmental protection. Cicero, 
the great Roman orator and Senator said, ``Gratitude is not only the 
greatest virtue, it is the parent of all others.'' In gratitude for 
Bruce Vento's service to the enhancement of our environment, I am very 
pleased that we are able to include this provision in this legislation.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this indeed is historic environmental legislation, not 
only because it provides for water resource protection and development 
throughout these United States, but most particularly because this is 
the largest ecosystem restoration project in the history of the world.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), who deserves so much credit for 
that, along with so many others around the country.
  (Mr. SHAW asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, 
and I thank the chairman for giving me this privilege of being able to 
close debate.
  Mr. Speaker, we here in this Chamber are only the voices speaking out 
for the millions of Americans who do care about the environment, and 
leading that in this House, of course, we have our great chairman, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  I had the privilege of working with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) both in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
and the Committee on Public Works; and the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Borski), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), who I think 
thinks he is representing Florida for the great work he has done for 
the restoration of the Everglades. Of course, we have many of the 
gentleman's New Yorkers in Florida, so I am sure that has been a great 
effort of his.
  Also, thanks to the gentlemen from Florida (Chairman Young) and the 
ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller), for the 
work they have done in their committees with regard to the Everglades.
  Secretary Babbitt, whose name has been missing from this debate, he I 
think has given us an extraordinary amount of attention in the 
Everglades, and his name should certainly be referenced in our 
discussion.
  And in the other body we have our two great Senators from Florida, 
Senator Connie Mack, who we are going to miss after this year, and 
Senator Bob Graham, who has really gotten deeply involved in matters 
pertaining to the Everglades.
  This has truly been a great moment of great bipartisan effort. I 
think the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) may have stated it 
best in his closing remarks when he said that the Earth does not belong 
to man, that man belongs to the Earth. This is certainly a recognition.
  Many roads are paved with great intentions that go in the wrong 
direction. This certainly is the case and has been the case with regard 
to the ecosystem of south Florida. Starting from just south of Orlando 
and going south to Lake Okeechobee, many years ago it was thought to be 
a great idea to get rid of the flooding, straighten the Kissimmee 
River, and have it dump directly into Lake Okeechobee.
  It worked, but it worked too well, because it brought all of the 
agricultural runoff down into the bottom, which has really changed the 
very nature of Lake Okeechobee. Some of the oldtimers down there will 
tell us that in the old days we could read the date off of a dime that 
was laying on the bottom of Lake Okeechobee. Now we cannot find the 
dime. It has changed considerably.
  But we are addressing that issue, and thanks to this great committee 
that this bill is coming out of, that restoration project is underway.
  Now it is time to change the nature of the rest of the sheet flow, 
the runoff that runs south over that great river of grass. It was once 
thought that this ecosystem was indestructible, that we could do 
anything and get away with it. Mother Nature had different ideas.

[[Page H10360]]

 We cannot. The very water that now shoots down in by ways of canals 
into the Florida Bay has greatly changed the salinity of the Florida 
Bay itself. The natural grasses that grew on the floor of Florida Bay 
have been damaged because of the salinity and how it varies.
  There are many other things that need to be studied, but we have a 
great blueprint. That blueprint is the Everglades to be restored before 
man changed it. We need to go back as close as we can.
  But when we see the great cooperation that we have received not only 
from this body, but we have to go to my own State of Florida and talk 
about my Florida legislature that has stood up, stepped up to the plate 
and has put the money up, the matching funds required in order to make 
this happen; and all of the interests involved, the agricultural 
interests that wanted to go one way, the environmental interests that 
wanted to go the other way, the developers, the Miccosukee and Seminole 
Indian tribes, we had a coming together that was absolutely incredible. 
It was almost a magic moment.
  It is very important on this bill that we not only vote it in today 
by the great bipartisan vote that I am confident of, but that we 
conference it promptly and get it passed into law and get it to the 
President's desk for signature. This is tremendously important because 
of that fragile balance that we have, the fragile balance of State and 
all of the interests that I have mentioned.
  I can tell the Members, this is really a wonderful, wonderful moment 
in this institution and in the history of the country. It is not just a 
Florida issue. I would like to say, and I would want to absolutely 
recognize the greatness of our Florida delegation in working together, 
with interest in north Florida as well as south Florida, in bringing 
together what is going to happen here in just a minute or so; that is, 
the passage of this great bill.
  Mr. Speaker, this Congress, this 106th Congress, it can look back and 
say that we put forth the greatest, largest environmental restoration 
project in the history of this globe. It is a wonderful moment for this 
institution. It is a wonderful moment for our country. I urge a yes 
vote.
  Mr. Speaker, it is remarkable to have this broad a cross-section of 
Americans supporting legislation on any single issue. But protection of 
the Everglades is a national priority, because most Americans speak of 
this national treasure in the same breath as the Redwood Forests, the 
Mississippi River, Old Faithful, the Appalachian Trail, or the Grand 
Canyon.
  Most Americans also understand the basic concepts of clean water and 
the delicate balance that nature requires. Everglades restoration is 
about restoring the balance that was disturbed by man-made structures 
as we pursued the noble goal of flood protection in decades past.
  That is why so many diverse interests have come together, in historic 
fashion, to support enactment of a Comprehensive Everglades Restoration 
Plan, as outlined by the Comprehensive Review Study undertaken by the 
Central & Southern Florida Project, led by the U.S. Corps of Engineers 
and the South Florida Water Management District. (A list of 
participating organizations is submitted herein for the Record, with 
much applause for their work.)
  That is why our underlying Everglades restoration bill, H.R. 5121 and 
S. 2796/2797, as modified by today's manager's amendment and the 
stellar work undertaken in the other Chamber, has been endorsed by 
numerous organizations, from environmental groups to agricultural 
groups to home builders and other businesses, to utility districts and 
other local governmental bodies, to recreational users and Native 
American Indian tribes. (A list of organizations supporting the 
legislation is also submitted for the Record.)
  This legislation is as much about a process to make future decisions 
affecting the ecology of South Florida as it is about specific projects 
authorized by this bill. I am pleased that Members from other parts of 
the country have respected our State's right to determine what is 
correct within the context of our own State water laws. While 
recognizing that Florida has come to the table as a full and equal 
partner in this restoration effort, for the good of all Americans.
  The State of Florida has already taken the extraordinary step of 
putting up 50 percent of the up-front construction costs, which 
Governor Jeb Bush has shepherded through the State legislature as a 
commitment in anticipation of the federal response. We at the federal 
level can no longer delay answering the call.
  I thank Chairmen Bud Shuster, Don Young, and Sherry Boehlert, along 
with the Ranking Members Oberstar, Miller, and Borski, my Florida 
colleagues and co-sponsors from other states for their leadership and 
support of doing the right thing.
  Citizens from all over the country understand that this is not a 
local issue affecting only South Florida--although not simply because 
our state boasts tourists and future residents from all 50 states and 
many foreign countries.
  What is good for the environment is good for us all, and with a vote 
to pass Everglades restoration in the House, we can truly lay claim to 
a legacy for the 106th Congress:
  We will have worked in bipartisan, bicameral fashion to deliver a 
huge victory for the American people and a huge victory for the 
environment, with the largest and most significant environmental 
restoration project in the history of the United States, if not the 
history of the world.
  Let me discuss a little about the Everglades. There is no other 
ecosystem like it anywhere in the world. It is home to 68 individual 
endangered or threatened species of plants and animals, which are 
threatened with extinction unless we act. The Everglades has also been 
shown to play a significant role in global weather patterns.
  Several years of research by state and federal scientists, private 
environmental and agricultural experts and the Corps of Engineers 
produced the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), which 
includes 68 individual projects to be completed by the Corps of 
Engineers over the next 36 years. The total cost of the plan is $7.8 
billion, to be shared 50/50 with the state of Florida.
  The CERP will restore more than 1.7 billion gallons of freshwater per 
day to the natural system, which is currently lost to sea via the St. 
John and Caloosahatchee rivers. Flood control projects constructed by 
the Corps of Engineers in the 1940s destroyed the original freshwater 
sheet flow through the natural system, and more than 50% of the 
original ecosystem has been lost. This plan will restore the Everglades 
to almost 80% of its original condition.
  In its natural state, the Everglades covered over 18,000 square miles 
and was connected by the flow of water from the Lake Okeechobee through 
the vast freshwater marshes to Florida Bay and on to the coral reefs of 
the Florida Keys.
  The Everglades is the largest remaining tropical and subtropical 
wilderness remaining in the United States. Its wonders include unique 
habitats of sawgrass prairies, tree islands, estuaries and the vast 
waters of Florida Bay.
  The lands owned and managed by the Federal government--4 national 
parks and 16 national wildlife refugees and 1 national marine sanctuary 
which comprise half of the remaining Everglades--will receive the 
benefits of the restoration.
  But this legislation is designed to restore the entire ecosystem of 
the Everglades, not just the national parks and federally owned lands. 
This should be of comfort to those who enjoy the recreational benefits 
of such wilderness areas, as well as those living in communities on the 
periphery of the Everglades who are affected by the water flows of the 
system. I have heard from local property owners, sportsmen's chapters, 
airboat associations and Safari Club chapters and understand how 
important this is to to them.
  The compelling Federal interest has been matched by the State of 
Florida, which has already stepped up and committed $2 billion to the 
effort. Florida's Fish & Wildlife Agency will maintain its strong role. 
Congress needs to respond to that pledge.
  Finally, there are additional opportunities for community involvement 
contemplated or even called for by this legislation. One area is in the 
scientific verification procedures. Our Everglades legislation includes 
a provision for independent scientific review, contemplating that the 
National Academy of Sciences or some other qualified body or bodies 
will convene a panel to review the Plan's progress towards achieving 
the stated natural restoration goals. I believe it is appropriate to 
point out that, in South Florida, we have a number of institutions that 
could contribute significantly to such scientific research because of 
their demonstrated competency in such areas.
  For example, Florida international University, one of the leading 
research universities in my State, has done a remarkable job in 
fostering an ecosystem approach to meeting the challenges created by 
population growth in one of the most environmentally sensitive regions 
on Earth--the greater Everglades ecosystem. Spearheading this effort is 
the Southeast Environmental Research Center (FIU-SERC) with its 
experienced scientific staff and established network of collaboration 
with university, federal, state, local, and private organizations. FIU-
SERC has extensive expertise in conducting monitoring assessments for 
the Everglades that can contribute to the Adaptive Monitoring and 
Assessment Program in

[[Page H10361]]

WRDA. The Corps of Engineers can greatly benefit from utilizing FIU-
SERC's existing resources to conduct future monitoring activities in 
the Everglades.
  In addition, the Museum of Discovery and Science in Fort Lauderdale, 
Florida, is uniquely situated to provide an interpretive site to carry 
out public outreach and educational opportunities pertaining to the 
restoration of the Everglades. In August, 1999, the Museum signed an 
agreement with the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force to 
provide public education outreach in conjunction with the restoration 
effort. The Museum has a 25-year history of providing environmental 
science education to the public in innovative ways. It currently hosts 
more than 500,000 visitors annually and plans to build a dynamic, 
interactive facility called the Florida Environmental Education Center, 
as well as expanding its Florida Ecoscapes Exhibition. I hope that such 
activity would be looked upon favorably by the Corps of Engineers in 
developing an interpretive site partnership initiative for community 
outreach and assistance.
  Mr. Speaker, I include the following material on this legislation:

       The Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive 
     Review Study was led by the US Army Corps of Engineers, 
     Jacksonville District and the South Florida Water Management 
     District, located in West Palm Beach, Florida. Many other 
     federal, state, tribal and local agencies were active 
     partners in developing the Comprehensive Plan and that 
     partnership will continue through the implementation of the 
     Plan. Those agencies are listed below.
       US Department of the Army:
       US Army Corps of Engineers;
       Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
     Works.
       US Department of Agriculture:
       Agricultural Research Service;
       Natural Resources Conservation Service.
       US Department of the Interior:
       US Fish and Wildlife Service;
       US Geological Survey/Biological Resources Division;
       Everglades National Park;
       Everglades Research and Education Center;
       Biscayne National Park;
       Big Cypress National Preserve.
       US Department of Commerce:
       National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;
       National Marine Fisheries Service;
       National Ocean Service;
       Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.
       US Environmental Protection Agency.
       Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida.
       Seminole Tribe of Florida.
       State of Florida:
       Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services;
       Department of Environmental Protection;
       Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission;
       Governors Commission for a Sustainable South Florida;
       Governor's Office;
       South Florida Water Management District.
       Local Agencies:
       Broward County Department of Natural Resource Protection;
       Broward County Office of Environmental Services;
       Lee County Utility Department;
       Martin County;
       Miami-Dade Department of Environmental Resource Management;
       Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department;
       Palm Beach County Environmental Resource Management;
       Palm Beach County Water Utilities.
       Academic Institutions:
       Florida International University;
       University of Miami;
       University of Tennessee.


             supporters of the everglades restoration bill

     The Clinton-Gore Administration
     Governor Jeb Bush
     Seminole Tribe of Florida
     Miccosukee Tribe of Indians
     National Audubon Society
     National Wildlife Federation
     Florida Wildlife Federation
     World Wildlife Fund
     Center for Marine Conservation
     Defenders of Wildlife
     National Parks and Conservation Association
     The Everglades Foundation
     The Everglades Trust
     Audubon of Florida
     1000 Friends of Florida
     Natural Resources Defense Council
     Environmental Defense
     Florida Citrus Mutual
     Florida Farm Bureau
     Florida Home Builders
     American Water Works Association
     Florida Chamber of Commerce
     Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association
     Southeastern Florida Utility Council
     Gulf Citrus Growers Association
     Florida Sugar Cane League
     Florida Water Environmental Utility Council
     Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of America
     Florida Fertilizer and Agrichemical Association
     League of Women Voters of Florida
     League of Women Voters of Dade County
     Chamber South

  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank and praise the leadership and hard 
work of the following people, on behalf of those they represented in 
creating a consensus product, legislation to restore the American 
Everglades, as embodied in this bill:
  Governor Jeb Bush and his staff, especially Nina Oviedo and Clarke 
Cooper of the Governor's Washington office, Secretary David Struhs and 
Leslie Palmer of the Department of Environmental Protection, and Kathy 
Copeland of the South Florida Water Management District;
  Senator Bob Graham and Catharine Cyr-Randsom of his staff;
  Senator Connie Mack and C.K. Lee of his staff;
  Mike Strachn and Ben Grumbles of the Transportation & Infrastructure 
Committee;
  Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Michael Davis;
  Acting Assistant Secretary Mary Doyle and Peter Umhofer of the 
Department of the Interior;
  Tom Adams of the Audubon Society;
  Bob Dawson, representing the coalition of agriculture, home builders, 
and utility districts;
  Mary Barley, Bill Riley, and Fowler West of the Everglades Trust;
  Col. Terry Rice of Florida International University;
  Dexter Lehtinen, The Honorable Jimmy Hayes, and Lee Forsgren, 
representing the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians; and finally, my own 
staff, especially Donna Boyer, Mike Sewell, and Bob Castro.
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2796, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 and would like to emphasize my 
support specifically for the Everglades language contained in it.
  As many of my colleagues have already stated during this debate, the 
Everglades provisions represent a major step toward restoration of this 
unique ecosystem. As Chairman of the Interior Appropriations 
Subcommittee, I have become involved in this restoration effort, as it 
directly impacts the natural areas in federal ownership including 
Everglades National Park, Big Cypress Natural Preserve and several 
national wildlife refuges. Their future and that of the numerous 
species who make the Everglades their home, depend upon the success of 
this effort. Only if the Corps of Engineers carried out the restoration 
initiative properly will they survive.
  I commend the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee for recognizing that the environment must be the primary 
beneficiary of the water made available through the Comprehensive Plan 
for the restoration. The object of the plan is to restore, preserve and 
protect the natural system while also meeting the water supply, flood 
protection and agricultural needs of the region.
  As we make our way through this massive ecosystem restoration, I 
intend to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ensure 
that we remain focused on the restoration of the natural areas. I 
commend the Members on their bipartisan work in bringing this 
legislation to the floor today and urge the support of the House in 
passing it.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for S. 2796, the Water Resources development act of 2000. This historic 
legislation will provide funding for valuable projects across our 
nation and the 11th Congressional District of Illinois.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that three projects that are very 
important to my constituents were included in the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000 (WRDA). Legislative language was included in 
the bill which will ensure the continuation of valuable work by the 
Army Corps of Engineers at Ballard's Island in the Illinois River; the 
Ottawa YMCA will have land transferred to it from the Army Corps of 
Engineers for expansion of its facilities; and the Joliet Park district 
will have land transferred to it for use as their regional 
headquarters.
  Ballard's Island is a natural and historic treasure located in the 
Illinois River. However, the side channel around Ballard's Island has 
become severely clogged with sand and silt due to the Army Corps of 
Engineers erection of a closure structure at the end of the side 
channel of Ballard's Island in the 1940s. This side channel has since 
become increasingly clogged with sand and silt, the problem becoming 
severe over the past three decades. The original depth of the side 
channel was 19 feet but today it has been reduced to two feet, making 
the channel completely unusable. This channel was once a thriving and 
vibrant aquatic ecosystem, but it is now so choked with mud and 
sediment that it no longer supports the plants and animals it used to 
and it is no longer productive for local citizens.
  To solve these problems, the Army Corps is prepared to begin a 
Section 1135 Preliminary Restoration Plan for solving the river's woes. 
The Illinois Department of Natural Resources will be the 25% non-
federal sponsor for this project. However, the Illinois Department of 
Natural Resources has already begun work on removing sediment from the 
channel through a $250,000 state appropriation. The legislative

[[Page H10362]]

language included in this bill will ensure that the valuable work 
already begun on the river will continue and its habitat and ecosystem 
restored. This is a victory for the people who live on and love this 
river who have watched it slowly die--their river will be returned to 
them.
  Two other projects in this bill will help the people of Ottawa and 
Joliet, Illinois. The Ottawa YMCA is an outstanding community 
organization which already provides health and recreational services to 
hundreds of Illinois Valley families. In fact, because of the growing 
demand for these services, the Ottawa YMCA has launched a capital 
campaign to raise funds to expand its current facilities.

  Earlier this year, with construction about to begin on the $1.3 
million expansion project, YMCA officials learned that the U.S. 
Government was granted an easement in 1933 on the very piece of 
property intended as the site for the YMCA's expansion project. This 
easement, although never utilized, was intended for use in conjunction 
with the Army Corps of Engineers Illinois Waterway Project. On 
September 19, 2000 with legislative language provided to me by the Rock 
Island Army Corps district, I introduced H.R. 5216, a bill to convey 
the Army Corps easement back to the YMCA, ensuring that there will be 
no further questions about the land used by the YMCA for its expansion. 
I am pleased that H.R. 5216 was included in the Water Resources 
Development Act and that the good work of the Ottawa YMCA will be able 
to continue.
  WRDA also provides a new home for the Joliet Park District. The Army 
Corps of Engineers currently owns property located at 622 Railroad 
Street in Joliet, Illinois. The property has served several functions 
in its official use but has recently been vacated. This property is no 
longer used or needed by the Army Corps of Engineers and is in the 
process of being deemed ``excess.''
  The Joliet Park District has requested use of the land and buildings 
for its new location for its headquarters. The Park District currently 
has its headquarters and maintenance facilities in two separate, small 
locations on opposite sides of the City of Joliet. The approval of this 
property transfer will allow the Park District to increase its 
efficiency and save time and funds which can be much better used to the 
improvement of parks and recreation facilities. I am pleased that the 
Water Resources Development Act included H.R. 5389, legislation I 
introduced that conveys the land from the Army Corps of Engineers to 
the Joliet Park District.
  Mr. Speaker, this is good legislation and I commend Chairmen Boehlert 
and Shuster for their work and efforts on this legislation. I urge 
passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 by my 
colleagues.
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Speaker, today we take an historic step to restoring 
one of our nation's natural treasures, the Everglades. This will be the 
largest environmental project the Corps of Engineers has ever 
undertaken and Democrats and Republicans have come together to 
accomplish this great task.
  My friend and colleague Clay Shaw, the dean of our delegation, 
successfully guided this legislation through the House. Also, our 
Governor, Jeb Bush, has not wavered on his commitment to the 
Everglades. His tireless efforts guarantee state funding for the 
project over the next ten years.
  This bipartisan plan will restore, preserve and protect the South 
Florida ecosystem while saving generations from inheriting an 
environmental nightmare. Over a million Americans visit the Everglades 
system each year--enjoying the natural wonders of this remarkable spot. 
Though we should be alarmed that this important ecosystem is now half 
its original size. But today, we start to reverse that dangerous trend 
and begin undoing the mistakes of the past. I know our children and 
grandchildren will benefit from a stronger Everglades.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I wish to echo the sentiments of the 
gentleman from Florida, Mr. Shaw, about the FIU Southeast Environmental 
Research Center and reinforce the important contributions that the 
Center has made in the area of monitoring assessments in the 
Everglades. I would encourage the Corps of Engineers to explore ways to 
collaborate with FIU-SERC and utilize the Center's expertise in 
monitoring assessments. SERC has extensive expertise in Everglades 
restoration and can provide research and monitoring, technical 
assistance and infrastructure to support the Corps. FIU-SERC can also 
serve to coordinate technology transfer and apply the techniques and 
methodologies learned from CERP to other sustainable ecosystems.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 2796, the Water 
Resources Development Act. The communities in my district have learned 
first hand that the Army Corps of Engineers has become a large, bloated 
and intransigent bureaucracy. Now is the time for reform, and while I 
commend the Transportation Committee for their efforts to bring about 
some reform in the area of peer-review for projects in S. 2796, I 
believe more work must be done, and more efforts to shrink the size and 
power of the Corps of Engineers should be made.
  To illustrate the point, I am enclosing for the Record the following 
Op-Ed I recently submitted to the Aurora Sentinel regarding the need 
for reform in the Army Corps of Engineers.
  On a related topic, I believe that the public image and reputation of 
the Corps of Engineers might be improved tremendously if it would adopt 
some of the recommended policy changes suggested by the 1999 National 
Recreation Lakes Study Commission.
  Specifically, I believe it is time for the Corps to reverse its long-
standing opposition to cost-share proposals that would rehabilitate 
facilities on the recreational properties it leases to non-federal 
entities such as the State of Colorado.
  Over the last year and a half, I have worked with the interested 
parties to encourage the Corps to enter into a cost-share agreement 
with the state of Colorado to improve the recreational facilities of 
Cherry Creek Reservoir, Chatfield Reservoir, and Trinidad Reservoir 
State Parks.
  Cherry Creek, Chatfield, and Trinidad Reservoirs are each operated 
and maintained by the Corps, while the State manages all parks and 
recreation facilities on the surrounding federally-owned land. These 
reservoir-parks are the most valued sources of water recreation in 
Colorado, a state where virtually no natural large body of water 
exists. The three parks combined host almost 3.5 million visitors 
annually.
  Most recreational facilities in these parks were constructed over 25 
years ago. Entrance gates, trails, campsites, and outhouses are near 
states of disrepair. Worse, public safety is at risk if water, sewer, 
and Americans with Disabilities Act compliance improvements are not 
addressed. The State is not financially capable of meeting the repair 
and renovation needs without matching federal assistance.
  In a recent meeting with Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
Works, Dr. Joseph Westphal, I was assured by Secretary Westphal that 
the Corps is committed to beginning this cost share agreement as a 
pilot project. Governor Bill Owens has also committed the State of 
Colorado to meeting its financial obligation for the cost share 
program. Unfortunately, the project has not progressed as planned.
  As was demonstrated by previous recreational facility cost share 
agreements with the Bureau of Reclamation, these agreements are a 
tremendously efficient way to leverage federal dollars and to help 
preserve Colorado's quality of life. In addition, the facilities 
provided through the cost shares enable the Corps to meet their legal 
obligation to provide recreation on these three reservoirs.
  Because of the lack of an agreement, I proposed a policy reform in 
the form of an amendment to S. 2796 that instructed the Corps of 
Engineers to submit a plan in no less than one year on how it could 
implement cost-share programs with non federal entities for 
recreational purposes. While the amendment was not made in order, I 
intend to craft legislation that will seek to reform and improve the 
operations of the Corps of Engineers, and introduce the legislation 
when the 107th Congress convenes.

           A Bright Light Shed on the Army Corps of Engineers

                     (By Congressman Tom Tancredo)

       The evidence is in, and it is conclusive. The Army Corps of 
     Engineers has tried to throw a blanket over the heads of 
     American taxpayers in order to advance their own projects and 
     agenda, and the citizens around the Cherry Creek Dam and 
     Reservoir have been a top target.
       The Washington Post released an article on February 24th 
     entitled ``Generals Push Huge Growth for Engineers,'' which 
     details an internal push to expand the budget, size, and 
     scope of the Army Corps of Engineers.
       At the surface, the Corps has internally planned for growth 
     of their budget to $6.5 billion by 2005, more than $2 billion 
     greater than their 2000 budget, which breaks down more 
     specifically within the agency.
       The information obtained by the Washington Post also shows 
     that Corps officials had been pressured by superiors to ``get 
     creative with cost-benefit analysis in order to greenlight 
     major projects.''
       The Cherry Creek Dam controversy that has developed between 
     the Corps, the local community and local public officials 
     over the expansion of flood controls around the dam is even 
     more alarming with the information contained in the Corps 
     report proposing a ``program with targeted studies that 
     should lead to target construction activities with 
     continuation of historical success rates.''
       This answers a few questions I had surrounding the proposed 
     addition of flood controls to the Cherry Creek Dam. Why the 
     conflicting facts and figures from the Corps? And why have 
     they suppressed the concerns of local citizens and elected 
     officials, myself included? The answer to those questions is 
     evident in the report, the growth of the Corps is first and 
     foremost.

[[Page H10363]]

       Like many, I was skeptical of the need to add more flood 
     control onto the Cherry Creek Dam when the Corps had admitted 
     that the chances of a flood capable of breaking the dam, 24.7 
     inches in 72 hours, is approximately one in a billion. With 
     Metro Denver averaging around fourteen inches of moisture a 
     year, this would be a flood of biblical proportions.
       What the Corps has turned into is a major public works 
     department with over 37,000 workers attempting to capitalize 
     on the expansion of the American economy and proposed 
     government surpluses.
       Let me be the first to inform the Army Corps of Engineers 
     that the days of reckless government and fraud is over.
       America has more pressing needs--saving Social Security and 
     keeping our commitment to our nation's veterans--than to 
     needlessly expand the budget of an agency whose motto is, 
     ``growth.''
       I am just sorry that the citizens of this community have 
     had to endure what has become a stressful issue that has 
     scared many families and individuals and affected property 
     values in the proposed area.
       As this process moves forward, and both Congressman Joel 
     Hefley and I are discussing legislation that would require 
     the Corps to use criteria for similar projects more in line 
     with what the State of Colorado uses, I will keep the 
     communities best interests, and not the Corps, at the 
     forefront of the debate.

  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of the manager's amendment to the Water Resources Development 
Act of 2000. This bipartisan piece of legislation is a tribute to the 
outgoing Chairman Bud Shuster and Ranking Member Jim Oberstar. I want 
to touch on two components of the legislation that I wholeheartedly 
support.
  Representing a district that sits within a 100-year floodplain along 
Hurricane Alley is often a daunting but fulfilling task. Hurricane 
Floyd ripped through Eastern North Carolina more than one year ago, 
causing billions of dollars of damage and displacing thousands of 
families.
  While recovery is progressing and people's lives are slowing 
returning to normal, our rivers and streams remain clogged with debris 
from that horrific storm. If these streams are not immediately cleared 
after major disasters, flooding problems will be exacerbated and North 
Carolina will continue to remain vulnerable to extreme weather 
conditions. For instance, one country in my district, Onslow County, 
has almost 600 miles of rivers and streams that remain clogged, a 
continuing threat to life, property and economic development.
  Included in the legislation is a demonstration project authorizing 
the Army Corps of Engineers to remove accumulated snags and debris in 
Eastern North Carolina rivers and tributaries immediately following 
major disasters. The accumulated debris in our rivers and streams are a 
contributing factor in the disastrous floods experienced by eastern 
North Carolina in the last few years.
  Without this provision, flood control problems will worsen as urban 
centers are now being impacted by floodwaters. This emergency authority 
for the Army Corps of Engineers will help alleviate continued flooding 
within Eastern North Carolina and supplement other flood control 
programs.
  The proposed program will not only aid navigation and safety, but it 
will also help the flow of the rivers themselves. With this provision, 
Eastern North Carolina will be better prepared to deal with extreme 
weather events like Hurricanes Bertha, Fran, Dennis, Floyd and Irene in 
the future.
  The second provision I support is an authorization for hurricane and 
storm damage reduction for Dare County, North Carolina. The 
authorization affects the towns of Nags Head, Kill Devil Hills, and 
Kitty Hawk. I am a strong supporter of beach nourishment, not just for 
the 3 million tourists who visit our shores every year, but also for 
storm protection for our homes and infrastructure.
  It is not well remembered, but it is nevertheless a fact, that these 
communities--indeed most of North Carolina's Outer Banks--have been 
protected for well over a half a century by a line of dunes constructed 
by the federal government under the Works Progress Administration. 
These dunes have been a wise investment of resources. Now, however, 
these dunes and berms have deteriorated and must be repaired.
  Erosion along North Carolina's shoreline threatens the future 
existence of these beaches and shore protection is truly the only 
option available to ensure coastal areas will be here tomorrow. 
Nourishment of these beaches will provide the best protection against 
the devastating effects of storm surges on the dune system, private 
property, roads and other critical public infrastructure guaranteeing a 
healthy and fortified coastline.
  Without beach nourishment these reinforcement measures cannot take 
place. Unfortunately it takes years for the Army Corps of Engineers and 
the local communities to actually place sand on the affected beaches. 
Shore protection projects have become entangled with numerous state and 
federal environmental regulations.
  In addition, the projects are even further delayed by the Clinton-
Gore Administration's opposition to beach nourishment, under which 
there have been no new startups of beach nourishment programs. I am 
hopeful that a new Administration will support such a sound program to 
protect both our communities and precious natural resources. Rest 
assured that I will continue to support shore protection and other 
initiatives along the North Carolina coast. It is essential that we 
protect the entire coast for the inhabitants and visitors today as well 
for future generations.
  I commend the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for 
bringing this important legislation to the House floor. I hope it will 
be possible for us to improve this bill today and for the House and the 
other body to agree on a final version of this critical legislation 
prior to adjournment. This bill is a victory for Eastern North 
Carolina, a victory for Congress, and a victory for America.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Water 
Resources Development Act and I urge my colleagues to give it their 
full support as well. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of 
one provision of this bill that will begin the long over due effort to 
preserve the Everglades and restore them to their natural beauty.
  Mr. Speaker, with this legislation, we will begin to correct the 
mistakes we made over 40 years ago when we began development in and 
around the Everglades area. In those years, we did not have the 
scientific understanding of the ramifications of our actions, and the 
result was enormous damage to this vital ecosystem. Yet since that 
time, clear and compelling scientific data has shown the perilous state 
of the Everglades.
  Under the bill before us, 18,000 square miles of subtropical uplands, 
coral reefs and wetlands will be preserved, in addition to the habitat 
of 68 federally listed threatened and endangered species. Once 
implemented, 2 million acres of Everglades will be restored with a 50/
50 cost share between the state of Florida and the federal government, 
providing $100 million per year for 10 years.
  While I am pleased with this, it is only a first step in the 
preservation of the environment in Florida. As the state's population 
increases, Florida will experience increasing demands on its water 
resources. Mr. Speaker, I am committed to maintaining the federal-state 
partnership we have built for the Everglades, and I am pleased to be 
able to say that the legislation before this body has the support of a 
broad spectrum of groups and individuals, ranging from 
environmentalists, to agricultural and industry groups, to the Seminole 
Indians and the state of Florida. That broad array of support 
demonstrates just what we in this body can accomplish when we put 
partisan differences aside.
  Mr. Speaker, I was proud to work with my Republican and Democratic 
colleagues from Florida on this measure, and I will continue to work in 
the forefront of the effort to protect our state's unique environment. 
This is prudent, scientifically sound legislation that will preserve a 
valuable national asset for generations to come, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote in favor of this investment in our nation's future.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I have some serious reservations 
about this bill, especially those parts dealing with oceanfront 
development, dredging, and other projects to be carried out by the 
Corps of Engineers. I think the House should have had the chance to 
consider amendments that would have improved the bill. I regret that 
the rule adopted earlier does not permit that. However, I will vote the 
bill because I strongly support authorizing the important program of 
environmental restoration for the Everglades. The bill will now go to 
conference with the Senate. I hope that will result in improvements in 
the measure to make it one that everyone can support without 
reservations.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, Marjory Stoneman Douglass, grand matron of the 
Everglades immortalized the sprawling South Florida wetlands in her 
classic book, Everglades: River of Grass. ``Nothing anywhere else is 
like them,'' she wrote. ``They are, they have always been, one of the 
unique regions of the earth, remote, never wholly known.''
  I am not sure that there is any better way to describe what is one of 
our nation's greatest natural wonders. But, I can tell you that even 
though we will never fully know or understand the Everglades, we do 
know a few things. The Everglades is home to a wide and rich bird 
population, particularly large wading birds, such as the roseate 
spoonbill, wood stork, great blue heron and a variety of egrets. It 
contains both temperate and tropical plant communities, including 
sawgrass prairies, mangrove and cypress swamps, pinelands and hardwood 
hammocks, as well as marine and estuarine environments. It is the only 
place in the world where alligators and crocodiles exist side by side. 
However, man has also lived in and around the Everglades for

[[Page H10364]]

the past 2,000 years, sometimes with disastrous consequences. Starting 
in the 1880's, man began diverting water from the Everglades to make it 
more a hospitable place for people. Over the last century canals were 
dug and impoundments were created to provide drinking water, protection 
from floods and land for houses.
  As a result of man's habitation and engineering, the Everglades are 
dying. Many portions are drying out and many species are threatened 
with extinction. We need to take immediate and long term steps to save 
this massive ecosystem. The Water Resources Development Act includes a 
$7.8 billion, 35-year federal-state plan to restore the Florida 
Everglades that is a major step towards saving that goal. This 
restoration plan will reverse the effects of the dams and waterways 
that drain 1.7 billion gallons of water a day from the Everglades into 
the Atlantic Ocean. This plan has 68 project components and will 
restore the natural water flow while continuing to supply water to 
South Florida. This legislation also requires that an ongoing, 
independent scientific review be established to ensure that the plan is 
progressing toward restoration.
  I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support this plan to save 
this truly unique natural resource.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to the 
Water Resources Development Act. I do not oppose this bill for its 
content. Rather, I oppose the measure because the rule did not provide 
an opportunity to offer amendments. This bill does not include language 
about preventing the withdrawal and diversion of water from the Great 
Lakes. In 1998, a Canadian company planned to ship 3 billion liters of 
water from Lake Superior over five years and sell it to Asia. I 
authored legislation that passed the House of Representatives that 
called on the United States government to oppose this action. The 
permit was subsequently withdrawn. We must strengthen existing laws to 
protect the possibility of other countries making similar requests in 
the future. We owe it to the estimated 35 million people who reside in 
the Great Lakes Basin.
  I want to thank Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member Oberstar for 
their commitment to protecting our Great Lakes and I hope that similar 
language will be inserted in the WRDA conference report. Another point 
of concern for me in this bill concerns the transfer of a lighthouse in 
Ontonagon, Michigan, from the Secretary of the Army to the Ontonagon 
County Historical Society. This facility was built in 1866 and guided 
ships through the seas of Lake Superior for more than 100 years.
  Thanks to the Ontonagon County Historical Society's efforts, this 
facility has been preserved for the public's enjoyment. To continue its 
work, the non-profit organization is seeking to have the lighthouse and 
the adjacent land of 1.8 acres transferred. Unfortunately, the Army 
Corps of Engineers, which owns and uses the property, has witnessed 
contamination of the property. Lead-based paint coats the interior 
walls and the exterior gallery of the lighthouse. A 5,000-gallon fuel 
tank, which may have leaked oil into the soil, sits idle near the 
lighthouse. Finally, for 14 years coal has been stored onsite by a 
company subletting the property; an action which has contaminated the 
soil.
  This bill, however, does not include language absolving the 
organization of responsibility. And in no way should the Ontonagon 
County Historical Society be held liable for environmental damage of 
the property when it occurred during the ownership of the Army Corps of 
Engineers. Such an omission forces me to oppose this bill. The Senate 
version of WRDA would hold the Secretary of the Army responsible for 
the removal of onsite contaminated soil and lead-based paint. I hope 
that its language is retained in the bill's conference report.
  Again, I reluctantly oppose this bill but wish to thank Mr. Shuster 
and Mr. Oberstar for bringing this legislation to the floor, especially 
given the session's time constraints. Their leadership in crafting a 
bipartisan bill should be commended.
  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, today the House is considering S. 
2796, the Water Resources and Development Act of 2000. I would like to 
thank Chairman Shuster for his leadership in drafting this legislation 
and I rise in strong support of its passage.
  This legislation takes the necessary steps to address the many water 
resources needs across the country. It does so by authorizing important 
water programs such as those sponsored and constructed by the Army 
Corps of Engineers. These projects provide important water resources to 
the areas they serve. These water resources are crucial to the economic 
development of many of these areas.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Shuster again for his 
leadership on this legislation and I urge my colleagues in the House to 
join me by casting their vote in favor of S. 2796.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ose). All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 639, the previous question is ordered on 
the Senate bill, as amended.
  The question is on the third reading of the Senate bill.
  The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, and was read the 
third time.


                 Motion to Commit Offered by Mr. Rahall

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to commit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the Senate bill?
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in its current form, I am opposed to the 
Senate bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to commit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Rahall moves to commit the bill S. 2796 to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith 
     with the following amendments:
       Strike section 330 of the bill and redesignate subsequent 
     sections of title III of the bill, accordingly.
       In section 348 of the bill, strike ``substantially'' and 
     all that follows through ``1992''.
       Strike section 436 of the bill and redesignate subsequent 
     sections of title IV of the bill, accordingly.
       In section 563 of the bill, strike ``stabilization and 
     preservation'' and insert ``preservation and restoration''.
       Conform the table of contents of the bill by striking the 
     items relating to sections 330 and 436 and redesignate 
     subsequent items accordingly.
  Mr. RAHALL (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion to commit be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from West Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. 
Rahall) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion to commit.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, we accept the gentleman's motion.
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member seek time in opposition?
  Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
commit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to commit.
  The motion to commit was agreed to.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, acting under the instructions of the House 
and on behalf of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I 
report the Senate bill, S. 2796, back to the House with an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment:
       Strike section 330 of the bill and redesignate subsequent 
     sections of title III of the bill, accordingly.
       In section 348 of the bill, strike ``substantially'' and 
     all that follows through ``1992''.
       Strike section 436 of the bill and redesignate subsequent 
     sections of title IV of the bill, accordingly.
       In section 563 of the bill, strike ``stabilization and 
     preservation'' and insert ``preservation and restoration''.
       Conform the table of contents of the bill by striking the 
     items relating to sections 330 and 436 and redesignate 
     subsequent items accordingly.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the third reading of the 
Senate bill.
  The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, and was read the 
third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the Senate 
bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 394, 
nays 14, not voting 24, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 534]

                               YEAS--394

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Archer
     Armey

[[Page H10365]]


     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--14

     Andrews
     Coburn
     Doggett
     Hill (MT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Paul
     Ramstad
     Royce
     Sanford
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Shays
     Stupak
     Tancredo

                             NOT VOTING--24

     Ballenger
     Campbell
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clay
     Dingell
     Franks (NJ)
     Gephardt
     Hansen
     Hilliard
     Houghton
     Jones (OH)
     Lazio
     Lipinski
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Miller (FL)
     Morella
     Oxley
     Rodriguez
     Simpson
     Stark
     Talent
     Turner
     Wise

                              {time}  1206

  Mr. SCHAFFER changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. PETRI and Mr. CHABOT changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the Senate bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 534, I was inadvertently 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

                          ____________________