[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 93 (Wednesday, June 6, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H4798-H4815]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2018


                             General Leave

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous materials on H.R. 8.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rouzer). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 918 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 8.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer) to preside 
over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1437


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 8) to provide for improvements to the rivers and harbors of the 
United States, to provide for the conservation and development of water 
and related resources, and for other purposes, with Mr. Palmer in the 
chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to bring to the floor today the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2018. This marks the third Congress in a 
row that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of the House 
will consider a water resources bill, so we are back to regular order 
when it comes to WRDA.
  I hope we bring it to the floor today, and I hope we pass a WRDA 
bill. That is good news for the American people and the American 
economy, because WRDA works. WRDA works because it ensures that 
Congress carries out its clear Federal role in addressing 
infrastructure that is critical to our commerce and competitiveness, 
and to protecting communities throughout the country.
  WRDA authorizes targeted investments in America's harbors, ports, 
locks, dams, inland waterways, flood protection, environmental 
restoration, and other water resources infrastructure.
  This infrastructure, maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 
is vital to every part of the country and every American benefits from 
it. You don't have to live near a port or a major waterway to 
experience these benefits. The health of this infrastructure directly 
impacts how efficiently the things we buy get onto our store shelves, 
and how quickly the goods that we produce get to markets around the 
world.
  WRDA improvements originate at the local level. They grow our local, 
regional, and national economies, and they create good-paying jobs. 
Restoring WRDA legislation to a 2-year congressional cycle was one of 
the first goals when I became chairman in 2013. By working together, we 
passed WRDA into law in 2014 and 2016.
  Both of these measures attracted broad bipartisan support, and this 
bill is no different, passing out of our committee unanimously 2 weeks 
ago. I want to thank Ranking Member DeFazio, Water Resources 
Environment Subcommittee Chairman Garret Graves, and Subcommittee 
Ranking Member Grace Napolitano for working with me to introduce this 
bill.
  Our bipartisan legislation follows the fiscally responsible, 
transparent process for considering Corps activities that Congress 
established in 2014. It maintains strong congressional oversight and 
the constitutional authority of the Legislative Branch. It deauthorizes 
old projects to fully offset new authorizations, and sunsets new 
authorizations to prevent future backlogs.
  WRDA also builds on past reforms of the Corps and explores new ways 
to deliver projects more efficiently. In keeping with traditional 
WRDAs, my cosponsors and I agreed to narrowly focus our bill on the 
civil works program of the Corps. Preserving the civil works focus of 
this bill increases the likelihood of final passage.
  If we don't enact a bill into law this year, we will delay necessary 
water infrastructure improvements and increase project costs. Let's 
approve this vital bill today. Let's build our water infrastructure. 
Let's grow our economy, and let's create jobs. Let's pass WRDA, because 
WRDA does work, and let's ensure that WRDA continues to work for the 
American people.
  Mr. Chairman, I look forward to a good debate today and to moving 
this bill to the Senate, so I urge all of my colleagues to support the 
bill.
  Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a cost estimate from the 
Congressional Budget Office for H.R. 8.

                                                    U.S. Congress,


                                  Congressional Budget Office,

                                     Washington, DC, June 4, 2018.
     Hon. Bill Shuster,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
     prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 8, the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2018.
       If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
     pleased to provide them.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Keith Hall,
                                                         Director.
       Enclosure.

            H.R. 8--Water Resources Development Act of 2018

As reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
                            on June 1, 2018


                                SUMMARY

       H.R. 8 would authorize the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
     (Corps) to construct projects to improve navigation and flood 
     management, to mitigate storm and hurricane damage and to 
     provide assistance for water recycling and water treatment 
     projects. The bill also would authorize the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency (FEMA) to assist states and local 
     governments in mitigating flood risks from aging dams and 
     levees. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 8 would cost 
     about $1.1 billion over the next five years and $2.5 billion 
     over the 2019-2028 period, assuming appropriation of 
     authorized and necessary amounts.
       Enacting H.R. 8 also would increase direct spending by $5 
     million over the 2019-2028 period; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
     procedures apply. The bill would authorize the Corps to 
     convey nine acres of federal land to the city of Nashville, 
     Tennessee, in exchange for the fair market value of the 
     property, which CBO estimates would total about $1 million. 
     The bill also would authorize the Corps to credit the 
     nonfederal sponsor of the Kissimmee River Restoration Project 
     for certain in-kind contributions totaling $6 million. 
     Enacting the bill would not affect revenues.
       H.R. 8 would significantly increase direct spending by more 
     than $2.5 billion and on-budget deficits by more than $5 
     billion in at least one of the four consecutive 10-year 
     periods beginning in 2029, by authorizing the Corps to spend 
     amounts in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund without further 
     appropriation.
       H.R. 8 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
     mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
     (UMRA).


                ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

       The estimated budgetary effect of H.R. 8 is shown in the 
     following table. The costs of the legislation fall within 
     budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).

[[Page H4799]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars--
                                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 2019       2020       2021       2022       2023       2024       2025       2026       2027       2028    2019-2023  2019-2028
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          INCREASES OR DECREASES (-) IN DIRECT SPENDING
 
Estimated Budget Authority..................................          0         -1          0          0          0          0          6          0          0          0         -1          5
Estimated Outlays...........................................          0         -1          0          0          0          0          6          0          0          0         -1          5
                                                                         INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
 
Water Resources Infrastructure:
    Estimated Authorization Level...........................         13        157        152        226        231        224        226        171        161        165        778      1,726
    Estimated Outlays.......................................          5         67        110        161        198        208        215        193        172        163        541      1,491
Dam and Levee Safety:
    Authorization Level.....................................         30        123        123        123        123         30         30         30          0          0        522        612
    Estimated Outlays.......................................         12         57         89        108        116         83         56         40         20          9        382        590
Navigation and Nonfederal Construction Programs:
    Authorization Level.....................................         13         38         38         38         38         13         13         13         13         13        163        225
    Estimated Outlays.......................................          5         19         28         33         36         26         18         14         12         12        121        203
Studies and Other Provisions:
    Estimated Authorization Level...........................         26         29         27         24         16         12         12         12         13         13        122        184
    Estimated Outlays.......................................         36         23         25         24         19         14         12         12         12         12        104        167
    Total:
        Estimated Authorization Level.......................         82        346        339        410        408        278        281        225        187        190      1,584      2,747
        Estimated Outlays...................................         36        165        252        326        369        330        302        260        216        195      1,148      2,451
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           BASIS OF ESTIMATE

       For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 8 will be enacted 
     near the end of 2018 and that the authorized and necessary 
     amounts will be appropriated for each fiscal year. Estimates 
     of amounts necessary to implement the bill are based on 
     information from the Corps and FEMA; estimated outlays are 
     based on historical spending patterns for similar projects 
     and programs. Major components of the estimated costs are 
     described below.


                   Spending Subject to Appropriation

       CBO estimates that H.R. 8 would authorize appropriations 
     totaling about $2.7 billion over the 2019-2028 period for 
     water infrastructure projects and studies administered by the 
     Corps and FEMA. We estimate that implementing those 
     provisions would cost $2.5 billion over the 2018-2028 period.


                     Water Resources Infrastructure

       CBO estimates that implementing provisions of the bill that 
     would authorize the Corps to construct and modify water 
     infrastructure projects would cost about $1.5 billion over 
     the 2019-2028 period, assuming appropriation of the specified 
     amounts and accounting for anticipated inflation. Those 
     provisions would authorize the Corps to construct seven new 
     projects and would modify the existing authorization of three 
     projects aimed at mitigating hurricane and storm damage, 
     strengthening flood-risk management, improving the nation's 
     navigation system, restoring the environment, and providing 
     assistance for water recycling and water treatment projects. 
     Using information from the Corps, CBO estimates that the 
     total cost to complete those projects would be $4.2 billion. 
     H.R. 8 would authorize the appropriation of $2.7 billion to 
     cover the federal share of those costs--of that $1.7 billion 
     would need to be appropriated over the 2019-2028 period 
     (assuming historical rates of spending for similar 
     projects)--and nonfederal entities would be responsible for 
     the remaining costs, totaling an estimated $1.5 billion.
       The estimated cost of the largest project authorized by 
     H.R. 8 totals $3.3 billion; the federal share would total 
     about $2.2 billion. That project aims to address erosion 
     along the coast in Galveston, Texas, and restore ecosystems 
     including wetlands and marshes to enhance protection from 
     storm surge in the area that was damaged by Hurricane Harvey. 
     The estimated cost for the other projects authorized by the 
     bill total $0.9 billion; the federal share of those projects 
     totals about $0.6 billion.
       Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
     estimates that spending on the project to restore the Texas 
     coast in Galveston would total about $940 million over the 
     2019-2028 period. CBO estimates that construction spending 
     for the other six projects and three modifications would 
     total about $550 million over the next 10 years.
       To estimate how funds appropriated for those projects would 
     be spent, CBO used information from the Corps about when 
     construction for each project could begin, how long it would 
     take to complete, and what funding would be necessary to 
     complete it over the anticipated construction period. 
     Construction schedules and the pattern of spending for 
     such projects is uncertain and plans are subject to change 
     because of delays in obtaining funding and other 
     unforeseen circumstances. For this estimate, CBO assumed 
     that those projects with greater costs to benefits ratios 
     would be prioritized for funding. Information on cost 
     benefit ratios was provided to CBO by the Corps. CBO also 
     analyzed the historical spending patterns of similar 
     projects. Because of their size and complexity some large 
     Corps projects can take several years to commence and more 
     than ten years to complete. CBO estimates that the federal 
     share of the projects and modifications authorized by this 
     title would require the appropriation of about $1.7 
     billion over the 2019-2028 period; the remainder of the 
     federal share to complete the projects would be needed 
     after 2028.
       Finally, the bill would withdraw the authorization for five 
     projects originally authorized more than 70 years ago. 
     Information from the Corps indicates that these projects are 
     complete and no additional construction is planned; therefore 
     CBO expects that deauthorizing them would have no budgetary 
     effect.


                          dam and levee safety

       Using information provided by the Corps and FEMA, CBO 
     estimates that implementing provisions addressing dam and 
     levee safety would cost $590 million over the 2019-2028 
     period, assuming appropriation of authorized amounts.
       H.R. 8 would reauthorize the national dam and levee safety 
     programs operated by FEMA Corps. Those programs provide 
     grants to local and state governments to assist with levee 
     safety and rehabilitation, maintaining databases for the 
     nation's dams and levees, and implementing a public awareness 
     and education program for managing dam and levee safety. 
     Under those programs the Corps also would provide technical 
     assistance to local and state governments to rehabilitate 
     high risk levees. H.R. 8 would authorize the appropriation of 
     $372 million for FEMA and the Corps to implement those 
     programs. Using information on historical spending patterns 
     for similar projects, CBO estimates that implementing those 
     provisions would cost $365 million over the 2019-2028 period.
       The bill also would increase amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated each year for the Corps to rehabilitate dams 
     considered to be highly hazardous until the authorization for 
     program expires in 2026. Dams eligible for funding would 
     include those constructed by the Corps before 1940 that have 
     been classified as a high hazard by the state where the dam 
     is located and that are operated by a nonfederal entity. 
     Using information on historical spending patterns for this 
     program, CBO estimates that implementing that provision would 
     cost $225 million over the 2019-2028 period.


            navigation and nonfederal construction programs

       CBO estimates that implementing provisions of the bill 
     related to navigation and nonfederal construction programs 
     would cost $203 million over the 2019-2028 period, assuming 
     appropriation of the specified amounts.
       H.R. 8 would increase the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated each year by $12.5 million for the Corps to 
     construct small harbor projects to improve navigation. Using 
     information from the Corps, CBO estimates that implementing 
     that provision would cost $108 million over the 2019-2028 
     period.
       The bill also would reauthorize a pilot program for the 
     Corps to contract with nonfederal partners to construct 
     projects to manage risk from floods, reduce damage from 
     storms and improve navigation of the nation's harbors. The 
     program aims to identify opportunities for reducing the costs 
     and the time required to complete construction projects. The 
     provision would authorize the appropriation of $25 million 
     for each year from 2020 through 2023. Using information from 
     the Corps, CBO estimates that implementing that provision 
     would cost $95 million over the 2019-2028 period.


                      studies and other provisions

       Using information provided by the Corps, CBO estimates that 
     implementing the provisions described below would cost $167 
     million over the 2019-2028 period, assuming appropriation of 
     the necessary amounts. Those provisions would:
       Authorize the Corps to credit non-federal partners for work 
     carried out on projects to protect, preserve, and restore the 
     Louisiana coastal ecosystems;
       Authorize the Corps to conduct about 20 feasibility studies 
     for projects to reduce risks stemming from floods, to restore 
     ecosystems, and to improve navigation; and
       Direct the Corps to prepare a report on aquatic invasive 
     species and other management reports, fund a demonstration 
     project aimed at harmful algal bloom, and provide housing 
     support to Indian tribes displaced by the construction of 
     John Day Dam on the Columbia River in Washington and Oregon.
       CBO's cost estimate for H.R. 8 excludes the costs of 
     implementing section 108, which would authorize the Corps to 
     restore infrastructure for shore protection damaged by 
     natural disasters to pre-storm levels because the number of 
     eligible projects is not available.

[[Page H4800]]

  



                       changes in direct spending

       Using information provided by the Corps, CBO estimates that 
     implementing the provisions described below would increase 
     direct spending by about $5 million. The construction phase 
     of the Kissimmee River Restoration Project in Florida is 
     nearly complete and the Corps anticipates that the final 
     accounting for the federal and nonfederal shares of the 
     project's cost will occur in about 5 years. The Corps has 
     previously determined that certain in-kind contributions 
     provided by the local sponsor of the project were ineligible 
     as a qualifying credit toward the portion of the local cost 
     share. H.R. 8 would reverse that decision by the Corps and 
     reduce any cash settlement that would be required by the 
     local sponsor to reconcile the nonfederal account. The Corps 
     would be required to credit the nonfederal sponsor for the 
     Kissimmee River Restoration Project for those in-kind 
     contributions, which total $6 million.
       The bill also would authorize the Corps to convey 9 acres 
     of federal land to the city of Nashville, Tennessee, in 
     exchange for payment of the fair market value of the 
     property. Using information provided by the Corps, CBO 
     estimates the city would pay the federal government about 
     $600,000 in 2020 when the property is transferred.


                      pay-as-you-go considerations

       The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-
     reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation 
     affecting direct spending or revenues. The net changes in 
     outlay that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are 
     an increase in direct spending of $5 million.
       Enacting the bill would not affect revenues over the 2019-
     2028 period.


           increase in long-term direct spending and deficits

       CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 8 would increase net 
     direct spending and on-budget deficits by more than $2.5 
     billion and on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in at 
     least one of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning 
     in 2029.
       Under the bill, balances in the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
     Fund (HMTF) would become available to the Corps, without 
     further appropriation, beginning in fiscal year 2029. The 
     Corps would expend those funds on nonroutine maintenance 
     costs and deferred repairs at eligible projects. CBO 
     estimates that the balance in the HMTF would total about $15 
     billion in 2029. In recent years the annual appropriation 
     from the HMTF has been about $1 billion. CBO estimates that 
     direct spending from the HMTF in 2029 and later years would 
     exceed $1 billion per year. CBO cannot predict whether annual 
     discretionary appropriations from the HMTF would continue at 
     any level after 2028.


                                mandates

       H.R. 8 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
     mandates as defined in UMRA.


                          estimate prepared by

       Federal Costs: Aurora Swanson; Mandates: Jon Sperl.


                          estimate reviewed by

       Kim P. Cawley, Chief, Natural and Physical Resources Cost 
     Estimates Unit.
       Theresa Gullo, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 8, the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2018. This is the product of many months of hard 
work by members of the committee and staff, and I particularly want to 
congratulate the chairman. This will be his last WRDA bill, but until 
his leadership, water resources bills had languished for, I believe, a 
decade. So this has been a tremendous achievement.
  This is a good bill. However, it could be better. In the last 
Congress, I offered an amendment in committee to take the harbor 
maintenance trust fund off budget, allow the Corps to spend the 
proceeds in the trust fund every year, and draw down the surplus that 
deals with a backlog on all of our ports.
  Ports affect the entire Nation, any time you have an import or an 
export, which covers virtually all of the States of the union. These 
red dots are harbors that are critical to our infrastructure. On a 
daily basis, our major ports are at about 35 percent of their 
authorized depth. 35 percent. Why is that? Well, because we don't have 
the money to fix them. And the jetties are falling apart. We don't have 
the money to fix them.
  Well, actually, we do have the money to fix them, but some very 
shortsighted people around here want to play games. They want to 
collect a tax from the American people--a minuscule tax, 0.0125 cents 
on the value of every imported good that comes through a harbor. That 
is, if you buy a $30,000 car, you are going to spend about $37.50 that, 
starting with Ronald Reagan, was dedicated to maintaining our harbors 
at proper depths and maintaining the jetties for these harbors, not 
limiting the funds just to the commercial harbors, but to small and 
emerging ports, which are also critical to the Nation: the fishing 
industry, recreation, and others.
  However--and this has been a bipartisan problem, starting even when 
Democrats have been in charge--this has been underspent on an annual 
basis. Today, there is $10.5 billion of taxes collected from the 
American people sitting idle or having been spent somewhere else. It 
has got a theoretical trust fund.
  Now, that is going to grow every year as we underspend this tax. It 
could grow to $20 billion within a decade. So we don't have the money 
to dredge the ports and we don't have the money to fix the jetties, 
because Congress is diverting the money. I actually worked on this with 
the chairman's father quite some time ago, and the chairman has been 
supportive of my efforts.
  Unfortunately, it was stripped out of that bill by the Rules 
Committee 2 years ago. And this year, again, the Rules Committee found 
that they would not allow this to go forward. So we offered it in a 
different form to get around their technical objections about budget 
caps and discretionary spending.

                              {time}  1445

  So we offered--well, there actually is a way around that. They didn't 
like that either. They want to continue to steal money from the 
American people and divert it to be spent who knows where--somewhere 
else, but not on our harbors and our ports.
  Now, the administration actually sent to what is called their 
statement down to us with an SAP--and it really is a SAP; they are 
SAPs--a Statement of Administration Policy is what it stands for. They 
sent down a provision where they said: This is great that you are not 
allowing the Congress to spend the tax collected from the American 
people on the stated purpose.
  What? Really? Yes. That is their position. They say that the ports 
should have greater flexibility to spend local money on the ports.
  Well, they have all the flexibility in the world to spend local money 
on local ports. They can partner with the Corps and fund Corps 
activities. I did that a number of years ago in Oregon. They don't have 
the money, and we are depriving them of the money.
  But this is the Trump administration's solution. The big 
infrastructure package? This is going to be counted. We are going to 
add $3 billion to the pile of unfunded Corps projects.
  We have got today $96 billion of Corps projects that have been 
authorized by Congress that aren't funded in the foreseeable future. At 
the end of this debate there will be $99 billion--almost $100 billion--
quite an achievement, and the administration is applauding this. They 
think this is just great because it gives the local ports the 
capability of raising money they can't raise to spend on the 
improvements they can't make.
  Meanwhile, we are stealing money from the American people. It is a 
very sad day. So with that said, I will move on. There are other issues 
in this bill that are critical.
  We have $3 billion to new Chief's Reports which will go on the shelf 
for the indefinite future, maybe 100 years or longer. But people can go 
home and say: Well, I got that project, all we need to do now is get 
the money.
  Maybe a future Congress--maybe next year--we will decide to start 
spending the harbor maintenance tax on harbor maintenance. Who knows? 
It might depend upon who is in charge around here.
  There are other provisions in here that are critical, authorizing the 
national levee safety initiative, the national dam safety program--
those are pretty important things--promoting improved safety measures, 
and reducing the risk to life and property.
  There are a couple of provisions that benefit or would go for Corps 
projects in my district, one related to Fern Ridge Dam, and a 
collapsing road near the dam. A number of years ago, we had to expedite 
funds to fix a collapsing dam, now we have a collapsing road by the 
collapsing dam, and hopefully, the Corps can get to that before we have 
a major problem; and then delivering on a very long-ago promise to

[[Page H4801]]

Indian tribes that were displaced by dams that were built three-
quarters of a century ago. Their villages were flooded and displaced, 
and this would authorize the Corps to provide housing assistance to 
those tribes.
  There are other meritorious things in this bill. Again, I want to 
congratulate the chairman on what will be the third conservative 2-year 
authorization of the Water Resources Development Act. We just need to 
find the will and the money to fund the necessary projects.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Graves), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Water Resources and Environment.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania for all of his leadership on this important 
legislation. I want to thank my friend from Oregon and my friend from 
California for working with us on this, as there is a bipartisan 
agreement to move this bill forward.
  Mr. Chairman, why are we doing this bill? People at home who are 
watching this, people who are living in their communities, why are we 
doing this bill?
  We are doing this bill because we need to ensure that people live in 
places that are safe--safe from flooding and safe from hurricanes. We 
just saw last year the 2017 hurricanes, Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, 
and Nate, where we spent well over $150 billion so far--I believe we 
are near $180 billion--responding to those disasters. People need to 
live in safe, resilient communities.
  We need to ensure that we can build navigation channels that stay 
compatible with trends in shipping. We built the Panama Canal. The 
United States built the Canal, yet the Panamanians have stepped in and 
deepened and widened the canal and the lock system in a shorter period 
of time than we have been able to even deepen ports here in the United 
States.
  Then, of course, there are environmental issues, the environmental 
consequences of many of these projects, including in my home State of 
Louisiana, where we have lost 2,000 square miles of our coast, and the 
Corps of Engineers has not stepped in and done a single thing to 
actually restore the environmental consequences of their actions--2,000 
square miles of coastal wetlands. If you or I did that, we would be in 
jail today.
  So the reason we are doing this bill is because as the ranking 
member, Mr. DeFazio, mentioned a few minutes ago, we have a nearly $100 
billion backlog in projects. We are putting forward somewhere around $2 
billion a year in construction funds. You can do the math. I am a math 
whiz, and I can tell you that you will finish those projects 
approximately never, because $2 billion a year on $100 billion, you 
can't even keep up with inflation. We must reform the process, and this 
bill moves in that direction.
  There are important reforms in this bill like allowing the non-
Federal sponsors, the States, the parishes, the counties, the water 
boards, and the ports, to grab components of these projects and move 
them forward on their own working in collaboration with the Corps of 
Engineers to ensure that we are moving these projects forward 
efficiently.

  We need to make sure that we are moving redundancies in the process 
and allowing these non-Federal entities to use the same permitting 
process that the Corps of Engineers just went through and spent 
millions of dollars complying with. We are still being respectful to 
the environment, but we are not forcing them to carry out redundant 
measures, paying twice for the same actions because that doesn't make 
sense.
  Let me go back and talk about, again, what these outcomes actually 
yield. We are talking about projects to prevent communities from 
flooding, to prevent hurricane damages, to restore the environment, and 
to ensure that our ports and waterways can facilitate the ships that 
are growing in width and in depth across the globe to where we can have 
more cost-effective shipping in the United States and our port systems 
and we can facilitate the trade that comes around the globe and into 
our country.
  Mr. Chairman, they have projects that have been in the study phase, 
not for months or years, but for decades. We have projects that have 
been waiting on full implementation of construction for decades. Once 
again, in my home State of Louisiana, we have the Comite project that 
has been around for 32 years, $100 million nearly has been spent, and 
nothing has been done to actually provide flood relief--$100 million.
  We have another project in southeast Louisiana in Terrebone and 
Lafourche Parishes, where the Corps of Engineers has spent nearly $80 
million and hasn't put a shovel in the ground yet.
  How do you do that when you look at the fact that we have a $20 
trillion deficit and we are spending those sorts of dollars on actions 
that aren't benefiting taxpayers? Who is that representing? Because it 
is not the people who sent us here.
  So I will say it again: this bill moves forward in transparency, it 
moves forward in efficiency while respecting the environment, it allows 
projects to be expedited, and it gives more flexibility for the Corps 
and their non-Federal partners to work together to deliver these 
projects.
  One thing that is in here that I know the chairman is a big fan of 
and we pushed as well with our friends across the aisle, is taking a 
look to study whether or not the Corps of Engineers should remain 
within the Department of Defense.
  Is this a mission that is truly compatible with our Department of 
Defense? I want Secretary Mattis focused on Syria and focused on Iran, 
North Korea, China, Russia, and other threats to our country. I don't 
want him or her also worried about what is happening with a coastal 
wetlands permit. I want him focused on the national defense of our 
country, so looking at where this mission perhaps could be better 
housed, better compatibility, and ultimately to deliver better outcomes 
to taxpayers across the country.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I associate the remarks of my ranking member, the 
chairman of the committee, and the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. 
Graves. I rise in strong support of the bipartisan bill, H.R. 8, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2018.
  I very strongly thank Chairman Shuster, Ranking Member DeFazio, and 
Chairman Graves for their work on this legislation. It is encouraging 
to see that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee continue in 
a bipartisan fashion on this legislation every 2 years.
  This bill authorizes Army Corps of Engineers' feasibility studies, 
Chief's Reports, and section 7001 water resource projects across the 
country for a diverse array of purposes, including flood damage 
reduction, ecosystem restoration, hurricane and storm damage reduction, 
water supply--very important to me--and navigation.
  It also includes an important water recycling project for Los Angeles 
County in California, with the West Basin Municipal Water District's 
Harbor/South Bay project. This project provides a $35 million increase 
for an existing, successful authorization to improve microfiltration of 
wastewater and delivery to residents and businesses. This will create 
long-term water supply reliability in our drought-prone region.
  I want to thank my good friends, Directors Carol Kwan and Gloria 
Gray, for their commitment to this cost-effective and innovative water 
supply option for all their constituents.
  I also am pleased to see the inclusion of several provisions that 
will continue the work we have done in recent WRDAs to assist 
communities experiencing drought with additional water supply options.
  These provisions include section 109 that will require the Corps to 
work with local governments on integrated water resources planning to 
incorporate in Corps projects locally developed plans for stormwater 
management, water quality improvements, and--my baby--water recycling.
  Section 107 provides for forecast-informed reservoir operations in 
water control manuals to ensure that dams are being used effectively to 
maximize local water supply.
  Section 115 provides a comprehensive report on the operation and 
maintenance backlog of Corps projects so that

[[Page H4802]]

Congress has a full accounting of the unmet needs of authorized water 
resource projects.
  We have such a backlog, and there is that fund that goes nowhere, the 
billions of dollars that should be going to the ports that do not 
benefit, and we have a tremendous backlog.
  I am concerned that the bill does not include a bipartisan provision 
supported by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that would 
fully fund the harbor maintenance trust fund. Congress needs to remedy 
this inequity in the harbor maintenance trust fund once and for all, so 
that the taxes paid into the system are benefiting the projects they 
were intended for. I support the efforts of port stakeholders, 
including the American Association of Port Authorities, which 
includes all ports in the United States which recently approved, for 
the first time, a national agreement with all ports to create fairness 
in the harbor maintenance trust fund. It is very unfortunate that the 
House leadership is using procedural tactics to prevent the House from 
addressing this critical issue.

  I am confident that this bill, when and if enacted, will provide 
drought-prone regions like mine and other very necessary areas with the 
tools necessary to increase water supply and water conservation 
measures and be prepared for future storm events to capture and reuse 
the water that would have otherwise been lost.
  I want to thank my constituent water agencies for their input 
throughout this process, including the Upper San Gabriel Valley 
Municipal Water District, the Three Valleys Municipal Water District, 
the San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, the San Gabriel 
WaterMaster, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and my 
local Corps leadership, General Helmlinger, Colonel Gibbs, and David 
Van Dorpe.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this bill, and I ask Members to 
support H.R. 8.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Graves). The other Mr. Graves from the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee is the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Highways and Transit.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 
8.
  I want to say, too, the chairman's commitment to passing bipartisan 
WRDA bills every 2 years has been very impactful on better managing the 
bureaucracy of the Corps of Engineers.
  I think we can all agree that the Corps needs regular examination of 
projects and policy to hold them accountable, and this is good 
government and a policy I would like to see the committee remain 
committed to in the future.
  In my district, Mr. Chairman, this bill is extremely important to the 
agriculture economy and to everyone who relies on the Missouri and 
Mississippi Rivers.

                              {time}  1500

  My district alone is bordered by 400 miles of Missouri and 
Mississippi River frontage. So we in northern Missouri are directly 
affected by the Corps' actions.
  I am glad that the committee unanimously adopted my amendment to 
bring some common sense to the management of the endangered species--
specifically, the pallid sturgeon--that live along the Missouri River.
  Past efforts to help the pallid sturgeon have led to multiple years 
of flooding and millions of dollars' worth of damage to my 
constituents. What is worse is the fact that the Corps has spent money 
year after year on population recovery, and it has not helped the 
pallid sturgeon one bit. This is absolutely unacceptable.
  Before the Army Corps builds any new, unproven structures along the 
Missouri and spends millions of taxpayer dollars, they are now required 
to prove that it actually works. Furthermore, the Army Corps must prove 
that these structures, called IRCs, do not negatively impact the other 
management priorities on the Missouri River that the Corps is 
responsible for, most importantly, which is flood control and 
navigation.
  Mr. Chairman, the Corps shouldn't be focused on constructing 
environmental habitats. They should be protecting people and businesses 
from flooding and helping facilitate navigation on the river. We have 
been down this road before with unproven methods to help fish over 
people.
  In closing, this is a good bill. It is necessary to advance important 
flood control projects and ensure our inland waterways remain a 
reliable and efficient option for transporting goods up and down the 
rivers. I urge all my colleagues to vote for H.R. 8.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Michigan (Mrs. Lawrence), my colleague on the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Water Resources and 
Environment Subcommittee and a cosponsor of this bill, I rise in 
support of H.R. 8.
  Our water infrastructure is important to the health of our economy 
and job growth, including infrastructure job opportunity in the skilled 
trades.
  Supporting our water infrastructure is essential to the goal of 
ensuring environmental justice. Communities in poverty and women and 
children are especially vulnerable to the harsh consequences of failing 
and faulty water infrastructure. Let us not forget Flint, Michigan. 
This bill continues this important bipartisan process.
  As a Representative from Michigan, this bill continues to protect the 
Great Lakes region. The Davis amendment on the floor today affirms the 
commitment to fighting invasive species. Completion of the long-awaited 
Brandon Road Study is needed to combat environmental threats to our 
region.
  The Great Lakes waterways create thousands of jobs and create 
billions in revenue, annually. We must continue to support the Army 
Corps' operations that operate these critical waterways.
  As Members know, our Nation's infrastructure is in desperate need of 
repair, and we cannot kick the can down the road anymore. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bipartisan bill.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis), a member of the committee.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Shuster 
and Graves, Ranking Member DeFazio, and also my other good friend, the 
ranking member on the subcommittee, Mrs. Napolitano. I am proud to join 
them to support this bill and to say that WRDA works.
  In 2014, during my first term in Congress, we passed the first Water 
Resource Development Act in 7 years. This bill made critical reforms to 
add efficiencies to the Corps' process of studying and recommending 
projects for authorization, and, importantly, it set us up to get WRDA 
back on a 2-year cycle of authorizations. This bill represents the 
continuation of that process.
  Our bill authorizes a total of eight Army Corps of Engineers Chief's 
Reports received since the last WRDA passed by us in 2016. All of these 
Chief's Reports have been fully vetted by the committee at hearings 
during this Congress and in an open and transparent process.
  Now, I haven't shied away from my criticism of the Corps in the past. 
I think that the Corps is good at building things, but actually getting 
to construction is typically the most difficult part of the process.
  One particular provision in this bill directs the National Academy of 
Sciences to analyze the Corps' civil works functions and the potential 
impacts of transferring those functions to another Federal agency. They 
will be required to provide recommendations to us in Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, it is truly clear that WRDA works. The authorizing 
committee has diligently worked over the past three Congresses to get 
us back on this 2-year cycle to ensure that we continue to improve 
processes.
  I would also be remiss, Mr. Chairman, if I didn't mention those 
projects of national significance that have been authorized for many 
years and yet have seen very little progress, including the Navigation 
and Ecosystem Sustainability Program, or NESP. Authorized by Congress 
in 2007, this critical project would expand seven locks on the Upper 
Mississippi and Illinois Rivers to meet the demand for barges to 
transport agricultural and other commodities to the global marketplace.

[[Page H4803]]

  Unfortunately, because of incongruent priorities at the Corps in the 
past and a reluctance from the Appropriations Committee, we have yet to 
see this move forward.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Harper). The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, we can and must do better 
to align our priorities with the Corps to ensure critical projects of 
national significance don't languish after an initial authorization, 
which is why, related to my earlier comments, I believe it is important 
for Congress to understand the implications and potential efficiencies 
of moving the Corps' mission to another Federal agency.

  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I 
thank the committee Democrats and Republicans for bringing this 
bipartisan bill to the floor.
  One of the most important pieces of infrastructure in my particular 
district in the State of Michigan is the Saginaw River. This Federal 
port allows for raw material from around the world to be brought into 
our communities to be used in manufacturing and agriculture and is 
really the lifeblood of the economy there.
  The depth of the river, however, currently limits the size of the 
ships that can use this very important port. Our dock owners on the 
Saginaw River have joined with the local government and businesses to 
propose deepening the Saginaw River to increase business opportunities 
and grow jobs in our region.
  The Army Corps process to authorize deepening of the river, however, 
can sometimes be rather time-consuming. While millions have been spent 
by dock owners, under current law, the Army Corps construction plan for 
considering construction projects does not allow those investments that 
have already been made.
  So I am supporting this legislation, in part, because of the reforms 
in the bill. It changes the way the Army Corps does their cost-benefit 
analysis on a project. It will greatly benefit many projects, including 
the Saginaw River's deepening project.
  This will grow jobs in my district, in our State, and in our country. 
It is a step in the right direction. I encourage the Corps to work with 
those local members and that local coalition on the deepening of this 
river using the reforms in this bill. This is really important for my 
district.
  I really appreciate the work of the committee in coming together and 
delivering these reforms and delivering a good bill to the floor in a 
bipartisan fashion. I encourage my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I rise as a conservative in support of 
this measure.
  As conservatives, we want less government; but the government that we 
have, we want to work better. I think that WRDA does that.
  I think one of the things we look at is how do we become more 
competitive as a society relative to all the other places around the 
globe in the way that we deliver goods, whether by land, by air, or by 
sea. Again, this bill does that.
  I stand in support of this measure and thank the chairman for his 
work on it. I want to particularly single him out for what he has done 
with the WRDA process.
  As has already been mentioned, there was a 7-year skip between WRDA 
bills. But there was a bill in 2014; there was a bill in 2016; there 
was a bill in 2018. That kind of predictability is absolutely necessary 
if you are going to see marine and other investments as we have seen, 
for instance, in a place like Charleston.
  Two, I want to thank him for what he is doing with regard to non-
Federal sponsors. This idea of adding new flexibility in the way that 
we originate programs, I think, makes a lot of sense. One authorization 
means a bottleneck. What this bill does is frees up bottlenecks in the 
way that things get funded.
  Third, I want to single out Garret Graves and, again, the chairman, 
for this study on whether or not civil works can be done by nonmilitary 
actors. I think that this is vital in moving the backlog through that 
now exists on the WRDA front.
  Finally, I want to say thanks for what he is doing on cost-benefit 
analysis. A place like Charleston has been heavily hampered as a 
consequence of their throwing in local money. What we want to reward at 
the Federal level is more in the way of State and local money as we 
leverage Federal investment.
  Again, I thank the chairman for what he has done on this measure, and 
I rise in support of H.R. 8.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
  Ms. GABBARD. Mr. Chairman, this legislation is a bright light of 
bipartisanship that is sorely needed by communities like mine in Hawaii 
and those in Florida as well.
  There is nothing more necessary and basic to life than water. 
Strengthening and upgrading our water infrastructure is critical to 
protecting the health, safety, and welfare of communities all across 
the country. Those like mine, who are surrounded by water, and those in 
our coastal communities are acutely aware of the dire need for 
investment.
  For example, for us in Hawaii, we rely on our ports for the vast 
majority of the basic needs and supplies that we have to ship in for 
our residents. We have also experienced historic floods in Hawaii 
recently, like other States, exposing the urgent need for investment in 
water infrastructure.
  Just one example, risk experts in Hawaii have warned that the Ala Wai 
watershed's high vulnerability to devastating flooding could result in 
financial devastation to the tune of over $1.1 billion, damaging more 
than 3,000 structures, and speaks to the fact that the area is home to 
over 150,000 residents and over 80,000 visitors every day.
  This bipartisan legislation will secure critical funding for flood 
risk management both on the Ala Wai Canal, other places in Hawaii, and 
across the country, helping to provide that necessary safety and 
security for our residents.
  This is a critical piece of bipartisan legislation that deserves the 
support of Congress. Let's take this opportunity to better the lives of 
our constituents and residents across the country by strengthening our 
national infrastructure and ensuring clean and safe drinking water for 
all.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, North Carolina's Seventh Congressional 
District is fortunate to have some of the most beautiful beaches and 
waterways in the United States, which are major contributors to our 
State's vibrant tourism industry, attracting more than 50 million 
visitors a year and generating more than $22.9 billion in revenue. This 
Water Resources and Development Act is critical to strengthening our 
country's infrastructure projects, all of which are so critical to the 
Nation's economy.
  In the district I represent, Carolina Beach's Coastal Storm Damage 
Reduction project reached the end of its 50-year authorization in 2014. 
While the Army Corps of Engineers works to complete their study to 
determine future authorization of this project, this bill provides for 
continued authorization in the interim and long-term certainty of 
nourishment should the Corps study be favorable and funding available.
  Our ports, beaches, inlets, and waterways are the lifeline of 
economic activity and job growth for our coastal communities, and they 
are incredibly important for the Nation as a whole.
  I thank Chairman Shuster, Ranking Member DeFazio and the rest of my 
colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for 
putting forth a strong bill that addresses the unique coastal needs of 
North Carolina's Seventh District and makes great improvements to 
current law enabling critical projects to move forward while saving 
taxpayer dollars in multiple ways. A job well done.
  I urge everyone's support.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. LaMalfa).

[[Page H4804]]

  

  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, when I first got to the U.S. House, a WRDA 
bill hadn't passed in 6 years. Since then, Chairman Shuster has led a 
renaissance in the committee, putting us back on the 2-year cycle, 
which I applaud him and all of our colleagues on the committee for 
spearheading these efforts. What we are looking for is predictability 
and stability in this process. Just a few weeks ago, that process 
continued, as the Water Resources Development Act of 2018 passed 
through the committee in a unanimous and bipartisan fashion.

                              {time}  1515

  Now, WRDA stands before the House ready for final passage. This 
legislation will institute, importantly, a review process of the Army 
Corps of Engineers' backlog that can save, in the near term, $3 
billion. Now, with $100 billion worth of work identified, and maybe $2 
billion per year allocated, when will we ever get caught up on this 
unless there is a review and new process put in place?
  We will also implement a study to improve Army Corps' administration 
and procedures, and greatly increase the role of local shareholders in 
carrying out water development projects like we have seen in Sutter and 
Butte Counties in northern California. Indeed, the public will be much 
better served in safety when working on these levee projects and 
getting them done timely and for lower costs.
  This whole WRDA legislation will be key for important flood control 
work and levee work, in addition to the many other things that have 
been talked about today. This bill is an important next step in moving 
this process forward, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. I rise today in support of H.R. 
8--the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2018. As the most 
senior Texan on the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee and 
former chair of the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee, I am 
pleased to support this bill which represents a bipartisan effort to 
authorize critical water infrastructure projects and develop our 
nation's future water resources.
  Our ports, inland waterways, locks, dams, flood protection, and other 
water infrastructure are vital to our nation and its global 
competitiveness. Water infrastructure forms a critical backbone in 
support of our overall infrastructure needs and H.R. 8 will ensure that 
the United States can provide not only basic water resources for its 
people, but also promote commerce along our nation's waterways.
  One element of the WRDA bill that I wish had been addressed is the 
full use of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF). The HMTF was 
established to cover the operation and maintenance (O&M) expenses of 
our waterways and harbors. As Harbor Maintenance Taxes (HMTs) are 
collected, it is the responsibility of Congress to appropriate its 
spending for dredging and other O&M activities. A sufficient amount of 
HMT revenue is collected each year to meet our nation's annual 
authorized harbor maintenance needs. It is critical that we remain open 
to the idea of fully utilizing the HMTF for harbor maintenance 
purposes.
  Mr. Chair, I look forward to working with Congress to continue 
authorizing these important projects and sticking to a two-year 
authorization cycle. Doing so will ensure that we are able to advance 
water resources development projects in a timely manner and provide the 
predictability and support that is so desperately needed.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 
8, the Water Resources Development Act of 2018. Our district, centered 
in Eastside and Northside Houston and eastern Harris County, was one of 
the most highly impacted by Hurricane Harvey. While we have passed 
emergency supplemental funding the Port of Houston and the Army Corps 
of Engineers have drastic needs for mitigating the damage done by 
Harvey.
  The Port of Houston is the second busiest in the U.S. in terms of 
overall tonnage and the busiest in the U.S. in terms of foreign 
tonnage. Silt, from the bayous has drastically limited maneuverability 
and depth. The port had recently completed dredging to 45 feet. Many of 
the ships can no longer get through the channel due to hurricane 
damage. The disaster funding has not reached our ports.
  The port currently estimates that first phase of recovery from the 
storm will cost an estimated $457 million dollars. The ship channel is 
the lifeblood of Houston. The energy renaissance that we have 
experienced in this country is also driven by industry that relies on 
the Port and the ship channel. It's absolutely essential to our 
district that we adequately fund corps projects that get the port back 
at their normal capacity.
  Decades ago Congress created the Harbor Maintenance Fund, a tax on 
goods to keep our ports and harbors in good working order, and every 
year appropriators do not appropriate the needed funds. It is past time 
that we start putting all the money collected from port economic 
activity back into maintaining our ports.
  Army Corps of Engineer projects go hand in hand with the health of 
our ports as well. Houston is a city of Bayous. When our Bayou's are 
damaged in a storm like Harvey the silt flows downstream into the ship 
channel. The turning basis, which was hit hard in the Tax Day Floods of 
2016 has seen draft restrictions for over 1,300 days now.
  These Army Corps projects don't just save money though, they create 
jobs. These improvements in this bill aren't theoretical, they're 
shovel ready projects the Corps has read to go.
  The Army Corps of Engineers recently announced that it was allocating 
around $360 million to address high-priority needs for hurricane 
ravaged regions but unfortunately while many projects have been 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, no action has been 
take to clear these projects.
  I call on Director Mulvaney to take immediate action on these needs 
so OMB won't stand as a roadblock to protecting my constituents as we 
enter a new hurricane season. I'd like to thank my colleagues on the 
Transportation and Infrastructure committee for crafting a Water 
Resources Development Act that addresses these pressing issues and urge 
my colleagues to support the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, printed in the 
bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text 
of Rules Committee Print 115-72, shall be considered as adopted, and 
shall be considered as an original bill for purpose of further 
amendment under the 5-minute rule. The bill, as amended, shall be 
considered as read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                                 H.R. 8

       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 2018''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Secretary defined.

                      TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 101. Sense of Congress regarding water resources development 
              bills.
Sec. 102. Assessment of harbors and inland harbors.
Sec. 103. Levee safety initiative reauthorization.
Sec. 104. Dam safety.
Sec. 105. Rehabilitation of Corps of Engineers constructed dams.
Sec. 106. Forecast-informed reservoir operations.
Sec. 107. Identification of nonpowered dams for hydropower development.
Sec. 108. Emergency response to natural disasters.
Sec. 109. Integrated water resources planning.
Sec. 110. Mitigation banks.
Sec. 111. Indian Tribes.
Sec. 112. Columbia River.
Sec. 113. Dissemination of information.
Sec. 114. Non-Federal engagement and review.
Sec. 115. Comprehensive backlog report.
Sec. 116. Structures and facilities constructed by Secretary.
Sec. 117. Transparency in administrative expenses.
Sec. 118. Study of the future of the United States Army Corps of 
              Engineers.
Sec. 119. Acknowledgment of credit.
Sec. 120. Non-Federal implementation pilot program.
Sec. 121. Study of water resources development projects by non-Federal 
              interests.
Sec. 122. Construction of water resources development projects by non-
              Federal interests.
Sec. 123. Advanced funds for water resources development studies and 
              projects.
Sec. 124. Funding to process permits.
Sec. 125. Study on economic and budgetary analyses.

[[Page H4805]]

Sec. 126. Study of corrosion management at Corps of Engineers projects.
Sec. 127. Costs in excess of Federal participation limit.
Sec. 128. Report on innovative materials.
Sec. 129. Study on Corps of Engineers.
Sec. 130. GAO study.
Sec. 131. GAO report on Alaska Native village relocation efforts due to 
              flooding and erosion threats.
Sec. 132. Study and report on expediting certain waiver processes.
Sec. 133. Corps of Engineers continuing authorities program.
Sec. 134. Credit in lieu of reimbursement.
Sec. 135. Lake Okeechobee regulation schedule review.
Sec. 136. Missouri River.
Sec. 137. Access to real estate data.
Sec. 138. Aquatic invasive species research.
Sec. 139. Harmful algal bloom technology demonstration.
Sec. 140. Bubbly Creek, Chicago ecosystem restoration.
Sec. 141. Operation and maintenance of navigation and hydroelectric 
              facilities.
Sec. 142. Hurricane and storm damage reduction.
Sec. 143. Post-disaster watershed assessments in the territories of the 
              United States.

                           TITLE II--STUDIES

Sec. 201. Authorization of proposed feasibility studies.
Sec. 202. Additional studies.
Sec. 203. Expedited completion of reports for certain projects.

   TITLE III--DEAUTHORIZATIONS, MODIFICATIONS, AND RELATED PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Deauthorization of inactive projects.
Sec. 302. Backlog prevention.
Sec. 303. Project modifications.
Sec. 304. Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Sec. 305. Bridgeport Harbor, Connecticut.
Sec. 306. Conveyances.
Sec. 307. Clatsop County, Oregon.
Sec. 308. Kissimmee River Restoration, Central and Southern Florida.
Sec. 309. Lytle and Cajon Creeks, California.
Sec. 310. Yuba River Basin, California.

                TITLE IV--WATER RESOURCES INFRASTRUCTURE

Sec. 401. Project authorizations.

     SEC. 2. SECRETARY DEFINED.

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

                      TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 101. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING WATER RESOURCES 
                   DEVELOPMENT BILLS.

       It is the sense of Congress that, because the missions of 
     the Corps of Engineers for navigation, flood control, beach 
     erosion control and shoreline protection, hydroelectric 
     power, recreation, water supply, environmental protection, 
     restoration, and enhancement, and fish and wildlife 
     mitigation benefit all Americans, and because water resources 
     development projects are critical to maintaining the 
     country's economic prosperity, national security, and 
     environmental protection, Congress should consider a water 
     resources development bill not less often than once every 
     Congress.

     SEC. 102. ASSESSMENT OF HARBORS AND INLAND HARBORS.

       Section 210(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``shall assess the'' and 
     inserting ``shall assess, and issue a report to Congress on, 
     the''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Opportunities for beneficial use of dredged 
     materials.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall identify potential opportunities for the beneficial use 
     of dredged materials obtained from harbors and inland harbors 
     referred to in subsection (a)(2), including projects eligible 
     under section 1122 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     2016 (130 Stat. 1645; 33 U.S.C. 2326 note).''.

     SEC. 103. LEVEE SAFETY INITIATIVE REAUTHORIZATION.

        Title IX of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 
     (33 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 9005(g)(2)(E)(i), by striking ``2015 through 
     2019'' and inserting ``2019 through 2023''; and
       (2) in section 9008, by striking ``2015 through 2019'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``2019 through 2023''.

     SEC. 104. DAM SAFETY.

       Section 14 of the National Dam Safety Program Act (33 
     U.S.C. 467j) is amended by striking ``2015 through 2019'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``2019 through 2023''.

     SEC. 105. REHABILITATION OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTED 
                   DAMS.

       Section 1177 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 
     (33 U.S.C. 467f-2 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e), by striking ``$10,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$40,000,000''; and
       (2) in subsection (f), by striking ``$10,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$40,000,000''.

     SEC. 106. FORECAST-INFORMED RESERVOIR OPERATIONS.

       (a) Report on Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations.--Not 
     later than one year after the date of completion of the 
     forecast-informed reservoir operations research study pilot 
     program at Coyote Valley Dam, Russian River Basin, California 
     (authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 
     177)), the Secretary shall issue a report to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate on the results of the study pilot 
     program.
       (b) Contents of Report.--The Secretary shall include in the 
     report issued under subsection (a)--
       (1) an analysis of the use of forecast-informed reservoir 
     operations at Coyote Valley Dam, California;
       (2) an assessment of the viability of using forecast-
     informed reservoir operations at other dams owned or operated 
     by the Secretary;
       (3) an identification of other dams owned or operated by 
     the Secretary where forecast-informed reservoir operations 
     may assist the Secretary in the optimization of future 
     reservoir operations; and
       (4) any additional areas for future study of forecast-
     informed reservoir operations.

     SEC. 107. IDENTIFICATION OF NONPOWERED DAMS FOR HYDROPOWER 
                   DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall develop a list 
     of existing nonpowered dams owned and operated by the Corps 
     of Engineers that have the greatest potential for hydropower 
     development.
       (b) Considerations.--In developing the list under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may consider the following:
       (1) The compatibility of hydropower generation with 
     existing purposes of the dam.
       (2) The proximity of the dam to existing transmission 
     resources.
       (3) The existence of studies to characterize environmental, 
     cultural, and historic resources relating to the dam.
       (4) Whether hydropower is an authorized purpose of the dam.
       (c) Availability.--The Secretary shall provide the list 
     developed under subsection (a) to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate, and make such list available to the 
     public.

     SEC. 108. EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO NATURAL DISASTERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 5(a)(1) of the Act of August 18, 
     1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n(a)(1)) is amended in the first 
     sentence--
       (1) by striking ``strengthening, raising, extending, or 
     other modification thereof'' and inserting ``strengthening, 
     raising, extending, realigning, or other modification 
     thereof''; and
       (2) by striking ``structure or project damaged or destroyed 
     by wind, wave, or water action of other than an ordinary 
     nature to the design level of protection when, in the 
     discretion of the Chief of Engineers,'' and inserting 
     ``structure or project damaged or destroyed by wind, wave, or 
     water action of other than an ordinary nature to either the 
     pre-storm level or the design level of protection, whichever 
     provides greater protection, when, in the discretion of the 
     Chief of Engineers,''.
       (b) Duration.--Section 156(e) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5f(e)) is amended by 
     striking ``6 years'' and inserting ``9 years''.

     SEC. 109. INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES PLANNING.

        In carrying out a water resources development feasibility 
     study, the Secretary shall consult with local governments in 
     the watershed covered by such study to determine if local 
     water management plans exist, or are under development, for 
     the purposes of stormwater management, water quality 
     improvement, aquifer recharge, or water reuse.

     SEC. 110. MITIGATION BANKS.

       (a) Definition of Mitigation Bank.--In this section, the 
     term ``mitigation bank'' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 332.2 of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations.
       (b) Guidance.--The Secretary shall issue guidance on the 
     use of mitigation banks to meet requirements for water 
     resources development projects in order to update mitigation 
     bank credit release schedules to--
       (1) support the goal of achieving efficient permitting and 
     maintaining appropriate environmental protections; and
       (2) promote increased transparency in the use of mitigation 
     banks.
       (c) Requirements.--The guidance issued under subsection (b) 
     shall--
       (1) be consistent with--
       (A) part 230 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations;
       (B) section 906 of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283);
       (C) part 332 of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations; and
       (D) section 314(b) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136; 33 U.S.C. 1344 
     note); and
       (2) provide for--
       (A) the mitigation bank sponsor to provide sufficient 
     financial assurances to ensure a high level of confidence 
     that the compensatory mitigation project will be successfully 
     completed, in accordance with applicable performance 
     standards, under section 332.3(n) of title 33, Code of 
     Federal Regulations;
       (B) the mitigation bank sponsor to reserve the share of 
     mitigation bank credits required to ensure ecological 
     performance of the mitigation bank, in accordance with 
     section 332.8(o) of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations; 
     and
       (C) all credits except for the share reserved under 
     subparagraph (B) to be available upon completion of the 
     construction of the mitigation bank.

     SEC. 111. INDIAN TRIBES.

       (a) Cost Sharing Provisions for the Territories and Indian 
     Tribes.--Section 1156(a)(2) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2310(a)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 102 of the Federally Recognized Indian

[[Page H4806]]

     Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5130)'' and inserting 
     ``section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304(e))''.
       (b) Written Agreement Requirement for Water Resources 
     Projects.--Section 221(b)(1) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 
     (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``a 
     federally recognized Indian tribe and, as defined in section 
     3 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 
     1602), a Native village, Regional Corporation, and Village 
     Corporation'' and inserting ``an Indian tribe, as defined in 
     section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304(e))''.

     SEC. 112. COLUMBIA RIVER.

       (a) Bonneville Dam, Oregon.--Section 1178(c)(1)(A) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1675) is 
     amended by striking ``may provide assistance'' and inserting 
     ``may provide assistance, which may include housing and 
     related improvements,''.
       (b) John Day Dam, Washington and Oregon.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall, not later than 180 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act, and in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, conduct a 
     study to determine the extent to which Indian Tribes have 
     been displaced as a result of the construction of the John 
     Day Dam, Columbia River, Washington and Oregon, as authorized 
     by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 
     179), including an assessment of effects related to housing 
     and related improvements.
       (2) Additional actions.--If the Secretary determines, based 
     on the study under paragraph (1), that assistance is 
     required, the Secretary may use all existing authorities of 
     the Secretary to provide assistance, which may include 
     housing and related improvements, to Indian Tribes displaced 
     as a result of the construction of the John Day Dam, Columbia 
     River, Washington and Oregon.
       (3) Repeal.--Section 1178(c)(2) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1675) is repealed.
       (c) The Dalles Dam, Washington and Oregon.--The Secretary, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall 
     complete a village development plan for any Indian Tribe 
     displaced as a result of the construction of the Dalles Dam, 
     Columbia River, Washington and Oregon, as authorized by 
     section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (64 Stat. 179).

     SEC. 113. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Congress plays a central role in identifying, 
     prioritizing, and authorizing vital water resources 
     infrastructure activities throughout the United States.
       (2) The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 
     (Public Law 113-121) established a new and transparent 
     process to review and prioritize the water resources 
     development activities of the Corps of Engineers with strong 
     congressional oversight.
       (3) Section 7001 of the Water Resources Reform and 
     Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2282d) requires the 
     Secretary to develop and submit to Congress each year a 
     Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development and, 
     as part of the annual report process, to--
       (A) publish a notice in the Federal Register that requests 
     from non-Federal interests proposed feasibility studies and 
     proposed modifications to authorized water resources 
     development projects and feasibility studies for inclusion in 
     the report; and
       (B) review the proposals submitted and include in the 
     report those proposed feasibility studies and proposed 
     modifications that meet the criteria for inclusion 
     established under such section 7001.
       (4) Congress will use the information provided in the 
     annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources 
     Development to determine authorization needs and priorities 
     for purposes of water resources development legislation.
       (5) To ensure that Congress can gain a thorough 
     understanding of the water resources development needs and 
     priorities of the United States, it is important that the 
     Secretary take sufficient steps to ensure that non-Federal 
     interests are made aware of the new annual report process, 
     including the need for non-Federal interests to submit 
     proposals during the Secretary's annual request for proposals 
     in order for such proposals to be eligible for consideration 
     by Congress.
       (b) Dissemination of Process Information.--The Secretary 
     shall develop, support, and implement education and awareness 
     efforts for non-Federal interests with respect to the annual 
     Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development 
     required under section 7001 of the Water Resources Reform and 
     Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2282d), including efforts 
     to--
       (1) develop and disseminate technical assistance materials, 
     seminars, and guidance on the annual process as it relates to 
     non-Federal interests;
       (2) provide written notice to local elected officials and 
     previous and potential non-Federal interests on the annual 
     process and on opportunities to address local water resources 
     challenges through the missions and authorities of the Corps 
     of Engineers;
       (3) issue guidance for non-Federal interests to assist such 
     interests in developing proposals for water resources 
     development projects that satisfy the requirements of such 
     section 7001; and
       (4) provide, at the request of a non-Federal interest, 
     assistance with researching and identifying existing project 
     authorizations and Corps of Engineers decision documents.

     SEC. 114. NON-FEDERAL ENGAGEMENT AND REVIEW.

       (a) Public Notice.--
       (1) In general.--Prior to developing and issuing any new or 
     revised implementation guidance for a covered water resources 
     development law, the Secretary shall issue a public notice 
     that--
       (A) informs potentially interested non-Federal stakeholders 
     of the Secretary's intent to develop and issue such guidance; 
     and
       (B) provides an opportunity for interested non-Federal 
     stakeholders to engage with, and provide input and 
     recommendations to, the Secretary on the development and 
     issuance of such guidance.
       (2) Issuance of notice.--The Secretary shall issue the 
     notice under paragraph (1) through a posting on a publicly 
     accessible website dedicated to providing notice on the 
     development and issuance of implementation guidance for a 
     covered water resources development law.
       (b) Stakeholder Engagement.--
       (1) Input.--The Secretary shall allow a minimum of 60 days 
     after issuance of the public notice under subsection (a) for 
     non-Federal stakeholders to provide input and recommendations 
     to the Secretary, prior to finalizing implementation guidance 
     for a covered water resources development law.
       (2) Outreach.--The Secretary may, as appropriate (as 
     determined by the Secretary), reach out to non-Federal 
     stakeholders and circulate drafts of implementation guidance 
     for a covered water resources development law for informal 
     feedback and recommendations.
       (c) Development of Guidance.--When developing 
     implementation guidance for a covered water resources 
     development law, the Secretary shall take into consideration 
     the input and recommendations received from non-Federal 
     stakeholders, and make the final guidance available to the 
     public on-line on a publicly accessible website.
       (d) Covered Water Resources Development Law.--In this 
     section, the term ``covered water resources development law'' 
     means--
       (1) the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014;
       (2) the Water Resources Development Act of 2016;
       (3) this Act; and
       (4) any Federal water resources development law enacted 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 115. COMPREHENSIVE BACKLOG REPORT.

       Section 1001(b)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(4)) is amended--
       (1) in the header, by inserting ``and operation and 
     maintenance'' after ``backlog'';
       (2) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall compile and 
     publish--
       ``(i) a complete list of all projects and separable 
     elements of projects of the Corps of Engineers that are 
     authorized for construction but have not been completed; and
       ``(ii) a list of major Federal operation and maintenance 
     needs of projects and properties under the control of the 
     Corps of Engineers.'';
       (3) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) in the heading, by inserting ``backlog'' before 
     ``information''; and
       (B) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking 
     ``subparagraph (A)'' and inserting ``subparagraph (A)(i)'';
       (4) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D) 
     and inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
       ``(C) Required operation and maintenance information.--The 
     Secretary shall include on the list developed under 
     subparagraph (A)(ii), for each project and property under the 
     control of the Corps of Engineers on that list--
       ``(i) the authority under which the project was authorized 
     or the property was acquired by the Corps of Engineers;
       ``(ii) a brief description of the project or property;
       ``(iii) an estimate of the Federal costs to meet the major 
     operation and maintenance needs at the project or property; 
     and
       ``(iv) an estimate of unmet or deferred operation and 
     maintenance needs at the project or property.''; and
       (5) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated--
       (A) in clause (i), in the matter preceding subclause (I), 
     by striking ``Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall submit a 
     copy of the list'' and inserting ``For fiscal year 2019, and 
     biennially thereafter, in conjunction with the President's 
     annual budget submission to Congress under section 1105(a) of 
     title 31, United States Code, the Secretary shall submit a 
     copy of the lists''; and
       (B) in clause (ii), by striking ``list'' and inserting 
     ``lists''.

     SEC. 116. STRUCTURES AND FACILITIES CONSTRUCTED BY SECRETARY.

       Section 14 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 408) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Work Defined.--For the purposes of this section, the 
     term `work' shall not include unimproved real estate owned or 
     operated by the Secretary as part of a water resources 
     development project if the Secretary determines that 
     modification of such real estate would not affect the 
     function and usefulness of the project.''.

     SEC. 117. TRANSPARENCY IN ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       Section 1012(b)(1) of the Water Resources Reform and 
     Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2315a(b)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting ``Not later than 1 
     year after the date of enactment of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2018, the Secretary''.

     SEC. 118. STUDY OF THE FUTURE OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS 
                   OF ENGINEERS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into an 
     agreement with the National Academy

[[Page H4807]]

     of Sciences to convene a committee of experts to carry out a 
     comprehensive study on--
       (1) the ability of the Corps of Engineers to carry out its 
     statutory missions and responsibilities, and the potential 
     effects of transferring the functions (including regulatory 
     obligations), personnel, assets, and civilian staff 
     responsibilities of the Secretary relating to civil works 
     from the Department of Defense to a new or existing agency or 
     subagency of the Federal Government, including how such a 
     transfer might affect the Federal Government's ability to 
     meet the current statutory missions and responsibilities of 
     the Corps of Engineers; and
       (2) improving the Corps of Engineers' project delivery 
     processes, including recommendations for such improvements, 
     taking into account factors including--
       (A) the effect of the annual appropriations process on the 
     ability of the Corps of Engineers to efficiently secure and 
     carry out contracts for water resources projects and perform 
     regulatory obligations;
       (B) the effect that the current Corps of Engineers 
     leadership and geographic structure at the division and 
     district levels has on its ability to carry out its missions 
     in a cost-effective manner; and
       (C) the effect of the frequency of rotations of senior 
     leaders of the Corps of Engineers and how such frequency 
     affects the function of the district.
       (b) Considerations.--The study carried out under subsection 
     (a) shall include consideration of--
       (1) effects on the national security of the United States;
       (2) the ability of the Corps of Engineers to maintain 
     sufficient engineering capability and capacity to assist 
     ongoing and future operations of the United States armed 
     services; and
       (3) emergency and natural disaster response obligations of 
     the Federal Government that are carried out by the Corps of 
     Engineers.
       (c) Consultation.--The agreement entered into under 
     subsection (a) shall require the National Academy to, in 
     carrying out the study, consult with--
       (1) the Department of Defense, including the Secretary of 
     the Army and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
     Works;
       (2) the Department of Transportation;
       (3) the Environmental Protection Agency;
       (4) the Department of Homeland Security;
       (5) the Office of Management and Budget;
       (6) other appropriate Federal agencies;
       (7) professional and nongovernmental organizations; and
       (8) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
     the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment 
     and Public Works of the Senate.
       (d) Submission to Congress.--The Secretary shall submit the 
     final report of the National Academy containing the findings 
     of the study carried out under subsection (a) to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 119. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CREDIT.

       Section 7007(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     2007 (121 Stat. 1277; 128 Stat. 1226) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following: ``Notwithstanding section 
     221(a)(4)(C)(i) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 
     1962d-5b(a)(4)(C)(i)), the Secretary may provide credit for 
     work carried out during the period beginning on November 8, 
     2007, and ending on the date of enactment of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2018 by the non-Federal interest 
     for a project under this title if the Secretary determines 
     that the work is integral to the project and was carried out 
     in accordance with the laws specified in section 
     5014(i)(2)(A) of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
     Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1331) and all other applicable Federal 
     laws.''.

     SEC. 120. NON-FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION PILOT PROGRAM.

       Section 1043(b)(8) of the Water Resources Reform and 
     Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note(b)(8)) is 
     amended by striking ``2015 through 2019'' and inserting 
     ``2019 through 2023''.

     SEC. 121. STUDY OF WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS BY 
                   NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.

       Section 203 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2231) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting ``federally 
     authorized'' before ``feasibility study'';
       (2) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
       ``(c) Submission to Congress.--
       ``(1) Review and submission of studies to congress.--Not 
     later than 180 days after the date of receipt of a 
     feasibility study of a project under subsection (a)(1), the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives a report that describes--
       ``(A) the results of the Secretary's review of the study 
     under subsection (b), including a determination of whether 
     the project is feasible;
       ``(B) any recommendations the Secretary may have concerning 
     the plan or design of the project; and
       ``(C) any conditions the Secretary may require for 
     construction of the project.
       ``(2) Limitation.--The completion of the review by the 
     Secretary of a feasibility study that has been submitted 
     under subsection (a)(1) may not be delayed as a result of 
     consideration being given to changes in policy or priority 
     with respect to project consideration.''; and
       (3) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
       ``(e) Review and Technical Assistance.--
       ``(1) Review.--The Secretary may accept and expend funds 
     provided by non-Federal interests to undertake reviews, 
     inspections, certifications, and other activities that are 
     the responsibility of the Secretary in carrying out this 
     section.
       ``(2) Technical assistance.--At the request of a non-
     Federal interest, the Secretary shall provide to the non-
     Federal interest technical assistance relating to any aspect 
     of a feasibility study if the non-Federal interest contracts 
     with the Secretary to pay all costs of providing such 
     technical assistance.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Funds provided by non-Federal interests 
     under this subsection shall not be eligible for credit under 
     subsection (d) or reimbursement.
       ``(4) Impartial decisionmaking.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary shall ensure that the use of funds 
     accepted from a non-Federal interest will not affect the 
     impartial decisionmaking of the Secretary, either 
     substantively or procedurally.''.

     SEC. 122. CONSTRUCTION OF WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT 
                   PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.

       Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2232) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
     (A), by inserting ``federally authorized'' before ``water 
     resources development project'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``, except as 
     provided in paragraph (3)'' before the semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Permit exception.--
       ``(A) In general.--For a project described in subsection 
     (a)(1) or subsection (a)(3), or a separable element thereof, 
     with respect to which a written agreement described in 
     subparagraph (B) has been entered into, a non-Federal 
     interest that carries out a project under this section shall 
     not be required to obtain any Federal permits or approvals 
     that would not be required if the Secretary carried out the 
     project or separable element unless significant new 
     circumstances or information relevant to environmental 
     concerns or compliance have arisen since development of the 
     project recommendation.
       ``(B) Written agreement.--For purposes of this paragraph, a 
     written agreement shall provide that the non-Federal interest 
     shall comply with the same legal and technical requirements 
     that would apply if the project or separable element were 
     carried out by the Secretary, including all mitigation 
     required to offset environmental impacts of the project or 
     separable element as determined by the Secretary.
       ``(C) Certifications.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), if 
     a non-Federal interest carrying out a project under this 
     section would, in the absence of a written agreement entered 
     into under this paragraph, be required to obtain a 
     certification from a State under Federal law to carry out the 
     project, such certification shall still be required if a 
     written agreement is entered into with respect to the project 
     under this paragraph.''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``; and'' and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (ii) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) in the case of reimbursement, appropriations are 
     provided by Congress for such purpose.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (5)--
       (i) by striking ``flood damage reduction'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``water resources development'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``for a discrete 
     segment of a'' and inserting ``for carrying out a discrete 
     segment of a federally authorized''; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (D), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by inserting ``to be carried out'' after ``project''.

     SEC. 123. ADVANCED FUNDS FOR WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT 
                   STUDIES AND PROJECTS.

       (a) Contributions by States and Political Subdivisions for 
     Immediate Use on Authorized Flood-Control Work; Repayment.--
     The Act of October 15, 1940 (54 Stat. 1176; 33 U.S.C. 701h-1) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``a flood-control project duly adopted and 
     authorized by law'' and inserting ``a federally authorized 
     water resources development project,'';
       (2) by striking ``such work'' and inserting ``such 
     project'';
       (3) by striking ``from appropriations which may be provided 
     by Congress for flood-control work'' and inserting ``if 
     appropriations are provided by Congress for such purpose''; 
     and
       (4) by adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of 
     this Act, the term `State' means the several States, the 
     District of Columbia, the commonwealths, territories, and 
     possessions of the United States, and Indian tribes (as 
     defined in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and 
     Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304(e))).''.
       (b) No Adverse Effect on Processes.--In implementing any 
     provision of law that authorizes a non-Federal interest to 
     provide, advance, or contribute funds to the Secretary for 
     the development or implementation of a water resources 
     development project (including sections 203 and 204 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231, 
     2232), section 5 of the Act of June 22, 1936 (33 U.S.C. 
     701h), and the Act of October 15, 1940 (33 U.S.C. 701h-1)), 
     the Secretary shall ensure, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, that the use by a non-Federal interest of such 
     authorities does not adversely affect--
       (1) the process or timeline for development and 
     implementation of other water resources development projects 
     by other non-Federal entities that do not use such 
     authorities; or

[[Page H4808]]

       (2) the process for including such projects in the 
     President's annual budget submission to Congress under 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code.
       (c) Advances by Private Parties; Repayment.--Section 11 of 
     the Act of March 3, 1925 (Chapter 467; 33 U.S.C. 561) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 124. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.

       Section 214(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     2000 (33 U.S.C. 2352(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``10 years'' and 
     inserting ``12 years''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) by striking ``4 years after the date of enactment of 
     this paragraph'' and inserting ``December 31, 2022''; and
       (B) by striking ``carry out a study'' and inserting ``carry 
     out a followup study''.

     SEC. 125. STUDY ON ECONOMIC AND BUDGETARY ANALYSES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into an 
     agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to--
       (1) carry out a study on the economic principles and 
     analytical methodologies currently used by or applied to the 
     Corps of Engineers to formulate, evaluate, and budget for 
     water resources development projects; and
       (2) make recommendations to Congress on potential changes 
     to such principles and methodologies to improve transparency, 
     return on Federal investment, cost savings, and 
     prioritization, in the formulation, evaluation, and budgeting 
     of such projects.
       (b) Considerations.--The study under subsection (a) shall 
     include--
       (1) an analysis of the current economic principles and 
     analytical methodologies used by or applied to the Corps of 
     Engineers in determining the total benefits and total costs 
     during the formulation of, and plan selection for, a water 
     resources development project;
       (2) an analysis of improvements or alternatives to how the 
     Corps of Engineers utilizes the National Economic 
     Development, Regional Economic Development, Environmental 
     Quality, and Other Social Effects accounts developed by the 
     Institute for Water Resources of the Corps of Engineers in 
     the formulation of, and plan selection for, such projects;
       (3) an analysis of whether such principles and 
     methodologies fully account for all of the potential benefits 
     of project alternatives, including any reasonably associated 
     benefits of such alternatives that are not contrary to law, 
     Federal policy, or sound water resources management;
       (4) an analysis of whether such principles and 
     methodologies fully account for all of the costs of project 
     alternatives, including potential societal costs, such as 
     lost ecosystem services, and full lifecycle costs for such 
     alternatives; and
       (5) an analysis of the methodologies utilized by the 
     Federal Government in setting and applying discount rates for 
     benefit-cost analyses used in the formulation, evaluation, 
     and budgeting of Corps of Engineers water resources 
     development projects.
       (c) Publication.--The agreement entered into under 
     subsection (a) shall require the National Academy of Sciences 
     to, not later than 30 days after the completion of the 
     study--
       (1) submit a report containing the results of the study and 
     the recommendations to the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives; and
       (2) make a copy of such report available on a publicly 
     accessible website.
       (d) Sense of Congress on Budgetary Evaluation Metrics and 
     Transparency.--It is the sense of Congress that the 
     President, in the formulation of the annual budget request 
     for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Civil Works), should 
     submit to Congress a budget that--
       (1) aligns the assessment of the potential benefit-cost 
     ratio for budgeting water resources development projects with 
     that used by the Corps of Engineers during project plan 
     formulation and evaluation pursuant to section 80 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-17); 
     and
       (2) demonstrates the transparent criteria and metrics 
     utilized by the President in the evaluation and selection of 
     water resources development projects included in the budget 
     request.

     SEC. 126. STUDY OF CORROSION MANAGEMENT AT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 
                   PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 
     study of corrosion management efforts at projects and 
     properties under the control of the Corps of Engineers.
       (b) Requirements.--The study under subsection (a) shall 
     include--
       (1) an analysis of--
       (A) asset management protocols that are utilized by the 
     Corps of Engineers, including protocols that examine both 
     asset integrity and the integration of corrosion management 
     efforts within the asset lifecycle, which includes the stages 
     of design, manufacturing and construction, operation and 
     maintenance, and decommissioning;
       (B) available corrosion prevention technologies that may be 
     used at projects and properties under the control of the 
     Corps of Engineers;
       (C) corrosion-related asset failures and the management 
     protocols of the Corps of Engineers to incorporate lessons 
     learned from such failures into work and management 
     practices;
       (D) training of Corps of Engineers employees with respect 
     to, and best practices for, identifying and preventing 
     corrosion at projects and properties under the control of the 
     Corps of Engineers; and
       (E) the estimated costs and anticipated benefits, including 
     safety benefits, associated with the integration of corrosion 
     management efforts within the asset lifecycle; and
       (2) a description of Corps of Engineers, stakeholder, and 
     expert perspectives on the effectiveness of corrosion 
     management efforts to reduce the incidence of corrosion at 
     projects and properties under the control of the Corps of 
     Engineers.

     SEC. 127. COSTS IN EXCESS OF FEDERAL PARTICIPATION LIMIT.

       Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 
     701r) is amended by inserting ``, and if such amount is not 
     sufficient to cover the costs included in the Federal cost 
     share for a project, as determined by the Secretary, the non-
     Federal interest shall be responsible for any such costs that 
     exceed such amount'' before the period at the end.

     SEC. 128. REPORT ON INNOVATIVE MATERIALS.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that 
     describes activities conducted by the Corps of Engineers at 
     centers of expertise, technology centers, technical centers, 
     research and development centers, and similar facilities and 
     organizations relating to the testing, research, development, 
     identification, and recommended uses for innovative materials 
     in water resources development projects.

     SEC. 129. STUDY ON CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     submit to Congress a report that--
       (1) describes the capacity and preparedness of the Corps of 
     Engineers workforce, including challenges related to 
     diversity, recruitment, retention, retirements, 
     credentialing, professional development, on-the-job training, 
     and other readiness-related gaps in ensuring a fully prepared 
     21st century Corps of Engineers workforce; and
       (2) contains an assessment of the existing technology used 
     by the Corps of Engineers, the effects of inefficiencies in 
     the Corps' current technology usage, and recommendations for 
     improved technology or tools to accomplish its missions and 
     responsibilities.

     SEC. 130. GAO STUDY.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall submit to the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives a study of the consideration by the Corps of 
     Engineers of natural features and nature-based features in 
     the study of the feasibility of projects for flood risk 
     management, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and 
     ecosystem restoration.
       (b) Considerations.--The study under subsection (a) shall 
     include--
       (1) a description of guidance or instructions issued, and 
     other measures taken, by the Secretary and the Chief of 
     Engineers to consider natural features and nature-based 
     features in project feasibility studies;
       (2) an assessment of the costs, benefits, impacts, and 
     trade-offs associated with natural features and nature-based 
     features recommended by the Secretary for flood risk 
     reduction, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and 
     ecosystem restoration projects, and the effectiveness of 
     those natural features and nature-based features;
       (3) a description of any statutory, fiscal, regulatory, or 
     other policy barriers to the appropriate consideration and 
     use of a full array of natural features and nature-based 
     features; and
       (4) any recommendations for changes to statutory, fiscal, 
     regulatory, or other policies to improve the use of natural 
     features and nature-based features by the Corps of Engineers.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``natural 
     feature'' and ``nature-based feature'' have the meanings 
     given such terms in section 1184 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2016 (33 U.S.C. 2289a).

     SEC. 131. GAO REPORT ON ALASKA NATIVE VILLAGE RELOCATION 
                   EFFORTS DUE TO FLOODING AND EROSION THREATS.

       (a) Definition of Alaska Native Village.--In this section, 
     the term ``Alaska Native village'' means a Native village 
     that has a Village Corporation (as those terms are defined in 
     section 3 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
     U.S.C. 1602)).
       (b) Report.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall submit to Congress a report on efforts to relocate 
     Alaska Native villages due to flooding and erosion threats 
     that updates the report of the Comptroller General entitled 
     ``Alaska Native Villages: Limited Progress Has Been Made on 
     Relocating Villages Threatened by Flooding and Erosion'', 
     dated June 2009.
       (c) Inclusions.--The report under subsection (b) shall 
     include--
       (1) a summary of flooding and erosion threats to Alaska 
     Native villages throughout the State of Alaska, based on 
     information from--
       (A) the Corps of Engineers;
       (B) the Denali Commission; and
       (C) any other relevant sources of information as the 
     Comptroller General determines to be appropriate;
       (2) the status of efforts to relocate Alaska Native 
     villages due to flooding and erosion threats; and
       (3) any other issues relating to flooding and erosion 
     threats to, or relocation of, Alaska Native villages, as the 
     Comptroller General determines to be appropriate.

     SEC. 132. STUDY AND REPORT ON EXPEDITING CERTAIN WAIVER 
                   PROCESSES.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall complete

[[Page H4809]]

     and submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
     of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report based 
     on the results of a study on the best options available to 
     the Secretary to implement the waiver process for the non-
     Federal cost share under section 116 of the Energy and Water 
     Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (Public Law 111-85; 123 Stat. 2851).

     SEC. 133. CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM.

       Section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 
     577) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``$50,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$62,500,000''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``$10,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$12,500,000''.

     SEC. 134. CREDIT IN LIEU OF REIMBURSEMENT.

       Section 1022 of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
     Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2225) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1022. CREDIT IN LIEU OF REIMBURSEMENT.

       ``(a) Requests for Credits.--With respect to an authorized 
     flood damage reduction project, or separable element thereof, 
     that has been constructed by a non-Federal interest under 
     section 211 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (33 U.S.C. 701b-13), or an authorized coastal navigation 
     project that has been constructed by the Corps of Engineers 
     pursuant to section 11 of the Act of March 3, 1925, before 
     the date of enactment of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 2018, the Secretary may provide to the non-Federal 
     interest, at the request of the non-Federal interest, a 
     credit in an amount equal to the estimated Federal share of 
     the cost of the project or separable element, in lieu of 
     providing to the non-Federal interest a reimbursement in that 
     amount.
       ``(b) Application of Credits.--At the request of the non-
     Federal interest, the Secretary may apply such credit to the 
     share of the cost of the non-Federal interest of carrying out 
     other flood damage reduction and coastal navigation projects 
     or studies.''.

     SEC. 135. LAKE OKEECHOBEE REGULATION SCHEDULE REVIEW.

       The Secretary, acting through the Chief of Engineers, shall 
     expedite completion of the Lake Okeechobee regulation 
     schedule to coincide with the completion of the Herbert 
     Hoover Dike project, and may consider all relevant aspects of 
     the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan described in 
     section 601 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
     (114 Stat. 2680).

     SEC. 136. MISSOURI RIVER.

       (a) IRC Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate a report regarding the impacts of 
     interception-rearing complex construction on the navigation, 
     flood control, and other authorized purposes set forth in the 
     Missouri River Master Manual, and on the population recovery 
     of the pallid sturgeon.
       (b) No Additional IRC Construction.--Until the report under 
     subsection (a) is submitted, no additional interception-
     rearing complex construction is authorized.

     SEC. 137. ACCESS TO REAL ESTATE DATA.

       (a) In General.--As soon as is practicable, using available 
     funds, the Secretary shall make publicly available, including 
     on a publicly accessible website, information relating to all 
     real property with respect to which the Corps of Engineers 
     holds an interest. The information shall include standardized 
     real estate plat descriptions and geospatial information.
       (b) Limitation.--Nothing in this section may be construed 
     to compel or authorize the disclosure of data or other 
     information determined by the Secretary to be confidential, 
     privileged, national security, or personal information, or 
     information the disclosure of which is otherwise prohibited 
     by law.

     SEC. 138. AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES RESEARCH.

       (a) In General.--As part of the ongoing activities of the 
     Engineer Research and Development Center to address the 
     spread and impacts of aquatic invasive species, the Secretary 
     shall undertake research on the management and eradication of 
     aquatic invasive species, including Asian carp and zebra 
     mussels.
       (b) Locations.--In carrying out subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall work with Corps of Engineers district offices 
     representing diverse geographical regions of the continental 
     United States that are impacted by aquatic invasive species, 
     such as the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts and the Great 
     Lakes.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate a report recommending a plan to 
     address the spread and impacts of aquatic invasive species.

     SEC. 139. HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the Engineer 
     Research and Development Center of the Chief of Engineers, 
     shall implement a 5-year harmful algal bloom technology 
     development demonstration under the Aquatic Nuisance Research 
     Program. To the extent practicable, the Corps of Engineers 
     shall support research that will identify and develop 
     improved strategies for early detection, prevention, and 
     management techniques and procedures to reduce the occurrence 
     and effects of harmful algal blooms in the Nation's water 
     resources.
       (b) Scalability Requirement.--The Secretary shall ensure 
     that technologies identified, tested, and deployed under the 
     harmful algal bloom program technology development 
     demonstration have the ability to scale up to meet the needs 
     of harmful-algal-bloom-related events.

     SEC. 140. BUBBLY CREEK, CHICAGO ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

       The Secretary shall enter into a memorandum of 
     understanding with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to facilitate ecosystem restoration 
     activities at the South Fork of the South Branch of the 
     Chicago River (commonly known as Bubbly Creek).

     SEC. 141. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION AND 
                   HYDROELECTRIC FACILITIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 314 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2321) is amended--
       (1) in the heading by inserting ``navigation and'' before 
     ``hydroelectric facilities'';
       (2) in the first sentence, by striking ``Activities 
     currently performed'' and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--Activities currently performed'';
       (3) in subsection (a) (as designated by paragraph (2)), by 
     inserting ``navigation or'' before ``hydroelectric'';
       (4) in the second sentence, by striking ``This section'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Major Maintenance Contracts Allowed.--This section''; 
     and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Exclusion.--This section does not--
       ``(1) apply to a navigation facility that was under 
     contract on or before the date of enactment of this 
     subsection with a non-Federal interest to perform operations 
     or maintenance; and
       ``(2) prohibit the Secretary from contracting out 
     commercial activities after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection at a navigation facility.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents contained in 
     section 1(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 
     (104 Stat. 4604) is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 314 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 314. Operation and maintenance of navigation and hydroelectric 
              facilities.''.

     SEC. 142. HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION.

       Section 156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 
     (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5f) is amended in subsection (b)--
       (1) by striking ``Notwithstanding'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Timing.--The 15 additional years under paragraph (1) 
     shall begin on the date of initiation of construction of 
     congressionally authorized nourishment.''.

     SEC. 143. POST-DISASTER WATERSHED ASSESSMENTS IN THE 
                   TERRITORIES OF THE UNITED STATES.

       Section 3025 of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
     Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2267b) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(e) Assessments in the Territories of the United 
     States.--
       ``(1) In general.--For any major disaster declared in the 
     territories of the United States before the date of enactment 
     of this subsection, all activities in the territory carried 
     out or undertaken pursuant to the authorities described under 
     this section shall be conducted at full Federal expense 
     unless the President determines that the territory has the 
     ability to pay the cost share for an assessment under this 
     section without the use of non-Federal funds or loans.
       ``(2) Territories defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     `territories of the United States' means those insular areas 
     specified in section 1156(a)(1) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2310(a)(1)).''.

                           TITLE II--STUDIES

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF PROPOSED FEASIBILITY STUDIES.

       The Secretary is authorized to conduct a feasibility study 
     for the following projects for water resources development 
     and conservation and other purposes, as identified in the 
     reports titled ``Report to Congress on Future Water Resources 
     Development'' submitted to Congress on March 17, 2017, and 
     February 5, 2018, respectively, pursuant to section 7001 of 
     the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (33 
     U.S.C. 2282d) or otherwise reviewed by Congress:
       (1) Cave buttes dam, arizona.--Project for flood risk 
     management, Phoenix, Arizona.
       (2) San diego river, california.--Project for flood risk 
     management, navigation, and ecosystem restoration, San Diego, 
     California.
       (3) J. bennett johnston waterway, louisiana.--Project for 
     navigation, J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana.
       (4) Northshore, louisiana.--Project for flood risk 
     management, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana.
       (5) Ouachita-black rivers, louisiana.--Project for 
     navigation, Little River, Louisiana.
       (6) Chautauqua lake, new york.--Project for ecosystem 
     restoration and flood risk management, Chautauqua, New York.
       (7) Trinity river and tributaries, texas.--Project for 
     navigation, Liberty, Texas.
       (8) West cell levee, texas.--Project for flood risk 
     management, Irving, Texas.
       (9) Coastal virginia, virginia.--Project for flood risk 
     management, ecosystem restoration, and navigation, Coastal 
     Virginia.
       (10) Tangier island, virginia.--Project for flood risk 
     management and ecosystem restoration, Tangier Island, 
     Virginia.

     SEC. 202. ADDITIONAL STUDIES.

       (a) Lower Mississippi River; Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, 
     Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
     studies to determine the feasibility

[[Page H4810]]

     of habitat restoration for each of the eight reaches 
     identified as priorities in the report prepared by the 
     Secretary pursuant to section 402 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2000, titled ``Lower Mississippi River 
     Resource Assessment; Final Assessment In Response to Section 
     402 of WRDA 2000'' and dated July 2015.
       (2) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with the 
     Lower Mississippi River Conservation Committee during each 
     feasibility study carried out under paragraph (1).
       (b) St. Louis Riverfront, Meramec River Basin, Missouri and 
     Illinois.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
     studies to determine the feasibility of a project for 
     ecosystem restoration and flood risk management in Madison, 
     St. Clair, and Monroe Counties, Illinois, St. Louis City, and 
     St. Louis, Jefferson, Franklin, Gasconade, Maries, Phelps, 
     Crawford, Dent, Washington, Iron, St. Francois, St. 
     Genevieve, Osage, Reynolds, and Texas Counties, Missouri.
       (2) Continuation of existing study.--Any study carried out 
     under paragraph (1) shall be considered a continuation of the 
     study being carried out under Committee Resolution 2642 of 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives, adopted June 21, 2000.

     SEC. 203. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CERTAIN 
                   PROJECTS.

       (a) Feasibility Reports.--The Secretary shall expedite the 
     completion of a feasibility study for each of the following 
     projects, and if the Secretary determines that the project is 
     justified in a completed report, may proceed directly to 
     preconstruction planning, engineering, and design of the 
     project:
       (1) Project for riverbank stabilization, Selma, Alabama.
       (2) Project for ecosystem restoration, Three Mile Creek, 
     Alabama.
       (3) Project for navigation, Nome, Alaska.
       (4) Project for flood diversion, Seward, Alaska.
       (5) Project for navigation, Three Rivers, Arkansas.
       (6) Project for flood control, water conservation, and 
     related purposes, Coyote Valley Dam, California.
       (7) Project for flood risk management, Lower Cache Creek, 
     California.
       (8) Project for flood risk management, Lower San Joaquin 
     River, California, as described in section 1322(b)(2)(F) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1707) 
     (second phase of feasibility study).
       (9) Project for flood risk management, South San Francisco, 
     California.
       (10) Project for flood risk management and ecosystem 
     restoration, Tijuana River, California.
       (11) Project for flood risk management in East Hartford, 
     Connecticut.
       (12) Project for flood risk management in Hartford, 
     Connecticut.
       (13) Projects under the Comprehensive Flood Mitigation 
     Study for the Delaware River Basin.
       (14) Project for ecosystem restoration, Lake Apopka, 
     Florida.
       (15) Project for ecosystem restoration, Kansas River Weir, 
     Kansas.
       (16) Project for water resource improvements, Willamette 
     River Basin, Fern Ridge, Oregon.
       (17) Project for ecosystem restoration, Resacas at 
     Brownsville, Texas.
       (18) Project for navigation, Norfolk Harbor, Virginia.
       (19) Project for coastal storm risk management, Norfolk, 
     Virginia.
       (20) Project for navigation, Tacoma Harbor, Washington.
       (b) Lower San Joaquin River, California.--In expediting 
     completion of the second phase of the Lower San Joaquin River 
     feasibility study under subsection (a)(8), the Secretary 
     shall review and give priority to any plans and designs 
     requested by non-Federal interests and incorporate such plans 
     and designs into the Federal study if the Secretary 
     determines that such plans and designs are consistent with 
     Federal standards.
       (c) Post-authorization Change Reports.--The Secretary shall 
     expedite completion of a post-authorization change report for 
     the following projects:
       (1) Project for flood risk management, San Luis Rey River 
     Flood Control Protection Project, California.
       (2) Project for flood risk management, Success Reservoir 
     Enlargement Project, California.
       (3) Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir, Central 
     Everglades Planning Project, Florida.
       (4) Project for navigation, Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan.
       (d) Upper Mississippi River Protection.--Section 2010 of 
     the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (128 
     Stat. 1270) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Considerations.--In carrying out a disposition study 
     with respect to the Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam, 
     including a disposition study under section 216 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a), the Secretary may not 
     complete such study until the Secretary considers, and issues 
     a report to the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate on--
       ``(1) the feasibility of carrying out modifications to the 
     Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam to--
       ``(A) preserve and enhance recreational opportunities and 
     the health of the ecosystem; and
       ``(B) maintain the benefits to the natural ecosystem and 
     human environment; and
       ``(2) the preservation of any portion of the Upper St. 
     Anthony Falls Lock and Dam necessary to maintain flood 
     control.''.

   TITLE III--DEAUTHORIZATIONS, MODIFICATIONS, AND RELATED PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. DEAUTHORIZATION OF INACTIVE PROJECTS.

       (a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       (1) to identify $3,000,000,000 in water resources 
     development projects authorized by Congress that are no 
     longer viable for construction due to--
       (A) a lack of local support;
       (B) a lack of available Federal or non-Federal resources; 
     or
       (C) an authorizing purpose that is no longer relevant or 
     feasible;
       (2) to create an expedited and definitive process for 
     Congress to deauthorize water resources development projects 
     that are no longer viable for construction; and
       (3) to allow the continued authorization of water resources 
     development projects that are viable for construction.
       (b) Interim Deauthorization List.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop an interim 
     deauthorization list that identifies--
       (A) each water resources development project, or separable 
     element of a project, authorized for construction before 
     November 8, 2007, for which--
       (i) planning, design, or construction was not initiated 
     before the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (ii) planning, design, or construction was initiated before 
     the date of enactment of this Act, but for which no funds, 
     Federal or non-Federal, were obligated for planning, design, 
     or construction of the project or separable element of the 
     project during the current fiscal year or any of the 6 
     preceding fiscal years;
       (B) each project or separable element identified and 
     included on a list to Congress for deauthorization pursuant 
     to section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)); and
       (C) any project or separable element for which the non-
     Federal sponsor of such project or separable element submits 
     a request for inclusion on the list.
       (2) Public comment and consultation.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall solicit comments from 
     the public and the Governors of each applicable State on the 
     interim deauthorization list developed under paragraph (1).
       (B) Comment period.--The public comment period shall be 90 
     days.
       (3) Submission to congress; publication.--Not later than 90 
     days after the date of the close of the comment period under 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary shall--
       (A) submit a revised interim deauthorization list to the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives; and
       (B) publish the revised interim deauthorization list in the 
     Federal Register.
       (c) Final Deauthorization List.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a final 
     deauthorization list of water resources development projects, 
     or separable elements of projects, from the revised interim 
     deauthorization list described in subsection (b)(3).
       (2) Deauthorization amount.--
       (A) Proposed final list.--The Secretary shall prepare a 
     proposed final deauthorization list of projects and separable 
     elements of projects that have, in the aggregate, an 
     estimated Federal cost to complete that is at least 
     $3,000,000,000.
       (B) Determination of federal cost to complete.--For 
     purposes of subparagraph (A), the Federal cost to complete 
     shall take into account any allowances authorized by section 
     902 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
     2280), as applied to the most recent project schedule and 
     cost estimate.
       (3) Identification of projects.--
       (A) Sequencing of projects.--
       (i) In general.--The Secretary shall identify projects and 
     separable elements of projects for inclusion on the proposed 
     final deauthorization list according to the order in which 
     the projects and separable elements of the projects were 
     authorized, beginning with the earliest authorized projects 
     and separable elements of projects and ending with the latest 
     project or separable element of a project necessary to meet 
     the aggregate amount under paragraph (2)(A).
       (ii) Factors to consider.--The Secretary may identify 
     projects and separable elements of projects in an order other 
     than that established by clause (i) if the Secretary 
     determines, on a case-by-case basis, that a project or 
     separable element of a project is critical for interests of 
     the United States, based on the possible impact of the 
     project or separable element of the project on public health 
     and safety, the national economy, or the environment.
       (iii) Consideration of public comments.--In making 
     determinations under clause (ii), the Secretary shall 
     consider any comments received under subsection (b)(2).
       (B) Appendix.--The Secretary shall include as part of the 
     proposed final deauthorization list an appendix that--
       (i) identifies each project or separable element of a 
     project on the interim deauthorization list developed under 
     subsection (b) that is not included on the proposed final 
     deauthorization list; and
       (ii) describes the reasons why the project or separable 
     element is not included on the proposed final list.
       (4) Public comment and consultation.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall solicit comments from 
     the public and the Governor of each applicable State on the 
     proposed final deauthorization list and appendix developed 
     under paragraphs (2) and (3).
       (B) Comment period.--The public comment period shall be 90 
     days.
       (5) Submission of final list to congress; publication.--Not 
     later than 120 days after the date of the close of the 
     comment period under paragraph (4), the Secretary shall--

[[Page H4811]]

       (A) submit a final deauthorization list and an appendix to 
     the final deauthorization list in a report to the Committee 
     on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives; and
       (B) publish the final deauthorization list and the appendix 
     to the final deauthorization list in the Federal Register.
       (d) Deauthorization; Congressional Review.--
       (1) In general.--After the expiration of the 180-day period 
     beginning on the date of submission of the final 
     deauthorization list and appendix under subsection (c), a 
     project or separable element of a project identified in the 
     final deauthorization list is hereby deauthorized, unless 
     Congress passes a joint resolution disapproving the final 
     deauthorization list prior to the end of such period.
       (2) Non-federal contributions.--
       (A) In general.--A project or separable element of a 
     project identified in the final deauthorization list under 
     subsection (c) shall not be deauthorized under this 
     subsection if, before the expiration of the 180-day period 
     referred to in paragraph (1), the non-Federal interest for 
     the project or separable element of the project provides 
     sufficient funds to complete the project or separable element 
     of the project.
       (B) Treatment of projects.--Notwithstanding subparagraph 
     (A), each project and separable element of a project 
     identified in the final deauthorization list shall be treated 
     as deauthorized for purposes of the aggregate deauthorization 
     amount specified in subsection (c)(2)(A).
       (3) Projects identified in appendix.--A project or 
     separable element of a project identified in the appendix to 
     the final deauthorization list shall remain subject to future 
     deauthorization by Congress.
       (e) Special Rule for Projects Receiving Funds for Post-
     authorization Study.--A project or separable element of a 
     project may not be identified on the interim deauthorization 
     list developed under subsection (b), or the final 
     deauthorization list developed under subsection (c), if the 
     project or separable element received funding for a post-
     authorization study during the current fiscal year or any of 
     the 6 preceding fiscal years.
       (f) General Provisions.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this section, the following 
     definitions apply:
       (A) Post-authorization study.--The term ``post-
     authorization study'' means--
       (i) a feasibility report developed under section 905 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282);
       (ii) a feasibility study, as defined in section 105(d) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
     2215(d)); or
       (iii) a review conducted under section 216 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a), including an initial 
     appraisal that--

       (I) demonstrates a Federal interest; and
       (II) requires additional analysis for the project or 
     separable element.

       (B) Water resources development project.--The term ``water 
     resources development project'' includes an environmental 
     infrastructure assistance project or program of the Corps of 
     Engineers.
       (2) Treatment of project modifications.--For purposes of 
     this section, if an authorized water resources development 
     project or separable element of the project has been modified 
     by an Act of Congress, the date of the authorization of the 
     project or separable element shall be deemed to be the date 
     of the most recent modification.

     SEC. 302. BACKLOG PREVENTION.

       (a) Project Deauthorization.--
       (1) In general.--A water resources development project, or 
     separable element of such a project, authorized for 
     construction by this Act shall not be authorized after the 
     last day of the 10-year period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act unless--
       (A) funds have been obligated for construction of, or a 
     post-authorization study for, such project or separable 
     element during that period; or
       (B) the authorization contained in this Act has been 
     modified by a subsequent Act of Congress.
       (2) Identification of projects.--Not later than 60 days 
     after the expiration of the 10-year period referred to in 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 
     Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives a report that identifies the projects 
     deauthorized under paragraph (1).
       (b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     expiration of the 12-year period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives, and make available to the public, a 
     report that contains--
       (1) a list of any water resources development projects 
     authorized by this Act for which construction has not been 
     completed during that period;
       (2) a description of the reasons the projects were not 
     completed;
       (3) a schedule for the completion of the projects based on 
     expected levels of appropriations; and
       (4) a 5-year and 10-year projection of construction backlog 
     and any recommendations to Congress regarding how to mitigate 
     current problems and the backlog.
       (c) Clarification.--Section 6003(a) of the Water Resources 
     Reform and Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 579c(a)) is 
     amended by striking ``7-year'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``10-year''.

     SEC. 303. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS.

       (a) Consistency With Reports.--Congress finds that the 
     project modifications described in this section are in 
     accordance with the reports submitted to Congress by the 
     Secretary under section 7001 of the Water Resources Reform 
     and Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 2282d), titled 
     ``Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development'', 
     or have otherwise been reviewed by Congress.
       (b) Modifications.--
       (1) Harbor/South bay, california.--Section 219(f)(43) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 337; 
     114 Stat. 2763A-220) is amended by striking ``$35,000,000'' 
     and inserting ``$70,000,000''.
       (2) Lakes marion and moultrie, south carolina.--Section 
     219(f)(25) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. 2763A-220; 117 Stat. 1838; 130 
     Stat. 1677) is amended by striking ``$60,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$89,550,000''.

     SEC. 304. MILWAUKEE HARBOR, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN.

       The portion of the project for navigation, Milwaukee 
     Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, authorized by the first section 
     of the Act of March 3, 1843 (5 Stat. 619; chapter 85), 
     consisting of the navigation channel within the Menomonee 
     River that extends from the 16th Street Bridge upstream to 
     the upper limit of the authorized navigation channel and 
     described as follows is no longer authorized beginning on the 
     date of enactment of this Act:
       (1) Beginning at a point in the channel just downstream of 
     the 16th Street Bridge, N383219.703, E2521152.527.
       (2) Thence running westerly along the channel about 2,530.2 
     feet to a point, N383161.314, E2518620.712.
       (3) Thence running westerly by southwesterly along the 
     channel about 591.7 feet to a point at the upstream limit of 
     the existing project, N383080.126, E2518036.371.
       (4) Thence running northerly along the upstream limit of 
     the existing project about 80.5 feet to a point, N383159.359, 
     E2518025.363.
       (5) Thence running easterly by northeasterly along the 
     channel about 551.2 feet to a point, N383235.185, 
     E2518571.108.
       (6) Thence running easterly along the channel about 2,578.9 
     feet to a point, N383294.677, E2521150.798.
       (7) Thence running southerly across the channel about 74.3 
     feet to the point of origin.

     SEC. 305. BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.

       That portion of the project for navigation, Bridgeport 
     Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the Act of June 18, 1878 
     (20 Stat. 158), and modified by the Act of August 11, 1888 
     (25 Stat. 401), the Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1122), the 
     Act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 633), and the Act of July 3, 
     1930 (46 Stat. 919), and lying upstream of a line commencing 
     at point N627942.09, E879709.18 thence running southwesterly 
     about 125 feet to a point N627832.03, E879649.91 is no longer 
     authorized beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 306. CONVEYANCES.

       (a) Cheatham County, Tennessee.--
       (1) Conveyance authorized.--The Secretary may convey to 
     Cheatham County, Tennessee (in this subsection referred to as 
     the ``Grantee''), all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the real property in Cheatham County, 
     Tennessee, consisting of approximately 9.19 acres, identified 
     as portions of tracts E-514-1, E-514-2, E-518-1, E-518-2, E-
     519-1, E-537-1, and E-538, all being part of the Cheatham 
     Lock and Dam project at CRM 158.5, including any improvements 
     thereon.
       (2) Deed.--The conveyance of property under this subsection 
     shall be accomplished using a quitclaim deed and upon such 
     terms and conditions as the Secretary determines appropriate 
     to protect the interests of the United States, to include 
     retaining the right to inundate with water any land 
     transferred under this subsection.
       (3) Consideration.--The Grantee shall pay to the Secretary 
     an amount that is not less than the fair market value of the 
     land conveyed under this subsection, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (4) Subject to existing easements and other interests.--The 
     conveyance of property under this section shall be subject to 
     all existing easements, rights-of-way, and leases that are in 
     effect as of the date of the conveyance.
       (b) Nashville, Tennessee.--
       (1) Conveyance authorized.--The Secretary may convey, 
     without consideration, to the City of Nashville, Tennessee 
     (in this subsection referred to as the ``City''), all right, 
     title, and interest of the United States in and to the real 
     property covered by Lease No. DACW62-1-84-149, including any 
     improvements thereon, at the Riverfront Park Recreational 
     Development, consisting of approximately 5 acres, subject to 
     the right of the Secretary to retain any required easements 
     in the property.
       (2) Conveyance agreement.--A quit claim deed shall be used 
     to convey real property under this subsection upon the terms 
     and conditions mutually satisfactory to the Secretary and the 
     City. The deed shall provide that in the event the City, its 
     successors, or assigns cease to maintain improvements for 
     recreation included in the conveyance or otherwise utilize 
     the real property conveyed for purposes other than recreation 
     and compatible flood risk management, the City, its 
     successor, or assign shall repay to the United States the 
     Federal share of the cost of constructing the improvements 
     for recreation under the agreement between the United States 
     and the City dated December 8, 1981, increased as necessary 
     to account for inflation.
       (c) Generally Applicable Provisions.--
       (1) Survey to obtain legal description.--The exact acreage 
     and the legal description of

[[Page H4812]]

     any real property to be conveyed under this section shall be 
     determined by a survey that is satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (2) Applicability of property screening provisions.--
     Section 2696 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply 
     to any conveyance under this section.
       (3) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require that any conveyance under this section be subject to 
     such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary 
     considers necessary and appropriate to protect the interests 
     of the United States.
       (4) 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 documentation costs, associated 
     with the conveyance.
       (5) Liability.--An entity to which a conveyance is made 
     under this section shall hold the United States harmless from 
     any liability with respect to activities carried out, on or 
     after the date of the conveyance, on 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. 307. CLATSOP COUNTY, OREGON.

       The portions of the project for raising and improving 
     existing levees of Clatsop County Diking District No. 13, in 
     Clatsop County, Oregon, authorized by section 5 of the Act of 
     June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1590), that are referred to as 
     Christensen No. 1 Dike No. 42 and Christensen No. 2 Levee No. 
     43 are no longer authorized beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 308. KISSIMMEE RIVER RESTORATION, CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN 
                   FLORIDA.

       Subject to a determination by the Secretary that the costs 
     are reasonable and allowable and that the work for which 
     credit is requested was carried out in accordance with the 
     laws specified in section 5014(i)(2)(A) of the Water 
     Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1331) 
     and all other applicable Federal laws, the Secretary may 
     credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the 
     Kissimmee River project, authorized in section 101(8) of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4802), the 
     value of in-kind contributions made by the non-Federal 
     interest with respect to the six following actions, as 
     described in the final report of the Director of Civil Works 
     on the Central and Southern Florida Project, Kissimmee River 
     Restoration Project, dated April 27, 2018:
       (1) Shady Oaks Fish Camp land preparation.
       (2) Rocks Fish Camp land preparation.
       (3) Levee breaching of Sparks Candler and Bronson Levees.
       (4) Packingham Slough construction related to land 
     acquisition.
       (5) Engineering analysis of River Acres engineering 
     solution.
       (6) Small local levee modifications.

     SEC. 309. LYTLE AND CAJON CREEKS, CALIFORNIA.

       That portion of the channel improvement project, Lytle and 
     Cajon Creeks, California, authorized to be carried out as a 
     part of the project for the Santa Ana River Basin, 
     California, by the Act of December 22, 1944 (Chapter 665; 58 
     Stat. 900) that consists of five earth-filled groins commonly 
     referred to as ``the Riverside Avenue groins'' is no longer 
     authorized as a Federal project beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 310. YUBA RIVER BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) In General.--The project for flood damage reduction, 
     Yuba River Basin, California, authorized by section 
     101(a)(10) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
     (113 Stat. 275) is modified to allow a non-Federal interest 
     to construct a new levee to connect the existing levee with 
     high ground.
       (b) Project Description.--The levee to be constructed shall 
     tie into the existing levee at a point Northing 2186189.2438, 
     Easting 6703908.8657, thence running east and south along a 
     path to be determined to a point Northing 2187849.4328, 
     Easting 6719262.0164.
       (c) Cooperation Agreement.--The Secretary shall execute a 
     conforming amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding 
     Respecting the Sacramento River Flood Control Project with 
     the State of California dated November 30, 1953, that is 
     limited to changing the description of the project to reflect 
     the modification.
       (d) No Federal Cost.--
       (1) Review costs.--Before construction of the levee 
     described in subsection (b), the Secretary may accept and 
     expend funds received from a non-Federal interest to review 
     the planning, engineering, and design of the levee described 
     in subsection (b) to ensure that such planning, engineering, 
     and design complies with Federal standards.
       (2) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of constructing the levee shall be 100 percent.

                TITLE IV--WATER RESOURCES INFRASTRUCTURE

     SEC. 401. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

       The following projects for water resources development and 
     conservation and other purposes, as identified in the reports 
     titled ``Report to Congress on Future Water Resources 
     Development'' submitted to Congress on March 17, 2017, and 
     February 5, 2018, respectively, pursuant to section 7001 of 
     the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (33 
     U.S.C. 2282d) or otherwise reviewed by Congress 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 or decision documents 
     designated in this section:
       (1) Navigation.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               C.  Date of
                                Report of
A. State       B.  Name          Chief of        D.  Estimated  Costs
                                Engineers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TX     Galveston Harbor     Aug. 8, 2017  Federal: $10,046,000
           Channel Extension                 Non-Federal: $3,349,000
           Project, Houston-                 Total: $13,395,000
           Galveston
           Navigation
           Channels
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (2) Flood risk management.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               C.  Date of
                                Report of
A. State       B.  Name          Chief of        D.  Estimated  Costs
                                Engineers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. NY      Mamaroneck-        Dec. 14, 2017  Federal: $53,500,000
           Sheldrake Rivers                  Non-Federal: $28,750,000
                                             Total: $82,250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. HI     Ala Wai Canal       Dec. 21, 2017  Federal: $198,962,000;
                                             Non-Federal: $107,133,000
                                             Total: $306,095,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (3) Hurricane and storm damage risk reduction.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               C.  Date of
                                Report of       D.  Estimated Initial
A. State       B.  Name          Chief of        Costs and  Estimated
                                Engineers        Renourishment  Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. FL      St. Johns County   Aug. 8, 2017   Initial Federal: $5,712,000
                                              Initial Non-Federal:
                                              $19,122,000
                                             Initial Total: $24,834,000
                                              Renourishment Federal:
                                              $9,484,000
                                             Renourishment Non-Federal:
                                              $44,099,000
                                             Renourishment Total:
                                              $53,583,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page H4813]]

 
2. TX     Sabine Pass to      Dec. 7, 2017   Initial Federal:
           Galveston Bay                      $2,157,202,000
                                              Initial Non-Federal:
                                              $1,161,570,000
                                              Initial Total:
                                              $3,318,772,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. FL     St. Lucie County    Dec. 15,       Initial Federal: $7,097,000
                               2017          Initial Non-Federal:
                                              $13,179,000
                                              Initial Total: $20,276,000
                                              Renourishment Federal:
                                              $8,915,000
                                             Renourishment Non-Federal:
                                              $24,105,000
                                             Renourishment Total:
                                              $33,020,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (4) Flood risk management and ecosystem restoration.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               C.  Date of
                                Report of
A. State       B.  Name          Chief of        D.  Estimated  Costs
                                Engineers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. NM     Espanola Valley,     May 11, 2018  Federal: $40,117,000
           Rio Grande                        Non-Federal: $21,601,000
                                             Total: $61,718,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (5) Modifications and other projects.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               C.  Date of
A. State       B.  Name          Decision        D.  Estimated  Costs
                                 Document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. GA     Savannah Harbor      Dec. 5, 2016  Federal: $677,613,600
           Expansion Project                 Non-Federal: $295,829,400
                                             Total: $973,443,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. KY     Kentucky River      April 20,      Federal: $0
           Locks and Dams -    2018          Non-Federal: $0
           1, 2, 3, and 4                    Total: $0
------------------------------------------------------------------------


  The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, is in 
order except those printed in part A of House Report 115-711. Each such 
further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as 
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Shuster

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in part A of House Report 115-711.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 23, line 12, strike ``note(b)(8))'' and insert 
     ``note)''.
       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. 144. OLD RIVER CONTROL STRUCTURE, LOUISIANA.

       (a)In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate a report on the structure and 
     operations plan for the Old River control structure 
     authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1258) 
     based on the best available science, improved monitoring 
     capabilities, and other factors as determined by the 
     Secretary, including consideration of--
       (1) flood control;
       (2) navigational conditions;
       (3) water supply; and
       (4) ecosystem restoration and ecological productivity.
       (b)Public Participation.--In developing the report required 
     by subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide opportunity 
     for public input and stakeholder engagement, including public 
     meetings.

     SEC. 145. DREDGE PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a)In General.--The Secretary is authorized to carry out a 
     pilot program to award contracts with a duration of up to 
     five years for the operation and maintenance of harbors and 
     inland harbors referred to in section 210(a)(2) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238(a)(2)).
       (b)Scope.--In carrying out the pilot program under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may award a contract described 
     in such subsection, which may address one or more harbors or 
     inland harbors in a geographical region, if the Secretary 
     determines that the contract provides cost savings compared 
     to the awarding of such work on an annual basis.
       (c)Report to Congress.--Not later than one year after the 
     date on which the first contract is awarded pursuant to the 
     pilot program carried out under subsection (a), the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report evaluating, with respect to 
     the pilot program and any contracts awarded under the pilot 
     program--
       (1) cost effectiveness;
       (2) reliability and performance;
       (3) cost savings attributable to mobilization and 
     demobilization of dredge equipment; and
       (4) response times to address navigational impediments.
       (d)Sunset.--The authority of the Secretary to enter into 
     contracts pursuant to the pilot program carried out under 
     subsection (a) shall expire on the date that is 10 years 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 146. DISPOSITION OF PROJECTS.

       (a)In General.--In carrying out a disposition study for a 
     project of the Corps of Engineers, or a separable element of 
     such a project, including a disposition study under section 
     216 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (33 U.S.C. 549a), the 
     Secretary shall consider modifications that would improve the 
     overall quality of the environment in the public interest, 
     including removal of the project or separable element of a 
     project.
       (b)Disposition Study Transparency.--The Secretary shall 
     carry out disposition studies described in subsection (a) in 
     a transparent manner, including by--
       (1) providing opportunities for public input; and
       (2) publishing the final disposition studies.
       (c)Removal of Infrastructure.--For disposition studies 
     described in subsection (a) in which the Secretary determines 
     that a Federal interest no longer exists, and makes a 
     recommendation of removal of the project or separable element 
     of a project, the Secretary is authorized to pursue removal 
     of the project or separable element of a project using--
       (1) existing authorities, as considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary; or

[[Page H4814]]

       (2) partnerships with other Federal agencies and non-
     Federal entities with appropriate capabilities to undertake 
     infrastructure removal.
       Page 52, after line 24, insert the following:
       (21) Project for flood damage reduction, Westminster-East 
     Garden Grove, California.
       (22) Project for hurricane and storm damage risk reduction 
     and ecosystem restoration, Southwest Coastal Louisiana, 
     Louisiana, authorized by section 1401(8) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat.1715).
       (23) Project for navigation and channel deepening, Baptiste 
     Collette Bayou, Louisiana, under section 203 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231).
       (24) Project for navigation and channel deepening, Houma 
     Navigation Canal, Louisiana, under section 203 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231).
       (25) Project for navigation and channel deepening, Bayou 
     Lafourche, Louisiana, under section 203 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231).
       Strike section 308 and insert the following:

     SEC. 308. KISSIMMEE RIVER RESTORATION, CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN 
                   FLORIDA.

        Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate a report on the total estimated value of 
     in-kind contributions made by the non-Federal interest with 
     respect to the following six actions, as described in the 
     final report of the Director of Civil Works on the Central 
     and Southern Florida Project, Kissimmee River Restoration 
     Project, dated April 27, 2018:
       (1) Shady Oaks Fish Camp land preparation.
       (2) Rocks Fish Camp land preparation.
       (3) Levee breaching of Sparks Candler and Bronson Levees.
       (4) Packingham Slough construction related to land 
     acquisition.
       (5) Engineering analysis of River Acres engineering 
     solution.
       (6) Small local levee modifications.
       At the end of title III, add the following:

     SEC. 311. BOSTON HARBOR RESERVED CHANNEL DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

       (a)40-foot Reserved Channel.--
       (1)In general.--The portions of the project for navigation, 
     Boston Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by the first section 
     of the Act of October 17, 1940 (54 Stat. 1198, chapter 895) 
     and modified by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 
     1958 (72 Stat. 297), section 101(a)(13) of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607), and 
     section 7002(1) of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
     Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1365) described in paragraph (2) are 
     no longer authorized beginning on the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (2)Areas described.--
       (A)First area.--The first areas described in this paragraph 
     are--
       (i) beginning at a point N. 2950154.45, E. 785995.64;
       (ii) running southwesterly about 1451.63 feet to a point N. 
     2950113.83, E. 784544.58;
       (iii) running southeasterly about 54.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950059.85, E. 784546.09;
       (iv) running southwesterly about 1335.82 feet to a point N. 
     2950022.48, E. 783210.79;
       (v) running northwesterly about 83.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950105.44, E. 783208.47;
       (vi) running northeasterly about 2787.45 feet to a point N. 
     2950183.44, E. 785994.83; and
       (vii) running southeasterly about 29.00 feet to the point 
     described in clause (i).
       (B)Second area.--The second areas described in this 
     paragraph are--
       (i) beginning at a point N. 2950502.86, E. 785540.84;
       (ii) running northeasterly about 46.11 feet to a point 
     N2950504.16, E785586.94;
       (iii) running southwesterly about 25.67 feet to a point N. 
     2950480.84, E. 785576.18;
       (iv) running southwesterly to a point N. 2950414.32, E. 
     783199.83;
       (v) running northwesterly about 8.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950422.32, E. 783199.60;
       (vi) running northeasterly about 2342.58 feet to a point N. 
     2950487.87, E. 785541.26; and
       (vii) running northwesterly about 15.00 feet to the point 
     described in clause (i).
       (b)35-foot Reserved Channel.--
       (1)In general.--The portions of the project for navigation, 
     Boston Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by the first section 
     of the Act of October 17, 1940 (54 Stat. 1198, chapter 895) 
     and modified by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 
     1958 (72 Stat. 297) described in paragraph (2) are no longer 
     authorized beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2)Areas described.--
       (A)First area.--The first areas described in this paragraph 
     are--
       (i) beginning at a point N. 2950143.44, E. 787532.14;
       (ii) running southeasterly about 22.21 feet to a point N. 
     2950128.91, E. 787548.93;
       (iii) running southwesterly about 4,339.42 feet to a point 
     N. 2950007.48, E. 783211.21;
       (iv) running northwesterly about 15.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950022.48, E. 783210.79; and
       (v) running northeasterly about 4,323.05 feet to the point 
     described in clause (i).
       (B)Second area.--The second areas described in this 
     paragraph are--
       (i) beginning at a point N. 2950502.86, E. 785540.84;
       (ii) running southeasterly about 15.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950487.87, E. 785541.26;
       (iii) running southwesterly about 2342.58 feet to a point 
     N. 2950422.32, E. 783199.60;
       (iv) running southeasterly about 8.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950414.32, E. 783199.83;
       (v) running southwesterly about 1339.12 feet to a point N. 
     2950376.85, E. 781861.23;
       (vi) running northwesterly about 23.00 feet to a point N. 
     2950399.84, E. 781860.59; and
       (vii) running northeasterly about 3681.70 feet to the point 
     described in clause (i).

     SEC. 312. CONTINUED AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN PROJECTS.

       Notwithstanding the third sentence of section 1001(b)(2) of 
     the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 
     579a(b)(2)), projects and separable elements of projects 
     identified in the fiscal year 2017 report prepared in 
     accordance with such section and submitted to Congress on 
     December 15, 2016, shall not be deauthorized unless such 
     projects and separable elements meet the requirements of 
     section 1301(b)(1)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 2016 (130 Stat. 1687).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 918, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The manager's amendment we are offering makes technical and 
conforming changes to the Rules Committee Print and adds important 
provisions that we worked out with the minority. This amendment 
includes a provision that establishes a regional long-term contract 
pilot program in order to drive efficiency and cost savings for our 
Nation's dredging responsibilities.
  It also contains a provision that the Secretary deliver a report to 
Congress on the current status of the Old River control structure on 
the Mississippi River.
  This amendment corrects a provision that would have created direct 
spending authority for certain Everglades projects. It expedites five 
project studies for critical water resource projects. Lastly, this 
amendment de-authorizes a project in Boston Harbor.
  Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment, although I support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I ask all Members to support the amendment, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in part A of House Report 115-711.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, parliamentary inquiry.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon will state his 
parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, wouldn't it be in order just to move along? 
If people aren't responsible enough to be here, they don't get to offer 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in part A of 
House Report 115-711.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. The gentleman did not respond to my previous inquiry.
  There were 53 amendments offered. The Rules Committee didn't give us 
en bloc authority. We need to expedite this. If people aren't here, we 
need to move along.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3.
  The Chair will query for the next amendment.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in part A of 
House Report 115-711.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in part A of 
House Report 115-711.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Shuster

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in part A of House Report 115-711.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, as the designee of the gentleman from 
Florida, I offer amendment No. 6.

[[Page H4815]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 27, line 14, strike ``and''.
       Page 27, after line 14, insert the following (and 
     redesignate the subsequent paragraph accordingly):
       (2) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
       ``(c) Studies and Engineering.--
       ``(1) In general.--When requested by an appropriate non-
     Federal interest, the Secretary shall undertake all necessary 
     studies, engineering, and technical assistance on 
     construction for any project to be undertaken under 
     subsection (b), and provide technical assistance in obtaining 
     all necessary permits for the construction, if the non-
     Federal interest contracts with the Secretary to furnish the 
     United States funds for the studies, engineering, or 
     technical assistance on construction in the period during 
     which the studies, engineering, or technical assistance on 
     construction are being conducted.
       ``(2) No waiver.--Nothing in this section may be construed 
     to waive any requirement of section 3142 of title 40, United 
     States Code.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Funds provided by non-Federal interests 
     under this subsection shall not be eligible for credit or 
     reimbursement under subsection (d).
       ``(4) Impartial decisionmaking.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary shall ensure that the use of funds 
     accepted from a non-Federal interest will not affect the 
     impartial decisionmaking of the Secretary, either 
     substantively or procedurally.''; and

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 918, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, this amendment should help projects be 
executed more quickly, and I appreciate my colleagues who worked on 
this: Mr. Posey, Mr. Mast, Mr. Hastings, and Ms. Wilson.
  I ask all my colleagues to support this. I think it is a good 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in part A of House Report 115-711.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in part A of 
House Report 115-711.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Graves of Louisiana) having assumed the chair, Mr. Harper, Acting Chair 
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 8) 
to provide for improvements to the rivers and harbors of the United 
States, to provide for the conservation and development of water and 
related resources, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution 
thereon.

                          ____________________