H3600 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

Brown, Corrine Hoyer Platts Johnson, Sam Mica Ryan (WI) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Butterfield Inslee Pomeroy Jordan Miller (FL) Sali Washington, DC, April 5, 2007. Kanjorski Miller (MI) Capps Jackson (IL) Price (NC) Saxton Hon. NANCY PELOSI, Keller Miller, Gary Capuano Jackson-Lee Rahall Schmidt Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, Cardoza (TX) Rangel King (IA) Mitchell Sensenbrenner Carnahan Jefferson Reyes King (NY) Moran (KS) Sessions DC. Carson Johnson (GA) Rodriguez Kingston Murphy, Patrick Shadegg DEAR MADAM SPEAKER: This is to notify Castor Johnson, E. B. Ross Kirk Murphy, Tim Shimkus you formally, pursuant to Rule VIII of the Chandler Jones (OH) Rothman Kline (MN) Musgrave Shuster Rules of the House of Representatives, that I Clarke Kagen Roybal-Allard Knollenberg Myrick Simpson have been served with a subpoena, issued by Clay Kaptur Ruppersberger Kuhl (NY) Neugebauer Smith (NE) the General District Court for Charlottes- Cleaver Kennedy Rush LaHood Nunes Smith (NJ) ville, Virginia, for testimony in a criminal Lamborn Paul Clyburn Kildee Ryan (OH) Smith (TX) case. Cohen Kilpatrick Salazar Latham Pearce Souder ´ After consultation with the Office of Gen- Conyers Kind Sanchez, Linda LaTourette Pence Space Lewis (CA) Peterson (PA) eral Counsel, I have determined that compli- Cooper Klein (FL) T. Stearns Lewis (KY) Petri ance with the subpoena is consistent with Costa Kucinich Sanchez, Loretta Sullivan Costello Langevin Sarbanes Linder Pickering Tancredo the precedents and privileges of the House. Courtney Lantos Schakowsky LoBiondo Pitts Taylor Sincerely, Cramer Larsen (WA) Schiff Lucas Poe Terry ESTHER PAGE, Crowley Larson (CT) Schwartz Lungren, Daniel Porter Thornberry Caseworker. Cuellar Lee Scott (GA) E. Price (GA) Tiahrt Cummings Levin Scott (VA) Mack Pryce (OH) f Davis (AL) Lewis (GA) Serrano Manzullo Putnam Tiberi Davis (CA) Lipinski Sestak Marchant Radanovich Turner WATER RESOURCES Davis (IL) Loebsack Shays Marshall Ramstad Upton DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007 Davis, Lincoln Lofgren, Zoe Shea-Porter Matheson Regula Walberg Davis, Tom Lowey Sherman McCarthy (CA) Rehberg Walden (OR) The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- DeFazio Lynch Shuler McCaul (TX) Reichert Wamp ant to House Resolution 319 and rule DeGette Mahoney (FL) Sires McCotter Renzi Weldon (FL) XVIII, the Chair declares the House in Weller Delahunt Maloney (NY) Skelton McCrery Reynolds the Committee of the Whole House on DeLauro Markey Slaughter McHenry Rogers (AL) Westmoreland Dicks Matsui Smith (WA) McHugh Rogers (KY) Wilson (NM) the state of the Union for the consider- Dingell McCarthy (NY) Snyder McKeon Rogers (MI) Wilson (SC) ation of the bill, H.R. 1495. Doggett McCollum (MN) Solis McMorris Ros-Lehtinen Wolf Doyle McDermott Spratt Rodgers Roskam Young (AK) b 1611 Edwards McGovern Stark McNerney Royce Young (FL) IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Ellison McIntyre Stupak Emanuel McNulty Sutton NOT VOTING—14 Accordingly, the House resolved Engel Meehan Tanner Boehner Israel Walsh (NY) itself into the Committee of the Whole Eshoo Meek (FL) Tauscher Cantor Jones (NC) Whitfield House on the state of the Union for the Etheridge Meeks (NY) Thompson (CA) Cubin Lampson Wicker consideration of the bill (H.R. 1495) to Farr Melancon Thompson (MS) Davis, Jo Ann Millender- Filner Michaud Tierney Fattah McDonald provide for the conservation and devel- Frank (MA) Miller (NC) Towns Higgins Rohrabacher opment of water and related resources, Gillibrand Miller, George Udall (CO) to authorize the Secretary of the Army Gonzalez Mollohan Udall (NM) Gordon Moore (KS) Van Hollen b 1608 to construct various projects for im- Green, Al Moore (WI) Vela´ zquez provements to rivers and harbors of the Mr. BERRY changed his vote from Green, Gene Moran (VA) Visclosky United States, and for other purposes, Grijalva Murphy (CT) Walz (MN) ‘‘nay’’ to ‘‘yea.’’ with Mr. ROSS in the chair. Gutierrez Murtha Wasserman So the bill was passed. The Clerk read the title of the bill. Hall (NY) Nadler Schultz The result of the vote was announced Hare Napolitano Waters The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Harman Neal (MA) Watson as above recorded. rule, the bill is considered read the Hastings (FL) Oberstar Watt A motion to reconsider was laid on first time. Herseth Sandlin Obey Waxman the table. Hill Olver Weiner The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Hinchey Ortiz Welch (VT) The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. OBERSTAR) and the gentleman from Hinojosa Pallone Wexler WEINER). Pursuant to section 3 of H. Florida (Mr. MICA) each will control 30 Hirono Pascrell Wilson (OH) Res. 317, H.R. 1433 is laid on the table minutes. Hodes Pastor Woolsey and H.R. 1906 is laid on the table. Holt Payne Wu The Chair recognizes the gentleman Honda Perlmutter Wynn from Minnesota. Hooley Peterson (MN) Yarmuth f Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may con- NAYS—203 GENERAL LEAVE sume. Aderholt Capito Fossella I rise in strong support of H.R. 1495, Akin Carney Foxx Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask Alexander Carter Franks (AZ) unanimous consent that all Members the Water Resources Development Act Bachmann Castle Frelinghuysen have 5 legislative days to revise and ex- of 2007, a bill long in the making, 6 Bachus Chabot Gallegly tend their remarks on H.R. 1495 and in- years in the making, a bill that has ul- Baker Coble Garrett (NJ) timately passed the House, not passed Barrett (SC) Cole (OK) Gerlach clude extraneous material in the the Senate, passed the House, passed Bartlett (MD) Conaway Giffords RECORD on that legislation which will Barton (TX) Crenshaw Gilchrest be considered by the House presently. the Senate, not gone to conference. Biggert Culberson Gillmor We tried in the closing hours of the The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bilbray Davis (KY) Gingrey 109th Congress to wrap this measure Bilirakis Davis, David Gohmert WEINER). Is there objection to the re- up, then-Chairman DON YOUNG and I, Bishop (UT) Deal (GA) Goode quest of the gentleman from Min- Blackburn Dent Goodlatte working with our counterparts in the nesota? Blunt Diaz-Balart, L. Granger other body, attempting to reach an Bonner Diaz-Balart, M. Graves There was no objection. Bono Donnelly Hall (TX) agreement, but it just proved insur- Boozman mountable, too insurmountable an ob- Doolittle Hastert f Boren Drake Hastings (WA) stacle to get there. Boustany Dreier Hayes In this 110th Congress, we resumed on Brady (TX) Duncan Heller COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF Brown (SC) Ehlers Hensarling the base of the legislation that has Brown-Waite, Ellsworth Herger MEMBER OF THE HON. VIRGIL H. built up over 6 years, over three Con- Ginny Emerson Hobson GOODE, JR., MEMBER OF CON- gresses, and working with the distin- Buchanan English (PA) Hoekstra GRESS Burgess Everett Holden guished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Burton (IN) Fallin Hulshof The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- MICA), the ranking member on the Buyer Feeney Hunter fore the House the following commu- Committee on Transportation and In- Calvert Ferguson Inglis (SC) nication from Esther Page, Case- frastructure, we spent a great deal of Camp (MI) Flake Issa Campbell (CA) Forbes Jindal worker, Office of the Honorable VIRGIL time together thinking through how to Cannon Fortenberry Johnson (IL) H. GOODE, Jr., Member of Congress: proceed with this legislation.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3601 We agreed on basic principles that we the current WRDA bill on the Great Louisiana, New Orleans area, the Mis- would start with the bill that passed Lakes. Invasive species are threatening sissippi River gulf outlet, which al- the House. There was no conference our native aquatic species, biota and lowed salt water intrusion to come up ever consummated in the 109th Con- flora, as well as a new issue called a from the gulf, kill the wetlands. It al- gress. So we decided that the bench- deadly fish virus, a hemorrhagic virus lowed the overtopping of St. Bernard mark bill for this Congress would be that destroys the fisheries and is car- Parish. We have got to restore that only those measures that were in the ried in ballast waters from one region wetland, and this legislation will do bill of the 109th Congress, and we start- of the Great Lakes to another. that at the request and insistence of ed from there. And then we have We have language in this bill that the Louisiana delegation. worked our way through myriad issues, will initiate an emergency program by There are many other important fea- Members who wanted new projects or the Corps of Engineers to protect the tures in this legislation. In all, 56 amendments or additions to existing vital food supply and the quality of the chiefs’ reports, we had a request of over projects; and in all cases, we made waters. 1,500 projects. There are over 700 very, very difficult, but I think honest Lake Superior, because of a drought projects in this legislation. More than and consistent, decisions about the leg- in the Great Lakes watershed, has seen 300 Members of the House have a direct islation we bring before you today. the water level drop 8 inches in the interest in the legislation. We welcome I want to assure Members that are past 3 years and will drop another 2 their interest in this participation. We concerned, that have issues that have inches this year with the beginning of bring to this body a very critical and arisen since the 109th Congress, that the major shipping season. It will be at supportable piece of legislation. those issues that need to be addressed nearly its lowest level in history. That Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance by projects of the Corps of Engineers has meant that vessels carrying iron of my time. will be addressed in subsequent legisla- ore from the upper lakes to the lower Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I yield my- tion. As soon as we are able to move lakes steel mills have gone out 7,500 self such time as I may consume. this bill through the House, through tons light. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would conference with the Senate, which I am It means two or three extra voyages like to urge all Members of the House confident can be done before the mid- per vessel per season, raising the cost on both sides of the aisle to support dle of June, maybe earlier if the other of iron ore, raising the cost of steel, af- H.R. 1495, which is known as the Water body will be able to free itself to work fecting our competitiveness. We have Resources Development Act of 2007. with us in conference, we can get this legislation, we have language in this As we have heard from the chairman, done very quickly, and then begin on legislation that will direct the Corps to this bill authorizes and directs the the next round of water resources undertake an accelerated dredging pro- Corps of Engineers to carry out various projects which I guarantee is not going gram making up for the 15 years they studies, projects and programs relating to take 7 years. haven’t done the dredging because we to navigation, flood damage reduction, have had high waters on the Great shoreline protection, dam safety, 1615 b Lakes. shoreline protection and recreation and We are going to deal with somebody, We authorize locks, improved ex- environmental restoration and protec- maybe in the next 7 or 8 months after tended locks on the Mississippi River tion. the conclusion of this legislation. system, seven extended locks to take Our subcommittee, led by Mr. BAKER Again, I express my appreciation to the the 600-foot locks to make them 1,200- of Louisiana, held two days of hearings gentleman from Florida for consist- foot locks. A barge tow leaving Clin- on projects, programs and policies dur- ently working to move this critically ton, Iowa, round-trip to New Orleans, ing the development of this legislation. important legislation. back to Clinton, Iowa, takes 820 hours. After a careful review, the committee The Committee on Transportation New Orleans is the world’s most impor- was able to approve the authorization and Infrastructure is the proud inheri- tant grain export facility. of more than 50 projects with the tor of a long tradition of work, of in- We can cut 60 hours off that round- chiefs’ reports relating to flood damage vestment in America’s transportation trip by extending the locks at 1,200 feet reduction, navigation, hurricane and needs, water resources, where the very so the tows that are 1,200 feet don’t storm damage reduction, and environ- first concerns of the new Nation in 1789 have to be broken in half, sent through mental restoration. and the first act of the first Congress, 600 feet at a time, lashed together, go We also have in this legislation, navi- 1789, was to authorize the establish- through the next lock and do it all over gation and ecosystem restoration ment of a lighthouse, at the entry to again. We are in a world competitive projects for the upper Mississippi Hampton Roads in Virginia. market on which grain moves on as lit- River. Illinois waterway system, and Starting from that point, this com- tle as an eighth of a cent a bushel. Everglades restoration project, which I mittee continued the direction of the Every time you have to spend those would like to talk about in just a mo- Constitution to build and maintain extra hours going through the locks, ment, and conserving and restoring the post roads. Well, not all roads were you are raising the cost of our com- Louisiana coastal area. built just for the postal service; but, modities, which makes us less competi- We have in the bill a provision for again, it was the spirit of the Constitu- tive with, say, Brazil, which is mount- streamlining and expediting the Corps tion, the spirit of the new Nation that ing a massive soybean export facility of Engineers’ project delivery and per- we needed mobility. The Nation was at Recife, which is 2,500 miles further mits system. We have provisions for founded along the waterways, the salt out in the Atlantic Ocean than New Or- improvement of the Corps of Engineers’ water coasts, the inland waterways. It leans is. planning and project development has been our task to assure mobility, We have legislation here, language in process, including independent peer re- movement of people and goods through this legislation to deal with the res- view of larger and more controversial waterways, and then the highways, toration of the Everglades, a matter of studies. We also have authorization of later the railways, and then the air- great interest to the gentleman from a number of smaller project modifica- ways. Florida, for which he has been an elo- tions, investigations, related to our Here we come with this massive bill, quent advocate. They are in a state of civil works programs of the Corps of because the President, because Con- disrepair. The buffer to protect them Engineers. I think all in all we have a gress hasn’t done its work; and the last from storms is weak because of our in- good piece of legislation that we have time a President signed a Water Re- action, and we are going to deal with worked on in a bipartisan fashion, and sources Development Act was in 2000. that issue, as well as the wetlands you see the product before us today. Well, we hope that the next one will be along the Gulf of Mexico from Texas, Now, I know the administration has this year, which we fully expect. Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, all issued a position opposing this legisla- There are many issues that have aris- the way on to Florida. tion. However, I want to talk to a cou- en in the intervening years, some that We are insistent on addressing the ple of points that they have raised. were weighing heavily upon us when we needs of the Everglades, the needs of They do have a responsibility to be began this process in 2000 of crafting the Louisiana coastal region and in good trustees of the public monies and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3602 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 the difficult situation we find ourselves work the Senate started.’’ This is the Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I in financially. year 2000. Here we are in 2007. yield myself 1 minute to express my But in this legislation between 3 and Now, in 2000 we authorized a study. great appreciation again to the gen- $4 billion would be typically spent dur- What is important about this bill is we tleman from Florida for his thoughtful ing a WRDA cycle or authorization authorize for the first time projects discussion. I join him in his statement process on this type of legislation. We that actually do construction and work on the administration’s statement of have not had a bill since the year 2000. in restoring our precious national policy. I think they have it wrong, and So actually if you do simple math on treasure, and Florida’s national envi- the gentleman stated it just right. that, you can see that the total cost of ronmental treasure, the Everglades. Over the past 6 years, if we had this bill in Federal dollars, $13.1 bil- b 1630 passed the water resources bill in a lion, is reasonable. The total cost with timely fashion, it would have been in the State participation is $17.8 billion. So that is one reason why I am ex- the range of $2 billion a year. That is But we do, indeed, have a backlog of cited about this piece of legislation. It normal. So what we are dealing with is projects over what would amount to at does take a long time and a lot of a huge, pent-up backlog. least three cycles. So this WRDA bill, money. Again, as the gentleman said, this is this authorization legislation, in fact, Finally, I do want to also cite that I an investment in America, and Mem- combines the equivalent of all of those just inherited the responsibility of the bers of Congress representing their years of backlog of projects. The price Transportation leader on the Repub- constituents, their businesses, their tag, in fact, is consistent with that as- lican side, and I never realized how im- water resources, know what they need. sumption. portant these projects are to individual They have come forward with thought- While this bill is considered costly by Members. For example, not on our side ful recommendations, and this bill re- some, the 2005 WRDA legislation con- of the aisle, but Ms. MATSUI, a Demo- flects those recommendations. tained almost 900 projects. That is an- crat Member, she has a project in here We have served as a filter to weed out other complaint of the administration, that would provide a 100-year level of those in our best judgment that did not too many projects. This bill contains flood protection for the city of Sac- measure up on cost-benefit analysis. So 682 project provisions. Not that Mr. ramento. Almost a million Americans we have set a standard for the future OBERSTAR, myself, Ms. JOHNSON, Mr. live in the capital of California, more and we have, in accordance with the BAKER haven’t had Members through- than twice the population of the pre- rules of the House, made all of the out the Congress come to us and beg Katrina New Orleans that today has Member projects available, and will and plead to have additional projects only an 80-year level of flood protec- continue to do that. that are critical to their district in- tion. No other community in America I would like to acknowledge the cluded in this legislation. I think we, of this size has this little flood protec- splendid work of the Chair of the Sub- too, have been good custodians and re- tion. This is a project important to Ms. committee on Water Resources, Ms. sponsible in crafting this legislation. MATSUI. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON. She has de- Let me say that the administration There are not Republican projects, voted years of her service in the Con- also raised some questions about cost there are not Democrat projects; there gress to consideration of water re- benefits. We have gone through this. are projects for the people that are im- sources vital to her State of Texas. She Mr. OBERSTAR, myself, Mr. BAKER, Ms. portant to their survival. And we have has taken ownership of these issues JOHNSON, we have looked at cost bene- seen the mistakes and the errors of our and led the subcommittee hearings. fits. We have done our very best to en- ways in Katrina. Mr. BAKER can speak Even this afternoon, she has hearings sure that the taxpayers’ dollars again to what he has gone through in Lou- going on in our committee room while are well spent and there is a good re- isiana. We need not repeat those errors. she is here to help manage the bill. turn for the investment that is being So here we have in this legislation an Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to made here by the Federal taxpayer. opportunity to help her and 299 other the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. So those are the reasons that I dis- districts. I wish it was 435. So it has EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON). agree with my administration on this. been put together in a bipartisan way. Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of I actively support this. I think we have And finally, on my effort, I tried to Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. done this in a very good fashion. do it in a transparent way. All of the I am pleased to rise to support H.R. Finally, I want to talk to some of the Republican projects have been on file, 1495, the Water Resources Development measures that are in the bill. You have open to the public, and any of the ear- Act of 2007. heard the chairman talk about some of marks, open to public and press scru- This bill authorizes water resources the measures that are in this bill. This tiny. So I have tried to do it in a man- projects and the U.S. Army Corps of bill is important to me, not only as a ner that restores public faith, because I Engineers policy and programmatic Member of Congress, and I don’t rep- would rather have elected Members of changes that our Congress has failed to resent the Everglades, but I do rep- Congress make those decisions, fight consider for far too long. resent the State of Florida. It is inter- for them, and have it done and con- Water resources legislation is most esting how it takes time to undo some ducted in a transparent fashion rather effective when it is considered bienni- of the damage that mankind has done than have some bureaucrat down there ally. I support this 2-year cycle, as it to our natural resources and national decide where the taxpayer money, provides stability to the program and treasures. which they just paid in in huge assurance to the non-Federal sponsors I have a copy of the Palm Beach amounts over the past week to Wash- who support Corps projects. Post, which I kept in a file, from Sun- ington, get expended. That is our re- When we let them go, they get to be day, April 11, 1993, irony, same month a sponsibility, it is elected officials’ re- more costly. And, unfortunately, no number of years ago, talking about the sponsibility, not appointed bureaucrats water resources bill has been enacted Everglades, reversing man’s mistakes. who don’t have the responsibility we since 2000, the entire term of our cur- I started working on that along with have under the Constitution. rent administration. This is a result, in the Clinton administration, Secretary So, again, I recognize my colleagues part, of a failure of the current admin- Babbitt. Hear is an article from July 4, on the other side of the aisle, Mr. istration to engage in this important 1994, about a $465 million government OBERSTAR, Ms. JOHNSON and Mr. legislation, as well as a failure of the industry agreement to start cleaning BAKER. I also want to thank Mr. Congress to reach agreement. up the Everglades, which had been COSTELLO, who is no longer the Chair Last year, we came very close to re- damaged by man’s abuse. or the ranking member, and Mr. DUN- solving our differences with the other Here is another article I pulled from CAN, who was the Chair because this is body in conference. However, we ulti- the news journal Daytona Beach News- an inherited work. Again, several bills mately ran out of time. I hope this leg- Journal that says: ‘‘Representative are combined that are long overdue. So islation that we consider today can John Mica and the other Members of I urge their passage. take us to that point and further, re- central Florida’s House delegation are Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance leasing this backlog of authorizations in a fortunate position to finish the of my time. to fix our existing infrastructure and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3603 to authorize new flood control, naviga- and partnership with me, and for their an important and complex bill with 682 tion and environmental restoration support. projects. They are important economi- projects. I strongly support this legislation. I cally. They are important environ- We are trying very hard to move a hope and urge my colleagues to vote in mentally. We found out less than 2 little ahead of the next flooding. We favor of its final passage. The time is years ago how critical they are to the must do that. And they are not going now. Nation. Hurricane Katrina revealed it to kick out Democrats or Republicans Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this can literally be a matter of life or for flooding, it is going to be whoever time I recognize a valued member of death. is in the way. It is purposeful that we the committee, Mr. BROWN, for 2 min- This legislation has been hung up have brought this bill to the floor as utes. since the year 2000, in part because of early as we have in this session. (Mr. BROWN of South Carolina asked disagreements about the reform agenda The authorizations in the language and was given permission to revise and with the Corps of Engineers. I am are time sensitive, and there should be extend his remarks.) pleased that we have signaled an effort no surprise that this bill contains a Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. I to try and move forward, to be able to substantial number of provisions. thank the gentleman for yielding me break that impasse with this legisla- Many of these authorizations have this time. tion, the provisions in it and others been waiting for action more than 6 Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong sup- that will follow. years. port of this critical legislation. I want I am also pleased to have an oppor- Within the 110th Congress, the com- to thank so many on this committee tunity to offer an amendment to up- mittee intends to move two water re- for their hard work and long dedication date the principles and guidelines that sources bill. This first one contains a to this legislation, especially our would help the Corps move even closer logjam of more than 6 years of issues. chairman, Mr. OBERSTAR, and our to developing environmentally, fis- The second bill will consider new ranking member, Mr. MICA; and the cally, and structurally sound projects. projects and policy changes that we subcommittee chairwoman, Ms. EDDIE Let me be clear. The amendment will were not able to add to this legislation, BERNICE JOHNSON, and Mr. BAKER, the not impact any project currently under that we will consider today. This ap- ranking member. I also thank Mr. DUN- way or anything covered in this legis- proach may not be traditional, but it is CAN, the former chairman, and Mr. lation. It would simply tell the Corps of Engineers to update their own prin- necessary. COSTELLO, who is the ranking member. Since Congress last passed a Water We have been working on this bill ciples and guidelines, the playbook for Resources Development Act, we have now for my term in Congress, and this developing water resources projects seen Hurricanes Katrina and Rita tear is my fourth term, and I am happy that are over 25 years old. The Na- up the gulf coast and my home State of today we are here to present it again. tional Academy of Sciences has said Texas, flooding cities, damaging econo- One of the most important elements they are woefully out of date. And the mies and businesses, and threatening in this bill are reforms made to the Corps and the Congress’ inability to public health. processes and procedures of the Army update these principles and guidelines The Florida Everglades continue to Corps. The infrastructure needs of our is one of the reasons why the Corps has need attention and restoration to save Nation have never been at a higher drawn criticism from the Government the unique treasures it brings to the level. We need to do all we can to en- Accountability Office, the National State and our country. sure that the limited dollars available Academy of Sciences, and the OMB, This bill also contains smaller are spent wisely, and the reforms in along with internal Pentagon reviews. It is one of the reasons why we have projects that may be less publicized this bill will give the Corps the tools to had trouble passing WRDA in the last 6 but just as vital to communities that make that happen. years and reconciling it with the Sen- rely on various water resources for In addition, the bill makes signifi- ate which has similar provisions. It their livelihood. cant changes to the project delivery does not affect anything in the bill cur- As in the past, these projects were process used by the Army Corps. The rently; and I think it will be an oppor- not considered on a partisan basis, but process the Corps has to go through tunity for us not just passing the bill, on individual merit. Their approval now to deliver a project are long and but it would be a reason for the Presi- should not be considered solely on hard, to say the least. This bill makes dent to sign it, given the problems they whether they are Democratic projects commonsense change to streamline have had. or Republican projects; these are that process to help our communities. I appreciate the hard work that has human projects. They should be consid- Improving infrastructure is not a been done. I appreciate the opportunity ered on their contributions to public partisan issue, it is a commitment we to speak in support of the bill, and look safety and economics. as a Nation must ensure is met. If we forward to having support for the H.R. 1495 authorizes programmatic do not, then we as a Nation will be fac- amendment for updating the principles changes to the Corps of Engineers that ing significantly greater environ- and guidelines later in the afternoon. previously have passed the House, but mental and economic challenges than Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield have stalled in the failed conference we do currently. 11⁄2 minutes to the gentlewoman from negotiations. During the 109th Con- In closing, I want to say again that I West Virginia (Mrs. CAPITO), a valued gress we came close to resolving these strongly support this legislation and I member of the committee. differences with the Senate. I urge my am confident we will enact a bill this Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in colleagues to once again support these year. I also want to thank my friends strong support for the reauthorization provisions. Everybody who has been and colleagues on the committee as we of the Water Resources Development here more than 6 years ought to know all have joined to invest so much effort Act. I would like to thank Chairman what everything is in this bill because into this particular legislation. OBERSTAR, Ranking Member MICA, they have seen it over and over and I am proud to stand with you in sup- Subcommittee Chairman JOHNSON and over again. We must engage the other port of its passage. Ranking Member BAKER for their hard body and together produce the best Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I work in getting this legislation to the package for Corps reform. yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from floor. I would like to acknowledge Chair- Oregon (Mr. BLUMENAUER), an alumnus It has been too long since the water man OBERSTAR for his leadership and of the committee. resources bill has become law, and it is eloquence in the Committee on Trans- Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I important that we continue to move portation and Infrastructure, as well as appreciate the gentleman’s courtesy, this and make this reauthorization a the interest and expertise that he and I am proud of the time that I was reality. Projects authorized in this bill shares on water resources issues. able to work with you for 10 years on are critical to our national waterways I also would like to thank our rank- this subcommittee. transportation system that businesses ing member, Mr. MICA, and the ranking I rise in support of the bill. As was and industry in every State and con- member of the subcommittee, Mr. referenced by the Chair of the com- gressional district rely on to move BAKER, for their knowledge and effort mittee and the subcommittee, this is their products.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3604 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 In my State of West Virginia, a well- I urge my colleagues to support this River in southeast Missouri. And while maintained system of navigable water- investment in water resource develop- the river, at times destructive, the ways is crucial to moving coal from ment and conservation projects and the river has been a provider for me and our mines to plants across the country passage of this much-needed bill. my family, delivering the grain from to power this Nation’s economy. The Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this our farm to international markets. bill addresses local needs. I am pleased time I would like to yield 2 minutes to And I will tell you, as the gentleman that this legislation recognizes the im- my distinguished colleague from Lou- from Minnesota has stated, the nickels portant water and wastewater chal- isiana who has worked tirelessly on as- and dimes that we saved by shipping lenges in West Virginia by continuing sisting the people of the storm-stricken via barge were often the difference be- the authorization for the Central West area, Dr. BOUSTANY. tween our farm ending up in the red or Virginia Environmental Infrastructure Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I ending up in the black. Those few cents Program. want to thank my colleague from Lou- have helped keep food on our table; b 1645 isiana for yielding time. clothes on our back; and, over the Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of years, kept our farm even within our This program has provided access to this bill. WRDA reauthorization is long own family. clean water and wastewater treatment overdue, and it is vital that we pass to many rural West Virginians who Title VIII of the legislation, lock H.R. 1495 and get a bill signed into law modernization, will insure that farmers otherwise would be without these crit- this year. ical utilities. I am pleased that this in northeast Missouri and farmers in WRDA authorizes nearly $2.1 billion Iowa and Illinois, Minnesota, Wis- Corps of Engineers program will be for the Louisiana coastal area, and it able to continue assisting local public consin and elsewhere will continue to will allow the Army Corps of Engineers have the same benefit that my family service districts to address these im- to move forward on many critical portant community needs. had, the ability to ship crops to inter- coastal restoration and hurricane pro- national markets via the most cost-ef- I want to thank the committee for tection projects statewide. their hard work. I look forward to the fective method. I also want to thank Chairman OBER- final passage and the President’s signa- I will tell you that a recent study by STAR for accepting my amendment in the Food and Ag Policy Research Insti- ture on this bill. committee to add projects identified in Mr. OBERSTAR. Could the Chair ad- tute, FAPRI, found that if the Mis- the Southwest Louisiana Coastal Hur- vise the time remaining on both sides. sissippi River and Illinois waterways The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman ricane Storm and Reduction Study to were forced to close, possibly because from Minnesota has 13 minutes remain- the list of priority projects and of a massive lock failure, that farmers, ing. The gentleman from Louisiana has projects to be expedited under this bill. our own U.S. farmers, would lose be- 17 minutes remaining. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. tween $645 million and $806 million a Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I This study is the first comprehensive year, a year in increased transpor- assessment of hurricane and flood pro- yield 11⁄2 minutes to the distinguished tation costs. We experienced a glimpse gentleman from Colorado (Mr. tection needs of southwest Louisiana. of that in the aftermath of Hurricane The Corps has nearly completed the re- SALAZAR). Katrina when the river was shut down, Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Chairman, I want connaissance phase, and I anticipate navigation was shut down for a short to thank the gentleman from Min- that we will enter into an agreement time during the fall of 2005. Farmers nesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) for yielding, with the State to proceed with the fea- endured a 60-cent-per-bushel penalty on and I would like to recognize him, as sibility phase in the near future. a bushel of corn during that critical It is important that we expedite well as the ranking member, for the ex- time in September of 2005. And a mas- these projects, not only for southwest ceptional leadership on this critical sive failure, unfortunately, is a distinct Louisiana, but for the entire Nation be- issue. possibility. cause in southwest Louisiana our wa- Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support These locks are standing just out of terways protect much of the vital and of H.R. 1495, the Water Resources De- habit, or as my constituent, Senator necessary energy infrastructure that velopment Act of 2007. I urge the swift KIT BOND, is fond of saying, ‘‘These keeps this country running. passage of the measure. Passage of this locks belong in the National Register We have one of the largest strategic bill is long overdue. of Historic Locations.’’ They were built petroleum reserves in my district that My communities are desperately in the 1930s to accommodate steam- is affected here. Also, the Henry Hub, waiting for infrastructure projects boats for the next 50 years. As the gen- which is where pricing is set for nat- which are of major importance to their tleman pointed out, these locks are no ural gas for the country, is in my dis- districts. longer navigation aids, but hindrances. My district includes hundreds of trict. And it was actually flooded in They are 600 feet long. The modern small communities that have narrow Hurricane Rita. barge is close to 1,200 feet, often three economic and tax bases. Small commu- And nearly 25 percent of the liquefied across and five long. nities like these often are unable to ad- natural gas will run through my dis- What I want to emphasize again to dress the significant infrastructure trict by 2015. my friend from Oregon who spoke, and needs. Water infrastructure is vital to These waterways and coastal wet- others, these locks benefit the Amer- the economy and stability of these lands are far more than just commer- ican public in other ways. The typical small communities. cial routes or playgrounds. They are a My rural communities rely on anti- critical buffer to protect homes, busi- tow removes 870 18-wheel tractor trail- quated water systems, and they need to ness and our energy infrastructure and er trucks from our already congested be updated. Without the means to up- our way of life in Louisiana. What we roads, bridges, and interstate high- date old systems, many of our con- are talking about is America’s energy ways. A gallon of diesel fuel will push 1 stituents and communities nationwide coast, a working coast. one ton of freight 2 ⁄2 times further by have been living in substandard condi- So I urge my colleagues to support barge than by locomotive; nine times tions. this bill. farther than by truck. Moreover, ac- It is not only an environmental Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this cording to the Environmental Protec- health issue. A lack of sufficient water time I would like to recognize a Mem- tion Agency, towboats emit 35 to 60 resources can effectively prevent the ber who has expressed interest in this percent fewer pollutants than loco- community from moving forward with subject matter, Mr. HULSHOF, for 21⁄2 motives or trucks. All in all, all wor- critical infrastructure, like additional minutes. thy. housing for its inhabitants. (Mr. HULSHOF asked and was given I urge its support. This bill is an important and nec- permission to revise and extend his re- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I essary step in protecting our Nation’s marks.) yield myself 13⁄4 minutes, and I yield to water infrastructure. Quite simply, Mr. Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Chairman, I rise the gentleman from Wisconsin. Chairman, we cannot afford not to pass in support of H.R. 1495. I grew up in the Mr. KAGEN. Mr. Chairman, in the this critical legislation. shadow of levees along the Mississippi last Congress the House approved a

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3605 water resources bill that included lan- dissenting votes. The bill passed with seen the black and white photos of guage to modify the navigation chan- over 400 votes in favor of it each time wagons overflowing with fish. I have nel for the Fox River in Wisconsin. in the House. We did our work, but seen the photos of kids swimming in This provision, which was inserted by then it got held up in the other body. the lagoon. my predecessor, would have modified Some people say that these projects It is time to quit talking about fixing part of the navigational channel from should be paid for entirely on a local it. It is time for our kids to go fishing. 150 feet wide to 75 feet and from an au- basis. But I can tell you there is a very It is time for this Congress to have the thorized depth of 18 feet to 6 feet. How- important Federal role in regard to our courage and leadership to pass H.R. ever, the Congress adjourned and the water resources because people in Cali- 1495. work never was completed. fornia or New York or Michigan use Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this This year I requested that this lan- the water in Tennessee. And people ex- time I would yield 1 minute to Mrs. guage not be included in the water re- pect us to have a good wastewater and BIGGERT. sources bill because of my concern that clean water system in this country. Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1495. My dis- it might impair the navigability of the And yet it is something that people trict in Illinois represents the front Fox River and the potential for future take for granted probably more than line in the fight to keep the Asian carp commerce. It is my understanding that anything else that I can think of. And from decimating the ecosystem of the a 9-foot authorization depth is consid- we have got to improve and strengthen Great Lakes and endangering a multi- ered the minimal depth for a naviga- our water resource system in this million dollar commercial fishing in- tional channel to safely handle barge country. dustry. traffic. Over the last few years, we have I would like to work with the Con- spent many billions on the water sys- b 1700 gress, with the chairman in conference tem, our wastewater and clean water Competing with native species for to ensure that whatever language is in- systems in Iraq. But we have fallen food, living space, and spawning areas, cluded in the conference agreement, it down at the Federal level on what we these voracious fish grow to between 50 will not adversely impact the naviga- are doing on our wastewater and clean and 150 pounds, eat up to 40 percent of bility of the Fox River and will accom- water systems in this country. And their body weight every day, and each plish the goals of a safe cleanup of the most of the spending has been done by female can carry up to a million eggs. Fox River. the State and local governments and The bill before us today will enable Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gen- particularly by the ratepayers. And so the Army Corps of Engineers to fortify tleman for his leadership on this issue. this is a very necessary, very overdue its aquatic and invasive species dis- The question of the Fox River has been bill, as many have pointed out. And I persal barrier, an invisible, under- on the agenda of the committee for urge support for this legislation. water, electric fence on the Chicago over 20 years. Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I Ship and Sanitary Canal in Illinois And the gentleman has stated the yield to the distinguished gentleman that repulses fish like the Asian carp. issue very well: that 6-foot channel from Florida (Mr. MAHONEY) 11⁄2 min- That is why I rise today, to thank depth is simply not viable for today’s utes. Chairman OBERSTAR and Ranking barge traffic. Mr. MAHONEY of Florida. Mr. Chair- Member MICA, as well as Sub- And there is also the issue of PCB man, I rise today in strong support of committee Chairman JOHNSON and contamination in the lower Fox River. H.R. 1495, the Water Resources Devel- Ranking Member BAKER, for recog- The gentleman has shown real fore- opment Act of 2007. nizing the continuing threat of the sight in dealing with the issue both of Seven years ago Congress, in the Asian carp and including provisions in navigation and of cleanup. So the spirit of bipartisanship, had the wis- this bill to protect the Great Lakes. Superfund really ought to deal with dom to protect for future generations Our Great Lakes are too important this problem. It is not going to. We are one of America’s most precious natural just to leave them vulnerable to going to be vigilant on the matter. If areas, the Everglades, by authorizing invasive species like the Asian carp. Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I there is an opportunity in conference the largest environmental restoration yield 11⁄2 minutes to the distinguished to address the issue in an appropriate project in our Nation’s history, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. manner, we will do that. If not, we will Comprehensive Everglades Restoration CARNAHAN). do it in a subsequent water resources Plan (CERP). Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I bill. And I look forward to coming to This ambitious plan consists of over rise as a strong supporter and cospon- Green Bay to see the gentleman’s dis- 40 projects that, when completed, sor of this Water Resources Develop- trict and the lower Fox River. would restore much of the Everglades. ment Act of 2007. Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this The plan, from its inception, was a This new Democratic Congress has time I would like to yield 2 minutes to joint venture, an equal partnership made reauthorizing WRDA a top pri- a gentleman who is a former chairman with the people of my State of Florida ority. I thank Chairman OBERSTAR and of the Water Resources Subcommittee to share in the costs. Subcommittee Chairwoman JOHNSON and who put an enormous amount of I am sorry to say that Washington for their work in quickly moving this work into the product on the House has failed to honor its word and live up bill of national significance to help floor today, Mr. DUNCAN. to its commitment. In fact, to the protect America’s waterways. Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chairman, I first shame of the Republican-controlled These projects are vital to my home want to commend Chairman OBERSTAR, Congress and the current administra- State of Missouri. Our local economy is Ranking Member MICA, Chairwoman tion, not a single WRDA bill has been driven by use of such important routes JOHNSON, with whom I spent so many passed since 2000. Not a single penny as the Mississippi, Missouri, and Illi- hours. She was my ranking member spent. nois Rivers. Commerce on these rivers during the entire 6 years that I had the I am proud to say that during this will be greatly benefited by this bill’s privilege of chairing the Water Re- same period of time, Florida has spent strong commitment to repair current sources and Environment, or during over $2 billion to get CERP going. In locks and reconstruct new locks on the part of the time that I chaired the fact, this is so important in my district Mississippi River. Water Resources and Environment that the good people from Martin As a member of the Subcommittee on Subcommittee, and such a good friend, County voted to increase their taxes to Water Resources and Environment, I and Ranking Member BAKER, for bring- help pay. have fought on behalf of my constitu- ing this bill to the floor today and for In my 16th Congressional District we ents to secure new levels of funding to their good and hard work on this legis- are going to get the opportunity to re- help throughout our region. In par- lation. And I urge its support. store the Indian River Lagoon. ticular, the bill authorizes $35 million This is a very conservative bill, Mr. Stuart, Florida, which straddles the for combined sewer overflow elimi- Chairman. It is a bill that passed this lagoon, is the sailfish capital of the nation in St. Louis. Some of our waste- House with only eight dissenting votes world and was built on tourism based water infrastructure dates back to the a few years ago and then later only 14 on its world-renowned fishing. I have Lincoln administration.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3606 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 The great flood of 1993 exposed seri- tial for the deterioration in local air These dangerous conditions are ous flaws in the St. Louis flood wall. quality due to blowing sediments are a caused by a structure erected, im- This bill addresses that. very serious reality. These problems proved, and maintained by the United Lastly, this bill continues the excit- will likely only worsen in the future, States Government. For that reason I ing progress of the Great Rivers Green- depending on the actions the State of believe that the Federal Government way in St. Louis City and County. By California and our Federal Government must act to alleviate the problem. Sec- creating an aquatic ecosystem restora- take. tion 3065 funds a spur jetty and a series tion, constructing bike paths, and in- I now yield to the gentleman from of breakwaters that will diminish the creasing access to the Mississippi Florida in the hopes of entering into a force of wave action on the beach. For River, my constituents will gain more colloquy. the past 7 years, I have been actively use of one of our national treasures. Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the involved with Federal, State, and local These projects are important to the gentlewoman for yielding. officials, as well as with Camp Ellis strength of our community and the First of all, I know, Mrs. BONO, that residents, all dedicated to fixing the health of our waterways. I stand in you have worked tirelessly on behalf of Camp Ellis erosion problem. strong support of H.R. 1495. restoration of the Salton Sea project. Passage of WRDA could not be more Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this Only through a technicality in our timely. On Monday I was there in the time I would like to yield 3 minutes to agreement for moving forward with middle of the storm surge, and during the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. this legislation has your Bono Salton this week’s nor’easter, Camp Ellis lost BONO). Sea restoration provision been left at least two homes to the sea. If the Mrs. BONO. Mr. Chairman, I thank from this bill. But you have my assur- proposed modifications to the jetty had the gentleman for yielding me this ance that you will have top priority for been made, these homes would not time. consideration for the conference on have been destroyed. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer something you have worked year after I urge passage of this bill. my concerns regarding a provision that year and so hard for. So before this Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this was not included in this legislation, gets to the President’s desk, you have time I yield 2 minutes to my distin- yet it is of significant importance to my assurance that it will be part of the guished colleague from Louisiana (Mr. all of southern California. My concerns President’s bill, if we have a bill. JINDAL). pertain to the importance of addressing Mrs. BONO. Mr. Chairman, reclaim- Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Chairman, I want ing my time, I thank the gentleman. the issues associated with the Salton to thank Chairman OBERSTAR, Chair- And I just want to reiterate that Sea in southern California, which is woman JOHNSON, and Ranking Mem- since my coming to Congress, I took California’s largest lake. bers MICA and BAKER for their excel- over this issue actually from my late This body of water is significant not lent work on H.R. 1495. husband, Sonny Bono, and we did pass only because of its role in becoming an This legislation is critical to the en- the Sonny Bono Memorial Act in 1998. economic engine for the future, but tire country, but for Louisiana in par- I thank the gentleman very much for also because of the impacts that will be ticular it provides much-needed au- his understanding of how important felt in our local economy and environ- thority and direction for the U.S. this is and southern California’s will- ment if action is not taken. Army Corps of Engineers to design and ingness to help me as we move forward In order to address the problems as- construct a comprehensive hurricane, sociated with the Salton Sea, I have in conference. Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, will flood, and coastal protection program worked to include moneys within the gentlewoman yield? safeguarding hundreds of thousands of WRDA in prior congressional sessions. Mrs. BONO. I yield to the gentleman lives and tens of billions of dollars in My goal is that moneys can be included from Minnesota. industry and infrastructure vital to to fund pilot projects in my district Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I our Nation’s economy. that would begin the proper steps to re- concur in the remarks of the distin- WRDA specifically allocates approxi- store the sea. guished ranking member, and we are mately $1.2 billion for actions to re- To meet this need, yesterday I of- committed to working together either store Louisiana’s coastal wetlands over fered an amendment in the Rules Com- in conference or subsequently in re- the next decade, including a plan for mittee that would provide $26 million solving this matter. the closure and environmental restora- for the restoration projects. Unfortu- Mr. Chairman, I yield 11⁄2 minutes to tion of the MRGO, the Inner Harbor nately, today we do not have the the distinguished gentleman from Navigational Canal Lock, other chance to vote on this important fund- Maine (Mr. ALLEN). projects like the Ouachita River levees ing. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in and the Red River basin and several It is important to note that my strong support of H.R. 1495, the Water other projects throughout the State. amendment would have directly mir- Resources Development Act. Among the critical projects included rored language that was included in In particular, I want to call attention in the WRDA bill is the Morganza to the final version of the WRDA legisla- to section 3065 and to thank Chairman the Gulf Hurricane Protection project. tion in the 109th Congress, H.R. 2864. At OBERSTAR and the Chair of the sub- This project is the best solution to pro- that time, displaying the bipartisan committee, Ms. JOHNSON, for their sup- tecting exposed areas in the bayou re- nature of this proposal, both the chair- port of the city of Saco, Maine. gion of Louisiana. man and the ranking member, and now Section 3065 authorizes construction I am very pleased that the adminis- chairman, Mr. OBERSTAR, agreed that of modifications to an Army Corps of tration softened its stance on this language was important and wor- Engineers jetty at the mouth of the Morganza to the Gulf, which will pro- thy of inclusion. Saco River in the Camp Ellis neighbor- vide essential hurricane protections to The support of the Senate remains hood of Saco. The Corps built the jetty those in Terrebonne and Lafourche consistent with their approval in con- more than 130 years ago and subse- Parishes. When complete, this project ference of this project last year and its quently has lengthened, smoothed, and will provide category 3 protection for recent inclusion in their WRDA legisla- raised it. 200,000 citizens and approximately $8 tion reported from the Environment Unfortunately, the jetty is destroy- billion of public and private infrastruc- and Public Works Committee just a few ing the Camp Ellis neighborhood by ture. weeks ago. I am grateful that we have contributing to what the Maine State Though I certainly would have pre- the support from the other body on a geologist has called the worst coastal ferred an unqualified endorsement for Salton Sea provision. erosion in the State. Thirty-eight Morganza to the Gulf from the admin- The time is right to act, as the State homes have been lost to the sea. Cur- istration, I look forward to working of California is on the verge of deter- rently, homes that were once six rows with my colleagues in the House to en- mining a plan that will permanently back from the shoreline are in danger sure that Morganza and other impor- save the Salton Sea. The status quo, of being destroyed. During winter tant projects remain intact in the final Mr. Chairman, is simply not an option. nor’easter storms, one part of Camp bill. I urge my colleagues to support Massive yearly fish die and the poten- Ellis often becomes an island. H.R. 1495.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3607 I want to thank again the chairman, Mr. Chairman, again I salute Chair- I urge my colleagues to support the and ranking member, Mr. BAKER, in man OBERSTAR, Chairwoman JOHNSON, Water Resources Development Act. By particular, for their work on this bill. Mr. MICA, Mr. BAKER, and Mr. DUNCAN improving our water resources infra- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I for their leadership and hard work. And structure, we will make our river com- yield such time as he may consume to I strongly support this legislation and munities safer and strengthen our Na- the distinguished gentleman from Illi- urge my colleagues to support it. tion’s economy and environmental wel- nois (Mr. COSTELLO), former ranking Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, at this fare. member of the subcommittee, who de- time I yield 1 minute to the gentle- Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I claim voted an enormous amount of his time, woman from Ohio (Mrs. SCHMIDT). the remainder of our time. along with Mr. DUNCAN, in shaping this (Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given I want to express my appreciation to bill in the previous Congress and now permission to revise and extend her re- Chairman OBERSTAR, Chairman JOHN- leads us on aviation as the chairman of marks.) SON and of course my ranking member, the Aviation Subcommittee. Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, I rise Mr. MICA, for their very diligent and Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I today in support of this legislation be- hard work; more specifically, for the thank Chairman OBERSTAR for yielding cause it is long overdue. Seven years is time spent in the great State of Lou- time to me. a long time and much has changed. isiana after the landfall of Hurricane Mr. Chairman, today we are consid- This bill includes language important Katrina. The committee has come ering the Water Resources Develop- to my own district, but more impor- down, Members often more than once, ment Act of 2007. This bill addresses tantly, it has national importance. We to observe for themselves the damage what the Congress has failed to do in need this legislation to authorize new that has been caused by this unbeliev- previous years, enact a WRDA bill that Army Corps of Engineer water infra- able natural catastrophe. addresses the critical infrastructure structure studies and projects. And it The bill under consideration today needs of our country. is not just about new projects, but how will begin an enormous and monu- I would like to thank Chairman the Corps manages them, and for Con- mental project for the restoration of OBERSTAR, Chairwoman JOHNSON, Mr. gress to have an opportunity to exer- coastal Louisiana. It is not just about MICA, Mr. BAKER, and the former chair- cise its oversight authority over cur- keeping people with the ability to live man of the subcommittee, Mr. DUNCAN, rent and future projects. This legisla- on the water’s edge; it is giving the for a job well done in bringing this bill tion is long overdue. ability to stop the storm surge coming to the floor today. Without their lead- I want to commend our committee inland and bringing about the type of ership and their persistence, we would leadership on both sides for working in devastation that we have painfully ex- not have a bill here to consider on the a bipartisan fashion to move this so perienced again. floor. quickly. I thank everyone for their This legislation is a landmark, cer- H.R. 1495 authorizes projects for hard work, and I look forward to vot- tainly for the traditional reasons. major flood control, navigation, envi- ing for this this evening. Many Members have interests in ronmental restoration, and other water projects for economic development rea- b 1715 projects and authorizes several impor- sons, for control of public water sys- tant projects to restore and enhance Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield 2 minutes to tems, for enhancing water runoff and the Nation’s environmental infrastruc- the distinguished gentleman from Illi- minimizing agricultural and other ture. nois (Mr. HARE). sources of contamination to our water The United States transportation Mr. HARE. I thank the gentleman for systems. But this bill is really impor- system has an extensive system of yielding. tant for maintenance of life and qual- highways, ports, locks and dams, and Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong ity of life in our State, and it will airports. Yet we continue to neglect support of the Water Resources Devel- begin the meaningful restoration of upgrading and modernizing our infra- opment Act of 2007. what is a tremendous natural asset, structure. We should not build our in- This bill authorizes important long- coastal Louisiana. frastructure and then walk away from overdue flood control, dam safety and I would emphasize what has already it without maintaining and modern- environmental restoration projects. In been stated repeatedly: this is a proc- izing it as it becomes antiquated, like my district, the Great Flood of 1993 ess resulting in over 600 projects which we have done with the Upper Mis- took the lives of 47 people and resulted has come about over a 6-year period. sissippi and the Illinois Waterways in over $15 billion in catastrophic dam- And so it is my deepest hope that this lock and dam system. ages throughout much of the Mis- House will this evening favorably adopt In H.R. 1495 we are again authorizing sissippi River basin. I support this bill 1495, that the Senate will work expedi- the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Wa- for the safety of my constituents. tiously with us in moving forward, and terways system. This bill authorizes Additionally, over 50 percent of our that the administration will find a way the replacement of 600-foot navigation locks and dams have aged beyond their to sign this important jobs bill into locks with seven new 1,200-foot locks. life cycle, and they are crumbling. law. In addition, the bill authorizes the WRDA authorizes repair of these struc- $13.1 billion is a lot of money, and largest environmental restoration pro- tures and includes critical provisions when coupled with the local matched gram next to the Florida Everglades to modernize seven new locks and dams dollars which are required, it will be a project to ensure that the project goes on the upper Mississippi and Illinois significant shot in the economic arm forward while respecting the environ- Rivers. These improvement will expand for the construction industry across ment and minimizing any adverse im- navigation capacity, reduce shipping this country. So I am most appre- pact. delays, and accommodate larger barge ciative of the opportunity to have par- Our current system loses about 10 tows, which is critical for the $12 bil- ticipated in this process. percent of its capacity due to the sys- lion worth of products that the river I am grateful to my Democratic col- tem failure and breakdowns because it transports ever year, as well as the ag- leagues for their kind and hard work has exceeded its life expectancy by riculture, commercial and labor inter- on this subject and listening to the over 20 years. The system cannot han- ests of my State of Illinois. people of Louisiana in their hour of dle today’s traffic in an efficient, cost- This bill includes a much-needed pro- need. For that we are and will always effective manner, and it is costing tax- gram to restore the upper Mississippi be most appreciative. payers tens of millions of dollars to River ecosystem and authorizes com- Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- patch it together, let alone the cost in pletion of the Emiquon Wildlife Pre- ance of my time. time and money to the users. Modern- serve in my district. This preserve is Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, how izing that infrastructure is the right one of the largest flood plain restora- much time do we have remaining on thing to do. It is a necessity, and I am tion projects in the country outside the our side? glad to see that this bill is moving for- Florida Everglades, and I am proud to The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman ward on such a significant project to have sponsored its inclusion in this bill from Minnesota has 11⁄2 minutes re- our economy and our commerce. today. maining.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3608 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 Mr. OBERSTAR. There is an old say- sites, including the Cornfields site in downtown shape Lake St. Clair’s future, but only if they ing among seafarers: ‘‘No helmsman is Los Angeles. With the inclusion of the LA are implemented. Having come this far, we tested in fair water.’’ The gentleman River projects in the WRDA authorization, the can’t let the report and its recommendations from Louisiana was tested in the after- Army Corps of Engineers can begin to break become another study that sits on a shelf and math of Katrina, and I saw him at the ground on these revitalization activities. gathers dust. Everyone, including the federal helm in Baton Rouge when our com- I want to take this opportunity to recognize government, has to step forward and take re- mittee made a tour of the devastation my local community and public officials who sponsibility for turning these recommendations wreaked by Hurricane Katrina. I was have worked tirelessly to make the Los Ange- into action. impressed then and continue to be by les River revitalization project a success. The Again, I support the bill before the House his composure, his grasp of facts, grasp LA River revitalization plan reflects the vision and urge its adoption. of the magnitude of the problem, and of City Councilman Ed Reyes, who for many Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong his willingness to address the issues in years has led the effort at the local level. I support of this bill that will finally move forward a coordinated and bipartisan manner. I commend him for his commitment to enhanc- important construction, navigation, and eco- salute him for his continued leadership ing the quality of life for the communities along system restoration projects along the Mis- and service not only to the State, but the River and for all Angelenos. sissippi River, Great Lakes, and elsewhere. In to the Nation. I also applaud the strong support of Mayor particular, H.R. 1495 will authorize the corps Again, I express my appreciation to Antonio Villaraigosa and the local stakeholders of engineers’ sustainability plan for the upper the gentleman from Florida (Mr. MICA) who continue to explore ways to convert the Mississippi River. for similarly taking the helm in a time land adjacent to the Los Angeles River into On the eve of Earth Day, founded by the of turbulence when we had this work of parks, housing, and economic opportunities for great Senator from Wisconsin Gaylord Nelson, 6 years thrust upon us, trying to sort it our local communities. what better gift to the people of the upper Mis- out, do the right thing and serve our The passage of WRDA with the LA River re- sissippi River basin than the largest ever in- Members, their districts, and our Na- vitalization project will continue an exciting alli- vestment in ecosystem restoration in the riv- tion at the same time and measure ance between the federal government, the er’s history? This bill will have a tremendous each project against the yardstick of City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County. impact on water quality, wildlife habitat, and balance that has historically guided We have worked in particular to enrich the recreation in the upper Mississippi River re- the Corps of Engineers and guided the lives of the many families who live in the com- gion. work of this committee, and I think we munities along the River and to enhance op- Reauthorization of the Water Resources De- have come here with a good product. portunities for economic development associ- velopment Act has been a long time coming, And I especially appreciate, once ated with revitalization. and it has seen some improvement over the again, the splendid work of the gentle- I look forward to continuing to work with my years. The current bill, for instance, includes woman from Texas, Ms. JOHNSON, who colleagues to build upon this exciting oppor- an important provision, that I included, requir- is the Chair of the subcommittee and tunity to transform the LA River from an un- ing that construction and restoration projects who has put her heart and soul into sightly and environmentally void industrial on the upper Mississippi achieve equal seeing this bill move forward. space to a communal recreational space in progress so that construction and navigation Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise which all Angelenos can take pride. improvements do not degrade the river eco- to support H.R. 1495, the Water Resources I thank the Committee for its hard work and system. The WRDA bill of 1986 established Development Act of 2007. This bill, which au- urge my colleagues to support this important the upper Mississippi River system as the only thorizes water projects through the Army legislationy. waterbody in the Nation recognized by Con- Corps of Engineers, is essential to maintaining Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong gress as both a ‘‘nationally significant eco- and improving our Nation’s vital water re- support of the Water Resources Development system and a nationally significant commercial sources and infrastructure. Act and urge its passage by the House. I want navigation system,’’ so it is important that the This bill is long overdue. Congress has to compliment Chairman OBERSTAR and the needs of these two aspects of the river are been unable to enact a comprehensive WRDA Transportation and Infrastructure Committee met in tandem. bill since the year 2000. Without Federal re- for making early passage of this legislation a The Bush administration also has recog- sources authorized in this bill, critical projects priority. The last Water Resources bill was nized the ecological importance of the basin needed to sustain and protect America’s water signed into law over 6 years ago by President by making the upper Mississippi River Basin needs into the future have been stalled. I com- Clinton. It is Congress’ job to renew this law environmental management program a priority mend Chairman OBERSTAR for his leadership every 2 years, but for whatever reason, we project in the corps budget. A relatively mod- and steadfast commitment to this vital issue. I have been unable to reach agreement with the est program with authorized funding of $33.5 thank his hardworking staff, who worked long other body and get a final bill to the President million, the EMP has demonstrated remark- hours to complete this bill, which is a top pri- for his signature. able results in restoring river habitats all along ority of our new Democratic Congress. The Nation’s water and environmental infra- my congressional district in western Wisconsin As a representative from southern California structure problems won’t wait forever. We and beyond. And its long-term resource moni- where water is a scare and precious resource, need to overcome our past differences and toring program has produced invaluable data I appreciate the distinguished Chairman’s ef- move this bill to upgrade and modernize our and knowledge. forts to put forth a bill that advances essential Federal programs relating to navigation, flood Mr. Chairman, it is especially fitting that we water resource infrastructure projects in the damage reduction, shoreline protection, dam pass this bill today in light of the 20th anniver- region. safety, water supply, recreation, and environ- sary that EMP celebrated last year. This bill, I am particularly pleased that this legislation mental restoration. H.R. 1495, and the accompanying manager’s includes an historic authorization for revitaliza- I want to express my thanks to Chairman amendment contain language assuring that tion efforts along the Los Angeles River. The OBERSTAR for including a project I requested the navigation and ecosystem sustainability $20 million authorization contained within the to authorize Federal funding to implement res- plan will continue the EMP’s mission, including bill will mark a significant Federal commitment toration projects in Lake St. Clair. In the past, long-term resource monitoring. to transforming the LA River from an unsightly Lake St. Clair has been described as ‘‘the for- But this bill will address long-standing needs concrete flood control channel into green gotten lake.’’ No longer. Today, many of my well beyond the upper Mississippi. This coun- space that will promote badly needed recre- constituents refer to Lake St. Clair as the try’s water resources infrastructure was largely ation, housing and job creation opportunities. ‘‘Heart of the Great Lakes.’’ We need to pro- constructed 70 or more years ago, and much In addition, the legislation will enable the Army tect and restore it. Lake St. Clair is not the of it has fallen into various states of disrepair Corps of Engineers to develop a plan to im- largest body of water in the Great Lakes Sys- and neglect. Hurricane Katrina so clearly dem- prove water quality, restore historic habitats, tem, but it is absolutely one of the most heav- onstrated to the world the consequences of and enhance the river’s flood protection func- ily used portions of the Lakes in terms of fish- this lack of attention. Reauthorization of tion. ing, boating and drinking water. WRDA is a necessary first step in meeting the For years, I have worked with my col- Two years ago, the Corps of Engineers needs of our citizens, industry, and environ- leagues from Los Angeles to obtain Federal completed a comprehensive management plan ment. funding for studies on promising revitalization for Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River. Con- I urge all of my colleagues to join me in projects along the River. Our efforts have se- gress paid for this plan. The recommendations support of this vital legislation so that resi- cured over $3 million for studies at various contained in the management plan will help dents of low-lying areas can be reassured that

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 9920 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3609 the levees that protect them will be made ade- will go a long way to ensuring the livelihoods Sec. 2013. Wetlands mitigation. quate, so that farmers will know they will be of the men and women that rely on these wa- Sec. 2014. Mitigation for fish and wildlife able to ship their grain downriver to be ex- terways. losses. Sec. 2015. Remote and subsistence harbors. ported to foreign markets, and hunters, an- Another project in WRDA that is critical to Sec. 2016. Beneficial uses of dredged material. glers, and birdwatchers will know that the the Great Lakes and important to all of Chi- Sec. 2017. Cost-sharing provisions for certain habitat they know and love will be maintained. cago is the Asian Carp barrier. As the resi- areas. Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I dents of the Fifth Congressional District know, Sec. 2018. Use of other Federal funds. would like to thank Chairman OBERSTAR and invasive species pose a severe threat to Lake Sec. 2019. Revision of project partnership agree- Ranking Member MICA, as well as Sub- Michigan, capable of billions of dollars in eco- ment. committee Chairwoman JOHNSON and Ranking nomic losses and inestimable environmental Sec. 2020. Cost sharing. Sec. 2021. Expedited actions for emergency flood Member BAKER for their hard work and leader- damage. damage reduction. ship on this important legislation—the first The Asian Carp in particular has affected Sec. 2022. Watershed and river basin assess- water improvement and conservation package Great Lakes fisheries, and I have been work- ments. in seven years. ing with my Great Lakes colleagues in making Sec. 2023. Tribal partnership program. Following several earlier impasses, I want to sure that this barrier is funded and operational Sec. 2024. Wildfire firefighting. take this opportunity to commend the spirit of to protect the Great Lakes from Asian Carp. Sec. 2025. Technical assistance. bipartisanship and compromise on this impor- Mr. Chairman, the Water Resources Devel- Sec. 2026. Lakes program. tant measure. I hope it extends to a bicameral opment Act is a hat trick—it’s good for the en- Sec. 2027. Coordination and scheduling of Fed- bipartisanship in the weeks to come. eral, State, and local actions. vironment, it’s good for the economy, and it’s Sec. 2028. Project streamlining. This bill benefits all Americans and their good for America’s future. I want to thank Mr. Sec. 2029. Cooperative agreements. families who use and enjoy our Nation’s wa- OBERSTAR and Mr. MICA for all of their good Sec. 2030. Training funds. terways, public beaches—including over 300 work, and I am glad that we are getting this Sec. 2031. Access to water resource data. miles of coastline along my district—and for bill done. I yield back the balance of my time. Sec. 2032. Shore protection projects. U.S. businesses that depend on healthy and Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I Sec. 2033. Ability to pay. viable waterways throughout the country. yield back the balance of my time. Sec. 2034. Leasing authority. My district benefits from the good work that The CHAIRMAN. All time for general Sec. 2035. Cost estimates. the Army Corps of Engineers does for coastal Sec. 2036. Project planning. debate has expired. Sec. 2037. Independent peer review. communities by helping small towns deal with Pursuant to the rule, the amendment Sec. 2038. Studies and reports for water re- multiple concerns ranging from erosion to in the nature of a substitute printed in sources projects. longstanding environmental challenges. The the bill shall be considered as an origi- Sec. 2039. Offshore oil and gas fabrication port. Corps is currently working on several projects nal bill for the purpose of amendment Sec. 2040. Use of firms employing local resi- on eastern Long Island that will dredge inlets, under the 5-minute rule and shall be dents. restore damaged ecosystems, and study considered read. TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS coastal health. The text of the amendment in the na- Sec. 3001. Cook Inlet, Alaska. In addition, H.R. 1495 will go a long way to- ture of a substitute is as follows: Sec. 3002. King Cove Harbor, Alaska. ward supplying the Corps with all the re- H.R. 1495 Sec. 3003. Sitka, Alaska. Sec. 3004. Tatitlek, Alaska. sources it needs to protect coastal commu- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- Sec. 3005. Rio De Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona. nities and vacationers by modernizing project resentatives of the United States of America in Sec. 3006. Osceola Harbor, Arkansas. planning and approval. Congress assembled, Mr. Chairman, I thank the Chairman and Sec. 3007. Pine Mountain Dam, Arkansas. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. Sec. 3008. American and Sacramento Rivers, Ranking Member again for their hard work on (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as California. this issue, and I look forward to working with the ‘‘Water Resources Development Act of 2007’’. Sec. 3009. Compton Creek, California. my colleagues to make sure that we get a (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.— Sec. 3010. Grayson Creek/Murderer’s Creek, WRDA bill to the President as soon as we Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. California. can. We simply cannot afford to let another Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary. Sec. 3011. Hamilton Airfield, California. year go by without passing this legislation. TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS Sec. 3012. John F. Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel, Cali- Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today Sec. 1001. Project authorizations. fornia. in strong support of H.R. 1945, the Water Re- Sec. 1002. Small projects for flood damage re- Sec. 3013. Kaweah River, California. duction. sources Development Act (WRDA). As the Sec. 3014. Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, Sec. 1003. Small projects for emergency Democratic Majority begins our second 100 California. streambank protection. days, we are continuing to move America for- Sec. 3015. Llagas Creek, California. Sec. 1004. Small projects for navigation. ward, and WRDA does just that. Sec. 3016. Magpie Creek, California. Sec. 1005. Small projects for improvement of the This bill will help commerce by improving Sec. 3017. Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, quality of the environment. California. navigation on waterways and making it easier Sec. 1006. Small projects for aquatic ecosystem Sec. 3018. Pinole Creek, California. to bring products to market. This bill will invest restoration. Sec. 3019. Prado Dam, California. in our future by modernizing the locks and Sec. 1007. Small projects for shoreline protec- Sec. 3020. Sacramento and American Rivers dams on the Mississippi River and elsewhere. tion. flood control, California. Sec. 1008. Small projects for snagging and sedi- This bill will protect the Great Lakes by finally Sec. 3021. Sacramento Deep Water Ship Chan- ment removal. making the Asian Carp barrier permanent. nel, California. This bill invests in rural and urban America TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 3022. Santa Cruz Harbor, California. alike by renewing our commitment to pro- Sec. 2001. Non-Federal contributions. Sec. 3023. Seven Oaks Dam, California. tecting the environment and the economy. Sec. 2002. Harbor cost sharing. Sec. 3024. Upper Guadalupe River, California. The Water Resources Development Act is a Sec. 2003. Funding to process permits. Sec. 3025. Walnut Creek Channel, California. good bill that has been written in a bipartisan Sec. 2004. National shoreline erosion control de- Sec. 3026. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, process to address the needs of the whole velopment and demonstration pro- California. gram. Sec. 3027. Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, country, but there are two parts of the bill in Sec. 2005. Small shore and beach restoration California. particular that I am especially proud are in- and protection projects. Sec. 3028. Yuba River Basin project, California. cluded. Sec. 2006. Aquatic ecosystem restoration. Sec. 3029. South Platte River Basin, Colorado. The locks on the Mississippi River and Illi- Sec. 2007. Small flood damage reduction Sec. 3030. Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware nois Waterways are in need of repair, and projects. River to Chesapeake Bay, Dela- WRDA finally addresses the long overdue Sec. 2008. Modification of projects for improve- ware and Maryland. need for lock modernization. Navigation in the ment of the quality of the envi- Sec. 3031. Brevard County, Florida. upper Mississippi supports more than 400,000 ronment. Sec. 3032. Broward County and Hillsboro Inlet, Sec. 2009. Written agreement for water re- Florida. jobs and 90,000 high-paying manufacturing sources projects. Sec. 3033. Canaveral Harbor, Florida. jobs, and passage of WRDA will create more Sec. 2010. Assistance for remediation, restora- Sec. 3034. Gasparilla and Estero Islands, Flor- jobs in the region. Every year, shipping in the tion, and reuse. ida. upper Mississippi River adds up to about $1.2 Sec. 2011. Compilation of laws. Sec. 3035. Jacksonville Harbor, Florida. billion to our economy. Modernizing the locks Sec. 2012. Dredged material disposal. Sec. 3036. Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6343 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3610 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 Sec. 3037. Miami Harbor, Florida. Sec. 3100. South Central Pennsylvania. Sec. 4040. Hamburg and Green Oak Townships, Sec. 3038. Peanut Island, Florida. Sec. 3101. Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania. Michigan. Sec. 3039. Tampa Harbor-Big Bend Channel, Sec. 3102. Cedar Bayou, Texas. Sec. 4041. Duluth-Superior Harbor, Minnesota Florida. Sec. 3103. Freeport Harbor, Texas. and Wisconsin. Sec. 3040. Tampa Harbor Cut B, Florida. Sec. 3104. Lake Kemp, Texas. Sec. 4042. Northeast Mississippi. Sec. 3041. Allatoona Lake, Georgia. Sec. 3105. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas. Sec. 4043. St. Louis, Missouri. Sec. 3042. Latham River, Glynn County, Geor- Sec. 3106. North Padre Island, Corpus Christi Sec. 4044. Dredged material disposal, New Jer- gia. Bay, Texas. sey. Sec. 3043. Dworshak Dam and Reservoir im- Sec. 3107. Pat Mayse Lake, Texas. Sec. 4045. Bayonne, New Jersey. provements, Idaho. Sec. 3108. Proctor Lake, Texas. Sec. 4046. Carteret, New Jersey. Sec. 3044. Beardstown Community Boat Harbor, Sec. 3109. San Antonio Channel, San Antonio, Sec. 4047. Gloucester County, New Jersey. Beardstown, Illinois. Texas. Sec. 4048. Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Sec. 3045. Cache River Levee, Illinois. Sec. 3110. Lee, Russell, Scott, Smyth, Tazewell, Sec. 4049. Batavia, New York. Sec. 3046. Chicago River, Illinois. and Wise Counties, Virginia. Sec. 4050. Big Sister Creek, Evans, New York. Sec. 3047. Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Sec. 3111. Tangier Island Seawall, Virginia. Sec. 4051. Finger Lakes, New York. dispersal barriers project, Illinois. Sec. 3112. Duwamish/Green, Washington. Sec. 4052. Lake Erie Shoreline, Buffalo, New Sec. 3048. Emiquon, Illinois. Sec. 3113. Yakima River, Port of Sunnyside, York. Sec. 3049. Lasalle, Illinois. Washington. Sec. 4053. Newtown Creek, New York. Sec. 3050. Spunky Bottoms, Illinois. Sec. 3114. Greenbrier River Basin, West Vir- Sec. 4054. Niagara River, New York. Sec. 3051. Fort Wayne and vicinity, Indiana. ginia. Sec. 4055. Shore Parkway Greenway, Brooklyn, Sec. 3052. Koontz Lake, Indiana. Sec. 3115. Lesage/Greenbottom Swamp, West New York. Sec. 3053. White River, Indiana. Virginia. Sec. 4056. Upper Delaware River Watershed, Sec. 3054. Des Moines River and Greenbelt, Sec. 3116. Northern West Virginia. New York. Iowa. Sec. 3117. Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin. Sec. 4057. Lincoln County, North Carolina. Sec. 3055. Prestonsburg, Kentucky. Sec. 3118. Mississippi River headwaters res- Sec. 4058. Wilkes County, North Carolina. Sec. 3056. Amite River and tributaries, Lou- ervoirs. Sec. 4059. Yadkinville, North Carolina. isiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Sec. 3119. Continuation of project authoriza- Sec. 4060. Lake Erie, Ohio. Watershed. tions. Sec. 4061. Ohio River, Ohio. Sec. 3057. Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana. Sec. 3120. Project reauthorizations. Sec. 4062. Ecosystem restoration and fish pas- Sec. 3058. Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Sec. 3121. Project deauthorizations. sage improvements, Oregon. Louisiana. Sec. 3122. Land conveyances. Sec. 4063. Walla Walla River Basin, Oregon. Sec. 3059. Bayou Plaquemine, Louisiana. Sec. 3123. Extinguishment of reversionary inter- Sec. 4064. Chartiers Creek Watershed, Pennsyl- Sec. 3060. J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mis- ests and use restrictions. vania. sissippi River to Shreveport, Lou- TITLE IV—STUDIES Sec. 4065. Kinzua Dam and Allegheny Res- isiana. ervoir, Pennsylvania. Sec. 4001. John Glenn Great Lakes Basin Pro- Sec. 3061. Melville, Louisiana. Sec. 4066. Western Pennsylvania flood damage gram. Sec. 3062. Mississippi Delta Region, Louisiana. reduction, Pennsylvania. Sec. 4002. Lake Erie dredged material disposal Sec. 3063. New Orleans to Venice, Louisiana. Sec. 4067. Williamsport, Pennsylvania. sites. Sec. 3064. West bank of the Mississippi River Sec. 4068. Yardley Borough, Pennsylvania. Sec. 4003. Southwestern United States drought (East of Harvey Canal), Lou- Sec. 4069. Rio Valenciano, Juncos, Puerto Rico. study. isiana. Sec. 4070. Crooked Creek, Bennettsville, South Sec. 4004. Delaware River. Sec. 3065. Camp Ellis, Saco, Maine. Carolina. Sec. 4005. Knik Arm, Cook Inlet, Alaska. Sec. 3066. Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Sec. 4071. Broad River, York County, South Sec. 4006. Kuskokwim River, Alaska. Michigan. Carolina. Sec. 4007. St. George Harbor, Alaska. Sec. 3067. St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Sec. 4072. Chattanooga, Tennessee. Sec. 4008. Susitna River, Alaska. Michigan. Sec. 4073. Cleveland, Tennessee. Sec. 4009. Gila Bend, Maricopa, Arizona. Sec. 3068. St. Joseph Harbor, Michigan. Sec. 4074. Cumberland River, Nashville, Ten- Sec. 4010. Searcy County, Arkansas. Sec. 3069. Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan. nessee. Sec. 4011. Elkhorn Slough Estuary, California. Sec. 3070. Ada, Minnesota. Sec. 4075. Lewis, Lawrence, and Wayne Coun- Sec. 4012. Fresno, Kings, and Kern Counties, Sec. 3071. Duluth Harbor, McQuade Road, ties, Tennessee. California. Minnesota. Sec. 4076. Wolf River and Nonconnah Creek, Sec. 4013. Los Angeles River revitalization Sec. 3072. Grand Marais, Minnesota. Memphis Tennessee. study, California. Sec. 3073. Grand Portage Harbor, Minnesota. Sec. 4077. Abilene, Texas. Sec. 4014. Lytle Creek, Rialto, California. Sec. 3074. Granite Falls, Minnesota. Sec. 4078. Coastal Texas ecosystem protection Sec. 4015. Mokelumne River, San Joaquin Sec. 3075. Knife River Harbor, Minnesota. and restoration, Texas. County, California. Sec. 3076. Red Lake River, Minnesota. Sec. 4079. Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas. Sec. 4016. Napa River, St. Helena, California. Sec. 3077. Silver Bay, Minnesota. Sec. 4080. Port of Galveston, Texas. Sec. 4017. Orick, California. Sec. 3078. Taconite Harbor, Minnesota. Sec. 4081. Grand County and Moab, Utah. Sec. 4018. Rialto, Fontana, and Colton, Cali- Sec. 3079. Two Harbors, Minnesota. Sec. 4082. Southwestern Utah. fornia. Sec. 3080. Deer Island, Harrison County, Mis- Sec. 4083. Chowan River Basin, Virginia and Sec. 4019. Sacramento River, California. sissippi. North Carolina. Sec. 4020. San Diego County, California. Sec. 3081. Pearl River Basin, Mississippi. Sec. 4084. Elliott Bay Seawall, Seattle, Wash- Sec. 4021. San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Sec. 3082. Festus and Crystal City, Missouri. ington. Joaquin Delta, California. Sec. 3083. L–15 levee, Missouri. Sec. 4085. Monongahela River Basin, northern Sec. 4022. South San Francisco Bay shoreline Sec. 3084. Monarch-Chesterfield, Missouri. West Virginia. study, California. Sec. 3085. River Des Peres, Missouri. Sec. 4086. Kenosha Harbor, Wisconsin. Sec. 4023. Twentynine Palms, California. Sec. 3086. Antelope Creek, Lincoln, Nebraska. Sec. 4087. Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. Sec. 4024. Yucca Valley, California. Sec. 3087. Sand Creek Watershed, Wahoo, Ne- Sec. 4088. Johnsonville Dam, Johnsonville, Wis- Sec. 4025. Roaring Fork River, Basalt, Colo- braska. consin. Sec. 3088. Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape rado. May Point, New Jersey. Sec. 4026. Delaware and Christina Rivers and TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS Sec. 3089. Passaic River Basin flood manage- Shellpot Creek, Wilmington, Dela- Sec. 5001. Maintenance of navigation channels. ment, New Jersey. ware. Sec. 5002. Watershed management. Sec. 3090. Buffalo Harbor, New York. Sec. 4027. Collier County Beaches, Florida. Sec. 5003. Dam safety. Sec. 3091. Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York. Sec. 4028. Lower St. Johns River, Florida. Sec. 5004. Structural integrity evaluations. Sec. 3092. Port of New York and New Jersey, Sec. 4029. Vanderbilt Beach Lagoon, Florida. Sec. 5005. Flood mitigation priority areas. New York and New Jersey. Sec. 4030. Meriwether County, Georgia. Sec. 5006. Additional assistance for authorized Sec. 3093. New York State Canal System. Sec. 4031. Tybee Island, Georgia. projects. Sec. 3094. Lower Girard Lake Dam, Ohio. Sec. 4032. Boise River, Idaho. Sec. 5007. Expedited completion of reports and Sec. 3095. Mahoning River, Ohio. Sec. 4033. Ballard’s Island Side Channel, Illi- construction for certain projects. Sec. 3096. Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New nois. Sec. 5008. Expedited completion of reports for Jersey, and Delaware. Sec. 4034. Salem, Indiana. certain projects. Sec. 3097. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania. Sec. 4035. Buckhorn Lake, Kentucky. Sec. 5009. Southeastern water resources assess- Sec. 3098. Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Sec. 4036. Dewey Lake, Kentucky. ment. Creek, Allegheny County, Penn- Sec. 4037. Louisville, Kentucky. Sec. 5010. Upper Mississippi River environ- sylvania. Sec. 4038. Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts mental management program. Sec. 3099. Solomon’s Creek, Wilkes-Barre, and Rhode Island. Sec. 5011. Missouri and Middle Mississippi Pennsylvania. Sec. 4039. Clinton River, Michigan. River enhancement project.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6343 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3611 Sec. 5012. Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem Sec. 5070. Cross Lake, Shreveport, Louisiana. Sec. 6008. Modified water deliveries. restoration. Sec. 5071. West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. Sec. 6009. Deauthorizations. Sec. 5013. Great Lakes remedial action plans Sec. 5072. Charlestown, Maryland. Sec. 6010. Regional engineering model for envi- and sediment remediation. Sec. 5073. Anacostia River, District of Columbia ronmental restoration. Sec. 5014. Great Lakes tributary models. and Maryland. TITLE VII—LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA Sec. 5015. Great Lakes navigation. Sec. 5074. Delmarva Conservation Corridor, Sec. 7001. Definitions. Sec. 5016. Upper Mississippi River dispersal bar- Delaware and Maryland. Sec. 7002. Comprehensive plan. rier project. Sec. 5075. Massachusetts dredged material dis- Sec. 7003. Louisiana coastal area. Sec. 5017. Susquehanna, Delaware, and Poto- posal sites. Sec. 7004. Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protec- mac River Basins, Delaware, Sec. 5076. Ontonagon Harbor, Michigan. tion and Restoration Task Force. Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Sec. 5077. Crookston, Minnesota. Sec. 7005. Project modifications. Virginia. Sec. 5078. Garrison and Kathio Township, Min- Sec. 7006. Construction. Sec. 5018. Chesapeake Bay environmental res- nesota. Sec. 7007. Non-Federal cost share. toration and protection program. Sec. 5079. Itasca County, Minnesota. Sec. 7008. Project justification. Sec. 5019. Hypoxia assessment. Sec. 5080. Minneapolis, Minnesota. Sec. 7009. Independent review. Sec. 5020. Potomac River watershed assessment Sec. 5081. Northeastern Minnesota. Sec. 7010. Expedited reports. and tributary strategy evaluation Sec. 5082. Wild Rice River, Minnesota. Sec. 7011. Reporting. and monitoring program. Sec. 5083. Harrison, Hancock, and Jackson Sec. 7012. New Orleans and vicinity. Sec. 5021. Lock and dam security. Counties, Mississippi. Sec. 7013. Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. Sec. 5022. Rehabilitation. Sec. 5084. Mississippi River, Missouri and Illi- TITLE VIII—UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER Sec. 5023. Research and development program nois. AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY SYSTEM for Columbia and Snake River Sec. 5085. St. Louis, Missouri. salmon survival. Sec. 5086. Hackensack Meadowlands area, New Sec. 8001. Definitions. Sec. 5024. Auburn, Alabama. Jersey. Sec. 8002. Navigation improvements and res- Sec. 5025. Pinhook Creek, Huntsville, Alabama. Sec. 5087. Atlantic Coast of New York. toration. Sec. 5026. Alaska. Sec. 5088. College Point, New York City, New Sec. 8003. Authorization of construction of Sec. 5027. Barrow, Alaska. York. navigation improvements. Sec. 5028. Coffman Cove, Alaska. Sec. 5089. Flushing Bay and Creek, New York Sec. 8004. Ecosystem restoration authorization. Sec. 5029. Fire Island, Alaska. City, New York. Sec. 8005. Comparable progress. Sec. 5030. Fort Yukon, Alaska. Sec. 5090. Hudson River, New York. SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY. Sec. 5031. Kotzebue Harbor, Alaska. Sec. 5091. Mount Morris Dam, New York. In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Sec. 5032. Lowell Creek Tunnel, Seward, Alas- Sec. 5092. John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir, Secretary of the Army. ka. North Carolina. TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS Sec. 5033. St. Herman and St. Paul Harbors, Sec. 5093. Stanly County, North Carolina. SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. Kodiak, Alaska. Sec. 5094. Cincinnati, Ohio. Sec. 5034. Tanana River, Alaska. Sec. 5095. Toussaint River, Ohio. Except as otherwise provided in this section, Sec. 5035. Valdez, Alaska. Sec. 5096. Eugene, Oregon. the following projects for water resources devel- Sec. 5036. Whittier, Alaska. Sec. 5097. Fern Ridge Dam, Oregon. opment and conservation and other purposes Sec. 5037. Wrangell Harbor, Alaska. Sec. 5098. Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. are authorized to be carried out by the Secretary Sec. 5038. Augusta and Clarendon, Arkansas. Sec. 5099. Kehly Run Dams, Pennsylvania. substantially in accordance with the plans, and Sec. 5039. Des Arc levee protection, Arkansas. Sec. 5100. Lehigh River, Lehigh County, Penn- subject to the conditions, described in the re- Sec. 5040. Loomis Landing, Arkansas. sylvania. spective reports designated in this section: Sec. 5041. St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas Sec. 5101. Northeast Pennsylvania. (1) HAINES, ALASKA.—The project for naviga- and Missouri. Sec. 5102. Upper Susquehanna River Basin, tion, Haines, Alaska: Report of the Chief of En- Sec. 5042. Cambria, California. Pennsylvania and New York. gineers dated December 20, 2004, at a total cost Sec. 5043. Contra Costa Canal, Oakley and Sec. 5103. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto of $14,040,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Knightsen, California; Mallard Rico. $11,232,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of Slough, Pittsburg, California. Sec. 5104. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower $2,808,000. (2) PORT LIONS, ALASKA.—The project for Sec. 5044. Dana Point Harbor, California. Brule Sioux Tribe, and terrestrial navigation, Port Lions, Alaska: Report of the Sec. 5045. East San Joaquin County, California. wildlife habitat restoration, South Chief of Engineers dated June 14, 2006, at a Sec. 5046. Eastern Santa Clara basin, Cali- Dakota. total cost of $9,530,000, with an estimated Fed- fornia. Sec. 5105. Fritz Landing, Tennessee. eral cost of $7,624,000 and an estimated non- Sec. 5047. Los Osos, California. Sec. 5106. J. Percy Priest Dam and Reservoir, Federal cost of $1,906,000. Sec. 5048. Pine Flat Dam and Reservoir, Cali- Tennessee. (3) RIO SALADO OESTE, ARIZONA.—The project fornia. Sec. 5107. Town Creek, Lenoir City, Tennessee. for environmental restoration, Rio Salado Oeste, Sec. 5049. Raymond Basin, Six Basins, Chino Sec. 5108. Tennessee River partnership. Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Basin, and San Gabriel Basin, Sec. 5109. Upper Mississippi embayment, Ten- December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $166,650,000, California. nessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi. with an estimated Federal cost of $106,629,000 Sec. 5050. San Francisco, California. Sec. 5110. Bosque River Watershed, Texas. and an estimated non-Federal cost of Sec. 5051. San Francisco, California, waterfront Sec. 5111. Dallas Floodway, Dallas Texas. $60,021,000. area. Sec. 5112. Harris County, Texas. (4) SANTA CRUZ RIVER, PASEO DE LAS IGLESIAS, Sec. 5052. San Pablo Bay, California, water- Sec. 5113. Onion Creek, Texas. ARIZONA.—The project for environmental res- shed and Suisun Marsh ecosystem Sec. 5114. Eastern Shore and southwest Vir- toration, Santa Cruz River, Pima County, Ari- restoration. ginia. zona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Sec. 5053. Stockton, California. Sec. 5115. Dyke Marsh, Fairfax County, Vir- March 28, 2006, at a total cost of $97,700,000, Sec. 5054. Charles Hervey Townshend Break- ginia. with an estimated Federal cost of $63,300,000 water, New Haven Harbor, Con- Sec. 5116. Baker Bay and Ilwaco Harbor, and an estimated non-Federal cost of necticut. Washington. $34,400,000. Sec. 5055. Florida Keys water quality improve- Sec. 5117. Hamilton Island campground, Wash- (5) TANQUE VERDE CREEK, PIMA COUNTY, ARI- ments. ington. ZONA.—The project for environmental restora- Sec. 5056. Lake Worth, Florida. Sec. 5118. Puget Island, Washington. tion, Tanque Verde Creek, Pima County, Ari- Sec. 5057. Riley Creek Recreation Area, Idaho. Sec. 5119. Willapa Bay, Washington. zona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Sec. 5058. Reconstruction of Illinois flood pro- Sec. 5120. West Virginia and Pennsylvania July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $5,906,000, with tection projects. flood control. an estimated Federal cost of $3,836,000 and an Sec. 5059. Illinois River Basin restoration. Sec. 5121. Central West Virginia. estimated non-Federal cost of $2,070,000. Sec. 5060. Kaskaskia River Basin, Illinois, res- Sec. 5122. Southern West Virginia. (6) SALT RIVER (VA SHLYAY’ AKIMEL), MARI- toration. Sec. 5123. Construction of flood control projects COPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.—The project for envi- Sec. 5061. Floodplain mapping, Little Calumet by non-Federal interests. River, Chicago, Illinois. ronmental restoration, Salt River (Va Shlyay’ Sec. 5062. Promontory Point, Lake Michigan, TITLE VI—FLORIDA EVERGLADES Akimel), Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engi- Illinois. Sec. 6001. Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, neers dated January 3, 2005, at a total cost of Sec. 5063. Burns Waterway Harbor, Indiana. Florida. $162,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Sec. 5064. Calumet region, Indiana. Sec. 6002. Pilot projects. $105,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost Sec. 5065. Paducah, Kentucky. Sec. 6003. Maximum costs. of $56,900,000. Sec. 5066. Southern and eastern Kentucky. Sec. 6004. Project authorization. (7) MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS.—The Sec. 5067. Winchester, Kentucky. Sec. 6005. Credit. project for flood damage reduction, May Sec. 5068. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Sec. 6006. Outreach and assistance. Branch, Fort Smith, Arkansas, Report of the Sec. 5069. Calcasieu Ship Channel, Louisiana. Sec. 6007. Critical restoration projects. Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3612 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

total cost of $30,850,000, with an estimated Fed- (16) PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, ILLI- estimated Federal cost of $42,530,000 and an esti- eral cost of $15,010,000 and an estimated non- NOIS.—The project for environmental restora- mated non-Federal cost of $22,900,000. Federal cost of $15,840,000. tion, Peoria Riverfront Development, Illinois: (27) SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, BLUE (8) HAMILTON CITY, CALIFORNIA.—The project Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 28, RIVER, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.—The project for for flood damage reduction and environmental 2003, at a total cost of $18,220,000, with an esti- flood damage reduction, Swope Park Industrial restoration, Hamilton City, California: Report of mated Federal cost of $11,840,000 and an esti- Area, Blue River, Kansas City, Missouri: Report the Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, mated non-Federal cost of $6,380,000. of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, at a total cost of $52,400,000, with an estimated (17) WOOD RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM RECONSTRUC- 2003, at a total cost of $16,980,000, with an esti- Federal cost of $34,100,000 and estimated non- TION, MADISON COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—The project mated Federal cost of $11,037,000 and an esti- Federal cost of $18,300,000. for flood damage reduction, Wood River Levee mated non-Federal cost of $5,943,000. (9) IMPERIAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA.—The project System Reconstruction, Madison County, Illi- (28) GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS for storm damage reduction, Imperial Beach, nois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated INLET, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane California: Report of the Chief of Engineers July 18, 2006, at a total cost of $17,220,000, with and storm damage reduction, Great Egg Harbor dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of an estimated Federal cost of $11,193,000 and an Inlet to Townsends Inlet, New Jersey: Report of $13,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of estimated non-Federal cost of $6,027,000. the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at $8,521,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (18) DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, DES a total cost of $54,360,000, with an estimated $5,179,000, and at an estimated total cost of MOINES, IOWA.—The project for flood damage re- Federal cost of $35,069,000 and an estimated $42,500,000 for periodic beach nourishment over duction, Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers, Des non-Federal cost of $19,291,000, and at an esti- the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Moines, Iowa: Report of the Chief of Engineers mated total cost of $202,500,000 for periodic Federal cost of $21,250,000 and an estimated dated March 28, 2006, at a total cost of nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, non-Federal cost of $21,250,000. $10,780,000, with an estimated Federal cost of with an estimated Federal cost of $101,250,000 (10) MATILIJA DAM, VENTURA COUNTY, CALI- $6,967,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of and an estimated non-Federal cost of FORNIA.—The project for environmental restora- $3,813,000. $101,250,000. tion, Matilija Dam, Ventura County, California: (19) LICKING RIVER BASIN, CYNTHIANA, KEN- (29) HUDSON RARITAN ESTUARY, LIBERTY STATE PARK NEW JERSEY Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December TUCKY.—The project for flood damage reduction, , .— (A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environ- 20, 2004, at a total cost of $144,500,000, with an Licking River Basin, Cynthiana, Kentucky: Re- mental restoration, Hudson Raritan Estuary, estimated Federal cost of $89,700,000 and an esti- port of the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, Liberty State Park, New Jersey: Report of the mated non-Federal cost of $54,800,000. 2006, at a total cost of $18,200,000, with an esti- (11) MIDDLE CREEK, LAKE COUNTY, CALI- Chief of Engineers dated August 25, 2006, at a mated Federal cost of $11,830,000 and an esti- FORNIA.—The project for flood damage reduc- total cost of $34,100,000, with an estimated Fed- mated non-Federal cost of $6,370,000. tion and environmental restoration, Middle eral cost of $22,200,000 and an estimated non- (20) BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LOUISIANA.—The Federal cost of $11,900,000. Creek, Lake County, California: Report of the project for navigation, Bayou Sorrel Lock, Lou- (B) RESTORATION TEAMS.—In carrying out the Chief of Engineers dated November 29, 2004, at isiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated a total cost of $45,200,000, with an estimated project, the Secretary shall establish and utilize January 3, 2005, at a total cost of $9,680,000. The watershed restoration teams composed of estu- Federal cost of $29,500,000 and an estimated costs of construction of the project are to be non-Federal cost of $15,700,000. ary restoration experts from the Corps of Engi- paid 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated from the (12) NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, neers, the New Jersey department of environ- general fund of the Treasury and 1⁄2 from CALIFORNIA.— mental protection, and the Port Authority of amounts appropriated from the Inland Water- (A) IN GENERAL.—The project for environ- New York and New Jersey and other experts mental restoration, Napa River Salt Marsh Res- ways Trust Fund. designated by the Secretary for the purpose of (21) MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOU- toration, Napa, California: Report of the Chief developing habitat restoration and water qual- ISIANA.— of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total ity enhancement. (A) IN GENERAL.—The project for hurricane cost of $134,500,000, with an estimated Federal (30) MANASQUAN INLET TO BARNEGAT INLET, and storm damage reduction, Morganza to the cost of $87,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana: Reports of the Chief cost of $47,000,000. storm damage reduction, Manasquan Inlet to of Engineers dated August 23, 2002, and July 22, (B) ADMINISTRATION.—In carrying out the Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief project authorized by this paragraph, the Sec- 2003, at a total cost of $886,700,000, with an esti- of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total retary shall— mated Federal cost of $576,355,000 and an esti- cost of $71,900,000, with an estimated Federal (i) construct a recycled water pipeline extend- mated non-Federal cost of $310,345,000. cost of $46,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal ing from the Sonoma Valley County Sanitation (B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- cost of $25,165,000, and at an estimated total District Waste Water Treatment Plant and the ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the cost of $119,680,000 for periodic beach nourish- Napa Sanitation District Waste Water Treat- project the cost of design and construction work ment over the 50-year life of the project, with an ment Plant to the project; and carried out by the non-Federal interest before estimated Federal cost of $59,840,000 and an esti- (ii) restore or enhance Salt Ponds 1, 1A, 2, and the date of the partnership agreement for the mated non-Federal cost of $59,840,000. 3. project if the Secretary determines that the work (31) RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION (13) DENVER COUNTY REACH, SOUTH PLATTE is integral to the project. BEACH, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane RIVER, DENVER, COLORADO.—The project for en- (22) PORT OF IBERIA, LOUISIANA.—The project and storm damage reduction, Raritan Bay and vironmental restoration, Denver County Reach, for navigation, Port of Iberia, Louisiana, Report Sandy Hook Bay, Union Beach, New Jersey: Re- South Platte River, Denver, Colorado: Report of of the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, port of the Chief of Engineers dated January 4, the Chief of Engineers dated May 16, 2003, at a 2006, at a total cost of $131,250,000, with an esti- 2006, at a total cost of $115,000,000, with an esti- total cost of $21,050,000, with an estimated Fed- mated Federal cost of $105,315,000 and an esti- mated Federal cost of $74,800,000 and an esti- eral cost of $13,680,000 and an estimated non- mated non-Federal cost of $25,935,000. mated non-Federal cost of $40,200,000, and at an Federal cost of $7,370,000. (23) SMITH ISLAND, SOMERSET COUNTY, MARY- estimated total cost of $6,500,000 for periodic (14) MIAMI HARBOR, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, LAND.—The project for environmental restora- nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, FLORIDA.— tion, Smith Island, Somerset County, Maryland: with an estimated Federal cost of $3,250,000 and (A) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,250,000. Miami Harbor, Miami-Dade County, Florida: 29, 2001, at a total cost of $15,580,000, with an (32) SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NEW Report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 25, estimated Federal cost of $10,127,000 and an esti- JERSEY.—The project for hurricane and storm 2005, at a total cost of $125,270,000, with an esti- mated non-Federal cost of $5,453,000. damage reduction and environmental restora- mated Federal cost of $75,140,000 and an esti- (24) ROSEAU RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA.—The tion, South River, Raritan River Basin, New mated non-Federal cost of $50,130,000. project for flood damage reduction, Roseau Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated (B) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT.—The River, Roseau, Minnesota, Report of the Chief July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $122,300,000, with non-Federal share of the cost of the general re- of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total an estimated Federal cost of $79,500,000 and an evaluation report that resulted in the report of cost of $25,100,000, with an estimated Federal estimated non-Federal cost of $42,800,000. the Chief of Engineers referred to in subpara- cost of $13,820,000 and an estimated non-Federal (33) SOUTHWEST VALLEY, BERNALILLO COUNTY, graph (A) shall be the same percentage as the cost of $11,280,000. NEW MEXICO.—The project for flood damage re- non-Federal share of cost of construction of the (25) MISSISSIPPI COASTAL, MISSISSIPPI.—The duction, Southwest Valley, Bernalillo County, project. project for hurricane and storm damage reduc- New Mexico: Report of the Chief of Engineers (C) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter tion and environmental restoration, Mississippi dated November 29, 2004, at a total cost of into a new partnership with the non-Federal in- Coastal, Mississippi, Report of the Chief of En- $24,840,000, with an estimated Federal cost of terest to reflect the cost sharing required by sub- gineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost $16,150,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of paragraph (B). of $107,690,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $8,690,000. (15) EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS.— $70,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (34) MONTAUK POINT, NEW YORK.—The project The project for environmental restoration and $37,690,000. for hurricane and storm damage reduction, recreation, East St. Louis and Vicinity, Illinois: (26) KANSAS CITYS LEVEES, MISSOURI AND KAN- Montauk Point, New York: Report of the Chief Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December SAS.—The project for flood damage reduction, of Engineers dated March 31, 2006, at a total 22, 2004, at a total cost of $208,260,000, with an Kansas Citys levees, Missouri and Kansas, Re- cost of $14,600,000, with an estimated Federal estimated Federal cost of $134,910,000 and an es- port of the Chief of Engineers dated December cost of $7,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal timated non-Federal cost of $73,350,000. 19, 2006, at a total cost of $65,430,000, with an cost of $7,300,000.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3613

(35) HOCKING RIVER, MONDAY CREEK SUB- (2) WEISS LAKE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood (31) SPRING CREEK, LOWER MACUNGIE TOWN- BASIN, OHIO.—The project for environmental res- damage reduction, Weiss Lake, Alabama. SHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage toration, Hocking River, Monday Creek Sub- (3) LITTLE COLORADO RIVER LEVEE, ARIZONA.— reduction, Spring Creek, Lower Macungie basin, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers Project for flood damage reduction, Little Colo- Township, Pennsylvania. dated August 24, 2006, at a total cost of rado River Levee, Arizona. (32) YARDLEY AQUEDUCT, SILVER AND BROCK $20,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of (4) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.— CREEKS, YARDLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for $13,440,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of Project for flood damage reduction, Cache River flood damage reduction, Yardley Aqueduct, Sil- $7,540,000. Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas. ver and Brock Creeks, Yardley, Pennsylvania. (36) TOWN OF BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUN- (5) BARREL SPRINGS WASH, PALMDALE, CALI- (33) SURFSIDE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA.— TY, PENNSYLVANIA.—The project for flood dam- FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, Project for flood damage reduction, Surfside age reduction, town of Bloomsburg, Columbia Barrel Springs Wash, Palmdale, California. Beach and vicinity, South Carolina. County, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of (6) BORREGO SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA.—Project (34) CONGELOSI DITCH, MISSOURI CITY, Engineers dated January 25, 2006, at a total cost for flood damage reduction, Borrego Springs, TEXAS.—Project for flood damage reduction, of $44,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of California. Congelosi Ditch, Missouri City, Texas. $28,925,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (7) COLTON, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood (35) DILLEY, TEXAS.—Project for flood damage $15,575,000. damage reduction, Colton, California. reduction, Dilley, Texas. (37) PAWLEY’S ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA.—The (8) DUNLAP STREAM, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA.— (b) SPECIAL RULES.— project for hurricane and storm damage reduc- Project for flood damage reduction, Dunlap (1) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS.— tion, Pawley’s Island, South Carolina, Report of Stream, Yucaipa, California. The Secretary may proceed with the project for the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, (9) HUNTS CANYON WASH, PALMDALE, CALI- the Cache River Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas, re- at a total cost of $8,980,000, with an estimated FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, ferred to in subsection (a), notwithstanding that Federal cost of $5,840,000 and an estimated non- Hunts Canyon Wash, Palmdale, California. the project is located within the boundaries of Federal cost of $3,140,000, and at an estimated (10) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA.—Project the flood control project, Cache River Basin, Ar- total cost of $21,200,000 for periodic nourishment for flood damage reduction, Ontario and Chino, kansas and Missouri, authorized by section 204 over the 50-year life of the project, with an esti- California. of the Flood Control Act of 1950, (64 Stat. 172) mated Federal cost of $10,600,000 and an esti- (11) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA.—Project for and modified by section 99 of the Water Re- mated non-Federal cost of $10,600,000. flood damage reduction, Santa Venetia, Cali- sources Development Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 41). (38) CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, CORPUS fornia. (2) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA.—The CHRISTI, TEXAS.—The project for navigation and (12) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood Secretary shall carry out the project for flood ecosystem restoration, Corpus Christi Ship damage reduction, Whittier, California. damage reduction, Ontario and Chino, Cali- Channel, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engi- (13) WILDWOOD CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALI- fornia, referred to in subsection (a) if the Sec- neers dated June 2, 2003, at a total cost of FORNIA.—Project for flood damage reduction, retary determines that the project is feasible. $188,110,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Wildwood Creek, Yucaipa, California. (3) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA.—The Sec- $87,810,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (14) ST. FRANCISVILLE, LOUSIANA.—Project for retary shall carry out the project for flood dam- $100,300,000. flood damage reduction, St. Francisville, Lou- age reduction, Santa Venetia, California, re- ULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, (39) G isiana. ferred to in subsection (a) if the Secretary deter- MATAGORDA BAY RE-ROUTE, TEXAS.—The project (15) SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for mines that the project is feasible and shall allow for navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, flood damage reduction, Salem, Massachusetts. the non-Federal interest to participate in the fi- Matagorda Bay Re-Route, Texas: Report of the (16) CASS RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for flood nancing of the project in accordance with sec- Chief of Engineers dated December 24, 2002, at a damage reduction, Cass River, Vassar and vicin- tion 903(c) of the Water Resources Development total cost of $17,280,000. The costs of construc- ity, Michigan. Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the tion of the project are to be paid 1⁄2 from (17) CROW RIVER, ROCKFORD, MINNESOTA.— Secretary’s evaluation indicates that applying amounts appropriated from the general fund of Project for flood damage reduction, Crow River, such section is necessary to implement the the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated Rockford, Minnesota. project. from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. (18) MARSH CREEK, MINNESOTA.—Project for (4) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—The Secretary (40) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, HIGH IS- flood damage reduction, Marsh Creek, Min- shall carry out the project for flood damage re- LAND TO BRAZOS RIVER, TEXAS.—The project for duction, Whittier, California, referred to in sub- navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, High nesota. OUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, section (a) if the Secretary determines that the Island to Brazos River, Texas: Report of the (19) S project is feasible. Chief of Engineers dated April 16, 2004, at a BORUP, MINNESOTA.—Project for flood damage (5) SOUTH BRANCH OF THE WILD RICE RIVER, total cost of $14,450,000. The costs of construc- reduction, South Branch of the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota. BORUP, MINNESOTA.—In carrying out the project tion of the project are to be paid 1⁄2 from for flood damage reduction, South Branch of amounts appropriated from the general fund of (20) BLACKSNAKE CREEK, ST. JOSEPH, MIS- SOURI.—Project for flood damage reduction, the Wild Rice River, Borup, Minnesota, referred the Treasury and 1⁄2 from amounts appropriated to in subsection (a) the Secretary may consider from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, Missouri. (41) LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN PHASE I, (21) ACID BROOK, POMPTON LAKES, NEW JER- national ecosystem restoration benefits in deter- TEXAS.—The project for flood damage reduction SEY.—Project for flood damage reduction, Acid mining the Federal interest in the project and and environmental restoration, Lower Colorado Brook, Pompton Lakes, New Jersey. shall allow the non-Federal interest to partici- River Basin Phase I, Texas, Report of the Chief (22) CANNISTEO RIVER, ADDISON, NEW YORK.— pate in the financing of the project in accord- of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total Project for flood damage reduction, Cannisteo ance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources cost of $110,730,000, with an estimated Federal River, Addison, New York. Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the cost of $69,640,000 and an estimated non-Federal (23) COHOCTON RIVER, CAMPBELL, NEW YORK.— extent that the Secretary’s evaluation indicates cost of $41,090,000. Project for flood damage reduction, Cohocton that applying such section is necessary to imple- (42) ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY River, Campbell, New York. ment the project. BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, (24) DRY AND OTTER CREEKS, CORTLAND, NEW (6) ACID BROOK, POMPTON LAKES, NEW JER- VIRGINIA.—The project for Atlantic Intracoastal YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, Dry SEY.—The Secretary shall carry out the project Waterway Bridge Replacement, Deep Creek, and Otter Creeks, Cortland, New York. for flood damage reduction, Acid Brook, Chesapeake, Virginia: Report of the Chief of (25) EAST RIVER, SILVER BEACH, NEW YORK Pompton Lakes, New Jersey, referred to in sub- Engineers dated March 3, 2003, at a total cost of CITY, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage re- section (a) if the Secretary determines that the $37,200,000. duction, East River, Silver Beach, New York project is feasible. (43) CRANEY ISLAND EASTWARD EXPANSION, City, New York. (7) DILLEY, TEXAS.—The Secretary shall carry NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS, VIRGINIA.— (26) EAST VALLEY CREEK, ANDOVER, NEW out the project for flood damage reduction, The project for navigation, Craney Island East- YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, East Dilley, Texas, referred to in subsection (a) if the ward Expansion, Norfolk Harbor and Channels, Valley Creek, Andover, New York. Secretary determines that the project is feasible. Virginia: Report of Chief of Engineers dated Oc- (27) SUNNYSIDE BROOK, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, SEC. 1003. SMALL PROJECTS FOR EMERGENCY tober 24, 2006, at a total cost of $712,103,000, NEW YORK.—Project for flood damage reduction, STREAMBANK PROTECTION. with an estimated Federal cost of $31,229,000 Sunnyside Brook, Westchester County, New The Secretary shall conduct a study for each and an estimated non-Federal cost of York. of the following projects and, if the Secretary $680,874,000. (28) LITTLE YANKEE RUN, OHIO.—Project for determines that a project is feasible, may carry SEC. 1002. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE flood damage reduction, Little Yankee Run, out the project under section 14 of the Flood REDUCTION. Ohio. Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r): (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct (29) LITTLE NESHAMINY CREEK, WARRENTON, (1) ST. JOHNS BLUFF TRAINING WALL, DUVAL a study for each of the following projects and, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood damage reduc- COUNTY, FLORIDA.—Project for emergency if the Secretary determines that a project is fea- tion, Little Neshaminy Creek, Warrenton, Penn- streambank protection, St. Johns Bluff Training sible, may carry out the project under section sylvania. Wall, Duval County, Florida. 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. (30) SOUTHAMPTON CREEK WATERSHED, SOUTH- (2) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, IBERVILLE 701s): AMPTON, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood dam- PARISH, LOUISIANA.—Projects for emergency (1) HALEYVILLE, ALABAMA.—Project for flood age reduction, Southampton Creek watershed, streambank restoration, Gulf Intracoastal Wa- damage reduction, Haleyville, Alabama. Southampton, Pennsylvania. terway, Iberville Parish, Louisiana.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3614 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

(3) OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, ARKANSAS (9) TOWER HARBOR, TOWER, MINNESOTA.— tion, Santa Rosa Creek in the vicinity of the AND LOUISIANA.—Projects for emergency Project for navigation, Tower Harbor, Tower, Prince Memorial Greenway, Santa Rosa, Cali- streambank protection, Ouachita and Black Minnesota. fornia. Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana. (10) OLCOTT HARBOR, OLCOTT, NEW YORK.— (7) STOCKTON DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL AND (4) PINEY POINT LIGHTHOUSE, ST. MARY’S Project for navigation, Olcott Harbor, Olcott, LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project COUNTY, MARYLAND.—Project for emergency New York. for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Stockton streambank protection, Piney Point Lighthouse, (b) SPECIAL RULES.— Deep Water Ship Channel and lower San Joa- St. Mary’s County, Maryland. (1) TRAVERSE CITY HARBOR, TRAVERSE CITY, quin River, California. (5) PUG HOLE LAKE, MINNESOTA.—Project for MICHIGAN.—The Secretary shall review the lo- (8) SWEETWATER RESERVOIR, SAN DIEGO COUN- emergency streambank protection, Pug Hole cally prepared plan for the project for naviga- TY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem Lake, Minnesota. tion, Traverse City Harbor, Michigan, referred restoration, Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego (6) MIDDLE FORK GRAND RIVER, GENTRY COUN- to in subsection (a), and, if the Secretary deter- County, California, including efforts to address TY, MISSOURI.—Project for emergency mines that the plan meets the evaluation and aquatic nuisance species. streambank protection, Middle Fork Grand design standards of the Corps of Engineers and (9) BISCAYNE BAY, FLORIDA.—Project for River, Gentry County, Missouri. that the plan is feasible, the Secretary may use aquatic ecosystem restoration, Biscayne Bay, (7) PLATTE RIVER, PLATTE CITY, MISSOURI.— the plan to carry out the project and shall pro- Key Biscayne, Florida. Project for emergency streambank protection, vide credit toward the non-Federal share of the (10) CLAM BAYOU AND DINKINS BAYOU, SANIBEL Platte River, Platte City, Missouri. cost of the project for the cost of work carried ISLAND, FLORIDA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem (8) RUSH CREEK, PARKVILLE, MISSOURI.— out by the non-Federal interest before the date restoration, Clam Bayou and Dinkins Bayou, Project for emergency streambank protection, of the partnership agreement for the project if Sanibel Island, Florida. Rush Creek, Parkville, Missouri, including the Secretary determines that the work is inte- (11) CHATTAHOOCHEE FALL LINE, GEORGIA AND measures to address degradation of the creek gral to the project. ALABAMA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem res- bed. (2) TOWER HARBOR, TOWER MINNESOTA.—The toration, Chattahoochee Fall Line, Georgia and (9) DRY AND OTTER CREEKS, CORTLAND COUN- Secretary shall carry out the project for naviga- Alabama. TY, NEW YORK.—Project for emergency tion, Tower Harbor, Tower, Minnesota, referred (12) LONGWOOD COVE, GAINESVILLE, GEOR- streambank protection, Dry and Otter Creeks, to in subsection (a) if the Secretary determines GIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Cortland County, New York. that the project is feasible. Longwood Cove, Gainesville, Georgia. (10) KEUKA LAKE, HAMMONDSPORT, NEW SEC. 1005. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT (13) CITY PARK, UNIVERSITY LAKES, LOU- YORK.—Project for emergency streambank pro- OF THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRON- ISIANA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- tection, Keuka Lake, Hammondsport, New York. MENT. tion, City Park, University Lakes, Louisiana. (11) KOWAWESE UNIQUE AREA AND HUDSON The Secretary shall conduct a study for each (14) MILL POND, LITTLETON, MASSACHU- RIVER, NEW WINDSOR, NEW YORK.—Project for of the following projects and, if the Secretary SETTS.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- emergency streambank protection, Kowawese determines that a project is appropriate, may tion, Mill Pond, Littleton, Massachusetts. Unique Area and Hudson River, New Windsor, carry out the project under section 1135 of the (15) PINE TREE BROOK, MILTON, MASSACHU- New York. Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 SETTS.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- (12) OWEGO CREEK, TIOGA COUNTY, NEW U.S.C. 2309a): tion, Pine Tree Brook, Milton, Massachusetts. YORK.—Project for emergency streambank pro- (1) BALLONA CREEK, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, (16) RUSH LAKE, MINNESOTA.—Project for tection, Owego Creek, Tioga County, New York. CALIFORNIA.—Project for improvement of the aquatic ecosystem restoration, Rush Lake, Min- (13) HOWARD ROAD OUTFALL, SHELBY COUNTY, quality of the environment, Ballona Creek, Los nesota. TENNESSEE.—Project for emergency streambank Angeles County, California. (17) SOUTH FORK OF THE CROW RIVER, HUTCH- protection, Howard Road outfall, Shelby Coun- (2) BALLONA LAGOON TIDE GATES, MARINA DEL INSON, MINNESOTA.—Project for aquatic eco- ty, Tennessee. REY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for improvement of system restoration, South Fork of the Crow (14) MITCH FARM DITCH AND LATERAL D, SHEL- the quality of the environment, Ballona Lagoon River, Hutchinson, Minnesota. BY COUNTY, TENNESSEE.—Project for emergency Tide Gates, Marina Del Rey, California. (18) ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.—Project for aquatic streambank protection, Mitch Farm Ditch and (3) FT. GEORGE INLET, DUVAL COUNTY, FLOR- ecosystem restoration, St. Louis, Missouri. Lateral D, Shelby County, Tennessee. IDA.—Project for improvement of the quality of (19) TRUCKEE RIVER, RENO, NEVADA.—Project (15) WOLF RIVER TRIBUTARIES, SHELBY COUN- the environment, Ft. George Inlet, Duval Coun- for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Truckee TY, TENNESSEE.—Project for emergency ty, Florida. River, Reno, Nevada, including features for fish streambank protection, Wolf River tributaries, (4) RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA.—Project for im- passage for Washoe County. provement of the quality of the environment, Shelby County, Tennessee. (20) GROVER’S MILL POND, NEW JERSEY.— (16) JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.— Rathbun Lake, Iowa. Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, (5) SMITHVILLE LAKE, MISSOURI.—Project for Project for emergency streambank protection, Grover’s Mill Pond, New Jersey. improvement of the quality of the environment, Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas. (21) DUGWAY CREEK, BRATENAHL, OHIO.— Smithville Lake, Missouri. (17) WELLS RIVER, NEWBURY, VERMONT.— Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, (6) DELAWARE BAY, NEW JERSEY AND DELA- Project for emergency streambank protection, Dugway Creek, Bratenahl, Ohio. WARE.—Project for improvement of the quality Wells River, Newbury, Vermont. (22) JOHNSON CREEK, GRESHAM, OREGON.— of the environment, Delaware Bay, New Jersey Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, John- SEC. 1004. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION. and Delaware, for the purpose of oyster restora- son Creek, Gresham, Oregon. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct tion. (23) BEAVER CREEK, BEAVER AND SALEM, PENN- a study for each of the following projects and, (7) TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PENNSYLVANIA.— SYLVANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem res- if the Secretary determines that a project is fea- Project for improvement of the quality of the en- toration, Beaver Creek, Beaver and Salem, sible, may carry out the project under section vironment, Tioga-Hammond Lakes, Pennsyl- Pennsylvania. 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 vania. (24) CEMENTON DAM, LEHIGH RIVER, PENNSYL- U.S.C. 577): SEC. 1006. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECO- VANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- (1) MISSISSIPPI RIVER SHIP CHANNEL, LOU- SYSTEM RESTORATION. tion, Cementon Dam, Lehigh River, Pennsyl- ISIANA.—Project for navigation, Mississippi (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct vania. River Ship Channel, Louisiana. a study for each of the following projects and, (25) SAUCON CREEK, NORTHAMPTON COUNTY, (2) EAST BASIN, CAPE COD CANAL, SANDWICH, if the Secretary determines that a project is ap- PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for navigation, East propriate, may carry out the project under sec- restoration, Saucon Creek, Northampton Coun- Basin, Cape Cod Canal, Sandwich, Massachu- tion 206 of the Water Resources Development ty, Pennsylvania. setts. Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330): (26) BLACKSTONE RIVER, RHODE ISLAND.— (3) LYNN HARBOR, LYNN, MASSACHUSETTS.— (1) CYPRESS CREEK, MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA.— Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Black- Project for navigation, Lynn Harbor, Lynn, Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Cy- stone River, Rhode Island. Massachusetts. press Creek, Montgomery, Alabama. ILSON BRANCH CHERAW SOUTH CARO (4) MERRIMACK RIVER, HAVERHILL, MASSACHU- (2) BLACK LAKE, ALASKA.—Project for aquatic (27) W , , - SETTS.—Project for navigation, Merrimack ecosystem restoration, Black Lake, Alaska, at LINA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, River, Haverhill, Massachusetts. the head of the Chignik watershed. Wilson Branch, Cheraw, South Carolina. (5) OAK BLUFFS HARBOR, OAK BLUFFS, MASSA- (3) BEN LOMOND DAM, SANTA CRUZ, CALI- (28) WHITE RIVER, BETHEL, VERMONT.—Project CHUSETTS.—Project for navigation, Oak Bluffs FORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- for aquatic ecosystem restoration, White River, Harbor, Oak Bluffs, Massachusetts. tion, Ben Lomond Dam, Santa Cruz, California. Bethel, Vermont. (6) WOODS HOLE GREAT HARBOR, FALMOUTH, (4) DOCKWEILER BLUFFS, LOS ANGELES COUN- (b) SPECIAL RULE.—The Secretary shall carry MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for navigation, Woods TY, CALIFORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem out the project for aquatic ecosystem restora- Hole Great Harbor, Falmouth, Massachusetts. restoration, Dockweiler Bluffs, Los Angeles tion, Black Lake, Alaska referred to in sub- (7) AU SABLE RIVER, MICHIGAN.—Project for County, California. section (a) if the Secretary determines that the navigation, Au Sable River in the vicinity of (5) SALT RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for project is feasible. Oscoda, Michigan. aquatic ecosystem restoration, Salt River, Cali- SEC. 1007. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SHORELINE (8) TRAVERSE CITY HARBOR, TRAVERSE CITY, fornia. PROTECTION. MICHIGAN.—Project for navigation, Traverse (6) SANTA ROSA CREEK, SANTA ROSA, CALI- The Secretary shall conduct a study for each City Harbor, Traverse City, Michigan. FORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- of the following projects and, if the Secretary

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3615 determines that a project is feasible, may carry 2594; 117 Stat. 1836; 119 Stat. 2169; 120 Stat. 318; has entered into a written partnership agree- out the project under section 3 of the Act enti- 120 Stat. 3197) is amended by striking ‘‘2008’’ ment with the Secretary (or, where appropriate, tled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation and inserting ‘‘2010’’. the district engineer for the district in which the in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly SEC. 2004. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CON- project will be carried out) under which each owned property’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 TROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEM- party agrees to carry out its responsibilities and U.S.C. 426g): ONSTRATION PROGRAM. requirements for implementation or construction (1) NELSON LAGOON, ALASKA.—Project for (a) EXTENSION OF PROGRAM.—Section 5(a) of of the project or the appropriate element of the shoreline protection, Nelson Lagoon, Alaska. the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal project, as the case may be; except that no such (2) SANIBEL ISLAND, FLORIDA.—Project for participation in the cost of protecting the shores agreement shall be required if the Secretary de- shoreline protection, Sanibel Island, Florida. of publicly owned property’’, approved August termines that the administrative costs associated (3) APRA HARBOR, GUAM.—Project for shore- 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426h(a)), is amended by strik- with negotiating, executing, or administering line protection, Apra Harbor, Guam. ing ‘‘7 years’’ and inserting ‘‘10 years’’. the agreement would exceed the amount of the (4) PITI, CABRAS ISLAND, GUAM.—Project for (b) EXTENSION OF PLANNING, DESIGN, AND contribution required from the non-Federal in- shoreline protection, Piti, Cabras Island, Guam. CONSTRUCTION PHASE.—Section 5(b)(1)(A) of terest and are less than $25,000. (5) NARROWS AND GRAVESEND BAY, UPPER NEW such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)(1)(A)) is amended by YORK BAY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK.—Project for ‘‘(2) LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.—A partnership striking ‘‘3 years’’ and inserting ‘‘6 years’’. shoreline protection in the vicinity of the con- agreement described in paragraph (1) may in- (c) COST SHARING; REMOVAL OF PROJECTS.— fluence of the Narrows and Gravesend Bay, clude a provision for liquidated damages in the Section 5(b) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)) is Upper New York Bay, Shore Parkway Green- event of a failure of one or more parties to per- way, Brooklyn, New York. amended— form. (6) DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA NAVAL (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as ‘‘(3) OBLIGATION OF FUTURE APPROPRIA- SHIPYARD, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for shoreline paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively; and TIONS.—In any partnership agreement described protection, Delaware River in the vicinity of the (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol- in paragraph (1) and entered into by a State, or Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Pennsylvania. lowing: a body politic of the State which derives its (7) PORT ARANSAS, TEXAS.—Project for shore- ‘‘(3) COST SHARING.—The Secretary may enter powers from the State constitution, or a govern- line protection, Port Aransas, Texas. into a cost sharing agreement with a non-Fed- mental entity created by the State legislature, SEC. 1008. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SNAGGING AND eral interest to carry out a project, or a phase the agreement may reflect that it does not obli- SEDIMENT REMOVAL. of a project, under the erosion control program gate future appropriations for such performance The Secretary shall conduct a study for the in cooperation with the non-Federal interest. and payment when obligating future appropria- following project and, if the Secretary deter- ‘‘(4) REMOVAL OF PROJECTS.—The Secretary tions would be inconsistent with constitutional mines that the project is feasible, the Secretary may pay all or a portion of the costs of removing or statutory limitations of the State or a polit- may carry out the project under section 2 of the a project, or an element of a project, constructed ical subdivision of the State. Flood Control Act of August 28, 1937 (33 U.S.C. under the erosion control program if the Sec- ‘‘(4) CREDIT FOR IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.— 701g): Project for removal of snags and clearing retary determines during the term of the pro- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A partnership agreement and straightening of channels for flood control, gram that the project or element is detrimental described in paragraph (1) may provide with re- Kowawese Unique Area and Hudson River, New to the environment, private property, or public spect to a project that the Secretary shall credit Windsor, New York. safety.’’. toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- project, including a project implemented without tion 5(e)(2) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(e)(2)) is SEC. 2001. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS. specific authorization in law, the value of in- Section 103 of the Water Resources Develop- amended by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting kind contributions made by the non-Federal in- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213) is amended by ‘‘$31,000,000’’. terest, including— adding at the end the following: SEC. 2005. SMALL SHORE AND BEACH RESTORA- ‘‘(i) the costs of planning (including data col- ‘‘(n) NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.— TION AND PROTECTION PROJECTS. lection), design, management, mitigation, con- ‘‘(1) PROHIBITION ON SOLICITATION OF EXCESS Section 3 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act author- struction, and construction services that are CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary may not— izing Federal participation in the cost of pro- provided by the non-Federal interest for imple- ‘‘(A) solicit contributions from non-Federal in- tecting the shores of publicly owned property’’, mentation of the project; terests for costs of constructing authorized approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g), is ‘‘(ii) the value of materials or services pro- water resources projects or measures in excess of amended by striking ‘‘$3,000,000’’ and inserting vided before execution of the partnership agree- the non-Federal share assigned to the appro- ‘‘$5,000,000’’. ment, including efforts on constructed elements priate project purposes listed in subsections (a), SEC. 2006. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. incorporated into the project; and (b), and (c); or Section 206(e) of the Water Resources Develop- ‘‘(iii) the value of materials and services pro- ‘‘(B) condition Federal participation in such ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330) is amended by vided after execution of the partnership agree- projects or measures on the receipt of such con- striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting ment. tributions. ‘‘$40,000,000’’. ‘‘(B) CONDITION.—The Secretary shall credit ‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUC- an in-kind contribution under subparagraph (A) TION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be con- SEC. 2007. SMALL FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION strued to affect the Secretary’s authority under PROJECTS. if the Secretary determines that the material or section 903(c).’’. Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 service provided as an in-kind contribution is integral to the project. SEC. 2002. HARBOR COST SHARING. (33 U.S.C. 701s) is amended by striking ‘‘(C) WORK PERFORMED BEFORE PARTNERSHIP (a) PAYMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION.—Sec- ‘‘$50,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$60,000,000’’. tion 101(a)(1) of the Water Resources Develop- SEC. 2008. MODIFICATION OF PROJECTS FOR IM- AGREEMENT.—In any case in which the non- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211(a)(1); 100 Stat. PROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF Federal interest is to receive credit under sub- 4082) is amended in each of subparagraphs (B) THE ENVIRONMENT. paragraph (A)(ii) for the cost of work carried and (C) by striking ‘‘45 feet’’ and inserting ‘‘53 Section 1135(h) of the Water Resources Devel- out by the non-Federal interest and such work feet’’. opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(h)) is has not been carried out as of the date of enact- (b) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—Section amended by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting ment of this subparagraph, the Secretary and 101(b)(1) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2211(b)(1)) is ‘‘$30,000,000’’. the non-Federal interest shall enter into an amended by striking ‘‘45 feet’’ and inserting ‘‘53 SEC. 2009. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RE- agreement under which the non-Federal interest feet’’. SOURCES PROJECTS. shall carry out such work, and only work car- (c) DEFINITIONS.—Section 214 of such Act (33 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 221 of the Flood ried out following the execution of the agree- U.S.C. 2241; 100 Stat. 4108) is amended in each Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) is ment shall be eligible for credit. of paragraphs (1) and (3) by striking ‘‘45 feet’’ amended— ‘‘(D) LIMITATIONS.—Credit authorized under and inserting ‘‘53 feet’’. (1) by striking ‘‘SEC. 221’’ and inserting the this paragraph for a project— (d) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by following: ‘‘(i) shall not exceed the non-Federal share of subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall apply only to ‘‘SEC. 221. WRITTEN AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT the cost of the project; a project, or separable element of a project, on FOR WATER RESOURCES ‘‘(ii) shall not alter any other requirement which a contract for physical construction has PROJECTS.’’; that a non-Federal interest provide lands, ease- not been awarded before October 1, 2003. (2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the ments or rights-of-way, or areas for disposal of (e) REVISION OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.— following: dredged material for the project; The Secretary shall revise any partnership ‘‘(a) COOPERATION OF NON-FEDERAL INTER- ‘‘(iii) shall not alter any requirement that a agreement entered into after October 1, 2003, for EST.— non-Federal interest pay a portion of the costs any project to which the amendments made by ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—After December 31, 1970, the of construction of the project under sections 101 subsections (a), (b), and (c) apply to take into construction of any water resources project, or and 103 of the Water Resources Development account the change in non-Federal participa- an acceptable separable element thereof, by the Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211; 33 U.S.C. 2213); and tion in the project as a result of such amend- Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief ‘‘(iv) shall not exceed the actual and reason- ments. of Engineers, or by a non-Federal interest where able costs of the materials, services, or other SEC. 2003. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS. such interest will be reimbursed for such con- things provided by the non-Federal interest, as Section 214(c) of the Water Resources Develop- struction under any provision of law, shall not determined by the Secretary. ment Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note; 114 Stat. be commenced until each non-Federal interest ‘‘(E) APPLICABILITY.—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3616 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—This paragraph shall apply (A) by inserting after ‘‘injunction, for’’ the each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section to water resources projects authorized after No- following: ‘‘payment of damages or, for’’; to each of the Committee on Transportation and vember 16, 1986, including projects initiated (B) by striking ‘‘to collect a civil penalty im- Infrastructure of the House of Representatives after November 16, 1986, without specific author- posed under this section,’’; and and the Committee on Environment and Public ization in law. (C) by striking ‘‘any civil penalty imposed Works of the Senate. ‘‘(ii) LIMITATION.—In any case in which a under this section,’’ and inserting ‘‘any dam- (e) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary shall ensure specific provision of law provides for a non-Fed- ages,’’. that each volume compiled, and each volume re- eral interest to receive credit toward the non- (e) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by printed, pursuant to this section are available Federal share of the cost of a study for, or con- subsections (a), (b), and (d) only apply to part- through electronic means, including the Inter- struction or operation and maintenance of, a nership agreements entered into after the date net. water resources project, the specific provision of of enactment of this Act; except that, at the re- SEC. 2012. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL. law shall apply instead of this paragraph.’’. quest of a non-Federal interest for a project, the Section 217 of the Water Resources Develop- (b) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.—Section 221(b) of district engineer for the district in which the ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326a) is amended— such Act is amended to read as follows: project is located may amend a project partner- (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub- ‘‘(b) DEFINITION OF NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.— ship agreement entered into on or before such section (d); The term ‘non-Federal interest’ means a legally date and under which construction on the (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol- constituted public body (including a federally project has not been initiated as of such date of lowing: recognized Indian tribe), and a nonprofit entity enactment for the purpose of incorporating such ‘‘(c) DREDGED MATERIAL FACILITY.— with the consent of the affected local govern- amendments. ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter ment, that has full authority and capability to (f) PARTNERSHIP AND COOPERATIVE ARRANGE- into a partnership agreement under section 221 perform the terms of its agreement and to pay MENTS; REFERENCES.— of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. damages, if necessary, in the event of failure to (1) IN GENERAL.—A goal of agreements entered 1962d–5b) with one or more non-Federal inter- perform.’’. into under section 221 of the Flood Control Act ests with respect to a water resources project, or (c) PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION.—Section 221 of of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) shall be to further group of water resources projects within a geo- such Act is further amended— partnership and cooperative arrangements, and graphic region, if appropriate, for the acquisi- (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as sub- the agreements shall be referred to as ‘‘partner- tion, design, construction, management, or oper- section (h); and ship agreements’’. ation of a dredged material processing, treat- (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the fol- (2) REFERENCES TO COOPERATION AGREE- ment, contaminant reduction, or disposal facil- lowing: MENTS.—Any reference in a law, regulation, ity (including any facility used to demonstrate ‘‘(e) DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.—Not later document, or other paper of the United States to potential beneficial uses of dredged material, than September 30, 2008, the Secretary shall a ‘‘cooperation agreement’’ or ‘‘project coopera- which may include effective sediment contami- issue policies and guidelines for partnership tion agreement’’ shall be deemed to be a ref- nant reduction technologies) using funds pro- agreements that delegate to the district engi- erence to a ‘‘partnership agreement’’ or a vided in whole or in part by the Federal Govern- neers, at a minimum— ‘‘project partnership agreement’’, respectively. ment. ‘‘(1) the authority to approve any policy in a (3) REFERENCES TO PARTNERSHIP AGREE- ‘‘(2) PERFORMANCE.—One or more of the par- partnership agreement that has appeared in an MENTS.—Any reference to a ‘‘partnership agree- ties to a partnership agreement under this sub- agreement previously approved by the Secretary; ment’’ or ‘‘project partnership agreement’’ in section may perform the acquisition, design, ‘‘(2) the authority to approve any policy in a this Act (other than this section) shall be construction, management, or operation of a partnership agreement the specific terms of deemed to be a reference to a ‘‘cooperation dredged material processing, treatment, con- which are dictated by law or by a final feasi- agreement’’ or a ‘‘project cooperation agree- taminant reduction, or disposal facility. bility study, final environmental impact state- ment’’, respectively. ‘‘(3) MULTIPLE PROJECTS.—If a facility to ment, or other final decision document for a SEC. 2010. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RES- which this subsection applies serves to manage water resources project; TORATION, AND REUSE. dredged material from multiple water resources ‘‘(3) the authority to approve any partnership (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide projects located in the geographic region of the agreement that complies with the policies and to State and local governments assessment, facility, the Secretary may combine portions of guidelines issued by the Secretary; and planning, and design assistance for remediation, such projects with appropriate combined ‘‘(4) the authority to sign any partnership environmental restoration, or reuse of areas lo- costsharing between the various projects in a agreement for any water resources project un- cated within the boundaries of such State or partnership agreement for the facility under this less, within 30 days of the date of authorization local governments where such remediation, envi- subsection. of the project, the Secretary notifies the district ronmental restoration, or reuse will contribute ‘‘(4) SPECIFIED FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES AND engineer in which the project will be carried out to the improvement of water quality or the con- COST SHARING.— that the Secretary wishes to retain the preroga- servation of water and related resources of ‘‘(A) SPECIFIED FEDERAL FUNDING.—A part- tive to sign the partnership agreement for that drainage basins and watersheds within the nership agreement with respect to a facility project. United States. under this subsection shall specify— ‘‘(f) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 2 ‘‘(i) the Federal funding sources and com- (b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal years after the date of enactment of this sub- share of the cost of assistance provided under bined cost-sharing when applicable to multiple section, and every year thereafter, the Secretary subsection (a) shall be 50 percent. water resources projects; and shall submit to Congress a report detailing the ‘‘(ii) the responsibilities and risks of each of (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— following: the parties relating to present and future There is authorized to be appropriated to carry ‘‘(1) The number of partnership agreements dredged material managed by the facility. out this section $30,000,000 for each of fiscal signed by district engineers and the number of ‘‘(B) MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENTS.— years 2008 through 2012. partnership agreements signed by the Secretary. ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—A partnership agreement ‘‘(2) For any partnership agreement signed by SEC. 2011. COMPILATION OF LAWS. under this subsection may include the manage- the Secretary, an explanation of why delegation (a) COMPILATION OF LAWS ENACTED AFTER ment of sediments from the maintenance dredg- to the district engineer was not appropriate. NOVEMBER 8, 1966.—Not later than one year ing of Federal water resources projects that do ‘‘(g) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- not have partnership agreements. 120 days after the date of enactment of this sub- retary and the Chief of Engineers shall prepare ‘‘(ii) PAYMENTS.—A partnership agreement section, the Chief of Engineers shall— a compilation of the laws of the United States under this subsection may allow the non-Fed- ‘‘(1) ensure that each district engineer has relating to the improvement of rivers and har- eral interest to receive reimbursable payments made available to the public, including on the bors, flood damage reduction, beach and shore- from the Federal Government for commitments Internet, all partnership agreements entered line erosion, hurricane and storm damage reduc- made by the non-Federal interest for disposal or into under this section within the preceding 10 tion, ecosystem and environmental restoration, placement capacity at dredged material proc- years and all partnership agreements for water and other water resources development enacted essing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or resources projects currently being carried out in after November 8, 1966, and before January 1, disposal facilities. that district; and 2008, and have such compilation printed for the ‘‘(C) CREDIT.—A partnership agreement under ‘‘(2) make each partnership agreement entered use of the Department of the Army, Congress, this subsection may allow costs incurred by the into after such date of enactment available to and the general public. non-Federal interest before execution of the the public, including on the Internet, not later (b) REPRINT OF LAWS ENACTED BEFORE NO- partnership agreement to be credited in accord- than 7 days after the date on which such agree- VEMBER 8, 1966.—The Secretary shall have the ance with section 221(a)(4) of the Flood Control ment is entered into.’’. volumes containing the laws referred to in sub- Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(a)(4)). (d) LOCAL COOPERATION.—Section 912(b) of section (a) enacted before November 8, 1966, re- ‘‘(5) CREDIT.— the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 printed. ‘‘(A) EFFECT ON EXISTING AGREEMENTS.— (101 Stat. 4190) is amended— (c) INDEX.—The Secretary shall include an Nothing in this subsection supersedes or modi- (1) in paragraph (2)— index in each volume compiled, and each volume fies an agreement in effect on the date of enact- (A) by striking ‘‘shall’’ the first place it ap- reprinted, pursuant to this section. ment of this paragraph between the Federal pears and inserting ‘‘may’’; and (d) CONGRESSIONAL COPIES.—Not later than Government and any non-Federal interest for (B) by striking the last sentence; and December 1, 2008, the Secretary shall transmit at the cost-sharing, construction, and operation (2) in paragraph (4)— least 25 copies of each volume compiled, and of and maintenance of a water resources project.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3617

‘‘(B) CREDIT FOR FUNDS.—Subject to the ap- submit to the Committee on Transportation and poses of protection, restoration, or creation of proval of the Secretary and in accordance with Infrastructure of the House of Representatives aquatic and ecologically related habitat, the law (including regulations and policies) in effect and the Committee on Environment and Public cost of which does not exceed $750,000 and on the date of enactment of this paragraph, a Works of the Senate a report on the status of which will be located in a disadvantaged com- non-Federal interest for a water resources construction of projects that require mitigation munity as determined by the Secretary, may be project may receive credit for funds provided for under section 906 of the Water Resources Devel- carried out at Federal expense. the acquisition, design, construction, manage- opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283; 100 Stat. ‘‘(f) DETERMINATION OF CONSTRUCTION ment, or operation of a dredged material proc- 4186) and the status of such mitigation. COSTS.—Costs associated with construction of a essing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or (2) PROJECTS INCLUDED.—The status report project under this section shall be limited solely disposal facility to the extent the facility is used shall include the status of all projects that are to construction costs that are in excess of those to manage dredged material from the project. under construction, all projects for which the costs necessary to carry out the dredging for ‘‘(C) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST RESPONSIBIL- President requests funding for the next fiscal construction, operation, or maintenance of the ITIES.—A non-Federal interest entering into a year, and all projects that have completed con- authorized water resources project in the most partnership agreement under this subsection for struction, but have not completed the mitigation cos- effective way, consistent with economic, en- a facility shall— required under section 906 of the Water Re- gineering, and environmental criteria. ‘‘(i) be responsible for providing all necessary sources Development Act of 1986. ‘‘(g) SELECTION OF SEDIMENT DISPOSAL METH- lands, easements, rights-of-way, and relocations SEC. 2015. REMOTE AND SUBSISTENCE HARBORS. OD.—In developing and carrying out a water re- associated with the facility; and (a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting a study of sources project involving the disposal of sedi- ‘‘(ii) receive credit toward the non-Federal harbor and navigation improvements, the Sec- ment, the Secretary may select, with the consent share of the cost of the project with respect to retary may recommend a project without the of the non-Federal interest, a disposal method which the agreement is being entered into for need to demonstrate that the project is justified that is not the least cost option if the Secretary those items.’’; and solely by national economic development bene- determines that the incremental costs of such (3) in paragraphs (1) and (2)(A) of subsection fits if the Secretary determines that— disposal method are reasonable in relation to (d) (as redesignated by paragraph (1))— (1)(A) the community to be served by the the environmental benefits, including the bene- (A) by inserting ‘‘and maintenance’’ after project is at least 70 miles from the nearest sur- fits to the aquatic environment to be derived ‘‘operation’’ each place it appears; and face accessible commercial port and has no di- from the creation of wetlands and control of (B) by inserting ‘‘processing, treatment, con- rect rail or highway link to another community shoreline erosion. The Federal share of such in- taminant reduction, or’’ after ‘‘dredged mate- served by a surface accessible port or harbor; or cremental costs shall be determined in accord- rial’’ the first place it appears in each of those (B) the project would be located in the Com- ance with subsections (d) and (f). paragraphs. monwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Common- ‘‘(h) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding SEC. 2013. WETLANDS MITIGATION. wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 In carrying out a water resources project that United States Virgin Islands, or American U.S.C. 1962d–5b), for any project carried out involves wetlands mitigation and that has im- Samoa; under this section, a non-Federal interest may pacts that occur within the same watershed of a (2) the harbor is economically critical such include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of mitigation bank, the Secretary, to the maximum that over 80 percent of the goods transported the affected local government. ‘‘(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— extent practicable and where appropriate, shall through the harbor would be consumed within There is authorized to be appropriated first consider the use of the mitigation bank if the community served by the harbor and navi- $30,000,000 annually for projects under this sec- the bank contains sufficient available credits to gation improvement; and tion of which not more than $3,000,000 annually offset the impact and the bank is approved in (3) the long-term viability of the community may be used for construction of projects de- accordance with the Federal Guidance for the would be threatened without the harbor and scribed in subsection (e). Such sums shall re- Establishment, Use and Operation of Mitigation navigation improvement. main available until expended. Banks (60 Fed. Reg. 58605) or other applicable (b) JUSTIFICATION.—In considering whether to ‘‘(j) REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN- Federal law (including regulations). recommend a project under subsection (a), the NING.—In consultation with appropriate State Secretary shall consider the benefits of the SEC. 2014. MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE and Federal agencies, the Secretary may de- project to— LOSSES. velop, at Federal expense, plans for regional (1) public health and safety of the local com- (a) MITIGATION PLAN CONTENTS.—Section management of sediment obtained in conjunc- munity, including access to facilities designed to 906(d) of the Water Resources Development Act tion with the construction, operation, or mainte- protect public health and safety; of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(d)) is amended by adding nance of water resources projects, including po- (2) access to natural resources for subsistence at the end the following: tential beneficial uses of sediment for construc- purposes; ‘‘(3) CONTENTS.—A mitigation plan shall in- tion, repair, or rehabilitation of public projects (3) local and regional economic opportunities; clude— for navigation, flood damage reduction, hydro- (4) welfare of the local population; and ‘‘(A) a description of the physical action to be electric power, municipal and industrial water (5) social and cultural value to the commu- undertaken to achieve the mitigation objectives supply, agricultural water supply, recreation, nity. within the watershed in which such losses occur hurricane and storm damage reduction, aquatic and, in any case in which mitigation must take SEC. 2016. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATE- plant control, and environmental protection and place outside the watershed, a justification de- RIAL. restoration. tailing the rationale for undertaking the mitiga- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 204 of the Water Re- ‘‘(k) USE OF FUNDS.— tion outside of the watershed; sources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326) ‘‘(1) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.—The non-Fed- ‘‘(B) a description of the lands or interests in is amended by striking subsections (c) through eral interest for a project described in this sec- lands to be acquired for mitigation and the basis (g) and inserting the following: tion may use, and the Secretary shall accept, for a determination that such lands are avail- ‘‘(c) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry funds provided under any other Federal pro- able for acquisition; out projects to transport and place sediment ob- gram, to satisfy, in whole or in part, the non- ‘‘(C) the type, amount, and characteristics of tained in connection with the construction, op- Federal share of the cost of such project if such the habitat being restored; eration, or maintenance of an authorized water funds are authorized to be used to carry out ‘‘(D) success criteria for mitigation based on resources project at locations selected by a non- such project. replacement of lost functions and values of the Federal entity for use in the construction, re- ‘‘(2) OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.—The non- habitat, including hydrologic and vegetative pair, or rehabilitation of projects determined by Federal share of the cost of construction of a characteristics; and the Secretary to be in the public interest and as- project under this section may be met through ‘‘(E) a plan for any necessary monitoring to sociated with navigation, flood damage reduc- contributions from a Federal agency made di- determine the success of the mitigation, includ- tion, hydroelectric power, municipal and indus- rectly to the Secretary, with the consent of the ing the cost and duration of any monitoring trial water supply, agricultural water supply, affected local government, if such funds are au- and, to the extent practicable, the entities re- recreation, hurricane and storm damage reduc- thorized to be used to carry out such project. sponsible for any monitoring. tion, aquatic plant control, and environmental Before initiating a project to which this para- ‘‘(4) RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORING.—In protection and restoration. graph applies, the Secretary shall enter into an any case in which it is not practicable to iden- ‘‘(d) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.—Any project agreement with a non-Federal interest in which tify in a mitigation plan for a water resources undertaken pursuant to this section shall be ini- the non-Federal interest agrees to pay 100 per- project, the entity responsible for monitoring at tiated only after non-Federal interests have en- cent of the cost of operation, maintenance, re- the time of a final report of the Chief of Engi- tered into an agreement with the Secretary in placement, and rehabilitation of the project.’’. neers or other final decision document for the which the non-Federal interests agree to pay (b) REPEAL.— project, such entity shall be identified in the the non-Federal share of the cost of construc- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 145 of the Water Re- partnership agreement entered into with the tion of the project and 100 percent of the cost of sources Development Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 426j) non-Federal interest.’’. operation, maintenance, replacement, and reha- is repealed. (b) STATUS REPORT.— bilitation of the project in accordance with sec- (2) HOLD HARMLESS.—The repeal made by (1) IN GENERAL.—Concurrent with the Presi- tion 103 of the Water Resources Development paragraph (1) shall not affect the authority of dent’s submission to Congress of the President’s Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213). the Secretary to complete any project being car- request for appropriations for the Civil Works ‘‘(e) SPECIAL RULE.—Construction of a project ried out under such section 145 on the day be- Program for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall under subsection (a) for one or more of the pur- fore the date of enactment of this Act.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3618 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

(c) PRIORITY AREAS.—In carrying out section 2267a; 114 Stat. 2587–2588; 100 Stat. 4164) is carry out subsection (a)(2), of which not more 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of amended— than $2,000,000 annually may be used by the 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326), the Secretary shall give (1) in subsection (d)— Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements priority to the following: (A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph with nonprofit organizations to provide assist- (1) A project at Little Rock Slackwater Har- (4); ance to rural and small communities.’’; bor, Arkansas. (B) by striking the period at the end of para- (8) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub- (2) A project at Egmont Key, Florida. graph (5) and inserting ‘‘;’’; and section (e); and (3) A project in the vicinity of Calcasieu Ship (C) by adding at the end the following: (9) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol- Channel, Louisiana. ‘‘(6) Tuscarawas River Basin, Ohio; lowing: (4) A project in the vicinity of the Smith Point ‘‘(7) Sauk River Basin, Snohomish and Skagit ‘‘(d) ANNUAL SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED AC- Park Pavilion and the TWA Flight 800 Memo- Counties, Washington; TIVITIES.—Concurrent with the President’s sub- rial, Brookhaven, New York. ‘‘(8) Niagara River Basin, New York; mission to Congress of the President’s request (5) A project in the vicinity of Morehead City, ‘‘(9) Genesee River Basin, New York; and for appropriations for the Civil Works Program North Carolina. ‘‘(10) White River Basin, Arkansas and Mis- for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to (6) A project in the vicinity of Galveston Bay, souri.’’; the Committee on Transportation and Infra- Texas. (2) by striking paragraph (1) of subsection (f) (7) A project at Benson Beach, Washington. structure of the House of Representatives and and inserting the following: the Committee on Environment and Public SEC. 2017. COST-SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CER- ‘‘(1) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal Works of the Senate a report describing the indi- TAIN AREAS. share of the costs of an assessment carried out Section 1156 of the Water Resources Develop- vidual activities proposed for funding under under this section on or after December 11, 2000, subsection (a)(1) for that fiscal year.’’. ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2310; 100 Stat. 4256) shall be 25 percent.’’; and SEC. 2026. LAKES PROGRAM. is amended to read as follows: (3) by striking subsection (g). Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Devel- ‘‘SEC. 1156. COST-SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CER- (b) REVISION OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.— opment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148; 110 Stat. 3758; TAIN AREAS. The Secretary shall revise the partnership 113 Stat. 295) is amended— ‘‘The Secretary shall waive local cost-sharing agreement for any assessment being carried out (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at end of paragraph requirements up to $500,000 for all studies and under such section 729 to take into account the (18); projects— change in non-Federal participation in the as- ‘‘(1) in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, (2) by striking the period at the end of para- sessment as a result of the amendments made by American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of graph (19) and inserting a semicolon; and subsection (a). the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United (3) by adding at the end the following: States Virgin Islands; SEC. 2023. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM. ‘‘(20) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois, ‘‘(2) in Indian country (as defined in section (a) SCOPE.—Section 203(b)(1)(B) of the Water removal of silt and aquatic growth and meas- 1151 of title 18, United States Code, and includ- Resources Development Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. ures to address excessive sedimentation; ing lands that are within the jurisdictional area 2269(b)(1)(B); 114 Stat. 2589) is amended by in- ‘‘(21) McCarter Pond, Borough of Fairhaven, of an Oklahoma Indian tribe, as determined by serting after ‘‘Code’’ the following: ‘‘, and in- New Jersey, removal of silt and measures to ad- the Secretary of the Interior, and are recognized cluding lands that are within the jurisdictional dress water quality; by the Secretary of the Interior as eligible for area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe, as deter- ‘‘(22) Rogers Pond, Franklin Township, New trust land status under part 151 of title 25, Code mined by the Secretary of the Interior, and are Jersey, removal of silt and restoration of struc- of Federal Regulations); or recognized by the Secretary of the Interior as el- tural integrity; ‘‘(3) on land in the State of Alaska owned by igible for trust land status under part 151 of title ‘‘(23) Greenwood Lake, New York and New an Alaska Native Regional Corporation or an 25, Code of Federal Regulations’’. Jersey, removal of silt and aquatic growth; Alaska Native Village Corporation (as those (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- ‘‘(24) Lake Rodgers, Creedmoor, North Caro- terms are defined in the Alaska Native Claims tion 203(e) of such Act is amended by striking lina, removal of silt and excessive nutrients and Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)) or the ‘‘2006’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’. restoration of structural integrity; and Metlakatla Indian community.’’. SEC. 2024. WILDFIRE FIREFIGHTING. ‘‘(25) Lake Luxembourg, Pennsylvania.’’. SEC. 2018. USE OF OTHER FEDERAL FUNDS. Section 309 of Public Law 102–154 (42 U.S.C. SEC. 2027. COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING OF The non-Federal interest for a water resources 1856a–1; 105 Stat. 1034) is amended by inserting FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL AC- study or project may use, and the Secretary ‘‘the Secretary of the Army,’’ after ‘‘the Sec- TIONS. shall accept, funds provided by a Federal agen- retary of Energy,’’. (a) NOTICE OF INTENT.—Upon request of the non-Federal interest in the form of a written no- cy under any other Federal program, to satisfy, SEC. 2025. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. in whole or in part, the non-Federal share of tice of intent to construct or modify a non-Fed- Section 22 of the Water Resources Develop- eral water supply, wastewater infrastructure, the cost of the study or project if such funds are ment Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–16) is amend- authorized to be used to carry out the study or flood damage reduction, storm damage reduc- ed— tion, ecosystem restoration, or navigation project. (1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘(a) The Sec- project that requires the approval of the Sec- SEC. 2019. REVISION OF PROJECT PARTNERSHIP retary’’ and inserting the following: AGREEMENT. retary, the Secretary shall initiate, subject to ‘‘(a) FEDERAL STATE COOPERATION.— Upon authorization by law of an increase in subsection (g)(1), procedures to establish a ‘‘(1) COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.—The Secretary’’; the maximum amount of Federal funds that may (2) by inserting after the last sentence in sub- schedule for consolidating Federal, State, and be allocated for a water resources project or an section (a) the following: local agency and Indian tribe environmental as- sessments, project reviews, and issuance of all increase in the total cost of a water resources ‘‘(2) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— project authorized to be carried out by the Sec- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—At the request of a govern- permits for the construction or modification of retary, the Secretary shall revise the partner- mental agency or non-Federal interest, the Sec- the project. The non-Federal interest shall sub- ship agreement for the project to take into ac- retary may provide, at Federal expense, tech- mit to the Secretary, with the notice of intent, count the change in Federal participation in the nical assistance to such agency or non-Federal studies and documentation, including environ- project. interest in managing water resources. mental reviews, that may be required by Federal SEC. 2020. COST SHARING. ‘‘(B) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Technical assist- law for decisionmaking on the proposed project. An increase in the maximum amount of Fed- ance under this paragraph may include provi- All States and Indian tribes having jurisdiction eral funds that may be allocated for a water re- sion and integration of hydrologic, economic, over the proposed project shall be invited by the sources project, or an increase in the total cost and environmental data and analyses.’’; Secretary, but shall not be required, to partici- of a water resources project, authorized to be (3) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ‘‘this sec- pate in carrying out this section with respect to carried out by the Secretary shall not affect any tion’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘sub- the project. cost-sharing requirement applicable to the section (a)(1)’’; (b) PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS.—Within 15 days after receipt of notice under subsection (a), project. (4) in subsection (b)(3) by striking ‘‘Up to 1⁄2 of SEC. 2021. EXPEDITED ACTIONS FOR EMERGENCY the’’ and inserting ‘‘The’’; the Secretary shall publish such notice in the FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION. (5) in subsection (c) by striking ‘‘(c) There is’’ Federal Register. The Secretary also shall pro- The Secretary shall expedite any authorized and inserting the following: vide written notification of the receipt of a no- planning, design, and construction of any ‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— tice under subsection (a) to all State and local project for flood damage reduction for an area ‘‘(1) FEDERAL AND STATE COOPERATION.— agencies and Indian tribes that may be required that, within the preceding 5 years, has been There is’’; to issue permits for the construction of the subject to flooding that resulted in the loss of (6) in subsection (c)(1) (as designated by para- project or related activities. The Secretary shall life and caused damage of sufficient severity graph (5))— solicit the cooperation of those agencies and re- and magnitude to warrant a declaration of a (A) by striking ‘‘the provisions of this section’’ quest their entry into a memorandum of agree- major disaster by the President under the Robert and inserting ‘‘subsection (a)(1)’’; and ment described in subsection (c) with respect to T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency As- (B) by striking ‘‘$500,000’’ and inserting the project. Within 30 days after publication of sistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.). ‘‘$1,000,000’’; the notice in the Federal Register, State and SEC. 2022. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN AS- (7) by inserting at the end of subsection (c) local agencies and Indian tribes that intend to SESSMENTS. the following: enter into the memorandum of agreement with (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 729 of the Water Re- ‘‘(2) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—There is author- respect to the project shall notify the Secretary sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. ized to be appropriated $5,000,000 annually to of their intent in writing.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3619

(c) SCHEDULING AGREEMENT.—Within 90 days (d) COORDINATED REVIEWS.— (i) PURPOSE AND NEED AND DETERMINATION OF after the date of receipt of notice under sub- (1) IN GENERAL.—The coordinated review proc- REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.— section (a) with respect to a project, the Sec- ess under this section shall provide that all re- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, as the Fed- retary of the Interior, the Secretary of Com- views, analyses, opinions, permits, licenses, and eral lead agency responsible for carrying out a merce, and the Administrator of the Environ- approvals that must be issued or made by a Fed- study for a water resources project and the asso- mental Protection Agency, as necessary, and eral, State, or local government agency or In- ciated process for meeting the requirements of any State or local agencies that have notified dian tribe for the development of a water re- the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Secretary under subsection (b) shall enter sources project described in subsection (b) will shall— into an agreement with the Secretary estab- be conducted, to the maximum extent prac- (A) define the project’s purpose and need for lishing a schedule of decisionmaking for ap- ticable, concurrently and completed within a purposes of any document which the Secretary proval of the project and permits associated time period established by the Secretary, in co- is responsible for preparing for the project and with the project and with related activities. operation with the agencies identified under shall determine the range of alternatives for (d) CONTENTS OF AGREEMENT.—An agreement subsection (e) with respect to the project. consideration in any document which the Sec- entered into under subsection (c) with respect to (2) AGENCY PARTICIPATION.—Each Federal retary is responsible for preparing for the a project, to the extent practicable, shall con- agency identified under subsection (e) with re- project; and solidate hearing and comment periods, proce- spect to the development of a water resources (B) determine, in collaboration with partici- dures for data collection and report preparation, project shall formulate and implement adminis- pating agencies at appropriate times during the and the environmental review and permitting trative policy and procedural mechanisms to en- study process, the methodologies to be used and processes associated with the project and related able the agency to ensure completion of reviews, the level of detail required in the analysis of activities. The agreement shall detail, to the ex- analyses, opinions, permits, licenses, and ap- each alternative for the project. provals described in paragraph (1) for the tent possible, the non-Federal interest’s respon- (2) PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.—At the discre- project in a timely and environmentally respon- sibilities for data development and information tion of the Secretary, the preferred alternative sible manner. that may be necessary to process each permit re- for a project, after being identified, may be de- (e) IDENTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL AGEN- quired for the project, including a schedule veloped to a higher level of detail than other al- CIES.—With respect to the development of each ternatives. when the information and data will be provided water resources project, the Secretary shall (j) LIMITATIONS.—Nothing in this section shall to the appropriate Federal, State, or local agen- identify, as soon as practicable all Federal, preempt or interfere with— cy or Indian tribe. State, and local government agencies and In- (1) any statutory requirement for seeking pub- (e) REVISION OF AGREEMENT.—The Secretary dian tribes that may— may revise an agreement entered into under (1) have jurisdiction over the project; lic comment; subsection (c) with respect to a project once to (2) be required by law to conduct or issue a re- (2) any power, jurisdiction, or authority that extend the schedule to allow the non-Federal in- view, analysis, or opinion for the project; or a Federal, State, or local government agency, terest the minimum amount of additional time (3) be required to make a determination on Indian tribe, or non-Federal interest has with necessary to revise its original application to issuing a permit, license, or approval for the respect to carrying out a water resources meet the objections of a Federal, State, or local project. project; or agency or Indian tribe that is a party to the (f) STATE AUTHORITY.—If the coordinated re- (3) any obligation to comply with the provi- agreement. view process is being implemented under this sions of the National Environmental Policy Act (f) FINAL DECISION.—Not later than the final section by the Secretary with respect to the de- of 1969 and the regulations issued by the Coun- day of a schedule established by an agreement velopment of a water resources project described cil on Environmental Quality to carry out such entered into under subsection (c) with respect to in subsection (b) within the boundaries of a Act. a project, the Secretary shall notify the non- State, the State, consistent with State law, may SEC. 2029. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS. Federal interest of the final decision on the choose to participate in the process and to make (a) IN GENERAL.—For the purpose of expe- project and whether the permit or permits have subject to the process all State agencies that— diting the cost-effective design and construction been issued. (1) have jurisdiction over the project; of wetlands restoration that is part of an au- (g) COSTS OF COORDINATION.—The costs in- (2) are required to conduct or issue a review, thorized water resources project, the Secretary curred by the Secretary to establish and carry analysis, or opinion for the project; or may enter into cooperative agreements under (3) are required to make a determination on out a schedule to consolidate Federal, State, section 6305 of title 31, United States Code, with issuing a permit, license, or approval for the and local agency and Indian tribe environ- nonprofit organizations with expertise in wet- project. mental assessments, project reviews, and permit lands restoration to carry out such design and (g) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The issuance for a project under this section shall be coordinated review process developed under this construction on behalf of the Secretary. paid by the non-Federal interest. IMITATIONS.— section may be incorporated into a memorandum (b) L (h) REPORT ON TIMESAVINGS METHODS.—Not (1) PER PROJECT LIMIT.—A cooperative agree- of understanding for a water resources project later than 3 years after the date of enactment of ment under this section shall not obligate the between the Secretary, the heads of Federal, this section, the Secretary shall prepare and Secretary to pay the nonprofit organization State, and local government agencies, Indian transmit to Congress a report estimating the more than $1,000,000 for any single wetlands res- tribes identified under subsection (e), and the time required for the issuance of all Federal, toration project. non-Federal interest for the project. State, local, and tribal permits for the construc- (h) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINE.— (2) ANNUAL LIMIT.—The total value of work tion of non-Federal projects for water supply, (1) NOTIFICATION OF CONGRESS AND CEQ.—If carried out under cooperative agreements under wastewater infrastructure, flood damage reduc- the Secretary determines that a Federal, State, this section may not exceed $5,000,000 in any fis- tion, storm damage reduction, ecosystem restora- or local government agency, Indian tribe, or cal year. tion, and navigation. The Secretary shall in- non-Federal interest that is participating in the SEC. 2030. TRAINING FUNDS. clude in that report recommendations for fur- coordinated review process under this section (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may include ther reducing the amount of time required for with respect to the development of a water re- individuals not employed by the Department of the issuance of those permits, including any sources project has not met a deadline estab- the Army in training classes and courses offered proposed changes in existing law. lished under subsection (d) for the project, the by the Corps of Engineers in any case in which SEC. 2028. PROJECT STREAMLINING. Secretary shall notify, within 30 days of the the Secretary determines that it is in the best in- (a) POLICY.—The benefits of water resources date of such determination, the Committee on terest of the Federal Government to include projects are important to the Nation’s economy Transportation and Infrastructure of the House those individuals as participants. and environment, and recommendations to Con- of Representatives, the Committee on Environ- (b) EXPENSES.— gress regarding such projects should not be de- ment and Public Works of the Senate, the Coun- (1) IN GENERAL.—An individual not employed layed due to uncoordinated or inefficient re- cil on Environmental Quality, and the agency, by the Department of the Army attending a views or the failure to timely resolve disputes Indian tribe, or non-Federal interest involved training class or course described in subsection during the development of water resources about the failure to meet the deadline. (a) shall pay the full cost of the training pro- projects. (2) AGENCY REPORT.—Not later than 30 days vided to the individual. (b) SCOPE.—This section shall apply to each after the date of receipt of a notice under para- (2) PAYMENTS.—Payments made by an indi- study initiated after the date of enactment of graph (1), the Federal, State, or local govern- vidual for training received under paragraph this Act to develop a feasibility report under sec- ment agency, Indian tribe, or non-Federal inter- (1), up to the actual cost of the training— tion 905 of the Water Resources Development est involved may submit a report to the Sec- (A) may be retained by the Secretary; Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2282), or a reevaluation retary, the Committee on Transportation and (B) shall be credited to an appropriations ac- report, for a water resources project if the Sec- Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, count used for paying training costs; and retary determines that such study requires an the Committee on Environment and Public (C) shall be available for use by the Secretary, environmental impact statement under the Na- Works of the Senate, and the Council on Envi- without further appropriation, for training pur- tional Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 ronmental Quality explaining why the agency, poses. U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Indian tribe, or non-Federal interest did not (3) EXCESS AMOUNTS.—Any payments received (c) WATER RESOURCES PROJECT REVIEW PROC- meet the deadline and what actions it intends to under paragraph (2) that are in excess of the ac- ESS.—The Secretary shall develop and imple- take to complete or issue the required review, tual cost of training provided shall be credited ment a coordinated review process for the devel- analysis, or opinion or determination on issuing as miscellaneous receipts to the Treasury of the opment of water resources projects. a permit, license, or approval. United States.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3620 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 SEC. 2031. ACCESS TO WATER RESOURCE DATA. (2) by inserting ‘‘Indian tribes or’’ after ‘‘con- (1) a calculation of the residual risk of flood- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry siderations, to such’’; and ing following completion of the proposed project; out a program to provide public access to water (3) by inserting ‘‘federally recognized Indian (2) a calculation of any upstream or down- resources and related water quality data in the tribe’’ after ‘‘That in any such lease or license stream impacts of the proposed project; and custody of the Corps of Engineers. to a’’. (3) calculations to ensure that the benefits (b) DATA.—Public access under subsection (a) SEC. 2035. COST ESTIMATES. and costs associated with structural and non- shall— The estimated Federal and non-Federal costs structural alternatives are evaluated in an equi- (1) include, at a minimum, access to data gen- of projects authorized to be carried out by the table manner. erated in water resources project development Secretary before, on, or after the date of enact- SEC. 2037. INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW. and regulation under section 404 of the Federal ment of this Act are for informational purposes Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344); (a) PROJECT STUDIES SUBJECT TO INDE- only and shall not be interpreted as affecting PENDENT PEER REVIEW.— and the cost sharing responsibilities established by (2) appropriately employ geographic informa- (1) IN GENERAL.—Project studies shall be sub- law. tion system technology and linkages to water re- ject to a peer review by an independent panel of source models and analytical techniques. SEC. 2036. PROJECT PLANNING. experts as determined under this section. ETERMINATION OF ERTAIN ATIONAL (c) PARTNERSHIPS.—To the maximum extent (a) D C N (2) SCOPE.—The peer review may include a re- practicable, in carrying out activities under this BENEFITS.— view of the economic and environmental as- (1) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of section, the Secretary shall develop partner- sumptions and projections, project evaluation Congress that, consistent with the Economic ships, including cooperative agreements with data, economic analyses, environmental anal- State, tribal, and local governments and other and Environmental Principles and Guidelines yses, engineering analyses, formulation of alter- Federal agencies. for Water and Related Land Resources Imple- native plans, methods for integrating risk and (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— mentation Studies (1983), the Secretary may se- uncertainty, models used in evaluation of eco- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry lect a water resources project alternative that nomic or environmental impacts of proposed out this section $5,000,000 for each fiscal year. does not maximize net national economic devel- projects, and any biological opinions of the SEC. 2032. SHORE PROTECTION PROJECTS. opment benefits or net national ecosystem res- project study. (a) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with the Act toration benefits if there is an overriding reason (3) PROJECT STUDIES SUBJECT TO PEER RE- of July 3, 1930 (33 U.S.C. 426), and notwith- based on other Federal, State, local, or inter- VIEW.— standing administrative actions, it is the policy national concerns. (A) MANDATORY.—A project study shall be (2) FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, NAVIGATION, of the United States to promote beach nourish- subject to peer review under paragraph (1)— AND HURRICANE STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION ment for the purposes of flood damage reduction (i) if the project has an estimated total cost of PROJECTS.—With respect to a water resources and hurricane and storm damage reduction and more than $50,000,000, including mitigation project the primary purpose of which is flood related research that encourage the protection, costs, and is not determined by the Chief of En- damage reduction, navigation, or hurricane and restoration, and enhancement of sandy beaches, gineers to be exempt from peer review under storm damage reduction, an overriding reason including beach restoration and periodic beach paragraph (6); or for selecting a plan other than the plan that renourishment for a period of 50 years, on a (ii) the Governor of an affected State requests maximizes net national economic development comprehensive and coordinated basis by the a peer review by an independent panel of ex- benefits may be if the Secretary determines, and Federal Government, States, localities, and pri- perts. the non-Federal interest concurs, that an alter- vate enterprises. (B) DISCRETIONARY.—A project study may be native plan is feasible and achieves the project (b) PREFERENCE.—In carrying out the policy subject to peer review if— purposes while providing greater ecosystem res- under subsection (a), preference shall be given (i) the head of a Federal or State agency toration benefits. to— charged with reviewing the project study deter- (3) ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECTS.—With (1) areas in which there has been a Federal mines that the project is likely to have a signifi- respect to a water resources project the primary investment of funds for the purposes described cant adverse impact on environmental, cultural, purpose of which is ecosystem restoration, an in subsection (a); and or other resources under the jurisdiction of the (2) areas with respect to which the need for overriding reason for selecting a plan other than agency after implementation of proposed mitiga- prevention or mitigation of damage to shores the plan that maximizes net national ecosystem tion plans and requests a peer review by an and beaches is attributable to Federal naviga- restoration benefits may be if the Secretary de- independent panel of experts; or tion projects or other Federal activities. termines, and the non-Federal interest concurs, (ii) the Chief of Engineers determines that the (c) APPLICABILITY.—The Secretary shall apply that an alternative plan is feasible and achieves project study is controversial. the policy under subsection (a) to each shore the project purposes while providing greater eco- (4) CONTROVERSIAL PROJECTS.—Upon receipt protection and beach renourishment project (in- nomic development benefits. cluding shore protection and beach renourish- (b) IDENTIFYING ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND of a written request under paragraph (3)(B) or ment projects constructed before the date of en- PROJECTS.— on the initiative of the Chief of Engineers, the actment of this Act). (1) PRIMARILY ECONOMIC BENEFITS.—In con- Chief of Engineers shall determine whether a project study is controversial. SEC. 2033. ABILITY TO PAY. ducting a study of the feasibility of a project (5) FACTORS TO CONSIDER.—In determining (a) CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES.—Section where the primary benefits are expected to be whether a project study is controversial, the 103(m)(2) of the Water Resources Development economic, the Secretary may identify ecosystem Chief of Engineers shall consider if— Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)(2)) is amended by restoration benefits that may be achieved in the (A) there is a significant public dispute as to striking ‘‘180 days after such date of enact- study area and, after obtaining the participa- the size, nature, or effects of the project; or ment’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2007’’. tion of a non-Federal interest, may study and (b) PROJECTS.—The Secretary shall apply the recommend construction of additional measures, (B) there is a significant public dispute as to criteria and procedures referred to in section a separate project, or separable project element the economic or environmental costs or benefits 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act to achieve those benefits. of the project. of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) to the following (2) PRIMARILY ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION BENE- (6) PROJECT STUDIES EXCLUDED FROM PEER RE- projects: FITS.—In conducting a study of the feasibility of VIEW.—Project studies that may be excluded (1) ST. JOHNS BAYOU AND NEW MADRID a project where the primary benefits are ex- from peer review under paragraph (1) are— FLOODWAY, MISSOURI.—The project for flood pected to be associated with ecosystem restora- (A) a study for a project the Chief of Engi- control, St. Johns Bayou and New Madrid tion, the Secretary may identify economic bene- neers determines— Floodway, Missouri, authorized by section fits that may be achieved in the study area and, (i) is not controversial; 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act after obtaining the participation of a non-Fed- (ii) has no more than negligible adverse im- of 1986 (100 Stat. 4118). eral interest, may study and recommend con- pacts on scarce or unique cultural, historic, or (2) LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TEXAS.—The struction of additional measures, a separate tribal resources; project for flood control, Lower Rio Grande project, or separable project element to achieve (iii) has no substantial adverse impacts on Basin, Texas, authorized by section 401(a) of the those benefits. fish and wildlife species and their habitat prior Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 (3) RULES APPLICABLE TO CERTAIN MEASURES, to the implementation of mitigation measures; Stat. 4125). PROJECTS, AND ELEMENTS.—Any additional and (3) WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA measures, separate project, or separable element (iv) has, before implementation of mitigation PROJECTS.—The projects for flood control au- identified under paragraph (1) or (2) and rec- measures, no more than a negligible adverse im- thorized by section 581 of the Water Resources ommended for construction shall not be consid- pact on a species listed as endangered or threat- Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790–3791). ered integral to the underlying project and, if ened species under the Endangered Species Act SEC. 2034. LEASING AUTHORITY. authorized, shall be subject to a separate part- of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1539 et seq.) or the critical Section 4 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act author- nership agreement, unless a non-Federal inter- habitat of such species designated under such izing the construction of certain public works on est agrees to share in the cost of the additional Act; and rivers and harbors for flood control, and other measures, project, or separable element. (B) a study for a project pursued under sec- purposes’’, approved December 22, 1944 (16 (c) CALCULATION OF BENEFITS AND COSTS FOR tion 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 460d), is amended— FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECTS.—A feasi- U.S.C. 701s), section 2 of the Flood Control Act (1) by inserting ‘‘federally recognized Indian bility study for a project for flood damage re- of August 28, 1937 (33 U.S.C. 701g), section 14 of tribes and’’ before ‘‘Federal’’ the first place it duction shall include, as part of the calculation the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), appears; of benefits and costs— section 107(a) of the River and Harbor Act of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3621

1960 (33 U.S.C. 577(a)), section 3 of the Act enti- (d) DUTIES OF PANELS.—A panel of experts es- shall submit a report to Congress on the imple- tled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation tablished for a peer review for a project study mentation of this section. in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly under this section shall, consistent with the (j) NONAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Federal owned property’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 scope of the referral for review— Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall U.S.C. 426g), section 111 of the River and Har- (1) conduct a peer review for the project study not apply to any peer review panel established bor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i), section 3 of the submitted to the panel for review; under this section. Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construc- (2) assess the adequacy and acceptability of (k) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section tion, repair, and preservation of certain public the economic and environmental methods, mod- shall be construed to affect any authority of the works on rivers and harbors, and for other pur- els, and analyses used by the Chief of Engi- Chief of Engineers to cause or conduct a peer poses’’, approved March 2, 1945 (33 U.S.C. 603a), neers; review of a water resources project existing on section 1135 of the Water Resources Develop- (3) provide timely written and oral comments the date of enactment of this section. ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), section 206 of to the Chief of Engineers throughout the devel- (l) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the fol- the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 opment of the project study, as requested; and lowing definitions apply: (33 U.S.C. 2330), or section 204 of the Water Re- (4) submit to the Chief of Engineers a final re- (1) PROJECT STUDY.—The term ‘‘project study’’ sources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. port containing the panel’s economic, engineer- means a feasibility study or reevaluation study 2326). ing, and environmental analysis of the project for a project. The term also includes any other (7) APPEAL.—The decision of the Chief of En- study, including the panel’s assessment of the study associated with a modification or update gineers whether to peer review a project study adequacy and acceptability of the economic and of a project that includes an environmental im- shall be published in the Federal Register and environmental methods, models, and analyses pact statement, including the environmental im- pact statement. shall be subject to appeal by a person referred to used by the Chief of Engineers, to accompany (2) AFFECTED STATE.—The term ‘‘affected in paragraph (3)(B)(i) or (3)(B)(ii) to the Sec- the publication of the project study. State’’, as used with respect to a project, means retary of the Army if such appeal is made with- (e) DURATION OF PROJECT STUDY PEER RE- a State all or a portion of which is within the in the 30-day period following the date of such VIEWS.— drainage basin in which the project is or would publication. (1) DEADLINE.—A panel of experts shall— be located and would be economically or envi- (8) DETERMINATION OF PROJECT COST.—For (A) complete its peer review under this section ronmentally affected as a consequence of the purposes of determining the estimated total cost for a project study and submit a report to the project. of a project under paragraph (3)(A), the project Chief of Engineers under subsection (d)(4) with- (3) ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘‘eligi- cost shall be based upon the reasonable esti- in 180 days after the date of establishment of the mates of the Chief of Engineers at the comple- ble organization’’ means an organization that— panel, or, if the Chief of Engineers determines (A) is described in section 501(c)(3), and ex- tion of the reconnaissance study for the project. that a longer period of time is necessary, such empt from Federal tax under section 501(a), of If the reasonable estimate of project costs is sub- period of time established by the Chief of Engi- the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; sequently determined to be in excess of the neers, but in no event later than 90 days after (B) is independent; amount in paragraph (3)(A), the Chief of Engi- the date a draft project study is made available (C) is free from conflicts of interest; neers shall make a determination whether a for public review; and (D) does not carry out or advocate for or project study should be reviewed under this sec- (B) terminate on the date of submission of the against Federal water resources projects; and tion. report. (E) has experience in establishing and admin- IMING OF EER EVIEW (b) T P R .—The Chief of (2) FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINE.—If a panel istering peer review panels. Engineers shall determine the timing of a peer does not complete its peer review of a project SEC. 2038. STUDIES AND REPORTS FOR WATER review of a project study under subsection (a). study under this section and submit a report to RESOURCES PROJECTS. In all cases, the peer review shall occur during the Chief of Engineers under subsection (d)(4) (a) STUDIES.— the period beginning on the date of the comple- on or before the deadline established by para- (1) COST-SHARING REQUIREMENTS.—Section tion of the reconnaissance study for the project graph (1) for the project study, the Chief of En- 105(a) of the Water Resources Development Act and ending on the date the draft report of the gineers shall continue the project study for the of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215(a)) is amended by adding Chief of Engineers for the project is made avail- project that is subject to peer review by the at the end the following: able for public comment. Where the Chief of En- panel without delay. ‘‘(3) DETAILED PROJECT REPORTS.—The re- gineers has not initiated a peer review of a quirements of this subsection that apply to a (f) RECOMMENDATIONS OF PANEL.— project study, the Chief of Engineers shall con- (1) CONSIDERATION BY THE CHIEF OF ENGI- feasibility study also shall apply to a study that sider, at a minimum, whether to initiate a peer NEERS.—After receiving a report on a project results in a detailed project report, except that— ‘‘(A) the first $100,000 of the costs of a study review at the time that— study from a panel of experts under this section (1) the without-project conditions are identi- that results in a detailed project report shall be and before entering a final record of decision for fied; a Federal expense; and (2) the array of alternatives to be considered the project, the Chief of Engineers shall con- ‘‘(B) paragraph (1)(C)(ii) shall not apply to are identified; and sider any recommendations contained in the re- such a study.’’. (3) the preferred alternative is identified. port and prepare a written response for any rec- (2) PLANNING AND ENGINEERING.—Section Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to ommendations adopted or not adopted. 105(b) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2215(b)) is amended require the Chief of Engineers to conduct mul- (2) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY AND TRANSMITTAL TO by striking ‘‘authorized by this Act’’. tiple peer reviews for a project study. CONGRESS.—After receiving a report on a project (3) DEFINITIONS.—Section 105 of such Act (33 (c) ESTABLISHMENT OF PANELS.— study from a panel of experts under this section, U.S.C. 2215) is amended by adding at the end (1) IN GENERAL.—For each project study sub- the Chief of Engineers shall— the following: ject to peer review under subsection (a), as soon (A) make a copy of the report and any written ‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the fol- as practicable after the Chief of Engineers deter- response of the Chief of Engineers on rec- lowing definitions apply: mines that a project study will be subject to peer ommendations contained in the report available ‘‘(1) DETAILED PROJECT REPORT.—The term review, the Chief of Engineers shall contract to the public; and ‘detailed project report’ means a report for a with the National Academy of Sciences (or a (B) transmit to Congress a copy of the report, project not specifically authorized by Congress similar independent scientific and technical ad- together with any such written response, on the in law or otherwise that determines the feasi- visory organization), or an eligible organization, date of a final report of the Chief of Engineers bility of the project with a level of detail appro- to establish a panel of experts to peer review the or other final decision document for a project priate to the scope and complexity of the rec- project study for technical and scientific suffi- study that is subject to peer review by the panel. ommended solution and sufficient to proceed di- ciency. (g) COSTS.— rectly to the preparation of contract plans and (2) MEMBERSHIP.—A panel of experts estab- (1) IN GENERAL.—The costs of a panel of ex- specifications. The term includes any associated lished for a project study under this section perts established for a peer review under this environmental impact statement and mitigation shall be composed of independent experts who section— plan. For a project for which the Federal cost represent a balance of areas of expertise suitable (A) shall be a Federal expense; and does not exceed $1,000,000, the term includes a for the review being conducted. (B) shall not exceed $500,000. planning and design analysis document. (3) LIMITATION ON APPOINTMENTS.—An indi- (2) WAIVER.—The Chief of Engineers may ‘‘(2) FEASIBILITY STUDY.—The term ‘feasibility vidual may not be selected to serve on a panel waive the $500,000 limitation contained in para- study’ means a study that results in a feasibility of experts established for a project study under graph (1)(B) in cases that the Chief of Engineers report under section 905, and any associated en- this section if the individual has a financial or determines appropriate. vironmental impact statement and mitigation close professional association with any organi- (h) APPLICABILITY.—This section shall apply plan, prepared by the Corps of Engineers for a zation or group with a strong financial or orga- to— water resources project. The term includes a nizational interest in the project. (1) project studies initiated during the 2-year study that results in a project implementation (4) CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION.—Upon period preceding the date of enactment of this report prepared under title VI of the Water Re- identification of a project study for peer review Act and for which the array of alternatives to sources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680– under this section, but prior to initiation of any be considered has not been identified; and 2694), a general reevaluation report, and a lim- review, the Chief of Engineers shall notify the (2) project studies initiated during the period ited reevaluation report.’’. Committee on Environment and Public Works of beginning on such date of enactment and end- (b) REPORTS.— the Senate and the Committee on Transpor- ing 4 years after such date of enactment. (1) PREPARATION.—Section 905(a) of the Water tation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep- (i) REPORT.—Within 41⁄2 years of the date of Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. resentatives of such review. enactment of this section, the Chief of Engineers 2282(a)) is amended—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3622 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (A) by striking ‘‘(a) In the case of any’’ and water resources project, the Secretary may enter section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 inserting the following: into a contract or agreement with a private enti- (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to allow non-Federal ‘‘(a) PREPARATION OF REPORTS.— ty only if the private entity provides assurances interests to construct a mooring facility within ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any’’; satisfactory to the Secretary that, to the max- the existing authorized harbor channel, subject (B) by striking ‘‘the Secretary, the Secretary imum extent practicable— to all necessary permits, certifications, and shall’’ and inserting ‘‘the Secretary that results (1) local residents in the area of the project other requirements. in recommendations concerning a project or the will comprise not less than 50 percent of the (b) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUC- operation of a project and that requires specific workforce employed by the entity to perform the TION.—Nothing in this section shall be con- authorization by Congress in law or otherwise, contract or agreement; and strued as affecting the responsibility of the Sec- the Secretary shall perform a reconnaissance (2) local residents in the area of the project retary to maintain the general navigation fea- study and’’; will comprise not less than 50 percent of the tures of the project at a bottom width of 250 feet. (C) by striking ‘‘Such feasibility report’’ and workforce employed by each subcontractor at SEC. 3007. PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, ARKANSAS. inserting the following: each tier in connection with the contract or The Pine Mountain Dam feature of the ‘‘(2) CONTENTS OF FEASIBILITY REPORTS.—A agreement. project for flood protection, Lee Creek, Arkansas feasibility report’’; (b) EXEMPTIONS.— and Oklahoma, authorized by section 204 of the (D) by striking ‘‘The feasibility report’’ and (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may waive the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1078), is inserting ‘‘A feasibility report’’; and application of subsection (a) with respect to a modified— (E) by striking the last sentence and inserting contract or agreement if the Secretary deter- (1) to add environmental restoration as a the following: mines that compliance with subsection (a) is not project purpose; and ‘‘(3) APPLICABILITY.—This subsection shall feasible due to— (2) to direct the Secretary to finance the non- not apply to— (A) a lack of qualified local residents to permit Federal share of the cost of the project over a ‘‘(A) any study with respect to which a report satisfaction of the requirements of subsection 30-year period in accordance with section 103(k) has been submitted to Congress before the date (a); of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 of enactment of this Act; (B) a lack of sufficient numbers of specialized (33 U.S.C. 2213(k)). ‘‘(B) any study for a project, which project is workers necessary to carry out the project; or authorized for construction by this Act and is SEC. 3008. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, (C) the need to comply with small business or CALIFORNIA. . not subject to section 903(b); minority contracting requirements under Fed- ‘‘(C) any study for a project which does not (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood con- eral law. trol, American and Sacramento Rivers, Cali- require specific authorization by Congress in (2) DOCUMENTATION.—Any determination by law or otherwise; and fornia, authorized by section 101(a)(6)(A) of the the Secretary under paragraph (1) to waive the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 ‘‘(D) general studies not intended to lead to application of subsection (a) with respect to a recommendation of a specific water resources Stat. 274), as modified by section 128 of the En- contract or agreement shall be justified in writ- ergy and Water Development Appropriations project. ing. ‘‘(4) FEASIBILITY REPORT DEFINED.—In this Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2259), is further modified to (c) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary shall issue subsection, the term ‘feasibility report’ means authorize the Secretary to construct the auxil- regulations establishing local residency and iary spillway generally in accordance with the each feasibility report, and any associated envi- other requirements to facilitate compliance with ronmental impact statement and mitigation Post Authorization Change Report, American this section. River Watershed Project (Folsom Dam Modifica- plan, prepared by the Corps of Engineers for a (d) PRIOR CONTRACTS.—Nothing in this sec- water resources project. The term includes a tion and Folsom Dam Raise Projects), dated De- tion shall be construed to affect any contract or cember 2006, at a total cost of $683,000,000, with project implementation report prepared under agreement entered into before the effective date title VI of the Water Resources Development Act an estimated Federal cost of $444,000,000 and an of this section. estimated non-Federal cost of $239,000,000. of 2000 (114 Stat. 2680–2694), a general reevalua- (e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall be- tion report, and a limited reevaluation report.’’. (b) DAM SAFETY ACTIVITIES.—Nothing in this come effective 180 days after the date of enact- section shall be construed to limit the authority (2) PROJECTS NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED ment of this Act. BY CONGRESS.—Section 905 of such Act is further of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out dam amended— TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED safety activities in connection with the auxil- (A) in subsection (b) by inserting ‘‘RECONNAIS- PROVISIONS iary spillway in accordance with the Bureau of SANCE STUDIES.—’’ before ‘‘Before initiating’’; SEC. 3001. COOK INLET, ALASKA. Reclamation Safety of Dams Program. (B) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and Section 118(a)(3) of the Energy and Water De- (c) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.—The Secretary and (e) as subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively; velopment Appropriations Act, 2005 (title I of di- the Secretary of the Interior are authorized to (C) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol- vision C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, transfer between their respective agencies ap- lowing: 2005; 118 Stat. 2945) is amended by inserting ‘‘as propriated amounts and other available funds ‘‘(c) PROJECTS NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED part of the operation and maintenance of such (including funds contributed by non-Federal in- BY CONGRESS.—In the case of any water re- project modification’’ after ‘‘by the Secretary’’. terests) for the purpose of planning, design, and sources project-related study authorized to be SEC. 3002. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA. construction of the auxiliary spillway. Any undertaken by the Secretary without specific The maximum amount of Federal funds that transfer made pursuant to this subsection shall authorization by Congress in law or otherwise, may be expended for the project for navigation, be subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary shall prepare a detailed project re- King Cove Harbor, Alaska, being carried out agreed upon by the Secretary and the Secretary port.’’; under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of of the Interior. (D) in subsection (d) (as so redesignated) by 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be $8,000,000. SEC. 3009. COMPTON CREEK, CALIFORNIA. inserting ‘‘INDIAN TRIBES.—’’ before ‘‘For pur- SEC. 3003. SITKA, ALASKA. The project for flood control, Los Angeles poses of’’; and The Sitka, Alaska, element of the project for Drainage Area, California, authorized by sec- (E) in subsection (e) (as so redesignated) by navigation, Southeast Alaska Harbors of Ref- tion 101(b) of the Water Resources Development inserting ‘‘STANDARD AND UNIFORM PROCEDURES uge, Alaska, authorized by section 101(1) of the Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611), is modified to add AND PRACTICES.—’’ before ‘‘The Secretary Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 environmental restoration and recreation as shall’’. Stat. 4801), is modified to direct the Secretary to project purposes. SEC. 2039. OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS FABRICATION take such action as is necessary to correct de- SEC. 3010. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER’S CREEK, PORT. sign deficiencies in the Sitka Harbor Break- CALIFORNIA. (a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting a feasibility The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, water, at full Federal expense. The estimated study for the project for navigation, Grayson Creek/Murderer’s Creek, California, cost is $6,300,000. Atchafalaya River, Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and being carried out under section 206 of the Water Black, Louisiana, being conducted under sec- SEC. 3004. TATITLEK, ALASKA. Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. tion 430 of the Water Resources Development The maximum amount of Federal funds that 2330), is modified— Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2639), the Secretary shall may be expended for the project for navigation, (1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the include in the calculation of national economic Tatitlek, Alaska, being carried out under section non-Federal share of the cost of the project the development benefits all economic benefits asso- 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- ciated with contracts for new energy exploration U.S.C. 577), shall be $10,000,000. terest before the date of the partnership agree- and contracts for the fabrication of energy in- SEC. 3005. RIO DE FLAG, FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA. ment for the project if the Secretary determines frastructure that would result from carrying out The project for flood damage reduction, Rio that the work is integral to the project; and the project. De Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona, authorized by sec- (2) to authorize the Secretary to consider na- (b) REPEAL.—Section 6009 of the Emergency tion 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources Develop- tional ecosystem restoration benefits in deter- Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), is modified to mining the Federal interest in the project. the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, authorize the Secretary to construct the project SEC. 3011. HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA. 2005 (Public Law 109–13; 119 Stat. 282) is re- at a total cost of $54,100,000, with an estimated The project for environmental restoration, pealed. Federal cost of $35,000,000 and a non-Federal Hamilton Airfield, California, authorized by sec- SEC. 2040. USE OF FIRMS EMPLOYING LOCAL cost of $19,100,000. tion 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources Develop- RESIDENTS. SEC. 3006. OSCEOLA HARBOR, ARKANSAS. ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 279), is modified to (a) CONTRACTS OR AGREEMENTS WITH PRIVATE (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, direct the Secretary to construct the project sub- ENTITIES.—In carrying out construction of a Osceola Harbor, Arkansas, constructed under stantially in accordance with the report of the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3623 Chief of Engineers dated July 19, 2004, at a total 2330), is modified to authorize the Secretary to SEC. 3022. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. cost of $228,100,000, with an estimated Federal expend $2,000,000 to enhance public access to The project for navigation, Santa Cruz Har- cost of $171,100,000 and an estimated non-Fed- the project. bor, California, authorized by section 101 of the eral cost of $57,000,000. SEC. 3018. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. River and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 300) and SEC. 3012. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND The project for improvement of the quality of modified by section 809 of the Water Resources STOCKTON SHIP CHANNEL, CALI- the environment, Pinole Creek Phase I, Cali- Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) and sec- FORNIA. fornia, being carried out under section 1135 of tion 526 of the Water Resources Development The project for navigation, San Francisco to the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 346), is modified to direct Stockton, California, authorized by section 301 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct the Sec- the Secretary— of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. retary to credit toward the non-Federal share of (1) to renegotiate the memorandum of agree- 1091) is modified— the cost of the project the cost of work carried ment with the non-Federal interest to increase (1) to provide that the non-Federal share of out by the non-Federal interest before the date the annual payment to reflect the updated cost the cost of the John F. Baldwin Ship Channel of the partnership agreement for the project if of operation and maintenance that is the Fed- and Stockton Ship Channel element of the the Secretary determines that the work is inte- eral and non-Federal share as provided by law project may be provided in the form of in-kind gral to the project. based on the project purpose; and services and materials; and SEC. 3019. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA. (2) to revise the memorandum of agreement to (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the Upon completion of the modifications to the include terms that revise such payments for in- non-Federal share of the cost of such element Prado Dam element of the project for flood con- flation. the cost of planning and design work carried trol, Santa Ana River Mainstem, California, au- SEC. 3023. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA. out by the non-Federal interest before the date thorized by section 401(a) of the Water Re- The project for flood control, Santa Ana of an agreement for such planning and design if sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113), Mainstem, authorized by section 401(a) of the the Secretary determines that such work is inte- the Memorandum of Agreement for the Oper- Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 gral to such element. ation for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Stat. 4113) and modified by section 104 of the SEC. 3013. KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA. Water Conservation between the Department of Energy and Water Development Appropriations The project for flood control, Terminus Dam, the Army and the Orange County Water District Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329–11), section 102(e) of the Kaweah River, California, authorized by section (including all the conditions and stipulations in Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources Development the memorandum) shall remain in effect for vol- Stat. 4611), and section 311 of the Water Re- Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3658), is modified to direct umes of water made available prior to such sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal modifications. is further modified to direct the Secretary to share of the cost of the project, or provide reim- SEC. 3020. SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS conduct a study for the reallocation of water bursement not to exceed $800,000, for the costs of FLOOD CONTROL, CALIFORNIA. storage at the Seven Oaks Dam, California, for any work carried out by the non-Federal inter- (a) DETERMINATION OF FEDERAL COSTS PAID water conservation. est before, on, or after the date of the project BY NON-FEDERAL INTEREST.— SEC. 3024. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALI- partnership agreement if the Secretary deter- (1) FEDERAL COSTS PAID BY NON-FEDERAL IN- FORNIA. mines that the work is integral to the project. TEREST.—The Secretary shall determine the The project for flood damage reduction and SEC. 3014. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARK- amount paid by the Sacramento Area Flood recreation, Upper Guadalupe River, California, SPUR, CALIFORNIA. Control Agency towards the Federal share of authorized by section 101(a)(9) of the Water Re- The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry the cost of the project for the Natomas levee fea- sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), Channel, Larkspur, California, authorized by tures authorized by section 9159(b) of the De- is modified to authorize the Secretary to con- section 601(d) of the Water Resources Develop- partment of Defense Appropriations Act, 1993 struct the project generally in accordance with ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is modified to (106 Stat. 1944) of the project for flood control the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Damage Re- direct the Secretary to determine whether main- and recreation, Sacramento and American Riv- duction, San Jose, California, Limited Reevalu- tenance of the project is feasible, and if the Sec- ers, California. ation Report, dated March, 2004, at a total cost retary determines that maintenance of the (2) REIMBURSEMENTS TO NON-FEDERAL INTER- of $244,500,000. project is feasible, to carry out such mainte- EST.—The Secretary shall determine the amount SEC. 3025. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALI- nance. of reimbursements paid to the Sacramento Flood FORNIA. SEC. 3015. LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA. Control Agency for payment of the Federal The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood dam- share of the cost of the project referred to in Walnut Creek Channel, California, being car- age reduction, Llagas Creek, California, author- paragraph (1). ried out under section 206 of the Water Re- ized by section 501(a) of the Water Resources (3) DETERMINATION OF FEDERAL SHARE.—In sources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 333), is modi- carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall 2330), is modified— fied to authorize the Secretary to carry out the include in the total cost of the project all costs (1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the project at a total cost of $105,000,000, with an es- of the following activities that the Secretary de- non-Federal share of the cost of the project the timated Federal cost of $65,000,000, and an esti- termines to be integral to the project: cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- mated non-Federal cost of $40,000,000. (A) Planning, engineering, and construction. terest before the date of the partnership agree- (B) Acquisition of project lands, easements, (b) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and imple- ment for the project if the Secretary determines and rights-of-way. menting the project, the Secretary shall allow that the work is integral to the project; and (C) Performance of relocations. the non-Federal interest to participate in the fi- (D) Environmental mitigation for all project (2) to authorize the Secretary to consider na- nancing of the project in accordance with sec- elements. tional ecosystem restoration benefits in deter- tion 903(c) of the Water Resources Development (b) CREDIT.— mining the Federal interest in the project. Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall credit to- SEC. 3026. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, Secretary’s evaluation indicates that applying ward the non-Federal share of the cost of any CALIFORNIA. such section is necessary to implement the flood damage reduction project, authorized be- The project for improvement of the quality of project. fore the date of enactment of this Act, for which the environment, Wildcat/San Pablo Creek SEC. 3016. MAGPIE CREEK, CALIFORNIA. the non-Federal interest is the Sacramento Area Phase I, California, being carried out under sec- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for Magpie Flood Control Agency an amount equal to the tion 1135 of the Water Resources Development Creek, California, authorized under section 205 total amount determined under subsection (a)(1) Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to di- of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), reduced by the amount determined under sub- rect the Secretary to credit toward the non-Fed- is modified to direct the Secretary to apply the section (a)(2). eral share of the cost of the project the cost of cost-sharing requirements of section 103(b) of (2) ALLOCATION OF CREDIT.—The Secretary work carried out by the non-Federal interest be- the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 shall allocate the amount to be credited under fore the date of the partnership agreement for (100 Stat. 4085) for the portion of the project paragraph (1) toward the non-Federal share of the project if the Secretary determines that the consisting of land acquisition to preserve and such projects as are requested by the Sac- work is integral to the project. enhance existing floodwater storage. ramento Area Flood Control Agency. SEC. 3027. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, (b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- SEC. 3021. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CALIFORNIA. ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, project the cost of planning and design work The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California, carried out by the non-Federal interest before Water Ship Channel, California, authorized by being carried out under section 206 of the Water the date of the partnership agreement for the section 202(a) of the Water Resources Develop- Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. project if the Secretary determines that the work ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is modified to 2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to cred- is integral to the project. direct the Secretary to credit toward the non- it toward the non-Federal share of the cost of SEC. 3017. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SAC- Federal share of the cost of the project the cost the project the cost of work carried out by the RAMENTO, CALIFORNIA. of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the part- The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, non-Federal interest before the date of the part- nership agreement for the project if the Sec- Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California, nership agreement for the project if the Sec- retary determines that the work is integral to being carried out under section 206 of the Water retary determines that the work is integral to the project and to authorize the Secretary to Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. the project. consider national ecosystem restoration benefits

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3624 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 in determining the Federal interest in the trol Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1073), by Senate Resolu- sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. project. tion dated December 17, 1970, and by House Res- 2309a) shall be $9,750,000. SEC. 3028. YUBA RIVER BASIN PROJECT, CALI- olution dated December 15, 1970, and modified SEC. 3039. TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FORNIA. by section 309 of the Water Resources Develop- FLORIDA. The project for flood damage reduction, Yuba ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2602), is further modi- The project for navigation, Tampa Harbor-Big River Basin, California, authorized by section fied to direct the Secretary to credit toward the Bend Channel, Florida, authorized by section 101(a)(10) of the Water Resources Development non-Federal share of the cost of the project the 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modified— cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276) is modified to direct (1) to authorize the Secretary to construct the terest before the date of the partnership agree- the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal project at a total cost of $107,700,000, with an es- ment for the project if the Secretary determines share of the cost of the project the cost of plan- timated Federal cost of $70,000,000 and an esti- that the work is integral to the project. ning, design, and construction work carried out mated non-Federal cost of $37,700,000; and SEC. 3035. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLORIDA. by the non-Federal interest before the date of (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, the partnership agreement for the project if the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the Jacksonville Harbor, Florida, authorized by sec- Secretary determines that the work is integral to cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- tion 101(a)(17) of the Water Resources Develop- the project. terest before the date of the partnership agree- ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276), is modified to SEC. 3040. TAMPA HARBOR CUT B, FLORIDA. ment for the project if the Secretary determines authorize the Secretary to extend the navigation (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, that the work is integral to the project. features in accordance with the Report of the Tampa Harbor, Florida, authorized by section SEC. 3029. SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLO- Chief of Engineers, dated July 22, 2003, at a 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. RADO. total cost of $14,658,000, with an estimated Fed- 1818), is modified to authorize the Secretary to Section 808 of the Water Resources Develop- eral cost of $9,636,000 and an estimated non- construct passing lanes in an area approxi- ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) is amended by Federal cost of $5,022,000. mately 3.5 miles long and centered on Tampa striking ‘‘agriculture,’’ and inserting ‘‘agri- (b) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORTS.—The Harbor Cut B if the Secretary determines that culture, environmental restoration,’’. non-Federal share of the cost of the general re- such improvements are necessary for navigation safety. SEC. 3030. INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE evaluation report that resulted in the report of (b) GENERAL REEVAULATION REPORT.—The RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DELA- the Chief of Engineers for the project and the non-Federal share of the cost of the general re- WARE AND MARYLAND. non-Federal share of the cost of the general re- evaluation report for Tampa Harbor, Florida, The project for navigation, Intracoastal Wa- evaluation report for Jacksonville Harbor, Flor- being conducted on June 1, 2005, shall be the terway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, ida, being conducted on June 1, 2005, shall each same percentage as the non-Federal share of the Delaware and Maryland, authorized by the first be the same percentage as the non-Federal share cost of construction of the project. section of the Rivers and Harbors Act of August of the cost of construction of the project. (c) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1030), and section 101 of the (c) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall enter into a new partnership agreement with the non- River and Harbor Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1249), is into new partnership agreements with the non- Federal interest to reflect the cost sharing re- modified to add recreation as a project purpose. Federal interest to reflect the cost sharing re- quired by subsection (b). SEC. 3031. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. quired by subsection (b). SEC. 3041. ALLATOONA LAKE, GEORGIA. SEC. 3036. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA. (a) SHORELINE.—The project for shoreline pro- (a) LAND EXCHANGE.— tection, Brevard County, Florida, authorized by (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for shore protec- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may exchange section 101(b)(7) of the Water Resources Devel- tion, Lido Key Beach, Sarasota, Florida, au- lands above 863 feet in elevation at Allatoona opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), is modified— thorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Lake, Georgia, identified in the Real Estate De- (1) to direct the Secretary to establish the Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1819), deauthorized under sign Memorandum prepared by the Mobile dis- reach of the project as the reach between the section 1001(b) of the Water Resources Develop- trict engineer, April 5, 1996, and approved Octo- Florida department of environmental protection ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)), and reau- ber 8, 1996, for lands on the north side of monuments 75.4 to 118.3, a distance of 7.6 miles; thorized by section 364(2)(A) of the Water Re- Allatoona Lake that are needed for wildlife and sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 313), management and for protection of the water (2) to direct the Secretary to expedite the gen- is modified to direct the Secretary to construct quality and overall environment of Allatoona eral reevaluation report required by section 418 the project substantially in accordance with the Lake. of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 report of the Chief of Engineers dated December (2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The basis for all (114 Stat. 2637). 22, 2004, at a total cost of $15,190,000, with an land exchanges under this subsection shall be a (b) CREDIT.—Section 310 of the Water Re- estimated Federal cost of $9,320,000 and an esti- fair market appraisal so that lands exchanged sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301) mated non-Federal cost of $5,870,000, and at an are of equal value. is amended by adding at the end the following: estimated total cost of $65,000,000 for periodic (b) DISPOSAL AND ACQUISITION OF LANDS, ‘‘(d) CREDIT.—After completion of the study, nourishment over the 50-year life of the project. ALLATOONA LAKE, GEORGIA.— the Secretary shall credit toward the non-Fed- (b) CONSTRUCTION OF SHORELINE PROTECTION (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may also sell eral share of the cost of the project for shore PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—The lands above 863 feet in elevation at Allatoona protection the cost of nourishment and re- Secretary shall enter into a partnership agree- Lake, Georgia, identified in the memorandum nourishment associated with the project for ment with the non-Federal interest in accord- referred to in subsection (a)(1) and may use the shore protection incurred by the non-Federal in- ance with section 206 of the Water Resources proceeds to pay costs associated with the pur- terest to respond to damages to Brevard County Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 426i–1) for chase of lands needed for wildlife management beaches that are the result of a Federal naviga- the modified project. and for protection of the water quality and tion project, as determined in the final report SEC. 3037. MIAMI HARBOR, FLORIDA. overall environment of Allatoona Lake. for the study.’’. The project for navigation, Miami Harbor (2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Land sales and SEC. 3032. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO Channel, Florida, authorized by section purchases to be conducted under this subsection INLET, FLORIDA. 101(a)(9) of the Water Resources Development shall be subject to the following terms and con- The project for shore protection, Broward Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4606) and modified by sec- ditions: (A) Lands acquired under this subsection County and Hillsboro Inlet, Florida, authorized tion 315 of the Water Resources Development shall be by negotiated purchase from willing by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 302), is further modified— 1965 (79 Stat. 1090), and modified by section 311 (1) to include as a project purpose environ- sellers only. (B) The basis for all transactions under the of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 mental mitigation required before July 18, 2003, program shall be a fair market appraisal accept- (113 Stat. 301), is further modified to direct the by a Federal, State, or local environmental Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal able to the Secretary. agency for unauthorized or unanticipated envi- (C) The purchasers shall share in the associ- share of the cost of the project the cost of miti- ronmental impacts within, or in the vicinity of, ated real estate costs, to include surveys and as- gation construction and derelict erosion control the authorized project; and sociated fees in accordance with the memo- structure removal carried out by the non-Fed- (2) to direct the Secretary to reimburse the randum referred to in subsection (a)(1). eral interest before the date of the partnership non-Federal interest for the Federal share of the (D) Any other conditions that the Secretary agreement for the project if the Secretary deter- costs the non-Federal interest has incurred in may impose. mines that the work is integral to the project. construction of the project (including environ- (c) REPEAL.—Section 325 of the Water Re- SEC. 3033. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA. mental mitigation costs and costs incurred for sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4849) In carrying out the project for navigation, Ca- incomplete usable increments of the project) in is repealed. naveral Harbor, Florida, authorized by section accordance with section 204 of the Water Re- SEC. 3042. LATHAM RIVER, GLYNN COUNTY, GEOR- 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. GIA. 1174), the Secretary shall construct a sediment 2232). The maximum amount of Federal funds that trap. SEC. 3038. PEANUT ISLAND, FLORIDA. may be expended for the project for improvement SEC. 3034. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, The maximum amount of Federal funds that of the quality of the environment, Latham FLORIDA. may be expended for the project for improvement River, Glynn County, Georgia, being carried out The project for shore protection, Gasparilla of the quality of the environment, Peanut Is- under section 1135 of the Water Resources De- and Estero Island segments, Lee County, Flor- land, Palm Beach County, Florida, being car- velopment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a) shall be ida, authorized by section 201 of the Flood Con- ried out under section 1135 of the Water Re- $6,175,000.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3625

SEC. 3043. DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR IM- (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 345 of tion 520 of the Water Resources Development PROVEMENTS, IDAHO. the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2655), is further modified The Secretary may carry out improvements to 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 1352), is to direct the Secretary to seek to reduce the cost recreational facilities at the Dworshak Dam and amended to read as follows: of the project by using innovative technologies Reservoir, North Fork, Clearwater River, Idaho, ‘‘SEC. 345. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL and cost reduction measures determined from a authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control DISPERSAL BARRIER, ILLINOIS. review of non-Federal lake dredging projects in Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1193), to accommodate lower ‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated the vicinity of Koontz Lake. pool levels. such sums as may be necessary to carry out the SEC. 3053. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA. SEC. 3044. BEARDSTOWN COMMUNITY BOAT HAR- Barrier II project of the project for the Chicago The project for flood control, Indianapolis on BOR, BEARDSTOWN, ILLINOIS. Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, Illi- West Fork of White River, Indiana, authorized (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, nois, initiated pursuant to section 1135 of the by section 5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act author- Muscooten Bay, Illinois River, Beardstown Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 izing the construction of certain public works on Community Boat Harbor, Beardstown, Illinois, U.S.C. 2294 note; 100 Stat. 4251).’’. rivers and harbors for flood control, and for constructed under section 107 of the River and (d) FEASIBILITY STUDY.—The Secretary, in other purposes’’, approved June 22, 1936 (49 Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified— consultation with appropriate Federal, State, Stat. 1586), and modified by section 323 of the (1) to include the channel between the harbor local, and nongovernmental entities, shall con- Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 and the Illinois River; and duct, at Federal expense, a feasibility study of Stat. 3716) and section 322 of the Water Re- (2) to direct the Secretary to enter into a part- the range of options and technologies available sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 303– nership agreement with the city of Beardstown to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance spe- 304), is further modified— to replace the local cooperation agreement dated cies between the Great Lakes and Mississippi (1) to authorize the Secretary to undertake the August 18, 1983, with the Beardstown Commu- River Basins through the Chicago Sanitary and riverfront alterations described in the Central nity Park District. Ship Canal and other pathways. Indianapolis Waterfront Concept Plan, dated (b) TERMS OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.—The SEC. 3048. EMIQUON, ILLINOIS. February 1994, for the Fall Creek Reach feature partnership agreement referred to in subsection (a) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum at a total cost of $28,545,000; and (a) shall include the same rights and respon- amount of Federal funds that may be expended (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the sibilities as the local cooperation agreement for the project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, non-Federal share of the cost of the project the dated August 18, 1983, changing only the iden- Emiquon, Illinois, being carried out under sec- cost of planning, design, and construction work tity of the non-Federal sponsor. tion 206 of the Water Resources Development carried out by the non-Federal interest before (c) MAINTENANCE.—Following execution of the Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), shall be $7,500,000. the date of the partnership agreement for the partnership agreement referred to in subsection (b) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall project if the Secretary determines that the work (a), the Secretary may carry out maintenance of affect the eligibility of the project for emergency is integral to the project. the project referred to in subsection (a) on an repair assistance under section 5(a) of the Act SEC. 3054. DES MOINES RIVER AND GREENBELT, annual basis. entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of IOWA. SEC. 3045. CACHE RIVER LEVEE, ILLINOIS. certain public works on rivers and harbors for The project for the Des Moines Recreational The Cache River Levee constructed for flood flood control, and for other purposes’’, approved River and Greenbelt, Iowa, authorized by Public control at the Cache River, Illinois, and author- August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). Law 99–88 and modified by section 604 of the ized by the Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), SEC. 3049. LASALLE, ILLINOIS. Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 is modified to add environmental restoration as In carrying out section 312 of the Water Re- Stat. 4153), is modified to include enhanced pub- a project purpose. sources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639– lic access and recreational enhancements, at a SEC. 3046. CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS. 4640), the Secretary shall give priority to work Federal cost of $3,000,000. The navigation channel for the North Branch in the vicinity of LaSalle, Illinois, on the Illinois SEC. 3055. PRESTONSBURG, KENTUCKY. Canal portion of the Chicago River, authorized and Michigan Canal. The Prestonsburg, Kentucky, element of the by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors SEC. 3050. SPUNKY BOTTOMS, ILLINOIS. project for flood control, Levisa and Tug Fork Appropriations Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. of the Big Sandy and Cumberland Rivers, West (a) PROJECT PURPOSE.—The project for flood Virginia, Virginia, and Kentucky, authorized by 1129), extending from 100 feet downstream of the control, Spunky Bottoms, Illinois, authorized by section 202(a) of the Energy and Water Develop- Halsted Street Bridge to 100 feet upstream of the section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, ment Appropriations Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339), is Division Street Bridge is modified to be no wider 1936 (49 Stat. 1583), is modified to add environ- modified to direct the Secretary to take measures than 66 feet. mental restoration as a project purpose. to provide a 100-year level of flood protection for SEC. 3047. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL (b) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—The maximum the city of Prestonsburg. DISPERSAL BARRIERS PROJECT, IL- amount of Federal funds that may be expended LINOIS. for the project for improvement of the quality of SEC. 3056. AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, LOU- (a) TREATMENT AS SINGLE PROJECT.—The Chi- the environment, Spunky Bottoms, Illinois, ISIANA, EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH WATERSHED. cago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier being carried out under section 1135 of the The project for flood damage reduction and Project (in this section referred to as ‘‘Barrier Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 recreation, Amite River and Tributaries, Lou- I’’) (as in existence on the date of enactment of U.S.C. 2309a), shall be $7,500,000. this Act), constructed as a demonstration project isiana, East Baton Rouge Parish Watershed, (c) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall authorized by section 101(a)(21) of the Water under section 1202(i)(3) of the Nonindigenous affect the eligibility of the project for emergency Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of repair assistance under section 5(a) of the Act 277) and modified by section 116 of division D of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4722(i)(3)), and the project relat- entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of Public Law 108–7 (117 Stat. 140), is further modi- ing to the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal certain public works on rivers and harbors for fied— Dispersal Barrier, authorized by section 345 of flood control, and for other purposes’’, approved (1) to direct the Secretary to carry out the the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n). 2005 (Public Law 108–335; 118 Stat. 1352) (in this project with the cost sharing for the project de- section referred to as ‘‘Barrier II’’), shall be SEC. 3051. FORT WAYNE AND VICINITY, INDIANA. termined in accordance with section 103(a) of considered to constitute a single project. The project for flood control Fort Wayne, St. the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (b) AUTHORIZATION.— Mary’s and Maumee Rivers, Indiana, author- (33 U.S.C. 2213(a)), as in effect on October 11, (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, at Federal ex- ized by section 101(a)(11) of the Water Resources 1996; pense, shall— Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4604), is (2) to authorize the Secretary to construct the (A) upgrade and make permanent Barrier I; modified— project at a total cost of $187,000,000; and (B) construct Barrier II, notwithstanding the (1) to direct the Secretary to provide a 100- (3) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the project cooperation agreement with the State of year level of flood protection at the Berry- non-Federal share of the cost of the project the Illinois dated June 14, 2005; Thieme, Park-Thompson, Woodhurst, and Till- cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- (C) operate and maintain Barrier I and Bar- man sites along the St. Mary’s River, Fort terest before the date of the partnership agree- rier II as a system to optimize effectiveness; Wayne and vicinity, Indiana, at a total cost of ment for the project if the Secretary determines (D) conduct, in consultation with appropriate $5,300,000; and that the work is integral to the project. Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental enti- (2) to allow the non-Federal interest to par- SEC. 3057. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA. ties, a study of a range of options and tech- ticipate in the financing of the project in ac- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 315(a)(1) of the nologies for reducing impacts of hazards that cordance with section 903(c) of the Water Re- Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 may reduce the efficacy of the Barriers; and sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) Stat. 2603–2604) is amended to read as follows: (E) provide to each State a credit in an to the extent that the Secretary’s evaluation in- ‘‘(1) is authorized to study, design, construct, amount equal to the amount of funds contrib- dicates that applying such section is necessary operate, and maintain, at Federal expense, a uted by the State toward Barrier II. to implement the project. Type A Regional Visitor Center in the vicinity (2) USE OF CREDIT.—A State may apply a SEC. 3052. KOONTZ LAKE, INDIANA. of Morgan City, Louisiana, in consultation with credit provided to the State under paragraph The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, the State of Louisiana, to provide information (1)(E) to any cost sharing responsibility for an Koontz Lake, Indiana, being carried out under to the public on the Atchafalaya River system existing or future Federal project carried out by section 206 of the Water Resources Development and other associated waterways that have influ- the Secretary in the State. Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330) and modified by sec- enced surrounding communities, and national

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3626 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 and local water resources development of the section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 developing and implementing activities con- Army Corps of Engineers in South Central Lou- Stat. 1184), is modified to authorize the Sec- sistent with the management plan; isiana; and’’. retary to carry out the work on the St. Jude to ‘‘(C) plan, design, and implement projects (b) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 315(b) of City Price, Upper Reach A back levee. The Fed- consistent with the management plan; and such Act is amended by striking ‘‘(a)’’ and in- eral share of the cost of such work shall be 70 ‘‘(D) provide, in coordination with the Admin- serting ‘‘(a)(2)’’. percent. istrator of the Environmental Protection Agen- ONATIONS (c) D .—Section 315 of such Act is SEC. 3064. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER cy, financial and technical assistance, including amended by adding at the end the following: (EAST OF HARVEY CANAL), LOU- grants, to the State of Michigan (including po- ‘‘(c) DONATIONS.—In carrying out subsection ISIANA. litical subdivisions of the State) and interested (a)(1), the Mississippi River Commission is au- Section 328 of the Water Resources Develop- nonprofit entities for the planning, design, and thorized to accept the donation of cash, funds, ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 304–305) is amended— implementation of projects to restore, conserve, lands, materials, and services from non-Federal (1) in subsection (a)— manage, and sustain the St. Clair River, Lake governmental entities and nonprofit corpora- (A) by striking ‘‘operation and maintenance’’ St. Clair, and associated watersheds. tions.’’. and inserting ‘‘operation, maintenance, reha- ‘‘(2) SPECIFIC MEASURES.—Financial and tech- SEC. 3058. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYS- bilitation, repair, and replacement’’; and nical assistance provided under subparagraphs TEM, LOUISIANA. (B) by striking ‘‘Algiers Channel’’ and insert- (B) and (C) of paragraph (1) may be used in The public access feature of the Atchafalaya ing ‘‘Algiers Canal Levees’’; and support of non-Federal activities consistent with Basin Floodway System project, Louisiana, au- (2) by adding at the end the following: the management plan. thorized by section 601(a) of the Water Re- ‘‘(c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share ‘‘(d) SUPPLEMENTS TO MANAGEMENT PLAN AND sources Development Act 1986 (100 Stat. 4142), is of the cost of the project shall be 35 percent.’’. STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.—In con- modified to authorize the Secretary to acquire SEC. 3065. CAMP ELLIS, SACO, MAINE. sultation with the partnership and after pro- from willing sellers the fee interest, exclusive of The maximum amount of Federal funds that viding an opportunity for public review and oil, gas, and minerals, of an additional 20,000 may be expended for the project being carried comment, the Secretary shall develop informa- acres of land within the Lower Atchafalaya out under section 111 of the River and Harbor tion to supplement— Basin Floodway for the public access feature of Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i) for the mitigation of ‘‘(1) the management plan; and the Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, to en- shore damages attributable to the project for ‘‘(2) the strategic implementation plan devel- hance fish and wildlife resources, at a total cost navigation, Camp Ellis, Saco, Maine, shall be oped under subsection (c)(1)(A). of $4,000,000. $26,900,000. ‘‘(e) COST SHARING.— SEC. 3059. BAYOU PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANA. ‘‘(1) IN-KIND SERVICES.—The non-Federal The project for the improvement of the quality SEC. 3066. DETROIT RIVER SHORELINE, DETROIT, MICHIGAN. share of the cost of technical assistance under of the environment, Bayou Plaquemine, Lou- subsection (c), the cost of planning, design, and (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for emergency isiana, being carried out under section 1135 of construction of a project under subsection (c), the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 streambank and shoreline protection, Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, Michigan, being car- and the cost of development of supplementary (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct the Sec- information under subsection (d) may be pro- retary to credit toward the non-Federal share of ried out under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r), is modified to in- vided through the provision of in-kind services. the cost of the project the cost of work carried ‘‘(2) CREDIT FOR LAND, EASEMENTS, AND clude measures to enhance public access. out by the non-Federal interest before the date RIGHTS-OF-WAY.—The Secretary shall credit the (b) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The of the partnership agreement for the project if non-Federal sponsor for the value of any land, the Secretary determines that the work is inte- maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the project shall be $3,000,000. easements, rights-of-way, dredged material dis- gral to the project. posal areas, or relocations required in carrying SEC. 3060. J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, SEC. 3067. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, out a project under subsection (c). MICHIGAN. MISSISSIPPI RIVER TO SHREVEPORT, ‘‘(3) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding Section 426 of the Water Resources Develop- LOUISIANA. section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 326) is amended to The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife U.S.C. 1962d–5b), a non-Federal interest for any read as follows: losses, J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mis- project carried out under this section may in- sissippi River to Shreveport, Louisiana, author- ‘‘SEC. 426. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, clude a nonprofit entity. MICHIGAN. ized by section 601(a) of the Water Resources ‘‘(4) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The op- Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4142) and ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the fol- eration, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, modified by section 4(h) of the Water Resources lowing definitions apply: and replacement of projects carried out under Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4016), section ‘‘(1) MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The term ‘manage- this section shall be non-Federal responsibilities. 102(p) of the Water Resources Development Act ment plan’ means the management plan for the ‘‘(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— of 1990 (104 Stat. 4613), section 301(b)(7) of the St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair, Michigan, There is authorized to be appropriated to carry Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 that is in effect as of the date of enactment of out this section $10,000,000 for each fiscal Stat. 3710), and section 316 of the Water Re- the Water Resources Development Act of 2006. year.’’. sources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2572), ‘‘(2) PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘partnership’ SEC. 3068. ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICHIGAN. is further modified— means the partnership established by the Sec- The Secretary shall expedite development of (1) to authorize the purchase and reforesting retary under subsection (b)(1). the dredged material management plan for the of lands that have been cleared or converted to ‘‘(b) PARTNERSHIP.— project for navigation, St. Joseph Harbor, agricultural uses; and ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall estab- Michigan, authorized by section 101 of the River (2) to incorporate current wildlife and forestry lish and lead a partnership of appropriate Fed- and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 299). management practices for the purpose of im- eral agencies (including the Environmental Pro- proving species diversity on mitigation lands tection Agency) and the State of Michigan (in- SEC. 3069. SAULT SAINTE MARIE, MICHIGAN. that meet Federal and State of Louisiana habi- cluding political subdivisions of the State)— (a) IN GENERAL.—The text of section 1149 of tat goals and objectives. ‘‘(A) to promote cooperation among the Fed- the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 SEC. 3061. MELVILLE, LOUISIANA. eral, State, and local governments and other in- (100 Stat. 4254) is amended to read as follows: Section 315(a)(2) of the Water Resources De- volved parties in the management of the St. ‘‘The Secretary shall construct at Federal ex- velopment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2603) is amended Clair River and Lake St. Clair watersheds; and pense a second lock, of a width not less than 110 by inserting before the period at the end the fol- ‘‘(B) develop and implement projects con- feet and a length not less than 1,200 feet, adja- lowing: ‘‘and may include the town of Melville, sistent with the management plan. cent to the existing lock at Sault Sainte Marie, Louisiana, as one of the alternative sites’’. ‘‘(2) COORDINATION WITH ACTIONS UNDER Michigan, generally in accordance with the re- SEC. 3062. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOU- OTHER LAW.— port of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and ISIANA. ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Actions taken under this Harbors, dated May 19, 1986, and the limited re- The Mississippi Delta Region project, Lou- section by the partnership shall be coordinated evaluation report dated February 2004 at a total isiana, authorized as part of the project for hur- with actions to restore and conserve the St. cost of $341,714,000.’’. ricane-flood protection on Lake Pontchartrain, Clair River and Lake St. Clair and watersheds (b) CONFORMING REPEALS.—The following Louisiana, by section 204 of the Flood Control taken under other provisions of Federal and provisions are repealed: Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1077) and modified by sec- State law. (1) Section 107(a)(8) of the Water Resources tion 365 of the Water Resources Development ‘‘(B) NO EFFECT ON OTHER LAW.—Nothing in Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4620). Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3739), is further modified this section alters, modifies, or affects any other (2) Section 330 of the Water Resources Devel- to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non- provision of Federal or State law. opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3717–3718). Federal share of the cost of the project the costs ‘‘(c) IMPLEMENTATION OF ST. CLAIR RIVER AND (3) Section 330 of the Water Resources Devel- of relocating oyster beds in the Davis Pond LAKE ST. CLAIR MANAGEMENT PLAN.— opment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 305). project area if the Secretary determines that the ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— SEC. 3070. ADA, MINNESOTA. work is integral to the Mississippi Delta Region ‘‘(A) develop a St. Clair River and Lake St. (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood dam- project. Clair strategic implementation plan in accord- age reduction, Wild Rice River, Ada, Minnesota, SEC. 3063. NEW ORLEANS TO VENICE, LOUISIANA. ance with the management plan; being carried out under section 205 of the Flood The New Orleans to Venice, Louisiana, ‘‘(B) provide technical, planning, and engi- Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified project for hurricane protection, authorized by neering assistance to non-Federal interests for to authorize the Secretary to consider national

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3627

ecosystem restoration benefits in determining (d) MAXIMUM FUNDING.—The maximum (d) EVALUATION OF PROJECT COST.—For the the Federal interest in the project. amount of Federal funds that may be expended purposes of determining compliance with the (b) EVALUATION OF BENEFITS AND COSTS.—In for the flood damage reduction shall be first section of the Flood Control Act of June 22, evaluating the economic benefits and costs for $8,000,000. 1936 (33 U.S.C. 701a), the Secretary shall con- the project, the Secretary shall not consider the SEC. 3075. KNIFE RIVER HARBOR, MINNESOTA. sider only the costs of the national economic de- emergency levee adjacent to Judicial Ditch No. The project for navigation, Harbor at Knife velopment plan and shall exclude incremental 51 in the determination of conditions existing River, Minnesota, authorized by section 2 of the costs associated with the locally preferred plan prior to construction of the project. Rivers and Harbors Act of March 2, 1945 (59 that are in excess of such costs if the non-Fed- (c) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and imple- Stat. 19), is modified to direct the Secretary to eral interest agrees to pay 100 percent of such menting the project, the Secretary shall allow develop a final design and prepare plans and incremental costs. the non-Federal interest to participate in the fi- specifications to correct the harbor entrance and (e) NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE.—If the locally nancing of the project in accordance with sec- mooring conditions at the project. preferred plan is authorized for construction, tion 903(c) of the Water Resources Development SEC. 3076. RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA. the non-Federal share of the cost of the project Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the The project for flood control, Red Lake River, shall be the same percentage as the non-Federal Secretary’s evaluation indicates that applying Crookston, Minnesota, authorized by section share of the cost of the national economic devel- such section is necessary to implement the 101(a)(23) of the Water Resources Development opment plan plus all additional costs of con- project. Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 278), is modified to include struction associated with the locally preferred SEC. 3071. DULUTH HARBOR, MCQUADE ROAD, flood protection for the adjacent and inter- plan. MINNESOTA. connected areas generally known as the Samp- SEC. 3082. FESTUS AND CRYSTAL CITY, MISSOURI. (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, son and Chase/Loring neighborhoods, in accord- Section 102(b)(1) of the Water Resources De- Duluth Harbor, McQuade Road, Minnesota, ance with the feasibility report supplement for velopment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 282) is amended being carried out under section 107 of the River local flood protection, Crookston, Minnesota, at by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and a total cost of $25,000,000, with an estimated ‘‘$12,000,000’’. modified by section 321 of the Water Resources Federal cost of $16,250,000 and an estimated SEC. 3083. L–15 LEVEE, MISSOURI. Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2605), is fur- non-Federal cost of $8,750,000. The portion of the L–15 levee system that is ther modified to authorize the Secretary to pro- SEC. 3077. SILVER BAY, MINNESOTA. under the jurisdiction of the Consolidated North vide public access and recreational facilities as The project for navigation, Silver Bay, Min- County Levee District and situated along the generally described in the Detailed Project Re- nesota, authorized by section 2 of the Rivers right descending bank of the Mississippi River port and Environmental Assessment, McQuade and Harbors Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 19), from the confluence of that river with the Mis- Road Harbor of Refuge, Duluth, Minnesota, is modified to include operation and mainte- souri River and running upstream approxi- dated August 1999. nance of the general navigation facilities as a mately 14 miles shall be considered to be a Fed- (b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall provide cred- Federal responsibility. it toward the non-Federal share of the cost of eral levee for purposes of cost sharing under sec- SEC. 3078. TACONITE HARBOR, MINNESOTA. the project for the costs of design work carried tion 5 of the Act of August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. The project for navigation, Taconite Harbor, 701n). out before the date of the partnership agreement Minnesota, carried out under section 107 of the for the project if the Secretary determines that SEC. 3084. MONARCH-CHESTERFIELD, MISSOURI. River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is The project for flood damage reduction, Mon- the work is integral to the project. modified to include operation and maintenance (c) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The arch-Chesterfield, Missouri, authorized by sec- of the general navigation facilities as a Federal maximum amount of Federal funds that may be tion 101(b)(18) of the Water Resources Develop- responsibility. expended for the project shall be $9,000,000. ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified to SEC. 3079. TWO HARBORS, MINNESOTA. SEC. 3072. GRAND MARAIS, MINNESOTA. direct the Secretary to credit toward the non- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, The project for navigation, Grand Marais, Federal share of the cost of the project the cost Two Harbors, Minnesota, being carried out of the planning, design, and construction work Minnesota, carried out under section 107 of the under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) is carried out by the non-Federal interest before 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to include con- the date of the partnership agreement for the modified to direct the Secretary to provide credit struction of a dredged material disposal facility, toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project if the Secretary determines that the work including actions required to clear the site. is integral to the project. project the cost of design work carried out be- (b) LANDS, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF- SEC. 3085. RIVER DES PERES, MISSOURI. fore the date of the partnership agreement for WAY.—Non-Federal interests shall be respon- the project if the Secretary determines that the sible for providing all lands, easements, rights- The projects for flood control, River Des work is integral to the project. of-way, and relocations necessary for the con- Peres, Missouri, authorized by section 101(a)(17) SEC. 3073. GRAND PORTAGE HARBOR, MIN- struction of the dredged material disposal facil- of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 NESOTA. ity. (104 Stat. 4607) and section 102(13) of the Water The Secretary shall provide credit toward the (c) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. non-Federal share of the cost of the navigation maximum amount of Federal funds that may be 3668), are each modified to direct the Secretary project for Grand Portage Harbor, Minnesota, expended for the project shall be $5,000,000. to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out carried out under section 107 of the River and SEC. 3080. DEER ISLAND, HARRISON COUNTY, Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), for the costs MISSISSIPPI. by the non-Federal interest before the date of of design work carried out before the date of the The project for ecosystem restoration, Deer Is- the partnership agreement for the project if the partnership agreement for the project if the Sec- land, Harrison County, Mississippi, being car- Secretary determines that the work is integral to retary determines that the work is integral to ried out under section 204 of the Water Re- the project. the project. sources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. SEC. 3086. ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NE- SEC. 3074. GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA. 2326), is modified to authorize the non-Federal BRASKA. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is directed to interest to provide any portion of the non-Fed- The project for flood damage reduction, Ante- implement under section 205 of the Flood Con- eral share of the cost of the project in the form lope Creek, Lincoln, Nebraska, authorized by trol Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) the locally pre- of in-kind services and materials. section 101(b)(19) of the Water Resources Devel- ferred plan for flood damage reduction, Granite SEC. 3081. PEARL RIVER BASIN, MISSISSIPPI. opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified— Falls, Minnesota, substantially in accordance (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall com- (1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the with the detailed project report dated 2002, at a plete a feasibility study for the project for flood non-Federal share of the cost of the project the total cost of $12,000,000, with an estimated Fed- damage reduction, Pearl River Watershed, Mis- cost of design and construction work carried out eral cost of $8,000,000 and an estimated non- sissippi. by the non-Federal interest before the date of Federal cost of $4,000,000. (b) COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES.—The fea- the partnership agreement for the project if the (b) PROJECT FINANCING.—In evaluating and sibility study shall identify both the plan that Secretary determines that the work is integral to implementing the project under this section, the maximizes national economic development bene- the project; and Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interests fits and the locally preferred plan and shall (2) to allow the non-Federal interest for the to participate in the financing of the project in compare the level of flood damage reduction project to use, and to direct the Secretary to ac- accordance with section 903(c) of the Water Re- provided by each plan to that portion of Jack- cept, funds provided under any other Federal sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184), son, Mississippi, located below the Ross Barnett program, to satisfy, in whole or in part, the to the extent that the detailed project report Reservoir Dam. non-Federal share of the project if such funds evaluation indicates that applying such section (c) RECOMMENDED PLAN.—If the Secretary de- are authorized to be used to carry out the is necessary to implement the project. termines that the locally preferred plan provides project. (c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward a level of flood damage reduction that is equal SEC. 3087. SAND CREEK WATERSHED, WAHOO, NE- the non-Federal share of the project the cost of to or greater than the level of flood damage re- BRASKA. design and construction work carried out by the duction provided by the national economic de- The project for ecosystem restoration and non-Federal interest before the date of execution velopment plan and the locally preferred plan is flood damage reduction, Sand Creek watershed, of a partnership agreement for the project if the technically feasible and environmentally protec- Wahoo, Nebraska, authorized by section Secretary determines that the work is integral to tive, the Secretary shall recommend construction 101(b)(20) of the Water Resources Development the project. of the locally preferred plan. Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modified—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3628 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

(1) to direct the Secretary to provide credit to- ‘‘(c) NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM DE- authorized by section 349(a)(2) of the Water Re- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the FINED.—In this section, the term ‘New York sources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2632), project or reimbursement for the costs of any State Canal System’ means the 524 miles of navi- is modified to direct the Secretary to credit to- work that has been or will be performed by the gable canal that comprise the New York State ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the non-Federal interest before, on, or after the ap- Canal System, including the Erie, Cayuga-Sen- project the cost of planning and design work proval of the project partnership agreement, in- eca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals and the carried out by the non-Federal interest for the cluding work performed by the non-Federal in- historic alignments of these canals, including project if the Secretary determines that such terest in connection with the design and con- the cities of Albany, Rochester, and Buffalo.’’. work is integral to the project. struction of 7 upstream detention storage struc- SEC. 3094. LOWER GIRARD LAKE DAM, OHIO. (b) COST SHARING.—Cost sharing for construc- tures, if the Secretary determines that the work Section 507(1) of the Water Resources Develop- tion and operation and maintenance of the is integral to the project; ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3758) is amended by project shall be determined in accordance with (2) to require that in-kind work to be credited striking ‘‘$2,500,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$6,000,000’’. section 101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211). under paragraph (1) be subject to audit; and SEC. 3095. MAHONING RIVER, OHIO. (3) to direct the Secretary to accept advance SEC. 3103. FREEPORT HARBOR, TEXAS. In carrying out the project for environmental funds from the non-Federal interest as needed The project for navigation, Freeport Harbor, dredging, authorized by section 312(f)(4) of the to maintain the project schedule. Texas, authorized by section 101 of the Rivers Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (33 and Harbors Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818), is modi- SEC. 3088. LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE U.S.C. 1272(f)(4)), the Secretary is directed to MAY POINT, NEW JERSEY. fied.— credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost The project for navigation mitigation, eco- (1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the of the project the cost of work carried out by the system restoration, shore protection, and hurri- non-Federal share of the cost of the project the non-Federal interest before the date of the part- cane and storm damage reduction, Lower Cape cost of the planning, design, and construction nership agreement for the project if the Sec- May Meadows, Cape May Point, New Jersey, work carried out by the non-Federal interest be- retary determines that the work is integral to authorized by section 101(a)(25) of the Water fore the date of the partnership agreement for the project. Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. the project if the Secretary determines that the 278), is modified to incorporate the project for SEC. 3096. DELAWARE RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA, work is integral to the project; and NEW JERSEY, AND DELAWARE. shoreline erosion control, Cape May Point, New (2) to direct the Secretary to remove the sunk- The Secretary may remove debris from the Jersey, carried out under section 5 of the Act en- en vessel ‘‘COMSTOCK’’ at Federal expense. project for navigation, Delaware River, Penn- titled ‘‘An Act authorizing Federal participation SEC. 3104. LAKE KEMP, TEXAS. sylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, Philadel- in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may not take phia to the Sea. owned property’’, approved August 13, 1946 (33 any legal or administrative action seeking to re- U.S.C. 426h), if the Secretary determines that SEC. 3097. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. move a Lake Kemp improvement before the ear- such incorporation is feasible. The Secretary may take such action as may be lier of January 1, 2020, or the date of any trans- SEC. 3089. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGE- necessary, including construction of a break- fer of ownership of the improvement occurring MENT, NEW JERSEY. water, to prevent shoreline erosion between .07 after the date of enactment of this Act. The project for flood control, Passaic River, and 2.7 miles south of Pennsylvania State Route (b) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.—The United New Jersey and New York, authorized by sec- 994 on the east shore of Raystown Lake, Penn- States, or any of its officers, agents, or assign- tion 101(a)(18) of the Water Resources Develop- sylvania. ees, shall not be liable for any injury, loss, or ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4607) and modified by SEC. 3098. SHERADEN PARK STREAM AND damage accruing to the owners of a Lake Kemp section 327 of the Water Resources Development CHARTIERS CREEK, ALLEGHENY improvement, their lessees, or occupants as a re- Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2607), is further modified COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. sult of any flooding or inundation of such im- to direct the Secretary to include the benefits The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, provements by the waters of the Lake Kemp res- and costs of preserving natural flood storage in Sheraden Park Stream and Chartiers Creek, Al- ervoir, or for such injury, loss, or damage as any future economic analysis of the project. legheny County, Pennsylvania, being carried may occur through the operation and mainte- out under section 206 of the Water Resources nance of the Lake Kemp dam and reservoir in SEC. 3090. BUFFALO HARBOR, NEW YORK. Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is any manner. The project for navigation, Buffalo Harbor, modified to direct the Secretary to credit up to (c) LAKE KEMP IMPROVEMENT DEFINED.—In New York, authorized by section 101 of the $400,000 toward the non-Federal share of the this section, the term ‘‘Lake Kemp improve- River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1176), is cost of the project for planning and design work ment’’ means an improvement (including dwell- modified to include measures to enhance public carried out by the non-Federal interest before ings) located within the flowage easement of access, at Federal cost of $500,000. the date of the partnership agreement for the Lake Kemp, Texas, below elevation 1159 feet SEC. 3091. ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NEW YORK. project if the Secretary determines that the work mean sea level. Section 554 of the Water Resources Develop- is integral to the project. SEC. 3105. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TEXAS. ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781) is amended by SEC. 3099. SOLOMON’S CREEK, WILKES-BARRE, The project for flood control, Lower Rio striking ‘‘maximum Federal cost of $5,200,000’’ PENNSYLVANIA. Grande Basin, Texas, authorized by section and inserting ‘‘total cost of $20,000,000’’. The project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act SEC. 3092. PORT OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, Pennsylvania, authorized by section 401(a) of of 1986 (100 Stat. 4125), is modified— NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY. the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (1) to include as part of the project flood pro- The navigation project, Port of New York and (100 Stat. 4124), is modified to include as a tection works to reroute drainage to New Jersey, New York and New Jersey, author- project element the project for flood control for Raymondville Drain constructed by the non- ized by section 101(a)(2) of the Water Resources Solomon’s Creek, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Federal interests in Hidalgo County in the vi- Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), is SEC. 3100. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA. cinity of Edinburg, Texas, if the Secretary deter- modified— mines that such work meets feasibility require- (1) to authorize the Secretary to allow the Section 313 of the Water Resources Develop- ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4845; 109 Stat. 407; ments; non-Federal interest to construct a temporary (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the 110 Stat. 3723; 113 Stat. 310; 117 Stat. 142) is dredged material storage facility to receive non-Federal share of the cost of the project the amended— dredged material from the project if— cost of planning, design, and construction work (1) in subsection (g)(1) by striking (A) the non-Federal interest submits, in writ- carried out by the non-Federal interest before ‘‘$180,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$200,000,000’’; and ing, a list of potential sites for the temporary the date of the partnership agreement for the (2) in subsection (h)(2) by striking ‘‘Alle- storage facility to the Committee on Transpor- project if the Secretary determines that the work gheny, Armstrong, Beford, Blair, Cambria, tation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep- is integral to the project; and resentatives, the Committee on Environment and Clearfield, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, Greene, (3) to direct the Secretary in calculating the Public Works of the Senate, and the Secretary Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, Mifflin, Som- non-Federal share of the cost of the project, to at least 180 days before the selection of the final erset, Snyder, Washington, and Westmoreland make a determination, within 180 days after the site; and Counties’’ and inserting ‘‘Allegheny, Armstrong, date of enactment of this Act, under section (B) at least 70 percent of the dredged material Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fayette, Franklin, 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act generated in connection with the project suit- Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Juniata, of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)) on the non-Federal able for beneficial reuse will be used at sites in Somerset, Washington, and Westmoreland interest’s ability to pay. Counties’’. the State of New Jersey to the extent that there SEC. 3106. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, CORPUS are sufficient sites available; and SEC. 3101. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA. CHRISTI BAY, TEXAS. (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the In carrying out the project for flood control, The project for ecosystem restoration and non-Federal share of the cost of the project the Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania, authorized by storm damage reduction, North Padre Island, cost of construction of the temporary storage fa- section 401(a) of the Water Resources Develop- Corpus Christi Bay, Texas, authorized by sec- cility if the Secretary determines that the work ment Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4124), the Secretary tion 556 of the Water Resources Development is integral to the project. shall coordinate with non-Federal interests to Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 353), is modified to include SEC. 3093. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM. review opportunities for increased public access. recreation as a project purpose. Section 553(c) of the Water Resources Develop- SEC. 3102. CEDAR BAYOU, TEXAS. SEC. 3107. PAT MAYSE LAKE, TEXAS. ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781) is amended to (a) CREDIT FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN.—The The Secretary is directed to accept from the read as follows: project for navigation, Cedar Bayou, Texas, re- city of Paris, Texas, $3,461,432 as payment in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3629 full of monies owed to the United States for SEC. 3114. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIR- (3) The project for navigation, Fall River Har- water supply storage space in Pat Mayse Lake, GINIA. bor, Massachusetts, authorized by section 101 of Texas, under contract number DA–34–066– Section 579(c) of the Water Resources Develop- the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731); CIVENG–65–1272, including accrued interest. ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790; 113 Stat. 312) is except that the authorized depth of that portion amended by striking ‘‘$47,000,000’’ and inserting SEC. 3108. PROCTOR LAKE, TEXAS. of the project extending riverward of the ‘‘$99,000,000’’. Charles M. Braga, Jr. Memorial Bridge, Fall The Secretary is authorized to purchase fee SEC. 3115. LESAGE/GREENBOTTOM SWAMP, WEST River and Somerset, Massachusetts, shall not simple title to all properties located within the VIRGINIA. exceed 35 feet. boundaries, and necessary for the operation, of Section 30(d) of the Water Resources Develop- (b) LIMITATION.—A project described in sub- the Proctor Lake project, Texas, authorized by ment Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4030; 114 Stat. 2678) section (a) shall not be authorized for construc- section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 is amended to read as follows: tion after the last day of the 5-year period be- Stat. 1259). ‘‘(d) HISTORIC STRUCTURE.—The Secretary ginning on the date of enactment of this Act, SEC. 3109. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, SAN ANTO- shall ensure the preservation and restoration of unless, during such period, funds have been ob- NIO, TEXAS. the structure known as the ‘Jenkins House’, and ligated for the construction (including planning The project for flood control, San Antonio the reconstruction of associated buildings and and design) of the project. landscape features of such structure located Channel, Texas, authorized by section 203 of the SEC. 3120. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS. within the Lesage/Greenbottom Swamp in ac- Flood Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1259) as part Each of the following projects may be carried cordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s of the comprehensive plan for flood protection out by the Secretary and no construction on standards for the treatment of historic prop- on the Guadalupe and San Antonio Rivers in any such project may be initiated until the Sec- erties. Amounts made available for expenditure Texas and modified by section 103 of the Water retary determines that the project is feasible: Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. for the project authorized by section 301(a) of (1) MENOMINEE HARBOR AND RIVER, MICHIGAN 2921) and section 335 of the Water Resources De- the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 AND WISCONSIN.—The project for navigation, (100 Stat. 4110) shall be available for the pur- velopment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2611), is further Menominee Harbor and River, Michigan and poses of this subsection.’’. modified to authorize the Secretary to credit to- Wisconsin, authorized by section 101 of the ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the SEC. 3116. NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA. River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 482) and project the cost of design and construction work Section 557 of the Water Resources Develop- deauthorized on April 15, 2002, in accordance carried out by the non-Federal interest for the ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 353) is amended— with section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources project if the Secretary determines that the work (1) in the first sentence by striking ‘‘favor- Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)). is integral to the project. able’’; (2) MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN.—That (2) by striking ‘‘$8,400,000’’ and inserting SEC. 3110. LEE, RUSSELL, SCOTT, SMYTH, TAZE- portion of the project for navigation, Manitowoc ‘‘$12,000,000’’; and WELL, AND WISE COUNTIES, VIR- Harbor, Wisconsin, authorized by the first sec- (3) by striking ‘‘$4,200,000’’ each place it ap- GINIA. tion of the River and Harbor Act of August 30, pears and inserting ‘‘$6,000,000’’. The project for flood control, Levisa and Tug 1852 (10 Stat. 58), consisting of the channel in Forks of the Big Sandy River and Upper Cum- SEC. 3117. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN. the south part of the outer harbor, deauthorized berland River, authorized by section 202 of the The project for navigation, Manitowoc Har- by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of Energy and Water Development Appropriation bor, Wisconsin, authorized by the River and 1962 (76 Stat. 1176). Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339) and modified by section Harbor Act of August 30, 1852 (10 Stat. 58), is (3) HEARDING ISLAND INLET, DULUTH HARBOR, 352 of the Water Resources Development Act of modified to direct the Secretary to deepen the MINNESOTA.—The project for dredging, Hearding 1996 (110 Stat. 3724–3725) and section 336 of the upstream reach of the navigation channel from Island Inlet, Duluth Harbor, Minnesota, au- Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 12 feet to 18 feet, at a total cost of $405,000. thorized by section 22 of the Water Resources Stat. 2611), is further modified to direct the Sec- SEC. 3118. MISSISSIPPI RIVER HEADWATERS RES- Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4027). ERVOIRS. retary to determine the ability of Lee, Russell, SEC. 3121. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS. Section 21 of the Water Resources Develop- Scott, Smyth, Tazewell, and Wise Counties, Vir- (a) IN GENERAL.—The following projects are ginia, to pay the non-Federal share of the cost ment Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4027) is amended— (1) in subsection (a)— not authorized after the date of enactment of of the project based solely on the criterion speci- this Act: fied in section 103(m)(3)(A)(i) of the Water Re- (A) by striking ‘‘1276.42’’ and inserting ‘‘1278.42’’; (1) BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. portion of the project for navigation, Bridgeport 2213(m)(3)(A)(i)). (B) by striking ‘‘1218.31’’ and inserting ‘‘1221.31’’; and Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the first sec- SEC. 3111. TANGIER ISLAND SEAWALL, VIRGINIA. (C) by striking ‘‘1234.82’’ and inserting tion of the River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 Section 577(a) of the Water Resources Devel- ‘‘1235.30’’; and (46 Stat. 919), consisting of an 18-foot channel opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3789) is amended (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the in Yellow Mill River and described as follows: by striking ‘‘at a total cost of $1,200,000, with an following: Beginning at a point along the eastern limit of estimated Federal cost of $900,000 and an esti- ‘‘(b) EXCEPTION.—The Secretary may operate the existing project, N123,649.75, E481,920.54, mated non-Federal cost of $300,000.’’ and insert- the headwaters reservoirs below the minimum or thence running northwesterly about 52.64 feet to ing ‘‘at a total cost of $3,000,000, with an esti- above the maximum water levels established in a point N123,683.03, E481,879.75, thence running mated Federal cost of $2,500,000 and an esti- subsection (a) in accordance with water control northeasterly about 1,442.21 feet to a point mated non-Federal cost of $750,000.’’. regulation manuals (or revisions thereto) devel- N125,030.08, E482,394.96, thence running north- SEC. 3112. DUWAMISH/GREEN, WASHINGTON. oped by the Secretary, after consultation with easterly about 139.52 feet to a point along the eastern limit of the existing channel, The project for ecosystem restoration, the Governor of Minnesota and affected tribal N125,133.87, E482,488.19, thence running south- Duwamish/Green, Washington, authorized by governments, landowners, and commercial and westerly about 1,588.98 feet to the point of ori- section 101(b)(26) of the Water Resources Devel- recreational users. The water control regulation gin. opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2579), is modified— manuals (and any revisions thereto) shall be ef- fective when the Secretary transmits them to (2) MYSTIC RIVER, CONNECTICUT.—The portion (1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the Congress. The Secretary shall report to Congress of the project for navigation, Mystic River, Con- non-Federal share of the cost of the project the at least 14 days before operating any such head- necticut, authorized by the first section of the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- waters reservoir below the minimum or above River and Harbor Appropriations Act of Sep- terest before, on, or after the date of the part- the maximum water level limits specified in sub- tember 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 436) consisting of a 12- nership agreement for the project if the Sec- section (a); except that notification is not re- foot-deep channel, approximately 7,554 square retary determines that the work is integral to quired for operations necessary to prevent the feet in area, starting at a point N193,086.51, the project; and loss of life or to ensure the safety of the dam or E815,092.78, thence running north 59 degrees 21 (2) to authorize the non-Federal interest to if the drawdown of lake levels is in anticipation minutes 46.63 seconds west about 138.05 feet to a provide any portion of the non-Federal share of of flood control operations.’’. point N193,156.86, E814,974.00, thence running the cost of the project in the form of in-kind north 51 degrees 04 minutes 39.00 seconds west services and materials. SEC. 3119. CONTINUATION OF PROJECT AUTHOR- IZATIONS. about 166.57 feet to a point N193,261.51, SEC. 3113. YAKIMA RIVER, PORT OF SUNNYSIDE, (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section E814,844.41, thence running north 43 degrees 01 WASHINGTON. 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development minutes 34.90 seconds west about 86.23 feet to a The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)), the following point N193,324.55, E814,785.57, thence running Yakima River, Port of Sunnyside, Washington, projects shall remain authorized to be carried north 06 degrees 42 minutes 03.86 seconds west being carried out under section 206 of the Water out by the Secretary: about 156.57 feet to a point N193,480.05, Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. (1) The project for navigation, Sacramento E814,767.30, thence running south 21 degrees 21 2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to cred- Deep Water Ship Channel, California, author- minutes 17.94 seconds east about 231.42 feet to a it toward the non-Federal share of the cost of ized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources point N193,264.52, E814,851.57, thence running the project the cost of work carried out by the Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092). south 53 degrees 34 minutes 23.28 seconds east non-Federal interest before the date of the part- (2) The project for flood control, Agana River, about 299.78 feet to the point of origin. nership agreement for the project if the Sec- Guam, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water (3) NEW LONDON HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—The retary determines that the work is integral to Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. portion of the project for navigation, New Lon- the project. 4127). don Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3630 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 River and Harbor Appropriations Act of June 3734), is further modified to redesignate a por- and to the property shall revert to the United 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 333), that consists of a 23-foot tion of the 9-foot-deep channel as an anchorage States, at the option of the Secretary. waterfront channel and that is further described area, approximately 900 feet in length and 90,000 (3) MITIGATION.—Nothing in this subsection as beginning at a point along the western limit square feet in area, and lying generally north of extinguishes the responsibility of the Federal of the existing project, N188,802.75, E779,462.81, a line with points at coordinates N108,043.45, Government or the non-Federal interest for the thence running northeasterly about 1,373.88 feet E452,252.04 and N107,938.74, E452,265.74. project referred to in paragraph (1) from the ob- to a point N189,554.87, E780,612.53, thence run- (c) SACO RIVER, MAINE.—The portion of the ligation to implement mitigation for such project ning southeasterly about 439.54 feet to a point project for navigation, Saco River, Maine, au- that existed on the day prior to the transfer au- N189,319.88, E780,983.98, thence running south- thorized under section 107 of the River and Har- thorized by this subsection. westerly about 831.58 feet to a point N188,864.63, bor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577) and described as (b) MILFORD, KANSAS.— E780,288.08, thence running southeasterly about a 6-foot deep, 10-acre turning basin located at (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey 567.39 feet to a point N188,301.88, E780,360.49, the head of navigation, is redesignated as an by quitclaim deed without consideration to the thence running northwesterly about 1,027.96 feet anchorage area. Geary County Fire Department, Milford, Kan- to the point of origin. (d) UNION RIVER, MAINE.—The project for sas, all right, title, and interest of the United (4) FALMOUTH HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.—The navigation, Union River, Maine, authorized by States in and to real property consisting of ap- portion of the project for navigation, Falmouth the first section of the Act of June 3, 1896 (29 proximately 7.4 acres located in Geary County, Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by section Stat. 215), is modified by redesignating as an Kansas, for construction, operation, and main- 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1948 (62 Stat. anchorage area that portion of the project con- tenance of a fire station. 1172), beginning at a point along the eastern sisting of a 6-foot turning basin and lying (2) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines side of the inner harbor N200,415.05, E845,307.98, northerly of a line commencing at a point that the real property conveyed under para- thence running north 25 degrees 48 minutes 54.3 N315,975.13, E1,004,424.86, thence running north graph (1) ceases to be held in public ownership seconds east 160.24 feet to a point N200,559.20, 61 degrees 27 minutes 20.71 seconds west about or ceases to be operated and maintained as a E845,377.76, thence running north 22 degrees 7 132.34 feet to a point N316,038.37, E1,004,308.61. fire station, all right, title, and interest in and minutes 52.4 seconds east 596.82 feet to a point (e) MYSTIC RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS.—The por- to the property shall revert to the United States, N201,112.15, E845,602.60, thence running north tion of the project for navigation, Mystic River, at the option of the United States. 60 degrees 1 minute 0.3 seconds east 83.18 feet to Massachusetts, authorized by the first section of (c) PIKE COUNTY, MISSOURI.— a point N201,153.72, E845,674.65, thence running the River and Harbor Appropriations Act of (1) IN GENERAL.—At such time as S.S.S., Inc., south 24 degrees 56 minutes 43.4 seconds west July 13, 1892 (27 Stat. 96), between a line start- conveys all right, title and interest in and to the 665.01 feet to a point N200,550.75, E845,394.18, ing at a point N515,683.77, E707,035.45 and end- real property described in paragraph (2)(A) to thence running south 32 degrees 25 minutes 29.0 ing at a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85 and a line the United States, the Secretary shall convey all seconds west 160.76 feet to the point of origin. starting at a point N514,595.15, E707,746.15 and right, title, and interest of the United States in (5) ISLAND END RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS.—The ending at a point N514,732.94, E707,658.38 shall and to the real property described in paragraph portion of the project for navigation, Island End be relocated and reduced from a 100-foot wide (2)(B) to S.S.S., Inc. River, Massachusetts, carried out under section channel to a 50-foot wide channel after the date (2) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The parcels of land 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 of enactment of this Act described as follows: referred to in paragraph (1) are the following: U.S.C. 577), described as follows: Beginning at a Beginning at a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85, (A) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—Approximately 42 point along the eastern limit of the existing thence running southeasterly about 840.50 feet acres, the exact legal description to be deter- project, N507,348.98, E721,180.01, thence running to a point N515,070.16, E707,601.27, thence run- mined by mutual agreement of S.S.S., Inc., and northeast about 35 feet to a point N507,384.17, ning southeasterly about 177.54 feet to a point the Secretary, subject to any existing flowage E721,183.36, thence running northeast about 324 N514,904.84, E707,665.98, thence running south- easements situated in Pike County, Missouri, feet to a point N507,590.51, E721,433.17, thence easterly about 319.90 feet to a point with coordi- upstream and northwest, about a 200-foot dis- running northeast about 345 feet to a point nates N514,595.15, E707,746.15, thence running tance from Drake Island (also known as Grimes along the northern limit of the existing project, northwesterly about 163.37 feet to a point Island). (B) FEDERAL LAND.—Approximately 42 acres, N507,927.29, E721,510.29, thence running south- N514,732.94, E707,658.38, thence running north- the exact legal description to be determined by east about 25 feet to a point N507,921.71, westerly about 161.58 feet to a point N514.889.47, mutual agreement of S.S.S. Inc., and the Sec- E721,534.66, thence running southwest about 354 E707,618.30, thence running northwesterly about retary, situated in Pike County, Missouri, feet to a point N507,576.65, E721,455.64, thence 166.61 feet to a point N515.044.62, E707,557.58, known as Government Tract Numbers MIs–7 running southwest about 357 feet to the point of thence running northwesterly about 825.31 feet and a portion of FM–46 (both tracts on Buffalo origin. to a point N515,683.77, E707,035.45, thence run- Island), administered by the Corps of Engineers. (6) CITY WATERWAY, TACOMA, WASHINGTON.— ning northeasterly about 50.90 feet returning to (3) CONDITIONS.—The exchange of real prop- The portion of the project for navigation, City a point N515,721.28, E707,069.85. erty under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the Waterway, Tacoma, Washington, authorized by (f) CONDITIONS.—The first sentence of section following conditions: the first section of the River and Harbor Appro- 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development (A) DEEDS.— priations Act of June 13, 1902 (32 Stat. 347), con- Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)) is amended— (i) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of sisting of the last 1,000 linear feet of the inner (1) by striking ‘‘two years’’ and inserting portion of the waterway beginning at station the real property described in paragraph (2)(A) ‘‘year’’; and to the Secretary shall be by a warranty deed ac- 70+00 and ending at station 80+00. (2) by striking ‘‘7’’ and inserting ‘‘5’’. (7) AUNT LYDIA’S COVE, MASSACHUSETTS.— ceptable to the Secretary. (A) IN GENERAL.—The portion of the project SEC. 3122. LAND CONVEYANCES. (ii) FEDERAL LAND.—The instrument of con- for navigation, Aunt Lydia’s Cove, Massachu- (a) ST. FRANCIS BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MIS- veyance used to convey the real property de- setts, constructed under section 107 of the River SOURI.— scribed in paragraph (2)(B) to S.S.S., Inc., shall and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), con- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey be by quitclaim deed and contain such reserva- sisting of the 8-foot deep anchorage in the cove to the State of Arkansas, without monetary con- tions, terms, and conditions as the Secretary described in subparagraph (B). sideration and subject to paragraph (2), all considers necessary to allow the United States (B) DESCRIPTION OF PORTION.—The portion of right, title, and interest in and to real property to operate and maintain the Mississippi River 9- the project described in subparagraph (A) is within the State acquired by the Federal Gov- Foot Navigation Project. more particularly described as the portion begin- ernment as mitigation land for the project for (B) REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS.—S.S.S., Inc., ning at a point along the southern limit of the flood control, St. Francis Basin, Arkansas and may remove, and the Secretary may require existing project, N254,332.00, E1,023,103.96, Missouri Project, authorized by the Flood Con- S.S.S., Inc., to remove, any improvements on the thence running northwesterly about 761.60 feet trol Act of May 15, 1928 (33 U.S.C. 702a et seq.). land described in paragraph (2)(A). to a point along the western limit of the existing (2) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— (C) TIME LIMIT FOR EXCHANGE.—The land ex- project N255,076.84, E1,022,945.07, thence run- (A) IN GENERAL.—The conveyance by the change under paragraph (1) shall be completed ning southwesterly about 38.11 feet to a point United States under this subsection shall be sub- not later than 2 years after the date of enact- N255,038.99, E1,022,940.60, thence running ject to— ment of this Act. southeasterly about 267.07 feet to a point (i) the condition that the State of Arkansas (4) VALUE OF PROPERTIES.—If the appraised N254,772.00, E1,022,947.00, thence running agree to operate, maintain, and manage the real fair market value, as determined by the Sec- southeasterly about 462.41 feet to a point property for fish and wildlife, recreation, and retary, of the real property conveyed to S.S.S., N254,320.06, E1,023,044.84, thence running environmental purposes at no cost or expense to Inc., by the Secretary under paragraph (1) ex- northeasterly about 60.31 feet to the point of ori- the United States; and ceeds the appraised fair market value, as deter- gin. (ii) such other terms and conditions as the mined by the Secretary, of the real property (b) SOUTHPORT HARBOR, FAIRFIELD, CON- Secretary determines to be in the interest of the conveyed to the United States by S.S.S., Inc., NECTICUT.—The project for navigation, United States. under paragraph (1), S.S.S., Inc., shall make a Southport Harbor, Fairfield, Connecticut, au- (B) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines payment to the United States equal to the excess thorized by section 2 of the River and Harbor that the real property conveyed under para- in cash or a cash equivalent that is satisfactory Act of March 2, 1829, and by the first section of graph (1) ceases to be held in public ownership to the Secretary. the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935 (49 or the State ceases to operate, maintain, and (d) BOARDMAN, OREGON.—Section 501(g)(1) of Stat. 1029), and section 364 of the Water Re- manage the real property in accordance with the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3733– this subsection, all right, title, and interest in (110 Stat. 3751) is amended—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3631

(1) by striking ‘‘city of Boardman,’’ and in- (g) RICHARD B. RUSSELL LAKE, SOUTH CARO- and environmental documentation costs, associ- serting ‘‘the Boardman Park and Recreation LINA.— ated with the conveyance. District, Boardman,’’; and (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey (5) LIABILITY.—An entity to which a convey- (2) by striking ‘‘such city’’ and inserting ‘‘the to the State of South Carolina, by quitclaim ance is made under this section shall hold the city of Boardman’’. deed, at fair market value, all right, title, and United States harmless from any liability with (e) LOWELL, OREGON.— interest of the United States in and to the real respect to activities carried out, on or after the (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may convey property described in paragraph (2) that is man- date of the conveyance, on the real property without consideration to Lowell School District, aged, as of the date of enactment of this Act, by conveyed. The United States shall remain re- by quitclaim deed, all right, title, and interest of the South Carolina department of commerce for sponsible for any liability with respect to activi- the United States in and to land and buildings public recreation purposes for the Richard B. ties carried out, before such date, on the real thereon, known as Tract A–82, located in Low- Russell Dam and Lake, South Carolina, project property conveyed. ell, Oregon, and described in paragraph (2). authorized by section 203 of the Flood Control SEC. 3123. EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY (2) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The parcel of Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 1420). INTERESTS AND USE RESTRICTIONS. land authorized to be conveyed under para- (2) LAND DESCRIPTION.—Subject to paragraph (a) IDAHO.— graph (1) is as follows: Commencing at the point (3), the real property referred to in paragraph (1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to the property of intersection of the west line of Pioneer Street (1) is the parcel contained in the portion of real covered by each deed in paragraph (2)— with the westerly extension of the north line of property described in Army Lease Number (A) the reversionary interests and use restric- Summit Street, in Meadows Addition to Lowell, DACW21–1–92–0500. tions relating to port and industrial use pur- as platted and recorded at page 56 of Volume 4, (3) RESERVATION OF INTERESTS.—The United poses are extinguished; Lane County Oregon Plat Records; thence north States shall reserve— (B) the restriction that no activity shall be on the west line of Pioneer Street a distance of (A) ownership of all real property included in permitted that will compete with services and 176.0 feet to the true point of beginning of this the lease referred to in paragraph (2) that would facilities offered by public marinas is extin- description; thence north on the west line of have been acquired for operational purposes in guished; and Pioneer Street a distance of 170.0 feet; thence accordance with the 1971 implementation of the (C) the human habitation or other building west at right angles to the west line of Pioneer 1962 Army/Interior Joint Acquisition Policy; and structure use restriction is extinguished if the Street a distance of 250.0 feet; thence south and (B) such other rights and interests in and to elevation of the property is above the standard parallel to the west line of Pioneer Street a dis- the real property to be conveyed as the Sec- project flood elevation. tance of 170.0 feet; thence east 250.0 feet to the retary considers necessary for authorized project (2) AFFECTED DEEDS.—The deeds with the fol- true point of beginning of this description in purposes, including easement rights-of-way to lowing county auditor’s file numbers are re- Section 14, Township 19 South, Range 1 West of remaining Federal land. ferred to in paragraph (1): the Willamette Meridian, Lane County, Oregon. (A) Auditor’s Instrument No. 399218 of Nez (4) NO EFFECT ON SHORE MANAGEMENT POL- (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Before conveying Perce County, Idaho—2.07 acres. ICY.—The Shoreline Management Policy (ER– the parcel to the school district, the Secretary (B) Auditor’s Instrument No. 487437 of Nez 1130–2–406) of the Corps of Engineers shall not shall ensure that the conditions of buildings Perce County, Idaho—7.32 acres. be changed or altered for any proposed develop- and facilities meet the requirements of applica- (b) OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, CUM- ment of land conveyed under this subsection. ble Federal law. BERLAND RIVER, TENNESSEE.— (5) COST SHARING.—In carrying out the con- (4) REVERSION.—If the Secretary determines (1) RELEASE OF RETAINED RIGHTS, INTERESTS, that the property conveyed under paragraph (1) veyance under this subsection, the Secretary RESERVATIONS.—With respect to land conveyed ceases to be held in public ownership, all right, and the State shall comply with all obligations by the Secretary to the Tennessee Society of title, and interest in and to the property shall of any cost-sharing agreement between the Sec- Crippled Children and Adults, Incorporated revert to the United States, at the option of the retary and the State with respect to the real (commonly known as ‘‘Easter Seals Tennessee’’) United States. property described in paragraph (2) in effect as at Old Hickory Lock and Dam, Cumberland (f) LOWELL, OREGON.— of the date of the conveyance. River, Tennessee, under section 211 of the Flood (1) RELEASE AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF DEED (6) LAND NOT CONVEYED.—The State shall con- Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1087), the rever- RESERVATIONS.— tinue to manage the real property described in sionary interests and the use restrictions relat- (A) RELEASE AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF DEED paragraph (3) not conveyed under this sub- ing to recreation and camping purposes are ex- RESERVATIONS.—The Secretary may release and section in accordance with the terms and condi- tinguished. extinguish the deed reservations for access and tions of Army Lease Number DACW21–1–92–0500. (2) INSTRUMENT OF RELEASE.—As soon as communication cables contained in the quit- (h) DENISON, TEXAS.— practicable after the date of enactment of this claim deed, dated January 26, 1965, and re- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall offer to Act, the Secretary shall execute and file in the corded February 15, 1965, in the records of Lane convey at fair market value to the city of appropriate office a deed of release, amended County, Oregon; except that such reservations Denison, Texas, all right, title, and interest of deed, or other appropriate instrument effec- may only be released and extinguished for the the United States in and to the approximately tuating the release of interests required by para- lands owned by the city of Lowell as described 900 acres of land located in Grayson County, graph (1). in the quitclaim deed, dated April 11, 1991, in Texas, which is currently subject to an applica- (c) PORT OF PASCO, WASHINGTON.— such records. tion for lease for public park and recreational (1) EXTINGUISHMENT OF USE RESTRICTIONS AND (B) ADDITIONAL RELEASE AND EXTINGUISHMENT purposes made by the city of Denison, dated Au- FLOWAGE EASEMENT.—With respect to the prop- OF DEED RESERVATIONS.—The Secretary may gust 17, 2005. erty covered by the deed in paragraph (3)(A)— also release and extinguish the same deed res- (2) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.— (A) the flowage easement and human habi- ervations referred to in subparagraph (A) over The exact acreage and description of the real tation or other building structure use restriction land owned by Lane County, Oregon, within property referred to in paragraph (1) shall be is extinguished if the elevation of the property is the city limits of Lowell, Oregon, to accommo- determined by a survey paid for by the city of above the standard project flood elevation; and date the development proposals of the city of Denison, Texas, that is satisfactory to the Sec- (B) the use of fill material to raise areas of the Lowell/St. Vincent de Paul, Lane County, af- retary. property above the standard project flood ele- fordable housing project; except that the Sec- (3) CONVEYANCE.—On acceptance by the city vation is authorized, except in any area for retary may require, at no cost to the United of Denison, Texas, of an offer under paragraph which a permit under section 404 of the Federal States— (1), the Secretary may immediately convey the Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) is (i) the alteration or relocation of any existing land surveyed under paragraph (2) by quitclaim required. facilities, utilities, roads, or similar improve- deed to the city of Denison, Texas. (2) EXTINGUISHMENT OF FLOWAGE EASEMENT.— ments on such lands; and (i) GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.— With respect to the property covered by each (ii) the right-of-way for such facilities, utili- (1) SURVEY TO OBTAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION.— deed in paragraph (3)(B), the flowage easement ties, or improvements, as a pre-condition of any The exact acreage and the legal description of is extinguished if the elevation of the property is release or extinguishment of the deed reserva- any real property to be conveyed under this sec- above the standard project flood elevation. tions. tion shall be determined by a survey that is sat- (3) AFFECTED DEEDS.—The deeds referred to in (2) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary may convey isfactory to the Secretary. paragraphs (1) and (2) are as follows: to the city of Lowell, Oregon, at fair market (2) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING (A) Auditor’s File Number 262980 of Franklin value the parcel of land situated in the city of PROVISIONS.—Section 2696 of title 10, United County, Washington. Lowell, Oregon, at fair market value consisting States Code, shall not apply to any conveyance (B) Auditor’s File Numbers 263334 and 404398 of the strip of federally-owned lands located under this section. of Franklin County, Washington. northeast of West Boundary Road between (3) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The (d) NO EFFECT ON OTHER RIGHTS.—Nothing in Hyland Lane and the city of Lowell’s eastward Secretary may require that any conveyance this section affects the remaining rights and in- city limits. under this section be subject to such additional terests of the Corps of Engineers for authorized (3) ADMINISTRATIVE COST.—Notwithstanding terms and conditions as the Secretary considers project purposes. paragraphs (1) and (2), the city of Lowell, Or- appropriate and necessary to protect the inter- TITLE IV—STUDIES egon, shall pay the administrative costs in- ests of the United States. SEC. 4001. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN curred by the United States to execute the re- (4) COSTS OF CONVEYANCE.—An entity to PROGRAM. lease and extinguishment of the deed reserva- which a conveyance is made under this section Section 455 of the Water Resources Develop- tions under paragraph (1) and the conveyance shall be responsible for all reasonable and nec- ment Act of 1999 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–21) is amended under paragraph (2). essary costs, including real estate transaction by adding at the end the following:

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3632 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

‘‘(g) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS FOR STUDY.— shall incorporate such plans and designs into that such plans and designs are consistent with The non-Federal interest may provide up to 100 the Federal study if the Secretary determines Federal standards. percent of the non-Federal share required under that such plans and designs are consistent with SEC. 4017. ORICK, CALIFORNIA. subsection (f) in the form of in-kind services and Federal standards. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct materials.’’. SEC. 4010. SEARCY COUNTY, ARKANSAS. a study to determine the feasibility of carrying SEC. 4002. LAKE ERIE DREDGED MATERIAL DIS- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- out a project for flood damage reduction and POSAL SITES. mine the feasibility of using Greers Ferry Lake ecosystem restoration, Orick, California. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- as a water supply source for Searcy County, Ar- (b) FEASIBILITY OF RESTORING OR REHABILI- mine the nature and frequency of avian botu- kansas. TATING REDWOOK CREEK LEVEES.—In con- lism problems in the vicinity of Lake Erie associ- SEC. 4011. ELKHORN SLOUGH ESTUARY, CALI- ducting the study, the Secretary shall determine ated with dredged material disposal sites and FORNIA. the feasibility of restoring or rehabilitating the shall make recommendations to eliminate the The Secretary shall conduct a study of the Redwood Creek Levees, Humboldt County, Cali- conditions that result in such problems. Elkhorn Slough estuary, California, to deter- fornia. SEC. 4003. SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES mine the feasibility of conserving, enhancing, SEC. 4018. RIALTO, FONTANA, AND COLTON, CALI- DROUGHT STUDY. and restoring estuarine habitats by developing FORNIA. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordina- strategies to address hydrological management The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- tion with the Secretary of the Interior, the Sec- issues. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply for Rialto, Fontana, and Colton, retary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Com- SEC. 4012. FRESNO, KINGS, AND KERN COUNTIES, merce, and other appropriate agencies, shall CALIFORNIA. California. conduct, at Federal expense, a comprehensive The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4019. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA. study of drought conditions in the southwestern mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive United States, with particular emphasis on the water supply for Fresno, Kings, and Kern study to determine the feasibility of, and alter- Colorado River basin, the Rio Grande River Counties, California. natives for, measures to protect water diversion basin, and the Great Basin. SEC. 4013. LOS ANGELES RIVER REVITALIZATION facilities and fish protective screen facilities in (b) INVENTORY OF ACTIONS.—In conducting STUDY, CALIFORNIA. the vicinity of river mile 178 on the Sacramento the study, the Secretary shall assemble an in- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordina- River, California. ventory of actions taken or planned to be taken tion with the city of Los Angeles, shall— SEC. 4020. SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. to address drought-related situations in the (1) prepare a feasibility study for environ- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- southwestern United States. mental restoration, flood control, recreation, mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for (c) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the study shall and other aspects of Los Angeles River revital- water supply, San Diego County, California, in- be to develop recommendations to more effec- ization that is consistent with the goals of the cluding a review of the feasibility of connecting tively address current and future drought condi- Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan 4 existing reservoirs to increase usable storage tions in the southwestern United States. published by the city of Los Angeles; and capacity. (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (2) consider any locally-preferred project al- SEC. 4021. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO- There are authorized to be appropriated to the ternatives developed through a full and open SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA. Secretary to carry out this section $7,000,000. evaluation process for inclusion in the study. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct Such funds shall remain available until ex- (b) USE OF EXISTING INFORMATION AND MEAS- a study to determine the feasibility of the bene- pended. URES.—In preparing the study under subsection ficial use of dredged material from the San SEC. 4004. DELAWARE RIVER. (a), the Secretary shall use, to the maximum ex- Francisco Bay in the Sacramento-San Joaquin The Secretary shall review, in consultation tent practicable— Delta, California, including the benefits and im- with the Delaware River Basin Commission and (1) information obtained from the Los Angeles pacts of salinity in the Delta and the benefits to the States of Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jer- River Revitalization Master Plan; and navigation, flood damage reduction, ecosystem sey, and New York, the report of the Chief of (2) the development process of that plan. restoration, water quality, salinity control, Engineers on the Delaware River, published as (c) DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.— water supply reliability, and recreation. House Document Numbered 522, 87th Congress, (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (b) COOPERATION.—In conducting the study, Second Session, as it relates to the Mid-Dela- to construct demonstration projects in order to the Secretary shall cooperate with the Cali- ware River Basin from Wilmington to Port Jer- provide information to develop the study under fornia Department of Water Resources and ap- vis, and any other pertinent reports (including subsection (a)(1). propriate Federal and State entities in devel- the strategy for resolution of interstate flow (2) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the oping options for the beneficial use of dredged management issues in the Delaware River Basin cost of any project under this subsection shall material from San Francisco Bay for the Sac- dated August 2004 and the National Park Serv- be not more than 65 percent. ramento-San Joaquin Delta area. ice Lower Delaware River Management Plan (3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (c) REVIEW.—The study shall include a review (1997–1999)), with a view to determining whether There is authorized to be appropriated to carry of the feasibility of using Sherman Island as a any modifications of recommendations con- out this subsection $20,000,000. rehandling site for levee maintenance material, tained in the first report referred to are advis- as well as for ecosystem restoration. The review SEC. 4014. LYTLE CREEK, RIALTO, CALIFORNIA. able at the present time, in the interest of flood may include monitoring a pilot project using up The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, and to 150,000 cubic yards of dredged material and mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for other related problems. being carried out at the Sherman Island site, ex- flood damage reduction and groundwater re- amining larger scale use of dredged materials SEC. 4005. KNIK ARM, COOK INLET, ALASKA. charge, Lytle Creek, Rialto, California. The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal ex- from the San Francisco Bay and Suisun Bay pense, a study to determine the potential im- SEC. 4015. MOKELUMNE RIVER, SAN JOAQUIN Channel, and analyzing the feasibility of the COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. pacts on navigation of construction of a bridge potential use of saline materials from the San (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct across Knik Arm, Cook Inlet, Alaska. Francisco Bay for both rehandling and eco- a study to determine the feasibility of carrying system restoration purposes. SEC. 4006. KUSKOKWIM RIVER, ALASKA. out a project for water supply along the SEC. 4022. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORE- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Mokelumne River, San Joaquin County, Cali- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for LINE STUDY, CALIFORNIA. fornia. (a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting the South navigation, Kuskokwim River, Alaska, in the vi- (b) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUC- cinity of the village of Crooked Creek. San Francisco Bay shoreline study, the Sec- TION.—Nothing in this section shall be con- retary shall— SEC. 4007. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA. strued to invalidate, preempt, or create any ex- (1) review the planning, design, and land ac- The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal ex- ception to State water law, State water rights, quisition documents prepared by the California pense, a study to determine the feasibility of or Federal or State permitted activities or agree- State Coastal Conservancy, the Santa Clara providing navigation improvements at St. ments. Valley Water District, and other local interests George Harbor, Alaska. SEC. 4016. NAPA RIVER, ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA. in developing recommendations for measures to SEC. 4008. SUSITNA RIVER, ALASKA. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct provide flood protection of the South San Fran- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- a comprehensive study of the Napa River in the cisco Bay shoreline, restoration of the South mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for vicinity of St. Helena, California, for the pur- San Francisco Bay salt ponds (including lands hydropower, recreation, and related purposes on poses of improving flood management through owned by the Department of the Interior), and the Susitna River, Alaska. reconnecting the river to its floodplain; restoring other related purposes; and SEC. 4009. GILA BEND, MARICOPA, ARIZONA. habitat, including riparian and aquatic habitat; (2) incorporate such planning, design, and (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct improving fish passage and water quality; and land acquisition documents into the Federal a study to determine the feasibility of carrying restoring native plant communities. study if the Secretary determines that such doc- out a project for flood damage reduction, Gila (b) PLANS AND DESIGNS.—In conducting the uments are consistent with Federal standards. Bend, Maricopa, Arizona. study, the Secretary shall review plans and de- (b) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, (b) REVIEW OF PLANS.—In conducting the signs developed by non-Federal interests and 2008, the Secretary shall transmit a feasibility study, the Secretary shall review plans and de- shall incorporate such plans and designs into report for the South San Francisco Bay shore- signs developed by non-Federal interests and the Federal study if the Secretary determines line study to the Committee on Transportation

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3633 and Infrastructure of the House of Representa- the Secretary determines that the work is inte- flood damage reduction, St. Louis, Missouri, to tives and the Committee on Environment and gral to the project. restore or rehabilitate the levee system feature of Public Works of the Senate. SEC. 4033. BALLARD’S ISLAND SIDE CHANNEL, IL- the project for flood protection, St. Louis, Mis- (c) CREDIT.— LINOIS. souri, authorized by the first section of the Act (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall credit to- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing construction of ward the non-Federal share of the cost of any mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for certain public works on the Mississippi River for project authorized by law as a result of the ecosystem restoration, Ballard’s Island, Illinois. the protection of Saint Louis, Missouri’’, ap- South San Francisco Bay shoreline study the SEC. 4034. SALEM, INDIANA. proved August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 540). cost of work carried out by the non-Federal in- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4044. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL, NEW terest before the date of the partnership agree- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project to JERSEY. ment for the project if the Secretary determines provide an additional water supply source for The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- that the work is integral to the project. Salem, Indiana. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project in (2) LIMITATION.—In no case may work that SEC. 4035. BUCKHORN LAKE, KENTUCKY. the vicinity of the Atlantic Intracoastal Water- was carried out more than 5 years before the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct way, New Jersey, for the construction of a date of enactment of this Act be eligible for cred- a study to determine the feasibility of modifying dredged material disposal transfer facility to it under this subsection. the project for flood damage reduction, make dredged material available for beneficial SEC. 4023. TWENTYNINE PALMS, CALIFORNIA. Buckhorn Lake, Kentucky, authorized by sec- reuse. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- tion 2 of the Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 SEC. 4045. BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for (52 Stat. 1217), to add ecosystem restoration, The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- flood damage reduction, Pinto Cove Wash, in recreation, and improved access as project pur- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for the vicinity of Twentynine Palms, California. poses, including permanently raising the winter environmental restoration, including improved SEC. 4024. YUCCA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA. pool elevation of the project. water quality, enhanced public access, and The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (b) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The non-Fed- recreation, on the Kill Van Kull, Bayonne, New mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for eral interest may provide the non-Federal share Jersey. flood damage reduction, West Burnt Mountain of the cost of the study in the form of in-kind SEC. 4046. CARTERET, NEW JERSEY. basin, in the vicinity of Yucca Valley, Cali- services and materials. fornia. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4036. DEWEY LAKE, KENTUCKY. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for SEC. 4025. ROARING FORK RIVER, BASALT, COLO- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- RADO. environmental restoration, including improved mine the feasibility of modifying the project for water quality, enhanced public access, and The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Dewey Lake, Kentucky, to add water supply as mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for recreation, on the Raritan River, Carteret, New a project purpose. Jersey. flood damage reduction and other purposes for SEC. 4037. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. SEC. 4047. GLOUCESTER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. the Roaring Fork River, Basalt, Colorado. The Secretary shall conduct a study of the The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4026. DELAWARE AND CHRISTINA RIVERS project for flood control, Louisville, Kentucky, mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for AND SHELLPOT CREEK, WIL- authorized by section 4 of the Flood Control Act MINGTON, DELAWARE. flood damage reduction, Gloucester County, of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), to investigate The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- New Jersey, including the feasibility of restoring measures to address the rehabilitation of the mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for the flood protection dikes in Gibbstown, New project. flood damage reduction and related purposes Jersey, and the associated tidegates in Glouces- along the Delaware and Christina Rivers and SEC. 4038. FALL RIVER HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS ter County, New Jersey. AND RHODE ISLAND. Shellpot Creek, Wilmington, Delaware. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4048. PERTH AMBOY, NEW JERSEY. SEC. 4027. COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES, FLORIDA. mine the feasibility of deepening that portion of The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- the navigation channel of the navigation project mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for for Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and Rhode riverfront development, including enhanced hurricane and storm damage reduction and Island, authorized by section 101 of the River public access, recreation, and environmental flood damage reduction in the vicinity of Van- and Harbor Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 731), seaward of restoration, on the Arthur Kill, Perth Amboy, derbilt, Park Shore, and Naples beaches, Collier the Charles M. Braga, Jr. Memorial Bridge, Fall New Jersey. County, Florida. River and Somerset, Massachusetts. SEC. 4049. BATAVIA, NEW YORK. SEC. 4028. LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA. SEC. 4039. CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for hydropower and related purposes in the vicinity environmental protection and restoration, in- environmental restoration, Clinton River, Michi- of Batavia, New York. cluding improved water quality, and related gan. SEC. 4050. BIG SISTER CREEK, EVANS, NEW YORK. purposes, Lower St. Johns River, Florida. SEC. 4040. HAMBURG AND GREEN OAK TOWN- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct SEC. 4029. VANDERBILT BEACH LAGOON, FLOR- SHIPS, MICHIGAN. a study to determine the feasibility of carrying IDA. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- out a project for flood damage reduction, Big The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for Sister Creek, Evans, New York. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction on Ore Lake and the (b) EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS.— environmental restoration, water supply, and Huron River for Hamburg and Green Oak In conducting the study, the Secretary shall improvement of water quality at Vanderbilt Townships, Michigan. evaluate potential solutions to flooding from all Beach Lagoon, Florida. SEC. 4041. DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MIN- sources, including flooding that results from ice SEC. 4030. MERIWETHER COUNTY, GEORGIA. NESOTA AND WISCONSIN. jams. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct SEC. 4051. FINGER LAKES, NEW YORK. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for a study and prepare a report to evaluate the in- water supply, Meriwether County, Georgia. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- tegrity of the bulkhead system located on and in mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for SEC. 4031. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA. the vicinity of Duluth-Superior Harbor, Duluth, aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection, The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin. Finger Lakes, New York, to address water qual- (b) CONTENTS.—The report shall include— mine the feasibility of including the northern ity and aquatic nuisance species. end of Tybee Island extending from the north (1) a determination of causes of corrosion of terminal groin to the mouth of Lazaretto Creek the bulkhead system; SEC. 4052. LAKE ERIE SHORELINE, BUFFALO, NEW YORK. as a part of the project for beach erosion con- (2) recommendations to reduce corrosion of the The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- trol, Tybee Island, Georgia, carried out under bulkhead system; mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (42 (3) a description of the necessary repairs to storm damage reduction and shoreline protec- U.S.C. 1962d–5). the bulkhead system; and tion in the vicinity of Gallagher Beach, Lake SEC. 4032. BOISE RIVER, IDAHO. (4) an estimate of the cost of addressing the causes of the corrosion and carrying out nec- Erie Shoreline, Buffalo, New York. The study for flood control, Boise River, essary repairs. SEC. 4053. NEWTOWN CREEK, NEW YORK. Idaho, authorized by section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. SEC. 4042. NORTHEAST MISSISSIPPI. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- 324), is modified— The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- mine the feasibility of carrying out ecosystem (1) to add ecosystem restoration and water mine the feasibility of modifying the project for restoration improvements on Newtown Creek, supply as project purposes to be studied; and navigation, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, Brooklyn and Queens, New York. (2) to require the Secretary to credit toward Alabama and Mississippi, to provide water sup- SEC. 4054. NIAGARA RIVER, NEW YORK. the non-Federal share of the cost of the study ply for northeast Mississippi. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- the cost, not to exceed $500,000, of work carried SEC. 4043. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for out by the non-Federal interest before the date The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- a low-head hydroelectric generating facility in of the partnership agreement for the project if mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for the Niagara River, New York.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3634 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 SEC. 4055. SHORE PARKWAY GREENWAY, BROOK- SEC. 4064. CHARTIERS CREEK WATERSHED, PENN- flood damage reduction, Chattanooga Creek, LYN, NEW YORK. SYLVANIA. Dobbs Branch, Chattanooga, Tennessee. The Secretary shall conduct a study of the The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 4073. CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE. feasibility of carrying out a project for shoreline mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- protection in the vicinity of the confluence of flood damage reduction, Chartiers Creek water- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for the Narrows and Gravesend Bay, Upper New shed, Pennsylvania. flood damage reduction, Cleveland, Tennessee. York Bay, Shore Parkway Greenway, Brooklyn, SEC. 4065. KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RES- SEC. 4074. CUMBERLAND RIVER, NASHVILLE, TEN- ERVOIR, PENNSYLVANIA. New York. NESSEE. The Secretary shall conduct a study of the SEC. 4056. UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- project for flood control, Kinzua Dam and Alle- NEW YORK. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for gheny Reservoir, Warren, Pennsylvania, au- Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood Con- recreation on, riverbank protection for, and en- thorized by section 5 of the Flood Control Act of trol Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b) and with vironmental protection of, the Cumberland River June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1570), and modified by the consent of the affected local government, a and riparian habitats in the city of Nashville section 2 of the Flood Control Act of June 28, nonprofit organization may serve as the non- and Davidson County, Tennessee. Federal interest for a study for the Upper Dela- 1938 (52 Stat. 1215), section 2 of the Flood Con- trol Act of August 18, 1941 (55 Stat. 646), and SEC. 4075. LEWIS, LAWRENCE, AND WAYNE COUN- ware River watershed, New York, being carried TIES, TENNESSEE. section 4 of the Flood Control Act of December out under Committee Resolution 2495 of the The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 887), to review operations of Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for and identify modifications to the project to ex- ture of the House of Representatives, adopted water supply for Lewis, Lawrence, and Wayne pand recreational opportunities. May 9, 1996. Counties, Tennessee. SEC. 4057. LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. SEC. 4066. WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD DAM- AGE REDUCTION, PENNSYLVANIA. SEC. 4076. WOLF RIVER AND NONCONNAH CREEK, The Secretary shall conduct a study of exist- MEMPHIS TENNESSEE. ing water and water quality-related infrastruc- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a study of structural and nonstructural flood The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- ture in Lincoln County, North Carolina, to as- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for sist local interests in determining the most effi- damage reduction, stream bank protection, storm water management, channel clearing and flood damage reduction along Wolf River and cient and effective way to connect county infra- Nonconnah Creek, in the vicinity of Memphis, structure. modification, and watershed coordination meas- ures in the Mahoning River basin, Pennsyl- Tennessee, to include the repair, replacement, SEC. 4058. WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. rehabilitation, and restoration of the following The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- vania, the Allegheny River basin, Pennsylvania, and the Upper Ohio River basin, Pennsylvania, pumping stations: Cypress Creek, Nonconnah mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for Creek, Ensley, Marble Bayou, and Bayou water supply, Wilkes County, North Carolina. to provide a level of flood protection sufficient to prevent future losses to communities located Gayoso. SEC. 4059. YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA. SEC. 4077. ABILENE, TEXAS. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- in such basins from flooding such as occurred in September 2004, but not less than a 100-year The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply, Yadkinville, North Carolina. level of flood protection. (b) PRIORITY COMMUNITIES.—In carrying out water supply, Abilene, Texas. SEC. 4060. LAKE ERIE, OHIO. this section, the Secretary shall give priority to SEC. 4078. COASTAL TEXAS ECOSYSTEM PROTEC- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- the following Pennsylvania communities: Mar- TION AND RESTORATION, TEXAS. mine the feasibility of carrying out projects for shall Township, Ross Township, Shaler Town- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop power generation at confined disposal facilities ship, Jackson Township, Harmony, Zelienople, a comprehensive plan to determine the feasi- along Lake Erie, Ohio. Darlington Township, Houston Borough, bility of carrying out projects for flood damage SEC. 4061. OHIO RIVER, OHIO. Chartiers Township, Washington, Canton reduction, hurricane and storm damage reduc- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Township, Tarentum Borough, and East Deer tion, and ecosystem restoration in the coastal mine the feasibility of carrying out projects for Township. areas of the State of Texas. flood damage reduction on the Ohio River in SEC. 4067. WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYLVANIA. (b) SCOPE.—The comprehensive plan shall Mahoning, Columbiana, Jefferson, Belmont, The Secretary shall conduct a study of the provide for the protection, conservation, and Noble, Monroe, Washington, Athens, Meigs, project for flood control, Williamsport, Pennsyl- restoration of wetlands, barrier islands, shore- Gallia, Lawrence, and Scioto Counties, Ohio. vania, authorized by section 5 of the Flood Con- lines, and related lands and features that pro- SEC. 4062. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND FISH trol Act of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1570), to inves- tect critical resources, habitat, and infrastruc- PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS, OREGON. tigate measures to rehabilitate the project. ture from the impacts of coastal storms, hurri- (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a SEC. 4068. YARDLEY BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA. canes, erosion, and subsidence. study to determine the feasibility of undertaking The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, ecosystem restoration and fish passage improve- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for the term ‘‘coastal areas in the State of Texas’’ ments on rivers throughout the State of Oregon. flood damage reduction, at Yardley Borough, means the coastal areas of the State of Texas (b) REQUIREMENTS.—In carrying out the Pennsylvania, including the alternative of rais- from the Sabine River on the east to the Rio study, the Secretary shall— Grande River on the west and includes tidal wa- (1) work in coordination with the State of Or- ing River Road. SEC. 4069. RIO VALENCIANO, JUNCOS, PUERTO ters, barrier islands, marshes, coastal wetlands, egon, local governments, and other Federal rivers and streams, and adjacent areas. agencies; and RICO. (2) place emphasis on— (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct SEC. 4079. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS. (A) fish passage and conservation and res- a study to reevaluate the project for flood dam- (a) REEVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RES- toration strategies to benefit species that are age reduction and water supply, Rio TORATION FEATURES.—The Secretary shall re- listed or proposed for listing as threatened or Valenciano, Juncos, Puerto Rico, authorized by evaluate the project for flood damage reduction, endangered species under the Endangered Spe- section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 environmental restoration, and recreation, au- cies Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and Stat. 1197) and section 204 of the Flood Control thorized by section 101(b)(14) of the Water Re- (B) other watershed restoration objectives. Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1828), to determine the fea- sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 280), (c) PILOT PROGRAM.— sibility of carrying out the project. to develop alternatives to the separable environ- (1) IN GENERAL.—In conjunction with con- (b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- mental restoration element of the project. ducting the study under subsection (a), the Sec- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the (b) STUDY OF ADDITIONAL FLOOD DAMAGE RE- retary may carry out pilot projects to dem- study the cost of work carried out by the non- DUCTION MEASURES.—The Secretary shall con- onstrate the effectiveness of ecosystem restora- Federal interest before the date of the partner- duct a study to determine the feasibility of addi- tion and fish passages. ship agreement for the project if the Secretary tional flood damage reduction measures and (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— determines that the work is integral to the erosion control measures within the boundaries There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 project. of the project referred to in subsection (a). to carry out this subsection. SEC. 4070. CROOKED CREEK, BENNETTSVILLE, (c) PLANS AND DESIGNS.—In conducting the SEC. 4063. WALLA WALLA RIVER BASIN, OREGON. SOUTH CAROLINA. studies referred to in subsections (a) and (b), the In conducting the study of determine the fea- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Secretary shall review plans and designs devel- sibility of carrying out a project for ecosystem mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for oped by non-Federal interests and shall use restoration, Walla Walla River Basin, Oregon, water supply, Crooked Creek, Bennettsville, such plans and designs to the extent that the the Secretary shall— South Carolina. Secretary determines that such plans and de- (1) credit toward the non-Federal share of the SEC. 4071. BROAD RIVER, YORK COUNTY, SOUTH signs are consistent with Federal standards. cost of the study the cost of work carried out by CAROLINA. (d) CREDIT TOWARD FEDERAL SHARE.—If an the non-Federal interest before the date of the The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- alternative environmental restoration element is partnership agreement for the project if the Sec- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for authorized by law, the Secretary shall credit to- retary determines that the work is integral to water supply, Broad River, York County, South ward the Federal share of the cost of that the project; and Carolina. project the costs incurred by the Secretary to (2) allow the non-Federal interest to provide SEC. 4072. CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE. carry out the separable environmental restora- the non-Federal share of the cost of the study in The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- tion element of the project referred to in sub- the form of in-kind services and materials. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for section (a). The non-Federal interest shall not

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3635 be responsible for reimbursing the Secretary for SEC. 4088. JOHNSONVILLE DAM, JOHNSONVILLE, (13) Long Island Sound watershed, New York. any amount credited under this subsection. WISCONSIN. (14) Ramapo River watershed, New York. (e) CREDIT TOWARD THE NON-FEDERAL The Secretary shall conduct a study of the (15) Western Lake Erie basin, Ohio. SHARE.—The Secretary shall credit toward the Johnsonville Dam, Johnsonville, Wisconsin, to (16) Those portions of the watersheds of the non-Federal share of the cost of the studies determine if the structure prevents ice jams on Beaver, Upper Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower under subsections (a) and (b), and the cost of the Sheboygan River. Allegheny, Kiskiminetas, Lower Monongahela, any project carried out as a result of such stud- TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Riv- ies the cost of work carried out by the non-Fed- SEC. 5001. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHAN- ers lying within the counties of Beaver, Butler, eral interest. NELS. Lawrence, and Mercer, Pennsylvania. SEC. 4080. PORT OF GALVESTON, TEXAS. (a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Fed- (17) Otter Creek watershed, Pennsylvania. (18) Unami Creek watershed, Milford Town- The Secretary shall conduct a study of the eral interest, the Secretary shall be responsible ship, Pennsylvania. feasibility of carrying out a project for dredged for maintenance of the following navigation (19) Sauk River basin, Washington. material disposal in the vicinity of the project channels and breakwaters constructed or im- (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— for navigation and environmental restoration, proved by the non-Federal interest if the Sec- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas, retary determines that such maintenance is eco- out this section $15,000,000. authorized by section 101(a)(30) of the Water nomically justified and environmentally accept- Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. able and that the channel or breakwater was SEC. 5003. DAM SAFETY. 3666). constructed in accordance with applicable per- (a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide assistance to enhance dam safety at the fol- SEC. 4081. GRAND COUNTY AND MOAB, UTAH. mits and appropriate engineering and design standards: lowing locations: The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (1) Manatee Harbor basin, Florida. (1) Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for (2) Bayou LaFourche Channel, Port (2) Hamilton Dam, Saginaw River, Flint, water supply for Grand County and the city of Fourchon, Louisiana. Michigan. Moab, Utah, including a review of the impact of (3) Calcasieu River at Devil’s Elbow, Lou- (3) State Dam, Auburn, New York. current and future demands on the Spanish isiana. (4) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York. Valley Aquifer. (4) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, Pidgeon Indus- (5) Ingham Spring Dam, Solebury Township, SEC. 4082. SOUTHWESTERN UTAH. trial Park, Memphis Harbor, Tennessee. Pennsylvania. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (5) Pix Bayou Navigation Channel, Chambers (6) Leaser Lake Dam, Lehigh County, Penn- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for County, Texas. sylvania. flood damage reduction, Santa Clara River, (6) Racine Harbor, Wisconsin. (7) Stillwater Dam, Monroe County, Pennsyl- Washington, Iron, and Kane Counties, Utah. (b) COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT.—Not later vania. SEC. 4083. CHOWAN RIVER BASIN, VIRGINIA AND than 6 months after the date of receipt of a re- (8) Wissahickon Creek Dam, Montgomery NORTH CAROLINA. quest from a non-Federal interest for Federal County, Pennsylvania. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- assumption of maintenance of a channel listed (b) SPECIAL RULE.—The assistance provided mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for in subsection (a), the Secretary shall make a de- under subsection (a) for State Dam, Auburn, flood damage reduction, environmental restora- termination as provided in subsection (a) and New York, shall be for a project for rehabilita- tion, navigation, and erosion control, Chowan advise the non-Federal interest of the Sec- tion in accordance with the report on State Dam River basin, Virginia and North Carolina. retary’s determination. Rehabilitation, Owasco Lake Outlet, New York, SEC. 5002. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT. dated March 1999, if the Secretary determines SEC. 4084. ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide that the project is feasible. technical, planning, and design assistance to (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (a) IN GENERAL.—The study for rehabilitation of the Elliott Bay Seawall, Seattle, Washington, non-Federal interests for carrying out water- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry being carried out under Committee Resolution shed management, restoration, and development out subsection (a) $6,000,000. 2704 of the Committee on Transportation and projects at the locations described in subsection SEC. 5004. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUA- Infrastructure of the House of Representatives (d). TIONS. (b) SPECIFIC MEASURES.—Assistance provided adopted September 25, 2002, is modified to in- (a) IN GENERAL.—Upon request of a non-Fed- under subsection (a) may be in support of non- clude a determination of the feasibility of reduc- eral interest, the Secretary shall evaluate the Federal projects for the following purposes: ing future damage to the seawall from seismic structural integrity and effectiveness of a (1) Management and restoration of water activity. project for flood damage reduction and, if the quality. CCEPTANCE OF CONTRIBUTIONS.—In car- Secretary determines that the project does not (b) A (2) Control and remediation of toxic sedi- rying out the study, the Secretary may accept meet such minimum standards as the Secretary ments. contributions in excess of the non-Federal share may establish and, absent action by the Sec- (3) Restoration of degraded streams, rivers, retary, the project will fail, the Secretary may of the cost of the study from the non-Federal in- wetlands, and other waterbodies to their nat- terest to the extent that the Secretary deter- take such action as may be necessary to restore ural condition as a means to control flooding, the integrity and effectiveness of the project. mines that the contributions will facilitate com- excessive erosion, and sedimentation. pletion of the study. (b) PRIORITY.—The Secretary shall evaluate (4) Protection and restoration of watersheds, under subsection (a) the following projects: (c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward including urban watersheds. the non-Federal share of the cost of any project (1) Project for flood damage reduction, Arkan- (5) Demonstration of technologies for non- sas River Levees, Arkansas. authorized by law as a result of the study the structural measures to reduce destructive im- value of contributions accepted by the Secretary (2) Project for flood damage reduction, pacts of flooding. Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee. under subsection (b). (c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal SEC. 5005. FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS. SEC. 4085. MONONGAHELA RIVER BASIN, NORTH- share of the cost of assistance provided under (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 212(e) of the Water ERN WEST VIRGINIA. subsection (a) shall be 50 percent. Resources Development Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (d) PROJECT LOCATIONS.—The locations re- mine the feasibility of carrying out aquatic eco- ferred to in subsection (a) are the following: 2332(e); 114 Stat. 2599) is amended— system restoration and protection projects in the (1) Big Creek watershed, Roswell, Georgia. (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- watersheds of the Monongahela River Basin (2) Those portions of the watersheds of the graphs (23) and (27); lying within the counties of Hancock, Ohio, Chattahoochee, Etowah, Flint, Ocmulgee, and (2) by striking the period at the end of para- Marshall, Wetzel, Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, Oconee Rivers lying within the counties of graph (28) and inserting a semicolon; and Doddridge, Monongalia, Marion, Harrison, Tay- Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, (3) by adding at the end the following: lor, Barbour, Preston, Tucker, Mineral, Grant, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Forsyth, ‘‘(29) Ascension Parish, Louisiana; ‘‘(30) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana; Gilmer, Brooke, and Rithchie, West Virginia, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Paulding, Rockdale, and ‘‘(31) Iberville Parish, Louisiana; particularly as related to abandoned mine Walton, Georgia. ‘‘(32) Livingston Parish, Louisiana; and drainage abatement. (3) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois. ‘‘(33) Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana.’’. SEC. 4086. KENOSHA HARBOR, WISCONSIN. (4) Amite River basin, Louisiana. (5) East Atchafalaya River basin, Iberville (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- tion 212(i)(1) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2332(i)(1)) is mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for Parish and Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana. (6) Red River watershed, Louisiana. amended by striking ‘‘section—’’ and all that navigation, Kenosha Harbor, Wisconsin, includ- (7) Lower Platte River watershed, Nebraska. follows before the period at the end and insert- ing the extension of existing piers. (8) Rio Grande watershed, New Mexico. ing ‘‘section $20,000,000’’. SEC. 4087. WAUWATOSA, WISCONSIN. (9) Taunton River basin, Massachusetts. SEC. 5006. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AU- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (10) Marlboro Township, New Jersey. THORIZED PROJECTS. mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for (11) Esopus, Plattekill, and Rondout Creeks, (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 219(e) of the Water flood damage reduction and environmental res- Greene, Sullivan, and Ulster Counties, New Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. toration, Menomonee River and Underwood York. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 334) is amended— Creek, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, and greater Mil- (12) Greenwood Lake watershed, New York (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph waukee watersheds, Wisconsin. and New Jersey. (7);

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3636 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (2) by striking the period at the end of para- SEC. 5009. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES (1) investigate and identify environmentally graph (8) and inserting a semicolon; and ASSESSMENT. sound methods for preventing and reducing the (3) by adding at the end the following: (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall con- dispersal of aquatic nuisance species; ‘‘(9) $35,000,000 for the project described in duct, at Federal expense, an assessment of the (2) study, design, and carry out a project for subsection (c)(18); water resources needs of the river basins and a dispersal barrier, using available technologies ‘‘(10) $27,000,000 for the project described in watersheds of the southeastern United States. and measures, to be located in the lock portion subsection (c)(19); (b) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—In carrying of Lock and Dam 11 in the Upper Mississippi ‘‘(11) $20,000,000 for the project described in out the assessment, the Secretary may enter into River basin; subsection (c)(20); cooperative agreements with State and local (3) monitor and evaluate, in cooperation with ‘‘(12) $35,000,000 for the project described in agencies, non-Federal and nonprofit entities, the Director of the United States Fish and Wild- subsection (c)(23); and regional researchers. life Service, the effectiveness of the project in ‘‘(13) $20,000,000 for the project described in (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— preventing and reducing the dispersal of aquatic subsection (c)(25); There is authorized to be appropriated $7,000,000 nuisance species through the Upper Mississippi ‘‘(14) $20,000,000 for the project described in to carry out this section. River system, and report to the Committee on subsection (c)(26); SEC. 5010. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRON- Transportation and Infrastructure of the House MENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. ‘‘(15) $35,000,000 for the project described in of Representatives and the Committee on Envi- Section 1103(e)(7) of the Water Resources De- subsection (c)(27); ronment and Public Works of the Senate on the velopment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(7)) is ‘‘(16) $20,000,000 for the project described in results of the evaluation; and amended— subsection (c)(28); and (4) operate and maintain the project. (1) by adding at the end of subparagraph (A) (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ‘‘(17) $30,000,000 for the project described in the following: ‘‘The non-Federal interest may subsection (c)(40).’’. There is authorized to be appropriated $4,000,000 provide the non-Federal share of the cost of the to carry out this section. (b) EAST ARKANSAS ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY, project in the form of in-kind services and mate- ARKANSAS.—Federal assistance made available SEC. 5017. SUSQUEHANNA, DELAWARE, AND PO- rials.’’; and TOMAC RIVER BASINS, DELAWARE, under the rural enterprise zone program of the (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the Department of Agriculture may be used toward MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA, AND following: VIRGINIA. payment of the non-Federal share of the costs of ‘‘(C) Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood (a) EX OFFICIO MEMBER.—Notwithstanding the project described in section 219(c)(20) of the Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), a non- section 3001(a) of the 1997 Emergency Supple- Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (114 Federal interest may include for any project un- mental Appropriations Act for Recovery From Stat. 2763A–219) if such assistance is authorized dertaken under this section, a nonprofit entity Natural Disasters, and for Overseas Peace- to be used for such purposes. with the consent of the affected local govern- keeping Efforts, Including Those in Bosnia SEC. 5007. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS ment.’’. (Public Law 105–18; 111 Stat. 176), section 2.2 of AND CONSTRUCTION FOR CERTAIN SEC. 5011. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI PROJECTS. the Susquehanna River Basin Compact (Public RIVER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT. Law 91–575), and section 2.2 of the Delaware The Secretary shall expedite completion of the Section 514(g) of the Water Resources Devel- River Basin Compact (Public Law 87–328), be- reports and, if the Secretary determines that the opment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 343; 117 Stat. 142) ginning in fiscal year 2002, and each fiscal year project is feasible, shall expedite completion of is amended by striking ‘‘and 2004’’ and inserting thereafter, the Division Engineer, North Atlan- construction for the following projects: ‘‘through 2015’’. tic Division, Corps of Engineers— (1) False River, Louisiana, being carried out SEC. 5012. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECO- (1) shall be the ex officio United States mem- under section 206 of the Water Resources Devel- SYSTEM RESTORATION. ber under the Susquehanna River Basin Com- opment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). Section 506(f)(3)(B) of the Water Resources pact, the Delaware River Basin Compact, and (2) Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk, New Development Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–22; 114 the Potomac River Basin Compact; York, being carried out under section 205 of the Stat. 2646) is amended by striking ‘‘50 percent’’ (2) shall serve without additional compensa- Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). and inserting ‘‘100 percent’’. tion; and (3) Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New SEC. 5013. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION (3) may designate an alternate member in ac- York, being carried out under section 205 of the PLANS AND SEDIMENT REMEDI- cordance with the terms of those compacts. Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). ATION. (b) AUTHORIZATION TO ALLOCATE.—The Sec- (4) Steele Creek, Village of Ilion, New York, Section 401(c) of the Water Resources Develop- retary shall allocate funds to the Susquehanna being carried out under section 205 of the Flood ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4644; 33 U.S.C. 1268 River Basin Commission, Delaware River Basin Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). note) is amended by striking ‘‘through 2006’’ Commission, and the Interstate Commission on (5) Oriskany Wildlife Management Area, and inserting ‘‘through 2012’’. the Potomac River Basin (Potomac River Basin Rome, New York, being carried out under sec- SEC. 5014. GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODELS. Compact (Public Law 91–407)) to fulfill the equi- tion 206 of the Water Resources Development Section 516(g)(2) of the Water Resources De- table funding requirements of the respective Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). velopment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326b(g)(2)) is interstate compacts. (6) Whitney Point Lake, Otselic River, Whit- amended by striking ‘‘through 2006’’ and insert- (c) WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION STOR- ney Point, New York, being carried out under ing ‘‘through 2012’’. AGE, DELAWARE RIVER BASIN.— section 1135 of the Water Resources Develop- SEC. 5015. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION. (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a). (a) IN GENERAL.—Using available funds, the into an agreement with the Delaware River (7) North River, Peabody, Massachusetts, Secretary shall expedite the operation and Basin Commission to provide temporary water being carried out under section 205 of the Flood maintenance, including dredging, of the naviga- supply and conservation storage at the Francis Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). tion features of the Great Lakes and Connecting E. Walter Dam, Pennsylvania, for any period (8) Chenango Lake, Chenango County, New Channels for the purpose of supporting commer- during which the Commission has determined York, being carried out under section 206 of the cial navigation to authorized project depths. that a drought warning or drought emergency Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 (b) GREAT LAKES AND CONNECTING CHANNELS exists. U.S.C. 2330). DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘Great (2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide SEC. 5008. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS Lakes and Connecting Channels’’ includes that the cost for water supply and conservation FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS. Lakes Superior, Huron, Michigan, Erie, and storage under paragraph (1) shall not exceed the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall expedite Ontario, all connecting waters between and incremental operating costs associated with pro- completion of the reports for the following among such lakes used for commercial naviga- viding the storage. projects and, if the Secretary determines that a tion, any navigation features in such lakes or (d) WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION STOR- project is justified in the completed report, pro- waters that are a Federal operation or mainte- AGE, SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN.— ceed directly to project preconstruction, engi- nance responsibility, and areas of the Saint (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter neering, and design: Lawrence River that are operated or maintained into an agreement with the Susquehanna River (1) Project for water supply, Little Red River, by the Federal government for commercial navi- Basin Commission to provide temporary water Arkansas. gation. supply and conservation storage at Federal fa- (2) Project for shoreline stabilization at SEC. 5016. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER DISPERSAL cilities operated by the Corps of Engineers in the Egmont Key, Florida. BARRIER PROJECT. Susquehanna River Basin for any period for (3) Project for ecosystem restoration, Univer- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consulta- which the Commission has determined that a sity Lake, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. tion with appropriate Federal and State agen- drought warning or drought emergency exists. (4) Project for navigation, Sabine-Neches Wa- cies, shall study, design, and carry out a project (2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide terway, Texas and Louisiana. for preventing and reducing the dispersal of that the cost for water supply and conservation (b) SPECIAL RULE FOR EGMONT KEY, FLOR- aquatic nuisance species through the Upper storage under paragraph (1) shall not exceed the IDA.—In carrying out the project for shoreline Mississippi River system. The Secretary shall incremental operating costs associated with pro- stabilization at Egmont Key, Florida, referred to complete the study, design, and construction of viding the storage. in subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall waive the project not later than 6 months after the (e) WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION STOR- any cost share to be provided by non-Federal in- date of enactment of this Act. AGE, POTOMAC RIVER BASIN.— terests for any portion of the project that bene- (b) DISPERSAL BARRIER.—The Secretary, at (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter fits federally owned property. Federal expense, shall— into an agreement with the Potomac River

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3637 Basin Commission to provide temporary water burn, Alabama. There is authorized to be appro- SEC. 5033. ST. HERMAN AND ST. PAUL HARBORS, supply and conservation storage at Federal fa- priated $5,000,000 to carry out this section. KODIAK, ALASKA. cilities operated by the Corps of Engineers in the SEC. 5025. PINHOOK CREEK, HUNTSVILLE, ALA- The Secretary shall carry out, on an emer- Potomac River Basin for any period for which BAMA. gency basis, necessary removal of rubble, sedi- the Commission has determined that a drought (a) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary ment, and rock impeding the entrance to the St. warning or drought emergency exists. shall design and construct the locally preferred Herman and St. Paul Harbors, Kodiak, Alaska, (2) LIMITATION.—The agreement shall provide plan for flood protection at Pinhook Creek, at a Federal cost of $2,000,000. that the cost for water supply and conservation Huntsville, Alabama. In carrying out the SEC. 5034. TANANA RIVER, ALASKA. storage under paragraph (1) shall not exceed the project, the Secretary shall utilize, to the extent The Secretary shall carry out, on an emer- incremental operating costs associated with pro- practicable, the existing detailed project report gency basis, the removal of the hazard to navi- viding the storage. for the project prepared under the authority of gation on the Tanana River, Alaska, near the SEC. 5018. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 mouth of the Chena River, as described in the RESTORATION AND PROTECTION U.S.C. 701s). January 3, 2005, memorandum from the Com- PROGRAM. (b) PARTICIPATION BY NON-FEDERAL INTER- mander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District, to (a) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Section 510(a)(2) of EST.—The Secretary shall allow the non-Federal the Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, Anchor- the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 interest to participate in the financing of the age, Alaska. (110 Stat. 3759) is amended by striking ‘‘, and project in accordance with section 903(c) of the SEC. 5035. VALDEZ, ALASKA. beneficial uses of dredged material’’ and insert- Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 The Secretary is authorized to construct a ing ‘‘, beneficial uses of dredged material, and Stat. 4184) to the extent that the Secretary’s small boat harbor in Valdez, Alaska, at a total restoration of submerged aquatic vegetation’’. evaluation indicates that applying such section cost of $20,000,000, with an estimated Federal (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- is necessary to implement the project. cost of $10,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal tion 510(i) of such Act (110 Stat. 3761) is amend- (c) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward ed by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting the non-Federal share of the cost of the project cost of $9,500,000. ‘‘$50,000,000’’. the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal SEC. 5036. WHITTIER, ALASKA. SEC. 5019. HYPOXIA ASSESSMENT. interest before the date of the partnership agree- (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct, at The Secretary may participate with Federal, ment for the project if the Secretary determines Federal expense, a study to determine the feasi- State, and local agencies, non-Federal and non- that the work is integral to the project. bility of carrying out projects for navigation at profit entities, regional researchers, and other SEC. 5026. ALASKA. Whittier, Alaska, to construct a new boat har- interested parties to assess hypoxia in the Gulf Section 570 of the Water Resources Develop- bor at the head of Whittier Bay and to expand of Mexico. ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 369) is amended— the existing harbor and, if the Secretary deter- SEC. 5020. POTOMAC RIVER WATERSHED ASSESS- (1) in subsection (c) by inserting ‘‘environ- mines that a project is feasible, the Secretary MENT AND TRIBUTARY STRATEGY mental restoration,’’ after ‘‘water supply and may carry out the project. EVALUATION AND MONITORING PRO- related facilities,’’; (b) NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE.—The non-Fed- GRAM. (2) in subsection (e)(3)(B) by striking the last eral interest for the project may use, and the The Secretary may participate in the Potomac sentence; Secretary shall accept, funds provided by a Fed- River Watershed Assessment and Tributary (3) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ eral agency under any other Federal program, Strategy Evaluation and Monitoring Program to and inserting ‘‘$45,000,000’’; and to satisfy, in whole or in part, the non-Federal identify a series of resource management indica- (4) by adding at the end the following: share of the cost of the project if such funds are tors to accurately monitor the effectiveness of ‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding authorized to be used to carry out the project. the implementation of the agreed upon tributary section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— strategies and other public policies that pertain (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal interest There is authorized to be appropriated to carry to natural resource protection of the Potomac may include for any project undertaken under out this section $35,200,000. River watershed. this section a nonprofit entity with the consent SEC. 5037. WRANGELL HARBOR, ALASKA. of the affected local government. SEC. 5021. LOCK AND DAM SECURITY. (a) GENERAL NAVIGATION FEATURES.—In car- ‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten per- (a) STANDARDS.—The Secretary, in consulta- rying out the project for navigation, Wrangell tion with the Federal Emergency Management cent of the amounts appropriated to carry out this section may be used by the Corps of Engi- Harbor, Alaska, authorized by section 101(b)(1) Agency, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 the Coast Guard, shall develop standards for the neers district offices to administer projects under this section at Federal expense.’’. (113 Stat. 279), the Secretary shall consider the security of locks and dams, including the testing dredging of the mooring basin and construction SEC. 5027. BARROW, ALASKA. and certification of vessel exclusion barriers. of the inner harbor facilities to be general navi- The Secretary shall carry out, under section (b) SITE SURVEYS.—At the request of a lock or gation features for purposes of estimating the 117 of the Energy and Water Development Ap- dam owner, the Secretary shall provide tech- non-Federal share of project costs. propriations Act, 2005 (118 Stat. 2944), a non- nical assistance, on a reimbursable basis, to im- (b) REVISION OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.— structural project for coastal erosion and storm prove lock or dam security. The Secretary shall revise the partnership damage prevention and reduction at Barrow, (c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.—The Secretary agreement for the project to reflect the change Alaska, including relocation of infrastructure. may enter into a cooperative agreement with a required by subsection (a). nonprofit alliance of public and private organi- SEC. 5028. COFFMAN COVE, ALASKA. The Secretary is authorized to carry out a SEC. 5038. AUGUSTA AND CLARENDON, ARKAN- zations that has the mission of promoting safe SAS. waterways and seaports to carry out testing and project for navigation, Coffman Cove, Alaska, (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized certification activities, and to perform site sur- at a total cost of $3,000,000. to perform operation, maintenance, and reha- veys, under this section. SEC. 5029. FIRE ISLAND, ALASKA. bilitation of authorized and completed levees on (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized the White River between Augusta and There is authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000 to provide planning, design, and construction Clarendon, Arkansas. to carry out this section. assistance to the non-Federal interest for the (b) REIMBURSEMENT.—After performing the construction of a causeway between Point SEC. 5022. REHABILITATION. operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation Campbell and Fire Island, Alaska, including the The Secretary, at Federal expense and not to under subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek beneficial use of dredged material in the con- exceed $1,000,000, shall rehabilitate and improve reimbursement from the Secretary of the Interior struction of the causeway. the water-related infrastructure and the trans- of an amount equal to the costs allocated to portation infrastructure for the historic prop- (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 benefits to a Federal wildlife refuge of such op- erty in the Anacostia River Watershed located eration, maintenance, and rehabilitation. in the District of Columbia, including measures to carry out this section. to address wet weather conditions. To carry out SEC. 5030. FORT YUKON, ALASKA. SEC. 5039. DES ARC LEVEE PROTECTION, ARKAN- SAS. this section, the Secretary shall accept funds The Secretary shall make repairs to the dike The Secretary shall review the project for provided for such project under any other Fed- at Fort Yukon, Alaska, so that the dike meets flood control, Des Arc, Arkansas, to determine eral program. Corps of Engineers standards. SEC. 5031. KOTZEBUE HARBOR, ALASKA. whether bank and channel scour along the SEC. 5023. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PRO- White River threaten the existing project and GRAM FOR COLUMBIA AND SNAKE The Secretary is authorized to carry out a RIVER SALMON SURVIVAL. project for navigation, Kotzebue Harbor, whether the scour is as a result of a design defi- Section 511 of the Water Resources Develop- Kotzebue, Alaska, at total cost of $2,200,000. ciency. If the Secretary determines that such conditions exist as a result of a deficiency, the ment Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 3301 note; 110 Stat. SEC. 5032. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, 3761; 113 Stat. 375) is amended— ALASKA. Secretary shall carry out measures to eliminate (1) in subsection (a)(6) by striking (a) LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.— the deficiency. ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$25,000,000’’; and The Secretary shall assume responsibility for the SEC. 5040. LOOMIS LANDING, ARKANSAS. (2) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ‘‘$1,000,000’’ long-term maintenance and repair of the Lowell The Secretary shall conduct a study of shore and inserting ‘‘$10,000,000’’. Creek Tunnel. damage in the vicinity of Loomis Landing, Ar- SEC. 5024. AUBURN, ALABAMA. (b) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a kansas, to determine if the damage is the result The Secretary may provide technical assist- study to determine whether alternative methods of a Federal navigation project, and, if the Sec- ance relating to water supply to the city of Au- of flood diversion in Lowell Canyon are feasible. retary determines that the damage is the result

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3638 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 of a Federal navigation project, the Secretary (1) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting SEC. 5051. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, WATER- shall carry out a project to mitigate the damage ‘‘$28,000,000’’; and FRONT AREA. under section 111 of the River and Harbor Act of (2) by striking ‘‘$7,000,000’’ and inserting (a) AREA TO BE DECLARED NONNAVIGABLE; 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i). ‘‘$10,000,000’’. PUBLIC INTEREST.—Unless the Secretary finds, after consultation with local and regional public SEC. 5041. ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS SEC. 5047. LOS OSOS, CALIFORNIA. officials (including local and regional public AND MISSOURI. Section 219(c)(27) of the Water Resources De- The Secretary shall conduct a study of in- planning organizations), that the proposed velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 114 Stat. projects to be undertaken within the boundaries creased siltation and streambank erosion in the 2763A–219) is amended to read as follows: St. Francis River Basin, Arkansas and Missouri, of the portion of the San Francisco, California, ‘‘(27) LOS OSOS, CALIFORNIA.—Wastewater in- waterfront area described in subsection (b) are to determine if the siltation or erosion, or both, frastructure, Los Osos, California.’’. are the result of a Federal flood control project not in the public interest, such portion is de- and, if the Secretary determines that the silta- SEC. 5048. PINE FLAT DAM AND RESERVOIR, CALI- clared to be nonnavigable waters of the United FORNIA. tion or erosion, or both, are the result of a Fed- States. (b) NORTHERN EMBARCADERO SOUTH OF BRY- eral flood control project, the Secretary shall (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall review ANT STREET.—The portion of the San Francisco, carry out a project to mitigate the siltation or the Kings River Fisheries Management Program California, waterfront area referred to in sub- erosion, or both. Framework Agreement, dated May 29, 1999, among the California Department of Fish and section (a) is as follows: Beginning at the inter- SEC. 5042. CAMBRIA, CALIFORNIA. Game, the Kings River Water Association, and section of the northeasterly prolongation of that Section 219(f)(48) of the Water Resources De- the Kings River Conservation District and, if portion of the northwesterly line of Bryant velopment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–220) is the Secretary determines that the management Street lying between Beale Street and Main amended— Street with the southwesterly line of Spear (1) by striking ‘‘$10,300,000’’ and inserting the program is feasible, the Secretary may partici- pate in the management program. Street, which intersection lies on the line of ju- following: risdiction of the San Francisco Port Commis- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$10,300,000’’; (b) PROHIBITION.—Nothing in this section au- (2) by adding at the end the following: thorizes any project for the raising of, or the sion; following thence southerly along said line ‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- construction of, a multilevel intake structure at of jurisdiction as described in the State of Cali- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the Pine Flat Dam, California. fornia Harbor and Navigation Code Section project not to exceed $3,000,000 for the cost of (c) USE OF EXISTING STUDIES.—In carrying 1770, as amended in 1961, to its intersection with planning and design work carried out by the out this section, the Secretary shall use, to the the easterly line of Townsend Street along a line non-Federal interest before the date of the part- maximum extent practicable, studies in existence that is parallel and distant 10 feet southerly nership agreement for the project if the Sec- on the date of enactment of this Act, including from the existing southern boundary of Pier 40 produced to its point of intersection with the retary determines that the work is integral to data and environmental documentation in the United States Government pier-head line; thence the project.’’; and Report of the Chief of Engineers, Pine Flat Dam (3) by aligning the remainder of the text of and Reservoir, Fresno County, California, dated northerly along said pier-head line to its inter- subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph July 19, 2002. section with a line parallel with, and distant 10 feet easterly from, the existing easterly bound- (1) of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as (d) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- ary line of Pier 30–32; thence northerly along added by paragraph (2) of this section). ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the said parallel line and its northerly prolongation, project the cost of planning, design, and con- SEC. 5043. CONTRA COSTA CANAL, OAKLEY AND to a point of intersection with a line parallel KNIGHTSEN, CALIFORNIA; MALLARD struction work carried out by the non-Federal with, and distant 10 feet northerly from, the ex- SLOUGH, PITTSBURG, CALIFORNIA. interest before the date of the partnership agree- isting northerly boundary of Pier 30–32, thence Sections 512 and 514 of the Water Resources ment for the project if the Secretary determines westerly along last said parallel line to its inter- Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2650) are that the work is integral to the project. each amended by adding at the end the fol- section with the United States Government pier- (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— head line; to the northwesterly line of Bryant lowing: ‘‘All planning, study, design, and con- There is authorized to be appropriated to struction on the project shall be carried out by Street produced northwesterly; thence south- $20,000,000 to carry out this section. westerly along said northwesterly line of Bryant the office of the district engineer, San Fran- SEC. 5049. RAYMOND BASIN, SIX BASINS, CHINO cisco, California.’’. Street produced to the point of beginning. BASIN, AND SAN GABRIEL BASIN, (c) REQUIREMENT THAT AREA BE IMPROVED.— SEC. 5044. DANA POINT HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA. The declaration of nonnavigability under sub- The Secretary shall conduct a study of the (a) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The Secretary, in section (a) applies only to those parts of the causes of water quality degradation within consultation and coordination with appropriate area described in subsection (b) that are or will Dana Point Harbor, California, to determine if Federal, State, and local entities, shall develop be bulkheaded, filled, or otherwise occupied by the degradation is the result of a Federal navi- a comprehensive plan for the management of permanent structures and does not affect the gation project, and, if the Secretary determines water resources in the Raymond Basin, Six Ba- applicability of any Federal statute or regula- that the degradation is the result of a Federal sins, Chino Basin, and San Gabriel Basin, Cali- tion applicable to such parts the day before the navigation project, the Secretary shall carry out fornia. The Secretary may carry out activities date of enactment of this Act, including sections a project to mitigate the degradation at Federal identified in the comprehensive plan to dem- 9 and 10 of the Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. expense. onstrate practicable alternatives for water re- 401 and 403; 30 Stat. 1151), commonly known as SEC. 5045. EAST SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALI- sources management. the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of FORNIA. (b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— 1899, section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Section 219(f)(22) of the Water Resources De- (1) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and the National velopment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 336) is amend- the cost of activities carried out under this sec- Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 ed— tion shall be 35 percent. et seq.). (1) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting the (2) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward (d) EXPIRATION DATE.—If, 20 years from the following: the non-Federal share of the cost of activities date of enactment of this Act, any area or part ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$25,000,000’’; carried out under this section the cost of plan- thereof described in subsection (b) is not bulk- (2) by adding at the end the following: ning, design, and construction work completed headed or filled or occupied by permanent struc- ‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- by or on behalf of the non-Federal interests for tures, including marina facilities, in accordance ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the implementation of measures under this section. with the requirements set out in subsection (c), project (i) the cost of design and construction The amount of such credit shall not exceed the or if work in connection with any activity per- work carried out by the non-Federal interest be- non-Federal share of the cost of such activities. mitted in subsection (c) is not commenced within fore, on, or after the date of the partnership (3) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non- 5 years after issuance of such permits, then the agreement for the project if the Secretary deter- Federal share of the cost of operation and main- declaration of nonnavigability for such area or mines that the work is integral to the project; tenance of any measures constructed under this part thereof shall expire. and (ii) the cost of provided for the project by section shall be 100 percent. SEC. 5052. SAN PABLO BAY, CALIFORNIA, WATER- the non-Federal interest. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— SHED AND SUISUN MARSH ECO- ‘‘(C) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The non-Fed- SYSTEM RESTORATION. eral interest may provide any portion of the There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000. (a) SAN PABLO BAY WATERSHED, CALI- non-Federal share of the cost of the project in FORNIA.— the form of in-kind services and materials.’’; SEC. 5050. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall complete and (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coopera- work, as expeditiously as possible, on the ongo- (3) by aligning the remainder of the text of tion with the Port of San Francisco, California, ing San Pablo Bay watershed, California, study subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph may carry out the project for repair and re- to determine the feasibility of opportunities for (1) of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as moval, as appropriate, of Piers 30-32, 35, 36, 70 restoring, preserving and protecting the San added by paragraph (2) of this section). (including Wharves 7 and 8), and 80 in San Pablo Bay watershed. SEC. 5046. EASTERN SANTA CLARA BASIN, CALI- Francisco, California, substantially in accord- (2) REPORT.—Not later than March 31, 2008, FORNIA. ance with the Port’s redevelopment plan. the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report Section 111(c) of the Miscellaneous Appropria- (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.— on the results of the study. tions Act, 2001 (as enacted into law by Public There is authorized to be appropriated (b) SUISUN MARSH, CALIFORNIA.—The Sec- Law 106–554; 114 Stat. 2763A–224) is amended— $25,000,000 to carry out this subsection. retary shall conduct a comprehensive study to

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3639 determine the feasibility of opportunities for re- a reference to the ‘‘Charles Hervey Townshend (8) Flood control levee projects in Brookport, storing, preserving and protecting the Suisun Breakwater’’. Shawneetown, Old Shawneetown, Golconda, Marsh, California. SEC. 5055. FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IM- Rosiclare, Harrisburg, and Reevesville, Illinois. (c) SAN PABLO AND SUISUN BAY MARSH WA- PROVEMENTS. (e) JUSTIFICATION.—The reconstruction of a TERSHED CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.— Section 109 of the Miscellaneous Appropria- project authorized by this section shall not be (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may partici- tions Act, 2001 (enacted into law by Public Law considered a separable element of the project. pate in critical restoration projects that will 106–554) (114 Stat. 2763A–222) is amended— (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— produce, consistent with Federal programs, (1) by adding at the end of subsection (e)(2) There is authorized to be appropriated— projects, and activities, immediate and substan- the following: (1) $15,000,000 to carry out the projects de- tial ecosystem restoration, preservation, and ‘‘(C) CREDIT FOR WORK PRIOR TO EXECUTION scribed in paragraphs (1) through (7) of sub- protection benefits in the following sub-water- OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.—The Sec- section (d); and sheds of the San Pablo and Suisun Bay Marsh retary shall credit toward the non-Federal share (2) $15,000,000 to carry out the projects de- watersheds: of the cost of the project— scribed in subsection (d)(8). (A) The tidal areas of the Petaluma River, ‘‘(i) the cost of construction work carried out Such sums shall remain available until ex- Napa-Sonoma Marsh. by the non-Federal interest before the date of pended. (B) The shoreline of West Contra Costa Coun- the partnership agreement for the project if the SEC. 5059. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION. ty. Secretary determines that the work is integral to (a) EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION.—Section (C) Novato Creek. the project; and 519(c)(2) of the Water Resources Development (D) Suisun Marsh. ‘‘(ii) the cost of land acquisition carried out Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2654) is amended by strik- (E) Gallinas-Miller Creek. by the non-Federal interest for projects to be ing ‘‘2004’’ and inserting ‘‘2010’’. (2) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Participation in carried out under this section.’’; and (b) IN-KIND SERVICES.—Section 519(g)(3) of critical restoration projects under this sub- (2) in subsection (f) by striking ‘‘$100,000,000’’ such Act (114 Stat. 2655) is amended by inserting section may include assistance for planning, de- and inserting ‘‘$100,000,000, of which not more before the period at the end of the first sentence sign, or construction. than $15,000,000 may be used to provide plan- ‘‘if such services are provided not more than 5 (d) NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—Notwith- ning, design, and construction assistance to the years before the date of initiation of the project standing section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority for a water or activity’’. of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal treatment plant, Florida City, Florida’’. (c) NONPROFIT ENTITIES AND MONITORING.— interest may include for any project undertaken SEC. 5056. LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA. Section 519 of such Act (114 Stat. 2654) is amend- under this section a nonprofit entity with the The Secretary may carry out necessary repairs ed by adding at the end the following: consent of the affected local government. for the Lake Worth bulkhead replacement ‘‘(h) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding (e) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward project, West Palm Beach, Florida, at an esti- section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 the non-Federal share of the cost of construc- mated total cost of $9,000,000. (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal interest tion of a project under this section— SEC. 5057. RILEY CREEK RECREATION AREA, may include for any project undertaken under (1) the value of any lands, easements, rights- IDAHO. this section a nonprofit entity, with the consent of-way, dredged material disposal areas, or relo- The Secretary is authorized to carry out the of the affected local government. cations provided by the non-Federal interest for Riley Creek Recreation Area Operation Plan of ‘‘(i) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall de- carrying out the project, regardless of the date the Albeni Falls Management Plan, dated Octo- velop an Illinois river basin monitoring program of acquisition; ber 2001, for the Riley Creek Recreation Area, to support the plan referred to in subsection (b). (2) funds received from the CALFED Bay- Albeni Falls Dam, Bonner County, Idaho. Data collected under the monitoring program Delta program; and SEC. 5058. RECONSTRUCTION OF ILLINOIS FLOOD shall incorporate data provided by the State of (3) the cost of the studies, design, and con- PROTECTION PROJECTS. Illinois and shall be publicly accessible through struction work carried out by the non-Federal (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may partici- electronic means.’’. interest before the date of execution of a part- pate in the reconstruction of an eligible flood SEC. 5060. KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, ILLINOIS, nership agreement for the project if the Sec- control project if the Secretary determines that RESTORATION. retary determines that the work is integral to such reconstruction is not required as a result of (a) KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN DEFINED.—In this the project. improper operation and maintenance of the section, the term ‘‘Kaskaskia River Basin’’ (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— project by the non-Federal interest. means the Kaskaskia River, Illinois, its back- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry (b) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of waters, its side channels, and all tributaries, in- out this section $40,000,000. the costs for the reconstruction of a flood con- cluding their watersheds, draining into the trol project authorized by this section shall be Kaskaskia River. SEC. 5053. STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. the same non-Federal share that was applicable (b) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.— (a) REEVALUATION.—The Secretary shall re- to construction of the project. The non-Federal (1) DEVELOPMENT.—The Secretary shall de- evaluate the feasibility of the Lower Mosher interest shall be responsible for operation and velop, as expeditiously as practicable, a com- Slough element and the levee extensions on the maintenance and repair of a project for which prehensive plan for the purpose of restoring, Upper Calaveras River element of the project for reconstruction is undertaken under this section. preserving, and protecting the Kaskaskia River flood control, Stockton Metropolitan Area, Cali- (c) RECONSTRUCTION DEFINED.—In this sec- Basin. fornia, carried out under section 211(f)(3) of the tion, the term ‘‘reconstruction’’, as used with re- (2) TECHNOLOGIES AND INNOVATIVE AP- Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 spect to a project, means addressing major PROACHES.—The comprehensive plan shall pro- Stat. 3683), to determine the eligibility of such project deficiencies caused by long-term deg- vide for the development of new technologies elements for reimbursement under section 211 of radation of the foundation, construction mate- and innovative approaches— such Act (33 U.S.C. 701b–13). rials, or engineering systems or components of (A) to enhance the Kaskaskia River as a PECIAL RULES FOR REEVALUATION.—In (b) S the project, the results of which render the transportation corridor; conducting the reevaluation under subsection project at risk of not performing in compliance (B) to improve water quality within the entire (a), the Secretary shall not reject a feasibility with its authorized project purposes. In address- Kaskaskia River Basin; determination based on one or more of the poli- ing such deficiencies, the Secretary may incor- (C) to restore, enhance, and preserve habitat cies of the Corps of Engineers concerning the porate current design standards and efficiency for plants and wildlife; frequency of flooding, the drainage area, and improvements, including the replacement of ob- (D) to ensure aquatic integrity of sidechannels the amount of runoff. solete mechanical and electrical components at and backwaters and their connectivity with the (c) REIMBURSEMENT.—If the Secretary deter- pumping stations, if such incorporation does not mainstem river; mines that the elements referred to subsection significantly change the scope, function, and (E) to increase economic opportunity for agri- (a) are feasible, the Secretary shall reimburse, purpose of the project as authorized. culture and business communities; and subject to appropriations, the non-Federal inter- (d) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—The following flood (F) to reduce the impacts of flooding to com- est under section 211 of the Water Resources De- control projects are eligible for reconstruction munities and landowners. velopment Act of 1996 for the Federal share of under this section: (3) SPECIFIC COMPONENTS.—The comprehen- the cost of such elements. (1) Clear Creek Drainage and Levee District, sive plan shall include such features as are nec- SEC. 5054. CHARLES HERVEY TOWNSHEND Illinois. essary to provide for— BREAKWATER, NEW HAVEN HARBOR, (2) Fort Chartres and Ivy Landing Drainage (A) the development and implementation of a CONNECTICUT. District, Illinois. program for sediment removal technology, sedi- (a) DESIGNATION.—The western breakwater (3) Cairo, Illinois Mainline Levee, Cairo, Illi- ment characterization, sediment transport, and for the project for navigation, New Haven Har- nois. beneficial uses of sediment; bor, Connecticut, authorized by the first section (4) Goose Pond Pump Station, Cairo, Illinois. (B) the development and implementation of a of the Act of September 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 426), (5) Cottonwood Slough Pump Station, Alex- program for the planning, conservation, evalua- shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Charles ander County, Illinois. tion, and construction of measures for fish and Hervey Townshend Breakwater’’. (6) 10th and 28th Street Pump Stations, Cairo, wildlife habitat conservation and rehabilitation, (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, Illinois. and stabilization and enhancement of land and map, regulation, document, paper, or other (7) Prairie Du Pont Levee and Sanitary Dis- water resources in the basin; record of the United States to the breakwater re- trict, including Fish Lake Drainage and Levee (C) the development and implementation of a ferred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be District, Illinois. long-term resource monitoring program;

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3640 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (D) a conveyance study of the Kaskaskia SEC. 5061. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, LITTLE CAL- the Secretary determines that the project is fea- River floodplain from Vandalia, Illinois, to UMET RIVER, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. sible, the Secretary shall carry out the project at Carlyle Lake to determine the impacts of exist- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide a total cost of $3,000,000. ing and future waterfowl improvements on flood assistance for a project to develop maps identi- SEC. 5066. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY. stages, including detailed surveys and mapping fying 100- and 500-year flood inundation areas Section 531 of the Water Resources Develop- information to ensure proper hydraulic and along the Little Calumet River, Chicago, Illi- ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3773; 113 Stat. 348; hydrological analysis; nois. 117 Stat. 142) is amended by adding the fol- (E) the development and implementation of a (b) REQUIREMENTS.—Maps developed under lowing: computerized inventory and analysis system; the project shall include hydrologic and hy- ‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten per- and draulic information and shall accurately show cent of the amounts appropriated to carry out (F) the development and implementation of a the flood inundation of each property by flood this section may be used by the Corps of Engi- systemic plan to reduce flood impacts by means risk in the floodplain. The maps shall be pro- neers district offices to administer projects under of ecosystem restoration projects. duced in a high resolution format and shall be this section at Federal expense.’’. (4) CONSULTATION.—The comprehensive plan made available to all flood prone areas along SEC. 5067. WINCHESTER, KENTUCKY. shall be developed by the Secretary in consulta- the Little Calumet River, Chicago, Illinois, in an Section 219(c) of the Water Resources Develop- tion with appropriate Federal agencies, the electronic format. ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 114 Stat. 2763A– State of Illinois, and the Kaskaskia River Wa- (c) PARTICIPATION OF FEMA.—The Secretary 219) is amended by adding at the end the fol- tershed Association. and the non-Federal interests for the project lowing: EPORT TO CONGRESS (5) R .—Not later than 2 shall work with the Director of the Federal ‘‘(41) WINCHESTER, KENTUCKY.—Wastewater years after the date of enactment of this Act, Emergency Management Agency to ensure the infrastructure, Winchester, Kentucky.’’. the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report validity of the maps developed under the project SEC. 5068. BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA. containing the comprehensive plan. for flood insurance purposes. Section 219(f)(21) of the Water Resources De- (6) ADDITIONAL STUDIES AND ANALYSES.—After (d) FORMS OF ASSISTANCE.—In carrying out velopment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 336; 114 Stat. transmission of a report under paragraph (5), the project, the Secretary may enter into con- 2763A–220) is amended by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ the Secretary shall conduct studies and anal- tracts or cooperative agreements with the non- and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’. yses of projects related to the comprehensive Federal interests or provide reimbursements of plan that are appropriate and consistent with project costs. SEC. 5069. CALCASIEU SHIP CHANNEL, LOU- ISIANA. this subsection. (e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the (c) GENERAL PROVISIONS.— cost of the project shall be 50 percent. The Secretary shall expedite completion of a (1) WATER QUALITY.—In carrying out activi- (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— dredged material management plan for the ties under this section, the Secretary’s rec- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry Calcasieu Ship Channel, Louisiana, and may ommendations shall be consistent with applica- out this section $2,000,000. take interim measures to increase the capacity of existing disposal areas, or to construct new ble State water quality standards. SEC. 5062. PROMONTORY POINT, LAKE MICHIGAN, (2) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—In developing the ILLINOIS. confined or beneficial use disposal areas, for the channel. comprehensive plan under subsection (b), the (a) REVIEW.— Secretary shall implement procedures to facili- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry out SEC. 5070. CROSS LAKE, SHREVEPORT, LOU- tate public participation, including providing a third-party review of the Promontory Point ISIANA. advance notice of meetings, providing adequate project along the Chicago Shoreline, Chicago, The Secretary may accept from the Depart- opportunity for public input and comment, Illinois, at a cost not to exceed $450,000. ment of the Air Force, and may use, not to ex- maintaining appropriate records, and making a (2) JOINT REVIEW.—The Buffalo and Seattle ceed $4,500,000 to assist the city of Shreveport, record of the proceedings of meetings available districts of the Corps of Engineers shall jointly Louisiana, with its plan to construct a water in- for public inspection. conduct the review. take facility. (d) CRITICAL PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES.—If (3) STANDARDS.—The review shall be based on SEC. 5071. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOU- the Secretary, in cooperation with appropriate the standards under part 68 of title 36, Code of ISIANA. Federal agencies and the State of Illinois, deter- Federal Regulations, for implementation by the (a) MODIFICATION OF STUDY.—The study for mines that a project or initiative for the non-Federal sponsor for the Chicago Shoreline, waterfront and riverine preservation, restora- Kaskaskia River Basin will produce inde- Chicago, Illinois, project. tion, and enhancement, Mississippi River, West pendent, immediate, and substantial benefits, (b) CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary shall ac- Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, being carried the Secretary may proceed expeditiously with cept from a State or political subdivision of a out under Committee Resolution 2570 of the the implementation of the project. State voluntarily contributed funds to initiate Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- (e) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall inte- the third-party review under subsection (a). ture of the House of Representatives adopted grate activities carried out under this section (c) EFFECT OF SECTION.—Nothing in this sec- July 23, 1998, is modified— with ongoing Federal and State programs, tion affects the authorization for the project for (1) to add West Feliciana Parish and East projects, and activities, including the following: the Chicago Shoreline, Chicago, Illinois. Baton Rouge Parish to the geographic scope of the study; and (1) Farm programs of the Department of Agri- SEC. 5063. BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, INDIANA. (2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the culture. The Secretary shall conduct a study of (2) Conservation Reserve Enhancement Pro- non-Federal share the cost of the study and the shoaling in the vicinity of Burns Waterway non-Federal share of the cost of any project au- gram (State of Illinois) and Conservation 2000 Harbor, Indiana, to determine if the shoaling is Ecosystem Program of the Illinois Department of thorized by law as a result of the study the cost the result of a Federal navigation project, and, of work carried out by the non-Federal interest Natural Resources. if the Secretary determines that the shoaling is (3) Conservation 2000 Conservation Practices before the date of the partnership agreement for the result of a Federal navigation project, the Program and the Livestock Management Facili- the project if the Secretary determines that the Secretary shall carry out a project to mitigate ties Act administered by the Illinois Department work is integral to the study or project, as the the shoaling under section 111 of the River and of Agriculture. case may be. Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426). (4) National Buffer Initiative of the Natural (b) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—Section Resources Conservation Service. SEC. 5064. CALUMET REGION, INDIANA. 517(5) of the Water Resources Development Act (5) Nonpoint source grant program adminis- Section 219(f)(12) of the Water Resources De- of 1999 (113 Stat. 345) is amended to read as fol- tered by the Illinois Environmental Protection velopment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 335; 117 Stat. lows: Agency. 1843) is amended— ‘‘(5) Mississippi River, West Baton Rouge, (6) Other programs that may be developed by (1) by striking ‘‘$30,000,000’’ and inserting the West Feliciana, and East Baton Rouge Parishes, the State of Illinois or the Federal Government, following: Louisiana, project for waterfront and riverine or that are carried out by non-profit organiza- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$100,000,000’’; preservation, restoration, and enhancement tions, to carry out the objectives of the (2) by adding at the end the following: modifications.’’. Kaskaskia River Basin Comprehensive Plan. ‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- SEC. 5072. CHARLESTOWN, MARYLAND. (f) IN-KIND SERVICES.—The Secretary may ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry credit the cost of in-kind services provided by project the cost of planning and design work out a project for nonstructural flood damage re- the non-Federal interest for an activity carried carried out by the non-Federal interest before, duction and ecosystem restoration at Charles- out under this section toward not more than 80 on, or after the date of the partnership agree- town, Maryland. percent of the non-Federal share of the cost of ment for the project if the Secretary determines (b) LAND ACQUISITION.—The flood damage re- the activity. In-kind services shall include all that the work is integral to the project.’’; and duction component of the project may include State funds expended on programs that accom- (3) by aligning the remainder of the text of the acquisition of private property from willing plish the goals of this section, as determined by subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph sellers. the Secretary. The programs may include the (1) of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as (c) JUSTIFICATION.—Any nonstructural flood Kaskaskia River Conservation Reserve Program, added by paragraph (2) of this section). damage reduction project to be carried out the Illinois Conservation 2000 Program, the SEC. 5065. PADUCAH, KENTUCKY. under this section that will result in the conver- Open Lands Trust Fund, and other appropriate The Secretary shall complete a feasibility re- sion of property to use for ecosystem restoration programs carried out in the Kaskaskia River port for rehabilitation of the project for flood and wildlife habitat shall be justified based on Basin. damage reduction, Paducah, Kentucky, and, if national ecosystem restoration benefits.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3641

(d) USE OF ACQUIRED PROPERTY.—Property COUNTY, MILLE LACS COUNTY, MILLE LACS INDIAN logically related habitats located in Harrison, acquired under this section shall be maintained RESERVATION, AND KATHIO TOWNSHIP’’; Hancock, and Jackson Counties, Mississippi, in public ownership for ecosystem restoration (2) by striking ‘‘$11,000,000’’ and inserting under section 204 of the Water Resources Devel- and wildlife habitat. ‘‘$17,000,000’’; opment Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326), the Sec- (e) ABILITY TO PAY.—In determining the ap- (3) by inserting ‘‘, Crow Wing County, Mille retary shall accept any portion of the non-Fed- propriate non-Federal cost share for the project, Lacs County, Mille Lacs Indian Reservation (10 eral share of the cost of the project in the form the Secretary shall determine the ability of Cecil Stat. 1165),’’ after ‘‘Garrison’’; and of in-kind services and materials. County, Maryland, to participate as a cost- (4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Such SEC. 5084. MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSOURI AND IL- sharing non-Federal interest in accordance with assistance shall be provided directly to the Gar- LINOIS. section 103(m) of the Water Resources Develop- rison-Kathio-West Mille Lacs Lake Sanitary As a part of the operation and maintenance of ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)). District, Minnesota, except for assistance pro- the project for the Mississippi River (Regulating (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— vided directly to the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Works), between the Ohio and Missouri Rivers, There is authorized to be appropriated $2,000,000 at the discretion of the Secretary.’’. Missouri and Illinois, authorized by the first to carry out this section. (b) PROCEDURES.—In carrying out the project section of an Act entitled ‘‘Making appropria- SEC. 5073. ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF CO- authorized by such section 219(f)(61), the Sec- tions for the construction, repair, and preserva- LUMBIA AND MARYLAND. retary may use the cost sharing and contracting tion of certain public works on rivers and har- (a) COMPREHENSIVE ACTION PLAN.—Not later procedures available to the Secretary under sec- bors, and for other purposes’’, approved June than one year after the date of enactment of tion 569 of the Water Resources Development 25, 1910, the Secretary may carry out activities this Act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368). necessary to restore and protect fish and wild- Mayor of the District of Columbia, the Governor SEC. 5079. ITASCA COUNTY, MINNESOTA. life habitat in the middle Mississippi River sys- of Maryland, the county executives of Mont- The Secretary shall carry out a project for tem. Such activities may include modification of gomery County and Prince George’s County, flood damage reduction, Trout Lake and navigation training structures, modification and Maryland, and other interested entities, shall Canisteo Pit, Itasca County, Minnesota, irre- creation of side channels, modification and cre- develop and make available to the public a 10- spective of normal policy considerations. ation of islands, and studies and analysis nec- year comprehensive action plan to provide for SEC. 5080. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA. essary to apply adaptive management principles the restoration and protection of the ecological (a) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary shall convey in design of future work. integrity of the Anacostia River and its tribu- to the city of Minneapolis by quitclaim deed and taries. SEC. 5085. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. without consideration all right, title, and inter- (b) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—On completion of Section 219(f)(32) of the Water Resources De- the comprehensive action plan under subsection est of the United States to the property known velopment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 337) is amend- (a), the Secretary shall make the plan available as the War Department (Fort Snelling Inter- ed— to the public, including on the Internet. ceptor) Tunnel in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (1) by striking ‘‘project’’ and inserting (b) APPLICABILITY OF PROPERTY SCREENING SEC. 5074. DELMARVA CONSERVATION CORRIDOR, ‘‘projects’’; DELAWARE AND MARYLAND. PROVISIONS.—Section 2696 of title 10, United (2) by striking ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and inserting (a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide States Code, shall not apply to the conveyance ‘‘$35,000,000’’; and technical assistance to the Secretary of Agri- under this section. (3) by inserting ‘‘and St. Louis County’’ be- culture for use in carrying out the Conservation SEC. 5081. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA. fore ‘‘, Missouri’’. Corridor Demonstration Program established (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 569 of the Water Re- SEC. 5086. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, under subtitle G of title II of the Farm Security sources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 368) NEW JERSEY. and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (16 U.S.C. 3801 is amended— Section 324 of the Water Resources Develop- note; 116 Stat. 275). (1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘Benton, ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4849; 110 Stat. 3779) (b) COORDINATION AND INTEGRATION.—In car- Sherburne,’’ and inserting ‘‘Beltrami, Hubbard, is amended— rying out water resources projects in Delaware Wadena,’’; (1) in subsection (a)— and Maryland on the Delmarva Peninsula, the (2) by striking the last sentence of subsection (A) by striking ‘‘design’’ and inserting ‘‘plan- Secretary shall coordinate and integrate those (e)(3)(B); ning, design,’’; and projects, to the maximum extent practicable, (3) by striking subsection (g) and inserting the (B) by striking ‘‘Hackensack Meadowlands with any activities carried out to implement a following: Development’’ and all that follows through conservation corridor plan approved by the Sec- ‘‘(g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding ‘‘Plan for’’ and inserting ‘‘New Jersey retary of Agriculture under section 2602 of the section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 Meadowlands Commission for the development Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal interest of an environmental improvement program for’’; (16 U.S.C. 3801 note; 116 Stat. 275). may include for any project undertaken under (2) in subsection (b)— SEC. 5075. MASSACHUSETTS DREDGED MATERIAL this section a nonprofit entity.’’; (A) in the subsection heading by striking ‘‘RE- DISPOSAL SITES. (4) in subsection (h) by striking ‘‘$40,000,000’’ QUIRED’’; The Secretary may cooperate with Massachu- and inserting ‘‘$54,000,000’’; and (B) by striking ‘‘shall’’ and inserting ‘‘may’’; setts in the management and long-term moni- (5) by adding at the end the following: (C) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting toring of aquatic dredged material disposal sites ‘‘(i) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten per- the following: within the State, and is authorized to accept cent of the amounts appropriated to carry out ‘‘(1) Restoration and acquisitions of signifi- funds from the State to carry out such activities. this section may be used by the Corps of Engi- cant wetlands and aquatic habitat that con- SEC. 5076. ONTONAGON HARBOR, MICHIGAN. neers district offices to administer projects under tribute to the Meadowlands ecosystem.’’; The Secretary shall conduct a study of shore this section at Federal expense.’’. (D) in paragraph (2) by inserting ‘‘and aquat- damage in the vicinity of the project for naviga- (b) BIWABIK, MINNESOTA.—The Secretary ic habitat’’ before the period at the end; and tion, Ontonagon Harbor, Ontonagon County, shall reimburse the non-Federal interest for the (E) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting Michigan, authorized by section 101 of the Riv- project for environmental infrastructure, the following: ers and Harbors Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1176, 100 Biwabik, Minnesota, carried out under section ‘‘(7) Research, development, and implementa- Stat. 4213, 110 Stat. 3730), to determine if the 569 of the Water Resources Development Act of tion for a water quality improvement program, damage is the result of a Federal navigation 1999 (113 Stat. 368), for planning, design, and including restoration of hydrology and tidal project, and, if the Secretary determines that construction costs that were incurred by the flows and remediation of hot spots and other the damage is the result of a Federal navigation non-Federal interest with respect to the project sources of contaminants that degrade existing or project, the Secretary shall carry out a project before the date of the partnership agreement for planned sites.’’; to mitigate the damage under section 111 of the the project and that were in excess of the non- (3) in subsection (c) by inserting before the River and Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i). Federal share of the cost of the project if the last sentence the following: ‘‘The non-Federal Secretary determines that the costs are appro- SEC. 5077. CROOKSTON, MINNESOTA. sponsor may also provide in-kind services, not to The Secretary shall conduct a study for a priate. exceed the non-Federal share of the total project project for emergency streambank protection SEC. 5082. WILD RICE RIVER, MINNESOTA. cost, and may also receive credit for reasonable along the Red Lake River in Crookston, Min- The Secretary shall expedite the completion of cost of design work completed prior to entering nesota, and, if the Secretary determines that the the general reevaluation report, authorized by into the partnership agreement with the Sec- project is feasible, the Secretary may carry out section 438 of the Water Resources Development retary for a project to be carried out under the the project under section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2640), for the project for program developed under subsection (a).’’; and Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r); except that the max- flood protection, Wild Rice River, Minnesota, (4) in subsection (d) by striking ‘‘$5,000,000’’ imum amount of Federal funds that may be ex- authorized by section 201 of the Flood Control and inserting ‘‘$35,000,000’’. pended for the project shall be $6,500,000. Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1825), to develop alter- SEC. 5087. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK. SEC. 5078. GARRISON AND KATHIO TOWNSHIP, natives to the Twin Valley Lake feature, and (a) DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM.—Section MINNESOTA. upon the completion of such report, shall con- 404(a) of the Water Resources Development Act (a) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—Section 219(f)(61) struct the project at a total cost of $20,000,000. of 1992 (106 Stat. 4863) is amended— of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 SEC. 5083. HARRISON, HANCOCK, AND JACKSON (1) by striking ‘‘processes’’ and inserting ‘‘and (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is amended— COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI. related environmental processes’’; (1) in the paragraph heading by striking ‘‘AND In carrying out projects for the protection, (2) by inserting after ‘‘Atlantic Coast’’ the fol- KATHIO TOWNSHIP’’ and inserting ‘‘, CROW WING restoration, and creation of aquatic and eco- lowing: ‘‘(and associated back bays)’’;

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3642 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (3) by inserting after ‘‘actions’’ the following: project the cost of planning, design, and con- ter Dam, at different water levels, to determine ‘‘, environmental restoration or conservation struction work carried out by the non-Federal its impact on water and related resources in and measures for coastal and back bays,’’; and interest before the date of the partnership agree- along the Lehigh River in Lehigh County, (4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The ment for the project if the Secretary determines Pennsylvania. There is authorized to be appro- plan for collecting data and monitoring infor- that the work is integral to the project. priated $500,000 to carry out this section. mation included in such annual report shall be SEC. 5095. TOUSSAINT RIVER, OHIO. SEC. 5101. NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA. fully coordinated with and agreed to by appro- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, Section 219(f)(11) of the Water Resources De- priate agencies of the State of New York.’’. Toussaint River, Carroll Township, Ohio, au- velopment Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is amended (b) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Section 404(b) of such thorized by section 107 of the River and Harbor by striking ‘‘and Monroe’’ and inserting Act is amended— Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to au- ‘‘Northumberland, Union, Snyder, Luzerne, and (1) by striking ‘‘INITIAL PLAN.—Not later than thorize the Secretary to enter into an agreement Monroe’’. 12 months after the date of the enactment of this with the non-Federal interest under which the SEC. 5102. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, Act, the’’ and inserting ‘‘ANNUAL REPORTS.— Secretary may— PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW YORK. The’’; (1) acquire, and transfer to the non-Federal (a) STUDY AND STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT.— (2) by striking ‘‘initial plan for data collection interest, a dredge and associated equipment Section 567(a) of the Water Resources Develop- and monitoring’’ and inserting ‘‘annual report with the capacity to perform operation and ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3787; 114 Stat. 2662) of data collection and monitoring activities’’; maintenance of the project; and is amended— and (2) provide the non-Federal interest with a (3) by striking the last sentence. lump-sum payment to cover all future costs of (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting ‘‘and carry out’’ after ‘‘develop’’; and (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- operation and maintenance of the project. tion 404(c) of such Act (113 Stat. 341) is amended (b) AGREEMENT.—The Secretary may carry out (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000.’’ by striking ‘‘and an additional total of subsection (a)(1) by entering into an agreement and inserting ‘‘$20,000,000, of which the Sec- $2,500,000 for fiscal years thereafter’’ and insert- with the non-Federal interest under which the retary may utilize not more than $5,000,000 to ing ‘‘$2,500,000 for fiscal years 2000 through non-Federal interest may acquire the dredge design and construct feasible pilot projects dur- 2004, and $7,500,000 for fiscal years beginning and associated equipment directly and be reim- ing the development of the strategy to dem- after September 30, 2004,’’. bursed by the Secretary. onstrate alternative approaches for the strategy. (d) TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM.—Section 404 of (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— The total cost for any single pilot project may the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 There is authorized to be appropriated $1,800,000 not exceed $500,000. The Secretary shall evalu- (106 Stat. 4863) is amended by adding at the end to carry out this section. Of such funds, $500,000 ate the results of the pilot projects and consider the following: may be used to carry out subsection (a)(1). the results in the development of the strategy.’’. ‘‘(d) TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM.—There is au- (d) RELEASE.—Upon the acquisition and (b) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—Section 567(c) thorized to be appropriated $800,000 for the Sec- transfer of a dredge and associated equipment of such Act (114 Stat. 2662) is amended— retary to carry out a project for a tsunami under subsection (a)(1), and the payment of (1) in the subsection heading by striking ‘‘CO- warning system, Atlantic Coast of New York.’’. funds under subsection (a)(2), all future Federal OPERATION’’ and inserting ‘‘COOPERATIVE’’; and responsibility for operation and maintenance of (2) in the first sentence— SEC. 5088. COLLEGE POINT, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK. the project is extinguished. (A) by inserting ‘‘and carrying out’’ after ‘‘de- In carrying out section 312 of the Water Re- SEC. 5096. EUGENE, OREGON. veloping’’; and sources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639), (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct (B) by striking ‘‘cooperation’’ and inserting the Secretary shall give priority to work in Col- a study to determine the feasibility of restoring ‘‘cost-sharing and cooperative’’. lege Point, New York City, New York. the millrace in Eugene, Oregon, and, if the Sec- (c) IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGY.—Section retary determines that the restoration is fea- 567(d) of such Act (114 Stat. 2663) is amended— SEC. 5089. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NEW YORK sible, the Secretary shall carry out the restora- (1) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting CITY, NEW YORK. tion. The Secretary shall credit toward the non- the following: (b) CONSIDERATION OF NONECONOMIC BENE- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; Federal share of the cost of the project for eco- FITS.—In determining the feasibility of restoring (2) in the second sentence of paragraph (1) (as system restoration, Flushing Bay and Creek, the millrace, the Secretary shall include non- so designated)— New York City, New York, the cost of design economic benefits associated with the historical (A) by striking ‘‘implement’’ and inserting and construction work carried out by the non- significance of the millrace and associated with ‘‘carry out’’; and Federal interest before the date of the partner- preservation and enhancement of resources. (B) by striking ‘‘implementing’’ and inserting ship agreement for the project if the Secretary (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ‘‘carrying out’’; determines that the work is integral to the There is authorized to be appropriated to carry (3) by adding at the end the following: project. out this section $20,000,000. ‘‘(2) PRIORITY PROJECT.—In carrying out SEC. 5090. HUDSON RIVER, NEW YORK. SEC. 5097. FERN RIDGE DAM, OREGON. projects to implement the strategy, the Secretary The Secretary may participate with the State The Secretary may treat all work carried out shall give priority to the project for ecosystem of New York, New York City, and the Hudson for emergency corrective actions to repair the restoration, Cooperstown, New York, described River Park Trust in carrying out activities to re- embankment dam at the Fern Ridge Lake in the Upper Susquehanna River Basin—Coop- store critical marine habitat, improve safety, project, Oregon, as a dam safety project. The erstown Area Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility and protect and rehabilitate critical infrastruc- cost of work carried out may be recovered in ac- Study, dated December 2004, prepared by the ture. There is authorized to be appropriated cordance with section 1203 of the Water Re- Corps of Engineers and the New York State De- $5,000,000 to carry out this section. sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 467n; partment of Environmental Conservation.’’; and SEC. 5091. MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NEW YORK. 100 Stat. 4263). (4) by aligning the remainder of the text of As part of the operation and maintenance of SEC. 5098. ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1) the Mount Morris Dam, New York, the Sec- Section 219(f)(66) of the Water Resources De- of this subsection) with paragraph (2) (as added retary may make improvements to the access velopment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is by paragraph (3) of this subsection). road for the dam to provide safe access to a Fed- amended— (d) CREDIT.—Section 567 of such Act (110 Stat. eral visitor’s center. (1) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting the 3787; 114 Stat. 2662) is amended by adding at the SEC. 5092. JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, following: end the following: ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$20,000,000’’; NORTH CAROLINA. ‘‘(e) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- The Secretary shall expedite the completion of (2) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of a the calculations necessary to negotiate and exe- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project under this section— cute a revised, permanent contract for water project the cost of work carried out by the non- ‘‘(1) the cost of design and construction work supply storage at John H. Kerr Dam and Res- Federal interest before the date of the partner- carried out by the non-Federal interest before ervoir, North Carolina, among the Secretary and ship agreement for the project if the Secretary the date of the partnership agreement for the the Kerr Lake Regional Water System and the determines that the work is integral to the project if the Secretary determines that the work city of Henderson, North Carolina. project.’’; and is integral to the project; and SEC. 5093. STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. (3) by aligning the remainder of the text of ‘‘(2) the cost of in-kind services and materials Section 219(f)(64) of the Water Resources De- subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph provided for the project by the non-Federal in- velopment Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A–221) is (1) of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as terest.’’. amended by inserting ‘‘water and’’ before added by paragraph (2) of this section). SEC. 5103. CANO MARTIN PENA, SAN JUAN, PUER- ‘‘wastewater’’. SEC. 5099. KEHLY RUN DAMS, PENNSYLVANIA. TO RICO. SEC. 5094. CINCINNATI, OHIO. Section 504(a)(2) of the Water Resources De- The Secretary shall review a report prepared (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized velopment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 338; 117 Stat. by the non-Federal interest concerning flood to undertake the ecosystem restoration and 1842) is amended by striking ‘‘Dams’’ and insert- protection and environmental restoration for recreation components of the Central Riverfront ing ‘‘Dams No. 1–5’’. Cano Martin Pena, San Juan, Puerto Rico, and, Park Master Plan, dated December 1999, at a SEC. 5100. LEHIGH RIVER, LEHIGH COUNTY, if the Secretary determines that the report meets total cost of $25,000,000. PENNSYLVANIA. the evaluation and design standards of the (b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- The Secretary shall use existing water quality Corps of Engineers and that the project is fea- ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the data to model the effects of the Francis E. Wal- sible, the Secretary may carry out the project at

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3643

a total cost of $130,000,000, with an estimated ‘‘(C) INVESTMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.— ‘‘(ii) include the determination under clause Federal cost of $85,000,000 and an estimated ‘‘(i) INITIAL INVESTMENT.—Each amount de- (i) in the written findings of the audit. non-Federal cost of $45,000,000. posited in the principal account of the Fund ‘‘(5) MODIFICATION OF INVESTMENT REQUIRE- SEC. 5104. CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, shall be invested initially in eligible obligations MENTS.— LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE, AND having the shortest maturity then available ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITAT until the date on which the amount is divided Treasury determines that meeting the require- RESTORATION, SOUTH DAKOTA. into 3 substantially equal portions and those ments under paragraph (2) with respect to the (a) DISBURSEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE STATE portions are invested in eligible obligations that investment of a Fund is not practicable, or OF SOUTH DAKOTA AND THE CHEYENNE RIVER are identical (except for transferability) to the would result in adverse consequences for the SIOUX TRIBE AND THE LOWER BRULE SIOUX next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations Fund, the Secretary shall modify the require- TRIBE TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITAT RES- having a 2-year maturity, a 5-year maturity, ments, as the Secretary determines to be nec- TORATION TRUST FUNDS.—Section 602(a)(4) of and a 10-year maturity, respectively. essary. the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 ‘‘(ii) SUBSEQUENT INVESTMENT.—As each 2- ‘‘(B) CONSULTATION.—Before modifying a re- (113 Stat. 386) is amended— year, 5-year, and 10-year eligible obligation ma- quirement under subparagraph (A), the Sec- (1) in subparagraph (A)— tures, the principal of the maturing eligible obli- retary of the Treasury shall consult with the (A) in clause (i) by inserting ‘‘and the Sec- gation shall also be invested initially in the State regarding the proposed modification.’’; retary of the Treasury’’ after ‘‘Secretary’’; and shortest-maturity eligible obligation then avail- (2) in subsection (d)(2) by inserting ‘‘of the (B) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the able until the principal is reinvested substan- Treasury’’ after ‘‘Secretary’’; and following: tially equally in the eligible obligations that are (3) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the ‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—On notifica- identical (except for transferability) to the next- following: tion in accordance with clause (i), the Secretary issued publicly issued Treasury obligations hav- ‘‘(f) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—There are of the Treasury shall make available to the ing 2-year, 5-year, and 10-year maturities. authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary State of South Dakota funds from the State of ‘‘(iii) DISCONTINUANCE OF ISSUANCE OF OBLI- of the Treasury to pay expenses associated with South Dakota Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Res- GATIONS.—If the Department of the Treasury investing the Fund and auditing the uses of toration Trust Fund established under section discontinues issuing to the public obligations amounts withdrawn from the Fund— 603, to be used to carry out the plan for terres- having 2-year, 5-year, or 10-year maturities, the ‘‘(1) $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 and trial wildlife habitat restoration submitted by principal of any maturing eligible obligation 2007; and ‘‘(2) such sums as are necessary for each sub- the State of South Dakota after the State cer- shall be reinvested substantially equally in eligi- sequent fiscal year.’’. tifies to the Secretary of the Treasury that the ble obligations that are identical (except for (c) INVESTMENT PROVISIONS FOR THE CHEY- funds to be disbursed will be used in accordance transferability) to the next-issued publicly ENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE AND LOWER BRULE with section 603(d)(3) and only after the Trust issued Treasury obligations of the maturities SIOUX TRIBE TRUST FUNDS.—Section 604 of the Fund is fully capitalized.’’; and longer than 1 year then available. Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 (2) in subparagraph (B) by striking clause (ii) ‘‘(D) INVESTMENT OF INTEREST ACCOUNT.— and inserting the following: Stat. 389; 114 Stat. 2665) is amended— ‘‘(i) BEFORE FULL CAPITALIZATION.—Until the (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the ‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—On notifica- date on which the Fund is fully capitalized, following: tion in accordance with clause (i), the Secretary amounts in the interest account of the Fund ‘‘(c) INVESTMENTS.— of the Treasury shall make available to the shall be invested in eligible obligations that are ‘‘(1) ELIGIBLE OBLIGATIONS.—Notwithstanding Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Lower identical (except for transferability) to publicly any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Brule Sioux Tribe funds from the Cheyenne issued Treasury obligations that have maturities Treasury shall invest the amounts deposited River Sioux Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restora- that coincide, to the maximum extent prac- under subsection (b) and the interest earned on tion Trust Fund and the Lower Brule Sioux ticable, with the date on which the Fund is ex- those amounts only in interest-bearing obliga- Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Trust pected to be fully capitalized. tions of the United States issued directly to the Fund, respectively, established under section ‘‘(ii) AFTER FULL CAPITALIZATION.—On and Funds. 604, to be used to carry out the plans for terres- after the date on which the Fund is fully cap- ‘‘(2) INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— trial wildlife habitat restoration submitted by italized, amounts in the interest account of the ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Lower Fund shall be invested and reinvested in eligible Treasury shall invest the amounts in each of the Brule Sioux Tribe, respectively, to after the re- obligations having the shortest maturity then Funds in accordance with the requirements of spective tribe certifies to the Secretary of the available until the amounts are withdrawn and this paragraph. Treasury that the funds to be disbursed will be transferred to fund the activities authorized ‘‘(B) SEPARATE INVESTMENTS OF PRINCIPAL used in accordance with section 604(d)(3) and under subsection (d)(3). AND INTEREST.— only after the Trust Fund is fully capitalized.’’. ‘‘(E) PAR PURCHASE PRICE.—The price to be ‘‘(i) PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.—The amounts de- (b) INVESTMENT PROVISIONS OF THE STATE OF paid for eligible obligations purchased as invest- posited in each Fund under subsection (b) shall SOUTH DAKOTA TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE RES- ments of the principal account shall not exceed be credited to an account within the Fund (re- TORATION TRUST FUND.—Section 603 of the the par value of the obligations so that the ferred to in this paragraph as the ‘principal ac- Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 amount of the principal account shall be pre- count’) and invested as provided in subpara- Stat. 388; 114 Stat. 2664) is amended— served in perpetuity. graph (C). (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the ‘‘(F) HIGHEST YIELD.—Among eligible obliga- ‘‘(ii) INTEREST ACCOUNT.—The interest earned following: tions having the same maturity and purchase from investing amounts in the principal account ‘‘(c) INVESTMENTS.— price, the obligation to be purchased shall be the of each Fund shall be transferred to a separate ‘‘(1) ELIGIBLE OBLIGATIONS.—Notwithstanding obligation having the highest yield. account within the Fund (referred to in this any other provision of law, the Secretary of the ‘‘(G) HOLDING TO MATURITY.—Eligible obliga- paragraph as the ‘interest account’) and in- Treasury shall invest the amounts deposited tions purchased shall generally be held to their vested as provided in subparagraph (D). under subsection (b) and the interest earned on maturities. ‘‘(iii) CREDITING.—The interest earned from those amounts only in interest-bearing obliga- ‘‘(3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF INVESTMENT ACTIVI- investing amounts in the interest account of tions of the United States issued directly to the TIES.—Not less frequently than once each cal- each Fund shall be credited to the interest ac- Fund. endar year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall count. ‘‘(2) INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS.— review with the State of South Dakota the re- ‘‘(C) INVESTMENT OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the sults of the investment activities and financial ‘‘(i) INITIAL INVESTMENT.—Each amount de- Treasury shall invest the amounts in the Fund status of the Fund during the preceding 12- posited in the principal account of each Fund in accordance with the requirements of this month period. shall be invested initially in eligible obligations paragraph. ‘‘(4) AUDITS.— having the shortest maturity then available ‘‘(B) SEPARATE INVESTMENTS OF PRINCIPAL ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The activities of the State until the date on which the amount is divided AND INTEREST.— of South Dakota (referred to in this subsection into 3 substantially equal portions and those ‘‘(i) PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT.—The amounts de- as the ‘State’) in carrying out the plan of the portions are invested in eligible obligations that posited in the Fund under subsection (b) shall State for terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration are identical (except for transferability) to the be credited to an account within the Fund (re- under section 602(a) shall be audited as part of next-issued publicly issued Treasury obligations ferred to in this paragraph as the ‘principal ac- the annual audit that the State is required to having a 2-year maturity, a 5-year maturity, count’) and invested as provided in subpara- prepare under the Office of Management and and a 10-year maturity, respectively. graph (C). Budget Circular A–133 (or a successor circula- ‘‘(ii) SUBSEQUENT INVESTMENT.—As each 2- ‘‘(ii) INTEREST ACCOUNT.—The interest earned tion). year, 5-year, and 10-year eligible obligation ma- from investing amounts in the principal account ‘‘(B) DETERMINATION BY AUDITORS.—An audi- tures, the principal of the maturing eligible obli- of the Fund shall be transferred to a separate tor that conducts an audit under subparagraph gation shall also be invested initially in the account within the Fund (referred to in this (A) shall— shortest-maturity eligible obligation then avail- paragraph as the ‘interest account’) and in- ‘‘(i) determine whether funds received by the able until the principal is reinvested substan- vested as provided in subparagraph (D). State under this section during the period cov- tially equally in the eligible obligations that are ‘‘(iii) CREDITING.—The interest earned from ered by the audit were used to carry out the identical (except for transferability) to the next- investing amounts in the interest account of the plan of the State in accordance with this sec- issued publicly issued Treasury obligations hav- Fund shall be credited to the interest account. tion; and ing 2-year, 5-year, and 10-year maturities.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3644 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

‘‘(iii) DISCONTINUATION OF ISSUANCE OF OBLI- of the Treasury to pay expenses associated with tiously as practicable, a comprehensive plan for GATIONS.—If the Department of the Treasury investing the Funds and auditing the uses of development of new technologies and innovative discontinues issuing to the public obligations amounts withdrawn from the Funds— approaches for restoring, preserving, and pro- having 2-year, 5-year, or 10-year maturities, the ‘‘(1) $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 and tecting the Bosque River watershed within principal of any maturing eligible obligation 2007; and Bosque, Hamilton, McLennan, and Erath Coun- shall be reinvested substantially equally in eligi- ‘‘(2) such sums as are necessary for each sub- ties, Texas. The Secretary, in cooperation with ble obligations that are identical (except for sequent fiscal year.’’. the Secretary of Agriculture, may carry out ac- transferability) to the next-issued publicly SEC. 5105. FRITZ LANDING, TENNESSEE. tivities identified in the comprehensive plan to issued Treasury obligations of the maturities The Secretary shall— demonstrate practicable alternatives for sta- longer than 1 year then available. (1) conduct a study of the Fritz Landing Agri- bilization and enhancement of land and water ‘‘(D) INVESTMENT OF THE INTEREST AC- cultural Spur Levee, Tennessee, to determine the resources in the basin. COUNT.— extent of levee modifications that would be re- (b) SERVICES OF PUBLIC NON-PROFIT INSTITU- ‘‘(i) BEFORE FULL CAPITALIZATION.—Until the quired to make the levee and associated drain- TIONS AND OTHER ENTITIES.—In carrying out date on which each Fund is fully capitalized, age structures consistent with Federal stand- subsection (a), the Secretary may utilize, amounts in the interest account of the Fund ards; through contracts or other means, the services shall be invested in eligible obligations that are (2) design and construct such modifications; of public non-profit institutions and such other identical (except for transferability) to publicly and entities as the Secretary considers appropriate. issued Treasury obligations that have maturities (3) after completion of such modifications, in- (c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— that coincide, to the maximum extent prac- corporate the levee into the project for flood (1) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit toward ticable, with the date on which the Fund is ex- control, Mississippi River and Tributaries, au- the non-Federal share of the cost of activities pected to be fully capitalized. thorized by the Act entitled ‘‘An Act for the carried out under this section the cost of plan- ‘‘(ii) AFTER FULL CAPITALIZATION.—On and control of floods on the Mississippi River and its ning, design, and construction work completed after the date on which each Fund is fully cap- tributaries, and for other purposes’’, approved by or on behalf of the non-Federal interests for italized, amounts in the interest account of the May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534–539), commonly implementation of measures constructed with Fund shall be invested and reinvested in eligible known as the ‘‘Flood Control Act of 1928’’. assistance provided under this section. The obligations having the shortest maturity then SEC. 5106. J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, amount of such credit shall not exceed the non- available until the amounts are withdrawn and TENNESSEE. Federal share of the cost of such activities. transferred to fund the activities authorized The Secretary shall plan, design, and con- (2) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non- under subsection (d)(3). struct a trail system at the J. Percy Priest Dam Federal share of the cost of operation and main- ‘‘(E) PAR PURCHASE PRICE.—The price to be and Reservoir, Tennessee, authorized by section tenance for measures constructed with assist- paid for eligible obligations purchased as invest- 4 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the ance provided under this section shall be 100 ments of the principal account shall not exceed construction of certain public works on rivers percent. the par value of the obligations so that the and harbors for flood control, and for other pur- (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— amount of the principal account shall be pre- poses’’, approved June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), There is authorized to be appropriated to carry served in perpetuity. and adjacent public property, including design out this section $10,000,000. ‘‘(F) HIGHEST YIELD.—Among eligible obliga- and construction of support facilities. In car- SEC. 5111. DALLAS FLOODWAY, DALLAS TEXAS. tions having the same maturity and purchase rying out such improvements, the Secretary is (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood con- price, the obligation to be purchased shall be the authorized to use funds made available by the trol, Trinity River and tributaries, Texas, au- obligation having the highest yield. State of Tennessee from any Federal or State thorized by section 2 of the Act entitled, ‘‘An ‘‘(G) HOLDING TO MATURITY.—Eligible obliga- source, or both. Act authorizing the construction, repair, and tions purchased shall generally be held to their SEC. 5107. TOWN CREEK, LENOIR CITY, TEN- preservation of certain public works on rivers maturities. NESSEE. and harbors, and for other purposes’’, approved ‘‘(3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF INVESTMENT ACTIVI- The Secretary shall design and construct the March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 18), is modified to— TIES.—Not less frequently than once each cal- project for flood damage reduction designated as (1) direct the Secretary to review the Balanced endar year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall Alternative 4 in the Town Creek, Lenoir City, Vision Plan for the Trinity River Corridor, Dal- review with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Loudon County, Tennessee, feasibility report of las, Texas, dated December 2003 and amended in the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe (referred to in this the Nashville district engineer, dated November March 2004, prepared by the non-Federal inter- subsection as the ‘Tribes’) the results of the in- 2000, under the authority of section 205 of the est for the project; vestment activities and financial status of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), not- (2) direct the Secretary to review the Interior Funds during the preceding 12-month period. withstanding section 1 of the Flood Control Act Levee Drainage Study Phase-I report, Dallas, ‘‘(4) AUDITS.— of June 22, 1936 (33 U.S.C. 701a; 49 Stat. 1570). Texas, dated September 2006, prepared by the ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The activities of the Tribes The non-Federal share of the cost of the project non-Federal interest; and in carrying out the plans of the Tribes for ter- (3) if the Secretary determines that the project shall be subject to section 103(m) of the Water restrial wildlife habitat restoration under sec- is technically sound and environmentally ac- Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. tion 602(a) shall be audited as part of the an- ceptable, authorize the Secretary to construct 2213(m)). nual audit that the Tribes are required to pre- the project at a total cost of $459,000,000, with pare under the Office of Management and SEC. 5108. TENNESSEE RIVER PARTNERSHIP. an estimated Federal cost of $298,000,000 and an Budget Circular A–133 (or a successor circula- (a) IN GENERAL.—As part of the operation and estimated non-Federal cost of $161,000,000. tion). maintenance of the project for navigation, Ten- (b) CREDIT.— ‘‘(B) DETERMINATION BY AUDITORS.—An audi- nessee River, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, (1) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary tor that conducts an audit under subparagraph and Kentucky, authorized by the first section of shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the (A) shall— the River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930 (46 cost of the project the cost of planning, design, ‘‘(i) determine whether funds received by the Stat. 927), the Secretary may enter into a part- and construction work carried out by the non- Tribes under this section during the period cov- nership with a nonprofit entity to remove debris Federal interest before the date of the partner- ered by the audit were used to carry out the from the Tennessee River in the vicinity of ship agreement for the project if the Secretary plan of the appropriate Tribe in accordance Knoxville, Tennessee, by providing a vessel to determines that the work is integral to the with this section; and such entity, at Federal expense, for such debris project. ‘‘(ii) include the determination under clause removal purposes. (2) CASH CONTRIBUTIONS.—The Secretary shall (i) in the written findings of the audit. (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— accept funds provided by the non-Federal inter- ‘‘(5) MODIFICATION OF INVESTMENT REQUIRE- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry est for use in carrying out planning, engineer- MENTS.— out this section $500,000. ing, and design for the project. The Federal ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the SEC. 5109. UPPER MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT, TEN- share of such planning, engineering, and design Treasury determines that meeting the require- NESSEE, ARKANSAS, AND MIS- carried out with non-Federal contributions shall ments under paragraph (2) with respect to the SISSIPPI. be credited against the non-Federal share of the investment of a Fund is not practicable, or The Secretary may participate with non-Fed- cost of the project. would result in adverse consequences for the eral and nonprofit entities to address issues con- SEC. 5112. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. Fund, the Secretary shall modify the require- cerning managing groundwater as a sustainable (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 575(a) of the Water ments, as the Secretary determines to be nec- resource through the Upper Mississippi Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. essary. Embayment, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mis- 3789; 113 Stat. 311) is amended by inserting be- ‘‘(B) CONSULTATION.—Before modifying a re- sissippi, and coordinating the protection of fore the period at the end the following: ‘‘, quirement under subparagraph (A), the Sec- groundwater supply and groundwater quality whether or not such works or actions are par- retary of the Treasury shall consult with the with local surface water protection programs. tially funded under the hazard mitigation grant Tribes regarding the proposed modification.’’; There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 program of the Federal Emergency Management and to carry out this section. Agency’’. (2) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the SEC. 5110. BOSQUE RIVER WATERSHED, TEXAS. (b) SPECIFIC PROJECTS.—Section 575(b) of such following: (a) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.—The Secretary, in Act (110 Stat. 3789; 113 Stat. 311) is amended— ‘‘(f) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—There are consultation with appropriate Federal, State, (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary and local entities, shall develop, as expedi- end;

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3645

(2) in paragraph (4) by striking the period at (1) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ‘‘may con- ‘‘(15) BUFFALO BAYOU, TEXAS.—A project for the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and struct’’ and inserting ‘‘shall construct’’; and flood control, Buffalo Bayou, Texas, to provide (3) by adding the following: (2) by inserting ‘‘and ecosystem restoration’’ an alternative to the project authorized by the ‘‘(5) the project for flood control, Upper White after ‘‘erosion protection’’ each place it appears. first section of the River and Harbor Act of June Oak Bayou, Texas, authorized by section 401(a) SEC. 5120. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA 20, 1938 (52 Stat. 804) and modified by section 3a of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 FLOOD CONTROL. of the Flood Control Act of August 11, 1939 (53 (100 Stat. 4125).’’. (a) CHEAT AND TYGART RIVER BASINS, WEST Stat. 1414). SEC. 5113. ONION CREEK, TEXAS. VIRGINIA.—Section 581(a)(1) of the Water Re- ‘‘(16) HALLS BAYOU, TEXAS.—A project for In carrying out the study for the project for sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790; flood control, Halls Bayou, Texas, to provide an flood damage reduction, recreation, and eco- 113 Stat. 313) is amended— alternative to the project for flood control, Buf- system restoration, Onion Creek, Texas, the Sec- (1) by striking ‘‘flood control measures’’ and falo Bayou and tributaries, Texas, authorized retary shall include the costs and benefits asso- inserting ‘‘structural and nonstructural flood by section 101(a)(21) of the Water Resources De- ciated with the relocation of flood-prone resi- control, streambank protection, stormwater velopment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610).’’. management, and channel clearing and modi- dences in the study area for the project in the TITLE VI—FLORIDA EVERGLADES period beginning 2 years before the date of initi- fication measures’’; and (2) by inserting ‘‘with respect to measures that SEC. 6001. HILLSBORO AND OKEECHOBEE AQUI- ation of the study and ending on the date of FER, FLORIDA. execution of the partnership agreement for con- incorporate levees or floodwalls’’ before the (a) MODIFICATION.—The project for Hillsboro struction of the project to the extent the Sec- semicolon. and Okeechobee Aquifer, Florida, authorized by retary determines such relocations are compat- (b) PRIORITY COMMUNITIES.—Section 581(b) of section 101(a)(16) of the Water Resources Devel- ible with the project. The Secretary shall credit the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 opment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 276), is modified to toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the (110 Stat. 3791) is amended— (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph authorize the Secretary to carry out the project project the cost of relocation of such flood-prone (5); at a total cost of $42,500,000. residences incurred by the non-Federal interest (2) by striking the period at the end of para- (b) TREATMENT.—Section 601(b)(2)(A) of the before the date of the partnership agreement for graph (6) and inserting a semicolon; and Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 the project if the Secretary determines that the (3) by adding at the end the following: Stat. 2681) is amended— relocation of such residences is integral to the ‘‘(7) Etna, Pennsylvania, in the Pine Creek (1) in clause (i) by adding at the end the fol- project. watershed; and lowing: ‘‘The project for aquifer storage and re- SEC. 5114. EASTERN SHORE AND SOUTHWEST VIR- ‘‘(8) Millvale, Pennsylvania, in the Girty’s covery, Hillsboro and Okeechobee Aquifer, Flor- GINIA. Run River basin.’’. ida, authorized by section 101(a)(16) of the Section 219(f)(10) of the Water Resources De- (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. tion 581(c) of the Water Resources Development Stat. 276), shall be treated for purposes of this 335) is amended— Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3791) is amended by strik- section as being in the Plan, except that oper- (1) by striking ‘‘$20,000,000 for water supply ing ‘‘$12,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$90,000,000’’. ation and maintenance costs of the project shall and wastewater infrastructure’’ and inserting SEC. 5121. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA. remain a non-Federal responsibility.’’; and the following: Section 571 of the Water Resources Develop- (2) in clause (iii) by inserting after ‘‘subpara- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—$20,000,000 for water sup- ment Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 371) is amended— graph (B)’’ the following: ‘‘and the project for ply, wastewater infrastructure, and environ- (1) in subsection (a)— aquifer storage and recovery, Hillsboro and mental restoration’’; (A) by striking ‘‘Nicholas,’’; and Okeechobee Aquifer’’. (2) by adding at the end the following: (B) by striking ‘‘Gilmer,’’; and ‘‘(B) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- (2) by adding at the end the following: SEC. 6002. PILOT PROJECTS. ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the ‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding Section 601(b)(2)(B) of the Water Resources project the cost of work carried out by the non- section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2681) is Federal interest before the date of the partner- (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal interest amended— ship agreement for the project if the Secretary may include for any project undertaken under (1) in the matter preceding clause (i)— determines that the work is integral to the this section a nonprofit entity with the consent (A) by striking ‘‘$69,000,000’’ and inserting project.’’; and of the affected local government. ‘‘$71,200,000’’; and (3) by aligning the remainder of the text of ‘‘(j) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten per- (B) by striking ‘‘$34,500,000’’ each place it ap- subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph cent of the amounts appropriated to carry out pears and inserting ‘‘$35,600,000’’; and (1) of this section) with subparagraph (B) (as this section may be used by the Corps of Engi- (2) in clause (i)— added by paragraph (2) of this section). neers district offices to administer projects under (A) by striking ‘‘$6,000,000’’ and inserting SEC. 5115. DYKE MARSH, FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIR- this section at Federal expense.’’. ‘‘$8,200,000’’; and GINIA. SEC. 5122. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA. (B) by striking ‘‘$3,000,000’’ each place it ap- The Secretary shall accept funds from the Na- (a) CORPS OF ENGINEERS.—Section 340 of the pears and inserting ‘‘$4,100,000’’. tional Park Service to restore Dyke Marsh, Fair- Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 SEC. 6003. MAXIMUM COSTS. fax County, Virginia. Stat. 4856; 113 Stat. 320) is amended by adding (a) MAXIMUM COST OF PROJECTS.—Section SEC. 5116. BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, at the end the following: 601(b)(2)(E) of the Water Resources Development WASHINGTON. ‘‘(h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS.—Ten percent of Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2683) is amended by insert- The Secretary shall conduct a study of in- the amounts appropriated to carry out this sec- ing ‘‘and section (d)’’ before the period at the creased siltation in Baker Bay and Ilwaco Har- tion may be used by the Corps of Engineers dis- end. bor, Washington, to determine if the siltation is trict offices to administer projects under this (b) MAXIMUM COST OF PROGRAM AUTHOR- the result of a Federal navigation project (in- section at Federal expense.’’. ITY.—Section 601(c)(3) of such Act (114 Stat. cluding diverted flows from the Columbia River) (b) SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA DEFINED.—Sec- 2684) is amended by adding at the end the fol- and, if the Secretary determines that the silta- tion 340(f) of such Act is amended by inserting lowing: tion is the result of a Federal navigation ‘‘Nicholas,’’ after ‘‘Greenbrier,’’. ‘‘(C) MAXIMUM COST OF PROGRAM AUTHOR- project, the Secretary shall carry out a project (c) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Section 340 of the ITY.—Section 902 of the Water Resources Devel- to mitigate the siltation as part of maintenance Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2280) shall apply of the Federal navigation project. Stat. 4856) is further amended by adding at the to the individual project funding limits in sub- SEC. 5117. HAMILTON ISLAND CAMPGROUND, end the following: paragraph (A) and the aggregate cost limits in WASHINGTON. ‘‘(i) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (B).’’. section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 The Secretary is authorized to plan, design, SEC. 6004. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION. and construct a campground for Bonneville (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), a non-Federal interest may include for any project undertaken under Section 601(d) of the Water Resources Devel- Lock and Dam at Hamilton Island (also know opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2684) is amended as ‘‘Strawberry Island’’) in Skamania County, this section a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local government.’’. by adding at the end the following: Washington. ‘‘(3) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The following SEC. 5118. PUGET ISLAND, WASHINGTON. SEC. 5123. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL INTER- project for water resources development and The Secretary is directed to place dredged and ESTS. conservation and other purposes is authorized other suitable material along portions of the Co- Section 211(f) of the Water Resources Develop- to be carried out by the Secretary substantially lumbia River shoreline of Puget Island, Wash- ment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 701b–13) is amended in accordance with the plans, and subject to the ington, between river miles 38 to 47 in order to by adding at the end the following: conditions, described in the report designated in protect economic and environmental resources ‘‘(12) PERRIS, CALIFORNIA.—The project for this paragraph: in the area from further erosion, at a Federal flood control, Perris, California. ‘‘(A) INDIAN RIVER LAGOON SOUTH, FLORIDA.— cost of $1,000,000. This action shall be coordi- ‘‘(13) THORNTON RESERVOIR, COOK COUNTY, IL- The project for ecosystem restoration, water nated with appropriate resource agencies and LINOIS.—An element of the project for flood con- supply, flood damage reduction, and protection comply with applicable Federal laws. trol, Chicagoland Underflow Plan, Illinois. of water quality, Indian River Lagoon South, SEC. 5119. WILLAPA BAY, WASHINGTON. ‘‘(14) LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LOU- Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Section 545 of the Water Resources Develop- ISIANA.—The project for flood control, Larose to August 6, 2004, at a total cost of $1,365,000,000, ment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2675) is amended— Golden Meadow, Louisiana. with an estimated Federal cost of $682,500,000

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3646 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 and an estimated non-Federal cost of Federal agency or from non-Federal interests for analysis, and design of the comprehensive coast- $682,500,000. construction of the project modification under al protection master plan authorized and de- ‘‘(B) PICAYUNE STRAND, FLORIDA.—The project subsection (a) or for carrying out such other fined pursuant to Act 8 of the First Extraor- for environmental restoration, Picayune Strand, work that the Secretary determines to be appro- dinary Session of the Louisiana State Legisla- Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated priate and consistent with authorized purposes ture, 2005, including— September 15, 2005, at a total cost of of the modified project. (1) investigation and study of the maximum $375,330,000, with an estimated Federal cost of SEC. 6009. DEAUTHORIZATIONS. effective use of the water and sediment of the $187,665,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost The following projects are not authorized Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers for coastal of $187,665,000. after the date of enactment of this Act: restoration purposes consistent with flood con- ‘‘(C) SITE 1 IMPOUNDMENT, FLORIDA.—The (1) The uncompleted portions of the project for trol and navigation; project for environmental restoration, Site 1 Im- the C–44 Basin Storage Reservoir of the Com- (2) a schedule for the design and implementa- poundment, Florida: Report of the Chief of En- prehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, author- tion of large-scale water and sediment reintro- gineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost ized by section 601(b)(2)(C)(i) of the Water Re- duction projects and an assessment of funding of $80,840,000, with an estimated Federal cost of sources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2682), needs from any source; and $40,420,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of at a total cost of $147,800,000, with an estimated (3) an investigation and assessment of alter- $40,420,000.’’. Federal cost of $73,900,000 and an estimated ations in the operation of the Old River Control SEC. 6005. CREDIT. non-Federal cost of $73,900,000. Structure, consistent with flood control and Section 601(e)(5)(B) of the Water Resources (2) The uncompleted portions of the Martin navigation purposes. Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2685) is County, Florida, modifications to the project for (d) INCLUSIONS.—The comprehensive plan amended— Central and Southern Florida, authorized by shall include a description of— (1) the framework of a long-term program in- (1) in clause (i)— section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 tegrated with hurricane and storm damage re- (A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subclause Stat. 740), at a total cost of $15,471,000, with an duction, flood damage reduction, and naviga- (I); estimated Federal cost of $8,073,000 and an esti- tion activities that provide for the comprehen- (B) by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end of subclause mated non-Federal cost of $7,398,000. sive protection, conservation, and restoration of (II); and (3) The uncompleted portions of the East the wetlands, estuaries (including the (C) by adding at the end the following: Coast Backpumping, St. Lucie–Martin County, Barataria-Terrebonne estuary), barrier islands, ‘‘(III) the credit is provided for work carried Spillway Structure S–311 modifications to the shorelines, and related land and features of the out before the date of the partnership agreement project for Central and Southern Florida, au- coastal Louisiana ecosystem, including protec- between the Secretary and the non-Federal thorized by section 203 of the Flood Control Act tion of critical resources, habitat, and infra- sponsor, as defined in an agreement between the of 1968 (82 Stat. 740), at a total cost of structure from the effects of a coastal storm, a Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor pro- $77,118,000, with an estimated Federal cost of hurricane, erosion, or subsidence; viding for such credit;’’; and $55,124,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (2) the means by which a new technology, or (2) in clause (ii)— $21,994,000. (A) by striking ‘‘design agreement or the an improved technique, can be integrated into project cooperation’’; and SEC. 6010. REGIONAL ENGINEERING MODEL FOR the program referred to in paragraph (1); ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION. (B) by inserting before the semicolon the fol- (3) the role of other Federal and State agen- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall com- lowing: ‘‘, including in the case of credit pro- cies and programs in carrying out such pro- plete the development and testing of the re- vided under clause (i)(III) conditions relating to gram; gional engineering model for environmental res- design and construction’’. (4) specific, measurable ecological success cri- toration as expeditiously as practicable. SEC. 6006. OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE. teria by which success of the plan will be meas- (b) USAGE.—The Secretary shall consider Section 601(k) of the Water Resources Devel- ured; and using, as appropriate, the regional engineering (5) proposed projects in order of priority as de- opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2691) is amended model for environmental restoration in the de- by adding at the end the following: termined by their respective potential to con- velopment of future water resource projects, in- tribute to— ‘‘(3) MAXIMUM EXPENDITURES.—The Secretary cluding projects developed pursuant to section may expend up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year for (A) creation of coastal wetlands; and 601 of the Water Resources Development Act of (B) flood protection of communities ranked by fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2004, 2000 (114 Stat. 2680). population density and level of protection. to carry out this subsection.’’. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (e) CONSIDERATIONS.—In developing the com- SEC. 6007. CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS. There is authorized to be appropriated prehensive plan, the Secretary shall consider the Section 528(b)(3)(C) of the Water Resources $10,000,000 to carry out subsection (a). advisability of integrating into the program re- Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3769; 113 Stat. TITLE VII—LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ferred to in subsection (d)(1)— 286) is amended— (1) any related Federal or State project being SEC. 7001. DEFINITIONS. (1) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘$75,000,000’’ and carried out on the date on which the plan is de- In this title, the following definitions apply: all that follows through ‘‘2003’’ and inserting veloped; (1) COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM.—The term ‘‘$95,000,000’’; and (2) any activity in the Plan; or (2) in clause (ii) by striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and ‘‘coastal Louisiana ecosystem’’ means the coast- (3) any other project or activity identified in— inserting ‘‘$30,000,000’’. al area of Louisiana from the Sabine River on (A) the Mississippi River and Tributaries pro- SEC. 6008. MODIFIED WATER DELIVERIES. the west to the Pearl River on the east, includ- gram; (a) IN GENERAL.—The project, Modified Water ing those parts of the Deltaic Plain and the (B) the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conserva- Deliveries to Everglades National Park, author- Chenier Plain included within the study area of tion Plan; ized by section 104 of the Everglades National the Plan. (C) the Louisiana Coastal Zone Management Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 (16 (2) GOVERNOR.—The term ‘‘Governor’’ means Plan; or U.S.C. 410r-8), as described in the General De- the Governor of the State of Louisiana. (D) the plan of the State of Louisiana entitled sign Memorandum and Environmental Impact (3) PLAN.—The term ‘‘Plan’’ means the report ‘‘Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Lou- Statement for Modified Water Deliveries to Ev- of the Chief of Engineers for ecosystem restora- isiana’’. erglades National Park, June 1992, is modified to tion for the Louisiana Coastal Area dated Janu- (f) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.— authorize the Secretary to construct the project ary 31, 2005. (1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 1 year substantially in accordance with the Revised (4) TASK FORCE.—The term ‘‘Task Force’’ after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- General Reevaluation Report/Second Supple- means the Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protec- retary shall submit to Congress a report con- mental Environmental Impact Statement for the tion and Restoration Task Force established by taining the comprehensive plan. Tamiami Trail Modifications, Modified Water section 7003. (2) UPDATES.—Not later that 5 years after the Deliveries to Everglades National Park, August SEC. 7002. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. date of submission of a report under paragraph 2005, at a total cost of $144,131,000. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordina- (1), and at least once every 5 years thereafter (b) USE OF FUNDS.—Funds made available tion with the Governor, shall develop a com- until implementation of the comprehensive plan under section 102(f) of the Everglades National prehensive plan for protecting, preserving, and is complete, the Secretary shall submit to Con- Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 (16 restoring the coastal Louisiana ecosystem. gress a report containing an update of the plan U.S.C. 410r–6), may be used to carry out the (b) INTEGRATION OF PLAN INTO COMPREHEN- and an assessment of the progress made in im- project modification under subsection (a). SIVE HURRICANE PROTECTION STUDY.—In devel- plementing the plan. (c) SOURCE AND ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.— oping the comprehensive plan, the Secretary SEC. 7003. LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA. (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para- shall integrate the plan into the analysis and (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry graph (2), Federal costs incurred for construc- design of the comprehensive hurricane protec- out a program for ecosystem restoration, Lou- tion of the project modification under subsection tion study authorized by title I of the Energy isiana Coastal Area, Louisiana, substantially in (a) on or after October 1, 2004, shall be shared and Water Development Appropriations Act, accordance with the report of the Chief of Engi- equally between the Secretary and the Secretary 2006 (Public Law 109–103; 119 Stat. 2247). neers, dated January 31, 2005. of the Interior. (c) CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE COAST- (b) PRIORITIES.— (2) ACCEPTANCE AND USE OF FUNDS.—The Sec- AL PROTECTION MASTER PLAN.—In developing (1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the program retary may accept and expend funds, without the comprehensive plan, the Secretary shall en- under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give further appropriation, provided from another sure that the plan is consistent with the goals, priority to—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3647 (A) any portion of the program identified in and navigation in those areas in Louisiana for determines to be necessary to assist the Sec- the report described in subsection (a) as a crit- which a major disaster has been declared by the retary in carrying out this subsection. ical restoration feature; President as a result of Hurricane Katrina or (4) CONTRACTS AND COOPERATIVE AGREE- (B) any Mississippi River diversion project Rita. MENTS.—In carrying out this subsection, the that— (B) EXPERTISE; REPRESENTATION.—In estab- Secretary may enter into a contract or coopera- (i) will protect a major population area of the lishing the working group under subparagraph tive agreement with an individual or entity (in- Pontchartain, Pearl, Breton Sound, Barataria, (A), the Task Force shall ensure that the cluding a consortium of academic institutions in or Terrebonne basins; and group— Louisiana) with scientific or engineering exper- (ii) will produce an environmental benefit to (i) has expertise in coastal estuaries, diver- tise in the restoration of aquatic and marine the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; sions, coastal restoration and wetlands protec- ecosystems for coastal restoration and enhance- (C) any barrier island, or barrier shoreline, tion, ecosystem restoration, hurricane protec- ment through science and technology. project that— tion, storm damage reduction systems, naviga- (b) DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.— (i) will be carried out in conjunction with a tion, and ports; and (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Mississippi River diversion project; and (ii) represents the State of Louisiana and local Secretary may carry out demonstration projects (ii) will protect a major population area; governments in south Louisiana. substantially in accordance with the Plan and (D) any project that will reduce storm surge (f) COMPENSATION.—Members of the Task within the coastal Louisiana ecosystem for the and prevent or reduce the risk of loss of human Force and members of a working group estab- purpose of resolving critical areas of scientific or life and the risk to public safety; and lished by the Task Force may not receive com- technological uncertainty related to the imple- (E) a project to physically modify the Mis- pensation for their services as members of the mentation of the comprehensive plan to be de- sissippi River-Gulf outlet and to restore the Task Force or working group, as the case may veloped under section 7002(a). areas affected by the Mississippi River-Gulf out- be. (2) MAXIMUM COST.— let in accordance with the comprehensive plan (g) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Travel expenses in- (A) TOTAL COST.—The total cost for planning, to be developed under section 7002(a), subject to curred by members of the Task Force and mem- design, and construction of all projects under the conditions and recommendations in a final bers of a working group established by the Task this subsection shall not exceed $100,000,000. report of the Chief of Engineers. Force, in the performance of their service on the (B) INDIVIDUAL PROJECT.—The total cost of an individual project under this subsection shall SEC. 7004. COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PRO- Task Force or working group, as the case may TECTION AND RESTORATION TASK be, shall be paid by the agency or entity that not exceed $25,000,000. (c) INITIAL PROJECTS.— FORCE. the member represents. (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a (h) NONAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Fed- to carry out the following projects substantially task force to be known as the Coastal Louisiana eral Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task in accordance with the Plan: shall not apply to the Task Force or any work- (A) Mississippi River Gulf Outlet environ- Force (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Task ing group established by the Task Force. Force’’). mental restoration at a total cost of $105,300,000. SEC. 7005. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS. (B) Small diversion at Hope Canal at a total (b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Task Force shall con- (a) REVIEW.—The Secretary, in cooperation cost of $68,600,000. sist of the following members (or, in the case of with the non-Federal interest of the project in- (C) Barataria basin barrier shoreline restora- the head of a Federal agency, a designee at the volved, shall review each Federally-authorized tion at a total cost of $242,600,000. level of Assistant Secretary or an equivalent water resources project in the coastal Louisiana (D) Small Bayou Lafourche reintroduction at level): ecosystem being carried out or completed as of a total cost of $133,500,000. (1) The Secretary. the date of enactment of this Act to determine (E) Medium diversion at Myrtle Grove with (2) The Secretary of the Interior. whether the project needs to be modified— dedicated dredging at a total cost of (3) The Secretary of Commerce. (1) under the program authorized by section $278,300,000. (4) The Administrator of the Environmental 7003; or (2) MODIFICATIONS.— Protection Agency. (2) to contribute to ecosystem restoration (A) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out each project (5) The Secretary of Agriculture. under section 7003. under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall carry (6) The Secretary of Transportation. ODIFICATIONS.—Subject to subsections (c) out such modifications as may be necessary to (7) The Secretary of Energy. (b) M and (d), the Secretary may carry out the modi- the ecosystem restoration features identified in (8) The Director of the Federal Emergency the Plan to address the impacts of Hurricanes Management Agency. fications described in subsection (a). (c) PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT.—Before Katrina and Rita on the areas of the project. (9) The Commandant of the Coast Guard. (B) INTEGRATION.—The Secretary shall ensure (10) The Coastal Advisor to the Governor. completing the report required under subsection (d), the Secretary shall provide an opportunity that each modification under subparagraph (A) (11) The Secretary of the Louisiana Depart- is taken into account in conducting the study of ment of Natural Resources. for public notice and comment. (d) REPORT.— comprehensive hurricane protection authorized (12) A representative of the Governor’s Advi- by title I of the Energy and Water Development sory Commission on Coastal Restoration and (1) IN GENERAL.—Before modifying an oper- ation or feature of a project under subsection Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2247). Conservation. (3) CONSTRUCTION REPORTS.—Before the Sec- (c) DUTIES.—The Task Force shall make rec- (b), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the retary may begin construction of any project ommendations to the Secretary regarding— under this subsection, the Secretary shall submit (1) policies, strategies, plans, programs, House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a a report documenting any modifications to the projects, and activities for addressing conserva- project, including cost changes, to the Com- tion, protection, restoration, and maintenance report describing the modification. (2) INCLUSION.—A report describing a modi- mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of of the coastal Louisiana ecosystem; the House of Representatives and the Committee (2) financial participation by each agency fication under paragraph (1) shall include such information relating to the timeline for and cost on Environment and Public Works of the Sen- represented on the Task Force in conserving, ate. protecting, restoring, and maintaining the of the modification, as the Secretary determines to be relevant. (4) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER PROVISIONS.— coastal Louisiana ecosystem, including rec- Notwithstanding section 902 of the Water Re- (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ommendations— sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. (A) that identify funds from current agency There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000. 2280), the cost of a project described in para- missions and budgets; and graph (1) and any modifications to the project (B) for coordinating individual agency budget SEC. 7006. CONSTRUCTION. shall not exceed 150 percent of the cost of such requests; and (a) SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.— project set forth in paragraph (1). (3) the comprehensive plan to be developed (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry (d) BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATERIAL.— under section 7002(a). out a coastal Louisiana ecosystem program sub- The Secretary, substantially in accordance with (d) REPORT.—The Task Force shall submit to stantially in accordance with the Plan, at a the Plan, shall implement in the coastal Lou- Congress a biennial report that summarizes the total cost of $100,000,000. isiana ecosystem a program for the beneficial activities of the Task Force. (2) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the program use of material dredged from federally main- (e) WORKING GROUPS.— under paragraph (1) shall be— tained waterways at a total cost of $100,000,000. (1) GENERAL AUTHORITY.—The Task Force (A) to identify any uncertainty relating to the (e) ADDITIONAL PROJECTS.— may establish such working groups as the Task physical, chemical, geological, biological, and (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized Force determines to be necessary to assist the cultural baseline conditions in coastal Lou- to carry out a project for ecosystem restoration Task Force in carrying out this section. isiana ecosystem; for the Chenier Plain, Louisiana, and the fol- (2) HURRICANES KATRINA AND RITA.— (B) to improve knowledge of the physical, lowing projects referred to in the Plan if the (A) IN GENERAL.—The Task Force may estab- chemical, geological, biological, and cultural Secretary determines such projects are feasible: lish a working group for the purpose of advising baseline conditions in coastal Louisiana eco- (A) Land Bridge between Caillou Lake and the Task Force of opportunities to integrate the system; and the Gulf of Mexico at a total cost of $56,300,000. planning, engineering, design, implementation, (C) to identify and develop technologies, mod- (B) Gulf Shoreline at Point Au Fer Island at and performance of Corps of Engineers projects els, and methods to carry out this subsection. a total cost of $43,400,000. for hurricane and storm damage reduction, (3) WORKING GROUPS.—The Secretary may es- (C) Modification of Caernarvon Diversion at a flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, tablish such working groups as the Secretary total cost of $20,700,000.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3648 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (D) Modification of Davis Pond Diversion at a ment of a project intended to produce benefits (6) reinforce or replace flood walls in the ex- total cost of $64,200,000. that are predominantly unrelated to the protec- isting Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Project (2) REPORTS.—Not later than December 31, tion, preservation, and restoration of the coastal and the existing West Bank and Vicinity Project 2009, the Secretary shall submit feasibility re- Louisiana ecosystem. to improve performance of the flood and storm ports on the projects described in paragraph (1) SEC. 7009. INDEPENDENT REVIEW. damage reduction systems; to the Committee on Transportation and Infra- The Secretary shall establish the Louisiana (7) perform one time stormproofing of interior structure of the House of Representatives and Water Resources Council which shall serve as pump stations to ensure the operability of the the Committee on Environment and Public the exclusive peer review panel for projects stations during hurricanes, storms, and high Works of the Senate. under this title as required by section 2037 of water events; (8) repair, replace, modify and improve non- (3) CONSTRUCTION.—No appropriations shall this Act. be made to construct any project under this sub- Federal levees and associated protection meas- SEC. 7010. EXPEDITED REPORTS. ures in Terrebonne Parish; and section if the report under paragraph (2) has The Secretary shall expedite completion of the not been approved by resolutions adopted by the (9) reduce the risk of storm damage to the reports for the following projects and, if the Sec- greater New Orleans metropolitan area by re- Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- retary determines that a project is justified in ture of the House of Representatives and the storing the surrounding wetlands through meas- the completed report, proceed directly to project ures to begin to reverse wetland losses in areas Committee on Environment and Public Works of preconstruction engineering and design: the Senate. affected by navigation, oil and gas, and other (1) The projects identified in the study of com- channels and through modification of the SEC. 7007. NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE. prehensive hurricane protection authorized by Caernarvon Freshwater Diversion structure or (a) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- title I of the Energy and Water Development its operations. ward the non-Federal share of the cost of a Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2447). (b) FUNDING AUTHORITY.—Activities author- study or project under this title the cost of work (2) A project for ecosystem restoration for the ized by subsection (a) and section 7013 shall be carried out in the coastal Louisiana ecosystem Chenier Plain, Louisiana. carried out in a manner that is consistent with by the non-Federal interest before the date of (3) The project for Multipurpose Operation of the cost-sharing requirements specified in the the execution of the partnership agreement for Houma Navigation Lock. Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for the study or project if the Secretary determines (4) The project for Terrebonne Basin Barrier Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurri- that the work is integral to the study or project. Shoreline Restoration. cane Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 109–234). (b) SOURCES OF FUNDS.—The non-Federal in- (5) The project for Small Diversion at Con- (c) CONDITIONS.—The Secretary shall notify terest may use, and the Secretary shall accept, vent/Blind River. the Committee on Transportation and Infra- funds provided under any other Federal pro- (6) The project for Amite River Diversion structure of the House of Representatives and gram to satisfy, in whole or in part, the non- Canal Modification. the Committee on Environment and Public Federal share of the construction of any project (7) The project for Medium Diversion at Works of the Senate if estimates for the expendi- carried out under this section if such funds are White’s Ditch. ture of funds on any single project or activity authorized to be used to carry out such project. (8) The project to convey Atchafalaya River identified in subsection (a) exceeds the amount (c) TREATMENT OF CREDIT BETWEEN Water to Northern Terrebonne Marshes. specified for that project or activity in the Emer- PROJECTS.—Any credit provided under this sec- (9) The projects identified in the Southwest gency Supplemental Appropriations Act for De- tion toward the non-Federal share of the cost of Coastal Louisiana hurricane and storm damage fense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane a study or project under this title may be ap- reduction study authorized by the Committee on Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 109–234). No appro- plied toward the non-Federal share of the cost Transportation and Infrastructure of the House priation in excess of 25 percent above the of any other study or project under this title. of Representatives on December 7, 2005. amount specified for a project or activity in (d) PERIODIC MONITORING.— SEC. 7011. REPORTING. such Act shall be made until an increase in the (1) IN GENERAL.—To ensure that the contribu- (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 6 years after level of expenditure has been approved by reso- tions of the non-Federal interest equal the non- the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary lutions adopted by the Committee on Transpor- Federal share of the cost of a study or project shall submit to the Committee on Transportation tation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep- under this title during each 5-year period begin- and Infrastructure of the House of Representa- resentatives and the Committee on Environment ning after the date of commencement of the first tives and the Committee on Environment and and Public Works of the Senate. study or project under this title, the Secretary Public Works of the Senate a report including a SEC. 7013. MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET. shall— description of— (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, (A) monitor for each study or project under (1) the projects authorized and undertaken Mississippi River-Gulf outlet, authorized by the this title the non-Federal provision of cash, in- under this title; Act entitled ‘‘An Act to authorize construction kind services and materials, and land, ease- (2) the construction status of the projects; of the Mississippi River-Gulf outlet’’, approved ments, rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal (3) the cost to date and the expected final cost March 29, 1956 (70 Stat. 65), as modified by sec- areas; and of each project undertaken under this title; and tion 844 of the Water Resources Development (B) manage the requirement of the non-Fed- (4) the benefits and environmental impacts of Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4177), is not authorized. eral interest to provide for each such study or the projects. (b) PLAN FOR CLOSURE AND RESTORATION.— project cash, in-kind services and materials, and (b) EXTERNAL REVIEW.—The Secretary shall The Secretary shall carry out a study and im- land, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and enter into a contract with the National Acad- plement a project to physically modify the Mis- disposal areas. emy of Sciences under which the National Acad- sissippi River-Gulf outlet and to restore the (2) OTHER MONITORING.—The Secretary shall emy of Sciences shall perform and submit to the areas affected by the Mississippi River-Gulf out- conduct monitoring separately for the study Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- let in accordance with the plan to be developed phase, construction phase, preconstruction engi- ture of the House of Representatives and the under section 7002(a), subject to the conditions neering and design phase, and planning phase Committee on Environment and Public Works of and recommendations in a final report of the for each project authorized on or after date of the Senate an external review of the demonstra- Chief of Engineers if a favorable report of the enactment of this Act for all or any portion of tion program authorized by subsection 7006(b). Chief is completed not later than 180 days after the coastal Louisiana ecosystem. SEC. 7012. NEW ORLEANS AND VICINITY. the date of enactment of this Act. The plan shall (e) AUDITS.—Credit for land, easements, (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized incorporate the recommendations of the Interim rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal areas to— Mississippi River Gulf Outlet Deep-Draft De- (including land value and incidental costs) pro- (1) raise levee heights where necessary and Authorization Report submitted to Congress in vided under this section, and the cost of work otherwise enhance the Lake Pontchartrain and December 2006. provided under this section, shall be subject to Vicinity Project and the West Bank and Vicin- (c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 180 audit by the Secretary. ity Project to provide the levels of protection days after the date of enactment of this Act, the SEC. 7008. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION. necessary to achieve the certification required Secretary shall submit to the Committee on (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 209 for participation in the national flood insurance Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962– program under the National Flood Insurance of Representatives and the Committee on Envi- 2) or any other provision of law, in carrying out Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.); ronment and Public Works of the Senate a re- any project or activity under this title or any (2) modify the 17th Street, Orleans Avenue, port on the project described in subsection (b). other provision of law to protect, conserve, and and London Avenue drainage canals and install (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— restore the coastal Louisiana ecosystem, the Sec- pumps and closure structures at or near the There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 retary may determine that— lakefront at Lake Pontchartrain; for the costs of carrying out the study and de- (1) the project or activity is justified by the (3) armor critical elements of the New Orleans veloping the report of the Chief of Engineers re- environmental benefits derived by the coastal hurricane and storm damage reduction system; quired by subsection (b). Such costs shall be a Louisiana ecosystem; and (4) modify the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Federal expense. (2) no further economic justification for the to increase the reliability of the flood protection TITLE VIII—UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER project or activity is required if the Secretary system for the city of New Orleans; AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY SYSTEM determines that the project or activity is cost ef- (5) replace or modify certain non-Federal lev- SEC. 8001. DEFINITIONS. fective. ees in Plaquemines Parish to incorporate the In this title, the following definitions apply: (b) LIMITATION ON APPLICABILITY.—Sub- levees into the New Orleans to Venice Hurricane (1) PLAN.—The term ‘‘Plan’’ means the project section (a) shall not apply to any separable ele- Protection Project; for navigation and ecosystem improvements for

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3649 the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Water- ability of the ecosystem of the Upper Mississippi shall include a monitoring plan for the perform- way System: Report of the Chief of Engineers, River and Illinois River in accordance with the ance measures identified under paragraph dated December 15, 2004. general framework outlined in the Plan. (1)(A), including— (2) UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WA- (2) PROJECTS INCLUDED.—Ecosystem restora- (A) a timeline to achieve the identified target TERWAY SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘Upper Mississippi tion projects may include— goals; and River and Illinois Waterway System’’ means the (A) island building; (B) a timeline for the demonstration of project projects for navigation and ecosystem restora- (B) construction of fish passages; completion. tion authorized by Congress for— (C) floodplain restoration; (e) CONSULTATION AND FUNDING AGREE- (A) the segment of the Mississippi River from (D) water level management (including water MENTS.— the confluence with the Ohio River, River Mile drawdown); (1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the environ- 0.0, to Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock in Min- (E) backwater restoration; mental sustainability, ecosystem restoration, neapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, River Mile 854.0; (F) side channel restoration; and monitoring activities authorized in this sec- and (G) wing dam and dike restoration and modi- tion, the Secretary shall consult with the Sec- (B) the Illinois Waterway from its confluence fication; retary of the Interior and the States of Illinois, with the Mississippi River at Grafton, Illinois, (H) island and shoreline protection; Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin. River Mile 0.0, to T.J. O’Brien Lock in Chicago, (I) topographical diversity; (2) FUNDING AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary is Illinois, River Mile 327.0. (J) dam point control; authorized to enter into agreements with the (K) use of dredged material for environmental Secretary of the Interior, the Upper Mississippi SEC. 8002. NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS AND RESTORATION. purposes; River Basin Association, and natural resource Except as modified by this title, the Secretary (L) tributary confluence restoration; and conservation agencies of the States of Illi- shall undertake navigation improvements and (M) spillway, dam, and levee modification to nois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin restoration of the ecosystem for the Upper Mis- benefit the environment; and to provide for the direct participation of and sissippi River and Illinois Water System sub- (N) land and easement acquisition. transfer of funds to such entities for the plan- (3) COST SHARING.— stantially in accordance with the Plan and sub- ning, implementation, and evaluation of (A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in sub- ject to the conditions described therein. projects and programs established by this sec- paragraphs (B) and (C), the Federal share of tion. SEC. 8003. AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION the cost of carrying out an ecosystem restoration (f) SPECIFIC PROJECTS AUTHORIZATION.— OF NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS. project under this subsection shall be 65 percent. (1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be ap- (a) SMALL SCALE AND NONSTRUCTURAL MEAS- (B) EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN RESTORATION propriated to carry out this subsection URES.— PROJECTS.—In the case of a project under this $1,580,000,000, of which not more than (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— section for ecosystem restoration, the Federal $226,000,000 shall be available for projects de- (A) construct mooring facilities at Locks 12, share of the cost of carrying out the project scribed in subsection (b)(2)(B) and not more 14, 18, 20, 22, 24, and LaGrange Lock or other shall be 100 percent if the project— than $43,000,000 shall be available for projects alternative locations that are economically and (i) is located below the ordinary high water described in subsection (b)(2)(J). Such sums environmentally feasible; mark or in a connected backwater; shall remain available until expended. (B) provide switchboats at Locks 20 through (ii) modifies the operation of structures for (2) LIMITATION ON AVAILABLE FUNDS.—Of the 25; and navigation; or amounts made available under paragraph (1), (C) conduct development and testing of an ap- (iii) is located on federally owned land. not more than $35,000,000 in any fiscal year may pointment scheduling system. (C) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this sub- be used for land acquisition under subsection (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—The section affects the applicability of section 906(e) (b)(4). total cost of projects authorized under this sub- of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (3) INDIVIDUAL PROJECT LIMIT.—Other than section shall be $235,000,000. Such costs are to be (33 U.S.C. 2283(e)). for projects described in subparagraphs (B) and paid 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the (D) NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.—Not- (J) of subsection (b)(2), the total cost of any sin- general fund of the Treasury and 1/2 from withstanding section 221 of the Flood Control gle project carried out under this subsection amounts appropriated from the Inland Water- Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b), for any project shall not exceed $25,000,000. ways Trust Fund. Such sums shall remain avail- carried out under this title, a non-Federal spon- (4) MONITORING.—In addition to amounts au- able until expended. sor may include a nonprofit entity, with the thorized under paragraph (1), there are author- (b) NEW LOCKS.— consent of the affected local government. ized $10,420,000 per fiscal year to carry out the (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall con- (4) LAND ACQUISITION.—The Secretary may ac- monitoring program under subsection (c) if such struct new 1,200-foot locks at Locks 20, 21, 22, quire land or an interest in land for an eco- sums are not appropriated pursuant to section 24, and 25 on the Upper Mississippi River and at system restoration project from a willing seller 1103(e)(4) the Water Resources Development Act LaGrange Lock and Peoria Lock on the Illinois through conveyance of— of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(4)). Waterway. (A) fee title to the land; or (g) IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS.— (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—The (B) a flood plain conservation easement. (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than June 30, 2008, total cost of projects authorized under this sub- (c) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall carry and every 4 years thereafter, the Secretary shall section shall be $1,795,000,000. Such costs are to out a long term resource monitoring, computer- submit to the Committee on Environment and be paid 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the ized data inventory and analysis, and applied Public Works of the Senate and the Committee general fund of the Treasury and 1/2 from research program for the Upper Mississippi on Transportation and Infrastructure of the amounts appropriated from the Inland Water- River and Illinois River to determine trends in House of Representatives an implementation re- ways Trust Fund. Such sums shall remain avail- ecosystem health, to understand systemic port that— able until expended. changes, and to help identify restoration needs. (A) includes baselines, milestones, goals, and (c) CONCURRENCE.—The mitigation required The program shall build upon the monitoring priorities for ecosystem restoration projects; and for the projects authorized under subsections (a) program established under section (B) measures the progress in meeting the and (b), including any acquisition of lands or 1103(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Water Resources Develop- goals. (2) ADVISORY PANEL.— interests in lands, shall be undertaken or ac- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(1)(A)(ii)). (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall appoint quired concurrently with lands and interests in (d) ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION and convene an advisory panel to provide inde- lands for the projects authorized under sub- PRECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN.— pendent guidance in the development of each sections (a) and (b), and physical construction (1) RESTORATION DESIGN.—Before initiating implementation report under paragraph (1). required for the purposes of mitigation shall be the construction of any individual ecosystem (B) PANEL MEMBERS.—Panel members shall in- undertaken concurrently with the physical con- restoration project, the Secretary shall— struction of such projects. clude— (A) establish ecosystem restoration goals and (i) one representative of each of the State re- SEC. 8004. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AUTHOR- identify specific performance measures designed source agencies (or a designee of the Governor IZATION. to demonstrate ecosystem restoration; of the State) from each of the States of Illinois, (a) OPERATION.—To ensure the environmental (B) establish the without-project condition or Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin; sustainability of the existing Upper Mississippi baseline for each performance indicator; and (ii) one representative of the Department of River and Illinois Waterway System, the Sec- (C) for each separable element of the eco- Agriculture; retary shall modify, consistent with require- system restoration, identify specific target goals (iii) one representative of the Department of ments to avoid adverse effects on navigation, for each performance indicator. Transportation; the operation of the Upper Mississippi River and (2) OUTCOMES.—Performance measures identi- (iv) one representative of the United States Illinois Waterway System to address the cumu- fied under paragraph (1)(A) shall include spe- Geological Survey; lative environmental impacts of operation of the cific measurable environmental outcomes, such (v) one representative of the United States system and improve the ecological integrity of as changes in water quality, hydrology, or the Fish and Wildlife Service; the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois River. well-being of indicator species the population (vi) one representative of the Environmental (b) ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECTS.— and distribution of which are representative of Protection Agency; (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry the abundance and diversity of ecosystem-de- (vii) one representative of affected land- out, consistent with requirements to avoid ad- pendent aquatic and terrestrial species. owners; verse effects on navigation, ecosystem restora- (3) RESTORATION DESIGN.—Restoration design (viii) two representatives of conservation and tion projects to attain and maintain the sustain- carried out as part of ecosystem restoration environmental advocacy groups; and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 6333 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3650 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 (ix) two representatives of agriculture and in- $27,110,000, with an estimated Federal cost of transboundary water resources management dustry advocacy groups. $11,210,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost in the southwestern United States and other (C) CHAIRPERSON.—The Secretary shall serve of $15,900,000. international water resources management as chairperson of the advisory panel. In section 1002(b) of the bill, after para- problems. (D) APPLICATION OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COM- graph (4) insert the following (and redesig- (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— MITTEE ACT.—The Advisory Panel and any nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): There are authorized to be appropriated to working group established by the Advisory (5) WILDWOOD CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALI- the Secretary to carry out subsection (a)(1) Panel shall not be considered an advisory com- FORNIA.—The Secretary shall review the lo- $5,000,000, to carry out subsection (a)(2) mittee under the Federal Advisory Committee cally prepared plan for the project for flood $5,000,000, and to carry out subsection (a)(3) Act (5 U.S.C. App.). damage, Wildwood Creek, California, re- $5,000,000. Such sums shall remain available (h) RANKING SYSTEM.— ferred to in subsection (a) and, if the Sec- until expended. (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consulta- retary determines that the plan meets the SEC. 2042. FEDERAL HOPPER DREDGES. tion with the Advisory Panel, shall develop a evaluation and design standards of the Corps Section 3(c) of the Act of August 11, 1888 (33 system to rank proposed projects. of Engineers and that the plan is feasible, U.S.C. 622; 25 Stat. 423), is amended— (2) PRIORITY.—The ranking system shall give the Secretary may use the plan to carry out (1) in paragraph (7)(B) by adding at the end greater weight to projects that restore natural the project and shall provide credit toward the following: ‘‘This subparagraph shall not river processes, including those projects listed in the non-Federal share of the cost of the apply to the Federal hopper dredges subsection (b)(2). project for the cost of work carried out by Essayons and Yaquina of the Corps of Engi- SEC. 8005. COMPARABLE PROGRESS. the non-Federal interest before the date of neers.’’; and (a) IN GENERAL.—As the Secretary conducts the partnership agreement for the project if (2) by adding at the end the following: pre-engineering, design, and construction for the Secretary determines that the work is ‘‘(9) READY RESERVE FOR THE HOPPER projects authorized under this title, the Sec- integral to the project. DREDGE MCFARLAND.—The Secretary shall retary shall— In section 1003 of the bill, before paragraph place the Federal hopper dredge McFarland (1) select appropriate milestones; (1) insert the following (and redesignate sub- of the Corps of Engineers in ready reserve (2) determine, at the time of such selection, sequent paragraphs accordingly): status not later than October 1, 2008.’’. whether the projects are being carried out at (1) ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA.—Projects for Strike section 3020 of the bill and insert comparable rates; and emergency streambank protection, Aliso the following: (3) make an annual report to Congress, begin- Creek, California. ning in fiscal year 2008, regarding whether the In section 1006(a) of the bill, after para- SEC. 3020. SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS FLOOD CONTROL, CALIFORNIA. projects are being carried out at a comparable graph (2) insert the following (and redesig- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pro- rate. nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): vide credit to the Sacramento Area Flood (b) NO COMPARABLE RATE.—If the Secretary (3) ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA.—Project for Control Agency, in the amount of $20,503,000, or Congress determines under subsection (a)(2) aquatic ecosystem restoration, Aliso Creek, for the non-reimbursed Federal share of that projects authorized under this title are not California. costs incurred by the Agency in connection moving toward completion at a comparable rate, In section 1006(a) of the bill, after para- the project for flood control and recreation, annual funding requests for the projects shall be graph (15) insert the following (and redesig- Sacramento and American Rivers, California adjusted to ensure that the projects move to- nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): (Natomas Levee features), authorized by sec- ward completion at a comparable rate in the fu- (16) KALAMAZOO RIVER WATERSHED, BATTLE tion 9159 of the Department of Defense Ap- ture. CREEK, MICHIGAN.—Project for aquatic eco- system restoration, Kalamazoo River water- propriations Act, 1993 (106 Stat. 1944). The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to (b) ALLOCATION OF CREDIT.—The Secretary shed, Battle Creek, Michigan. the committee amendment is in order In section 1006 of the bill, strike subsection shall allocate the amount to be credited except those printed in House Report (b) (and strike the subsection designation under subsection (a) toward the non-Federal 110–100. Each amendment may be of- and heading for subsection (a)). share of such projects as are requested by fered only in the order printed in the In section 2015(a)(1)(B) of the bill, after the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. report, by a Member designated in the ‘‘Guam,’’ insert ‘‘the State of Hawaii,’’. In section 3023 of the bill, strike ‘‘a study In section 2039(a) of the bill, insert before for the reallocation of water storage’’ and in- report, shall be considered read, shall sert ‘‘a study of water conservation and be debatable for the time specified in ‘‘the Secretary shall include’’ the following: ‘‘and for the project for navigation, Houma water quality’’. the report, equally divided and con- Navigation Canal, Louisiana, being con- In section 3079(c) of the bill, strike trolled by the proponent and an oppo- ducted pursuant to the Energy and Water ‘‘$5,000,000’’ and insert ‘‘$7,000,000’’. nent of the amendment, shall not be Development Appropriations Act, 1995 (Pub- After section 3087 of the bill, insert the fol- subject to amendment, and shall not be lic Law 103–316),’’. lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, subject to a demand for division of the At the end of title II of the bill, add the and conform the table of contents, accord- ingly): question. following (and conform the table of contents accordingly): SEC. 3088. WESTERN SARPY AND CLEAR CREEK, AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY MR. OBERSTAR SEC. 2041. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PRO- NEBRASKA. The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to GRAM. The project for ecosystem restoration and consider amendment No. 1 printed in (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section flood damage reduction, authorized by sec- House Report 110–100, as modified by 2361 of title 10, United States Code, the Sec- tion 101(b)(21) of the Water Resources Devel- the earlier order of the House. retary is authorized to provide assistance opment Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2578), is modi- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I through contracts, cooperative agreements, fied to authorize the Secretary to construct offer an amendment. and grants to— the project at a total cost of $21,664,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $14,082,000 and The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- (1) the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, for establishment and operation an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,582,000. ignate the amendment. of the Southeastern Water Resources Insti- Strike section 3110 of the bill (and redesig- The text of the amendment is as fol- tute to study sustainable development and nate subsequent sections, and conform the lows: utilization of water resources in the south- table of contents, accordingly). Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. OBER- eastern United States; After section 3113 of the bill, insert the fol- STAR: (2) Lewis and Clark Community College, Il- lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, In section 1001(21) of the bill, add at the linois, for the Great Rivers National Re- and conform the table of contents, accord- end the following: search and Education Center (including fa- ingly): (C) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The op- cilities that have been or will be constructed SEC. 3114. BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, eration, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, at one or more locations in the vicinity of WEST VIRGINIA. and replacement of the Houma Navigation the confluence of the Illinois River, the Mis- Section 102(ff) of the Water Resources De- Canal lock complex and the Gulf Intra- souri River, and the Mississippi River), a col- velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4810, 110 coastal Waterway floodgate features that laborative effort of Lewis and Clark Commu- Stat. 3726, 113 Stat. 312) is amended to read provide for inland waterway transportation nity College, the University of Illinois, the as follows: shall be a Federal responsibility in accord- Illinois Department of Natural Resources ‘‘(ff) BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, ance with section 102 of the Water Resources and Environmental Sciences, and other enti- WEST VIRGINIA.— Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2212). ties, for the study of river ecology, devel- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood In section 1001 of the bill, after paragraph oping watershed and river management control, Bluestone Lake, Ohio River Basin, (41) insert the following (and redesignate strategies, and educating students and the West Virginia, authorized by section 4 of the subsequent paragraphs accordingly): public on river issues; and Flood Control Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 1217) is (42) RIVERSIDE OXBOW, TEXAS.—The project (3) the University of Texas at Dallas for modified to direct the Secretary to imple- for environmental restoration, Riverside support and operation of the International ment Plan C/G, as defined in the Evaluation Oxbow, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engi- Center for Decision and Risk Analysis to Report of the District Engineer dated De- neers, dated May 29, 2003, at a total cost of study risk analysis and control methods for cember 1996, to prohibit the release of drift

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3651 and debris into waters downstream of the SEC. 4011. ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA. SEC. 5047. LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA. project, except for that organic matter nec- The Secretary shall conduct a study to de- Section 219(f)(50) of the Water Resources essary to maintain and enhance the biologi- termine the feasibility of carrying out a Development Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A-220) cal resources of such waters and such non- project for streambank protection and envi- is amended— obtrusive items of debris as may not be eco- ronmental restoration along Aliso Creek, (1) by inserting after ‘‘water’’ the fol- nomically feasible to prevent being released California. lowing: ‘‘and wastewater’’; and through such project, including measures to Strike section 4038 of the bill (and redesig- (2) by striking ‘‘$14,500,000’’ and inserting prevent the accumulation of drift and debris nate subsequent sections, and conform the ‘‘$24,500,000’’. at the project, the collection and removal of table of contents, accordingly). After section 5056 of the bill, insert the fol- drift and debris on the segment of the New Strike section 4079 of the bill (and redesig- lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, River upstream of the project, and the re- nate subsequent sections, and conform the and conform the table of contents, accord- moval (through use of temporary or perma- table of contents, accordingly). ingly): nent systems) and disposal of accumulated In section 5001(a) of the bill, after para- SEC. 5057. EAST CENTRAL AND NORTHEAST drift and debris at Bluestone Dam. graph (1) insert the following (and redesig- FLORIDA. ‘‘(2) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.—In carrying nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): (a) EAST CENTRAL AND NORTHEAST FLORIDA out the downstream cleanup under the plan (2) West turning basin, Canaveral Harbor, REGION DEFINED.—In this section, the term referred to in paragraph (1), the Secretary Florida. ‘‘East Central and Northeast Florida Re- may enter into a cooperative agreement with In section 5002(d) of the bill, before para- gion’’ means Flagler County, St. Johns the West Virginia Department of Environ- graph (1) insert the following (and redesig- County, Putman County (east of the St. mental Protection for the department to nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): Johns River), Seminole County, Volusia carry out the cleanup, including contracting (1) Charlotte Harbor watershed, Florida. County, the towns of Winter Park, Maitland, In section 5002(d) of the bill, after para- and procurement services, contract adminis- and Palatka, Florida. graph (14) insert the following (and redesig- (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- tration and management, transportation and nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): retary may establish a program to provide disposal of collected materials, and disposal (15) Tuscarawas River basin, Ohio. environmental assistance to non-Federal in- fees. In section 5003(a)(2) of the bill, strike terests in the East Central and Northeast ‘‘(3) INITIAL CLEANUP.—The Secretary may ‘‘Saginaw’’ and insert ‘‘Flint’’. Florida Region. provide the department up to $150,000 from In section 5007 of the bill, before paragraph (c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under funds previously appropriated for this pur- (1) insert the following (and redesignate sub- this section may be in the form of design and pose for the Federal share of the costs of the sequent paragraphs accordingly): construction assistance for water-related en- initial cleanup under the plan.’’. (1) Daytona Beach shore protection vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- In section 3119(a) of the bill, redesignate project, Florida. tection and development projects in the East paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and insert (2) Flagler Beach shore protection project, Central and Northeast Florida Region, in- after paragraph (2) the following: Florida. cluding projects for wastewater treatment (3) The project for navigation, Baltimore (3) St. Johns County shore protection and related facilities, water supply and re- Harbor and Channels, Maryland and Vir- project, Florida. lated facilities, environmental restoration, ginia, authorized by section 101 of the River After section 5015 of the bill, insert the fol- and surface water resource protection and and Harbor Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1818). lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, development. In section 3121(a) of the bill, after para- and conform the table of contents, accord- (d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Sec- graph (3) insert the following (and redesig- ingly) retary may provide assistance for a project nate subsequent paragraphs accordingly): SEC. 5016. GREAT LAKES PILOT PROJECT. under this section only if the project is pub- (4) ROCKLAND HARBOR, MAINE.—The portion Using available funds, the Secretary, in co- licly owned. of the project for navigation, Rockland Har- ordination with the Administrator of the En- (e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— bor, Maine, authorized by the Act of June 3, vironmental Protection Agency, the Com- (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- 1896 (29 Stat. 202), consisting of a 14-foot mandant of the Coast Guard, the Director of ance under this section, the Secretary shall channel located in Lermond Cove and begin- the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, enter into a partnership agreement with a ning at a point with coordinates N9977.37, and the Director of the Animal and Plant non-Federal interest to provide for design E340290.02, thence running easterly about Health Inspection Service, shall carry out a and construction of the project to be carried 200.00 feet to a point with coordinates pilot project, on an emergency basis, to con- out with the assistance. N99978.49, E340490.02, thence running north- trol and prevent further spreading of viral (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership erly about 138.00 feet to a point with coordi- hemorrhagic septicemia in the Great Lakes agreement for a project entered into under nates N100116.49, E340289.25, thence running and their connecting channels. this subsection shall provide for the fol- westerly about 200.00 feet to a point with co- SEC. 5017. SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY. lowing: ordinates N100115.37, E340289.25, thence run- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is author- (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, ning southerly about 138.00 feet to the point ized, using amounts contributed by the Saint in consultation with appropriate Federal and of origin. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- tection and development plan, including ap- In section 3123 of the bill, after subsection under subsection (b), to carry out projects propriate engineering plans and specifica- (a) insert the following (and redesignate sub- for operations, maintenance, repair, and re- tions. sequent subsections accordingly): habilitation, including associated mainte- nance dredging, of the Eisenhower and Snell (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- (b) LAKE TEXOMA, OKLAHOMA.— lock facilities and related navigational infra- TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- (1) RELEASE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST.— structure for the Saint Lawrence Seaway, at stitutional structures as are necessary to en- Any reversionary interest relating to public a total cost of $134,650,000. sure the effective long-term operation of the parks and recreation on the land conveyed (b) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—The Secretary is au- project by the non-Federal interest. by the Secretary to the State of Oklahoma thorized to accept funds from the Saint Law- (3) COST SHARING.— at Lake Texoma pursuant to the Act entitled rence Seaway Development Corporation to (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the ‘‘An Act to authorize the sale of certain carry out projects under this section. Such project costs under each partnership agree- lands to the State of Oklahoma’’, approved funds may include amounts made available ment entered into under this subsection June 16, 1953 (67 Stat. 63), is terminated as of to the Corporation from the Harbor Mainte- shall be 75 percent. The Federal share may the date of enactment of this Act. nance Trust Fund and the general fund of the be provided in the form of grants or reim- (2) INSTRUMENT OF RELEASE.—As soon as Treasury of the United States pursuant to bursements of project costs. practicable after the date of enactment of section 210 of the Water Resources Develop- (B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The non-Federal in- this Act, the Secretary shall execute and file ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238). terests shall receive credit for the reasonable in the appropriate office a deed of release, an Strike section 5029 of the bill and insert cost of design work on a project completed amended deed, or another appropriate instru- the following: by the non-Federal interest before entering ment to release each reversionary interest SEC. 5029. FIRE ISLAND, ALASKA. into a partnership agreement with the Sec- described in subsection (a). (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is author- retary for such project. (3) PRESERVATION OF RESERVED RIGHTS.— ized to provide planning, design, and con- (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a Release of a reversionary interest in accord- struction assistance to the non-Federal in- delay in the funding of the non-Federal share ance with this section shall not be construed terest for the construction of a barge landing of a project that is the subject of an agree- to affect any other right excepted or re- facility on Fire Island, Alaska. ment under this section, the non-Federal in- served for the United States in a deed of con- (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- veyance made pursuant to such Act of June There is authorized to be appropriated terest incurred in providing the non-Federal 16, 1953. $5,000,000 to carry out this section. share of the project’s costs. After section 4010 of the bill, insert the fol- After section 5046 of the bill, insert the fol- (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- and conform the table of contents, accord- and conform the table of contents, accord- ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- ingly): ingly): way, and relocations toward the non-Federal

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3652 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

share of project costs (including all reason- (3) COST SHARING.— (e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of able costs associated with obtaining permits (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the the cost of the project shall be 50 percent. necessary for the construction, operation, project costs under each partnership agree- (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— and maintenance of the project on publicly ment entered into under this subsection There is authorized to be appropriated to owned or controlled land), but such credit shall be 75 percent. The Federal share may carry out this section $3,000,000. may not exceed 25 percent of total project be in the form of grants or reimbursements In section 5065 of the bill, before ‘‘and, if’’ costs. of project costs. insert the following: ‘‘authorized by section 4 (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The (B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The non-Federal in- of the Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 non-Federal share of operation and mainte- terests shall receive credit for the reasonable Stat. 1217)’’. Strike section 5070 of the bill (and redesig- nance costs for projects constructed with as- cost of design work on a project completed nate subsequent sections, and conform the sistance provided under this section shall be by the non-Federal interest before entering table of contents, accordingly). 100 percent. into a partnership agreement with the Sec- After section 5070 of the bill, insert the fol- (f) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND retary for such project. lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a and conform the table of contents, accord- waives, limits, or otherwise affects the appli- delay in the funding of the non-Federal share ingly): cability of any provision of Federal or State of a project that is the subject of an agree- SEC. 5071. EAST ATCHAFALAYA BASIN AND AMITE law that would otherwise apply to a project ment under this section, the non-Federal in- RIVER BASIN REGION, LOUISIANA. to be carried out with assistance provided terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- (a) EAST ATCHAFALAYA BASIN AND AMITE under this section. terest incurred in providing the non-Federal RIVER BASIN REGION DEFINED.—In this sec- (g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding share of the project’s costs. tion, the term ‘‘East Atchafalaya Basin and section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY Amite River Basin Region’’ means the fol- 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- lowing parishes and municipalities in the undertaken under this section, a non-Federal ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- State of Louisiana: Ascension, East Baton interest may include a nonprofit entity. way, and relocations toward the non-Federal Rouge, East Feliciana, Iberville, Livingston, (h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten share of project costs (including all reason- Pointe Coupee, St. Helena, West Baton percent of the amounts appropriated to carry able costs associated with obtaining permits Rouge, and West Feliciana. out this section may be used by the Corps of necessary for the construction, operation, (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- Engineers district offices to administer and maintenance of the project on publicly retary may establish a program to provide projects under this section at Federal ex- owned or controlled land), but not to exceed environmental assistance to non-Federal in- pense. 25 percent of total project costs. terests in the East Atchafalaya Basin and (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The Amite River Basin Region. There is authorized to be appropriated to non-Federal share of operation and mainte- (c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under carry out this section $40,000,000. Such sums nance costs for projects constructed with as- this section may be in the form of design and shall remain available until expended. sistance provided under this section shall be construction assistance for water-related en- SEC. 5058. LAKE LANIER, GEORGIA. 100 percent. vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- The Secretary may assist local interests (f) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND tection and development projects in the East with planning, design, and construction of STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section Atchafalaya Basin and Amite River Basin facilities at the Lake Lanier Olympic Cen- waives, limits, or otherwise affects the appli- Region, including projects for wastewater ter, Georgia, at a total cost of $5,300,000. cability of any provision of Federal or State treatment and related facilities, water sup- After section 5062 of the bill, insert the fol- law that would otherwise apply to a project ply and related facilities, environmental res- lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, to be carried out with assistance provided toration, and surface water resource protec- and conform the table of contents, accord- under this section. tion and development. (d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Sec- ingly): (g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding retary may provide assistance for a project SEC. 5063. SOUTHWEST ILLINOIS. section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of under this section only if the project is pub- (a) SOUTHWEST ILLINOIS DEFINED.—In this 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project licly owned. section, the term ‘‘Southwest Illinois’’ undertaken under this section, a non-Federal (e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— means the counties of Madison, St. Clair, interest may include a nonprofit entity. (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- Monroe, Randolph, Perry, Franklin, Jack- (h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten ance under this section, the Secretary shall son, Union, Alexander, Pulaski, and percent of the amounts appropriated to carry enter into a partnership agreement with a Williamson, Illinois. out this section may be used by the Corps of non-Federal interest to provide for design (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- Engineers district offices to administer and construction of the project to be carried retary may establish a program to provide projects under this section at Federal ex- out with the assistance. environmental assistance to non-Federal in- pense. (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership terests in Southwest Illinois. (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under There is authorized to be appropriated to agreement of a project entered into under this section may be in the form of design and carry out this section $40,000,000. Such sums this subsection shall provide for the fol- construction assistance for water-related en- shall remain available until expended. lowing: vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- After section 5064 of the bill, insert the fol- (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, tection and development projects in South- lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, in consultation with appropriate Federal and west Illinois, including projects for waste- and conform the table of contents, accord- State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- water treatment and related facilities, water ingly): tection and development plan, including ap- supply and related facilities, and surface SEC. 5065. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, MISSOURI propriate engineering plans and specifica- water resource protection and development. RIVER, IOWA. tions. (d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Sec- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pro- (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- retary may provide assistance for a project vide assistance for a project to develop maps TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- under this section only if the project is pub- identifying 100- and 500-year flood inundation stitutional structures as are necessary to en- licly owned. areas in the State of Iowa, along the Mis- sure the effective long-term operation of the (e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— souri River. project by the non-Federal interest. (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- (b) REQUIREMENTS.—Maps developed under (3) COST SHARING.— ance under this section, the Secretary shall the project shall include hydrologic and hy- (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the enter into a partnership agreement with a draulic information and shall accurately project costs under each partnership agree- non-Federal interest to provide for design portray the flood hazard areas in the flood- ment entered into under this subsection and construction of the project to be carried plain. The maps shall be produced in a high shall be 75 percent. The Federal share may out with the assistance. resolution format and shall be made avail- be provided in the form of grants or reim- (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership able to the State of Iowa in an electronic for- bursements of project costs. agreement entered into under this sub- mat. (B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The non-Federal in- section shall provide for the following: (c) PARTICIPATION OF FEMA.—The Sec- terests shall receive credit for the reasonable (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, retary and the non-Federal interests for the cost of design work on a project completed in consultation with appropriate Federal and project shall work with the Director of the by the non-Federal interest before entering State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- Federal Emergency Management Agency to into a partnership agreement with the Sec- tection and development plan, including ap- ensure the validity of the maps developed retary for such project. propriate engineering plans and specifica- under the project for flood insurance pur- (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a tions. poses. delay in the funding of the non-Federal share (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- (d) FORMS OF ASSISTANCE.—In carrying out of a project that is the subject of an agree- TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- the project, the Secretary may enter into ment under this section, the non-Federal in- stitutional structures as are necessary to en- contracts or cooperative agreements with terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- sure the effective long-term operation of the the non-Federal interests or provide reim- terest incurred in providing the non-Federal project by the non-Federal interest. bursements of project costs. share of the project’s costs.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3653

(D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY tection and development plan, including ap- wastewater treatment and related facilities, CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- propriate engineering plans and specifica- water supply and related facilities, environ- ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- tions. mental restoration, and surface water re- way, and relocations toward the non-Federal (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- source protection and development. share of project costs (including all reason- TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- (d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Sec- able costs associated with obtaining permits stitutional structures as are necessary to en- retary may provide assistance for a project necessary for the construction, operation, sure the effective long-term operation of the under this section only if the project is pub- and maintenance of the project on publicly project by the non-Federal interest. licly owned. owned or controlled land), but such credit (3) COST SHARING.— (e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— N GENERAL may not exceed 25 percent of total project (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the (1) I .—Before providing assist- costs. project cost under each partnership agree- ance under this section, the Secretary shall enter into a partnership agreement with a (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The ment entered into under this subsection non-Federal share of operation and mainte- shall be 75 percent. The Federal share may non-Federal interest to provide for design nance costs for projects constructed with as- be in the form of grants or reimbursements and construction of the project to be carried sistance provided under this section shall be of project costs. out with the assistance. (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership 100 percent. (B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The non-Federal in- agreement entered into under this sub- (f) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND terests shall receive credit for the reasonable section shall provide for the following: STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section cost of design work on a project completed (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, waives, limits, or otherwise affects the appli- by the non-Federal interest before entering in consultation with appropriate Federal and cability of any provision of Federal or State into a partnership agreement with the Sec- State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- law that would otherwise apply to a project retary for such project. tection and development plan, including ap- to be carried out with assistance provided (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a propriate engineering plans and specifica- under this section. delay in the funding of the non-Federal share tions. (g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding of a project that is the subject of an agree- (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of ment under this section, the non-Federal in- TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- stitutional structures as are necessary to en- undertaken under this section, a non-Federal terest incurred in providing the non-Federal sure the effective long-term operation of the interest may include a nonprofit entity. share of the project cost. project by the non-Federal interest. (h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY (3) COST SHARING.— percent of the amounts appropriated to carry CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the out this section may be used by the Corps of ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- project costs under each partnership agree- Engineers district offices to administer way, and relocations toward the non-Federal ment entered into under this subsection projects under this section at Federal ex- share of project cost (including all reason- shall be 75 percent. The Federal share may pense. able costs associated with obtaining permits be in the form of grants or reimbursements (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— necessary for the construction, operation, of project costs. There is authorized to be appropriated to and maintenance of the project on publicly (B) CREDIT FOR WORK.—The non-Federal in- carry out this section $40,000,000. Such sums owned or controlled land), but not to exceed terests shall receive credit for the reasonable shall remain available until expended. 25 percent of total project cost. cost of design work on a project completed After section 5098 of the bill, insert the fol- (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The by the non-Federal interest before entering lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, non-Federal share of operation and mainte- into a partnership agreement with the Sec- and conform the table of contents, accord- nance costs for projects constructed with as- retary for such project. ingly): sistance provided under this section shall be (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In case of a SEC. 5099. CLINTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 100 percent. delay in the funding of the non-Federal share Section 219(f)(13) of the Water Resources (f) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND of a project that is the subject of an agree- Development Act of 1992 (113 Stat. 335) is STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section ment under this section, the non-Federal in- amended by striking ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and insert- waives, limits, or otherwise affects the appli- terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- ing ‘‘$2,000,000’’. cability of any provision of Federal or State terest incurred in providing the non-Federal After section 5104 of the bill, insert the fol- law that would otherwise apply to a project share of the project’s costs. lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, to be carried out with assistance provided (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY and conform the table of contents, accord- under this section. CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- ingly): (g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- SEC. 5105. EAST TENNESSEE. section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of way, and relocations toward the non-Federal (a) EAST TENNESSEE DEFINED.—In this sec- 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project share of project costs (including all reason- tion, the term ‘‘East Tennessee’’ means the undertaken under this section, a non-Federal able costs associated with obtaining permits counties of Blount, Knox, Loudon, McMinn, interest may include a nonprofit entity with necessary for the construction, operation, Monroe, and Sevier, Tennessee. the consent of the affected local government. and maintenance of the project on publicly (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- (h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten owned or controlled land), but such credit retary may establish a program to provide percent of the amounts appropriated to carry may not exceed 25 percent of total project environmental assistance to non-Federal in- out this section may be used by the Corps of costs. terests in East Tennessee. Engineers district offices to administer (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The (c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under projects under this section at Federal ex- non-Federal share of operation and mainte- this section may be in the form of design and pense. nance costs for projects constructed with as- construction assistance for water-related en- (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— sistance provided under this section shall be vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- There is authorized to be appropriated to 100 percent. tection and development projects in East carry out this section $40,000,000. Such sums (f) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND Tennessee, including projects for wastewater shall remain available until expended. STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section treatment and related facilities, water sup- After section 5110 of the bill, insert the fol- waives, limits, or otherwise affects the appli- ply and related facilities, environmental res- lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, cability of any provision of Federal or State toration, and surface water resource protec- and conform the table of contents, accord- law that would otherwise apply to a project tion and development. ingly): to be carried out with assistance provided (d) OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The Sec- SEC. 5111. DALLAS COUNTY REGION, TEXAS. under this section. (g) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding retary may provide assistance for a project (a) DALLAS COUNTY REGION DEFINED.—In under this section only if the project is pub- this section, the term ‘‘Dallas County re- section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b(b)), for any project licly owned. gion’’ means the city of Dallas, and the mu- undertaken under this section, a non-Federal (e) PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS.— nicipalities of DeSoto, Duncanville, Lan- interest may include a nonprofit entity. (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- caster, Wilmer, Hutchins, Balch Springs, (h) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Ten ance under this section, the Secretary shall Cedar Hill, Glenn Heights, and Ferris, Texas. percent of the amounts appropriated to carry enter into a partnership agreement with a (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- out this section may be used by the Corps of non-Federal interest to provide for design retary may establish a program to provide Engineers district offices to administer and construction of the project to be carried environmental assistance to non-Federal in- projects under this section at Federal ex- out with the assistance. terests in the Dallas County region. pense. (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each partnership (c) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— agreement entered into under this sub- this section may be in the form of design and There is authorized to be appropriated to section shall provide for the following: construction assistance for water-related en- carry out this section $40,000,000. Such sums (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- shall remain available until expended. in consultation with appropriate Federal and tection and development projects in the Dal- After section 5112 of the bill, insert the fol- State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- las County region, including projects for lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3654 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007

and conform the table of contents, accord- ‘‘(75) INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA.—$6,430,000 for Mountain project, Montezuma and La Plata ingly): environmental infrastructure for Indianap- Counties, Colorado. SEC. 5113. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS. olis, Indiana.’’; ‘‘(96) OTERO, BENT, CROWLEY, KIOWA, AND (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood (5) by redesignating the paragraph (73) re- PROWERS COUNTIES, COLORADO.—$35,000,000 for damage reduction, environmental restora- lating to St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin, as para- water transmission infrastructure, Otero, tion, and recreation, Johnson Creek, Arling- graph (76); and Bent, Crowley, Kiowa, and Prowers Counties, ton, Texas, authorized by section 101(b)(14) of (6) by adding at the end the following: Colorado. the Water Resources Development Act of ‘‘(77) ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ALABAMA.— ‘‘(97) PUEBLO AND OTERO COUNTIES, COLO- 1999 (113 Stat 280), is modified to authorize $5,000,000 for water related infrastructure, RADO.—$34,000,000 for water transmission in- the Secretary to construct the project sub- St. Clair County, Alabama. frastructure, Pueblo and Otero Counties, stantially in accordance with the report en- ‘‘(78) CRAWFORD COUNTY, ARKANSAS.— Colorado. titled ‘‘Johnson Creek: A Vision of Conserva- $35,000,000 for water supply infrastructure, ‘‘(98) LEDYARD AND MONTVILLE, CON- tion’’, dated March 30, 2006, at a total cost of Crawford County, Arkansas. NECTICUT.—$7,113,000 for water infrastruc- $80,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of ‘‘(79) ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTIES, ture, Ledyard and Montville, Connecticut. $52,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost CALIFORNIA.—$25,000,000 for recycled water ‘‘(99) ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF COLUM- of $28,000,000, if the Secretary determines treatment facilities within the East Bay Mu- BIA AND MARYLAND.—$20,000,000 for environ- that the project is feasible. nicipal Utility District service area, Ala- mental infrastructure and resource protec- (b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— meda and Contra Costa Counties, California. tion and development to enhance water qual- (1) IN GENERAL.—The non-Federal share of ‘‘(80) ARCADIA, SIERRA MADRE, AND UPLAND, ity and living resources in the Anacostia the cost of the project may be provided in CALIFORNIA.—$33,000,000 for water and waste- River watershed, District of Columbia and cash or in the form of in-kind services or ma- water infrastructure, Arcadia, Sierra Madre, Maryland. terials. and Upland, California, including $13,000,000 ‘‘(100) WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUM- (2) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall credit to- for stormwater infrastructure for Upland, BIA.—$35,000,000 for implementation of a ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the California. combined sewer overflow long-term control project the cost of planning, design, and con- ‘‘(81) BIG BEAR AREA REGIONAL WASTEWATER plan, Washington, District of Columbia. struction work carried out by the non-Fed- AGENCY, CALIFORNIA.—$15,000,000 for water ‘‘(101) CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA.— eral interest for implementation of the reclamation and distribution, Big Bear Area $3,000,000 for water supply infrastructure, project, if the Secretary determines that the Regional Wastewater Agency, California. Charlotte County, Florida. work is integral to the project. ‘‘(82) BRAWLEY COLONIA, IMPERIAL COUNTY, ‘‘(102) CHARLOTTE, LEE, AND COLLIER COUN- (c) SPECIAL RULE.—In evaluating and im- CALIFORNIA.—$1,400,000 for water infrastruc- TIES, FLORIDA.—$20,000,000 for water supply plementing the project, the Secretary shall ture to improve water quality in the Brawley interconnectivity infrastructure, Charlotte, allow the non-Federal interest to participate Colonia Water District, Imperial County, Lee, and Collier Counties, Florida. in the financing of the project in accordance California. ‘‘(103) COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$5,000,000 with section 903(c) of the Water Resources ‘‘(83) CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT, CALI- for water infrastructure to improve water Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184). FORNIA.—$23,000,000 for water and wastewater quality in the vicinity of the Gordon River, (d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 134 infrastructure for the Contra Costa Water Collier County, Florida. of the Energy and Water Development Ap- District, California. ‘‘(104) JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.—$25,000,000 propriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2263) is re- ‘‘(84) EAST BAY, SAN FRANCISCO, AND SANTA for wastewater related infrastructure, in- pealed. CLARA AREAS, CALIFORNIA.—$4,000,000 for a de- cluding septic tank replacements, Jackson- In section 5121 of the bill, strike ‘‘and’’ at salination project to serve the East Bay, San ville, Florida. the end of paragraph (1)(B), redesignate para- Francisco, and Santa Clara areas, California. ‘‘(105) SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA.— graph (2) as paragraph (3), and insert after ‘‘(85) IMPERIAL COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— $10,000,000 for water and wastewater infra- paragraph (1) the following: $10,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure, in- structure in Sarasota County, Florida. (2) in subsection (h) by striking cluding a wastewater disinfection facility ‘‘(106) SOUTH SEMINOLE AND NORTH ORANGE ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$20,000,000’’; and and polishing system, to improve water qual- COUNTY, FLORIDA.—$30,000,000 for wastewater After section 5123 of the bill, insert the fol- ity in the vicinity of Calexico, California, on infrastructure for the South Seminole and lowing (and conform the table of contents the southern New River, Imperial County, North Orange Wastewater Transmission Au- accordingly): California. thority, Florida. SEC. 5124. WAGE SURVEYS. ‘‘(86) LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— ‘‘(107) FAYETTEVILLE, GRANTVILLE, LA- Employees of the United States Army $3,000,000 for wastewater and water related GRANGE, PINE MOUNTAIN (HARRIS COUNTY), Corps of Engineers who are paid wages deter- infrastructure, Diamond Bar, La Habra DOUGLASVILLE, AND CARROLLTON, GEORGIA.— mined under the last undesignated paragraph Heights, and Rowland Heights, Los Angeles $24,500,000 for water and wastewater infra- under the heading ‘‘Administrative Provi- County, California. structure, Fayetteville, Grantville, La- sions’’ of chapter V of the Supplemental Ap- ‘‘(87) NEW RIVER, CALIFORNIA.—$10,000,000 Grange, Pine Mountain (Harris County), propriations Act, 1982 (5 U.S.C. 5343 note; 96 for wastewater infrastructure to improve Douglasville, and Carrollton, Georgia. Stat. 832) shall be allowed, through appro- water quality in the New River, California. ‘‘(108) MERIWETHER AND SPALDING COUNTIES, priate employee organization representa- ‘‘(88) ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— GEORGIA.—$7,000,000 for water and waste- tives, to participate in wage surveys under $15,000,000 for wastewater and water related water infrastructure, Meriwether and Spald- such paragraph to the same extent as are infrastructure, Anaheim, Brea, La Habra, ing Counties, Georgia. prevailing rate employees under subsection Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, and ‘‘(109) NORTH VERNON AND BUTLERVILLE, IN- (c)(2) of section 5343 of title 5, United States Yorba Linda, Orange County, California. DIANA.—$1,700,000 for wastewater infrastruc- Code. Nothing in such section 5343 shall be ‘‘(89) SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALI- ture, North Vernon and Butlerville, Indiana. considered to affect which agencies are to be FORNIA.—$9,000,000 for wastewater and water ‘‘(110) SALEM, WASHINGTON COUNTY, INDI- surveyed under such paragraph. related infrastructure, Chino and Chino ANA.—$3,200,000 for water supply infrastruc- SEC. 5125. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CRIT- Hills, San Bernardino County, California. ture, Salem, Washington County, Indiana. ICAL PROJECTS. ‘‘(90) SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.— ‘‘(111) CENTRAL KENTUCKY.—$10,000,000 for Section 219(f) of the Water Resources De- $5,500,000 for an advanced recycling water water related infrastructure and resource velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 treatment plant in Santa Clara County, Cali- protection and development, Scott, Frank- Stat. 335–337; 114 Stat. 2763A–220–221) is fornia. lin, Woodford, Anderson, Fayette, Mercer, amended— ‘‘(91) SOUTHERN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALI- Jessamine, Boyle, Lincoln, Garrard, Madi- (1) by striking the undesignated paragraph FORNIA.—$15,000,000 for environmental infra- son, Estill, Powell, Clark, Montgomery, and relating to Charleston, South Carolina, and structure for the groundwater basin optimi- Bourbon Counties, Kentucky. inserting the following: zation pipeline, Southern Los Angeles Coun- ‘‘(112) PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANA.—$7,000,000 ‘‘(72) CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.— ty, California. for sanitary sewer and wastewater infra- $10,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure, in- ‘‘(92) STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA.—$33,000,000 for structure, Plaquemine, Louisiana. cluding wastewater collection systems, and water treatment and distribution infrastruc- ‘‘(113) SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA.—$20,000,000 stormwater system improvements, Charles- ture, Stockton, California. for water supply infrastructure in Shreve- ton, South Carolina.’’; ‘‘(93) SWEETWATER RESERVOIR, SAN DIEGO port, Louisiana. (2) by redesignating the paragraph (71) re- COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.—$375,000 to improve ‘‘(114) CENTRAL IRON RANGE SANITARY lating to Placer and El Dorado Counties, water quality, and remove nonnative aquatic SEWER DISTRICT, MINNESOTA.—$12,000,000 for California, as paragraph (73); species from the Sweetwater Reservoir, San wastewater infrastructure for the Central (3) by redesignating the paragraph (72) re- Diego County, California. Iron Range Sanitary Sewer District to serve lating to Lassen, Plumas, Butte, Sierra, and ‘‘(94) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA.—$8,000,000 for the cities of Hibbing, Chisholm, Buhl, and Nevada Counties, California, as paragraph water, wastewater, and water related infra- Kinney, and Balkan and Great Scott Town- (74); structure, Whittier, California. ships, Minnesota. (4) by striking the paragraph (71) relating ‘‘(95) MONTEZUMA AND LA PLATA COUNTIES, ‘‘(115) GRAND RAPIDS, MINNESOTA.—$5,000,000 to Indianapolis, Indiana, and inserting the COLORADO.—$1,000,000 for water and waste- for wastewater infrastructure, Grand Rapids, following: water related infrastructure for the Ute Minnesota.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3655

‘‘(116) CITY OF BILOXI, CITY OF GULFPORT, ‘‘(141) COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO.— (B) by striking ‘‘$62,418,500’’ each place it AND HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI.— $35,000,000 for water and wastewater infra- appears and inserting ‘‘$192,505,000’’; and $15,000,000 for water and wastewater related structure in the Commonwealth of Puerto (4) in clause (vi)— infrastructure, city of Biloxi, city of Gulf- Rico. (A) by striking ‘‘$89,146,000’’ and inserting port, and Harrison County, Mississippi. ‘‘(142) CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.— ‘‘$199,340,000’’; and ‘‘(117) JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI.—$25,000,000 for $1,000,000 for stormwater control measures (B) by striking ‘‘$44,573,000’’ each place it water and wastewater infrastructure, Jack- and storm sewer improvements, Spring appears and inserting ‘‘$99,670,000’’. son, Mississippi. Street/Fishburne Street drainage project, In section 7002(e)(3) of the bill, strike sub- ‘‘(118) CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA.—$30,000,000 Charleston, South Carolina. paragraph (D) and insert the following: for wastewater infrastructure, Clark County, ‘‘(143) CROOKED CREEK, MARLBORO COUNTY, (D) the plan of the State of Louisiana enti- Nevada. SOUTH CAROLINA.—$25,000,000 for a project for tled ‘‘Integrated Ecosystem Restoration and ‘‘(119) HENDERSON, NEVADA.—$5,000,000 for water storage and water supply infrastruc- Hurricane Protection—Louisiana’s Com- wastewater infrastructure, Henderson, Ne- ture on Crooked Creek, Marlboro County, prehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable vada. South Carolina. Coast’’. At the end of section 7006(a) of the bill, in- ‘‘(120) PATERSON, NEW JERSEY.—$35,000,000 ‘‘(144) MYRTLE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA.— for wastewater infrastructure, Paterson, $8,000,000 for environmental infrastructure, sert the following: New Jersey. including ocean outfalls, Myrtle Beach, (5) APPLICABILITY OF THE FEDERAL ADVI- SORY COMMITTEE ACT.—A working group es- ‘‘(121) ELLICOTTVILLE, NEW YORK.—$2,000,000 South Carolina. tablished under this subsection shall not be for water supply, water, and wastewater in- ‘‘(145) NORTH MYRTLE BEACH, SOUTH CARO- considered to be an advisory committee frastructure in Ellicottville, New York. LINA.—$8,000,000 for environmental infra- under the Federal Advisory Committee Act ‘‘(122) SENNETT, NEW YORK.—$1,500,000 for structure, including ocean outfalls, North (5 U.S.C. App.). water infrastructure, Town of Sennett, New Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. ‘‘(146) SURFSIDE, SOUTH CAROLINA.— In section 7007(b) of the bill, strike ‘‘this York. section’’ and insert ‘‘this title’’. ‘‘(123) WELLSVILLE, NEW YORK.—$2,000,000 $8,000,000 for environmental infrastructure, including stormwater system improvements In section 7013 of the bill, strike subsection for water supply, water, and wastewater in- (a) and insert the following: and ocean outfalls, Surfside, South Carolina. frastructure in Wellsville, New York. (a) DEAUTHORIZATION.— ‘‘(147) ATHENS, TENNESSEE.—$16,000,000 for ‘‘(124) SPRINGPORT AND FLEMING, NEW (1) IN GENERAL.—The navigation channel wastewater infrastructure, Athens, Ten- YORK.—$10,000,000 for water related infra- portion of the project for navigation, Mis- nessee. structure, including water mains, pump sta- sissippi River-Gulf outlet, authorized by the ‘‘(148) CENTRAL TEXAS.—$20,000,000 for tions, and water storage tanks, Springport Act entitled, ‘‘An Act to authorize construc- water and wastewater infrastructure in and Fleming, New York. tion of the Mississippi River-Gulf outlet’’, Bosque, Brazos, Burleson, Grimes, Hill, ‘‘(125) CABARRUS COUNTY, NORTH CARO- approved March 29, 1956 (70 Stat. 65), as Hood, Johnson, Madison, McLennan, Lime- LINA.—$4,500,000 for water related infrastruc- modified by section 844 of the Water Re- stone, Robertson, and Somervell Counties, ture, Cabarrus County, North Carolina. sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. Texas. ‘‘(126) CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA.— 4177), and further modified by section 326 of ‘‘(149) EL PASO COUNTY, TEXAS.—$25,000,000 $11,000,000 for phase II of the Briar Creek the Water Resources Development Act of for water related infrastructure and resource wastewater project, Charlotte, North Caro- 1996 (110 Stat. 3717), which extends from the protection, including stormwater manage- lina. Gulf of Mexico to mile 60 at the southern ment, and development, El Paso County, ‘‘(127) RICHMOND COUNTY, NORTH CARO- bank of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway is Texas. LINA.—$13,500,000 for water related infra- not authorized. ‘‘(150) FT. BEND COUNTY, TEXAS.—$20,000,000 structure, Richmond County, North Caro- (2) SCOPE.—Paragraph (1) shall not be con- for water and wastewater infrastructure, Ft. lina. strued to modify or deauthorize the Inner Bend County, Texas. ‘‘(128) UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.— Harbor Navigation Canal Replacement ‘‘(151) DUCHESNE, IRON, AND UINTAH COUN- $6,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure, Project, authorized by the Act referred to in TIES, UTAH.—$10,800,000 for water related in- Union County, North Carolina. paragraph (1). ‘‘(129) SAIPAN, NORTHERN MARIANA IS- frastructure, Duchesne, Iron, and Uintah In section 8004(c) of the bill, strike ‘‘build LANDS.—$20,000,000 for water related infra- Counties, Utah. upon’’ and insert ‘‘adopt and continue’’. structure, Saipan, Northern Mariana Islands. ‘‘(152) NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.—$20,000,000 The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House ‘‘(130) LAKE COUNTY, OHIO.—$1,500,000 for for water and wastewater infrastructure in Resolution 319, the gentleman from wastewater infrastructure, Lake County, Hancock, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Tyler, Pleasants, Wood, Doddridge, Monongalia, Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) and a Mem- Ohio. ber opposed each will control 5 min- ‘‘(131) MENTOR-ON-LAKE, OHIO.—$625,000 for Marion, Harrison, Taylor, Barbour, Preston, water and wastewater infrastructure, Men- Tucker, Mineral, Grant, Gilmer, Brooke, utes. tor-on-Lake, Ohio. Ritchie Counties, West Virginia. The Chair recognizes the gentleman ‘‘(132) WILLOWICK, OHIO.—$665,000 for water ‘‘(153) UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS.— from Minnesota. and wastewater infrastructure, Willowick, $25,000,000 for wastewater infrastructure for Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I Ohio. the St. Croix Anguilla wastewater treatment yield myself such time as I may con- ‘‘(133) ALBANY, OREGON.—$35,000,000 for plant and the St. Thomas Charlotte Amalie sume. wastewater infrastructure to improve habi- wastewater treatment plant, United States This is the so-called traditional man- tat restoration, Albany, Oregon. Virgin Islands. ager’s amendment that we have worked ‘‘(134) BOROUGH OF STOCKERTON, BOROUGH OF ‘‘(154) CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX RESERVATION on for weeks in a bipartisan manner (DEWEY AND ZIEBACH COUNTIES) AND PERKINS TATAMY, AND PALMER TOWNSHIP, PENNSYL- across the aisle within the committee AND MEADE COUNTIES, SOUTH DAKOTA.— VANIA.—$10,000,000 for stormwater control to work out technical changes and measures, particularly to address sinkholes, $25,000,000 for water supply infrastructure for in the vicinity of the Borough of Stockerton, the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation in modifications to the bill that came to the Borough of Tatamy, and Palmer Town- Dewey and Ziebach Counties, and for com- the attention of the committee after ship, Pennsylvania. munities in Perkins and Meade Counties, consideration of the bill in March. A ‘‘(135) HATFIELD BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA.— South Dakota.’’. project of this magnitude always has $310,000 for wastewater related infrastructure After section 6002 of the bill, insert the fol- some issues that we need to resolve, for Hatfield Borough, Pennsylvania. lowing (and redesignate subsequent sections, and we have done that quite well in ‘‘(136) LEHIGH COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.— and conform the table of contents, accord- ingly): this manager’s amendment. $5,000,000 for stormwater control measures Among some of the highlights are a and storm sewer improvements, Lehigh SEC. 6003. INITIAL PROJECTS. provision that is of great importance County, Pennsylvania. Section 601(b)(2)(C) of the Water Resources ‘‘(137) NORTH WALES BOROUGH, PENNSYL- Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2682) is to the 35 million people who live along VANIA.—$1,516,584 for wastewater related in- amended— the Great Lakes. There is a provision frastructure for North Wales Borough, Penn- (1) in the matter preceding clause (i) by to direct the Secretary of the Army, sylvania. striking ‘‘at a total cost of $1,100,918,000’’ and along with directors of other agencies ‘‘(138) PEN ARGYL, PENNSYLVANIA.— all that follows before the colon; and entities, to carry out an emer- $5,250,000 for wastewater infrastructure, Pen (2) in clause (iv)— gency project to control and prevent Argyl, Pennsylvania. (A) by striking ‘‘$100,335,000’’ and inserting spreading a viral hemorrhagic septi- ‘‘(139) PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.— ‘‘$162,630,000’’; and cemia (VHS) virus in the Great Lakes $1,600,000 for wastewater related infrastruc- (B) by striking ‘‘$50,167,500’’ each place it ture for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. appears and inserting ‘‘$81,315,000’’; and the connecting channels. I alluded ‘‘(140) VERA CRUZ, PENNSYLVANIA.— (3) in clause (v)— to this issue at the outset of my re- $5,500,000 for wastewater infrastructure, Vera (A) by striking ‘‘$124,837,000’’ and inserting marks at the beginning of the legisla- Cruz, Pennsylvania. ‘‘$385,010,000’’; and tion. It is an infectious viral disease of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3656 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 fish and has caused fish kills through- member on the subcommittee as well aisle we have done everything possible out the lakes. It has been a problem in as the full committee and our general to vet these projects. I am also sorry Europe, it is a problem in Japan, and chairman. Thank you so very much. that we can’t put even more projects now we have confirmed presence in Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I re- in. Lake Ontario, Lake St. Clair, Erie, St. serve the balance of my time. We just had Mrs. BONO here, and her Lawrence River. It was discovered in Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to heart and soul in her work in Congress, Lake Huron. It is migrating up the claim the time in opposition, although which is something she inherited, actu- lakes, killing fish in its wake caused by I am not in opposition and therefore ally the work, too, of her late husband, ballast water that is infected on vessels ask unanimous consent to claim such Sonny Bono, a good friend and col- plying the Great Lakes. time. league. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, It spreads rapidly. We don’t really b 1730 know how it spreads, but we need to at- the gentleman from Louisiana is recog- tack this issue now. There is a multi- nized for 5 minutes. She wanted that so badly in this, and billion dollar fishery industry through- There was no objection. it is so important, the restoration of out the Great Lakes, sport fish and Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I just the Salton Sea, for her district. You commercial fishery, and this provision want to speak for a moment as to proc- can see how important these projects will help us deal with and hopefully ess and my appreciation for the man- are to Members and their districts. So find a way to contain this devastating ner in which the chairman handled this we have a good work product. virus. particular legislation. At the time of Let me make one point I did not We also have authorizations for new some of the subcommittee consider- make in opposition to the administra- projects in water and wastewater-re- ation, there were some Members who tion’s position on this piece of legisla- lated infrastructure. For years, these had not completed the necessary docu- tion in that it cost too much. If you were traditionally practices of the En- ments for submission of their projects look at 2000 when we started these vironmental Protection Agency, but in the required form, and the chairman projects, maybe they did cost $5 mil- they have run out of money, frankly. made clear that should a Member pro- lion. I can tell you that just with infla- Even though we have passed the State vide the necessary information in a tion and the cost of doing construction Revolving Loan fund bill in this com- timely manner, that their projects projects, having been in the develop- mittee to deal with the matter, there would be included for consideration. ment business, that every day we delay still are huge needs. No one better than And the manager’s amendment reflects will cost us more; and that is why the Corps of Engineers is equipped to the closure of that verbal agreement in these projects cost us more, and that is deal with the needs of environmental allowing many Members to complete why I am in opposition to the adminis- infrastructure. So in cooperation with the necessary documentation, there- tration’s point there. the Department of Agriculture’s Rural fore enabling the committee to include We have evenly divided the projects. Utilities Service program, the State their projects of interest in the final I don’t think we could have had a fairer Revolving Loan fund of the EPA, Corps mark before the House this evening. distribution. They are Republican, of Engineers will help communities re- That is a model of how appropriate leg- they are not Democrat, but they are of build their infrastructure and provide islative consideration should be en- national and district importance, and I for public health and economic vitality gaged, and I want to express apprecia- think we have done as good a job as of our towns all across America. The tion to him. you can. I am sure you can find some- needs of communities have not gone I can verify for him if there is ever thing wrong or questionable, if anyone away; the ability to deal with them has any question that there are a large seeks to do that. simply diminished. number of Members who have a very Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the The Corps can do this work; they deep and abiding interest in this sub- manager’s amendment, and I urge all have proven they can. And we have a ject matter, I have a list. And they also Members on both sides of the aisle to very vigorous and I think constructive are appreciative of the willingness to move and urge the passage of this bill, environmental infrastructure program give opportunity for appropriate con- not only through the House but in the manager’s amendment. sideration. through the other body and conference, Mr. Chairman, I would yield such The manager’s amendment is ex- so that we can do a better job for the time as she may wish to the gentle- traordinarily important in that it people that we represent in these im- woman from Texas. touches about a hundred projects portant environmental and water re- Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of which otherwise would not be included. sources projects. Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. I certainly hope that those present will I thank the gentleman. Chairman. support the adoption of the amend- Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman I support the manager’s amendment ment. for his remarks, and I certainly would on this water resources bill. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would be remiss if I did not comment on his The manager’s amendment reflects yield such time as the gentleman may effort to provide for transparency and project and policy revisions that have consume to my ranking member, Mr. disclosure of Members’ requests. It was come to the attention of the sub- MICA. a new process. We had a lot of new pa- committee that I chair, and the sub- Mr. MICA. Might I inquire of the perwork to engage in. But at the end of committee of Water Resources Envi- Chair as to how much time is remain- the day, I think the public interest is ronment. ing. well served and every Member is well Since the bill was passed out of com- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman served by having such disclosure made mittee, the Transportation and Infra- from Louisiana has 31⁄2 minutes re- in a timely manner; and for his leader- structure, in March, the amendment maining. ship in providing that counsel, I am contains authorizations that are by no Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for most appreciative. means inequitable to those that were yielding. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- contained in the bill that passed out of First of all, I rise in strong support of ance of my time. committee. Likewise, the projects in the manager’s amendment. Mr. OBER- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, we the manager’s amendment were not STAR, after the election, became the have labored mightily to comply with considered on a partisan basis but on a Chair, I became the ranking member of the new rules of the House, to cut need basis and merit. And this has been the Transportation Committee. And we every one of the projects back with a long tradition in our committee, and inherited, indeed, a huge backlog of each of the Members, each of 300 Mem- I hope we will always have that. projects. We also inherited a bill that bers who had a project in the last Con- I support the amendment. And I want required earmarking because they are gress that carried over to this Con- to express my appreciation to the per- Members’ projects, and everyone knows gress. We have worked very diligently sons who did do all of the certifications the problems that we have had with to serve as a filter for Members, to fil- and all the new paperwork we have to earmarks in the past. So I can assure ter out problems that they had, do. And I want to thank the ranking the Members that on both sides of the projects that really might not comply,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3657 that should not be considered at this plant at Rathbun Lake. Rathbun Lake opposition to the amendment, to claim stage. is the source of raw water for the treat- the time in opposition to the amend- We bring forward to you a bill that ment plant. ment. has been on the Internet, that is fully Rathbun Rural Water Association The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection vetted, and should pass with over- has experienced steady growth in the to the request of the gentleman from whelming support. demand for potable water. In response Minnesota? The CHAIRMAN. All time for debate to this demand, Rathbun Rural Water There was no objection. on the amendment has expired. Association doubled the capacity of its The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman The question is on the amendment treatment plant in 2000 and made im- from Minnesota is recognized for 5 min- offered by the gentleman from Min- provements to its distribution system. utes. nesota (Mr. OBERSTAR). Rathbun Rural Water Association Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I The amendment was agreed to. has completed an analysis of future support the amendment offered by the AMENDMENT NO. 2 OFFERED BY MR. BOSWELL water demand in its service territory. gentleman from Iowa. We have had a The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to This analysis indicates that Rathbun bipartisan agreement on this. I yield to the distinguished gen- consider amendment No. 2 printed in Regional Water Association must take steps to meet continued growth in de- tleman from Louisiana. House Report 110–100. Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I offer mand for potable water. The ability to for yielding. an amendment. secure the rights of the remaining drinking water pool in Lake Rathbun, Mr. Chairman, I just wish to com- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- pliment the gentleman on his amend- ignate the amendment. a facility managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is critical to meet ment. We have reviewed it. We have no The text of the amendment is as fol- objection to its consideration and lows: demand. There are 15,000 acre-feet of water adoption. Page 147, after line 2, insert the following Mr. OBERSTAR. The gentleman from (and redesignate subsequent sections, and supply storage in Rathbun Lake. Iowa (Mr. BOSWELL) and our former conform the table of contents accordingly): Rathbun Regional Water Association has purchased the rights to 6,680 acre- colleague from Iowa, Mr. Leach, have SEC. 3055. RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA. long worked with the committee on (a) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.—The Sec- feet of this water and storage from the retary shall provide, in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It is es- this issue of Rathbun Lake. It is as recommendations in the Rathbun Lake Re- sential that they be able to acquire the much a tribute to the gentleman from allocation Report approved by the Chief of rights of the remaining over 8,000 acre- Iowa (Mr. BOSWELL) as to our former Engineers on July 22, 1985, the Rathbun Re- feet of water supply storage in colleague, Mr. Leach. The gentleman gional Water Association with the right of Rathbun Lake in order to satisfy the has described the issue very well. first refusal to contract for or purchase any In initial consideration of this legis- growing demand for potable water in increment of the remaining allocation (8,320 lation, there was a PAYGO issue, and its service territory. This remaining acre-feet) of water supply storage in the gentleman from Iowa has worked acre-feet in water would provide access Rathbun Lake, Iowa. with us on both sides of the aisle to re- (b) PAYMENT OF COST.—The Rathbun Re- to approximately 2.7 billion gallons of solve the matter. We no longer have an gional Water Association shall pay the cost water. of any water supply storage allocation pro- The amendment submitted today impact on direct Federal spending in vided under subsection (a). takes two critical steps to ensure the the amendment. Therefore, it passes The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House availability of water for the region. our committee standards. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Resolution 319, the gentleman from First, it directs the U.S. Army Corps of amendment and appreciate the support Iowa (Mr. BOSWELL) and a Member op- Engineers to grant Rathbun Rural posed each will control 5 minutes. of the gentleman from Louisiana. Water the right of first refusal to con- Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- The Chair recognizes the gentleman tract for any increment of the remain- from Iowa. ance of my time. ing water supply storage allocation in Mr. BOSWELL. Thank you, Mr. Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield Rathbun Lake. This language is in ac- OBERSTAR, and the gentleman from myself such time as I may consume. cordance with the recommendations in Before I explain the amendment, I Louisiana, I appreciate your help and the Rathbun Lake Reallocation Report your work with us on this. I would join would like to thank Ms. JOHNSON and approved by the chief of engineers on again with Congressman LOEBSACK and Mr. OBERSTAR for their hard work. We July 22, 1985. have finally got something out here to urge passage of this amendment. Second, it allows Rathbun Regional Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. work with. I thank the gentleman from Water Association to contract for the Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment of- Louisiana and the gentleman from remaining water supply storage alloca- fered by my colleague, Mr. BOSWELL. Florida for working together with us. tion in total, or incrementally as dic- Congressman BOSWELL has been working It is something that our country need- tated by the demand of the potable with the Committee to resolve scoring issues ed very, very badly, and was overdue. water demand in the association’s serv- related to modifications for the Rathbun Lake, Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of ice territory, at such time as the full Iowa project that had surfaced since the this amendment that is highly impor- amount of storage may be purchased. project was last included in the Water Re- tant to the State of Iowa constituents This amendment ensures access to sources Development Act of 2005. and also a number of folks in northern quality water supply for rural resi- It is my understanding that these issues Missouri. As a member of the Trans- dents, small communities and busi- have now been settled. portation and Infrastructure Com- nesses in southern Iowa and northern I urge the adoption of this amendment. mittee, I would like to especially give Missouri. It enables Rathbun Rural Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield my appreciation for this opportunity Water to better manage the expense of back the balance of my time. that is before us today. purchasing water storage allocation in The CHAIRMAN. All time for debate My amendment is critical to the fu- a manner that reduces the financial on the amendment has expired. ture availability of quality drinking burden on its customers and ensures The question is on the amendment water for farmers, residents and busi- the vitality of Rathbun Regional Water offered by the gentleman from Iowa nesses in southern Iowa and northern Association to fulfill its commitment (Mr. BOSWELL). Missouri. Rathbun Regional Water As- to an extensive rural area. The amendment was agreed to. sociation is the largest rural water sys- I join with my colleague from Iowa, The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to tem in Iowa and one of the largest in Congressman LOEBSACK, in this re- consider amendment No. 3 printed in the United States. Rathbun Regional quest, and I urge my colleagues to sup- House Report 110–100. Water Association supplies potable port this amendment. Does any Member seek recognition? water to 60,000 people in the rural areas Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance AMENDMENT NO. 4 OFFERED BY MR. STUPAK of 15 counties and 41 communities in of my time. The CHAIRMAN. If not, it is now in southern Iowa and northern Missouri Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask order to consider amendment No. 4 from the association’s water treatment unanimous consent, though I am not in printed in House Report 110–100.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3658 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I offer ing plays an essential role in pre- projects and facilities that place lives an amendment. serving the economy and lifeline of and livelihoods at risk on the fierce The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- this harbor town. By only considering storms of the Great Lakes, because ignate the amendment. the amount of tonnage a harbor han- these are also harbors of refuge. So I The text of the amendment is as fol- dles, the administration ignores the strongly support it. lows: benefits provided to businesses and Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. STUPAK: residents that depend on electricity, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Page 116, after line 8, insert the following flood mitigation and other purposes be- HOEKSTRA). (and conform the table of contents of the bill yond the tonnage handled. Mr. HOEKSTRA. I thank my col- accordingly): With this new policy, the Corps also league for yielding and I am thankful SEC. 2041. CRITERIA FOR OPERATION AND MAIN- disregards the fact that approximately for his support and help on this amend- TENANCE OF HARBOR DREDGING ment. PROJECTS. two-thirds of all shipping in the United The Secretary shall budget and request ap- States either starts or finishes at a I would also like to thank my col- propriations for operation and maintenance small port. By ignoring the smaller league from Michigan for bringing this of harbor dredging projects based only upon communities, the Corps is also signifi- amendment together. I think we both criteria used for such projects in fiscal year cantly harming the Nation’s economy. recognize the importance of this 2004 and shall not use a budget standard for With the Corps’ proposed mainte- amendment. My congressional district, such projects based on the amount of ton- nance dredging guidelines, in each year I think we kind of represent God’s nage a harbor handles. our small harbors’ maintenance re- country. I represent about 200 miles of The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House mains uncertain. Without this Stupak- Lake Michigan shoreline. I don’t think Resolution 319, the gentleman from Hoekstra-Delahunt amendment, the I want to get into an argument with Michigan (Mr. STUPAK) and a Member economic vitality and the dream of my colleague from Michigan as to how opposed each will control 5 minutes. economic expansion for these 300 com- much shoreline he represents from the The Chair recognizes the gentleman munities remain uncertain. Great Lakes, but it is well in excess of from Michigan. As the House considers this WRDA that number. Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, in fiscal legislation, I am again offering this But we both have recognized that the year 2006, the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- amendment with Congressmen Hoek- current Corps guidelines present a dis- neers and the Office of Management stra and Delahunt, which keeps the tinct hardship to our communities, and Budget set new guidelines for maintenance dredging the same as it many of the communities along the maintenance dredging of commercial has been before the Corps and OMB Great Lakes. We don’t meet the newest harbors in their budget for fiscal year came up with these tonnage proposals. guidelines that establish the roughly 1 2006. The Corps excluded harbors that For the sake of our Nation’s small million tons or whatever of cargo that move less than 1 million tons of cargo harbors, from which two-thirds of all need to flow through a harbor. And this each year. shipping in the United States either is a change in the Corps’ position. For The House is on record that the starts or finishes at small ports, I en- the last 14 years that my colleague and Corps’ neglect of these harbors is un- courage my colleagues to adopt our I have been in Congress, the Corps has wise and unreasonable. With Members’ amendment, which would ensure that done a very, very good job and recog- help during consideration of WRDA, all harbor maintenance is funded fair- nized its responsibility for taking care the Stupak-Hoekstra-Delahunt amend- ly, regardless of the amount of tonnage of these small and medium-sized har- ment to prohibit the Corps from using a harbor handles. bors which they classify as rec- a tonnage-based standard was included Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance reational harbors. in the House bill by voice vote. of my time. But they are much more than rec- Now the Corps is back with a similar Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask reational harbors. For many of our tonnage-based formula. This formula unanimous consent to claim the time communities they do, we do transfer essentially credits $2 for maintenance in opposition to the amendment, al- cargo through these ports, but the har- dredging for every ton of product though I do not oppose the amendment. bors form the economic development moved. The harbor is then provided The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection zone for these communities. And if the only the amount from the formula, re- to the request of the gentleman from harbors and the channels are not gardless of the actual cost to dredge a Minnesota? dredged, this economic lifeline goes harbor. This policy not only discrimi- Mr. BAKER. Reserving the right to away. And when the economic lifeline nates against rural America by signifi- object, if I may make an inquiry of the goes away, eventually these commu- cantly limiting dredging of harbors in gentleman, we have a cosponsor on our nities go away. smaller communities, but it is pound side of the amendment. Will the gen- This is a policy that Congress needs wise and penny foolish. tleman be happy to yield? to address because, from a dis- For example, under the Corps pro- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I appointing standpoint, the administra- posal, my harbor in Ontonogan, Michi- will yield time to the gentleman, of tion has made an administrative deci- gan, will move just over 300,000 tons of course. sion that these harbors will not be material, so the Corps will provide Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I with- taken care of. Congress needs to speak $643,000 worth of maintenance dredg- draw my reservation of objection. on this issue. I am glad that we can ing, even though its dredging cost is The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, move this forward in a bipartisan basis more than $1 million. the gentleman from Minnesota is rec- and send a piece of legislation to the Again, there are almost 300 harbors ognized for 5 minutes. administration that no longer provides across this country that face the same There was no objection. them with the latitude as to whether problem. Our small harbors will never these harbors will be dredged or not. be able to adequately dredge, but will b 1745 These harbors need to be dredged. They silt in with each passing year. Thus, Mr. OBERSTAR. In the preceding will be dredged. This is exactly the ap- pound wise, penny foolish. Congress, this amendment was offered propriate message to send. These Corps guidelines will have a on the floor during consideration of the I thank my colleagues on the other detrimental effect on small-town, rural WRDA bill, and it passed by voice vote; side of the aisle for taking the initia- America, causing job losses, increased WRDA passed by 406 votes. It requires tive in bringing this legislation for- hardship for business, and endanger our adequate budgeting by the administra- ward. Nation’s entire shipping infrastructure. tion for maintenance of small, low-use Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gen- Each harbor that has been main- harbors. These are relatively smaller tleman from Michigan for his state- tained by the Corps for years has harbors; they may not handle thou- ment. I just wanted to point out that unique characteristics other than just sands of containers or millions of tons the Great Lakes have gone through 15 the amount of tonnage it moves. For of bulk commodities shipped on the years, in the 1960s, into the 1970s, into example, annual dredging helps pre- Great Lakes, as we do in the Harbor of the 1980s, nearly a 20-year period of ab- vent flooding in Ontonogan, and dredg- Duluth, but they are important normally high level. Now we are going

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3659 through a seventh year of low water greatest difficulty and are most likely to run (6) ensure that water resources projects are drought in the watershed of the Great aground. justified by benefits that accrue to the pub- Lakes. The Corps of Engineers has Entire portions of our local economy are or- lic at large. (c) PROPOSED PRINCIPLES AND GUIDE- avoided dredging costs all during those ganized around the sea and the easy trans- LINES.— two decades of high water on the Great port of people and products in and out of our (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 270 days Lakes. It is time now to recoup, to do harbors. When you consider our island com- after the date of enactment of this Act, the the dredging that is needed, especially munities—such as Martha’s Vineyard, Nan- Secretary shall publish in the Federal Reg- for these small harbors, harbors of ref- tucket, and Cuttyhunk—the waterways carry ister proposed principles and guidelines uge, small commercial harbors. And all the necessities for local citizens, everything under subsection (a). the gentleman’s amendment will en- from food and water to lumber and heating oil. (2) CONSULTATION.—In developing the pro- sure that this issue stays on the agenda In Chatham Harbor, which hosts the largest posed principles and guidelines, the Sec- retary shall consult with the Secretary of of this and future administrations. So I fleet of commercial fishing vessels in my dis- trict, we face a constant problem with the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, urge support of the amendment. the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- shoaling. It is a 900-foot channel and when it Housing and Urban Development, the Sec- ance of my time. is not clear, millions of dollars are at risk. retary of Transportation, the Administrator Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, in clos- Each year it is now a fight to keep the fishing of the Environmental Protection Agency, ing, I would like to thank Chairman industry on Cape Cod in business. the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of OBERSTAR. He has been a great help It’s the same thing with Green Harbor in Homeland Security, the National Academy throughout my whole career here, but Marshfield, where we have the second highest of Sciences, and the Council on Environ- especially on issues confronting the lobster catch harbor in New England. In mental Quality. (3) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—The Secretary Great Lakes and WRDA and other Woods Hole, we have a major Coast Guard station which launches many cutter search- shall provide notice and an opportunity for areas of his expertise in transportation the public to participate in the development infrastructure. And Mr. BAKER has also and-rescue missions a year. Without regular of the proposed principles and guidelines. been a friend and very helpful, as has dredging, that emergency equipment is land- (d) PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOWING ISSUANCE Ms. JOHNSON. bound. In that same harbor, the Federal gov- OF PROPOSED PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.— It is a bipartisan piece of legislation. ernment has invested millions in a state-of- After publication of the proposed principles I would hope that the Members support the-art NOAA research vessel, the Bigelow. and guidelines, the Secretary shall provide it. If we are going to truly care about But, these WHOI vessels and Navy vessels an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed principles and guidelines. The waterborne commerce and transpor- cannot do essential research because the har- bor is clogged with sentiment. comment period shall not be fewer than 60 tation in this Nation, we must remem- days. ber that two-thirds of all commerce on For coastal communities, our waterways are (e) FINAL PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.— our Nation’s waterways start and begin critical to their economic well-being. I urge my (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days fol- at the small ports the Army Corps no colleagues to support this Amendment and lowing the last day of the comment period longer wishes to dredge and maintain. support our mariners, our fishermen, the under subsection (d), the Secretary shall We need support on this amendment, Coast Guard, and small coastal communities issue final principles and guidelines under subsection (a). and I ask for your support. throughout the country. (2) APPLICABILITY.—After the date of Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, for my dis- The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gen- issuance of the final principles and guide- trict—coastal Massachusetts—our waterways lines, the final principles and guidelines are as important as our roadways. They are tleman from Michigan (Mr. STUPAK). The amendment was agreed to. shall apply— also a vital part of the Nation’s transportation (A) to all water resources projects carried infrastructure. AMENDMENT NO. 5 OFFERED BY MR. out by the Secretary, other than projects for BLUMENAUER It is the responsibility of the Army Corps of which the Secretary has commenced a feasi- The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to Engineers to help keep our harbors, rivers and bility report before the date of such consider amendment No. 5 printed in other channels in navigable condition. In New issuance; House Report 110–100. (B) at the request of a non-Federal inter- England, the Corps is responsible for main- Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I est, to a water resources project for which taining 171 ports and harbor channels, yet the offer an amendment. the Secretary has commenced a feasibility Bush Administration budget includes funding The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- report before the date of such issuance; and to take care of just one. That is because the ignate the amendment. (C) to reevaluation or modification of a rules for Army Corps projects were changed The text of the amendment is as fol- water resources project, other than a re- by the Bush Administration to now favor large, lows: evaluation or modification that has been commenced by the Secretary before the date commercial waterways. This constitutes an Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. abandonment of Federal responsibility and of such issuance. BLUMENAUER: (f) EXISTING STUDIES.—Principles and quite simply, is an assault on smaller commu- Strike section 2036 of the bill and insert guidelines issued under subsection (a) shall nities all over the country, putting lives and the the following (and conform the table of con- not affect the validity of any completed economic health of coastal communities at tents accordingly): study of a water resources development risk. SEC. 2036. PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES. project. The rationale for these changes is that fi- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall issue revised principles and guidelines for use in The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House nancial constraints require us to abruptly the formulation, evaluation, and implemen- Resolution 319, the gentleman from Or- change Army Corps’ priorities to favor projects tation of water resources projects. Subject to egon (Mr. BLUMENAUER) and a Member with ‘‘true value to the Nation.’’ This sounds the requirements of this section, the revised opposed each will control 5 minutes. good—but is dangerously misleading. The principles and guidelines shall apply to The Chair recognizes the gentleman changed formula focuses only on commercial water resources projects carried out by the from Oregon. tonnage and mileage, so smaller projects do Secretary instead of the principles and Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I not have a chance—even though they are crit- guidelines for such projects in effect on the yield myself 2 minutes. ical to the economy and public safety. date of enactment of this Act. Mr. Chairman, this amendment sim- (b) CONTENT.—The principles and guide- When waterways close due to sediment lines shall, among other things— ply requires the Secretary of the Army build-up, the commercial fishing industry suf- (1) provide for the consideration of envi- to update the principles and guidelines fers. Tourism is compromised. And our trans- ronmental restoration costs and benefits used by the Army Corps of Engineers in port stops—sometimes dead in the water. The under Corps of Engineers economic models; formulating, evaluating, and imple- Coast Guard can’t undertake ‘‘search and res- (2) incorporate new techniques in risk and menting water resource projects. As I cue’’ because they can’t move—literally. uncertainty analysis; said on the floor earlier today, they Just as a deteriorating highway or bridge (3) eliminate biases and disincentives for have not been updated since 1983. It is needs repair, our waterways need mainte- nonstructural flood damage reduction embarrassing that the Corps is oper- projects as compared to structural flood nance. If the traffic through a harbor requires damage reduction projects; ating under guidance a quarter century an eight-foot draft and sediment builds up, (4) incorporate new analytical techniques; old. leaving only five feet available, vessels cannot (5) encourage, to the maximum extent We have learned a lot in the last 25 pass. It is larger, commercial vessels like tank- practicable, the restoration of aquatic eco- months, as I look to my colleague from ers, fishing boats and barges that face the systems; and Louisiana, about Katrina and others in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3660 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 terms of the Corps. Imagine how things should look at things broader than just Mr. BAKER. The distinction between have changed in the last 25 years. dollars and cents. a statutory adoption and a circular Under this amendment, the Army On April 22, 2000, regulation 1105–2– being issued is managerial direction to Secretary would incorporate the latest 200 recognized the national ecosystem people who are implementing the pro- scientific and economic knowledge, restoration plan on a par with national grammatic requirements. It may be a eliminate biases and disincentives, economic development. difference of no distinction to the gen- would be required to consult with the March 26, 2002, chief of engineers tleman; but my opinion is, after spend- public and other Federal agencies issues the environmental operating ing some time with the Corps individ- while updating the principles and principles affirming sustainable devel- uals, they feel they are on top of and guidelines. opment. are trying as best they can within fi- I want to be clear about what it May 1, 2003: to provide for procedural nancial constraints to achieve the would not do. It would not impact any guidance for formulating and evalu- goals the gentleman is prescribing. My project already underway or impact ating projects consistent with environ- worry is this will now transfer a finan- any project that is in the bill that has mental sustainability. cial liability to the local sponsor which There was another on May 5, 2005. been created here today. It would not does not now exist and may well, be- But to ensure the gentleman has time prevent the Corps from doing struc- cause of the times outlined in the gen- for his question, I will wrap up by say- tural projects and would not delay any tleman’s amendment, protract the ing, I have been assured by the Corps projects at all. It is why it is supported timely construction of worthwhile that they are working as diligently as projects. by the American Society of Civil Engi- one can work to accommodate environ- neers, the professionals who actually I, for example, am not sure whether mental sensitivities while at the same this applies to aids to navigation. I do the work, taxpayer organizations, time assuring that projects move for- and environmental groups. don’t know. I am not suggesting it ward in a timely manner. does, but the way the amendment is The National Academy of Sciences in The reason for my concern, as the a report from the year 2000 pointed out constructed, I am worried about scope gentleman knows, I am highly sen- and reach. And please understand, I that the current principles and guide- sitized to our recovery from the want to be helpful to the gentleman’s lines were state-of-the-art thinking Katrina-Rita days, and I know the gen- interest. I am not at all averse to con- when it was written, and some of the tleman’s amendment is worded in such structing projects in an environ- concepts and paradigms that underpin a fashion that, if it is authorized prior mentally safe and sound manner. I am it are relevant today. However, in over to the adoption of this language, it has just not sure that the goals the gen- 20 years since it has been updated and no effect. But going forward, we are tleman seeks are the results we would revised, it needs to be revised to reflect going to be doing this stuff for a very get out of the adoption of the amend- contemporary management paradigms; long time in our State. ment. analytical methods; legislative direc- The unintended consequences of Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I tives; social, economic, and political these additional standards are going to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from realities. be costly to local sponsors, and they Wisconsin (Mr. PETRI). I deeply appreciate the work with the are going to require significant addi- Mr. PETRI. I thank my colleague for committee’s staff, the Chair and sub- tional programmatic time to achieve, yielding. committee Chair in getting this to this not to ignore the gentleman’s concerns Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the point. that ecosystem restoration is a valu- Blumenauer amendment, the bill be- Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in able and salutary goal that we should fore us, which would require the Army opposition to the amendment. pursue. Corps of Engineers to revise the prin- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman I am happy to yield to the gen- ciples and guidelines under which the from Louisiana is recognized for 5 min- tleman. Secretary formulates and evaluates utes. Mr. BLUMENAUER. I want to be water resource projects. Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I am cer- clear that what you just stated that It has been almost 25 years since any tainly appreciative of the gentleman’s our goals, the things that you just type of revision has been made to the interest and have worked with him cited, have never been incorporated Corps’ decision-making process for for- closely on a number of matters into the principles and guidelines, have mulating, evaluating, and imple- through the course of the years. And they? menting a project. The National Acad- just in this instance we have a matter Mr. BAKER. Yes. We may have a dis- emy of Sciences has twice rec- of policy difference. pute as to the meaning of the words ommended that these guidelines be up- The P&G planning process utilized by that we have on the page, but I will be dated. the Corps does not begin with an idea happy to provide the gentleman. We want to be sure that we have a May 5, 2005: planning in a collabo- that something must be done. It is not fair and impartial analysis of projects rative environment to build on mod- a process through which a commercial and that we don’t set in place a proce- ernized guidance, improve Corps activity will automatically or inordi- dure that inevitably leads to the larg- projects through greater collaboration nately be concluded must be imple- est projects getting built, not the most with all stakeholders. I am skipping a mented. The plan that is proposed cost-effective ones. little bit here. Broaden project selec- must seek certain levels of justifica- The amendment is supported by tion criteria to encompass net bene- many organizations, including the tion; that is an iterative process where ficial effects in all four P&G accounts; various parties are heard from over American Rivers, Taxpayers for Com- national economic development, re- mon Sense, and Republicans for Envi- time. gional development, economic develop- As to the element of whether the ronmental Protection. ment, environmental quality, and Up-to-date scientific engineering and P&G has been modified or not, I have other social effects. environmental tools should be taken done some work on the matter over the So it goes beyond even environ- into account when looking at projects. last days, knowing of the gentleman’s mental aspects in their planning proc- As Representative BLUMENAUER has interest in this amendment. And I can ess. said, it is time to bring the Corps into go back further over time, but on Sep- Mr. BLUMENAUER. And my ques- the 20th and 21st centuries. tember 30 of 1999, the Corps issued En- tion was, Is it not true that the Corps gineering Regulation 1165–2–501, which has not adopted those things into the b 1800 speaks directly to the gentleman’s in- principles and guidelines? Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I terest to encourage to the maximum Mr. BAKER. All I can speak to from yield 1 minute to the gentleman from extent practicable the restoration of my knowledge is Corps-issued Engi- Vermont (Mr. WELCH). aquatic ecosystems. neering Circular 1105–2–409 on May 5, Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Chair- From the gentleman’s amendment, 2005. man, as you know, this legislation will the 1999 issuance speaks directly to a Mr. BLUMENAUER. Engineering Cir- authorize projects that are vitally im- nonmonetary output compatible with cular that has not been incorporated portant to our communities, to our P&G selection criteria; meaning, we into their principles and guidelines. citizens, to our environment.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3661 This amendment is intended to begin that all the major projects, all the committee, in no way undermines what the process of reforming the Army projects over $50 million are subject to I said. These principles and guidelines Corps of Engineers process so it can be peer review. We have put in environ- have not been updated. There are pro- done better. I support and applaud the mental reform and Corps reform in re- cedures and circulars discussed by the leadership of the Committee on Trans- gard to mitigation issues. We have put gentlemen from LA. They have not portation and the cosponsors of this in Corps reform in regard to project been incorporated into an updated, re- amendment. We must establish trans- planning so that all the concerns of all vised principle and guideline for the parency, collaboration and account- the environmental groups who want to Corps of Engineers. ability within the Corps of Engineers be involved in this process will be in- That is why the National Academy of so as to better serve our communities. cluded. Public Administration, one of the What this amendment does is begin I just want to point that out, how en- many scientific organizations to rec- that process by citing improvements vironmentally strong this legislation is ommend updating the principles and that can be made in the principles and thanks to not only our efforts on this guidelines, they released their rec- the guidelines. This is essential be- side and the staff and Mr. BAKER, but ommendation after the circular that cause some of the things that have also Chairman OBERSTAR, Mr. the gentleman from Louisiana men- happened that have been adverse to our COSTELLO, Chairwoman JOHNSON with a tioned. His information simply is not communities and to our citizens have lot of contribution from the gentleman current in terms of how the Corps is been foreseeable and predictable. The from Oregon (Mr. BLUMENAUER) him- operating and all the independent bod- reforms that we are beginning to take self. ies, the Science Board, the public ad- with this amendment are to foresee, Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I ministrators, why the American Engi- predict and avoid. yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from neering Association, as well as tax- Secondly, independent peer review. I Illinois (Mr. COSTELLO). payers and environmental groups say it want to recognize the work of the com- Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, there is past time to fix this situation. mittee of including that in this legisla- is a lot of confusion over the For those of you who care about get- tion. It is my hope that going forward Blumenauer amendment, and let me ting something actually through Con- in the conference committee that will just say that the Blumenauer amend- gress, you ought to support this actually be strengthened. ment does not affect the language on amendment. One of the hang-ups be- Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I ask independent review. The Blumenauer tween the House and the Senate has unanimous consent that each side be amendment will make the study proc- been this issue of reform. The Senate given an additional 2 minutes for a ess more efficient, and for that reason has stronger language than this. I total of 4 minutes for debate on this I ask my colleagues to support the think it will help bridge the gap. I urge amendment only. Blumenauer amendment and support The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection its adoption. the bill. The CHAIRMAN. All time for debate to the request of the gentleman from Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I on the amendment has expired. Louisiana? There was no objection. yield 1 minute to the gentleman from The question is on the amendment The CHAIRMAN. The time is divided. Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR), our distin- offered by the gentleman from Oregon Who seeks recognition? guished chairman. (Mr. BLUMENAUER). Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gen- The amendment was agreed to. such time as he may consume to the tleman for yielding. AMENDMENT NO. 6 OFFERED BY MR. KIRK gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DUN- I appreciate the concerns of the dis- The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to CAN). tinguished ranking member of the sub- consider amendment No. 6 printed in Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the gentleman committee about time and cost. We House Report 110–100. from Louisiana for yielding me this certainly don’t want to add any more Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I offer an time, and I thank the majority side for time than Corps projects already take amendment. agreeing to this unanimous consent re- to evolve, nor do we want to foist addi- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- quest. tional costs on local governments. ignate the amendment. I simply wanted to rise to say this. The language of the amendment of The text of the amendment is as fol- During my 6 years as chairman of the the gentleman, though, is simply to lows: Water Resources and Environment take current practice that the Corps Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. KIRK: Subcommittee, I do not believe we had has in its principles and guidelines, but At the end of title II of the bill, add the a better member or more active mem- to make those principles and guide- following (and conform the table of contents ber than the gentleman from Oregon, lines into current law. I have talked accordingly): and I certainly have the greatest admi- with the Corps representatives in the SEC. 2041. SMALL PROJECTS FOR THE REHABILI- ration and respect for him and his con- chief’s office, and they say, well, we’re TATION AND REMOVAL OF DAMS. cern about this legislation. looking for direction from Congress. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may carry I simply wanted to rise to say this. I This language will not add time, will out a small dam removal or rehabilitation not create costs that are not already project if the Secretary determines that the don’t believe this Congress could pass a project will improve the quality of the envi- stronger environmental bill than this being incurred under our existing prac- ronment or is in the public interest. legislation that is before us at this tice, and in that spirit, I think the (b) COST SHARING.—A non-Federal interest time; Chairman OBERSTAR has contin- amendment should be accepted. shall provide 35 percent of the cost of the re- ually made sure of that. And when we Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, moval or remediation of any project carried started with this bill several years ago, may I inquire as to the time remain- out under this section, including provision of some people wanted no Corps reform at ing? all land, easements, rights-of-way, and nec- all; some people wanted so much Corps The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman essary relocations. (c) AGREEMENTS.—Construction of a from Oregon has 11⁄2 minutes remain- reform that really they were trying to project under this section shall be com- stop every project that was included in ing. menced only after a non-Federal interest has this bill. Mr. BLUMENAUER. Then I will entered into a binding agreement with the Mr. COSTELLO, who was my ranking close. Secretary to pay— member at that time, we compromised, I deeply appreciate the words of sup- (1) the non-Federal share of the costs of we worked out things. port that have been offered here by my construction required by this section; and I want to commend the staff for their colleague from Wisconsin (Mr. PETRI); (2) 100 percent of any operation and main- work in this regard, and we put in from my distinguished chairman, Mr. tenance cost. many environmental concerns the first OBERSTAR; and from the former rank- (d) COST LIMITATION.—Not more than ing member of the Water Resources $5,000,000 in Federal funds may be allotted time around. Then we put in even more under this section for a project at any single the second time around when we passed Committee, Mr. COSTELLO. location. this bill. I want to be clear that what was of- (e) FUNDING.—There is authorized to be ap- We are now here again. We have fered up by my friend, the distin- propriated to carry out this section given reform on peer review now so guished ranking member of the sub- $25,000,000 for each fiscal year.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3662 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT NO. 6 OFFERED There was no objection. Mr. OBERSTAR. I want to use this BY MR. KIRK Mr. OBERSTAR. And I do so to speak opportunity to thank the Chair of the Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, this deliberately, carefully and thought- Subcommittee on Water Resources, the amendment concerns removing small fully so that the Speaker pro tempore gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. EDDIE dams from rivers, especially in my con- can reach the House floor in order that BERNICE JOHNSON), for the superb work gressional district; and working with the committee may rise and report the she has done shaping the bill and bring- the chairman and the minority, what I bill to the House with sundry amend- ing us to this point; and to the ranking would like to do now is ask unanimous ments and that we can conclude action member of the subcommittee, Mr. consent to modify the amendment as on the bill. I mean, let’s be honest BAKER of Louisiana, whom I previously agreed to by both sides. about what we’re doing here in the eulogized for his work in the gulf; and The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- spirit of transparency. our full committee ranking member, port the modification. But the gentleman from Illinois Mr. MICA. The Clerk read as follows: speaks for himself and also the gentle- This has truly been an effort bringing Modification to amendment No. 6 offered woman from Illinois (Ms. BEAN) who this bill forward, and essential to this by Mr. KIRK: shares this river with him and also our team have been the staff. I am always In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- former Speaker, Mr. HASTERT, whom I grateful for the staff because that is serted, insert the following on page 40, after saw on the House floor just prior to line 23, (and redesignate subsequent para- where I started in this body 44 years graphs accordingly): consideration of the legislation. So he ago, as clerk of the Subcommittee on (13) LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—Project for thought this would be a good idea be- Rivers and Harbors, the predecessor of aquatic ecosystem restoration, Ryerson For- cause he would be able to do some wall- the Committee on Public Works. It was est Preserve Dam, Dam 1A, Dam 1B, and eye fishing on the river, and we are all the first committee of the Congress in Dam 1C, Lake County, Illinois. for fishing walleyes, and the gentleman the first Congress in 1789. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, has had a very, very clear and narrowly I want to thank Ryan Seiger of the the modification is approved. drawn objective. majority staff; Ted Ilston, Beth Gold- There was no objection. I am glad we have been able to work stein, Mike Brain, Rod Hall of Con- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House this out in a manner that suits his con- gresswoman JOHNSON’s staff; Dave Resolution 319, the gentleman from Il- cerns and allays the fears and concerns Heymsfeld of the full committee; John linois (Mr. KIRK) and a Member op- of those in the Western States that Anderson, a distinguished long-time posed each will control 5 minutes. thought this was going to be a major professional on the minority side; Geoff The Chair recognizes the gentleman hindrance to hydroelectric projects. Bowman, Tim Lundquist, Jim Coon of from Illinois. So I thank the gentleman for tai- the full committee staff; and Charlie Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, the scope loring the language of the amendment Ziegler, whom I have known for so of this amendment now is focused ex- to the needs at hand and to allay the many years, a friend of long-standing. I clusively on Lake County, Illinois, and broader concerns. don’t have old friends anymore, friends mainly the watershed of the Des Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he of long standing, when you get to my Plaines River. This is a river in which may require to the gentleman from age. several outdated and unused dams are Louisiana (Mr. BAKER). In the Legislative Counsel’s Office, preventing the return of higher-end Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman Curt Haensel and the ever-talented predator fish, specifically pike and for yielding. Dave Mendelsohn. All have worked to- I just wanted to express a word of ap- walleye, through the upper Des Plaines gether, pitched in to help us bring this preciation to the gentleman for revi- and Fox River Valleys. bill to this point. We are ready now to sion of his amendment as it now ap- Now, I have worked on this amend- conclude action on the amendment of pears before Members. He worked dili- ment and consulted with my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois. gently with the staff in order to assure Congresswoman MELISSA BEAN, and we Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- both agree on a bipartisan basis that that some concerns that had been ance of my time. the return of these high-end predator raised had been alleviated, and we find The CHAIRMAN. The question is on fish will not only help restore the envi- ourselves at a point where we have an the amendment offered by the gen- amendment to which I do not believe ronment of upper Lake County and its tleman from Illinois (Mr. KIRK). Fox River and Des Plaines watersheds, there is objection. The amendment was agreed to. but also will be a help to sports fishing At some point later in the evening I The CHAIRMAN. The question is on and boating in these areas. assume we will agree to adopt it and the committee amendment in the na- For these reasons, the removal of then later we will take up the under- ture of a substitute, as amended. these very small but damaging struc- lying bill and pass that as well. The committee amendment in the I assume that the gentleman has suf- tures will go a long way to restoring nature of a substitute, as amended, was ficiently consumed enough time to the ecosystems along the lines of the agreed to. where the managerial matters of his Chicago Paddlers Association and the The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the earlier interests may have now been re- Nature Conservancy and their rec- Committee rises. solved, I hope. ommendations. Accordingly, the Committee rose; Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I re- I want to particularly thank JOHN and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. serve the balance of my time. WELCH of Vermont) having assumed MICA and his staff, especially Amy Mr. KIRK. I would just like to state the chair, Mr. ROSS, Chairman of the Steinmann for her work on this, as to the gentleman that I thank you very Committee of the Whole House on the well as Chairman OBERSTAR for his much for your senior leadership on this state of the Union, reported that that help on this because this is going to bipartisan legislation. I would hope Committee, having had under consider- make a big difference in the ecosystem that we could all agree that pike and ation the bill (H.R. 1495) to provide for of Lake County, Illinois, and we hope walleye fishing should not be reserved the conservation and development of to invite all of you, maybe Mr. BAKER for those citizens of only Wisconsin and water and related resources, to author- as well, to come for a day, hopefully 5 Minnesota and can now return to the ize the Secretary of the Army to con- years from now, of exciting sports fish- citizens of northern Illinois, who will struct various projects for improve- ing in northern Illinois. see this ecosystem restored. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- ments to rivers and harbors of the of my time. ance of my time. United States, and for other purposes, Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask pursuant to House Resolution 319, he unanimous consent to claim time in b 1815 reported the bill back to the House opposition, though I am not in opposi- Mr. OBERSTAR. How much time do I with an amendment adopted by the tion to the amendment. have, Mr. Chairman? Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the gentleman from Minnesota is rec- from Minnesota has 21⁄2 minutes re- the rule, the previous question is or- ognized for 5 minutes. maining. dered.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3663 Is a separate vote demanded on any be considered as read and printed in carbon emissions were avoided in the amendment to the amendment re- the RECORD. United States when 268 million mega- ported from the Committee of the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there watt hours of hydroelectricity were Whole? If not, the question is on the objection to the request of the gen- generated. Hydropower offsets more amendment. tleman from Oregon? carbon emissions than all other renew- The amendment was agreed to. Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ob- able energy sources combined. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The ject. If they were to be removed, the dams question is on the engrossment and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objec- in the Northwest, it would take six and third reading of the bill. tion is heard. a half 500-megawatt coal-fired plants to The bill was ordered to be engrossed The Clerk will read. replace the energy generated, not that and read a third time, and was read the The Clerk continued to read the mo- anybody is talking about replacing third time. tion to recommit. them all. That, though, would increase CO emissions by 47.4 billion pounds, MOTION TO RECOMMIT OFFERED BY MR. WALDEN The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- 2 OF OREGON tleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 47.4 billion pounds. Let’s look at this in replacement of Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speak- minutes. shipping terms, if we don’t take care of er, I offer a motion to recommit. Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Thank you locks. In the Columbia and Snake The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the very much, Mr. Speaker. River system, certainly in the Colum- gentleman opposed to the bill? I want to first commend the gen- bia River, certainly at John Day, there Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. At this time tleman from Minnesota. He has a tough are issues about these antiquated locks in its present form I am. job; he has done it well on this com- mittee. I have enjoyed my work over that are having real maintenance The SPEAKER pro tempore. The needs, and yet we lack funding in some Clerk will report the motion to recom- the years on issues where we have agreed. I bring this motion to recom- cases to deal with it. mit. A tow of four 3,500-ton grain barges The Clerk read as follows: mit to the floor for a couple of reasons. The first deals with the issue of glob- equates to 400 trucks each at 400 horse- Mr. Walden of Oregon moves to recommit power. For example Tidewater Barge al warming and America’s energy inde- the bill H.R. 1495 to the Committee on Trans- Company, a single example, Tidewater pendence. I was appointed recently to portation and Infrastructure with instruc- ships about 6 million tons up and down the Select Committee on Energy Inde- tions to report back the same forthwith with the Columbia River each year. These 6 the following amendment: pendence and Global Warming. We million tons would require 171,200 SEC. 5124. RENEWABLE HYDROELECTRIC POWER. have had a lot of hearings there and in trucks if the barging capability was re- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— the Energy and Commerce Committee moved. Over 171,000 trucks. So you can (1) inventory, and, to the maximum extent and in the Energy and Air Quality Sub- see why I am concerned about lock economically feasible, develop and maintain, committee about how do we make maintenance and the need to continue all lands, properties, and projects under the America both energy independent and jurisdiction of the Secretary for the poten- down that path. This motion to recom- reduce our carbon emissions and green- mit would do that. tial of increasing hydroelectric power pro- house gas emissions. duction or constructing new hydroelectric I yield to the gentleman from Lou- power facilities thereon; Obviously, coming from the Pacific isiana. (2) study the potential effects of proposals Northwest, we are blessed in that a Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman to remove Federal hydroelectric dams under large percentage of our electrical gen- for yielding. the jurisdiction of the Secretary, including— eration comes from these large hydro- As I understand the amendment, it is (A) the impacts on domestic energy costs power projects. Hydropower for Amer- to require a study, an inventory, and to consumers; ica means no greenhouse gas emissions, an assessment of our hydroelectric ca- (B) the need to import more energy to virtually, virtually none. I suppose you pacity that is under the Secretary’s ju- make up for lost production from such dams; could say there is some in the creation risdiction, further to examine the ad- (C) the types of fossil-fuel based or other visability of perhaps private ownership energy sources (including clean nuclear of the cement that goes into the con- power) that are likely to be utilized to com- crete that makes up the dams, but once of those facilities for the public inter- pensate for the lost energy associated with they are built, they are 90 percent effi- est, or whether we should enhance the dam removal; and cient and no carbon emissions. So, ob- government-owned and -operated fa- (D) any impacts on existing or future agri- viously, there is discussion out there in cilities. cultural production of biofuels or other al- the courts and elsewhere about reduc- So it is an examination of our energy ternative energy feedstocks as a result of the ing hydropower by eliminating dams. resources to determine how we should loss of water to America’s family farmers; I think it would help us in our work, best go forward, and the Congress does and in both the Select Committee on En- not require today the expenditure of (3) to the maximum extent economically any new money for such purpose other feasible, carry out projects under the juris- ergy and Independence, and on global warming, to know what the impacts than that to accomplish the study. diction of the Secretary in a manner that Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. I think as seeks to maintain lock systems where the are and if you remove the hydropower spelled out in this motion to recommit, systems are essential for maintaining navi- system in any course or place, what the gentleman is correct. gable waterways used for commercial ship- the impacts on domestic energy cost to ping and transport. Mr. BAKER. I thank the gentleman. consumers would be; what would the With that understanding, I would just (b) REPORT.— need be to import more energy as re- (1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than one express support for the gentleman. year after the date of enactment of this Act, placement, because obviously that is Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Certainly the Secretary shall submit to Congress a re- one of the issues that we look at. If you anything that would be required here, port containing the results of the inventory take out a particular power generation because it does require the Corps to in- conducted under subsection (a)(1), the results capacity, and especially one that is 90 ventory, develop and maintain all of the study conducted under subsection percent efficient and doesn’t emit lands, properties, et cetera, for the po- (a)(2), and a description of actions taken by green house gases, then what’s the car- tential of producing hydropower. Obvi- the Secretary to increase hydroelectric bon footprint for the replacement ously, though, we waive no environ- power production. power? mental laws. Anything that would be (2) UPDATES.—The Secretary shall update We would look at that and call for a the report at least once every 5 years and authorized or result or interpreted that submit the updated reports to Congress. report on the types of fossil-based fuels way from this language would require (c) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in or other energy sources, perhaps in- appropriation. There would be all the this section shall be construed to supersede, cluding clean nuclear, to replace this reviews that are required for any other limit, or otherwise affect any provision of power that would likely be utilized. law. law in effect on the date of enactment of this In addition, we ask for a report on I urge support of the motion to re- Act. maintenance of the lock system as commit. Mr. WALDEN of Oregon (during the well, which is extraordinarily impor- Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous tant. I want to point out that in 2004 in opposition to the motion to recom- consent that the motion to recommit alone, more than 160 million tons of mit.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE H3664 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 19, 2007 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- [Roll No. 233] Herseth Sandlin McIntyre Schiff tleman from Minnesota is recognized Hill McNerney Schwartz YEAS—194 Hinchey McNulty Scott (GA) for 5 minutes. Aderholt Gallegly Myrick Hinojosa Meehan Scott (VA) Mr. OBERSTAR. First of all, we had Akin Garrett (NJ) Neugebauer Hirono Meek (FL) Serrano a very clear agreement within the com- Alexander Gerlach Nunes Hodes Meeks (NY) Sestak Holden Melancon mittee on the Democratic and Repub- Bachmann Gilchrest Paul Shea-Porter Bachus Gillmor Pearce Holt Michaud Sherman Honda lican side not to take new items that Baker Gingrey Pence Miller (NC) Shuler Hooley Miller, George were not in the 109th Congress Water Barrett (SC) Gohmert Peterson (PA) Sires Hoyer Mitchell Bartlett (MD) Goode Petri Skelton Resources Development Act. We have Inslee Mollohan Barton (TX) Goodlatte Pickering Slaughter vigorously adhered to that, kept a Jackson (IL) Moore (KS) Biggert Granger Pitts Jackson-Lee Moore (WI) Smith (WA) great many projects out. Bilbray Graves Platts (TX) Moran (VA) Snyder This proposal is not only new, but it Bilirakis Hall (TX) Poe Solis Bishop (UT) Hastert Jefferson Murphy (CT) is massive, it is huge, it is not a study Porter Space Blackburn Hastings (WA) Johnson (GA) Murphy, Patrick Price (GA) Spratt of potential effects. It has very clear Blunt Hayes Johnson, E. B. Murtha Pryce (OH) Stark declarative language: the Secretary Boehner Heller Jones (OH) Nadler Putnam Stupak Bonner Hensarling Kagen Napolitano shall inventory, develop and maintain Radanovich Kanjorski Neal (MA) Sutton Bono Herger Ramstad all lands, properties, projects, meaning Boozman Hobson Kaptur Oberstar Tanner hydroelectric projects. The language at Regula Kennedy Obey Tauscher Boustany Hoekstra Rehberg the very outset prohibits any action Brady (TX) Hulshof Kildee Olver Taylor Reichert Kilpatrick Ortiz Thompson (CA) Brown (SC) Hunter Renzi that may be proposed, as is being con- Kind Pallone Thompson (MS) Brown-Waite, Inglis (SC) Reynolds sidered along the Snake River, to re- Klein (FL) Pascrell Tierney Ginny Issa Rogers (AL) Buchanan Jindal Kucinich Pastor Towns move dams for environmental pur- Rogers (KY) Burgess Johnson (IL) Langevin Payne Udall (CO) poses, and by directing the Secretary Rogers (MI) Burton (IN) Johnson, Sam Lantos Perlmutter Udall (NM) to undertake this action, creates a Ros-Lehtinen Buyer Jordan Larsen (WA) Peterson (MN) Van Hollen Roskam PAYGO issue. There is a clear budg- Calvert Keller Larson (CT) Pomeroy ´ Royce Velazquez Camp (MI) King (IA) Lee Price (NC) etary consequence in that language. Ryan (WI) Visclosky Campbell (CA) King (NY) Levin Rahall This motion goes well beyond the in- Sali Walz (MN) Cannon Kingston Lewis (GA) Rangel Saxton Wasserman tent of the Water Resources Develop- Capito Kirk Lipinski Reyes Schmidt Schultz ment Act. It goes beyond the bipar- Carter Kline (MN) Loebsack Rodriguez Sensenbrenner Waters tisan agreement we have in bringing Castle Knollenberg Lofgren, Zoe Ross Sessions Lowey Rothman Watson this bill to the floor. It authorizes un- Chabot Kuhl (NY) Watt Coble LaHood Shadegg Lynch Roybal-Allard limited projects without consideration Shays Mahoney (FL) Ruppersberger Waxman Cole (OK) Lamborn Weiner Conaway Latham Shimkus Maloney (NY) Rush of environmental impacts or consider- Welch (VT) Crenshaw LaTourette Shuster Markey Ryan (OH) ation of taxpayer expense. Wexler Culberson Lewis (CA) Simpson Marshall Salazar Wilson (OH) b 1830 Davis (KY) Lewis (KY) Smith (NE) Matheson Sa´ nchez, Linda Davis, David Linder Smith (NJ) Matsui T. Woolsey It impacts legislation that we al- Davis, Tom LoBiondo Smith (TX) McCarthy (NY) Sanchez, Loretta Wu ready have in this bill. It goes far be- Deal (GA) Lucas Souder McDermott Sarbanes Wynn Dent Lungren, Daniel Stearns McGovern Schakowsky Yarmuth yond the scope that we intended in Sullivan Diaz-Balart, L. E. NOT VOTING—13 WRDA. Diaz-Balart, M. Mack Tancredo We can consider the gentleman’s pro- Doolittle Manzullo Terry Cantor Israel Millender- posal in future authorizations of Drake Marchant Thornberry Cubin Jones (NC) McDonald Dreier McCarthy (CA) Tiahrt Davis, Jo Ann Lampson Rohrabacher WRDA and in hearings that we will un- Duncan McCaul (TX) Tiberi Fattah McCollum (MN) Walsh (NY) dertake, but this amendment has no Ehlers McCotter Turner Higgins Wicker Emerson McCrery Upton place during floor consideration of this ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE bill at this late hour when it clearly English (PA) McHenry Walberg Everett McHugh Walden (OR) The SPEAKER pro tempore (during brings into play items well beyond the Fallin McKeon Wamp the vote). Members are advised that scope of the agreement between the Feeney McMorris Weldon (FL) there are 2 minutes remaining in this Democrats and Republicans on the bill Ferguson Rodgers Weller Flake Mica Westmoreland vote. and well beyond the scope of the pur- Forbes Miller (FL) Whitfield pose of the legislation. It imposes vast, Fortenberry Miller (MI) Wilson (NM) b 1859 potential new expenditures and re- Fossella Miller, Gary Wilson (SC) quirements upon the Secretary, some Foxx Moran (KS) Wolf Mr. HALL of New York, Mr. MITCH- Franks (AZ) Murphy, Tim Young (AK) of which are not even well understood Frelinghuysen Musgrave Young (FL) ELL, Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas, Ms. at this point. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. FARR So I oppose the motion, and I urge a NAYS—226 and Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi ‘‘no’’ vote. Abercrombie Capuano DeLauro changed their vote from ‘‘yea’’ to The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ackerman Cardoza Dicks ‘‘nay.’’ Allen Carnahan Dingell TIERNEY). Without objection, the pre- Altmire Carney Doggett Messrs. MCHUGH, STEARNS and vious question is ordered on the motion Andrews Carson Donnelly EHLERS changed their vote from to recommit. Arcuri Castor Doyle ‘‘nay’’ to ‘‘yea.’’ There was no objection. Baca Chandler Edwards So the motion to recommit was re- Baird Clarke Ellison The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Baldwin Clay Ellsworth jected. question is on the motion to recommit. Barrow Cleaver Emanuel The result of the vote was announced The question was taken; and the Bean Clyburn Engel as above recorded. Becerra Cohen Eshoo Speaker pro tempore announced that Berkley Conyers Etheridge The SPEAKER pro tempore. The the noes appeared to have it. Berman Cooper Farr question is on the passage of the bill. Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speak- Berry Costa Filner The question was taken; and the er, on that I demand the yeas and nays. Bishop (GA) Costello Frank (MA) Speaker pro tempore announced that Bishop (NY) Courtney Giffords The yeas and nays were ordered. Blumenauer Cramer Gillibrand the ayes appeared to have it. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- Boren Crowley Gonzalez Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on ant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair Boswell Cuellar Gordon that I demand the yeas and nays. Boucher Cummings Green, Al will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum Boyd (FL) Davis (AL) Green, Gene The yeas and nays were ordered. time for any electronic vote on the Boyda (KS) Davis (CA) Grijalva The SPEAKER pro tempore. This question of passage of the bill. Brady (PA) Davis (IL) Gutierrez will be a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic de- Braley (IA) Davis, Lincoln Hall (NY) The vote was taken by electronic de- Brown, Corrine DeFazio Hare vice, and there were—yeas 194, nays Butterfield DeGette Harman vice, and there were—yeas 394, nays 25, 226, not voting 13, as follows: Capps Delahunt Hastings (FL) not voting 14, as follows:

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE April 19, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H3665

[Roll No. 234] Poe Schiff Thornberry MOTION TO INSTRUCT OFFERED BY MR. LEWIS OF Pomeroy Schmidt Tiahrt CALIFORNIA YEAS—394 Porter Schwartz Tierney Price (GA) Scott (GA) Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speak- Abercrombie DeLauro King (NY) Towns Price (NC) Scott (VA) er, I offer a motion to instruct con- Ackerman Dent Kingston Turner Pryce (OH) Sensenbrenner Aderholt Diaz-Balart, L. Kirk Udall (CO) ferees. Putnam Serrano Akin Diaz-Balart, M. Klein (FL) Udall (NM) The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Radanovich Sessions Alexander Dicks Kline (MN) Upton Rahall Sestak Clerk will report the motion. Van Hollen Allen Dingell Knollenberg Ramstad Shays The Clerk read as follows: Vela´ zquez Altmire Doggett Kucinich Rangel Shea-Porter Andrews Donnelly Kuhl (NY) Visclosky Mr. Lewis of California moves that the Regula Sherman managers on the part of the House at the Arcuri Doolittle LaHood Rehberg Shimkus Walberg Baca Doyle Langevin Reichert Shuler Walden (OR) conference on the disagreeing votes of the Bachus Drake Lantos Renzi Shuster Walz (MN) two Houses on the Senate amendment to the Baird Dreier Larsen (WA) Reyes Simpson Wamp bill, H.R. 1591, be instructed to insist on sub- Baker Duncan Larson (CT) Reynolds Sires Wasserman sections (c), (d), (e) and (f) of section 1904 of Baldwin Edwards Latham Rodriguez Skelton Schultz the House bill, relating to the redeployment Barrett (SC) Ehlers LaTourette Rogers (AL) Slaughter Waters Barrow Ellison Lee of the Armed Forces from Iraq and restric- Rogers (KY) Smith (NE) Watson tions on the Secretary of Defense’s use of the Bartlett (MD) Ellsworth Levin Rogers (MI) Smith (NJ) Watt Barton (TX) Emanuel Lewis (CA) Armed Forces in Iraq after such redeploy- Ros-Lehtinen Smith (TX) Waxman Bean Emerson Lewis (GA) Roskam Smith (WA) Weiner ment. Becerra Engel Lewis (KY) Ross Snyder Welch (VT) The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- Berkley English (PA) Linder Rothman Solis Berman Eshoo Lipinski Weldon (FL) ant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the gen- Roybal-Allard Souder Weller Berry Etheridge LoBiondo Ruppersberger tleman from California (Mr. LEWIS) and Space Wexler Biggert Everett Loebsack Rush Spratt Whitfield the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Bilirakis Fallin Lofgren, Zoe Ryan (OH) Stark Wilson (NM) OBEY) each will control 30 minutes. Bishop (GA) Farr Lowey Ryan (WI) Stupak Bishop (NY) Ferguson Lucas Salazar Sullivan Wilson (OH) The Chair recognizes the gentleman Bishop (UT) Filner Lungren, Daniel Sali Sutton Wolf from California. Blumenauer Forbes E. Sa´ nchez, Linda Tanner Woolsey Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speak- Blunt Fortenberry Lynch Wu T. Tauscher er, I yield myself such time as I may Bonner Fossella Mack Sanchez, Loretta Taylor Wynn Bono Foxx Mahoney (FL) Sarbanes Terry Yarmuth consume. Boozman Frank (MA) Maloney (NY) Saxton Thompson (CA) Young (AK) In doing so, I rise to offer a very sim- Boren Frelinghuysen Manzullo Schakowsky Thompson (MS) Young (FL) Boswell Gallegly Marchant ple, straightforward motion to instruct Boucher Garrett (NJ) Markey NAYS—25 conferees on the fiscal year 2007 emer- Boustany Gerlach Marshall Bachmann Goode Royce gency supplemental appropriations Boyd (FL) Giffords Matheson Bilbray Goodlatte Shadegg bill. Boyda (KS) Gilchrest Matsui Blackburn Hensarling Stearns Brady (PA) Gillibrand McCarthy (CA) The motion to instruct simply insists Boehner Inglis (SC) Tancredo that House conferees support the pre- Brady (TX) Gillmor McCarthy (NY) Chabot Jordan Braley (IA) Gingrey McCaul (TX) Tiberi viously adopted House position with re- Feeney Lamborn Westmoreland Brown (SC) Gonzalez McCollum (MN) Flake McHenry gard to a timetable for the withdrawal Brown, Corrine Gordon McCotter Wilson (SC) Franks (AZ) Miller (FL) of troops from Iraq. This motion, which Brown-Waite, Granger McCrery Gohmert Pence Ginny Graves McDermott I will oppose, puts Members on record Buchanan Green, Al McGovern NOT VOTING—14 as either fully supporting our troops or Burgess Green, Gene McHugh Cantor Israel Paul Burton (IN) Grijalva McIntyre agreeing to a surrender date in Iraq. It Cubin Jones (NC) Pickering Butterfield Gutierrez McKeon is that simple. Davis, Jo Ann Lampson Rohrabacher Buyer Hall (NY) McMorris Fattah Millender- Walsh (NY) It is no secret that many Members of Calvert Hall (TX) Rodgers Higgins McDonald Wicker the House, both Republicans and Camp (MI) Hare McNerney Democrats, have strong reservations Campbell (CA) Harman McNulty ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE Cannon Hastert Meehan about the manner in which this legisla- The SPEAKER pro tempore (during Capito Hastings (FL) Meek (FL) tion undermines the authority of the Capps Hastings (WA) Meeks (NY) the vote). Members are advised there President, our commander in chief. Capuano Hayes Melancon are 2 minutes remaining in this vote. Cardoza Heller Mica Members are also rightly concerned Carnahan Herger Michaud about how this legislation places mili- b 1908 Carney Herseth Sandlin Miller (MI) tary decisions in the hands of politi- Carson Hill Miller (NC) So the bill was passed. Carter Hinchey Miller, Gary cians rather than the military com- Castle Hinojosa Miller, George The result of the vote was announced manders in the field. Castor Hirono Mitchell as above recorded. This legislation ought to focus on our Chandler Hobson Mollohan A motion to reconsider was laid on Clarke Hodes Moore (KS) troops. It ought to focus on providing Clay Hoekstra Moore (WI) the table. those in harm’s way with the resources Cleaver Holden Moran (KS) they need to complete their mission Clyburn Holt Moran (VA) f successfully. It ought to respect, not Coble Honda Murphy (CT) micromanage, our combatant com- Cohen Hooley Murphy, Patrick APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON Cole (OK) Hoyer Murphy, Tim manders in whom we place the ulti- Conaway Hulshof Murtha H.R. 1591, U.S. TROOP READINESS, mate responsibility for prosecuting Conyers Hunter Musgrave VETERANS’ HEALTH AND IRAQ military actions. Cooper Inslee Myrick ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, 2007 Costa Issa Nadler Mr. Speaker, Members of Congress Costello Jackson (IL) Napolitano Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to are many things. We are elected to rep- Courtney Jackson-Lee Neal (MA) clause 1 of rule XXII and by direction resent the interests of our constituents Cramer (TX) Neugebauer Crenshaw Jefferson Nunes of the Committee on Appropriations, I from our congressional districts. How- Crowley Jindal Oberstar move to take from the Speaker’s table ever, as presently written, this legisla- Cuellar Johnson (GA) Obey the bill (H.R. 1591) making emergency tion makes the dangerous assumption Culberson Johnson (IL) Olver supplemental appropriations for the that Congress also has an on-the- Cummings Johnson, E. B. Ortiz Davis (AL) Johnson, Sam Pallone fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, ground role in prosecuting the war in Davis (CA) Jones (OH) Pascrell and for other purposes, with a Senate Iraq. Davis (IL) Kagen Pastor amendment thereto, disagree to the In closing, let me remind my col- Davis (KY) Kanjorski Payne Davis, David Kaptur Pearce Senate amendment, and agree to the leagues of this: We are not generals. We Davis, Lincoln Keller Perlmutter conference asked by the Senate. are not the Secretary of State. And we Davis, Tom Kennedy Peterson (MN) The Clerk read the title of the bill. are most certainly not the commander Deal (GA) Kildee Peterson (PA) The motion was agreed to. in chief. DeFazio Kilpatrick Petri DeGette Kind Pitts A motion to reconsider was laid on The vote on this motion to instruct Delahunt King (IA) Platts the table. will signal whether Members of the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:24 May 13, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD07\H19AP7.REC H19AP7 mmaher on PROD1PC69 with CONG-REC-ONLINE