H2476 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 going on in Kosovo because of the enor- Now next week we will see it all dif- sent that the Committee on Rules be mous loss of life, but because we sim- ferent. Then we will have an appropria- discharged from further consideration ply do not like him. tions act out here, and we will want to of the resolution (H. Res. 153) amending Madam Speaker, it is a shame that give money to an effort that we do not House Resolution 5, One Hundred Sixth we would fall to partisanship while support. Congress, as amended by House Resolu- thousands and thousands and hundreds Madam Speaker, Lewis Carroll must tion 129, One Hundred Sixth Congress, of thousands of women and children are be writing the script because this place and ask for its immediate consider- being murdered and moved from their is getting curiouser and curiouser. ation. homes. What have we wrought? f The Clerk read the title of the resolu- Martin Luther King said injustice tion. WHY IS SPARTANBURG HIGH anywhere is injustice everywhere. My The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. SCHOOL SO SUCCESSFUL? question to my Republican friends: EMERSON). Is there objection to the re- Where is the outrage? (Mr. DEMINT asked and was given quest of the gentleman from Wash- Stop the partisanship. Let us unify permission to address the House for 1 ington? around saving lives, and standing up minute.) There was no objection. for American principles and believing Mr. DEMINT. Madam Speaker, on a The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- that we must fight this humanitarian more positive note, the upstate region lows: war. of South Carolina is home to H. RES. 153 Resolved, f Spartanburg High School, a four-time winner of the National Blue Ribbon SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF HOUSE RESOLUTION CALLING ON THE PRESIDENT TO Award. It is the only school in our Na- 5. PROVIDE LEADERSHIP Section 2(f)(1) of House Resolution 5, One tion to achieve this honor four times. Hundred Sixth Congress, agreed to January (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given Why Spartanburg High so successful? 6, 1999 (as amended by House Resolution 129, permission to address the House for 1 Caring parents, quality students, com- One Hundred Sixth Congress, agreed to minute.) mitted teachers, creative administra- March 24, 1999), is amended by striking Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, there tors, an active school board and en- ‘‘April 30, 1999’’ and inserting ‘‘May 14, 1999’’. was no vote taken yesterday not to couraging community. The people have The resolution was agreed to. support our military. There was a vote taken control of their school and have A motion to reconsider was laid on taken not to endorse a policy that we succeeded in spite of misguided federal the table. should have been asked weeks ago be- programs and paperwork. f fore the bombing started to be part of. Do not just take my word for it. Yes- terday the Spartanburg Herald Journal WATER RESOURCES There was a vote not to endorse a pol- DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999 icy that has not been explained to this wrote an editorial praising Congress Congress the way it should have been for passing legislation to give schools Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. explained by the administration. more flexibility. It read: Madam Speaker, by direction of the We have heard of vile partisanship on Federal lawmakers need to do more Committee on Rules, I call up House this House yesterday, but over 2 dozen to free state and local educators so Resolution 154 and ask for its imme- diate consideration. members of the Democratic party they can run their schools as they see The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- voted with Republicans, Republicans fit. Education is a State and local mat- lows: voted with Democrats. We would be ter. H. RES. 154 glad to have those 2 dozen members of I could not have said it better myself. f Resolved, That at any time after the adop- that party if they do not want them. tion of this resolution the Speaker may, pur- This was not a statement about vile LAST NIGHT’S VOTE NOT TO suant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the partisanship. This was a statement SUPPORT NATO House resolved into the Committee of the about principle. This is about whether (Mr. PASTOR asked and was given Whole House on the state of the Union for foreign policy is driven by the Con- permission to address the House for 1 consideration of the bill (H.R. 1480) to pro- stitution or by CNN, and the Constitu- vide for the conservation and development of minute and to revise and extend his re- water and related resources, to authorize the tion says the President and the Con- marks.) gress should be involved in that. United States Army Corps of Engineers to Mr. PASTOR. Madam Speaker, I construct various projects for improvements I call on the President to provide the could understand a year ago when the to rivers and harbors of the United States, leadership that this Congress needs. majority, because of their hate for and for other purposes. The first reading of f President Clinton, made the impeach- the bill shall be dispensed with. General de- bate shall be confined to the bill and shall THIS PLACE IS GETTING ment process a partisan procedure. But last night I could not believe that the not exceed one hour equally divided and con- CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER trolled by the chairman and ranking minor- vote to not support NATO was done be- (Mr. MCDERMOTT asked and was ity member of the Committee on Transpor- cause of the hate the majority has for given permission to address the House tation and Infrastructure. After general de- the President. for 1 minute.) bate the bill shall be considered for amend- What message have we sent to ment under the five-minute rule. It shall be Mr. MCDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, NATO? What message have we sent to in order to consider as an original bill for the yesterday, as I listened to that debate, our troops? That we do not support purpose of amendment under the five-minute I thought of my time in the Vietnam them. rule the amendment in the nature of a sub- war when I listened to soldiers and The ironic thing is today, this after- stitute recommended by the Committee on sailors and marines talk about what it noon, I am going to be asked to vote on Transportation and Infrastructure now was like fighting a war when the Amer- printed in the bill, modified by the amend- the supplemental that doubles the re- ments printed in part 1 of the report of the ican people did not support them. I got quest, and yet I am being asked to vote to wonder what people think sitting on Committee on Rules accompanying this res- for a supplemental that the majority olution. That amendment in the nature of a the flight line in Aviano in Italy today, does not support, does not support the substitute shall be considered as read. All asking themselves: action of the NATO cause. points of order against that amendment in Where is the Congress? Are we going In the words of the great Congress- the nature of a substitute are waived. No out there risking our lives, and they do man, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. amendment to that amendment in the na- ture of a substitute shall be in order except not support us? TRAFICANT), all I can say is: Now I watched last night when the Beam me up, Scotty. those printed in part 2 of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each amendment may leadership of this House stood by that f back retail and did not turn a single be offered only in the order printed in the re- port, may be offered only by a Member des- vote around. Amazing. One can be the AMENDING RULES OF HOUSE FOR 106TH CONGRESS ignated in the report, shall be considered as leader of this House, and they cannot read, shall be debatable for the time speci- change a single vote. They do not even Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. fied in the report equally divided and con- speak to anybody to change a vote. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous con- trolled by the proponent and an opponent, April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2477 shall not be subject to an amendment, and The rule allows for the Chairman of open rules, or, in some cases, under shall not be subject to a demand for division the Committee of the Whole to post- suspension of the rules. of the question in the House or in the Com- pone votes during consideration of the The Democratic members of the mittee of the Whole. The chairman of the bill and to reduce voting time to 5 min- Committee on Rules would not ordi- Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone narily support closing down a rule on until a time during further consideration in utes on a postponed question if the the Committee of the Whole a request for a vote follows a 15 minute vote. legislation as important as this water recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) re- Finally, the rule provides for one mo- resources development bill. In this duce to five minutes the minimum time for tion to recommit with or without in- case, however, we will not oppose the electronic voting on any postponed question structions. rule. This is because the majority and that follows another electronic vote without Madam Speaker, the Water Re- minority on the Committee on Trans- intervening business, provided that the min- sources Development Act of 1999, H.R. portation and Infrastructure have imum time for electronic voting on the first 1480, is the culmination of work that worked diligently to reach a number of in any series of questions shall be 15 min- was begun in the 105th Congress on a compromises on controversial posi- utes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendments the Committee shall variety of Bureau of Reclamation and tions in the committee reported bill, rise and report the bill to the House with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water and because every amendment sub- such amendments as may have been adopted. projects. In fact, I would like to take mitted to the Committee on Rules has Any Member may demand a separate vote in this opportunity to commend the been made in order either in the man- the House on any amendment adopted in the chairman of the Committee on Trans- ager’s amendment or as a freestanding Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the portation and Infrastructure and all amendment. amendment in the nature of a substitute committee members for their hard The major controversy in the com- made in order as original text. The previous work on this important legislation. mittee reported bill has been resolved question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final The maintenance and improvement in an amendment which will be self-ex- passage without intervening motion except of water resource infrastructure is ecuted into the text of the bill by vir- one motion to recommit with or without in- vital to the residents in my own dis- tue of adoption of the rule. The rule structions. trict and to the people and economy of self-executes an amendment which re- the entire Nation as a whole. moves language that would have al- b 1030 Specifically, H.R. 1480 authorizes 95 lowed one Member to further develop- The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. new water resource projects, makes ment in his district at the expense of EMERSON). The gentleman from Wash- necessary modifications to six existing his neighbors along the Sacramento ington (Mr. HASTINGS) is recognized for projects, and authorizes the U.S. Army and American Rivers. I would like to 1 hour. Corps of Engineers to conduct 26 stud- commend the gentleman from New Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. ies on a variety of water resource York (Mr. BOEHLERT) and the gentle- Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate issues. The bill authorizes $1.9 billion woman from California (Mrs. only, I yield the customary 30 minutes for these development projects, which TAUSCHER) for their willingness to to the distinguished gentleman from are funded on a cost-share basis with work out an agreement on this thorny Texas (Mr. FROST), pending which I non-Federal partners. These projects issue. yield myself such time as I may con- are being authorized only after detailed In spite of this compromise, the bill sume. During consideration of this res- feasibility studies conducted by the does not satisfactorily resolve the issue olution, all time yielded is for the pur- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and by a of flood control for the city of Sac- pose of debate only. careful review of the Committee on ramento, California. Flood control has (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked Transportation and Infrastructure. been and remains a serious and poten- and was given permission to revise and H.R. 1480 also addresses the concerns tially deadly issue for Sacramento. extend his remarks.) of those who believe that past water re- Quite frankly, the flood protection pro- Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. source projects have had unintended vided in the bill is inadequate, but an Madam Speaker, H.R. 154 is a struc- impacts on the environment. In par- amendment to be offered by the gen- tured rule providing 1 hour of general ticular, the bill establishes a pilot pro- tleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) debate to be equally divided and con- gram to explore the feasibility of nat- seeks to improve those flood protection trolled between the chairman and ural flood control methods, and it provisions and deserves the support of ranking minority member of the Com- makes it easier for nonprofit organiza- the House. mittee on Transportation and Infra- tions to participate in U.S. Army Corps Madam Speaker, I would like to structure. The rule makes in order the of Engineers environmental programs. point out that there are many provi- Committee on Transportation and In- Madam Speaker, passage of the sions in this legislation that are frastructure amendment in the nature Water Resources Development Act of strongly supported by communities of a substitute as an original bill for 1999 will allow needed maintenance and across the country. In particular, the the purposes of amendment, modified improvements to our Nation’s naviga- committee has responded to the re- by the amendments printed in part 1 of tion, irrigation, flood control and quest of a community in my congres- the report of the Committee on Rules power generation infrastructure to sional district to alter the original accompanying this resolution. move forward. I therefore encourage flood control plans of the Corps of En- The rule waives points of order my colleagues to support H. Res. 154, gineers. against consideration of the amend- which I believe is a fair rule, and to The city of Arlington, Texas, had re- ment in the nature of a substitute and support the underlying legislation. quested that the committee include a makes in order only those amendments Madam Speaker, I reserve the bal- locally preferred plan for flood control printed in part 2 of the Committee on ance of my time. for Johnson Creek, a tributary of the Rules report accompanying the resolu- Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield Trinity River which flows through the tion. myself such time as I may consume. cities of Arlington and Grand Prairie, Furthermore, the rule provides that Madam Speaker, I am supporting this in lieu of the original Corps plan. amendments made in order may be of- rule, in spite of the fact that the rule This locally preferred plan, which fered only in the order printed in the is not open and it does limit amend- will have a total cost of $20 million and report, may be offered only by the ments to those printed in the report of a Federal share of $12 million, would Member designated in the report, shall the Committee on Rules. While I am allow the city of Arlington to include be considered as read, be debatable for perfectly aware that every amendment recreational facilities and environ- the time specified in the report, equal- submitted to the Committee on Rules mental restoration along Johnson ly divided and controlled by an oppo- was made in order, the committee’s Creek, which will benefit the residents nent and proponent, shall not be sub- ranking member, the gentleman from of that city on an ongoing basis, while ject to amendment, and shall not be Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) did point assuring that adequate flood control subject to demand for a division of the out at the Committee on Rules hearing will protect life and property in the question in the House or in the Com- last night that water resources bills surrounding area. I am particularly mittee of the Whole. are nearly always considered under pleased that this amendment to the H2478 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 plan and the funding for it have been Madam Speaker, many of our col- vironment, I am proud to report that included in H.R. 1480. leagues on our side of the aisle in com- we have labored long and hard in a bi- Madam Speaker, I know that the mittee and other Members have ex- partisan manner to craft this bill. Es- gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chair- pressed surprise that we bring a water sentially, we are going forward with man SHUSTER) and the gentleman from resources bill to the floor, any bill unfinished business. We should have Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) are eager to from our committee, to the floor under concluded it at the end of the last Con- move their legislation, especially now what amounts to a modified closed rule gress, but we were not able to do so be- that the controversy on the Sac- and to a very unusual self-executing cause of a serious controversy about ramento and American Rivers has been provision in the rule that deals with one region of the country. That con- resolved. However, I must again point the substantive provision of the bill. troversy has now been resolved. out that a bill like water resources My response is that not in my 36 I think that WRDA 1999 specifically really should be considered under an years’ experience on the committee deals with the California water supply open rule. have we done such a maneuver on a and Sacramento flood protection provi- Madam Speaker, that being said, I re- water resources bill. Generally this is a sions in a very responsible way. Once serve the balance of my time. matter that is brought to the floor Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. again, let me report the environmental under an open rule, as we have nothing Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to community is endorsing what we are yield such time as he may consume to to fear. But in this case there were about and so, too, are the fiscal watch- the gentleman from California (Mr. some extenuating circumstances. dogs. This water resources bill has been DREIER), the distinguished chairman of What I did was I listened, I learned, I the Committee on Rules. held up for two Congresses over one heard and I heeded. So the bill we are (Mr. DREIER asked and was given project, and, even though that one bringing forward today has earned the permission to revise and extend his re- issue of flood control protection for the support of a broad coalition of Repub- marks.) city of Sacramento and water distribu- licans and Democrats alike. We are Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I rise tion for potential upstream users has about the Nation’s business. We are in strong support of this rule, and I not yet been satisfactorily resolved, it committed to dealing with infrastruc- congratulate my friends on both sides has at least been deferred to another ture, and in this bill we are dealing of the aisle for their management of it. time. That is the purpose of the self- with infrastructure in a very respon- I would like to especially congratulate executing provision in the rule. sible way in the best interests of the my friend the gentleman from New The bill deals with all the rest of entire Nation. York (Mr. BOEHLERT) for the role that what is needed in the rest of this coun- Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield he has played in helping to fashion a try. Indeed, as the previous speaker 2 minutes to the gentleman from Penn- compromise here. I would like to also said, a good deal of this bill benefits sylvania (Mr. BORSKI). congratulate the gentleman from the rest of the State of California out- Mr. BORSKI. Madam Speaker, I want Pennsylvania (Chairman SHUSTER) and side of Sacramento. to just follow up with my distinguished the others who have worked on this So, reluctant as I would be to support colleague and chairman of our sub- measure, and, of course, the many Cali- this type of procedure for our com- committee, the gentleman from New fornians who have played a role in get- mittee, in this case, this exceptional York (Mr. BOEHLERT) and explain just ting to where we are. case, it is a means to get through the These projects are particularly im- briefly, if I may, that in the sub- problem that has held up all the rest of committee we had a very partisan di- portant to western States, the 23 that the country and deal substantively have been authorized in this package vide on this issue; and as a matter of with the needs of other Members, and fact, in the full committee in reporting that we are going to be considering. My put off to another time the appropriate State of California is very, very key, as the bill, there was still a very partisan protection for the city of Sacramento. struggle, if you will. I mentioned, because access to safe, us- So, Madam Speaker, I support the I am reminded somewhat of the old able water is obviously very, very crit- rule, with those caveats. Mark Twain quote that ‘‘whiskey is for ical to our State’s survival. Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. drinking and water is for fighting.’’ We This bill addresses past environ- Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to fought a little bit in the subcommittee, mental concerns that water resources the distinguished gentleman from New projects have had unintended impacts and I particularly want to commend York (Mr. BOEHLERT), the chairman of on the environment. For example, the the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. the subcommittee dealing with this bill establishes a pilot program to ex- TAUSCHER) for her efforts in sub- issue. plore the feasibility of natural flood committee and full committee to bring Mr. BOEHLERT. Madam Speaker, I control methods, and, in addition to this to light. thank my colleague for yielding me that, the bill makes it easier for non- This rule, with the self-enacting rule time. profit organizations to participate in will, in effect, do what the gentle- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers environ- Madam Speaker, I want to rise in strong support of the rule. The chair- woman from California (Mrs. mental programs. AUSCHER) wanted to do in committee. man and the committee and the Com- T The rule also ensures that no provi- I want to commend our distinguished mittee on Rules have crafted a rule sions in the bill will interfere with chairman, because again, he had sug- that provides for the fair consideration California State water rights, which gested to us in the strongest terms pos- of the Water Resources and Develop- are balanced with great care by State sible that he would continue to work ment Act of 1999 and a rule that re- laws that we have today. In particular, with us to improve the bill. He has solves the primary fiscal and environ- members of my delegation with com- done so, and I support the rule. munities wrestling with major water mental concerns that were raised about Mr. GOSS. Madam Speaker, I encourage issues will be given the time that they this legislation. my colleagues to support this rule. It is a fair need to work on compromise language b 1045 that will be fair to everyone and ad- rule that makes in order every amendment dress the concerns that are there. Specifically, the rule includes an that was offered, ensuring an open debate. So I urge strong support of the rule. amendment that I offered at the Com- Let me begin by commending the transpor- I congratulate my friends on both sides mittee on Rules yesterday that strips tation committee for resolving the issues that of the aisle for having fashioned this all water supply language that was op- held this much needed legislation up over the compromise, and look forward to pas- posed by the environmental commu- last year. It is a critically important bill for my sage of both the rule and the bill itself. nity and the fiscal watchdog organiza- home state of Florida and the rest of the coun- Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield tions like Taxpayers for Common try. I am pleased to see that Congress, as evi- 2 minutes to the gentleman from Min- Sense. In fact, the leading environ- denced by the funding levels in this bill, has nesota (Mr. OBERSTAR). mental and taxpayer groups have en- once again turned back the Clinton-Gore ad- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I dorsed my amendment. ministration's assault on beach renourishment thank the gentleman for yielding me As the chairman of the Sub- projects. These vital projects serve the same time. committee on Water Resources and En- function as other flood control projects: they April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2479 save lives and limit damage to property. I sim- special thanks to the gentleman from diligent and deserves credit for the ply cannot understand the Clinton-Gore ad- Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR), the ranking work product that we bring to the ministration's continued neglect of these im- member of the full committee; the gen- House today with great pride. portant projects. It is irresponsible and it's past tleman from New York (Mr. BOEH- And now, Madam Chairman, I yield time they got the message. LERT), the chairman of the sub- such time as he may consume to the I am particularly grateful for the committee's committee; and the gentleman from gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. attention to southwest Florida and the captiva Pennsylvania (Mr. BORSKI), the rank- BORSKI), the ranking Democrat on the project. In addition, I would point out that this ing member of the subcommittee. Subcommittee on Water Resources. bill will help us continue moving forward on This legislation is unfinished busi- Mr. BORSKI. Madam Chairman, let the Everglades restoration program. The bill ness that should be enacted as soon as me thank the distinguished ranking extends the authorization period for the Ever- possible. The 105th Congress failed to member for yielding me this time and glades ``critical projects'' so they can be fund- enact the Water Resources Develop- for his outstanding leadership on all ed and completed as planned. Once again, ment Act, largely because of a conten- issues, but particularly on this water Congress has reaffirmed its commitment to tious flood control issue in California. resources issue that is before us today. the Everglades restoration program and is The bill we bring to the floor today, I also want to congratulate and com- meeting its obligations to help restore this na- however, ends the impasse. It rep- mend the gentleman from Pennsyl- vania (Mr. SHUSTER), my friend, the tional treasure. resents a fair and balanced compromise In conclusion, Madam Speaker, this is a fair on all fronts. distinguished chairman, and the gen- tleman from New York (Mr. BOEH- rule and a good bill. I encourage my col- Madam Chairman, this legislation LERT), my good friend and the sub- leagues to support both. accomplishes three important objec- Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I have tives. First, it reflects the committee’s committee chairman, for, as always, no further requests for time, and I continuing commitment to improving listening to the members of the minor- yield back the balance of my time. the Nation’s water infrastructure and ity, working with us in a fair and bi- Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. keeping to a regular schedule for au- partisan manner. The bill before us Madam Speaker, I yield back the bal- thorizations. today is one which we all can support. Madam Chairman, the committee on ance of my time, and I move the pre- Second, it responds to policy initia- Transportation and Infrastructure vious question on the resolution. tives to modernize the Corps of Engi- strongly supports biennial legislation The previous question was ordered. neers’ activities and to achieve pro- for the Corps’ water resources program The resolution was agreed to. grammatic reforms. because it provides stability to Corps A motion to reconsider was laid on Third, and this is very important, it programs, certainly to local project the table. takes advantage of the Corps’ capabili- sponsors, and timely response to The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. ties and recognizes evolving national changing circumstances. priorities by expanding and creating HASTINGS of Washington). Pursuant to The bill before us today authorizes House Resolution 154 and rule XVIII, new authorities for protecting and en- major flood control navigation, shore the Chair declares the House in the hancing the environment. protection, and other water resource Now, is this bill 100 percent perfect, Committee of the Whole House on the development projects. These projects free of controversy? I am sure it is not. State of the Union for the consider- have gone through the traditional re- ation of the bill, H.R. 1480. We have heard concerns about a few view and evaluation process of the provisions, and intend to address those b 1048 Corps and have received favorable re- as the bill progresses. There are also ports from the Chief of Engineers. An- IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE some differences between this legisla- other 16 projects will be authorized to Accordingly, the House resolved tion and the Senate counterpart that proceed to construction if their Chief’s itself into the Committee of the Whole must be resolved. In many cases, peo- reports are complete by September 30, House on the State of the Union for the ple are not getting everything they 1999. consideration of the bill (H.R. 1480) to want here, so many are not totally This bill also establishes a new flood provide for the conservation and devel- pleased, but it is a balanced com- mitigation and riverine restoration opment of water and related resources, promise and one that we think deserves pilot program that is modeled after the to authorize the United States Army support. administration’s proposed Challenge 21 Corps of Engineers to construct various Madam Chairman, as we move for- program. It takes a broader approach projects for improvements to rivers ward with this important legislation, I to address the issues of flood protec- and harbors of the United States, and intend to work with all parties to en- tion, especially by using nonstructural for other purposes, with Mrs. EMERSON sure that the final product reflects a measures and environmental restora- in the chair. balance of all interests. I also want to tion in a coherent manner. I see a great The Clerk read the title of the bill. assure my colleagues that we do intend deal of value in this approach and ex- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the to move another water resources bill pect overall savings as well as enhance- rule, the bill is considered as having that will really be the vehicle to ad- ment of the environment. been read the first time. dress new items and requests that have The bill also addresses current poli- Under the rule, the gentleman from arisen and are likely to arise in the cies concerning shore protection and Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER) and the coming months, and we intend indeed cost share of deep-draft harbors. With gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. to move that legislation early in the regard to shore protection and beach BORSKI), each will control 30 minutes. next session. nourishment, I hope the provisions in The Chair recognizes the gentleman This legislation is a strong bipartisan this bill will bring the administration’s from Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER). bill that reflects balance in every sense policy more in line with congressional Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I of the word, and a responsible approach intent. The proposed change to harbor yield myself such time as I may con- to developing water infrastructure, cost sharing is intended to proactively sume. H.R. 1480, the Water Resources preserving and enhancing the Federal, deal with potentially deeper draft re- Development Act of 1999, is a com- State and local partnerships. quirements of new generations of prehensive authorization of the water Madam Chairman, I strongly urge my oceangoing vessels. resources programs of the Army Corps colleagues to support this legislation. Madam Chairman, we all know that of Engineers. It represents two-and-a- Madam Chairman, I reserve the bal- our failure to enact the bill last year half years of bipartisan effort to pre- ance of my time. during its normal cycle was due en- serve and develop the water infrastruc- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, tirely to one issue: providing adequate ture that is so vital to our Nation’s before yielding, I would like to take flood protection for Sacramento, Cali- safety and economic well-being. this opportunity to commend the gen- fornia. The bill, as reported by the First, let me thank and congratulate tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. BOR- committee, attempted to address this my colleagues on the Committee on SKI) for his splendid work over several issue but further complicated the de- Transportation and Infrastructure for years of trying to shape this bill and bate by adding numerous provisions re- their tireless efforts. I want to give bring it to this point. He has been most lating to water supply. I am pleased H2480 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 that the adoption of the rule removed ment decontamination program. It en- West or the development of non- the offending water supply provisions courages beneficial reuse of dredge ma- structural flood control measures in from the bill. Any Federal involvement terial. The list goes on and on. the East, or the establishment of in a reallocation of water rights ad- Madam Chairman, I include the en- aquatic restoration projects in the versely affects the traditional State tire list at this point in the RECORD. South, WRDA 1999 provides critical re- prerogative jealously guarded by the ENVIRONMENTAL HIGHLIGHTS OF H.R. 1480, THE sources for the enhancement of our en- States and, in particular, by Western WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999 vironment. In recent years we have States. I do not believe the Federal A. PROGRAMMATIC AND POLICY CHANGES seen a gradual greening of the Corps of Government should get involved in Authorizes a $100 million pilot program for Engineers, and the legislation before us such matters. nonstructural flood control and riverine en- today continues that trend. Our com- Finally, I am concerned that the bill vironmental restoration mittee is most responsible for that does not provide the adequate flood Advances environmentally sensitive flood- greening of the Corps. protection that Sacramento needs. I plain management measures (including those The Corps’ traditional functions, support a level of flood protection for involving nonstructural features such as flood control and navigation, are also buyouts and relocations) Sacramento closer to 200 years, not to Continues Corps’ efforts to coordinate with continued in WRDA 1999. Dredging of 117 in the current bill. That level would FEMA’s hazard mitigation program our great harbors and navigation allow the issue to be disposed of once Authorizes aquatic ecosystem restoration routes is a central component of this and for all. Future WRDAs would not projects and makes programmatic changes legislation. Moving bulk commodities be held hostage by similar disagree- to encourage new local sponsors such as grain and coal by water is es- ments as occurred last year. Reauthorizes sediment decontamination sential to our growing economy. Madam Chairman, but for the issue program and authorizes the development and b 1100 of flood protection for Sacramento, testing of innovative dredging technologies to minimize release of contaminants and im- H.R. 1480 is a good bill and is worthy of WRDA 1999 provides increased protec- prove water quality tion for flooding for millions of Ameri- the strong support of the House. Encourages beneficial reuse of dredged ma- Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I terial cans. Perhaps no place is a better ex- am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the Promotes a ‘‘systems approach’’ to sand ample of that than the city of Sac- gentleman from New York (Mr. BOEH- management and beach nourishment ramento, the capital of California, of LERT), the chairman of our distin- Expands Corps’ efforts to control non-in- why WRDA 1999 is so critically needed. guished subcommittee. digenous invasive aquatic plant species Today the city of Sacramento has Mr. BOEHLERT. Madam Chairman, I Extends authorization for critical projects only about 77 years of flood protection. under the Everglades and South Florida eco- The legislation before us today, this thank the gentleman for yielding me system restoration program this time. Authorizes in-kind contributions to day, authorizes over $300 million for Before anything else, I just wanted to projects to enhance fish and wildlife re- projects designed to increase the flood pay tribute to the outstanding profes- sources thereby promoting additional local protection for Sacramento to nearly sionalism of the entire staff, the staff sponsorship of such projects 140 years. of the Subcommittee on Water Re- Encourages the use of innovative treat- As my colleague, the gentleman from sources and Development and the full ment technologies for watershed and envi- Pennsylvania (Mr. BORSKI), the rank- committee staff on the Committee on ronmental restoration and protection ing member of our subcommittee, has projects involving water quality stated so eloquently, and we have no Transportation and Infrastructure. Authorizes development of coastal aquatic Mike Strachn and Jeff More, Ben habitat management plans to address prob- disagreement on this, we want to pro- Grumbles, the whole team on our side lems associated with toxic micro-organisms vide the maximum level of protection and on the other side, a team of very and the resulting degradation of ecosystems for Sacramento, and we are determined able professionals. in tidal and non-tidal wetlands to do so. Not only are we investing $300 Secondly, I want to say this proves Provides for restoration of abandoned and million in this bill. No, we are expe- that we can work things out the way inactive coal mines diting studies of the possibility of ele- we should. Our Committee on Trans- B. REGIONAL PROGRAMS vating the Folsom Dam. We are expe- portation and Infrastructure I think is Reauthorizes and improves the Upper Mis- diting studies of the possibility of the envy of a lot of other committees sissippi Environmental Management Pro- doing levee work south of the dam. We on Capitol Hill, because while we have gram are looking at this in a very serious, differences, we come together in a bi- Directs a comprehensive study of the Great professional way. Lakes environment to promote effective That is what we should do, because partisan manner and we overcome planning and management those differences, and the product we Increases the acreage cap for the Missouri we want our final decisions to be made have on the floor today is as a result of River mitigation project to increase the pro- not based upon emotions, and we all that. gram’s effectiveness can get very emotional about these Before us this morning we have a Provides financial and technical assistance subjects, but based upon facts. That is water resources bill that provides bil- for management of non-indigenous species in exactly what we are going to do. lions of dollars for flood protection, the Great Lakes We have moved responsibly to dra- navigation improvements, water infra- Provides for aquatic restoration projects matically increase the flood protection on the Lower Missouri River structure and the enhancement of crit- Provides for aquatic resources restoration for the capital of California, and I re- ical environmental resources. This leg- in the Pacific Northwest main committed to the proposition islation is critical to our Nation’s Authorizes assistance for integrated water that we can provide additional flood ports, our Nation’s cities, the millions management planning for the State of Texas protection for Sacramento in next of Americans who live along our Na- C. MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS AND PROVISIONS year’s water bill. tion’s rivers; and yes, this bill is crit- Adds 3 additional projects to the Corps’ The chairman of the full committee ical to the environment, which is a Clean Lakes Program to improve water qual- has indicated that as soon as this bill very important subject that warms my ity by reducing silt and sediment is behind us, we are going to start on heart. Authorizes 3 projects for improvement of WRDA 2000. There is a fundamental na- I would like to share with my col- the environment under the authority of sec- tional interest in moving this legisla- leagues a list of some of the environ- tion 1135 of the Water Resources Develop- tion forward in a bipartisan, expedi- mental provisions in the Water Re- ment Act of 1986 tious fashion. Authorizes 16 projects for aquatic eco- sources Development Act of 1999. It au- system restoration under the authority of WRDA 1999 is important to the lives thorizes a $100 million pilot project for section 206 of the Water Resources Develop- and livelihood of millions of Ameri- nonstructural flood control and ment Act of 1996 cans, from Sacramento to Syracuse, riverine environmental restoration. It Authorizes technical assistance for 8 wa- from Savannah to Seattle, from Ur- enhances environmentally sensitive tersheds for environmental restoration and bana to Utica. WRDA 1999 deserves our floodplain management measures. It protection. support. authorizes an aquatic ecosystem res- Madam Chairman, whether it is help- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I toration project. It reauthorizes a sedi- ing clean up abandoned mines in the am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2481 gentleman from Texas (Mr. STENHOLM), Mr. DOOLITTLE. Madam Chairman, month we will be specifically address- ranking member of the Committee on today we come to the floor with a very ing that problem as we continue over- Agriculture. important bill, the water bill. I am sight over the Cal-Fed process. Water Mr. STENHOLM. Madam Chairman, I very, very pleased to be able to support storage has to be developed. thank the gentleman for yielding time it. It contains many important projects I strongly encourage my colleagues to me. across the country that can be devel- to support this legislation. I would like to thank the gentleman oped with the passage and enactment Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I from Pennsylvania (Chairman SHU- of this legislation. am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the STER), the ranking member, the gen- I would particularly like to thank for gentleman from California (Mr. MAT- tleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBER- their work on our problem in Sac- SUI), and to also commend him for his STAR), the gentleman from Pennsyl- ramento our chairman, the gentleman diligent work on behalf of his commu- vania (Mr. BORSKI), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER), and nity and people who desperately need from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT) for our subcommittee chairman, the gen- the flood control protection. He has their action and hard work in bringing tleman from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT) been a vigilant advocate for the people this bill to the floor. and their staffs. They have been tre- he represents. I rise today to speak in favor of this mendously helpful, and it has been a Mr. MATSUI. Madam Chairman, I legislation. I do it as the ranking mem- very, very difficult problem for us to first would like to thank the gen- ber of the Committee on Agriculture, resolve. tleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) but also to make my colleagues aware I would like to thank my colleagues for his very kind remarks and all of his of a rather ironic situation. from the Sacramento region who have help over the last decade, but particu- Section 501 would mandate that the been involved with me for months of larly over the last 3 or 4 years that he Army Corps of Engineers would take intense negotiation with our staffs, the has given me, along with the gen- control of some of the projects of the gentlemen from California, Mr. POMBO, tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. BOR- USDA’s Natural Resources and Con- Mr. OSE, Mr. HERGER, and Mr. MATSUI. SKI) as the subcommittee ranking servation Service. This would be done All of us have worked hard to try and member, obviously, and thanks to the because of a $1.5 billion backlog in the come up with a solution. gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBER- USDA’s small watershed program. Ultimately that solution that we STAR) for all of the help he has given Local residents who have sponsored worked on did not materialize in the me as ranking member of the full com- these projects have lost confidence in exact way that we had desired. But the mittee as well. USDA’s ability to provide funding, and bottom line is this, Madam Chairman, I would like to turn to my colleagues they are now looking at other sources this bill today enables Sacramento to on the other side, the other side of the of funding. This situation is indicative take a giant step forward in the area of aisle. Certainly the gentleman from of the lack of resources and support flood control, achieving virtually a 1 Pennsylvania (Chairman SHUSTER) has currently being provided to agri- hundred percent increase in the level of been extremely helpful in trying to put culture. protection over what we presently together a consensus for all of us in the Funding for the NRCS’s Small Water- have. Sacramento region. I want to express shed Program is no greater today than Madam Chairman, I would be less my gratitude and thanks to him, along it was in the 1950s. In fact, the program than candid if I did not say that this is with the gentleman from New York has been virtually cut in half in the still not what we need. But the truth of (Mr. BOEHLERT), who has been tireless last 5 years. As a result, projects typi- the matter is that we will never have over the last 3 or 4 years on our behalf. cally sit on the backlog list for more what we need until, in one fashion or The staffs of both majority and minor- than a decade. another, we are able to complete the ity have been extremely helpful, as We cannot blame the sponsors. In es- construction of the Auburn Dam. It is well. I do want to express my apprecia- sence, they are shopping for the most the only solution that provides the tion. available source of funding. There sim- level of flood protection for Sac- I also want to express my apologies ply is not enough funding in the USDA ramento. Everything else ultimately to members of the subcommittee and program to live up to existing respon- falls short. certainly the Members of the entire sibilities and commitments. But this is a political process, and House of Representatives. As we know, In 1937, the United States invested 6 one that requires a certain agreement as the gentleman from Pennsylvania percent of the Federal budget in USDA between all the parties. We are moving (Mr. BORSKI) and the gentleman from conservation programs. This is in stark in the right direction, and when we New York (Mr. BOEHLERT) have said, contrast to the .16 percent included in come to issues of water and flood con- this bill had been delayed from the last the 1999 Federal budget. In 1937, Con- trol and so forth, I think if you are Congress to this Congress. It was basi- gress appropriated $440 million for fi- moving in the right direction and mak- cally because of the Sacramento prob- nancial assistance, and $23 million in ing progress, that is something that we lem, and particularly about the flood technical assistance. In 1999 dollars, have to acknowledge and encourage. control issue. that would be $5.3 billion. We are taking this step today. It is I know it was very difficult for the In 1999, the estimated appropriation something that will be, I think, a very Members of this body, but I appreciate for USDA conservation financial and significant improvement for our com- the fact that there was tolerance to me technical assistance programs is $1.2 munity. Moreover, we do not do any and my constituents. I certainly would billion. These numbers speak for them- harm, such as by passing the disastrous hope that I would never have to put my selves. I would challenge my colleagues stepped release plan which is in the colleagues in that kind of imposition to make conservation spending a pri- Senate bill, which would actually again. ority in order to meet the pressing make things worse, increase the danger I would like to, if I may, just com- needs in rural America. to life and property, and export flood ment a little bit about my problem in Again, I thank the sponsors of this control problems to those down below. Sacramento County. We have about a legislation for, in another way, dealing So I am grateful to see that. 100-year protection, now. This bill with a part of the problem for many I cannot help but acknowledge that would get us up to about 137 years pro- areas, of which this was the only avail- this process has revealed the tremen- tection, because it would modify the able opportunity that they had. dous problem we also face in our State, existing Folsom Dam in Sacramento Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I which is the shortage of water. Even in County. am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the an average year we are short of water. The problem with this, as all of us distinguished gentleman from Cali- In a drought year we are significantly know, is the fact that we still would be fornia (Mr. DOOLITTLE), a member of short of water, by about 5 million acre by far the lowest community in terms the committee. feet a year. of flood protection in this Nation. Just (Mr. DOOLITTLE asked and was We in California are going to have to to read off a few, Kansas City currently given permission to revise and extend address that problem, and in my own has 500-year protection; St. Louis, 50- his remarks.) subcommittee which I chair, next year protection; Dallas, Texas, 500- H2482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 year; New Orleans, 300 years; Topeka, Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Chairman, Kansas, 500 years; and Omaha, Ne- am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the I thank the gentleman for those kind braska, Tacoma and the quad cities all distinguished gentleman from New words, and I also want to thank him have 500-year protection. York (Mr. FORBES). and the ranking member, the gen- We now will have, with this bill, 137 (Mr. FORBES asked and was given tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. BOR- years. We wanted to get up to about 170 permission to revise and extend his re- SKI) for all their help. years, and we are, of course, afraid, be- marks.) Madam Chairman, I rise in support of cause of the rainfall in northern Cali- Mr. FORBES. Madam Chairman, I H.R. 1480, which has incorporated the fornia and the continuing uncertainty thank the distinguished chairman for Tauscher-Petri amendment to strip the of our climate, that we could fall again yielding time to me. controversial American River water in terms of hydrology studies. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong supply provisions from H.R. 1480. I ap- We have approximately 600,000 people support of the Water Resources Devel- preciate the work of the gentleman at risk. We have over six major re- opment Act of 1999, H.R. 1480. This is from Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER) and gional hospitals. We have 100 public critically needed legislation, and I the gentleman from New York (Mr. schools. All of these are at risk with want to thank the chairman of the full BOEHLERT) and the gentleman from respect to Sacramento County. This committee, the gentleman from Penn- California (Mr. DREIER) to self-execute bill will go a long way, obviously, in sylvania (Mr. SHUSTER) for his leader- this important amendment as part of making sure that we are given some ship, and of course, my friend, the gen- the rule. additional level of protection, but we tleman from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT) As my colleagues know, H.R. 1480 tra- need more. I think my colleagues on for really shepherding this bill, this ditionally funds flood control and port both sides of the aisle know this, and much-needed bill, through the com- and harbor maintenance projects. This would want to help us. mittee and bringing it to the floor, un- year, however, over $287 million in mu- I would hope that as we proceed derstanding that it had to go through nicipal water supply projects were in- along over the next few weeks and per- some tenuous minefields getting fiscal cluded in the bill at the last minute haps months that we not confuse this watchdogs, environmental watchdogs which were wrong for the American issue. Sacramento County needs flood to agree to this much-needed legisla- taxpayer, wrong for the environment protection, and one of the real con- tion. and wrong for the development of long- I might remind my colleagues that cerns that I have is that we have been term water policy in my State of Cali- the ritual here in Congress has been tied into the whole issue of water sup- fornia. Over the past 2 weeks I have ply. that this program, this important pro- worked hard with members of the Com- I agree with the gentleman from gram, has been funded generally and mittee on Transportation and Infra- California (Mr. DOOLITTLE), the pre- sufficiently by the Congress, not by the vious speaker, that Northern California administration, for years. Whether it structure and Members of the House in needs more water. We are the fastest be the current administration or pre- general to address the implications of growing region in America. We need vious administrations, they have not this water grab. The Bay-Delta in my district is the more water. But we are trying to work provided the Army Corps of Engineers, largest estuary on the West Coast and that through right now with the State- in my estimation, the kinds of support serves as the drinking water source for Federal compact. they need, and it has been Congress 22 million Californians. Moreover, it We have Bruce Babbitt from the Inte- that has come to the rescue. rior Department. Obviously, former Again this year, it is the United serves as a key component of the Governor Wilson and now Governor States House of Representatives and State’s $24 billion agricultural indus- Gray Davis are attempting through this committee that have provided this try. In California, water is a zero-sum Cal-Fed to come up with a solution, be- adequate support. For over 150 years game, and these ill-conceived projects cause there are various competing in- the Corps has done a phenomenal job of that have been stripped out would have terests in California with respect to protecting our lives and property. If had devastating effects for water for the limited supply of water. you come from a place like I do, on two out of every three Californians. In We do need to solve this problem, but Long Island, New York, you understand addition, the projects were terribly ex- it has to be done in a methodical way. the tremendous importance of the pensive. But please, I urge my colleagues not to Army Corps program. I am pleased to have been joined by tie flood protection for 600,000 people I might point out in this bill is the the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. with this issue that has been raging in Atlantic Coast Monitoring Study, PETRI), Taxpayers for Common Sense, the State of California for over 125 which is a very, very important under- Friends of the River and Friends of the years. We are not going to solve the taking that will study tides, erosion Earth, and scores of other taxpayer and issue of water supply in California as data, make future erosion predictions, environmental organizations in effec- long as it is tied to the whole issue of and try to get ahead, if you will, of tively getting that message out. Offi- flood protection, which we need imme- Mother Nature, to the extent that we cials throughout California, including diately. can do that, and provide protection for Governor Gray Davis and Attorney The issue of water supply has to be our coastlines; very, very important. General Bill Lockyer expressed ex- an issue that is going to be dealt with I again thank the committee for rec- treme apprehension with the projects from a larger perspective, from a Fed- ognizing that and bringing the other included in the bill. eral-State perspective, with all the Federal agencies together with the Once again, I want to thank the gen- water districts in California. Army Corps of Engineers to get a final tleman from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT) I am not, however, suggesting that plan in place by June 30 for the and others for urging the removal of my colleague up north of me, the gen- Moriches Inlet Island plan. those audacious provisions from H.R. tleman from California (Mr. DOO- 1480. b LITTLE) is incorrect. Placer County is 1115 At the same time, however, I must growing and it will need water in a few I thank the committee tremendously object to the concurrent removal of the years. But that issue is one we need to for this support. This is a tremendous much needed flood control for the city work together on, not in an adversarial program. It deserves the support that of Sacramento. That city currently has role on, and flood protection, unfortu- is demonstrated in this bill today, and only 85 years of flood protection, mak- nately, puts us somewhat at odds. I urge my colleagues to support it, and ing it the largest metropolitan area in So I want to express my thanks to I hope the President will sign it. the country without an adequate flood my colleagues, all of them, the gentle- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I control system. That is why I urge sup- woman from California (Mrs. yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman port for the Oberstar amendment. TAUSCHER) and all of them for all of the from California (Mrs. TAUSCHER), who Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I tolerance and help they have given my has made a very valuable contribution yield 1 minute to the gentleman from community and myself over the last to our committee in her service and New York (Mr. WALSH). few months, and I urge adoption of this has been a leader on these California Mr. WALSH. Madam Chairman, I bill. water projects for the committee. thank the chairman for his leadership April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2483 on this incredibly important bill. I water resources across the United strategies for dealing with toxic micro- would also like to thank my good States. organisms and the damage they inflict friend and neighbor, colleague, the gen- Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I on aquatic ecosystems. tleman from New York (Mr. BOEH- yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from I want to congratulate my friend and LERT), who chairs the subcommittee, Maryland (Mr. GILCHREST), the chair- colleague, the gentleman from Mary- for the hard work he has done in bring- man of one of our subcommittees. land (Mr. WAYNE GILCHREST) on his ing this bill to fruition; also to the Mr. GILCHREST. Madam Chairman, support of this provision and his dis- ranking member, the gentleman from I too want to make some comments cussions just earlier about some of the Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR). I want to about the water bill of 1999, sort of a studies he has undertaken and his sup- thank them all for this terrific bill. retroactive process. port of making sure the Chesapeake The work that they have done is re- There are a lot of good projects in Bay is what we want it to be. markable, getting it this far, given all here. As the previous speaker men- Toxic microorganisms, Madam Chair- the traps along the way. tioned, there are a number of positive man, are a serious threat. The summer The project that I am supporting has environmental provisions in here. before last, Maryland was struck by been identified by my community as There are several in particular in my the toxic microorganism pfiesteria. the number one priority project, and district. One of those provisions is to Linked to the flow of excess nutrients we could not do it without the help of correct a couple of previous mistakes and the loss of aquatic habitat in our the Committee on Transportation and by the Corps of Engineers in Chesa- waterways, toxic blooms like pfiesteria Infrastructure and the Army Corps of peake City, where a water pipe was cut seriously impact regional economies Engineers and the Environmental Pro- as a result of dredging in the C&D and threaten sensitive aquatic re- tection Agency. This is a critical bill Canal. sources. to my community, I strongly support Another provision which is under Several Federal agencies, including it, and I urge all my colleagues to sup- evaluation to be corrected is an area the EPA, NOAA, and the Centers for port this legislation. where there is a dredge disposal site by Disease Control presently are assisting Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I the Corps of Engineers that was not States impacted by these toxic algae yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from managed properly and the wells of the blooms. I have worked diligently in the past, through the appropriations proc- Oregon (Mr. DEFAZIO). community right now cannot be used Mr. DEFAZIO. Madam Chairman, I as a result of the acidic leaching from ess, to ensure that these agencies have thank the esteemed ranking member that dredge disposal site. That will be the proper resources to undertake this for yielding me time and I would like corrected. effort. Although they have responded to congratulate the chairman of the There is a small community on the quickly and made substantial progress, subcommittee and the ranking mem- ocean side called Snug Harbor. There is no single agency is tasked with taking ber, as well as the full committee going to be some effort into producing a comprehensive look at the problem chairman and ranking member on what nonstructural flood control measures. and developing a master plan. Given its expertise in water resources I consider to be an excellent Water Re- And the other provision that is in the modeling, water quality monitoring, sources Development Act piece of legis- water bill, that I am very, very pleased watershed management and restora- lation. with, is a study that has never been tion, and environmental planning, the This bill is vital in three major areas done before, not even by the Chesa- Corps of Engineers has a vital role to for my State and for many States peake Bay Program, NMFS, or Fish play in this process. Section 573 simply across the Union. It contains invest- and Wildlife. This is a study to evalu- authorizes $7 million for the Corps’ ment in appropriate projects that are ate the nutrient loads into the Chesa- participation in these efforts, and I vital to the economic infrastructure peake Bay as a result of dredging urge my colleagues to support this im- and the competitiveness of the United across the entire bay. portant initiative and the bill itself. States in the international economy. Now, the Chesapeake Bay Program, Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I In particular, we have provided for an what we have funded every single year yield 2 minutes to the delegate from authorization, should all of the envi- with millions and millions and millions Guam (Mr. UNDERWOOD). ronmental reviews be adequately com- of dollars tries to evaluate the amount Mr. UNDERWOOD. Madam Chair- pleted by the Corps of Engineers, for of nitrogen and phosphorus and other man, I thank the gentleman from Min- the Columbia River. It is vital if the pollutants that get into the bay from nesota for yielding me the time. I rise port of Portland is to compete in the all kinds of sources: from air deposi- today to support the passage of H.R. Asia Rim, that they be able to accom- tion, from agricultural runoff, from 1480 to provide for the conservation and modate the new larger class of ships. shopping plazas, from housing develop- development of water and related re- It is vital in a number of other areas. ments, from roads; all kinds of sources, sources projects, and I wish to thank The environment. Certainly we can say with one exception, and that is the nu- the committee’s leadership for moving this is probably the most important trient pollution problem from dredg- this legislation quickly, well, not piece of environmental legislation to ing. In this bill there is going to be an quickly, but successfully to the House pass this Congress. It contains money 18-month study to determine the con- floor. for a number of projects in my district: tribution of pollution nutrient over- The projects in this bill are impor- Amazon Creek; Springfield Millrace; loads from dredging. tant to the successful development of going to look at nonstructural flood And if we are going to restore the water-related projects across America. control alternatives for the Willamette Chesapeake Bay to the kind of health It helps to prepare communities to River; Skinner Butte Park environ- that is necessary for that marine eco- mitigate themselves against natural mental restoration right in the heart system to be sustained for future gen- disasters and helps redress the destruc- of the largest city of my district; and, erations, this is the kind of thing we tion of storms past. finally, it is good for salmon. It con- really need to do, and this is in this bill The projects for Guam are a prime tains a large investment in a long over- and we are very pleased with it. example of repairing damages that due Willamette River temperature con- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I were inflicted by a cumulative series of trol project that I have been working yield 2 minutes to the distinguished storms that have devastated Guam on for almost a decade here in Con- gentleman from the State of Maryland over the past decade. The most recent gress. It is a large project, $65 million, (Mr. HOYER). one, Supertyphoon Paka, was one of but it will correct problems created by Mr. HOYER. Madam Chairman, I the largest and more powerful storms the Federal Government when those thank my friend from Minnesota and that have hit Guam in recent years. It dams were constructed, which are de- the chairman of the committee, and I inflicted a lot of damage to individual stroying salmon runs in the McKenzie rise in support of this bill and, in par- homes and businesses, but, most impor- and Willamette Rivers. ticular, section 573, which authorizes $7 tant, it nearly destroyed the lifeline of All in all, this is an excellent piece of million for the Corps of Engineers to our island, which is our port facilities. legislation. It is good for the economy, work with USDA, Interior, EPA, NOAA Seaports are the direct link to an is- good for the environment, and good for and State and local agencies to develop land’s economic development activities H2484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 and without them communities and job of creating it.’’ That was Mark stubbed its toe to the tune of $250 mil- families suffer. Twain. lion developing the base for a dam Guam’s plan to build a seawall to Those two statements together pay right on the fault line of a major earth- protect our harbor, the hardening of tribute to what the Corps of Engineers quake region in the upper reaches of our piers, and the reconstruction of has done so admirably and the great the American River. two of our largest marinas will help legacy they have left for all Americans The Auburn Dam has already been our island mitigate against any future protected in floods, enhanced with rejected by the House in 1992 in a vote damages caused by natural disasters. I river navigation programs, and pro- of 273–140. And it was rejected in 1996 in might add that the development of tecting the great resource of the Great our Committee on Transportation and these harbor projects are also very im- Lakes, one fifth of all the fresh water Infrastructure in a vote of 28 ayes, 35 portant for national defense. on the face of the Earth. nays. There is no reason to believe the I wish to thank again the chairman And that is the spirit in which we vote would be any different today. of the committee, the gentleman from normally present the Water Resources So why could we not have just simply Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER); the sub- Development Act, projects throughout accommodated whatever water re- committee chairman the gentleman our Nation to promote control of source needs there may be for the from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT); as well floods, to enhance river navigation, to upper reaches of the American River, as the two ranking Members, the gen- protect our shores, to protect and re- and at the same time provide Sac- tleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) store the environment, to enhance ramento its requested 200-year flood and the gentleman from Pennsylvania navigation. protection, and have done it in this (Mr. BORSKI) for their roles in moving And that is mostly what this bill be- bill? this legislation and these projects suc- fore us does today, with one flaw. It I had an amendment in committee to cessfully to the floor. fails to give the capital of the world’s do that. I offered the amendment in Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, sixth largest economy, the City of Sac- committee to make the adjustments to may I inquire as to how much time is ramento, the flood protection it needs Folsom, to widen the outlets so the remaining on our side? and deserves. gates can discharge more water, raise The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman This deficiency comes from a dispute the level of the dam to allow more from Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) has 12 between two parts of the State of Cali- water to be discharged in advance of minutes remaining. fornia that has resulted in flood con- midwinter melt from the Sierra Ne- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I trol at Sacramento being held hostage vada Mountains, where they get as yield myself such time as I may con- for almost a decade. The amendment much as 30 feet of snow and often have sume. made in order by the self-executing midwinter rains that cause not only Madam Chairman, I would like to rule, and which is now adopted because runoff but melt, to accommodate that take this opportunity to pay tribute to the rule has been adopted, gives the runoff, accommodate in a larger basin the organization frequently mentioned City of Sacramento only 117 years of and protect Sacramento and its resi- in debate here but almost never dis- flood protection, and that is the esti- dents and facilities, and also improve cussed, the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- mate of the Corps of Engineers in their the levees at Sacramento to accommo- neers. It celebrates its 224th birthday 1997 analysis. date that increased runoff. That is significantly less than the this year. It is the Nation’s oldest, The amendment was defeated on a protection given cities of comparable largest, and most experienced govern- straight party-line vote. And now we size, the nearly 200 to 500 years protec- ment organization in the area of water come to the floor with this legislation tion for Santa Ana, Tacoma, New Orle- and related land engineering matters. that does not do what Sacramento ans, St. Louis, Dallas, Kansas City, It has provided extraordinary, com- truly deserves and, as the gentleman Omaha. Surely Sacramento deserves as petent, lifesaving, economic develop- from California (Mr. MATSUI) said, does much flood protection as those cities. ment enhancing service to this country not really provide the water resources for two and a quarter centuries. Today some 400,000 residents in Sac- ramento face an unacceptable risk of needs of the upper reaches of the Amer- Little is it known that the Corps of ican River Valley area. Engineers, among its many responsibil- flood; 160,000 residential structures are in the flood plain in the capital city, There were several arguments made ities, had jurisdiction over Yellowstone about the amendment that I offered. Park. 5,000 businesses, 1,200 government fa- cilities, with an estimated value of $37 One was that the levee strengthening b 1130 billion. The 55,000-acre flood plain in- proposed for Sacramento in my amend- The Corps managed Yellowstone for cludes seven of the nine major hos- ment would create unacceptable risks 30 years. And Lieutenant Dan Kingman pitals in the region and 130 schools. to areas downstream. But that objec- of the Corps, later to become chief of Potential losses from flood in the tion fails on closer scrutiny. engineers, wrote: City of Sacramento range from $7 bil- The Army Corps of Engineers ana- The plan of development which I have sub- lion to $16 billion depending on the size lyzed that argument and rejected it. mitted is given upon the supposition and in of the flood. Even at the lower end of The Corps specifically stated this: ‘‘Ad- the earnest hope that it will be preserved as the scale, flood losses in Sacramento ditional protection can be provided nearly as may be as the hand of nature left would be comparable to the losses ex- without adversely affecting the reaches it, a source of pleasure to all who visit and perienced in the Northridge earthquake below the mouth of the American River a source of wealth to no one. a few years ago, to date the single larg- without project conditions.’’ A fewer years later, John Muir, est disaster in U.S. history. The Corps’ plan includes several dif- founder of the Sierra Club, said: Now, I do not say these words and ferent structural and operational modi- The best service in forest protection, al- make those comments in the abstract. fications to ensure that no flood threat most the only efficient service, is that ren- I have traveled several times to Sac- is transferred to downstream interests. dered by the military. For many years, they ramento. I have bicycled along the In addition, I talked with the City of have guarded the great Yellowstone Park, flood protection walls of the American Sacramento. They have committed to and now they are guarding Yosemite. They spend $100 million to mitigate any pos- found it a desert as far as underbrush, grass River. I have traveled to Folsom Dam and flowers are concerned. But, in 2 years, and further up river to the site once sible further adverse effects down- the skin of the mountains is healthy again, planned and once development begun stream. blessings on Uncle Sam’s soldiers, as they on the Auburn Dam proposal by the Finally, my amendment specifically have done the job well, and every pine tree is Bureau of Reclamation. I understand required that measures to increase the waving its arms for joy. what is at stake here. capacity of the levees be undertaken Another great American said: ‘‘The Linking flood protection for Sac- only after downstream mitigation fea- military engineers are taking upon ramento and reallocation of water tures will have been constructed. their shoulders the job of making the through a new dam at Auburn has been So absent any objective, substantive Mississippi River over again, a job in the works for many, many years. reason for opposition to the Sac- transcended in size only by the original But the Bureau of Reclamation already ramento amendment, I am left only to April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2485 surmise that the real basis for opposi- people drowned. This tragedy could have Jack Schenendorf, our chief of staff, tion was the desire by upstream inter- been avoided if flood control officials had been is without fear, in my judgment. There ests to withhold flood protection from allowed to complete repairs on the levee when never has been a more competent chief Sacramento in hope that the Auburn the problem was first acknowledged six years of staff in the history of the Congress Dam at some future time could be re- earlier. In 1955, almost directly across the that I am aware of, in my judgment. vived or that some alternative, far river from the Arboga break, another levee I want to thank our water staff for more expensive yet unstudied water broke and this time flooded Yuba City. How- the excellent work which they have distribution plan be enacted. ever, instead of three people losing their lives done: Ben Grumbles, Jeff More, Carrie That is not the way to conduct the 37 people died. Mr. Speaker and members, Jelsma on the Republican staff, Ken water resources business of the coun- we have a natural phenomenon in California Kopocis, and Art Chan on the Demo- try. And while I am not prepared to ac- where heavy snowfall in the Sierra Nevada cratic staff. cept this legislation as it is to go for- Mountains, followed by warm rains results in I would also like to thank John An- ward with the bill on the floor, the bill an overwhelming amount of water that flows derson, the detailee of the Committee before us, I will not relent in my pur- into our Sacramento River Valley. There is no on Transportation and Infrastructure pose of providing for Sacramento the levee system in the world that can handle this from the Corps of Engineers, for his protection that it rightly deserves and kind of extreme flows. Until we build a flood fine work. to address in a rational and responsible control structure that can hold back this over- But the one person who needs to real- manner the water resources require- whelming flow of water and release it in a con- ly be singled out for his superb work on ments upstream of Sacramento in an trolled manner, our levees are set up to fail. the Sacramento River and American appropriate time frame. As California's first State Engineer, William River issues, that person is Mike We should not hold Sacramento hos- Hall, said, ``There are two types of levees, Strachn. His outstanding knowledge of tage. We will have to come back at an- those that have failed and those that will.'' water resource programs and his high other time to address this issue. And I This legislation provides $26.6 million to com- standard of professionalism were of tre- am confident that at that future time plete flood control repairs along the Yuba mendous benefit to all Members of the we will treat the lives and the property River basin, but regrettably, it won't be House as we tried to work out these of the residents of Sacramento in an enough. I hope and pray that it will not take difficult issues. His efforts were in the appropriate and responsible manner, as another great tragedy before we are allowed highest tradition of the House and cer- this committee has always done, ab- to proceed with the development of a structure tainly has set an example for all staffs. that can hold back these waters. Next time, it sent these extraneous considerations. b 1145 Mr. BOEHLERT. Madam Chairman, may not be just three or even 37 people who will the gentleman yield? drown, but rather, if a levee breaks in Sac- I want to compliment all the individ- Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gen- ramento or in my Marysville and Yuba City uals on both sides of the aisle, both tleman from New York. area, we could be talking about thousands of Members and staff, as well as the ad- Mr. BOEHLERT. As the gentleman people drowned by this type of flooding. I do, ministration, who were involved in from California (Mr. MATSUI) and the however, want to commend my colleagues, bringing us to this point today to be endless flow of visitors from Sac- Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. POMBO and able to bring this very important na- ramento can attest, this Chair of this Mr. OSE for their hard work in reaching this tional bipartisan legislation to the subcommittee is determined to work historic compromise for further flood protection floor. I urge its passage. cooperatively to provide the maximum in our northern California area in a responsible Mrs. FOWLER. Madam Chairman, today, I level of protection for Sacramento. manner. I therefore urge my colleagues to rise in strong support of the Water Resources That is a commitment. support this legislation and vote in favor of the Development Act of 1999. Secondly, let me point out, we are 1999 Water Resources Development Act. This bill authorizes vital projects for our na- nearly doubling the level of protection Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I tion's coast line and the shoreline of our rivers in this bill, as the gentleman from yield myself such time as I may con- and tributaries, for dredging in our nation's California (Mr. MATSUI) himself has in- sume. harbors, and for flood control throughout our dicated, from 77 to 137 years, and we I wish to emphasize, Madam Chair- States. are studying the feasibility and prac- man, that with the passage of this leg- My district includes over 100 miles of coast- ticability and affordability of addi- islation today, it will represent the line, several ports and navigation channels. It tional measures. So we will continue to 21st piece of legislation that the Com- is easy to understand how important this bill is work together to protect Sacramento. mittee on Transportation and Infra- to my district. Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I structure of the House has brought to The corps projects authorized in this bill will look forward to that happy outcome. the floor and has seen passed. protect and create avenues of commerce and Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I In addition, thus far, six of our bills transportation. Improvements to our harbors am pleased to yield such time as he of the 21 pieces of legislation that have are necessary to open up access to our ports may consume to the gentleman from come to the floor have been signed into and enhance international trade. It is impera- law, representing 25 percent of the pub- California (Mr. HERGER). tive to continue projects that preserve property lic laws which have been signed into (Mr. HERGER asked and was given and protect our beaches. Shore protection law thus far this year. permission to revise and extend his re- So the Committee on Transportation projects are particularly important to Florida marks.) and Infrastructure is moving vigor- and I applaud the committee's work in under- Mr. HERGER. Madam Chairman, I would ously to bring important legislation to standing the need for preserving our beach- like to thank Chairman SHUSTER, Speaker the floor. And I certainly want to com- esÐsomething that the administration has HASTERT, and the other members of the lead- pliment, on a bipartisan basis, the failed to do. ership for their invaluable assistance in reach- leadership on the other side of the aisle This bill protects and maintains our vast and ing a final compromise for our California area as well as my colleagues on our com- crucial water resources not just in my district flood control. The compromise that is included mittee who have made this possible. but, across the country. in this bill is a win for those of us who have I want to particularly, in addition, I encourage my colleagues to join me in sought sincere dialogue and consensus in recognize Dr. Joe Westphal, the Assist- supporting this important legislation. California flood control issues. More impor- ant Secretary of the Army, for the val- Mr. EVERETT. Madam Chairman, I rise in tantly, however, this legislation is also a partial uable steps that he set in motion last strong support of the Water Resources Devel- win for northern California. I can testify from fall so that we could proceed; the water opment Act (H.R. 1480). This long overdue personal experience that California has a very experts in the Corps of Engineers, espe- legislation authorizes important civil works real need for increased flood protection. For cially Mr. Bob Childs in the Corps’ Sac- projects of the Army Corps of Engineers to ad- example, just two years ago the district I rep- ramento office, who has certainly made dress critical water resource and management resent in norhtern California suffered a horren- a major contribution; and to Mr. Dave issues facing the Nation. This $4.2 billion na- dous tragedy as a result of an inadequate Mendelsohn and Curt Haensel in our tional investment in flood control, navigation, flood control system. On January 2nd, 1997, a Legislative Counsel’s Office for their and water quality initiatives goes a long way in levee in my district near the community of expertise, patience, and undying ef- meeting the water resource needs in virtually Arboga suddenly broke, and as a result, three forts. every part of the country. H2486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 In Alabama, we are blessed with many river reduction in Des Plaines River flood damages River ship channel from 40 to 45 feet. I had systems that contribute significant environ- can be expected when the authorized con- prepared a number of amendments to address mental, commercial, and recreational benefits struction work is complete, the benefits of some of these concerns, but I have agreed to to the State and southeastern region. The Ala- which are anticipated to exceed the costs by withhold them with the assurance from the bama/Coosa/Tallapoosa and the a ratio of 1.7 to 1. Furthermore, the ground- chairman that we will address these concerns Appalachicola/Chattahoochee/Flint river sys- work will have been laid for the implementa- by working together as the process moves for- tems both flow through my district and are im- tion of additional flood prevention and/or re- ward. It is essential that as this project moves portant navigable waterways that, in addition duction measures. forward, it does so in an environmentally and to enhancing the environment, help drive the In short, these efforts to mitigate, if not economically sound manner. economy. This legislation continues to provide eliminate, flood damages along the Des First, let met state that I am concerned with the Corps of Engineers with the necessary Plaines are a win-win proposition. Thousands the environmental consequences that the funds to continue the operation and mainte- of people in the northern Chicago suburbs will project may have on the State of Delaware. I nance of these systems. profit because they will not suffer the same, or have heard from many of my constituents and Of particular note in my own district in as severe, disruptions as they have in the past there remains many unanswered questions southeast Alabama, flooding has been a prob- and millions of taxpayers will benefit because that the Army Corps of Engineers has yet to lem. In the past decade, Coffee and Geneva they are less likely to be asked to repair the address to Delaware's satisfaction. counties have been subjected to three major damages that future flooding episodes would I am concerned with the authority clarified in floods that forced the evacuation of the towns otherwise cause. Moreover, the same can be this bill to allow the local sponsorÐthe Dela- of Elba and Geneva. The flooding resulted said for a number of the other projects in the ware River Port AuthorityÐto operate a rev- from heavy tropical storms and hurricanes, bill, one reason being that, much to its credit, enue generating dredge spoil disposal oper- which are seasonal occurrences, and caused the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers takes very ation that is designed to import dredge these old and outdated levees to fail. I am seriously its obligation to determine that water- spoilsÐthat could be contaminatedÐand pleased that this legislation includes funds to resource projects under its jurisdiction have a dump them at sites along the Delaware River. rebuild both of these two levees to modern favorable benefit-to-cost ratio. Also, it should The Army Corps of Engineers requires a per- standards. Section 520 authorizes $12.9 mil- be noted that H.R. 1480 contains a number of mit for this disposal with checks and balances lion to repair and rehabilitate the Elba levee provisions aimed at making future flood control to prevent environmentally unsafe disposal of and section 521 authorizes $16.6 million to re- and water resource projects as environ- the dredge spoils. Even so, it would be a great pair and rehabilitate the Geneva levee. mentally friendly as possible. comfort to me to know that the Delaware De- It's important that we move this overdue au- To sum up, what we have before us today partment of Natural Resources and Environ- thorization forward, so I encourage the adop- is a long-awaited bill which authorizes projects mental Control (DNREC) has approved the tion of this measure in order to go to con- that promise substantial and cost-effective re- details because there are many different ways ference with the Senate to arrive at a final re- turns on the financial investment being made to dispose of dredge spoils, each with a dif- authorization bill for these water resource in them. With that thought very much in mind, ferent degree of environmental protection. The projects. let me reiterate my thanks to our Transpor- method chosen needs to meet Delaware's Mr. CRANE. Madam Chairman, I just want- tation and Infrastructure colleagues for bring- standards because Delawareans living near ed to take this opportunity to commend and ing this WRDA99 bill before us today and let these sites are the most at risk. thank the members of the Transportation and me urge my colleagues in the House to give Furthermore, I want to make absolutely cer- Infrastructure Committee, and its Sub- H.R. 1480 their full support. It deserves no tain that the Coastal Zone Management con- committee on Water Resources and Environ- less. sistency provisions apply to Federal activities ment, for the good work they have done in as- Mr. VENTO. Madam Chairman, I would like relating to the Delaware River channel deep- sembling this year's version of the Water Re- to express my thanks and appreciation to the ening project. DNREC has given its approval sources Development Act (WRDA). As re- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee conditioned upon a list of requirements being ported, H.R. 1480 authorizes numerous flood Chairman BUD SHUSTER and Ranking Member met, however this conditional approval is not control, navigational improvement, beach res- JIM OBERSTAR, and Water Resources and En- final approval as some have suggested in toration and ecosystem enhancement projects vironment Subcommittee Chairman SHER- public meetings. The Army Corps of Engineers that will be of significant benefit to millions of WOOD BOEHLERT and Ranking Member ROB- has given me assurances that they are fully Americans. ERT BORSKI for their hard work and tireless ef- aware they must meet the growing list of re- Let me cite one example with which I am fort to pass this long overdue and much need- quirements before consistency approval from particularly familiar. Thirteen years ago, the ed legislation. I would also like to thank rank- Delaware is effective. Des Plaines River, which flows through my ing member and friend JIM OBERSTAR for his Third, while this project has been authorized congressional district in northeastern Illinois, special effort in providing the authorization since 1992, last week, just prior to committee went on a rampage, flooding over 10,000 needed to implement an important educational consideration of this bill, section 347 was in- homes and businesses, forcing 15,000 people tool for the residents of Minnesota, the Mis- cluded in this bill to relocate a portion of the to flee to drier ground, and causing at least sissippi Place. The Mississippi Place would channel along the Camden area. It is my un- $35 million in damages. A year later, there bring together the Army Corps of Engineers, derstanding that this portion has been relo- was another major flood along the Des the U.S. Geological Survey, the Environmental cated to deeper water that will not require any Plaines and several times since the waters of Protection Agency and NASA to offer the na- dredging or disruption of the existing soils. In that river have spilled over their banks. Just tion an opportunity to develop a more com- fact, this shift in the channel will make the this past week, in fact, residents in the area plete understanding of the unique resource project less expensive for the taxpayer be- were reminded of the threat posed by the Des which the Upper Mississippi River System rep- cause the Army Corps of Engineers will not Plaines, when a pair of rainstorms caused the resents. Located on the banks of the Mis- have to dredge there. This is an encouraging river to crest 1.4 feet above flood stage in sissippi River in downtown St. Paul, Mis- development, but there should be more public Gurnee, IL. sissippi Place will provide these Federal enti- notice for stakeholders and efforts made to in- Much to my relief, and not just to mine ties an opportunity to partner with State, local, form the congressional delegations involved alone, sections 101 and 408 of H.R. 1480 ad- and educational institutions in providing the about changes to the project as originally au- dress this flood threat by authorizing (subject public with real time learning opportunities on thorized. to the timely completion of the final Corps of important issues affecting the river. In addition, Madam Chairman, I also have concerns Engineers report) the construction of the first the Corps and the USGS will operate Mis- about the economic risks of this project to the phase of the Des Plaines River Flood Control sissippi River monitoring stations at Mis- American taxpayer. According to the Army Project and an expanded study of the options sissippi Place for practical research purposes Corps of Engineers benefit-cost analysis, over for Phase II. Assuming their wording remains while still being accessible to the public. Once 80 percent of the benefits have been attrib- unchanged and H.R. 1480 is enacted into law, again, I would like to thank my colleagues for uted to six oil facilities along the river channel. those provisions will allow the Corps of Engi- their efforts in finally crafting this bipartisan However, none of the benefitting oil compa- neers to proceed expeditiously with work on legislation. nies have directly indicated outright support for three floodwater storage areas, the construc- Mr. CASTLE. Madam Chairman, I have the project. Although they are not legally re- tion of a pair of levees, the raising of an exist- some serious concerns with the potential envi- quired to commit to spending their own capital ing dam and development of additional flood ronmental and economic ramifications of the dollars to deepen their own berths to take ad- control alternatives. As a result, a 25-percent project authorized to deepen the Delaware vantage of a deeper channel, it seems prudent April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2487 for Congress or the Army Corps of Engineers they are presently written. At the Committee's veloping this bill and bringing it to the floor. to seek assurances that they will make those request, I have decided not to offer my This Member appreciates their diligence, per- expenditures before $300 million in taxpayer amendment, with the understanding that sistence, and hard work. funds are committed to building the channel. Chairman SHUSTER has pledged to work with This important legislation includes numerous In light of these financial concerns, it seems me to identify an appropriate legislative vehi- projects designed to improve flood control, particularly important that Congress reinforce cle for my proposal. navigation, and shore protection. It also pro- the intent of Congress in 1992 when the I would like to clarify that my amendment motes environmental restoration and protec- project was first authorized. Report 102±842 would not have altered or expanded the Clean tion efforts across the nation. accompanying the Water Resource Develop- Water Act, it simply urged the States to en- In particular, this Member is pleased that ment Act of 1992 states on page 12: sure that water quality should be considered the bill includes a provision he promoted Committee comments.—The Committee within the scope of all water quantity negotia- which helps to ensure that the Missouri River believes that the non-Federal cost of the tions as consistent with current Federal law. Mitigation Project can be implemented as en- channel deepening should be funded by water We need to emphasize that the citizens of visioned. In 1986, Congress authorized over transportation users, not surface transpor- $50 million (more than $79 million in today's tation users. The Committee urges the Dela- these States deserve to have not only the proper quantity of water they need, but also dollars if adjusted for inflation) to fund the Mis- ware River Port Authority to make every ef- souri River Mitigation Project to restore fish fort to ensure that the non-Federal cost of the highest quality of water. the project is borne by water transportation Mr. SHAW. Madam Chairman, I rise today and wildlife habitat that were lost due to the users. in support of the Water Resources Develop- construction of structures to implement the Pick-Sloan plan. At that time the Corps did not There has been some discussion of bridge ment Act of 1999. choose to include funding requests for imple- toll receipts being raised to help fund the non- I represent a district in South Florida with menting that Act in their budgeting process. Federal costÐ$100 million. Although report over 90 miles of coastline, and 100 miles of That is why this Member, along with other language is not binding, raising bridge tolls Intracoastal Waterway, so water projects are Members who represent the four states bor- would appear to violate the committee's intent. very important to my constituents. I commend dering the channelized Missouri River (Ne- Before the Delaware River Port Authority Chairmen SHUSTER, BOEHLERT, and all of the braska, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri), have raises bridge tolls, at a minimum it should members of the Water Resources Sub- worked to provide funding to implement the demonstrate its efforts to raise the funds from committee for their perseverance in getting Missouri River Mitigation Project which has water transportation users. this bill to the floor. We must make sure that those projects One issue of much concern to my constitu- just begun to become a reality during the last Congress chooses to finance give Americans ents is the continued participation of the fed- few years. This project is specifically needed to restore a sufficient return both on their tax dollar in- eral government to renourish beaches. De- fish and wildlife habitat lost due to the Feder- vestment and their investment of natural re- spite the Administration's decision to abandon ally sponsored channelization and stabilization sources. I look forward to continuing to ad- coastal communities across the country, for projects of the Pick-Sloan era. The islands, dress these fiscal and environmental con- three years the Committee has continued to ensure adequate funding levels for des- wetlands, and flat floodplains that are needed cerns. to support the wildlife and waterfowl that once Mr. MOORE. Madam Chairman, I rise in perately needed projects. When the Com- lived along the river are dramatically reduced. support of the managers' amendment to H.R. mittee finally decided to adjust the cost share And estimated 475,000 acres of habitat in 1480, the Water Resources Development Act formula for new construction projects, I am Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas have of 1999, and in support of the underlying legis- grateful they provided for a phased-in ap- been lost because of Federal action in cre- lation. proach over three years. This will give local I want to take this opportunity to thank pub- sponsors the chance to prepare for a reduced ating the flood control projects and channeliza- tion of the Missouri River. Today's fishery re- licly House Transportation Infrastructure Chair- federal share. I am optimistic that the change sources are estimated to be only one-fifth of man BUD SHUSTER of Pennsylvania and rank- will provide the needed motivation to the Clin- ton Administration to send a realistic budget to those which existed in pre-development days. ing Democrat JIM OBERSTAR of Minnesota for The success of the project has resulted in a the Congress next year, with sensible funding their assistance in adding to the managers' concern related to the original study that out- levels for shore protection. amendment language I requested authorizing lined habitat needs. Under this study, acreage On a related topic, I am most grateful to the a badly needed flood control project for Turkey goals for each state were listed and these Committee for including a provision in H.R. Creek Basin in Kansas City, MO, and Kansas goals are generally considered to be an acre- 1480 that will allow Broward County, Florida to City, KS. age limitation for each state. Nebraska and This language also is included in S. 507, the be reimbursed for the federal portion of their Kansas have already reached their acreage Senate companion measure to H.R. 1480, beach renourishment project in two phases. limits and Missouri is fast approaching its ceil- which passed the other body by voice vote on Although this language was not included in the ing. Before long, Iowa will also reach its acre- April 19. This project is of significant impor- Senate version, I hope the language will be in- age limit. tance to my congressional district. Turkey cluded in the final conference report. To correct this problem, H.R. 1480 author- Creek flows from its urbanized drainage basis Finally, the Committee is also to be com- izes an increase in mitigation lands authorized in Johnson County, KS, and into Kansas City, mended for their willingness to assist the Flor- to the four states to 25% of the lands lost, or MO, and the Kansas River. Severe flooding ida congressional delegation on the Ever- 118,650 acres. In addition, the Corps of Engi- has occurred along the basin, most recently in glades restoration effort. Three provisions in neersÐin conjunction with the four statesÐis 1993 and again in 1998. An improvement plan the bill relating to land acquisition and the ex- directed to study the amount of funds that has been prepared in partnership with the tension of critical projects authority will ensure would need to be authorized to achieve that U.S. Corps of Engineers. This project will pro- the program moves forward unimpeded. acreage goal. vide vitally needed protection for commercial Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to This Member is also pleased that H.R. 1480 and industrial areas in both cities. I hope that vote for this bill. also includes a provision which provides for Congress also will approve later this year an Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Chairman, this the completion of the Wood River Flood Con- appropriation I am seeking to complete design Member rises in support of H.R. 1480, the trol Project. When completed, this important work on this project. Water Resources Development Act of 1999. project in Nebraska's Third Congressional Dis- Once again, Madam Chairman, I commend This Member would like to begin by com- trict will provide protection for an estimated the bipartisan leadership of the Transportation mending the distinguished gentleman from 1,755 home and business structures in south- and Infrastructure Committee for bringing this Pennsylvania [Mr. SHUSTER], the Chairman of ern Grand Island, Nebraska. It is also ex- important legislation to the House floor and my the Transportation and Infrastructure Com- pected to protect more than 5,000 acres of irri- constituents and I very much appreciate their mittee, the distinguished gentleman from Min- gated farmland and 7,000 to 8,000 acres of timely responsiveness to this request. nesota [Mr. OBERSTAR], the ranking member of grassland. Mr. RILEY. Madam Chairman, I had the Transportation Committee, the distin- Madam Chairman, this Member urges his planned to offer an amendment today that guished gentleman from New York [Mr. BOEH- colleagues to support H.R. 1480, the Water would have expressed the Sense of Congress LERT], the Chairman of the Water Resources Resources Development Act of 1999. that any water agreement entered into be- and Environment Subcommittee, and the dis- Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Madam tween the States of Alabama, Georgia, and tinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of Florida should comply with existing Federal BORSKI], the ranking member of the Sub- H.S. 1480, the ``Water Resources Develop- environmental water quality protection laws as committee, for their extraordinary work in de- ment Act.'' H2488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 The bill authorizes $4.2 billion for projects pollution in the Chicago Metropolitan Area. The EMP is vital to the environmental and and programs of the Army Corps of Engineers The Thornton Reservoir is a crucial compo- economic well being of the Mississippi River, civil works program. nent of the TARP project. Once completed, and it enjoys strong bipartisan support It responds to pressing water infrastructure the Thornton Reservoir will provide 5 billion throughout the upper Mississippi region. priorities, policy initiatives to update existing gallons of floodwater storage. The reservoir Navigation along the upper Mississippi River water resources programs,and opportunities to will have a service area of 91 square miles supports 400,000 full and part-time jobs, which restore, protect, and enhance the aquatic envi- and will provide flood relief to 131,000 dwell- produces over $4 billion in individual income. ronment. ings in 18 communities. Recreation use totals 12 million visitors each Specifically, H.R. 1480 authorizes 95 new The continuation of the TARP project and year and 1.2 billion in direct and indirect ex- water resources projects, modifies 66 existing the Thornton Reservoir is important to 500,000 penditures annually. Communities along the authorized projects, and authorizes the Corps. families in Chicago's South Suburbs. I urge river from St. Paul, Minnesota to St. Louis, to conduct 26 studies to address a variety of my colleagues to support H.R. 1480. Missouri are striving to enhance the river. The water resources problems and opportunities. Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Madam Chair- EMP helps to rehabilitate the natural areas up The bill, Madam Chairman, is extremely im- man, I'm excited to rise in strong support for and down the river. portant to my district, especially to the Chino the Water Resources Development Act today. I urge the Members to support WRDA and Dairy Preserve in California. Three words can sum up my thoughtsÐfinally, the Environmental Management Program, and The bill calls upon the Secretary of the finally, finally! I thank the chairman for the time. Mr. HILLEARY. Madam Chairman, I want to Army, in coordination with the heads of other This Water Resources bill contains a reau- thank the distinguished Chairman of the Federal agencies, to provide technical assist- thorization for the Wood River/Warm Slough Transportation and Infrastructure Committee ance to State and local agencies in the study, flood control project in Grand Island, Ne- for his cooperation and assistance in address- design, and implementation of measures for braska. The residents of Grand Island and I ing an important concern in my district. flood damage reduction and environmental have been working on reauthorization and I appreciate that the chairman's manager's restoration and protection in the Santa Ana waiting for an opportunity to move it since amendment includes language to allow the River Watershed, with particular emphasis on 1997. Their patience has been tested, but I'm Corps of Engineers to conduct a feasibility structural and nonstructural measures in the pleased I'm going to be able to report good study on improvements to a regional water vicinity of the Chino Dairy Preserve. news today. supply for Cumberland County, Tennessee. H.R. 1480 also calls upon the Secretary to Construction of the Wood River project was Water Supply has become a critical concern conduct a feasibility study to determine the originally authorized in the 1996 Water Re- on the Cumberland Plateau. Recent growth most cost-effective plan for flood damage re- sources Development Act. Soon after the ini- and development throughout this region has duction an environmental restoration and pro- tial authorization, the Army Corps of Engineers placed extreme pressure on the six county tection in the vicinity of the Chino Dairy Pre- had to revise its cost estimates for the project. water utility districts in Cumberland County serve, Santa Ana River Watershed, Orange The revision increased the cost by more than and the City of Crossville to expand water County, and San Bernardino County, Cali- 20 percent, thus requiring congressional re- supplies. fornia. view and reauthorization. The Tennessee Department of Environment I wish to extend my deep appreciation for The project eventually will provide flood pro- and Conservation worked with the water utility the leadership shown by Chairman SHUSTER, tection for more than 1,700 structures in districts and local officials within Cumberland Ranking Member OBERSTAR, Subcommittee Grand Island and protect 5,000 acres of irri- County to form a regional water planning part- Chairman BOEHLERT and Ranking Member gated cropland. The project also will enhance nership to work together to address their mu- BORSKI in drafting this important piece of legis- wildlife habitat for many species, including the tual problem. lation. endangered Whooping Crane, and provide op- By working together in this partnership, they I ask my colleagues to vote for H.R. 1480. portunities for wetlands development. will be able to resolve water issues, avoid and Mr. WELLER. Madam Chairman, I rise This is a good project that deserves our reduce impacts to natural streams and save today in support of H.R. 1480, the Water Re- support. I wish to extend my sincere apprecia- time and taxpayers' money. sources Development Act. This important leg- tion to the Transportation Committee for expe- At the request of local and state officials, islation includes a provision that will advance ditiously moving this bill this spring. And thank the Army Corps of Engineers conducted a re- a flood control project important to thousands you very, very much for your work on behalf gional water supply study. This Preliminary of my constituents and many residents of Chi- of the residents of Grand Island, Nebraska. Engineering Report was completed earlier this cago's South Suburbs. H.R. 1480 will advance Mr. KIND. Madam Chairman, I rise today as year and provides Cumberland County resi- the construction of the Thornton Reservoir, a co-chair of the upper Mississippi River con- dents with innovative alternatives for a water which is located in my Congressional District, gressional task force, in support of the upper supply through the year 2050. This ``state of through an innovative approach allowing the Mississippi environmental management pro- the art'' model can be used as a process for Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of gram which is part of WRDA 99. other local governments to effectively plan the Greater Chicago to work with the Natural Re- The EMP is designed to evaluate, restore use of their region's water resources. sources Conservation Service to build a transi- and enhance river and wetland habitat along a The manager's amendment will help this tional reservoir for Thorn Creek. Because of 1200 mile stretch of the upper Mississippi and rapidly growing county by allowing them to this project, my constituents in the South Sub- Illinois Rivers. It is a cooperative effort among continue into the next phase of the process in urbs of Chicago will see the much needed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. solving their long-term water supply needs. benefits of flood control more than a decade Geological Service, the Army Corps of Engi- Again, I want to thank Chairman SHUSTER earlier than previously anticipated by the Army neers and the 5 upper Mississippi River basin for his assistance and urge all my colleagues Corps of Engineers. to support his amendment and the entire bill. States. Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I The innovative approach included in H.R. The EMP has always had bipartisan support yield back the balance of my time. 1480 will allow the Metropolitan Water Rec- in Congress and the five midwestern States. I, The CHAIRMAN. All time for general lamation District of Chicago to secure credit along with Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. GUTKNECHT and debate has expired. for the advance work which is critical to the Mr. LEACH co-chair the 16 member upper Mis- Pursuant to the rule, the committee development of the permanent Thornton Res- sissippi River congressional task force, which amendment in the nature of a sub- ervoir. The approach couples early protection strongly supports expansion of the EMP. stitute printed in the bill, modified by with local/federal partnering resulting in signifi- WRDA 99 authorizes funding of $33.17 mil- the amendments printed in part 1 of cant benefits to area communities. lion each year for EMP. House Report 106–120, is considered as Frequent flooding has been a constant prob- EMP was established in 1986 by my prede- an original bill for the purpose of lem in the Chicago area. This has consistently cessor Steve Gunderson. At the time EMP amendment under the 5-minute rule been the cause of disruptions in major ex- was only authorized for 15 years. This WRDA and is considered read. pressways, as well as rainwater and raw sew- bill gives EMP a permanent authorization. In The text of the committee amend- age back up into the basements of over the past EMP projects faced funding chal- ment in the nature of a substitute, as 500,000 homes. The solution comes from the lenges due to the uncertain future of the pro- modified, is as follows: Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) through an gram. With adequate funding and permanent H.R. 1480 intricate system of underground tunnels, authorization the EMP will be able to continue Be it enacted by the Senate and House of pumping stations and storage reservoirs used it's outstanding work protecting this great nat- Representatives of the United States of America to control this flooding and combined sewage ural resource. in Congress assembled, April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2489 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. Sec. 319. Ogden Dunes, Indiana. Sec. 408. Upper Des Plaines River and tribu- (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as Sec. 320. Saint Joseph River, South Bend, Indi- taries, Illinois and Wisconsin. the ‘‘Water Resources Development Act of 1999’’. ana. Sec. 409. Cameron Parish west of Calcasieu (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.— Sec. 321. White River, Indiana. River, Louisiana. Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 322. Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana. Sec. 410. Grand Isle and vicinity, Louisiana. Sec. 2. Secretary defined. Sec. 323. Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana. Sec. 411. Lake Pontchartrain seawall, Lou- Sec. 324. Louisiana State Penitentiary Levee, isiana. TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS Louisiana. Sec. 412. Westport, Massachusetts. Sec. 101. Project authorizations. Sec. 325. Twelve-mile Bayou, Caddo Parish, Sec. 413. Southwest Valley, Albuquerque, New Sec. 102. Small flood control projects. Louisiana. Mexico. Sec. 103. Small bank stabilization projects. Sec. 326. West Bank of the Mississippi River Sec. 414. Cayuga Creek, New York. Sec. 104. Small navigation projects. (East of Harvey Canal), Lou- Sec. 415. Arcola Creek Watershed, Madison, Sec. 105. Small projects for improvement of the isiana. Ohio. environment. Sec. 327. Tolchester Channel, Baltimore Harbor Sec. 416. Western Lake Erie Basin, Ohio, Indi- Sec. 106. Small aquatic ecosystem restoration and channels, Chesapeake Bay, ana, and Michigan. projects. Kent County, Maryland. Sec. 417. Schuylkill River, Norristown, Pennsyl- TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 328. Sault Sainte Marie, Chippewa County, vania. Sec. 201. Small flood control authority. Michigan. Sec. 418. Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Sec. 202. Use of non-Federal funds for com- Sec. 329. Jackson County, Mississippi. Carolina. piling and disseminating informa- Sec. 330. Tunica Lake, Mississippi. Sec. 419. Day County, South Dakota. tion on floods and flood damages. Sec. 331. Bois Brule Drainage and Levee Dis- Sec. 420. Corpus Christi, Texas. Sec. 203. Contributions by States and political trict, Missouri. Sec. 421. Mitchell’s Cut Channel (Caney Fork subdivisions. Sec. 332. Meramec River Basin, Valley Park Cut), Texas. Sec. 204. Sediment decontamination technology. Levee, Missouri. Sec. 422. Mouth of Colorado River, Texas. Sec. 205. Control of aquatic plants. Sec. 333. Missouri River mitigation project, Mis- Sec. 423. Kanawha River, Fayette County, West Sec. 206. Use of continuing contracts required souri, Kansas, Iowa, and Ne- Virginia. for construction of certain braska. Sec. 424. West Virginia ports. projects. Sec. 334. Wood River, Grand Island, Nebraska. Sec. 425. Great Lakes region comprehensive Sec. 207. Support of Army civil works program. Sec. 335. Absecon Island, New Jersey. study. Sec. 208. Water resources development studies Sec. 336. New York Harbor and Adjacent Chan- Sec. 426. Nutrient loading resulting from for the Pacific region. nels, Port Jersey, New Jersey dredged material disposal. Sec. 209. Everglades and south Florida eco- Sec. 337. Passaic River, New Jersey. Sec. 427. Santee Delta focus area, South Caro- system restoration. Sec. 338. Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet, New lina. Sec. 210. Beneficial uses of dredged material. Jersey. TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Sec. 339. Arthur Kill, New York and New Jer- Sec. 211. Harbor cost sharing. Sec. 501. Corps assumption of NRCS projects. sey. Sec. 212. Aquatic ecosystem restoration. Sec. 502. Construction assistance. Sec. 340. New York City watershed. Sec. 213. Watershed management, restoration, Sec. 503. Contaminated sediment dredging tech- Sec. 341. New York State Canal System. and development. nology. Sec. 342. Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point, Sec. 214. Flood mitigation and riverine restora- Sec. 504. Dam safety. New york. tion pilot program. Sec. 505. Great Lakes remedial action plans. Sec. 343. Broken Bow Lake, Red River Basin, Sec. 215. Shoreline management program. Sec. 506. Sea Lamprey control measures in the Oklahoma. Sec. 216. Assistance for remediation, restora- Great Lakes. Sec. 344. Willamette River temperature control, tion, and reuse. Sec. 507. Maintenance of navigation channels. Mckenzie Subbasin, Oregon. Sec. 217. Shore damage mitigation. Sec. 508. Measurement of Lake Michigan diver- Sec. 345. Aylesworth Creek Reservoir, Pennsyl- Sec. 218. Shore protection. sions. vania. Sec. 219. Flood prevention coordination. Sec. 509. Upper Mississippi River environmental Sec. 346. Curwensville Lake, Pennsylvania. Sec. 220. Annual passes for recreation. management program. Sec. 347. Delaware River, Pennsylvania and Sec. 221. Cooperative agreements for environ- Sec. 510. Atlantic Coast of New York moni- Delaware. mental and recreational measures. toring. Sec. 348. Mussers Dam, Pennsylvania. Sec. 222. Nonstructural flood control projects. Sec. 511. Water control management. Sec. 223. Lakes program. Sec. 349. Nine-Mile Run, Allegheny County, Sec. 512. Beneficial use of dredged material. Sec. 224. Construction of flood control projects Pennsylvania. Sec. 513. Design and construction assistance. by non-Federal interests. Sec. 350. Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania. Sec. 514. Lower Missouri River aquatic restora- Sec. 225. Enhancement of fish and wildlife re- Sec. 351. South Central Pennsylvania. tion projects. sources. Sec. 352. Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, Sec. 515. Aquatic resources restoration in the Sec. 226. Sense of Congress; requirement regard- South Carolina. Northwest. ing notice. Sec. 353. Bowie County Levee, Texas. Sec. 516. Innovative technologies for watershed Sec. 227. Periodic beach nourishment. Sec. 354. Clear Creek, Texas. restoration. Sec. 228. Environmental dredging. Sec. 355. Cypress Creek, Texas. Sec. 517. Environmental restoration. Sec. 356. Dallas Floodway Extension, Dallas, TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS Sec. 518. Expedited consideration of certain Texas. Sec. 301. Missouri River Levee System. projects. Sec. 357. Upper Jordan River, Utah. Sec. 302. Ouzinkie Harbor, Alaska. Sec. 519. Dog River, Alabama. Sec. 358. Elizabeth River, Chesapeake, Virginia. Sec. 303. Greers Ferry Lake, Arkansas. Sec. 520. Elba, Alabama. Sec. 359. Bluestone Lake, Ohio River Basin, Sec. 304. Ten- and Fifteen-Mile Bayous, Arkan- Sec. 521. Geneva, Alabama. West Virginia. sas. Sec. 522. Navajo Reservation, Arizona, New Sec. 360. Greenbrier Basin, West Virginia. Sec. 305. Loggy Bayou, Red River below Mexico, and Utah. Sec. 361. Moorefield, West Virginia. Denison Dam, Arkansas, Lou- Sec. 523. Augusta and Devalls Bluff, Arkansas. Sec. 362. West Virginia and Pennsylvania Flood isiana, Oklahoma, and Texas. Sec. 524. Beaver Lake, Arkansas. Control. Sec. 306. Sacramento River, Glenn-Colusa, Cali- Sec. 525. Beaver Lake trout production facility, Sec. 363. Project reauthorizations. fornia. Arkansas. Sec. 364. Project deauthorizations. Sec. 307. San Lorenzo River, California. Sec. 526. Chino Dairy Preserve, California. Sec. 365. American and Sacramento Rivers, Sec. 308. Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, Cali- Sec. 527. Novato, California. California. fornia. Sec. 528. Orange and San Diego Counties, Cali- Sec. 366. Martin, Kentucky. Sec. 309. Delaware River mainstem and channel fornia. deepening, Delaware, New Jersey, TITLE IV—STUDIES Sec. 529. Salton Sea, California. and Pennsylvania. Sec. 401. Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers Sec. 530. Santa Cruz Harbor, California. Sec. 310. Potomac River, Washington, District levees and streambanks protec- Sec. 531. Point Beach, Milford, Connecticut. of Columbia. tion. Sec. 532. Lower St. Johns River Basin, Florida. Sec. 311. Brevard County, Florida. Sec. 402. Upper Mississippi River comprehensive Sec. 533. Shoreline protection and environ- Sec. 312. Broward County and Hillsboro Inlet, plan. mental restoration, Lake Florida. Sec. 403. El Dorado, Union County, Arkansas. Allatoona, Georgia. Sec. 313. Fort Pierce, Florida. Sec. 404. Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego Sec. 534. Mayo’s Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa Sec. 314. Nassau County, Florida. County, California. River, Rome, Georgia. Sec. 315. Miami Harbor Channel, Florida. Sec. 405. Whitewater River Basin, California. Sec. 535. Comprehensive flood impact response Sec. 316. Lake Michigan, Illinois. Sec. 406. Little Econlackhatchee River Basin, modeling system, Coralville Res- Sec. 317. Springfield, Illinois. Florida. ervoir and Iowa River Watershed, Sec. 318. Little Calumet River, Indiana. Sec. 407. Port Everglades Inlet, Florida. Iowa. H2490 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

Sec. 536. Additional construction assistance in (2) RIO SALADO, SALT RIVER, PHOENIX AND New Jersey-Broadkill Beach, Delaware: Report Illinois. TEMPE, ARIZONA.—The project for flood control of the Chief of Engineers dated August 17, 1998, Sec. 537. Kanopolis Lake, Kansas. and environmental restoration, Rio Salado, Salt at a total cost of $9,049,000, with an estimated Sec. 538. Southern and Eastern Kentucky. River, Phoenix and Tempe, Arizona: Report of Federal cost of $5,674,000 and an estimated non- Sec. 539. Southeast Louisiana. the Chief of Engineers dated August 20, 1998, at Federal cost of $3,375,000, and at an estimated Sec. 540. Snug Harbor, Maryland. a total cost of $88,048,000, with an estimated average annual cost of $538,200 for periodic Sec. 541. Welch Point, Elk River, Cecil County, Federal cost of $56,355,000 and an estimated nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, and Chesapeake City, Maryland. non-Federal cost of $31,693,000. with an estimated annual Federal cost of Sec. 542. West View Shores, Cecil County, (3) TUCSON DRAINAGE AREA, ARIZONA.—The $349,800 and an estimated annual non-Federal Maryland. project for flood control, Tucson drainage area, cost of $188,400. Sec. 543. Restoration projects for Maryland, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated (9) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE AND Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. May 20, 1998, at a total cost of $29,900,000, with NEW JERSEY-PORT MAHON, DELAWARE.—The Sec. 544. Cape Cod Canal Railroad Bridge, Buz- an estimated Federal cost of $16,768,000 and an project for ecosystem restoration, Delaware Bay zards Bay, Massachusetts. estimated non-Federal cost of $13,132,000. coastline, Delaware and New Jersey-Port Sec. 545. St. Louis, Missouri. (4) AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED, CALI- Mahon, Delaware: Report of the Chief of Engi- Sec. 546. Beaver Branch of Big Timber Creek, FORNIA.— neers dated September 28, 1998, at a total cost of New Jersey. (A) IN GENERAL.—The Folsom Dam Modifica- $7,644,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Sec. 547. Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River tion portion of the Folsom Modification Plan $4,969,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of water levels, New York. described in the United States Army Corps of $2,675,000, and at an estimated average annual Sec. 548. New York-New Jersey Harbor, New Engineers Supplemental Information Report for cost of $234,000 for periodic nourishment over York and New Jersey. the American River Watershed Project, Cali- the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Sec. 549. Sea Gate Reach, Coney Island, New fornia, dated March 1996, as modified by the re- annual Federal cost of $152,000 and an esti- York, New York. port entitled ‘‘Folsom Dam Modification Report, mated annual non-Federal cost of $82,000. Sec. 550. Woodlawn, New York. New Outlets Plan,’’ dated March 1998, prepared (10) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE Sec. 551. Floodplain mapping, New York. by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, AND NEW JERSEY-ROOSEVELT INLET-LEWES BEACH, Sec. 552. White Oak River, North Carolina. at an estimated cost of $150,000,000, with an esti- DELAWARE.—The project for navigation mitiga- Sec. 553. Toussaint River, Carroll Township, mated Federal cost of $97,500,000 and an esti- tion and hurricane and storm damage reduc- Ottawa County, Ohio. mated non-Federal cost of $52,500,000. The Sec- tion, Delaware Bay coastline, Delaware and Sec. 554. Sardis Reservoir, Oklahoma. retary shall coordinate with the Secretary of the New Jersey-Roosevelt Inlet-Lewes Beach, Dela- Sec. 555. Waurika Lake, Oklahoma, water con- Interior with respect to the design and construc- ware: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated veyance facilities. tion of modifications at Folsom Dam authorized Sec. 556. Skinner Butte Park, Eugene, Oregon. February 3, 1999, at a total cost of $3,393,000, Sec. 557. Willamette River basin, Oregon. by this paragraph. with an estimated Federal cost of $2,620,000 and (B) REOPERATION MEASURES.—Upon comple- Sec. 558. Bradford and Sullivan Counties, an estimated non-Federal cost of $773,000, and tion of the improvements to Folsom Dam author- Pennsylvania. at an estimated average annual cost of $196,000 ized by subparagraph (A), the variable space al- Sec. 559. Erie Harbor, Pennsylvania. for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of Sec. 560. Point Marion Lock And Dam, Penn- located to flood control within the Reservoir the project, with an estimated annual Federal sylvania. shall be reduced from the current operating cost of $152,000 and an estimated annual non- Sec. 561. Seven Points’ Harbor, Pennsylvania. range of 400,000-670,000 acre-feet to 400,000- Federal cost of $44,000. Sec. 562. Southeastern Pennsylvania. 600,000 acre-feet. (11) JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLORIDA.— Sec. 563. Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna wa- (C) MAKEUP OF WATER SHORTAGES CAUSED BY (A) IN GENERAL.—The project for navigation, tershed restoration initiative. FLOOD CONTROL OPERATION.—The Secretary of Jacksonville Harbor, Florida: Report of the Sec. 564. Aguadilla Harbor, Puerto Rico. the Interior shall enter into, or modify, such Chief of Engineers April 21, 1999, at a total cost Sec. 565. Oahe Dam to Lake Sharpe, South Da- agreements with the Sacramento Area Flood of $26,116,000, with an estimated Federal cost of kota, study. Control Agency regarding the operation of Fol- $9,129,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of Sec. 566. Integrated water management plan- som Dam and reservoir as may be necessary in $16,987,000. ning, Texas. order that, notwithstanding any prior agree- (B) SPECIAL RULE.—Notwithstanding subpara- Sec. 567. Bolivar Peninsula, Jefferson, Cham- ment or provision of law, 100 percent of the graph (A), the Secretary may construct the bers, and Galveston Counties, water needed to make up for any water shortage project to a depth of 40 feet if the non-Federal Texas. caused by variable flood control operation dur- interest agrees to pay any additional costs above Sec. 568. Galveston Beach, Galveston County, ing any year at Folsom Dam and resulting in a those for the recommended plan. Texas. significant impact on recreation at Folsom Res- (12) TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FLOR- Sec. 569. Packery Channel, Corpus Christi, ervoir shall be replaced, to the extent the water IDA.—The project for navigation, Tampa Har- Texas. is available for purchase, by the Secretary of the bor-Big Bend Channel, Florida: Report of the Sec. 570. Northern West Virginia. Interior. Chief of Engineers dated October 13, 1998, at a Sec. 571. Urbanized peak flood management re- (D) SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON RECREATION.—For total cost of $9,356,000, with an estimated Fed- search. the purposes of this paragraph, a significant im- eral cost of $6,235,000 and an estimated non- Sec. 572. Mississippi River Commission. pact on recreation is defined as any impact that Federal cost of $3,121,000. Sec. 573. Coastal aquatic habitat management. results in a lake elevation at Folsom Reservoir (13) BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GEORGIA.—The Sec. 574. Abandoned and inactive noncoal mine below 435 feet above sea level starting on May 15 project for navigation, Brunswick Harbor, Geor- restoration. and ending on September 15 of any given year. gia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Oc- Sec. 575. Beneficial use of waste tire rubber. (5) SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, tober 6, 1998, at a total cost of $50,717,000, with Sec. 576. Site designation. CALIFORNIA.—The project for flood control, envi- an estimate Federal cost of $32,966,000 and an Sec. 577. Land conveyances. ronmental restoration and recreation, South estimated non-Federal cost of $17,751,000. Sec. 578. Namings. Sacramento County streams, California: Report (14) BEARGRASS CREEK, KENTUCKY.—The Sec. 579. Folsom Dam and Reservoir additional of the Chief of Engineers dated October 6, 1998, project for flood control, Beargrass Creek, Ken- storage and additional flood con- at a total cost of $65,500,000, with an estimated tucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated trol studies. Federal cost of $41,200,000 and an estimated May 12, 1998, at a total cost of $11,171,300, with Sec. 580. Wallops Island, Virginia. non-Federal cost of $24,300,000. an estimated Federal cost of $7,261,500 and an Sec. 581. Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan. (6) UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA.— estimated non-Federal cost of $3,909,800. SEC. 2. SECRETARY DEFINED. The project for flood control and recreation, (15) AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, LOU- In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Upper Guadalupe River, California: Locally ISIANA.—The project for flood control, Amite Secretary of the Army. Preferred Plan (known as the ‘‘Bypass Channel River and tributaries, Louisiana: Report of the Plan’’), Report of the Chief of Engineers dated Chief of Engineers dated December 23, 1996, at a TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS August 19, 1998, at a total cost of $140,285,000, total cost of $112,900,000, with an estimated Fed- SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. with an estimated Federal cost of $44,000,000 eral cost of $84,675,000 and an estimated non- (a) PROJECTS WITH CHIEF’S REPORTS.—The and an estimated non-Federal cost of Federal cost of $28,225,000. Cost sharing for the following projects for water resources develop- $96,285,000. project shall be determined in accordance with ment and conservation and other purposes are (7) YUBA RIVER BASIN, CALIFORNIA.—The section 103(a) of the Water Resources Develop- authorized to be carried out by the Secretary project for flood control, Yuba River Basin, ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213), as in effect on substantially in accordance with the plans, and California: Report of the Chief of Engineers October 11, 1996. subject to the conditions, described in the re- dated November 25, 1998, at a total cost of (16) BALTIMORE HARBOR ANCHORAGES AND spective reports designated in this subsection: $26,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of CHANNELS, MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA.—The (1) SAND POINT HARBOR, ALASKA.—The project $17,350,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of project for navigation, Baltimore harbor an- for navigation, Sand Point Harbor, Alaska: Re- $9,250,000. chorages and channels, Maryland and Virginia: port of the Chief of Engineers dated October 13, (8) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE AND Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 8, 1998, at a total cost of $11,760,000, with an esti- NEW JERSEY-BROADKILL BEACH, DELAWARE.—The 1998, at a total cost of $28,430,000, with an esti- mated Federal cost of $6,964,000 and an esti- project for hurricane and storm damage reduc- mated Federal cost of $19,000,000 and an esti- mated non-Federal cost of $4,796,000. tion, Delaware Bay coastline, Delaware and mated non-Federal cost of $9,430,000. April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2491

(17) RED RIVER LAKE AT CROOKSTON, MIN- and an estimated non-Federal cost of a total cost of $44,300,000 with an estimated Fed- NESOTA.—The project for flood control, Red $13,800,000. eral cost of $28,800,000 and an estimated non- River Lake at Crookston, Minnesota: Report of (4) OAKLAND HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.—The Federal cost of $15,500,000. the Chief of Engineers, dated April 20, 1998, at project for navigation, Oakland Harbor, Cali- (12) NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, BRIGAN- a total cost of $8,950,000, with an estimated Fed- fornia, at a total cost of $256,650,000, with an es- TINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR, BRIGANTINE eral cost of $5,720,000 and an estimated non- timated Federal cost of $143,450,000 and an esti- ISLAND, NEW JERSEY.—The project for hurricane Federal cost of $3,230,000. mated non-Federal cost of $113,200,000. and storm damage reduction, New Jersey shore (18) LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY (5) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE AND protection, Brigantine Inlet to Great Egg Har- POINT, NEW JERSEY.—The project for navigation NEW JERSEY: REEDS BEACH AND PIERCES POINT, bor, Brigantine Island, New Jersey, at a total mitigation, ecosystem restoration, and hurricane NEW JERSEY.—The project for shore protection cost of $4,970,000, with an estimated Federal cost and storm damage reduction, Lower Cape May and ecosystem restoration, Delaware Bay Coast- of $3,230,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost Meadows, Cape May Point, New Jersey: Report line, Delaware and New Jersey: Reeds Beach of $1,740,000, and at an estimated average an- of the Chief of Engineers dated April 5, 1999, at and Pierces Point, New Jersey, at a total cost of nual cost of $465,000 for periodic nourishment a total cost of $15,952,000, with an estimated $4,057,000, with an estimated Federal cost of over the 50-year life of the project, with an esti- Federal cost of $12,118,000 and an estimated $2,637,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of mated annual Federal cost of $302,000 and an non-Federal cost of $3,834,000, and at an esti- $1,420,000. estimated annual non-Federal cost of $163,000. mated average annual cost of $1,114,000 for peri- (6) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE AND (13) COLUMBIA RIVER CHANNEL, OREGON AND odic nourishment over the 50-year life of the NEW JERSEY: VILLAS AND VICINITY, NEW JERSEY.— WASHINGTON.—The project for navigation, Co- project, with an estimated annual Federal cost The project for shore protection and ecosystem lumbia River Channel, Oregon and Washington, of $897,000 and an estimated annual non-Fed- restoration, Delaware Bay Coastline, Delaware at a total cost of $183,623,000 with an estimated eral cost of $217,000. and New Jersey: Villas and Vicinity, New Jer- Federal cost $106,132,000 and an estimated non- (19) NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION: TOWN- sey, at a total cost of $7,520,000, with an esti- Federal cost of $77,491,000. SENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NEW JERSEY.— mated Federal cost of $4,888,000 and an esti- (14) JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.—The The project for hurricane and storm damage re- mated non-Federal cost of $2,632,000. locally preferred project for flood control, John- duction and ecosystem restoration, New Jersey (7) DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HENELOPEN son Creek, Arlington, Texas, at a total cost of Shore Protection: Townsends Inlet to Cape May TO FENWICK ISLAND, BETHANY BEACH/SOUTH $20,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engi- BETHANY BEACH, DELAWARE.—The project for $12,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of neers dated September 28, 1998, at a total cost of hurricane and storm damage reduction, Dela- $8,300,000. $56,503,000, with an estimated Federal cost of ware Coast from Cape Henelopen to Fenwick Is- (15) HOWARD HANSON DAM, WASHINGTON.—The $36,727,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of land, Bethany Beach/South Bethany Beach, project for water supply and ecosystem restora- $19,776,000, and at an estimated average annual Delaware, at a total cost of $22,205,000, with an tion, Howard Hanson Dam, Washington, at a cost of $2,000,000 for periodic nourishment over estimated Federal cost of $14,433,000 and an esti- total cost of $75,600,000, with an estimated Fed- the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated mated non-Federal cost of $7,772,000, and at an eral cost of $36,900,000 and an estimated non- annual Federal cost of $1,300,000 and an esti- estimated average annual cost of $1,584,000 for Federal cost of $38,700,000. mated annual non-Federal cost of $700,000. periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the SEC. 102. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS. (20) GUANAJIBO RIVER, PUERTO RICO.—The project, with an estimated annual Federal cost (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct project for flood control, Guanajibo River, Puer- of $1,030,000 and an estimated annual non-Fed- a study for each of the following projects and, to Rico: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated eral cost of $554,000. after completion of such study, shall carry out February 27, 1996, at a total cost of $27,031,000, (8) LITTLE TALBOT ISLAND, DUVAL COUNTY, the project under section 205 of the Flood Con- with an estimated Federal cost of $20,273,250 FLORIDA.—The project for hurricane and storm trol Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s): and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,757,750. damage prevention, Little Talbot Island, Duval (1) LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA.—Project for flood Cost sharing for the project shall be determined County, Florida, at a total cost of $5,915,000, control, Lancaster, California, westside in accordance with section 103(a) of the Water with an estimated Federal cost of $3,839,000 and stormwater retention facility. Resources Development Act 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213) an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,076,000. (2) GATEWAY TRIANGLE AREA, FLORIDA.— as in effect on October 11, 1986. (9) PONCE DE LEON INLET, FLORIDA.—The Project for flood control, Gateway Triangle (21) RIO GRANDE DE MANATI, BARCELONETA, project for navigation and related purposes, area, Collier County, Florida. PUERTO RICO.—The project for flood control, Rio Ponce de Leon Inlet, Volusia County, Florida, (3) PLANT CITY, FLORIDA.—Project for flood Grande De Manati, Barceloneta, Puerto Rico: at a total cost of $5,454,000, with an estimated control, Plant City, Florida. Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated January Federal cost of $2,988,000 and an estimated non- (4) STONE ISLAND, LAKE MONROE, FLORIDA.— 22, 1999, at a total cost of $13,491,000, with an Federal cost of $2,466,000. Project for flood control, Stone Island, Lake estimated Federal cost of $8,785,000 and an esti- (10) SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GEORGIA.— Monroe, Florida. mated non-Federal cost of $4,706,000. (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (5) OHIO RIVER, ILLINOIS.—Project for flood (22) RIO NIGUA AT SALINAS, PUERTO RICO.—The (B), the project for navigation, Savannah Har- project for flood control, Rio Nigua at Salinas, bor expansion, Georgia, including implementa- control, Ohio River, Illinois. Puerto Rico: Report of the Chief of Engineers, tion of the mitigation plan, with such modifica- (6) REPAUPO CREEK, NEW JERSEY.—Project for dated April 15, 1997, at a total cost of tions as the Secretary deems appropriate, at a flood control, Repaupo Creek, New Jersey. $13,702,000, with an estimated Federal cost of total cost of $230,174,000 (of which amount a (7) OWASCO LAKE SEAWALL, NEW YORK.— $7,645,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of portion is authorized for implementation of the Project for flood control, Owasco Lake seawall, $6,057,000. mitigation plan), with an estimated Federal cost New York. (23) SALT CREEK, GRAHAM, TEXAS.—The of $145,160,000 and an estimated non-Federal (8) PORT CLINTON, OHIO.—Project for flood project for flood control, environmental restora- cost of $85,014,000. control, Port Clinton, Ohio. tion and recreation, Salt Creek, Graham, Texas: (B) CONDITIONS.—The project authorized by (9) NORTH CANADIAN RIVER, OKLAHOMA.— Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October subparagraph (A) may be carried out only Project for flood control, North Canadian River, 6, 1998, at a total cost of $10,080,000, with an es- after— Oklahoma. timated Federal cost of $6,560,000 and an esti- (i) the Secretary, in consultation with affected (10) ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.— mated non-Federal cost of $3,520,000. Federal, State of Georgia, State of South Caro- Project for flood control, Baeder and Wana- (b) PROJECTS SUBJECT TO REPORT.—The fol- lina, regional, and local entities, has reviewed maker Roads, Abington Township, Pennsyl- lowing projects for water resources development and approved an environmental impact state- vania. and conservation and other purposes are au- ment for the project that includes— (11) PORT INDIAN, WEST NORRITON TOWNSHIP, thorized to be carried out by the Secretary sub- (I) an analysis of the impacts of project depth MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project stantially in accordance with the plans, and alternatives ranging from 42 feet through 48 for flood control, Port Indian, West Norriton subject to the conditions, recommended in a feet; and Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. final report of the Corps of Engineers, if the re- (II) a selected plan for navigation and an as- (12) PORT PROVIDENCE, UPPER PROVIDENCE port is completed not later than September 30, sociated mitigation plan as required by section TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood 1999. 906(a) of the Water Resources Development Act control, Port Providence, Upper Providence (1) NOME, ALASKA.—The project for naviga- of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283); and Township, Pennsylvania. tion, Nome, Alaska, at a total cost of $24,608,000, (ii) the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary (13) SPRINGFIELD TOWNSHIP, MONTGOMERY with an estimated Federal cost of $19,660,000 of Commerce, the Administrator of the Environ- COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for flood con- and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,948,000. mental Protection Agency, and the Secretary trol, Springfield Township, Montgomery Coun- (2) SEWARD HARBOR, ALASKA.—The project for have approved the selected plan and have deter- ty, Pennsylvania. navigation, Seward Harbor, Alaska, at a total mined that the mitigation plan adequately ad- (14) FIRST CREEK, KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE.— cost of $12,240,000, with an estimated Federal dresses the potential environmental impacts of Project for flood control, First Creek, Knoxville, cost of $4,364,000 and an estimated non-Federal the project. Tennessee. cost of $7,876,000. (C) MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.—The mitiga- (15) METRO CENTER LEVEE, CUMBERLAND (3) HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA.—The tion plan shall be implemented in advance of or RIVER, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE.—Project for flood project for wetlands restoration, Hamilton Air- concurrently with construction of the project. control, Metro Center Levee, Cumberland River, field, California, at a total cost of $55,200,000, (11) DES PLAINES RIVER, ILLINOIS.—The project Nashville, Tennessee. with an estimated Federal cost of $41,400,000 for flood control, Des Plaines River, Illinois, at (b) FESTUS AND CRYSTAL CITY, MISSOURI.— H2492 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

(1) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The (15) FORTESCUE INLET, DELAWARE BAY, NEW ties, Lake Ontelaunee Reservoir, Berks County, maximum amount of Federal funds that may be JERSEY.—Project for navigation for Fortescue Pennsylvania. expended for the project for flood control, Inlet, Delaware Bay, New Jersey. (16) BLACKSTONE RIVER BASIN, RHODE ISLAND Festus and Crystal City, Missouri, shall be (16) BUFFALO AND LASALLE PARK, NEW YORK.— AND MASSACHUSETTS.—Project for aquatic eco- $10,000,000. Project for navigation, Buffalo and LaSalle system restoration and fish passage facilities, (2) REVISION OF PROJECT COOPERATION AGREE- Park, New York. Blackstone River Basin, Rhode Island and Mas- MENT.—The Secretary shall revise the project co- (17) STURGEON POINT, NEW YORK.—Project for sachusetts. operation agreement for the project referred to navigation, Sturgeon Point, New York. TITLE II—GENERAL PROVISIONS in paragraph (1) to take into account the SEC. 105. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT SEC. 201. SMALL FLOOD CONTROL AUTHORITY. change in the Federal participation in such OF THE ENVIRONMENT. Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 project pursuant to paragraph (1). (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct (33 U.S.C. 701s) is amended— (3) COST SHARING.—Nothing in this section a study for each of the following projects and, (1) by striking ‘‘construction of small shall be construed to affect any cost-sharing re- after completion of such study, shall carry out projects’’ and inserting ‘‘implementation of quirement applicable to the project referred to in the project under section 1135 of the Water Re- small structural and nonstructural projects’’; paragraph (1) under the Water Resources Devel- sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. and opment Act of 1986. 2309a): (2) by striking ‘‘$5,000,000’’ and inserting SEC. 103. SMALL BANK STABILIZATION (1) ILLINOIS RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF HAVANA, ‘‘$7,000,000’’. PROJECTS. ILLINOIS.—Project for the improvement of the SEC. 202. USE OF NON-FEDERAL FUNDS FOR COM- The Secretary shall conduct a study for each environment, Illinois River in the vicinity of Ha- PILING AND DISSEMINATING INFOR- of the following projects and, after completion vana, Illinois. MATION ON FLOODS AND FLOOD of such study, shall carry out the project under (2) KNITTING MILL CREEK, VIRGINIA.—Project DAMAGES. section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 for the improvement of the environment, Knit- The last sentence of section 206(b) of the U.S.C. 701r): ting Mill Creek, Virginia. Flood Control Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 709a(b)) is (1) SAINT JOSEPH RIVER, INDIANA.—Project for (b) PINE FLAT DAM, KINGS RIVER, CALI- amended by inserting before the period the fol- streambank erosion control, Saint Joseph River, FORNIA.—The Secretary shall carry out under lowing: ‘‘; except that this limitation on fees Indiana. section 1135(a) of the Water Resources Develop- shall not apply to funds voluntarily contributed (2) SAGINAW RIVER, BAY CITY, MICHIGAN.— ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(a)) a project to by such entities for the purpose of expanding Project for streambank erosion control, Saginaw construct a turbine bypass at Pine Flat Dam, the scope of the services requested by such enti- River, Bay City, Michigan. Kings River, California, in accordance with the ties’’. (3) BIG TIMBER CREEK, NEW JERSEY.—Project Project Modification Report and Environmental SEC. 203. CONTRIBUTIONS BY STATES AND POLIT- for streambank erosion control, Big Timber Assessment dated September 1996. ICAL SUBDIVISIONS. Creek, New Jersey. SEC. 106. SMALL AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORA- Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, (4) LAKE SHORE ROAD, ATHOL SPRINGS, NEW TION PROJECTS. 1936 (33 U.S.C. 701h), is amended by inserting YORK.—Project for streambank erosion control, The Secretary shall conduct a study for each ‘‘or environmental restoration’’ after ‘‘flood Lake Shore Road, Athol Springs, New York. of the following projects and, after completion control’’. (5) MARIST COLLEGE, POUGHKEEPSIE, NEW of such study, shall carry out the project under SEC. 204. SEDIMENT DECONTAMINATION TECH- YORK.—Project for streambank erosion control, section 206 of the Water Resources Development NOLOGY. Marist College, Poughkeepsie, New York. Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330): Section 405 of the Water Resources Develop- (6) MONROE COUNTY, OHIO.—Project for (1) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, BAY DELTA, CALI- ment Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2239 note; 106 Stat. streambank erosion control, Monroe County, FORNIA.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restora- 4863) is amended— Ohio. tion, Contra Costa County, Bay Delta, Cali- (1) by adding at the end of subsection (a) the (7) GREEN VALLEY, WEST VIRGINIA.—Project for fornia. following: streambank erosion control, Green Valley, West (2) INDIAN RIVER, FLORIDA.—Project for aquat- ‘‘(4) PRACTICAL END-USE PRODUCTS.—Tech- Virginia. ic ecosystem restoration and lagoon restoration, nologies selected for demonstration at the pilot SEC. 104. SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS. Indian River, Florida. scale shall be intended to result in practical The Secretary shall conduct a study for each (3) LITTLE WEKIVA RIVER, FLORIDA.—Project end-use products. of the following projects and, after completion for aquatic ecosystem restoration and erosion ‘‘(5) ASSISTANCE BY THE SECRETARY.—The Sec- of such study, shall carry out the project under control, Little Wekiva River, Florida. retary shall assist the project to ensure expedi- section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (4) COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS.—Project for tious completion by providing sufficient quan- (33 U.S.C. 577): aquatic ecosystem restoration and lagoon res- tities of contaminated dredged material to con- (1) GRAND MARAIS, ARKANSAS.—Project for toration and protection, Cook County, Illinois. duct the full-scale demonstrations to stated ca- navigation, Grand Marais, Arkansas. (5) GRAND BATTURE ISLAND, MISSISSIPPI.— pacity.’’; (2) FIELDS LANDING CHANNEL, HUMBOLDT HAR- Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Grand (2) in subsection (c) by striking the first sen- BOR, CALIFORNIA.—Project for navigation, Batture Island, Mississippi. tence and inserting the following: ‘‘There is au- Fields Landing Channel, Humboldt Harbor, (6) HANCOCK, HARRISON, AND JACKSON COUN- thorized to be appropriated to carry out this sec- California. TIES, MISSISSIPPI.—Project for aquatic ecosystem tion $22,000,000 to complete technology testing, (3) SAN MATEO (PILLAR POINT HARBOR), CALI- restoration and reef restoration along the Gulf technology commercialization, and the develop- FORNIA.—Project for navigation San Mateo (Pil- Coast, Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson Coun- ment of full scale processing facilities within the lar Point Harbor), California. ties, Mississippi. New York/New Jersey Harbor.’’; and (4) AGANA MARINA, GUAM.—Project for naviga- (7) MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND RIVER DES PERES, (3) by adding at the end the following: tion, Agana Marina, Guam. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.—Project for aquatic eco- ‘‘(e) SUPPORT.—In carrying out the program (5) AGAT MARINA, GUAM.—Project for naviga- system restoration and recreation, Mississippi under this section, the Secretary is encouraged tion, Agat Marina, Guam. River and River Des Peres, St. Louis, Missouri. to utilize contracts, cooperative agreements, and (6) APRA HARBOR FUEL PIERS, GUAM.—Project (8) HUDSON RIVER, NEW YORK.—Project for grants with colleges and universities and other for navigation, Apra Harbor Fuel Piers, Guam. aquatic ecosystem restoration, Hudson River, non-Federal entities.’’. (7) APRA HARBOR PIER F–6, GUAM.—Project for New York. SEC. 205. CONTROL OF AQUATIC PLANTS. navigation, Apra Harbor Pier F–6, Guam. (9) ONEIDA LAKE, NEW YORK.—Project for Section 104 of the River and Harbor Act of (8) APRA HARBOR SEAWALL, GUAM.—Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Oneida Lake, 1958 (33 U.S.C. 610) is amended— navigation including a seawall, Apra Harbor, Oneida County, New York. (1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘arundo,’’ Guam. (10) OTSEGO LAKE, NEW YORK.—Project for after ‘‘milfoil,’’; (9) GUAM HARBOR, GUAM.—Project for naviga- aquatic ecosystem restoration, Otsego Lake, Ot- (2) in subsection (b) by striking ‘‘$12,000,000’’ tion, Guam Harbor, Guam. sego County, New York. and inserting ‘‘$15,000,000.’’; and (10) ILLINOIS RIVER NEAR CHAUTAUQUA PARK, (11) NORTH FORK OF YELLOW CREEK, OHIO.— (3) by adding at the end the following: ILLINOIS.—Project for navigation, Illinois River Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, North ‘‘(c) SUPPORT.—In carrying out this program, near Chautauqua Park, Illinois. Fork of Yellow Creek, Ohio. the Secretary is encouraged to utilize contracts, (11) WHITING SHORELINE WATERFRONT, WHIT- (12) WHEELING CREEK WATERSHED, OHIO.— cooperative agreements, and grants with col- ING, INDIANA.—Project for navigation, Whiting Project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, leges and universities and other non-Federal en- Shoreline Waterfront, Whiting, Indiana. Wheeling Creek watershed, Ohio. tities.’’. (12) NARAGUAGUS RIVER, MACHIAS, MAINE.— (13) SPRINGFIELD MILLRACE, OREGON.—Project SEC. 206. USE OF CONTINUING CONTRACTS RE- Project for navigation, Naraguagus River, for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Springfield QUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF Machias, Maine. Millrace, Oregon. CERTAIN PROJECTS. (13) UNION RIVER, ELLSWORTH, MAINE.— (14) UPPER AMAZON CREEK, OREGON.—Project (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other Project for navigation, Union River, Ellsworth, for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Upper Ama- provision of law, the Secretary shall not imple- Maine. zon Creek, Oregon. ment a fully allocated funding policy with re- (14) DETROIT WATERFRONT, MICHIGAN.— (15) LAKE ONTELAUNEE RESERVOIR, BERKS spect to a water resources project if initiation of Project for navigation, Detroit River, Michigan, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.—Project for aquatic construction has occurred but sufficient funds including dredging and removal of a reef. ecosystem restoration and distilling pond facili- are not available to complete the project. The April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2493

Secretary shall enter into continuing contracts (b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by (1) STUDIES.—Studies conducted under this for such project. subsection (a) shall only apply to a project, or section shall be subject to cost sharing in ac- (b) INITIATION OF CONSTRUCTION CLARIFIED.— separable element thereof, on which a contract cordance with section 105 of the Water Re- For the purposes of this section, initiation of for physical construction has not been awarded sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. construction for a project occurs on the date of before the date of enactment of this Act. 2215). enactment of an Act that appropriates funds for SEC. 212. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. (2) ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND NON- the project from 1 of the following appropriation Section 206 of the Water Resources Develop- STRUCTURAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.—The accounts: ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3679–3680) is non-Federal interests shall pay 35 percent of the (1) Construction, General. amended— cost of any environmental restoration or non- (2) Operation and Maintenance, General. (1) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the structural flood control project carried out (3) Flood Control, Mississippi River and Trib- following: ‘‘Before October 1, 2003, the Federal under this section. The non-Federal interests utaries. share may be provided in the form of grants or shall provide all land, easements, rights-of-way, SEC. 207. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PRO- reimbursements of project costs.’’; and dredged material disposal areas, and relocations GRAM. (2) by adding at the end of subsection (c) the necessary for such projects. The value of such The requirements of section 2361 of title 10, following: ‘‘Notwithstanding section 221(b) of land, easements, rights-of-way, dredged mate- United States Code, shall not apply to any con- the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d– rial disposal areas, and relocations shall be tract, cooperative research and development 5b(b)), the Secretary, after coordination with credited toward the payment required under this agreement, cooperative agreement, or grant en- the appropriate State and local government offi- paragraph. tered into under section 229 of the Water Re- cials having jurisdiction over an area in which (3) STRUCTURAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.— sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3703) a project under this section will be carried out, Any structural flood control measures carried between the Secretary and Marshall University may allow a nonprofit entity to serve as the out under this section shall be subject to cost or entered into under section 350 of this Act be- non-Federal interest for the project.’’. sharing in accordance with section 103(a) of the tween the Secretary and Juniata College. Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 SEC. 213. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, RESTORA- SEC. 208. WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT TION, AND DEVELOPMENT. U.S.C. 2213(a)). STUDIES FOR THE PACIFIC REGION. (4) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non- (a) NONPROFIT ENTITY AS NON-FEDERAL IN- Section 444 of the Water Resources Develop- Federal interests shall be responsible for all ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3747) is amended by TEREST.—Section 503(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3756) is costs associated with operating, maintaining, re- striking ‘‘interest of navigation’’ and inserting placing, repairing, and rehabilitating all ‘‘interests of water resources development, in- amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Notwithstanding section 221(b) of the Flood projects carried out under this section. cluding navigation, flood damage reduction, (d) PROJECT JUSTIFICATION.— Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), the and environmental restoration’’. (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other Secretary, after coordination with the appro- SEC. 209. EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA provision of law or requirement for economic priate State and local government officials hav- ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION. justification established pursuant to section 209 ing jurisdiction over an area in which a project (a) PROGRAM EXTENSION.—Section 528(b)(3) of of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962– under this section will be carried out, may allow the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 2), the Secretary may implement a project under a nonprofit entity to serve as the non-Federal (110 Stat. 3769) is amended— this section if the Secretary determines that the interest for the project.’’. (1) in subparagraph (B) by striking ‘‘1999’’ project— (b) PROJECT LOCATIONS.—Section 503(d) of and inserting ‘‘2000’’; and (A) will significantly reduce potential flood such Act is amended— (2) in subparagraph (C)(i) by striking ‘‘1999’’ damages; (1) in paragraph (7) by inserting before the pe- and inserting ‘‘2003’’. (B) will improve the quality of the environ- riod at the end ‘‘, including Clear Lake’’; and (b) CREDIT.—Section 528(b)(3) of such Act is ment; and (2) by adding at the end the following: amended by adding at the end the following: (C) is justified considering all costs and bene- ‘‘(14) Fresno Slough watershed, California. ‘‘(D) CREDIT OF PAST AND FUTURE ACTIVI- ficial outputs of the project. ‘‘(15) Hayward Marsh, Southern San Fran- TIES.—The Secretary may provide a credit to the (2) ESTABLISHMENT OF SELECTION AND RATING cisco Bay watershed, California. non-Federal interests toward the non-Federal CRITERIA AND POLICIES.—Not later than 180 days share of a project implemented under subpara- ‘‘(16) Kaweah River watershed, California. after the date of enactment of this section, the ‘‘(17) Malibu Creek watershed, California. graph (A). The credit shall be for reasonable Secretary, in cooperation with State, tribal, and ‘‘(18) Illinois River watershed, Illinois. costs of work performed by the non-Federal in- local agencies, shall develop, and transmit to ‘‘(19) Catawba River watershed, North Caro- terests if the Secretary determines that the work the Committee on Transportation and Infra- lina. substantially expedited completion of the project structure of the House of Representatives and ‘‘(20) Cabin Creek basin, West Virginia. and is compatible with and an integral part of the Committee on Environment and Public ‘‘(21) Lower St. Johns River basin, Florida.’’. the project, and the credit is provided pursuant Works of the Senate, criteria for selecting and to a specific project cooperation agreement.’’. SEC. 214. FLOOD MITIGATION AND RIVERINE RES- rating projects to be carried out under this sec- (c) CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER BASIN, FLOR- TORATION PILOT PROGRAM. tion and shall establish policies and procedures IDA.—Section 528(e)(4) of such Act is amended (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may under- for carrying out the studies and projects under- by inserting before the period at the end of the take a program for the purpose of conducting taken under this section. Such criteria shall in- first sentence the following: ‘‘if the Secretary projects that reduce flood hazards and restore clude, as a priority, the extent to which the ap- determines that such land acquisition is compat- the natural functions and values of rivers propriate State government supports the project. ible with and an integral component of the Ev- throughout the United States. (e) PRIORITY AREAS.—In carrying out this sec- erglades and South Florida ecosystem restora- (b) STUDIES AND PROJECTS.— tion, the Secretary shall examine the potential tion, including potential land acquisition in the (1) AUTHORITY.—In carrying out the program, for flood damage reductions at appropriate loca- Caloosahatchee River basin or other areas’’. the Secretary may conduct studies to identify tions, including the following: SEC. 210. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATE- appropriate flood damage reduction, conserva- (1) Upper Delaware River, New York. RIAL. tion, and restoration measures and may design (2) Willamette River floodplain, Oregon. Section 204 of the Water Resources Develop- and implement projects described in subsection (3) Pima County, Arizona, at Paseo De Las ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4826–4827) is (a). Iglesias and Rillito River. amended— (2) CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION.—The (4) Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers, Cali- (1) in subsection (c) by striking ‘‘cooperative studies and projects carried out under this sec- fornia. agreement in accordance with the requirements tion shall be conducted, to the maximum extent (5) Murrieta Creek, California. of section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970’’ practicable, in consultation and coordination (6) Napa County, California, at Yountville, and inserting ‘‘binding agreement with the Sec- with the Federal Emergency Management Agen- St. Helena, Calistoga, and American Canyon. retary’’; and cy and other appropriate Federal agencies, and (7) Santa Clara basin, California, at Upper (2) by adding at the end the following: in consultation and coordination with appro- Guadalupe River and tributaries, San ‘‘(g) NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—Notwith- priate State, tribal, and local agencies. Francisquito Creek, and Upper Penitencia standing section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act (3) NONSTRUCTURAL APPROACHES.—The stud- Creek. of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), the Secretary, ies and projects shall emphasize, to the max- (8) Pine Mount Creek, New Jersey. after coordination with the appropriate State imum extent practicable and appropriate, non- (9) Chagrin River, Ohio. and local government officials having jurisdic- structural approaches to preventing or reducing (10) Blair County, Pennsylvania, at Altoona tion over an area in which a project under this flood damages. and Frankstown Township. section will be carried out, may allow a non- (4) USE OF STATE, TRIBAL, AND LOCAL STUDIES (11) Lincoln Creek, Wisconsin. profit entity to serve as the non-Federal interest AND PROJECTS.—The studies and projects shall (f) PROGRAM REVIEW.— for the project.’’. include consideration of and coordination with (1) IN GENERAL.—The program established SEC. 211. HARBOR COST SHARING. any State, tribal, and local flood damage reduc- under this section shall be subject to an inde- (a) IN GENERAL.—Sections 101 and 214 of the tion or riverine and wetland restoration studies pendent review to evaluate the efficacy of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 and projects that conserve, restore, and manage program in achieving the dual goals of flood U.S.C. 2211 and 2241; P.L. 99–662) are amended hydrologic and hydraulic regimes and restore hazard mitigation and riverine restoration. by striking ‘‘45 feet’’ each place it appears and the natural functions and values of floodplains. (2) REPORT.—Not later than April 15, 2003, the inserting ‘‘53 feet’’. (c) COST-SHARING REQUIREMENTS.— Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on H2494 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 4199) is amended by inserting after ‘‘navigation protection projects, and data on the movement of Representatives and the Committee on Envi- works’’ the following: ‘‘and shore damages at- of sand along the Nation’s shores, including im- ronment and Public Works of the Senate a re- tributable to the Atlantic Intracoastal Water- pediments to such movement caused by natural port on the findings of the review conducted way and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway’’. and manmade features. under this subsection with any recommenda- (b) PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA.—The (3) ACCESS.—The national coastal data bank tions concerning continuation of the program. project for navigation, Palm Beach County, shall be made readily accessible to the public. (g) COST LIMITATIONS.— Florida, authorized by section 2 of the River SEC. 219. FLOOD PREVENTION COORDINATION. (1) MAXIMUM FEDERAL COST PER PROJECT.—No and Harbor Act of March 2, 1945 (59 Stat. 11), is Section 206 of the Flood Control Act of 1960 more than $30,000,000 may be expended by the modified to authorize the Secretary to undertake (33 U.S.C. 709a) is amended— United States on any single project under this beach nourishment as a dredged material dis- (1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as section. posal option under the project. subsections (c) and (d), respectively; and (2) COMMITTEE RESOLUTION PROCEDURE.— (c) GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS.—The Sec- (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol- (A) LIMITATION ON APPROPRIATIONS.—No ap- retary may place dredged material from the Gulf lowing: propriation shall be made to construct any Intracoastal Waterway on the beaches along ‘‘(b) FLOOD PREVENTION COORDINATION.—The project under this section the total Federal cost Rollover Pass, Galveston County, Texas, to sta- Secretary shall coordinate with the Director of of construction of which exceeds $15,000,000 if bilize beach erosion. the Federal Emergency Management Agency the project has not been approved by resolutions SEC. 218. SHORE PROTECTION. and the heads of other Federal agencies to en- adopted by the Committee on Transportation (a) NON-FEDERAL SHARE OF PERIODIC NOUR- sure that flood control projects and plans are and Infrastructure of the House of Representa- ISHMENT.—Section 103(d) of the Water Resources complementary and integrated to the extent tives and the Committee on Environment and Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4085–5086) is practicable and appropriate.’’. Public Works of the Senate. amended— SEC. 220. ANNUAL PASSES FOR RECREATION. (B) REPORT.—For the purpose of securing (1) by inserting ‘‘(1) CONSTRUCTION.—’’ before Section 208(c)(4) of the Water Resources De- consideration of approval under this paragraph, ‘‘Costs of constructing’’; velopment Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 460d note; 110 the Secretary shall transmit a report on the pro- (2) by inserting at the end the following: Stat. 3680) is amended by striking ‘‘1999, or the posed project, including all relevant data and ‘‘(2) PERIODIC NOURISHMENT.— date of transmittal of the report under para- information on all costs. ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph graph (3)’’ and inserting ‘‘2003’’. (h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (B), the non-Federal share of costs of periodic There is authorized to be appropriated to carry SEC. 221. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS FOR ENVI- nourishment measures for shore protection or RONMENTAL AND RECREATIONAL out this section— beach erosion control that are carried out— MEASURES. (1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2000; ‘‘(i) after January 1, 2001, shall be 40 percent; (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (2) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 if $12,500,000 ‘‘(ii) after January 1, 2002, shall be 45 percent; to enter into cooperative agreements with non- or more is appropriated to carry out subsection and Federal public bodies and non-profit entities for (e) for fiscal year 2000; ‘‘(iii) after January 1, 2003, shall be 50 per- the purpose of facilitating collaborative efforts (3) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 if $12,500,000 cent; involving environmental protection and restora- or more is appropriated to carry out subsection ‘‘(B) BENEFITS TO PRIVATELY OWNED tion, natural resources conservation, and recre- (e) for fiscal year 2001; and SHORES.—All costs assigned to benefits of peri- ation in connection with the development, oper- (4) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2003 if $12,500,000 odic nourishment measures to privately owned ation, and management of water resources or more is appropriated to carry out subsection shores (where use of such shores is limited to projects under the jurisdiction of the Depart- (e) for fiscal year 2002. private interests) or to prevention of losses of ment of the Army. SEC. 215. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. private lands shall be borne by the non-Federal (b) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after (a) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall review the interest and all costs assigned to the protection the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary implementation of the Corps of Engineers’ of federally owned shores for such measures shall transmit to the Committee on Transpor- shoreline management program, with particular shall be borne by the United States.’’; and tation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep- attention to inconsistencies in implementation (C) by indenting paragraph (1) (as designated resentatives and the Committee on Environment among the divisions and districts of the Corps of by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph) and and Public Works of the Senate a report that Engineers and complaints by or potential in- aligning such paragraph with paragraph (2) (as includes— equities regarding property owners in the Sa- added by subparagraph (B) of this paragraph). (1) a listing and general description of the co- vannah District including an accounting of the (b) UTILIZATION OF SAND FROM OUTER CONTI- operative agreements entered into by the Sec- number and disposition of complaints over the NENTAL SHELF.—Section 8(k)(2)(B) of the Outer retary with non-Federal public bodies and enti- last 5 years in the District. Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. ties under subsection (a); (b) REPORT.—As expeditiously as practicable 1337(k)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ‘‘an agen- (2) a determination of whether such agree- after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- cy of the Federal Government’’ and inserting ‘‘a ments are facilitating collaborative efforts; and retary shall transmit to the Committee on Trans- Federal, State, or local government agency’’. (3) a recommendation on whether such agree- portation and Infrastructure of the House of (c) REPORT ON NATION’S SHORELINES.— ments should be further encouraged. Representatives and the Committee on Environ- (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after SEC. 222. NONSTRUCTURAL FLOOD CONTROL ment and Public Works of the Senate a report the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary PROJECTS. describing the results of the review conducted shall report to Congress on the state of the Na- (a) ANALYSIS OF BENEFITS.—Section 308 of the under subsection (a). tion’s shorelines. Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (33 SEC. 216. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RES- (2) CONTENTS.—The report shall include— U.S.C. 2318; 104 Stat. 4638) is amended— TORATION, AND REUSE. (A) a description of the extent of, and eco- (1) in the heading to subsection (a) by insert- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide nomic and environmental effects caused by, ero- ing ‘‘ELEMENTS EXCLUDED FROM’’ before ‘‘BEN- to State and local governments assessment, sion and accretion along the Nation’s shores EFIT-COST’’; planning, and design assistance for remediation, and the causes thereof; (2) by redesignating subsections (b) through environmental restoration, or reuse of areas lo- (B) a description of resources committed by (e) as subsections (c) through (f), respectively; cated within the boundaries of such State or local, State, and Federal governments to restore and local governments where such remediation, envi- and renourish shorelines; (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol- ronmental restoration, or reuse will contribute (C) a description of the systematic movement lowing: to the conservation of water and related re- of sand along the Nation’s shores; and ‘‘(b) FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION BENEFITS.— sources of drainage basins and watersheds with- (D) recommendations regarding (i) appro- In calculating the benefits of a proposed project in the United States. priate levels of Federal and non-Federal partici- for nonstructural flood damage reduction, the (b) BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATERIAL.— pation in shoreline protection, and (ii) utiliza- Secretary shall calculate benefits of non- In providing assistance under subsection (a), tion of a systems approach to sand management. structural projects using methods similar to the Secretary shall encourage the beneficial use (3) UTILIZATION OF SPECIFIC LOCATION DATA.— structural projects, including similar treatment of dredged material, consistent with the findings In developing the report, the Secretary shall uti- in calculating the benefits from losses avoided of the Secretary under section 204 of the Water lize data from specific locations on the Atlantic, from both structural and nonstructural alter- Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. Pacific, Great Lakes, and Gulf of Mexico coasts. natives. In carrying out this subsection, the Sec- 2326). (d) NATIONAL COASTAL DATA BANK.— retary should avoid double counting of bene- (c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal (1) ESTABLISHMENT OF DATA BANK.—Not later fits.’’. share of the cost of assistance provided under than 2 years after the date of enactment of this (b) REEVALUATION OF FLOOD CONTROL subsection (a) shall be 50 percent. Act, the Secretary shall establish a national PROJECTS.—At the request of a non-Federal in- (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— coastal data bank containing data on the geo- terest for a flood control project, the Secretary There is authorized to be appropriated to carry physical and climatological characteristics of shall conduct a reevaluation of a previously au- out this section $3,000,000 for each of fiscal the Nation’s shorelines. thorized project to consider nonstructural alter- years 2000 through 2004. (2) CONTENT.—To the extent practical, the na- natives in light of the amendments made by sub- SEC. 217. SHORE DAMAGE MITIGATION. tional coastal data bank shall include data re- section (a). (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 111 of the River and garding current and predicted shoreline posi- (c) COST SHARING.—Section 103(b) of the Harbor Act of 1968 (33 U.S.C. 426i; 100 Stat. tions, information on federally-authorized shore Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2495 U.S.C. 2213(b)) is amended by adding at the end Acts’’ and inserting ‘‘subject to appropriations’’; actment of the Water Resources Development the following: ‘‘At any time during construction and Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note) shall not be of the project, where the Secretary determines (B) by inserting after ‘‘the cost of such work’’ treated as part of total project costs. that the costs of lands, easements, rights-of- the following: ‘‘, or provide credit (depending on SEC. 302. OUZINKIE HARBOR, ALASKA. way, dredged material disposal areas, and relo- the request of the non-Federal interest) for the (a) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The cations in combination with other costs contrib- non-Federal share of such work,’’. maximum amount of Federal funds that may be uted by the non-Federal interests will exceed 35 (3) SCHEDULE AND MANNER OF REIMBURSE- expended for the project for navigation, percent, any additional costs for the project, but MENTS.—Section 211(e) of such Act (33 U.S.C. Ouzinkie Harbor, Alaska, shall be $8,500,000. not to exceed 65 percent of the total costs of the 701b–13(e)) is amended by adding at the end the (b) REVISION OF PROJECT COOPERATION project, shall be a Federal responsibility and following: AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall revise the shall be contributed during construction as part ‘‘(6) SCHEDULE AND MANNER OF REIMBURSE- project cooperation agreement for the project re- of the Federal share.’’. MENT.— ferred to in subsection (a) to take into account SEC. 223. LAKES PROGRAM. ‘‘(A) BUDGETING.—The Secretary shall budget the change in the Federal participation in such Section 602(a) of the Water Resources Devel- and request appropriations for reimbursements project pursuant to subsection (a). opment Act of 1986 (110 Stat. 3758) is amended— under this section on a schedule that is con- (c) COST SHARING.—Nothing in this section (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph sistent with a Federal construction schedule. shall be construed to affect any cost-sharing re- (15); ‘‘(B) COMMENCEMENT OF REIMBURSEMENTS.— quirement applicable to the project referred to in (2) by striking the period at the end of para- Reimbursements under this section may com- subsection (a) under the Water Resources Devel- graph (16) and inserting a semicolon; and mence upon approval of a project by the Sec- opment Act of 1986. (3) by adding at the end the following: retary. SEC. 303. GREERS FERRY LAKE, ARKANSAS. ‘‘(17) Clear Lake, Lake County, California, re- ‘‘(C) CREDIT.—At the request of a non-Federal The project for flood control, Greers Ferry moval of silt and aquatic growth and measures interest, the Secretary may reimburse the non- Lake, Arkansas, authorized by the Act entitled to address excessive sedimentation and high nu- Federal interest by providing credit toward fu- ‘‘An Act authorizing the construction of certain trient concentration; and ture non-Federal costs of the project. public works on rivers and harbors for flood ‘‘(18) Osgood Pond, Milford, Hillsborough ‘‘(D) SCHEDULING.—Nothing in this paragraph control, and other purposes’’, approved June 28, County, New Hampshire, removal of silt and shall affect the President’s discretion to sched- 1938 (52 Stat. 1218), is modified to authorize the aquatic growth and measures to address exces- ule new construction starts.’’. Secretary to construct water intake facilities for sive sedimentation. SEC. 225. ENHANCEMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE the benefit of Lonoke and White Counties, Ar- ‘‘(19) Flints Pond, Hollis, Hillsborough Coun- RESOURCES. kansas. ty, New Hampshire, removal of silt and aquatic Section 906(e) of the Water Resources Develop- SEC. 304. TEN- AND FIFTEEN-MILE BAYOUS, AR- growth and measures to address excessive sedi- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(e)) is amended KANSAS. mentation.’’. by inserting after the second sentence the fol- The project for flood control, St. Francis River lowing: ‘‘Not more than 80 percent of the non- SEC. 224. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL Basin, Missouri and Arkansas, authorized by PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL INTER- Federal share of such first costs may be satisfied section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1950 (64 ESTS. through in-kind contributions, including facili- Stat. 172), is modified to expand the project (a) CONSTRUCTION BY NON-FEDERAL INTER- ties, supplies, and services that are necessary to boundaries to include Ten- and Fifteen-Mile ESTS.—Section 211(d)(1) of the Water Resources carry out the enhancement project.’’. Bayous near West Memphis, Arkansas. Notwith- Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 701b– SEC. 226. SENSE OF CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT standing section 103(f) of the Water Resources 13(d)(1)) is amended— REGARDING NOTICE. Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4086), the (1) by striking ‘‘(b) or’’; (a) PURCHASE OF AMERICAN-MADE EQUIPMENT flood control work at Ten- and Fifteen-Mile (2) by striking ‘‘Any non-Federal’’ and insert- AND PRODUCTS.—It is the sense of Congress Bayous shall not be considered separable ele- ing the following: that, to the greatest extent practicable, all ments of the St. Francis Basin project. ‘‘(A) STUDIES AND DESIGN ACTIVITIES UNDER equipment and products purchased with funds SEC. 305. LOGGY BAYOU, RED RIVER BELOW SUBSECTION (b).—A non-Federal interest may made available under this Act should be Amer- DENISON DAM, ARKANSAS, LOU- only carry out construction for which studies ican made. ISIANA, OKLAHOMA, AND TEXAS. and design documents are prepared under sub- (b) NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS OF ASSISTANCE.—In The project for flood control on the Red River section (b) if the Secretary approves such con- providing financial assistance under this Act, Below Denison Dam, Arkansas, Louisiana, struction. The Secretary shall approve such con- the Secretary, to the greatest extent practicable, Oklahoma, and Texas, authorized by section 10 struction unless the Secretary determines, in shall provide to each recipient of the assistance of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 647), writing, that the design documents do not meet a notice describing the statement made in sub- is modified to direct the Secretary to conduct a standard practices for design methodologies or section (a). study to determine the feasibility of expanding that the project is not economically justified or SEC. 227. PERIODIC BEACH NOURISHMENT. the project to include mile 0.0 to mile 7.8 of environmentally acceptable or does not meet the (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 506(a) of the Water Loggy Bayou between the Red River and Flat requirements for obtaining the appropriate per- Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. River. If the Secretary determines as a result of mits required under the Secretary’s authority. 3757) is amended by adding at the end the fol- the study that the project should be expanded, The Secretary shall not unreasonably withhold lowing: the Secretary may assume responsibility for op- approval. Nothing in this subparagraph may be ‘‘(5) LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA.—Project for shore- eration and maintenance of the expanded construed to affect any regulatory authority of line protection, Lee County, Captiva Island seg- project. the Secretary. ment, Florida.’’. SEC. 306. SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA, ‘‘(B) STUDIES AND DESIGN ACTIVITIES UNDER (b) PROJECTS.—Section 506(b)(3) of such Act CALIFORNIA. SUBSECTION (c).—Any non-Federal’’; and (110 Stat. 3758) is amended by striking subpara- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood con- (3) by aligning the remainder of subparagraph graph (A) and redesignating subparagraphs (B) trol, Sacramento River, California, authorized (B) (as designated by paragraph (2) of this sub- through (D) as subparagraphs (A) through (C), by section 2 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to pro- section) with subparagraph (A) (as inserted by respectively. vide for the control of the floods of the Mis- paragraph (2) of this subsection). SEC. 228. ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING. sissippi River and of the Sacramento River, (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section Section 312 of the Water Resources Develop- California, and for other purposes’’, approved 211(d)(2) of such Act is amended by inserting ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4639–4640) is March 1, 1917 (39 Stat. 949), and modified by ‘‘(other than paragraph (1)(A))’’ after ‘‘this amended— section 102 of the Energy and Water Develop- subsection’’. (1) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ‘‘50’’ and ment Appropriations Act, 1990 (103 Stat. 649), (c) REIMBURSEMENT.— inserting ‘‘35’’; and section 301(b)(3) of the Water Resources Devel- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 211(e)(1) of such Act (2) in subsection (d) by striking ‘‘non-Federal opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3110), and title I of is amended— responsibility’’ and inserting ‘‘shared as a cost the Energy and Water Development Appropria- (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (1) of construction’’. tions Act, 1999 (112 Stat. 1841), is further modi- by inserting after ‘‘constructed pursuant to this fied to authorize the Secretary— section’’ the following: ‘‘and provide credit for TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED (1) to carry out the portion of the project at the non-Federal share of the project’’; PROVISIONS Glenn-Colusa, California, at a total cost of (B) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- SEC. 301. MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM. $26,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of graph (A); The project for flood control, Missouri River $20,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of (C) by striking the period at the end of sub- Levee System, authorized by section 10 of the $6,000,000; and paragraph (B) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the construc- (2) to carry out bank stabilization work in the (D) by adding at the end the following: tion of certain public works on rivers and har- vicinity of the riverbed gradient facility, par- ‘‘(C) if the construction work is reasonably bors for flood control, and other purposes’’, ap- ticularly in the vicinity of River Mile 208. equivalent to Federal construction work.’’. proved December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 897), is modi- (b) CREDIT.—The Secretary shall provide the (2) SPECIAL RULES.—Section 211(e)(2)(A) of fied to provide that project costs totaling non-Federal interests for the project referred to such Act is amended— $2,616,000 expended on Units L–15, L–246, and in subsection (a) a credit of up to $4,000,000 to- (A) by striking ‘‘subject to amounts being L–385 out of the Construction, General account ward the non-Federal share of the project costs made available in advance in appropriations of the Corps of Engineers before the date of en- for the direct and indirect costs incurred by the H2496 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 non-Federal sponsor in carrying out activities May 1997, where the non-Federal interest has at a total cost of $17,000,000, with an estimated associated with environmental compliance for supplied the corresponding disposal capacity. Federal cost of $13,300,000 and an estimated the project. Such credit may be in the form of (4) The Secretary is authorized to enter into non-Federal cost of $3,700,000. reimbursements for costs which were incurred by an agreement with a non-Federal interest that SEC. 315. MIAMI HARBOR CHANNEL, FLORIDA. the non-Federal interests prior to an agreement will provide that the non-Federal interest may The project for navigation, Miami Harbor with the Corps of Engineers, to include the carry out or cause to have carried out, on behalf Channel, Florida, authorized by section value of lands, easements, rights-of-way, reloca- of the Secretary, a disposal area management 101(a)(9) of the Water Resources Development tions, or dredged material disposal areas. program for dredged material disposal areas Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4606), is modified to in- SEC. 307. SAN LORENZO RIVER, CALIFORNIA. necessary to construct, operate, and maintain clude construction of artificial reefs and related The project for flood control and habitat res- the project and to authorize the Secretary to re- environmental mitigation required by Federal, toration, San Lorenzo River, California, author- imburse the non-Federal interest for the costs of State, and local environmental permitting agen- ized by section 101(a)(5) of the Water Resources the disposal area management program activi- cies for the project. Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3663), is ties carried out by the non-Federal interest. SEC. 316. LAKE MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS. modified to authorize the Secretary to expand SEC. 310. POTOMAC RIVER, WASHINGTON, DIS- The project for storm damage reduction and the boundaries of the project to include bank TRICT OF COLUMBIA. shoreline erosion protection, Lake Michigan, Il- stabilization for a 1,000-foot portion of the San The project for flood control authorized by linois, from Wilmette, Illinois, to the Illinois-In- Lorenzo River. section 5 of the Flood Control Act of June 22, diana State line, authorized by section 1936 (69 Stat. 1574), as modified by section SEC. 308. TERMINUS DAM, KAWEAH RIVER, CALI- 101(a)(12) of the Water Resources Development FORNIA. 301(a)(4) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3664), is modified to au- Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3707), is further modified (a) TRANSFER OF TITLE TO ADDITIONAL thorize the Secretary to provide a credit against to authorize the Secretary to construct the LAND.—If the non-Federal interests for the the non-Federal share of the cost of the project project for flood control and water supply, Ter- project at a Federal cost of $5,965,000. for costs incurred by the non-Federal interest— minus Dam, Kaweah River, California, author- SEC. 311. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. (1) in constructing Reach 2D and Segment 8 of ized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources (a) STUDY.—The Secretary, in cooperation Reach 4 of the project; and Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), trans- with the non-Federal interest, shall conduct a (2) in reconstructing Solidarity Drive in Chi- fers to the Secretary without consideration title study of any damage to the project for shoreline cago, Illinois, prior to entry into a project co- to perimeter lands acquired for the project by protection, Brevard County, Florida, authorized operation agreement with the Secretary. the non-Federal interests, the Secretary may ac- by section 101(b)(7) of the Water Resources De- SEC. 317. SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS. cept the transfer of such title. velopment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), to deter- Section 417 of the Water Resources Develop- (b) LANDS, EASEMENT, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY.— mine whether the damage is the result of a Fed- ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3743) is amended— eral navigation project. Nothing in this section shall be construed to (1) by inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’ before (b) CONDITIONS.—In conducting the study, the change, modify, or otherwise affect the responsi- ‘‘The Secretary’’; and Secretary shall utilize the services of an inde- bility of the non-Federal interests to provide (2) by adding at the end the following: pendent coastal expert who shall consider all lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, ‘‘(b) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share and dredged material disposal areas necessary relevant studies completed by the Corps of Engi- of assistance provided under this section before, for the Terminus Dam project and to perform neers and the project’s local sponsor. The study on, or after the date of enactment of this sub- operation and maintenance for the project. shall be completed within 120 days of the date of section shall be 50 percent.’’. enactment of this Act. (c) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—Upon re- SEC. 318. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, INDIANA. (c) MITIGATION OF DAMAGES.—After comple- quest by the non-Federal interests, the Secretary The project for flood control, Little Calumet shall carry out operation, maintenance, repair, tion of the study, the Secretary shall mitigate any damage to the shoreline protection project River, Indiana, authorized by section 401(a) of replacement, and rehabilitation of the project if the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 the non-Federal interests enter into a binding that is the result of a Federal navigation project. The costs of the mitigation shall be allo- (100 Stat. 4115), is modified to authorize the Sec- agreement with the Secretary to reimburse the retary to construct the project substantially in Secretary for 100 percent of the costs of such op- cated to the Federal navigation project as oper- ation and maintenance. accordance with the report of the Corps of Engi- eration, maintenance, repair, replacement, and neers, at a total cost of $167,000,000, with an es- SEC. 312. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO rehabilitation. timated Federal cost of $122,000,000 and an esti- (d) HOLD HARMLESS.—The non-Federal inter- INLET, FLORIDA. mated non-Federal cost of $45,000,000. ests shall hold the United States harmless for The project for shoreline protection, Broward ownership, operation, and maintenance of lands County and Hillsboro Inlet, Florida, authorized SEC. 319. OGDEN DUNES, INDIANA. and facilities of the Terminus Dam project title by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a to which is transferred to the Secretary under 1965 (79 Stat. 1090), is modified to authorize the study of beach erosion in and around the town this section. Secretary to reimburse the non-Federal interest of Ogden Dunes, Indiana, to determine whether the damage is the result of a Federal navigation SEC. 309. DELAWARE RIVER MAINSTEM AND for the Federal share of the cost of CHANNEL DEEPENING, DELAWARE, preconstruction planning and design for the project. NEW JERSEY, AND PENNSYLVANIA. project upon execution of a contract to con- (b) MITIGATION OF DAMAGES.—After comple- The project for navigation, Delaware River struct the project if the Secretary determines tion of the study, the Secretary shall mitigate Mainstem and Channel Deepening, Delaware, such work is compatible with and integral to the any damage to the beach and shoreline that is New Jersey and Pennsylvania, authorized by project. the result of a Federal navigation project. The section 101(6) of the Water Resources Develop- SEC. 313. FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA. cost of the mitigation shall be allocated to the ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4802), is modified as (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for shore protec- Federal navigation project as operation and follows: tion and harbor mitigation, Fort Pierce, Florida, maintenance. (1) The Secretary is authorized to provide authorized by section 301 of the River and Har- SEC. 320. SAINT JOSEPH RIVER, SOUTH BEND, IN- non-Federal interests credit toward cash con- bor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1092) and section DIANA. tributions required for construction and subse- 506(a)(2) of the Water Resources Development (a) MAXIMUM TOTAL EXPENDITURE.—The quent to construction for engineering and de- Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3757), is modified to incor- maximum total expenditure for the project for sign and construction management work that is porate an additional 1 mile into the project in streambank erosion, recreation, and pedestrian performed by non-Federal interests and that the accordance with a final approved General Re- access features, Saint Joseph River, South Bend, Secretary determines is necessary to implement evaluation Report, at a total cost for initial Indiana, shall be $7,800,000. the project. Any such credits extended shall re- nourishment for the entire project of $9,128,000, (b) REVISION OF PROJECT COOPERATION duce the Philadelphia District’s private sector with an estimated Federal cost of $7,073,500 and AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall revise the performance goals for engineering work by a an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,054,500. project cooperation agreement for the project re- like amount. (b) PERIOD NOURISHMENT.—Periodic nourish- ferred to in subsection (a) to take into account (2) The Secretary is authorized to provide to ment is authorized for the project in accordance the change in the Federal participation in such non-Federal interests credit toward cash con- with section 506(a)(2) of Water Resources Devel- project pursuant to subsection (a). tributions required during construction and sub- opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3757). (c) COST SHARING.—Nothing in this section sequent to construction for the costs of con- (c) REVISION OF THE PROJECT COOPERATION shall be construed to affect any cost-sharing re- struction carried out by the non-Federal interest AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall revise the quirement applicable to the project referred to in on behalf of the Secretary and that the Sec- project cooperation agreement for the project re- subsection (a) under title I of the Water Re- retary determines is necessary to implement the ferred to in subsection (a) to take into account sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 project. the change in Federal participation in the et seq.). (3) The Secretary is authorized to enter into project pursuant to subsection (a). SEC. 321. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA. an agreement with a non-Federal interest for SEC. 314. NASSAU COUNTY, FLORIDA. The project for flood control, Indianapolis on the payment of disposal or tipping fees for The project for beach erosion control, Nassau West Fork of the White River, Indiana, author- dredged material from a Federal project other County (Amelia fIsland), Florida, authorized by ized by section 5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act au- than for the construction or operation and section 3(a)(3) of the Water Resources Develop- thorizing the construction of certain public maintenance of the new deepening project as de- ment Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4013), is modified to works on rivers and harbors for flood control, scribed in the Limited Reevaluation Report of authorize the Secretary to construct the project and other purposes’’, approved June 22, 1936 (49 April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2497 Stat. 1586), and modified by section 323 of the project, with a combined total cost of SEC. 333. MISSOURI RIVER MITIGATION PROJECT, Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 $280,300,000. MISSOURI, KANSAS, IOWA, AND NE- BRASKA. Stat. 3716), is further modified to authorize the SEC. 327. TOLCHESTER CHANNEL, BALTIMORE Secretary to undertake riverfront alterations as HARBOR AND CHANNELS, CHESA- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for mitigation of described in the Central Indianapolis Water- PEAKE BAY, KENT COUNTY, MARY- fish and wildlife losses, Missouri River Bank front Concept Master Plan, dated February LAND. Stabilization and Navigation Project, Missouri, 1994, at a total cost of $110,975,000, with an esti- The project for navigation, Tolchester Chan- Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska, authorized by sec- mated Federal cost of $52,475,000 and an esti- nel, Baltimore Harbor and Channels, Chesa- tion 601 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4143), is modified to in- mated non-Federal cost of $58,500,000. peake Bay, Kent County, Maryland, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of crease by 118,650 acres the lands and interests in SEC. 322. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LOUISIANA. 1958 (72 Stat. 297), is modified to authorize the lands to be acquired for the project. The project for hurricane-flood protection, Secretary to straighten the navigation channel (b) STUDY.— Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, authorized by in accordance with the District Engineer’s Navi- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in conjunc- section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 gation Assessment Report and Environmental tion with the States of Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Stat. 1077), is modified— Assessment, dated April 30, 1997. This modifica- and Missouri, shall conduct a study to deter- (1) to direct the Secretary to conduct a study tion shall be carried out in order to improve mine the cost of restoring, under the authority to determine the feasibility of constructing a navigation safety. of the Missouri River fish and wildlife mitiga- pump adjacent to each of the 4 proposed drain- SEC. 328. SAULT SAINTE MARIE, CHIPPEWA COUN- tion project, a total of 118,650 acres of lost Mis- age structures for the Saint Charles Parish fea- TY, MICHIGAN. souri River habitat. ture of the project; and The project for navigation Sault Sainte Marie, (2) REPORT.—The Secretary shall report to (2) to authorize the Secretary to construct Chippewa County, Michigan, authorized by sec- Congress on the results of the study not later such pumps upon completion of the study. tion 1149 of the Water Resources Development than 6 months after the date of enactment of SEC. 323. LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LOU- Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4254–4255) and modified by this Act. ISIANA. section 330 of the Water Resources Development SEC. 334. WOOD RIVER, GRAND ISLAND, NE- The project for hurricane protection Larose to Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3717–3718), is further modi- BRASKA. The project for flood control, Wood River, Golden Meadow, Louisiana, authorized by sec- fied to provide that the amount to be paid by Grand Island, Nebraska, authorized by section tion 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 non-Federal interests pursuant to section 101(a) 101(a)(19) of the Water Resources Development Stat. 1077), is modified to direct the Secretary to of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), is modified to au- convert the Golden Meadow floodgate into a (33 U.S.C. 2211(a)) and subsection (a) of such thorize the Secretary to construct the project navigation lock if the Secretary determines that section 330 shall not include any interest pay- substantially in accordance with the report of the conversion is feasible. ments. the Corps of Engineers dated June 29, 1998, at a SEC. 324. LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY SEC. 329. JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. total cost of $17,039,000, with an estimated Fed- LEVEE, LOUISIANA. The project for environmental infrastructure, The Louisiana State Penitentiary Levee eral cost of $9,730,000 and an estimated non- Jackson County, Mississippi, authorized by sec- Federal cost of $7,309,000. project, Louisiana, authorized by section 401(a) tion 219(c)(5) of the Water Resources Develop- of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 SEC. 335. ABSECON ISLAND, NEW JERSEY. ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835) and modified by The project for storm damage reduction and (100 Stat. 4117), is modified to direct the Sec- section 504 of the Water Resources Development retary to provide credit to the non-Federal inter- shoreline protection, Brigantine Inlet to Great Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3757), is further modified Egg Harbor Inlet, Absecon Island, New Jersey, est toward the non-Federal share of the cost of to direct the Secretary to provide a credit, not to the project. The credit shall be for cost of work authorized by section 101(b)(13) of the Water Re- exceed $5,000,000, against the non-Federal share sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3668), performed by the non-Federal interest prior to of the cost of the project for the costs incurred the execution of a project cooperation agreement is modified to provide that, if, after October 12, by the Jackson County Board of Supervisors 1996, the non-Federal interests carry out any as determined by the Secretary to be compatible since February 8, 1994, in constructing the with and an integral part of the project. work associated with the project that is later project if the Secretary determines that such recommended by the Chief of Engineers and ap- SEC. 325. TWELVE-MILE BAYOU, CADDO PARISH, costs are for work that the Secretary determines proved by the Secretary, the Secretary may LOUISIANA. is compatible with and integral to the project. credit the non-Federal interests toward the non- The Secretary shall be responsible for mainte- SEC. 330. TUNICA LAKE, MISSISSIPPI. Federal share of the cost of the project an nance of the levee along Twelve-Mile Bayou The project for flood control, Mississippi River amount equal to the Federal share of the cost of from its junction with the existing Red River Channel Improvement Project, Tunica Lake, such work, without interest. Below Denison Dam Levee approximately 26 Mississippi, authorized by the Act entitled: ‘‘An SEC. 336. NEW YORK HARBOR AND ADJACENT miles upstream to its terminus at high ground in Act for the control of floods on the Mississippi CHANNELS, PORT JERSEY, NEW JER- the vicinity of Black Bayou, Caddo Parish, River and its tributaries, and for other pur- SEY Louisiana, if the Secretary determines that such poses’’, approved May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534–538), The project for navigation, New York Harbor maintenance is economically justified and envi- is modified to include construction of a weir at and Adjacent Channels, New York and New Jer- ronmentally acceptable and that the levee was the Tunica Cutoff, Mississippi. sey, authorized by section 202(b) of the Water constructed in accordance with appropriate de- SEC. 331. BOIS BRULE DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DIS- Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. sign and engineering standards. TRICT, MISSOURI. 4098), is modified to authorize the Secretary to SEC. 326. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (a) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The construct that portion of the project that is lo- (EAST OF HARVEY CANAL), LOU- maximum amount of Federal funds that may be cated between Military Ocean Terminal Ba- ISIANA. allocated for the project for flood control, Bois yonne and Global Terminal in Bayonne, New (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control Brule Drainage and Levee District, Missouri, Jersey, substantially in accordance with the re- and storm damage reduction, West Bank of the authorized pursuant to section 205 of the Flood port of the Corps of Engineers, at a total cost of Mississippi River (East of Harvey Canal), Lou- Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), shall be $103,267,000, with an estimated Federal cost of isiana, authorized by section 401(b) of the Water $15,000,000. $76,909,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. (b) REVISION OF THE PROJECT COOPERATION $26,358,000. 4128) and section 101(a)(17) of the Water Re- AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall revise the SEC. 337. PASSAIC RIVER, NEW JERSEY. sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), project cooperation agreement for the project re- Section 101(a)(18)(B) of the Water Resources is modified— ferred to in subsection (a) to take into account Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4608–4609) is (1) to provide that any liability under the the change in Federal participation in the amended by inserting ‘‘, including an esplanade Comprehensive Environmental Response, Com- project pursuant to subsection (a). for safe pedestrian access with an overall width pensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. (c) COST SHARING.—Nothing in this section of 600 feet’’ after ‘‘public access to Route 21’’. 9601 et seq.) from the construction of the project shall be construed to affect any cost-sharing re- SEC. 338. SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NEW is a Federal responsibility; and quirement applicable to the project referred to in JERSEY. (2) to authorize the Secretary to carry out op- subsection (a) under title I of the Water Re- The project for shoreline protection, Sandy eration and maintenance of that portion of the sources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211 Hook to Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, authorized project included in the report of the Chief of En- et seq.). by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of gineers, dated May 1, 1995, referred to as ‘‘Al- SEC. 332. MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY PARK 1958 (72 Stat. 299), is modified— giers Channel’’, if the non-Federal sponsor re- LEVEE, MISSOURI. (1) to include the demolition of Long Branch imburses the Secretary for the amount of such The project for flood control, Meramec River pier and extension of Ocean Grove pier; and operation and maintenance included in the re- Basin, Valley Park Levee, Missouri, authorized (2) to authorize the Secretary to reimburse the port of the Chief of Engineers. by section 2(h) of an Act entitled ‘‘An Act to de- non-Federal sponsor for the Federal share of (b) COMBINATION OF PROJECTS.—The Sec- authorize several projects within the jurisdiction costs associated with the demolition of Long retary shall carry out work authorized as part of the Army Corps of Engineers’’ (95 Stat. 1682– Branch pier and the construction of the Ocean of the Westwego to Harvey Canal project, the 1683) and modified by section 1128 of the Water Grove pier. East of Harvey cannal project, and the Lake Resources Development Act of 1986, (100 Stat. SEC. 339. ARTHUR KILL, NEW YORK AND NEW JER- Cataouatche modifications as a single project, to 4246), is further modified to authorize the Sec- SEY. be known as the West Bank and vicinity, New retary to construct the project at a maximum The project for navigation, Arthur Kill, New Orleans, Louisiana, hurricane protection Federal expenditure of $35,000,000. York and New Jersey, authorized by section H2498 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 202(b) of the Water Resources Development Act SEC. 345. AYLESWORTH CREEK RESERVOIR, SEC. 351. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA. of 1986 (100 Stat. 4098) and modified by section PENNSYLVANIA. Section 313(g)(1) of the Water Resources De- 301(b)(11) of the Water Resources Development The project for flood control, Aylesworth velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4846) is amended Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3711), is further modified Creek Reservoir, Pennsylvania, authorized by by striking ‘‘$80,000,000’’ and inserting to authorize the Secretary to construct the por- section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (76 ‘‘$180,000,000’’. Stat. 1182), is modified to authorize the Sec- tion of the project at Howland Hook Marine SEC. 352. COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, Terminal substantially in accordance with the retary to transfer, in each of fiscal years 1999 SOUTH CAROLINA. report of the Corps of Engineers, dated Sep- and 2000, $50,000 to the Aylesworth Creek Res- The project for rediversion, Cooper River, tember 30, 1998, at a total cost of $315,700,000, ervoir Park Authority for recreational facilities. Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, authorized with an estimated Federal cost of $183,200,000 SEC. 346. CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of and an estimated non-Federal cost of Section 562 of the Water Resources Develop- 1968 (82 Stat. 731) and modified by title I of the $132,500,000. ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3784) is amended by Energy and Water Development Appropriations SEC. 340. NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED. adding at the end the following: ‘‘The Secretary Act, 1992 (105 Stat. 516), is further modified to Section 552(i) of the Water Resources Develop- shall provide design and construction assistance authorize the Secretary to pay to the State of ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781) is amended by for recreational facilities at Curwensville Lake South Carolina not more than $3,750,000 if the striking ‘‘$22,500,000’’ and inserting and, when appropriate, may require the non- Secretary and the State enter into a binding ‘‘$42,500,000’’. Federal interest to provide not more than 25 per- agreement for the State to perform all future op- SEC. 341. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM. cent of the cost of designing and constructing eration of, including associated studies to assess Section 553(e) of the Water Resources Develop- such facilities. The Secretary may transfer, in the efficacy of, the St. Stephen, South Carolina, ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3781) is amended by each of fiscal years 1999 through 2003, $100,000 fish lift. The agreement must specify the terms striking ‘‘$8,000,000’’ and inserting to the Clearfield County Municipal Services and and conditions under which payment will be ‘‘$18,000,000’’. Recreation Authority for recreational facili- made and the rights of, and remedies available SEC. 342. FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK ties.’’. to, the Federal Government to recover all or a POINT, NEW YORK. SEC. 347. DELAWARE RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA AND portion of such payment in the event the State The project for combined beach erosion con- DELAWARE. suspends or terminates operation of the fish lift trol and hurricane protection, Fire Island Inlet The project for navigation, Delaware River, or fails to operate the fish lift in a manner satis- to Montauk Point, Long Island, New York, au- Philadelphia to Wilmington, Pennsylvania and factory to the Secretary. Maintenance of the thorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Delaware, authorized by section 3(a)(12) of the fish lift shall remain a Federal responsibility. Stat. 483) and modified by the River and Harbor Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (102 SEC. 353. BOWIE COUNTY LEVEE, TEXAS. Act of 1962, the Water Resources Development Stat. 4014), is modified to authorize the Sec- The project for flood control, Red River Below Act of 1974, and the Water Resources Develop- retary to extend the channel of the Delaware Denison Dam, Texas and Oklahoma, authorized ment Act of 1986, is further modified to direct River at Camden, New Jersey, to within 150 feet by section 10 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 (60 the Secretary, in coordination with the heads of of the existing bulkhead and to relocate the 40- Stat. 647), is modified to direct the Secretary to other Federal departments and agencies, to com- foot deep Federal navigation channel, eastward implement the Bowie County Levee feature of plete all procedures and reviews expeditiously within Philadelphia Harbor, from the Ben the project in accordance with the plan defined and to adopt and transmit to Congress not later Franklin Bridge to the Walt Whitman Bridge, as Alternative B in the draft document entitled than June 30, 1999, a mutually acceptable shore into deep water. ‘‘Bowie County Local Flood Protection, Red erosion plan for the Fire Island Inlet to SEC. 348. MUSSERS DAM, PENNSYLVANIA. River, Texas Project Design Memorandum No. 1, Moriches Inlet reach of the project. Section 209 of the Water Resources Develop- Bowie County Levee’’, dated April 1997. In eval- SEC. 343. BROKEN BOW LAKE, RED RIVER BASIN, ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4830) is amended by uating and implementing this modification, the OKLAHOMA. striking subsection (e) and redesignating sub- Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to The project for flood control and water sup- section (f) as subsection (e). ply, Broken Bow Lake, Red River Basin, Okla- participate in the financing of the project in ac- SEC. 349. NINE-MILE RUN, ALLEGHENY COUNTY, cordance with section 903(c) of the Water Re- homa, authorized by section 203 of the Flood PENNSYLVANIA. Control Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 309) and modified sources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) The Nine-Mile Run project, Allegheny Coun- to the extent that the Secretary’s evaluation in- by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 ty, Pennsylvania, carried out pursuant to sec- (76 Stat. 1187), section 102(v) of the Water Re- dicates that applying such section is necessary tion 206 of the Water Resources Development to implement the project. sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4808), Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330; 110 Stat. 3679–3680), SEC. 354. CLEAR CREEK, TEXAS. and section 338 of the Water Resources Develop- is modified to authorize the Secretary to provide Section 575 of the Water Resources Develop- ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3720), is further modi- a credit toward the non-Federal share of the ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3789) is amended by fied to require the Secretary to make seasonal project for costs incurred by the non-Federal in- adding at the end the following: adjustments to the top of the conservation pool terest in preparing environmental and feasibility at the project as follows (if the Secretary deter- documentation for the project before entering ‘‘(c) CLEAR CREEK, TEXAS.—In any evaluation mines that the adjustments will be undertaken into an agreement with the Corps of Engineers of economic benefits and costs for the project for at no cost to the United States and will ade- with respect to the project if the Secretary deter- flood control, Clear Creek, Texas, authorized by quately protect impacted water and related re- mines such costs are for work that is compatible section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 sources): with and integral to the project. Stat. 742) that occurs after the date of enact- (1) Maintain an elevation of 599.5 from No- ment of this subsection, the Secretary shall in- vember 1 through March 31. SEC. 350. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA. clude the costs and benefits of nonstructural (2) Increase elevation gradually from 599.5 to (a) RECREATION PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE.— measures undertaken, including any buyout or 602.5 during April and May. Section 519(b) of the Water Resources Develop- relocation actions, of non-Federal interests (3) Maintain an elevation of 602.5 from June 1 ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3765) is amended— within the drainage area of such project before (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para- to September 30. the date of the evaluation in the determination graph (4); and (4) Decrease elevation gradually from 602.5 to of conditions existing before the construction of (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol- 599.5 during October. the project.’’. SEC. 344. WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE lowing: SEC. 355. CYPRESS CREEK, TEXAS. CONTROL, MCKENZIE SUBBASIN, OR- ‘‘(3) ENGINEERING AND DESIGN SERVICES.—The EGON. Secretary may perform, at full Federal expense, (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood con- (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for environ- engineering and design services for project in- trol, Cypress Creek, Texas, authorized by sec- mental restoration, Willamette River Tempera- frastructure expected to be associated with the tion 3(a)(13) of the Water Resources Develop- ture Control, McKenzie Subbasin, Oregon, au- development of the site at Raystown Lake, ment Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4014), is modified to thorized by section 101(a)(25) of the Water Re- Hesston, Pennsylvania.’’. authorize the Secretary to carry out a non- sources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3665), (b) CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE.— structural flood control project at a total cost of is modified to authorize the Secretary to con- (1) IN GENERAL.—Consistent with the master $5,000,000. struct the project substantially in accordance plan described in section 318 of the Water Re- (b) REIMBURSEMENT FOR WORK.—The Sec- with the Feature Memorandum dated July 31, sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4848), retary may reimburse the non-Federal interest 1998, at a total cost of $64,741,000. the Secretary may provide a grant to Juniata for the Cypress Creek project for work done by (b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the College for the construction of facilities and the non-Federal interest on the nonstructural date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary structures at Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania, to flood control project in an amount equal to the shall report to Congress on the reasons for the interpret and understand environmental condi- estimate of the Federal share, without interest, cost growth of the Willamette River project and tions and trends. As a condition of the receipt of of the cost of such work— outline the steps the Corps of Engineers is tak- such financial assistance, officials at Juniata (1) if, after authorization and before initiation ing to control project costs, including the appli- College shall coordinate with the Baltimore Dis- of construction of such nonstructural project, cation of value engineering and other appro- trict of the Army Corps of Engineers. the Secretary approves the plans for construc- priate measures. In the report, the Secretary (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— tion of such nonstructural project by the non- shall also include a cost estimate for, and rec- There is authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 Federal interest; and ommendations on the advisability of, adding for fiscal years beginning after September 30, (2) if the Secretary finds, after a review of fish screens to the project. 1998, to carry out this subsection. studies and design documents prepared to carry April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2499

out such nonstructural project, that construc- Juniata River basins, Pennsylvania, at a level (1) BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—That tion of such nonstructural project is economi- of protection that is sufficient to prevent any portion of the project for navigation, Bridgeport cally justified and environmentally acceptable. future losses to communities in these basins from Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by section 101 SEC. 356. DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, DAL- flooding such as occurred in January 1996, but of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. LAS, TEXAS. no less than a 100-year level of flood protection 297), consisting of a 2.4-acre anchorage area, 9 The project for flood control, Dallas Floodway with respect to those measures that incorporate feet deep, and an adjacent 0.6-acre anchorage, 6 Extension, Dallas, Texas, authorized by section levees or floodwalls.’’. feet deep, located on the west side of Johnsons 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. SEC. 363. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS. River. 1091) and modified by section 351 of the Water (a) LEE CREEK, ARKANSAS AND OKLAHOMA.— (2) CLINTON HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.—That Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. The project for flood protection on Lee Creek, portion of the project for navigation, Clinton 3724), is further modified— Arkansas and Oklahoma, authorized by section Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the Rivers (1) to add environmental restoration and 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. and Harbors Act of 1945, House Document 240, recreation as project purposes; and 1078) and deauthorized pursuant to section 76th Congress, 1st Session, lying upstream of a (2) to authorize the Secretary to construct the 1001(b)(1) of the Water Resources Development line designated by the 2 points N158,592.12, project substantially in accordance with the Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(1)), is authorized E660,193.92 and N158,444.58, E660,220.95. Chain of Wetlands Plan in the report of the to be carried out by the Secretary. (3) BASS HARBOR, MAINE.—The following por- Corps of Engineers at a total cost of (b) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.—The tions of the project for navigation, Bass Harbor, $123,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of project for shore protection, Indian River Coun- Maine, authorized on May 7, 1962, under section $80,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of ty, Florida, authorized by section 501 of the 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 $43,200,000. Water Resources and Development Act of 1986 U.S.C. 577): SEC. 357. UPPER JORDAN RIVER, UTAH. (100 Stat. 4134) and deauthorized pursuant to (A) Beginning at a bend in the project, The project for flood control, Upper Jordan section 1001(b)(1) of the Water Resources Devel- N149040.00, E538505.00, thence running easterly River, Utah, authorized by section 101(a)(23) of opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(1)), is au- about 50.00 feet along the northern limit of the the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 thorized to be carried out by the Secretary. project to a point N149061.55, E538550.11, thence (104 Stat. 4610) and modified by section (c) LIDO KEY, FLORIDA.—The project for shore running southerly about 642.08 feet to a point, 301(a)(14) of the Water Resources Development protection, Lido Key, Florida, authorized by N14877.64, E538817.18, thence running south- Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3709), is further modified section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1970 westerly about 156.27 feet to a point on the west- to direct the Secretary to carry out the locally (84 Stat. 1819) and deauthorized pursuant to erly limit of the project, N148348.50, E538737.02, preferred project, entitled ‘‘Upper Jordan River section 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Devel- thence running northerly about 149.00 feet Flood Control Project, Salt Lake County, opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C 579a(b)(2)), is au- along the westerly limit of the project to a bend Utah—Supplemental Information’’ and identi- thorized to be carried out by the Secretary. in the project, N148489.22, E538768.09, thence fied in the document of Salt Lake County, Utah, (d) ST. AUGUSTINE, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLOR- running northwesterly about 610.39 feet along dated July 30, 1998, at a total cost of $12,870,000, IDA.— the westerly limit of the project to the point of with an estimated Federal cost of $8,580,000 and (1) IN GENERAL.—The project for shore protec- origin. tion and storm damage reduction, St. Augustine, an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,290,000. (B) Beginning at a point on the westerly limit St. Johns County, Florida, authorized by section SEC. 358. ELIZABETH RIVER, CHESAPEAKE, VIR- of the project, N148118.55, E538689.05, thence 501 of the Water Resources Development Act of GINIA. running southeasterly about 91.92 feet to a 1986 and deauthorized pursuant to section Notwithstanding any other provision of law, point, N148041.43, E538739.07, thence running 1001(a) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 579a(a)), is au- after September 30, 1999, the city of Chesapeake, southerly about 65.00 feet to a point, N147977.86, thorized to include navigation mitigation as a Virginia, shall not be obligated to make the an- E538725.51, thence running southwesterly about project purpose and to be carried out by the Sec- nual cash contribution required under para- 91.92 feet to a point on the westerly limit of the retary substantially in accordance with the graph 1(9) of the Local Cooperation Agreement project, N147927.84, E538648.39, thence running General Reevaluation Report dated November dated December 12, 1978, between the Govern- northerly about 195.00 feet along the westerly 18, 1998, at a total cost of $16,086,000, with an ment and the city for the project for navigation, limit of the project to the point of origin. southern branch of Elizabeth River, Chesa- estimated Federal cost of $12,949,000 and an esti- mated non-Federal cost of $3,137,000. (4) BOOTHBAY HARBOR, MAINE.—The project peake, Virginia. for navigation, Boothbay Harbor, Maine, au- (2) PERIODIC NOURISHMENT.—The Secretary is SEC. 359. BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, authorized to carry out periodic nourishment for thorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1912 (37 WEST VIRGINIA. the project for a 50-year period at an estimated Stat. 201). Section 102(ff) of the Water Resources Devel- average annual cost of $1,251,000, with an esti- (5) BUCKSPORT HARBOR, MAINE.—That portion opment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4810) is amended mated annual Federal cost of $1,007,000 and an of the project for navigation, Bucksport Harbor, by striking ‘‘take such measures as are techno- estimated annual non-Federal cost of $244,000. Maine, authorized by the River and Harbor Act logically feasible’’ and inserting ‘‘implement (e) CASS RIVER, MICHIGAN (VASSAR).—The of 1902, consisting of a 16-foot deep channel be- Plan C/G, as defined in the Evaluation Report project for flood protection, Cass River, Michi- ginning at a point N268.748.16, E423.390.76, of the District Engineer, dated December 1996,’’. gan (Vassar), authorized by section 203 of the thence running north 47 degrees 02 minutes 23 SEC. 360. GREENBRIER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA. Flood Control Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 311) and de- seconds east 51.76 feet to a point N268.783.44, Section 579(c) of the Water Resources Develop- authorized pursuant to section 1001(b)(2) of the E423.428.64, thence running north 67 degrees 54 ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790) is amended by Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 minutes 32 seconds west 1513.94 feet to a point striking ‘‘$12,000,000’’ and inserting U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)), is authorized to be carried N269.352.81, E422.025.84, thence running south ‘‘$73,000,000.’’ out by the Secretary. 47 degrees 02 minutes 23 seconds west 126.15 feet SEC. 361. MOOREFIELD, WEST VIRGINIA. (f) SAGINAW RIVER, MICHIGAN (SHIAWASSEE to a point N269.266.84, E421.933.52, thence run- Effective October 1, 1999, the project for flood FLATS).—The project for flood control, Saginaw ning south 70 degrees 24 minutes 28 seconds east control, Moorefield, West Virginia, authorized River, Michigan (Shiawassee Flats), authorized 1546.79 feet to the point of origin. by section 101(a)(25) of the Water Resources De- by section 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1958 (6) EAST BOOTHBAY HARBOR, MAINE.—The velopment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4610-4611), is (72 Stat. 311) and deauthorized pursuant to sec- project for navigation, East Boothbay Harbor, modified to provide that the non-Federal inter- tion 1001(b)(2) of the Water Resources Develop- Maine, authorized by the first section of the Act est shall not be required to pay the unpaid bal- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 579a(b)(2)), is au- entitled, ‘‘An Act making appropriations for the ance, including interest, of the non-Federal thorized to be carried out by the Secretary. construction, repair, and preservation of certain share of the cost of the project. (g) PARK RIVER, GRAFTON, NORTH DAKOTA.— public works on rivers and harbors, and for SEC. 362. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA The project for flood control, Park River, Graf- other purposes’’, approved June 25, 1910 (36 FLOOD CONTROL. ton, North Dakota, authorized by section 401(a) Stat. 631). Section 581(a) of the Water Resources Devel- of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (7) WELLS HARBOR, MAINE.—The following opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3790) is amended to (100 Stat. 4121) and deauthorized pursuant to portions of the project for navigation, Wells read as follows: section 1001(a) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 579a(a)), Harbor, Maine, authorized by section 101 of the ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may design is authorized to be carried out by the Secretary. River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 480): and construct— (h) MEMPHIS HARBOR, MEMPHIS, TEN- (A) The portion of the 6-foot channel the ‘‘(1) flood control measures in the Cheat and NESSEE.—The project for navigation, Memphis boundaries of which begin at a point with co- Tygart River basins, West Virginia, at a level of Harbor, Memphis, Tennessee, authorized by sec- ordinates N177,992.00, E394,831.00, thence run- protection that is sufficient to prevent any fu- tion 601(a) of the Water Resources Development ning south 83 degrees 58 minutes 14.8 seconds ture losses to these communities from flooding Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4145) and deauthorized west 10.38 feet to a point N177,990.91, such as occurred in January 1996 but no less pursuant to 1001(a) of such Act (33 U.S.C E394,820.68, thence running south 11 degrees 46 than a 100-year level of protection; and 579a(a)), is authorized to be carried out by the minutes 47.7 seconds west 991.76 feet to a point ‘‘(2) structural and nonstructural flood con- Secretary. N177,020.04, E394,618.21, thence running south trol, streambank protection, stormwater man- SEC. 364. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS. 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 10.00 feet agement, and channel clearing and modification (a) IN GENERAL.—The following projects or to a point N177,018.00, E394,628.00, thence run- measures in the Lower Allegheny, Lower portions of projects are not authorized after the ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 22.8 seconds Monongahela, West Branch Susquehanna, and date of enactment of this Act: east 994.93 feet to the point of origin. H2500 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

(B) The portion of the 6-foot anchorage the N232,139.91, E758,773.61, thence running south (B) 6-FOOT CHANNEL.—The following portion boundaries of which begin at a point with co- 87 degrees 35 minutes 31.6 seconds west 196.84 of the project for navigation, Wells Harbor, ordinates N177,778.07, E394,336.96, thence run- feet to a point N232,131.64, E758,576.94, thence Maine, navigation project referred to in sub- ning south 51 degrees 58 minutes 32.7 seconds running north 47 degrees 47 minutes 48.4 sec- section (a)(7) shall be redesignated as part of west 15.49 feet to a point N177,768.53, onds west 502.72 feet to a point N232,469.35, the 6-foot channel: the portion of the 6-foot an- E394,324.76, thence running south 11 degrees 46 E758,204.54, thence running north 10 degrees 10 chorage the boundaries of which begin at a minutes 26.5 seconds west 672.87 feet to a point minutes 20.3 seconds west 438.88 feet to a point point with coordinates N178,102.26, E394,751.83, N177,109.82, E394,187.46, thence running south N232,901.33, E758,127.03, thence running north thence running south 51 degrees 59 minutes 42.1 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 10.00 feet 79 degrees 49 minutes 43.1 seconds east 121.69 seconds west 526.51 feet to a point N177,778.07, to a point N177,107.78, E394,197.25, thence run- feet to a point N232,922.82, E758,246.81, thence E394,336.96, thence running south 11 degrees 46 ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 25.4 seconds running south 04 degrees 29 minutes 17.6 sec- minutes 26.6 seconds west 511.83 feet to a point east 684.70 feet to the point of origin. onds east 52.52 feet to a point N232,870.46, N177,277.01, E394,232.52, thence running south (C) The portion of the 10-foot settling basin E758,250.92, thence running south 23 degrees 56 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds east 80.00 feet the boundaries of which begin at a point with minutes 11.2 seconds east 49.15 feet to a point to a point N177,260.68, E394,310.84, thence run- coordinates N177,107.78, E394,197.25, thence run- N323,825.54, E758,270.86, thence running south ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 24.8 seconds ning north 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds 79 degrees 49 minutes 27.0 seconds west 88.19 feet east 482.54 feet to a point N177,733.07, west 10.00 feet to a point N177,109.82, to a point N232,809.96, E758,184.06, thence run- E394,409.30, thence running north 51 degrees 59 E394,187.46, thence running south 11 degrees 46 ning south 10 degrees 10 minutes 25.7 seconds minutes 41.0 seconds east 402.63 feet to a point minutes 15.7 seconds west 300.00 feet to a point east 314.83 feet to a point N232,500.08, N177,980.98, E394,726.55, thence running north N176,816.13, E394,126.26, thence running south E758,239.67, thence running south 56 degrees 33 11 degrees 46 minutes 27.6 seconds east 123.89 78 degrees 12 minutes 21.4 seconds east 9.98 feet minutes 56.1 seconds east 583.07 feet to a point feet to the point of origin. to a point N176,814.09, E394,136.03, thence run- N232,178.82, E758,726.25, thence running south (3) REALIGNMENT.—The 6-foot anchorage area ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 29.1 seconds 85 degrees 33 minutes 16.0 seconds east to the described in paragraph (2)(B) shall be realigned east 300.00 feet to the point of origin. point of origin. to include the area located south of the inner (D) The portion of the 10-foot settling basin (B) A portion of the 30-foot west maneuvering harbor settling basin in existence on the date of the boundaries of which begin at a point with basin, authorized by the River and Harbor Act enactment of this Act beginning at a point with coordinates N177,018.00, E394,628.00, thence run- of 3 July 1930, beginning at a point with coordi- coordinates N176,726.36, E394,556.97, thence run- ning north 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds nates N232,139.91, E758,773.61, thence running ning north 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds west 10.00 feet to a point N177,020.04, north 81 degrees 49 minutes 30.1 seconds east west 160.00 feet to a point N176,759.02, E394,618.21, thence running south 11 degrees 46 160.76 feet to a point N232,162.77, E758.932.74, E394,400.34, thence running south 11 degrees 47 minutes 44.0 seconds west 300.00 feet to a point thence running north 85 degrees 33 minutes 16.0 minutes 03.8 seconds west 45 feet to a point N176,726.36, E394,556.97, thence running south seconds west 141.85 feet to a point N232,173.77, N176,714.97, E394,391.15, thence running south 78 degrees 12 minutes 30.3 seconds east 10.03 feet E758,791.32, thence running south 27 degrees 36 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 seconds 160.00 feet to to a point N176,724.31, E394,566.79, thence run- minutes 52.8 seconds west to the point of origin. a point N176,682.31, E394,547.78, thence running ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 22.4 seconds (b) ANCHORAGE AREA, CLINTON HARBOR, CON- north 11 degrees 47 minutes 03.8 seconds east 45 east 300.00 feet to the point of origin. NECTICUT.—That portion of the Clinton Harbor, feet to the point of origin. (8) FALMOUTH HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.— Connecticut, navigation project referred to in (4) RELOCATION.—The Secretary may relocate That portion of the project for navigation, Fal- subsection (a)(2) beginning at a point beginning: the settling basin feature of the project for navi- mouth Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by N158,444.58, E660,220.95, thence running north gation, Wells Harbor, Maine, navigation project section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1948 79 degrees 37 minutes 14 seconds east 833.31 feet referred to in subsection (a)(7) to the outer har- lying southeasterly of a line commencing at a to a point N158,594.72, E661,040.67, thence run- bor between the jetties. point N199,286.41, E844,394.91, thence running ning south 80 degrees 51 minutes 53 seconds east (d) ANCHORAGE AREA, GREEN HARBOR, MASSA- north 66 degrees 52 minutes 3.31 seconds east 181.21 feet to a point N158,565.95, E661,219.58, CHUSETTS.—The portion of the Green Harbor, 472.95 feet to a point N199,472.21, E844,829.83, thence running north 57 degrees 38 minutes 04 Massachusetts, navigation project referred to in thence running north 43 degrees 9 minutes 28.3 seconds west 126.02 feet to a point N158,633.41, subsection (a)(9) consisting of a 6-foot deep seconds east 262.64 feet to a point N199,633.80, E660,113.14, thence running south 79 degrees 37 channel that lies northerly of a line whose co- E845,009.48, thence running north 21 degrees 40 minutes 14 seconds west 911.61 feet to a point ordinates are North 394825.00, East 831660.00 minutes 11.26 seconds east 808.38 feet to a point N158,469.17, E660,216.44, thence running south and North 394779.28, East 831570.64 is redesig- N200,415.05, E845,307.98, thence running north 10 degrees 22 minutes 46 seconds east 25 feet re- nated as an anchorage area. 32 degrees 25 minutes 29.01 seconds east 160.76 turning to a point N158,444.58, E660,220.95 is re- SEC. 365. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, CALIFORNIA. feet to a point N200,550.75, E845,394.18, thence designated as an anchorage area. (c) WELLS HARBOR, MAINE.— (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood dam- running north 24 degrees 56 minutes 42.29 sec- (1) PROJECT MODIFICATION.—The project for age reduction, American and Sacramento Riv- onds east 1,410.29 feet to a point N201,829.48, navigation, Wells Harbor, Maine, navigation ers, California, authorized by section 101(a)(1) E845,988.97. project referred to in subsection (a)(7) is modi- of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (9) GREEN HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.—That fied to authorize the Secretary to realign the portion of the project for navigation, Green Har- (110 Stat. 3662–3663), is modified to direct the channel and anchorage areas based on a harbor bor, Massachusetts, undertaken pursuant to Secretary to include the following improvements design capacity of 150 craft. section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 as part of the overall project: (2) REDESIGNATIONS.— (1) Raising the left bank of the non-Federal (33 U.S.C. 577), consisting of the 6-foot deep (A) 6-FOOT ANCHORAGE.—The following por- levee upstream of the Mayhew Drain for a dis- channel beginning at a point along the west tions of the project for navigation, Wells Har- tance of 4,500 feet by an average of 2.5 feet. limit of the existing project, North 395990.43, bor, Maine, navigation project referred to in (2) Raising the right bank of the American East 831079.16, thence running northwesterly subsection (a)(7) shall be redesignated as part of River levee from 1,500 feet upstream to 4,000 feet about 752.85 feet to a point, North 396722.80, the 6-foot anchorage: downstream of the Howe Avenue bridge by an East 830904.76, thence running northwesterly (i) The portion of the 6-foot channel the average of 1 feet. about 222.79 feet to a point along the west limit boundaries of which begin at a point with co- (3) Modifying the south levee of the Natomas of the existing project, North 396844.34, East ordinates N177,990.91, E394,820.68, thence run- Cross Canal for a distance of 5 miles to ensure 830718.04, thence running southwesterly about ning south 83 degrees 58 minutes 40.8 seconds that the south levee is consistent with the level 33.72 feet along the west limit of the existing west 94.65 feet to a point N177,980.98, of protection provided by the authorized levee project to a point, North 396810.80, East E394,726.55, thence running south 11 degrees 46 along the east bank of the Sacramento River. 830714.57, thence running southeasterly about minutes 22.4 seconds west 962.83 feet to a point (4) Modifying the north levee of the Natomas 195.42 feet along the west limit of the existing N177,038.40, E394,530.10, thence running south Cross Canal for a distance of 5 miles to ensure project to a point, North 396704.19, East 78 degrees 13 minutes 45.7 seconds east 90.00 feet that the height of the levee is equivalent to the 830878.35, thence running about 544.66 feet to a point N177,020.04, E394,618.21, thence run- height of the south levee as authorized by para- along the west limit of the existing project to a ning north 11 degrees 46 minutes 47.7 seconds graph (3). point, North 396174.35, East 831004.52, thence east 991.76 feet to the point of origin. (5) Installing gates to the existing Mayhew running southeasterly about 198.49 feet along (ii) The portion of the 10-foot inner harbor Drain culvert and pumps to prevent backup of the west limit of the existing project to the point settling basin the boundaries of which begin at floodwater on the Folsom Boulevard side of the of beginning. a point with coordinates N177,020.04, gates. (10) NEW BEDFORD AND FAIRHAVEN HARBOR, E394,618.21, thence running north 78 degrees 13 (6) Installation of a slurry wall in the north MASSACHUSETTS.—The following portions of the minutes 30.5 seconds west 160.00 feet to a point levee of the American River from the east levee project for navigation, New Bedford and N177,052.69, E394,461.58, thence running south of the Natomas east Main Drain upstream for a Fairhaven Harbor, Massachusetts: 11 degrees 46 minutes 45.4 seconds west 299.99 distance of approximately 1.2 miles. (A) A portion of the 25-foot spur channel lead- feet to a point N176,759.02, E394,400.34, thence (7) Installation of a slurry wall in the north ing to the west of Fish Island, authorized by the running south 78 degrees 13 minutes 17.9 sec- levee of the American River from 300 feet west of River and Harbor Act of 3 March 1909, begin- onds east 160 feet to a point N176,726.36, Jacob Lane north for a distance of approxi- ning at a point with coordinates N232,173.77, E394,556.97, thence running north 11 degrees 46 mately 1 mile to the end of the existing levee. E758,791.32, thence running south 27 degrees 36 minutes 44.0 seconds east 300.00 feet to the point (b) COST LIMITATIONS.—Section 101(a)(1)(A) of minutes 52.8 seconds west 38.2 feet to a point of origin. the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2501 (110 Stat. 3662) is amended by striking ‘‘at a SEC. 404. SWEETWATER RESERVOIR, SAN DIEGO for shoreline protection and storm damage re- total cost of’’ and all that follows through COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. duction. ‘‘$14,225,000,’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘at a The Secretary shall conduct a study of the po- SEC. 413. SOUTHWEST VALLEY, ALBUQUERQUE, total cost of $91,900,000, with an estimated Fed- tential water quality problems and pollution NEW MEXICO. eral cost of $68,925,000 and an estimated non- abatement measures in the watershed in and The Secretary shall undertake and complete a Federal cost of $22,975,000,’’. around Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego Coun- feasibility study for flood damage reduction in (c) COST SHARING.—For purposes of section ty, California. the Southwest Valley, Albuquerque, New Mex- 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of SEC. 405. WHITEWATER RIVER BASIN, CALI- ico, and, based upon the results of such study, 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213), the modifications author- FORNIA. give priority consideration to including the rec- ized by this section shall be subject to the same The Secretary shall undertake and complete a ommended project in the flood mitigation and cost sharing in effect for the project for flood feasibility study for flood damage reduction in riverine restoration pilot program authorized in damage reduction, American and Sacramento the Whitewater River basin, California, and, section 214 of this Act. Rivers, California, authorized by section based upon the results of such study, give pri- SEC. 414. CAYUGA CREEK, NEW YORK. 101(a)(1) of the Water Resources Development ority consideration to including the rec- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3662). ommended project, including the Salton Sea mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for wetlands restoration project, in the flood mitiga- SEC. 366. MARTIN, KENTUCKY. flood control for Cayuga Creek, New York. The project for flood control, Martin, Ken- tion and riverine restoration pilot program au- tucky, authorized by section 202(a) of the En- thorized in section 214 of this Act. SEC. 415. ARCOLA CREEK WATERSHED, MADISON, OHIO. ergy and Water Development Appropriations SEC. 406. LITTLE ECONLACKHATCHEE RIVER The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- Act, 1981 (94 Stat. 1339) is modified to authorize BASIN, FLORIDA. mine the feasibility of a project to provide envi- the Secretary to take all necessary measures to The Secretary shall conduct a study of pollu- ronmental restoration and protection for the prevent future losses that would occur from a tion abatement measures in the Little Arcola Creek watershed, Madison, Ohio. flood equal in magnitude to a 100-year fre- Econlackhatchee River basin, Florida. SEC. 416. WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OHIO, INDI- quency event. SEC. 407. PORT EVERGLADES INLET, FLORIDA. ANA, AND MICHIGAN. TITLE IV—STUDIES The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct mine the feasibility of carrying out a sand by- SEC. 401. UPPER MISSISSIPPI AND ILLINOIS RIV- a study to develop measures to improve flood pass project at Port Everglades Inlet, Florida. ERS LEVEES AND STREAMBANKS control, navigation, water quality, recreation, PROTECTION. SEC. 408. UPPER DES PLAINES RIVER AND TRIBU- and fish and wildlife habitat in a comprehensive The Secretary shall conduct a study of erosion TARIES, ILLINOIS AND WISCONSIN. manner in the western Lake Erie basin, Ohio, damage to levees and infrastructure on the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is directed to Indiana, and Michigan, including watersheds of upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers and the im- conduct a study of the upper Des Plaines River the Maumee, Ottawa, and Portage Rivers. pact of increased barge and pleasure craft traf- and tributaries, Illinois and Wisconsin, up- (b) COOPERATION.—In carrying out the study, fic on deterioration of levees and other flood stream of the confluence with Salt Creek at Riv- the Secretary shall cooperate with interested control structures on such rivers. erside, Illinois, to determine the feasibility of im- Federal, State, and local agencies and non- SEC. 402. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER COM- provements in the interests of flood damage re- governmental organizations and consider all rel- PREHENSIVE PLAN. duction, environmental restoration and protec- evant programs of such agencies. (a) DEVELOPMENT.—The Secretary shall de- tion, water quality, recreation, and related pur- (c) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the velop a plan to address water and related land poses. date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary resources problems and opportunities in the (b) SPECIAL RULE.—In conducting the study, shall submit to Congress a report on the results Upper Mississippi and Illinois River Basins, ex- the Secretary may not exclude from consider- of the study, including findings and rec- tending from Cairo, Illinois, to the headwaters ation and evaluation flood damage reduction ommendations. of the Mississippi River, in the interest of sys- measures based on restrictive policies regarding temic flood damage reduction by means of a the frequency of flooding, drainage area, and SEC. 417. SCHUYLKILL RIVER, NORRISTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA. mixture of structural and nonstructural flood amount of runoff. control and floodplain management strategies, The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 409. CAMERON PARISH WEST OF CALCASIEU mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for continued maintenance of the navigation RIVER, LOUISIANA. flood control for Schuylkill River, Norristown, project, management of bank caving and ero- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- sion, watershed nutrient and sediment manage- Pennsylvania, including improvement to exist- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for ing stormwater drainage systems. ment, habitat management, recreation needs, storm damage reduction and environmental res- and other related purposes. toration, Cameron Parish west of Calcasieu SEC. 418. LAKES MARION AND MOULTRIE, SOUTH CAROLINA. (b) CONTENTS.—The plan shall contain rec- River, Louisiana. ommendations on future management plans and The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- SEC. 410. GRAND ISLE AND VICINITY, LOUISIANA. actions to be carried out by the responsible Fed- mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for In carrying out a study of the storm damage eral and non-Federal entities and shall specifi- Lakes Marion and Moultrie to provide water reduction benefits to Grand Isle and vicinity, cally address recommendations to authorize con- supply, treatment, and distribution to Calhoun, Louisiana, the Secretary shall include benefits struction of a systemic flood control project in Clarendon, Colleton, Dorchester, Orangeburg, that a storm damage reduction project for Grand accordance with a plan for the Upper Mis- and Sumter Counties, South Carolina. Isle and vicinity, Louisiana, may have on the sissippi River. The plan shall include rec- mainland coast of Louisiana as project benefits SEC. 419. DAY COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA. ommendations for Federal action where appro- attributable to the Grand Isle project. The Secretary shall conduct an investigation priate and recommendations for follow-on stud- of flooding and other water resources problems ies for problem areas for which data or current SEC. 411. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN SEAWALL, LOU- ISIANA. between the James River and Big Sioux water- technology does not allow immediate solutions. sheds in South Dakota and an assessment of (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall com- (c) CONSULTATION AND USE OF EXISTING flood damage reduction needs of the area. DATA.—The Secretary shall consult with appro- plete a post-authorization change report on the SEC. 420. CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS. priate State and Federal agencies and shall project for hurricane-flood protection, Lake The Secretary shall include, as part of the make maximum use of existing data and ongoing Pontchartrain, Louisiana, and vicinity, author- study authorized in a resolution of the Com- programs and efforts of States and Federal ized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of mittee on Public Works and Transportation of agencies in developing the plan. 1965 (79 Stat. 1077), to incorporate and accom- the House of Representatives, dated August 1, (d) COST SHARING.—Development of the plan plish structural modifications to the seawall under this section shall be at Federal expense. fronting protection along the south shore of 1990, a review of two 175-foot-wide barge shelves Feasibility studies resulting from development of Lake Pontchartrain from the New Basin Canal on either side of the navigation channel at the such plan shall be subject to cost sharing under on the west to the Inner harbor Navigation Port of Corpus Christi, Texas. section 105 of the Water Resources Development Canal on the east. SEC. 421. MITCHELL’S CUT CHANNEL (CANEY Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215). (b) REPORT.—The Secretary shall ensure expe- FORK CUT), TEXAS. (e) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit a re- ditious completion of the post-authorization The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- port that includes the comprehensive plan to the change report required by subsection (a) not mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- later than 180 days after the date of enactment navigation, Mitchell’s Cut Channel (Caney Fork ture of the House of Representatives and the of this section. Cut), Texas. Committee on Environment and Public Works of SEC. 412. WESTPORT, MASSACHUSETTS. SEC. 422. MOUTH OF COLORADO RIVER, TEXAS. the Senate not later than 3 years after the date The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- of enactment of this Act. mine the feasibility of carrying out a navigation mine the feasibility of carrying out a project for SEC. 403. EL DORADO, UNION COUNTY, ARKAN- project for the town of Westport, Massachusetts, navigation at the mouth of the Colorado River, SAS. and the possible beneficial uses of dredged mate- Texas, to provide a minimum draft navigation The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- rial for shoreline protection and storm damage channel extending from the Colorado River mine the feasibility of improvements to regional reduction in the area. In determining the bene- through Parkers Cut (also known as ‘‘Tiger Is- water supplies for El Dorado, Union County, fits of the project, the Secretary shall include land Cut’’), or an acceptable alternative, to Arkansas. the benefits derived from using dredged material Matagorda Bay. H2502 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

SEC. 423. KANAWHA RIVER, FAYETTE COUNTY, with section 103 of the Water Resources Devel- (b) COST SHARING.—Projects carried out under WEST VIRGINIA. opment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213). this section on lands owned by the United The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- (3) TRANSITIONAL STORAGE.—The Secretary of States shall be carried out at full Federal ex- mine the feasibility of developing a public port Agriculture may cooperate with non-Federal in- pense. The non-Federal share of the cost of any along the Kanawha River in Fayette County, terests to provide, on a transitional basis, flood such project undertaken on lands not in Federal West Virginia, at a site known as ‘‘Longacre’’. control storage for the Natural Resources Con- ownership shall be 35 percent. SEC. 424. WEST VIRGINIA PORTS. servation Service Thornton Reservoir (Structure (c) NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.—Notwith- The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- 84) in the west lobe of the Thornton quarry in standing section 221(b) of the Flood Control Act mine the feasibility of expanding public port de- advance of Corps’ construction. of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), the Secretary, velopment in West Virginia along the Ohio (4) CREDITING.—The Secretary may credit after coordination with the appropriate State River and navigable portion of the Kanawha against the non-Federal share of the Thornton and local government officials having jurisdic- River from its mouth to river mile 91.0 Reservoir project all design, lands, easements, tion over an area in which a project under this SEC. 425. GREAT LAKES REGION COMPREHENSIVE rights-of-way (as of the date of authorization), section will be carried out, may allow a non- STUDY. and construction costs incurred by the non-Fed- profit entity to serve as the non-Federal interest (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a eral interests before the signing of the project for the project. comprehensive study of the Great Lakes region cooperation agreement. (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— to ensure the future use, management, and pro- (5) REEVALUATION REPORT.—The Secretary There is authorized to be appropriated to carry tection of water and related resources of the shall determine the credits authorized by para- out this section $2,000,000 for each of fiscal Great Lakes basin. Such study shall include a graph (4) that are integral to the Thornton Res- years 2000 through 2005. comprehensive management plan specifically for ervoir project and the current total project costs SEC. 507. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHAN- St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair. based on a limited reevaluation report. NELS. (b) REPORT.—Not later than 4 years after the SEC. 502. CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE. Section 509(a) of the Water Resources Devel- date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary Section 219(e) of the Water Resources Develop- opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3759) is amended shall submit to the Committee on Transportation ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4836–4837) is amended by adding at the end the following: and Infrastructure of the House of Representa- by striking paragraphs (5) and (6) and inserting ‘‘(12) Acadiana Navigation Channel, Lou- tives and the Committee on Environment and the following: isiana. Public Works of the Senate a report that in- ‘‘(5) $25,000,000 for the project described in ‘‘(13) Contraband Bayou, Louisiana, as part cludes the strategic plan for Corps of Engineers subsection (c)(2); of the Calcasieu River and Pass Ship Channel. programs in the Great Lakes basin and details ‘‘(6) $20,000,000 for the project described in ‘‘(14) Lake Wallula Navigation Channel, of proposed Corps of Engineers environmental, subsection (c)(9); Washington. navigation, and flood damage reduction projects ‘‘(7) $30,000,000 for the project described in ‘‘(15) Wadley Pass (also known as McGriff in the region. subsection (c)(16); and Pass), Suwanee River, Florida.’’. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ‘‘(8) $30,000,000 for the project described in SEC. 508. MEASUREMENT OF LAKE MICHIGAN DI- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry subsection (c)(17).’’. VERSIONS. Section 1142(b) of the Water Resources Devel- out this section $1,400,000 for fiscal years 2000 SEC. 503. CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT DREDGING through 2003. TECHNOLOGY. opment Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–20 note; 100 Stat. 4253) is amended by striking ‘‘$250,000’’ SEC. 426. NUTRIENT LOADING RESULTING FROM (a) CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT DREDGING and inserting ‘‘$1,250,000’’. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL. PROJECT.— (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a (1) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall conduct a SEC. 509. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRON- study of nutrient loading that occurs as a result review of innovative dredging technologies de- MENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. of discharges of dredged material into open- signed to minimize or eliminate contamination (a) AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES.—Section water sites in the Chesapeake Bay. of a water column upon removal of contami- 1103(e)(1) of the Water Resources Development (b) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after nated sediments. The Secretary shall complete Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(1)) is amended— the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary such review by June 1, 2001. (1) by inserting ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- graph (A); shall transmit to Congress a report on the re- (2) TESTING.—After completion of the review (2) in subparagraph (B) by striking ‘‘long- sults of the study. under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall select term resource monitoring program; and’’ and in- SEC. 427. SANTEE DELTA FOCUS AREA, SOUTH the technology of those reviewed that the Sec- serting ‘‘long-term resource monitoring, comput- CAROLINA. retary determines will increase the effectiveness erized data inventory and analysis, and applied The Secretary shall conduct a study of the of removing contaminated sediments and signifi- research program.’’; and Santee Delta focus area, South Carolina, to de- cantly reduce contamination of the water col- (3) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting termine the feasibility of carrying out a project umn. Not later than December 31, 2001, the Sec- the following: for enhancing wetlands values and public rec- retary shall enter into an agreement with a pub- reational opportunities in the area. lic or private entity to test such technology in ‘‘In carrying out subparagraph (A), the Sec- retary shall establish an independent technical TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS the vicinity of Peoria Lakes, Illinois. (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— advisory committee to review projects, moni- SEC. 501. CORPS ASSUMPTION OF NRCS toring plans, and habitat and natural resource PROJECTS. There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,000,000. needs assessments.’’. (a) LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA.—The Sec- (b) REPORTS.—Section 1103(e)(2) of such Act SEC. 504. DAM SAFETY. retary is authorized to complete the remaining (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(2)) is amended to read as fol- (a) ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary is authorized reaches of the Natural Resources Conservation lows: to provide assistance to enhance dam safety at Service’s flood control project at Llagas Creek, ‘‘(2) REPORTS.—Not later than December 31, California, undertaken pursuant to section 5 of the following locations: 2004, and not later than December 31st of every (1) Healdsburg Veteran’s Memorial Dam, Cali- the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention sixth year thereafter, the Secretary, in consulta- fornia Act (16 U.S.C. 1005), substantially in accordance tion with the Secretary of the Interior and the (2) Felix Dam, Pennsylvania with the Natural Resources Conservation Serv- States of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, (3) Kehly Run Dam, Pennsylvania ice watershed plan for Llagas Creek, Depart- and Wisconsin, shall transmit to Congress a re- (4) Owl Creek Reservoir, Pennsylvania ment of Agriculture, and in accordance with the port that— (5) Sweet Arrow Lake Dam, Pennsylvania requirements of local cooperation as specified in ‘‘(A) contains an evaluation of the programs (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— section 4 of such Act, at a total cost of described in paragraph (1); There is authorized to be appropriated $6,000,000 $45,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of ‘‘(B) describes the accomplishments of each of to carry out this section. $21,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of such programs; $23,200,000. SEC. 505. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION ‘‘(C) provides updates of a systemic habitat (b) THORNTON RESERVOIR, COOK COUNTY, IL- PLANS. needs assessment; and LINOIS.— Section 401(a)(2) of the Water Resources De- ‘‘(D) identifies any needed adjustments in the (1) IN GENERAL.—The Thornton Reservoir velopment Act of 1990 (110 Stat. 3763) is amended authorization.’’. project, an element of the project for flood con- by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Nonprofit (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sec- trol, Chicagoland Underflow Plan, Illinois, au- public or private entities may contribute all or a tion 1103(e) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 652(e)) is thorized by section 3(a)(5) of the Water Re- portion of the non-Federal share.’’. amended— sources Development Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4013), SEC. 506. SEA LAMPREY CONTROL MEASURES IN (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ‘‘not to ex- is modified to authorize the Secretary to include THE GREAT LAKES. ceed’’ and all that follows before the period at additional permanent flood control storage at- (a) IN GENERAL.—In conjunction with the the end and inserting ‘‘$22,750,000 for fiscal year tributable to the Natural Resources Conserva- Great Lakes Fishery Commission, the Secretary 1999 and each fiscal year thereafter’’; tion Service Thornton Reservoir (Structure 84), is authorized to undertake a program for the (2) in paragraph (4) by striking ‘‘not to ex- Little Calumet River Watershed, Illinois, ap- control of sea lampreys in and around waters of ceed’’ and all that follows before the period at proved under the Watershed Protection and the Great Lakes. The program undertaken pur- the end and inserting ‘‘$10,420,000 for fiscal year Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.). suant to this section may include projects which 1999 and each fiscal year thereafter’’; and (2) COST SHARING.—Costs for the Thornton consist of either structural or nonstructural (3) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the Reservoir project shall be shared in accordance measures or a combination thereof. following: April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2503

‘‘(5) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— Federal navigation projects in the vicinity of subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with There is authorized to be appropriated to carry Sabine Refuge, Louisiana. other Federal, State, and local agencies and out paragraph (1)(A) $350,000 for each of fiscal (3) HANCOCK, HARRISON, AND JACKSON COUN- make maximum use of data and studies in exist- years 1999 through 2009.’’. TIES, MISSISSIPPI.—A project to make beneficial ence on the date of enactment of this Act. (d) TRANSFER OF AMOUNTS.—Section 1103(e)(6) use of dredged material from a Federal naviga- (2) PARTICIPATION BY NON-FEDERAL INTER- of such Act is amended to read as follows: tion project in Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson ESTS.—Participation by non-Federal interests in ‘‘(6) TRANSFER OF AMOUNTS.—For fiscal year Counties, Mississippi. projects under this section shall be voluntary. 1999, and each fiscal year thereafter, the Sec- (4) ROSE CITY MARSH, ORANGE COUNTY, The Secretary shall not take any action under retary, in consultation with the Secretary of the TEXAS.—A project to make beneficial use of this section that will result in a non-Federal in- Interior and the States of Illinois, Iowa, Min- dredged material from a Federal navigation terest being held financially responsible for an nesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, may transfer project in Rose City Marsh, Orange County, action under a project unless the non-Federal not to exceed 20 percent of the amounts appro- Texas. interest has voluntarily agreed to participate in priated to carry out subparagraph (A) or (B) of (5) BESSIE HEIGHTS MARSH, ORANGE COUNTY, the project. paragraph (1) to the amounts appropriated to TEXAS.—A project to make beneficial use of (c) COST SHARING.—Projects carried out under carry out the other of such subparagraphs.’’. dredged material from a Federal navigation this section on lands owned by the United (e) HABITAT NEEDS ASSESSMENT.—Section project in Bessie Heights Marsh, Orange Coun- States shall be carried out at full Federal ex- 1103(h)(2) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 652(h)(2)) is ty, Texas. pense. The non-Federal share of the cost of any amended by adding at the end the following: SEC. 513. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ASSIST- such project undertaken on lands not in Federal ‘‘The Secretary shall complete the on-going ANCE. ownership shall be 35 percent. habitat needs assessment conducted under this Section 507(2) of the Water Resources Develop- (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— paragraph not later than September 30, 2000, ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3758) is amended to There is authorized to be appropriated to carry and shall include in each report required by read as follows: out this section $10,000,000 for fiscal years be- subsection (e)(2) the most recent habitat needs ‘‘(2) Expansion and improvement of Long Pine ginning after September 30, 1999. assessment conducted under this paragraph.’’. Run Dam and associated water infrastructure SEC. 516. INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES FOR WA- (f) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 1103 in accordance with the requirements of sub- TERSHED RESTORATION. of such Act (33 U.S.C. 652) is amended— sections (b) through (e) of section 313 of the The Secretary shall use, and encourage the (1) in subsection (e)(7) by striking ‘‘para- Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 use of, innovative treatment technologies, in- graphs (1)(B) and (1)(C)’’ and inserting ‘‘para- Stat. 4845) at a total cost of $20,000,000.’’. cluding membrane technologies, for watershed graph (1)(B)’’; and and environmental restoration and protection (2) in subsection (f)(2)— SEC. 514. LOWER MISSOURI RIVER AQUATIC RES- TORATION PROJECTS. projects involving water quality. (A) by striking ‘‘(2)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘(2)’’; and (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after SEC. 517. ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION. (B) by striking subparagraph (B). funds are made available for such purposes, the (a) ATLANTA, GEORGIA.—Section 219(c)(2) of Secretary shall complete a comprehensive the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 SEC. 510. ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK MONI- TORING. report— (106 Stat. 4835) is amended by inserting before Section 404(c) of the Water Resources Develop- (1) identifying a general implementation strat- the period ‘‘and watershed restoration and de- ment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4863) is amended by egy and overall plan for environmental restora- velopment in the regional Atlanta watershed, striking ‘‘1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997’’ and tion and protection along the Lower Missouri including Big Creek and Rock Creek’’. inserting ‘‘1993 through 2003’’. River between Gavins Point Dam and the con- (b) PATERSON AND PASSAIC VALLEY, NEW JER- fluence of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers; SEY.—Section 219(c)(9) of such Act (106 Stat. SEC. 511. WATER CONTROL MANAGEMENT. and 4836) is amended to read as follows: (a) IN GENERAL.—In evaluating potential im- (2) recommending individual environmental ‘‘(9) PATERSON, PASSAIC COUNTY, AND PASSAIC provements for water control management ac- restoration projects that can be considered by VALLEY, NEW JERSEY.—Drainage facilities to al- tivities and consolidation of water control man- the Secretary for implementation under section leviate flooding problems on Getty Avenue in agement centers, the Secretary may consider a 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of the vicinity of St. Joseph’s Hospital for the City regionalized water control management plan but 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330; 110 Stat. 3679–3680). of Paterson, New Jersey, and Passaic County, may not implement such a plan until the date (b) SCOPE OF PROJECTS.—Any environmental New Jersey, and innovative facilities to manage on which a report is transmitted under sub- restoration projects recommended under sub- and treat additional flows in the Passaic Valley, section (b). section (a) shall provide for such activities and Passaic River basin, New Jersey.’’. (b) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the measures as the Secretary determines to be nec- date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary SEC. 518. EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF CER- essary to protect and restore fish and wildlife shall transmit to the Committee on Transpor- TAIN PROJECTS. habitat without adversely affecting private tation and Infrastructure and the Committee on The Secretary shall expedite completion of the property rights or water related needs of the re- Appropriations of the House of Representatives reports for the following projects and proceed gion surrounding the Missouri River, including and the Committee on Environment and Public directly to project planning, engineering, and flood control, navigation, and enhancement of Works and the Committee on Appropriations of design: water supply, and shall include some or all of the Senate a report containing the following: (1) Arroyo Pasajero, San Joaquin River basin, (1) A description of the primary objectives of the following components: California, project for flood control. streamlining water control management activi- (1) Modification and improvement of naviga- (2) Success Dam, Tule River, California, ties. tion training structures to protect and restore project for flood control and water supply. (2) A description of the benefits provided by fish and wildlife habitat. (3) Alafia Channel, Tampa Harbor, Florida, streamlining water control management activi- (2) Modification and creation of side channels project for navigation. ties through consolidation of centers for such to protect and restore fish and wildlife habitat. SEC. 519. DOG RIVER, ALABAMA. activities. (3) Restoration and creation of fish and wild- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (3) A determination of whether or not benefits life habitat. to establish, in cooperation with non-Federal in- to users of regional water control management (4) Physical and biological monitoring for terests, a pilot project to restore natural water centers will be retained in each district office of evaluating the success of the projects. depths in the Dog River, Alabama, between its the Corps of Engineers that does not have a re- (c) COORDINATION.—To the maximum extent mouth and the Interstate Route 10 crossing, and gional center. practicable, the Secretary shall integrate in the downstream portion of its principal tribu- (4) A determination of whether or not users of projects carried out in accordance with this sec- taries. such regional centers will receive a higher level tion with other Federal, tribal, and State res- (b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance pro- of benefits from streamlining water management toration activities. vided under subsection (a) shall be in the form control management activities. (d) COST SHARING.—The report under sub- of design and construction of water-related re- (5) A list of the Members of Congress who rep- section (a) shall be undertaken at full Federal source protection and development projects af- resent a district that currently includes a water expense. fecting the Dog River, including environmental control management center that is to be elimi- SEC. 515. AQUATIC RESOURCES RESTORATION IN restoration and recreational navigation. nated under a proposed regionalized plan. THE NORTHWEST. (c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal SEC. 512. BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGED MATE- (a) IN GENERAL.—In cooperation with other share of the cost of the project carried out with RIAL. Federal agencies, the Secretary is authorized to assistance under this section shall be 90 percent. The Secretary is authorized to carry out the develop and implement projects for fish screens, (d) LANDS, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF- following projects under section 204 of the Water fish passage devices, and other similar measures WAY.—The non-Federal sponsor provide all Resources Development Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. agreed to by non-Federal interests and relevant lands, easements, rights of way, relocations, 2326): Federal agencies to mitigate adverse impacts as- and dredged material disposal areas including (1) BODEGA BAY, CALIFORNIA.—A project to sociated with irrigation system water diversions retaining dikes required for the project. make beneficial use of dredged materials from a by local governmental entities in the States of (e) OPERATION MAINTENANCE.—The non-Fed- Federal navigation project in Bodega Bay, Cali- Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Idaho. eral share of the cost of operation, maintenance, fornia. (b) PROCEDURE AND PARTICIPATION.— repair, replacement, or rehabilitation of the (2) SABINE REFUGE, LOUISIANA.—A project to (1) CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT; USE OF EX- project carried out with assistance under this make beneficial use of dredged materials from ISTING DATA.—In providing assistance under section shall be 100 percent. H2504 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

(f) CREDIT TOWARD NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— agencies, shall provide technical assistance to SEC. 533. SHORELINE PROTECTION AND ENVI- The value of the lands, easements, rights of State and local agencies in the study, design, RONMENTAL RESTORATION, LAKE way, relocations, and dredged material disposal and implementation of measures for flood dam- ALLATOONA, GEORGIA. areas, including retaining dikes, provided by the age reduction and environmental restoration (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coopera- non-Federal sponsor shall be credited toward and protection in the Santa Ana River water- tion with the Administrator of the Environ- the non-Federal share. shed, California, with particular emphasis on mental Protection Agency, is authorized to carry out the following water-related environ- SEC. 520. ELBA, ALABAMA. structural and nonstructural measures in the vi- mental restoration and resource protection ac- The Secretary is authorized to repair and re- cinity of the Chino Dairy Preserve. tivities to restore Lake Allatoona and the habilitate a levee in the city of Elba, Alabama (b) COMPREHENSIVE STUDY.—The Secretary Etowah River in Georgia: at a total cost of $12,900,000. shall conduct a feasibility study to determine the most cost-effective plan for flood damage re- (1) LAKE ALLATOONA/ETOWAH RIVER SHORELINE SEC. 521. GENEVA, ALABAMA. duction and environmental restoration and pro- RESTORATION DESIGN.—Develop pre-construction The Secretary is authorized to repair and re- tection in the vicinity of the Chino Dairy Pre- design measures to alleviate shoreline erosion habilitate a levee in the city of Geneva, Ala- serve, Santa Ana River watershed, Orange and sedimentation problems. bama at a total cost of $16,600,000. County and San Bernardino County, Cali- (2) LITTLE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORA- SEC. 522. NAVAJO RESERVATION, ARIZONA, NEW fornia. TION.—Conduct a feasibility study to evaluate MEXICO, AND UTAH. environmental problems and recommend envi- SEC. 527. NOVATO, CALIFORNIA. (a) IN GENERAL.—In cooperation with other ronmental infrastructure restoration measures The Secretary shall carry out a project for appropriate Federal and local agencies, the Sec- for the Little River within Lake Allatoona, flood control under section 205 of the Flood retary shall undertake a survey of, and provide Georgia. Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) at Rush technical, planning, and design assistance for, (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— Creek, Novato, California. watershed management, restoration, and devel- There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal opment on the Navajo Indian Reservation, Ari- SEC. 528. ORANGE AND SAN DIEGO COUNTIES, years beginning after September 30, 1999— CALIFORNIA. zona, New Mexico, and Utah. (1) $850,000 to carry out subsection (a)(1); and The Secretary, in cooperation with local gov- (b) COST SHARING.—The Federal share of the (2) $250,000 to carry out subsection (a)(2). ernments, may prepare special area management cost of activities carried out under this section SEC. 534. MAYO’S BAR LOCK AND DAM, COOSA plans in Orange and San Diego Counties, Cali- shall be 75 percent. Funds made available under RIVER, ROME, GEORGIA. fornia, to demonstrate the effectiveness of using the Indian Self-Determination and Education The Secretary is authorized to provide tech- such plans to provide information regarding Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.) may be nical assistance, including planning, engineer- aquatic resources. The Secretary may use such used by the Navajo Nation in meeting the non- ing, and design assistance, for the reconstruc- plans in making regulatory decisions and issue Federal share of the cost of such activities. tion of the Mayo’s Bar Lock and Dam, Coosa permits consistent with such plans. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— River, Rome, Georgia. The non-Federal share of There is authorized to be appropriated to carry SEC. 529. SALTON SEA, CALIFORNIA. assistance under this section shall be 50 percent. out this section $12,000,000 for fiscal years be- (a) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary, in SEC. 535. COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD IMPACT RE- ginning after September 30, 1999. coordination with other Federal agencies, shall SPONSE MODELING SYSTEM, provide technical assistance to Federal, State, SEC. 523. AUGUSTA AND DEVALLS BLUFF, ARKAN- CORALVILLE RESERVOIR AND IOWA SAS. and local agencies in the study, design, and im- RIVER WATERSHED, IOWA. plementation of measures for the environmental (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coopera- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized to perform operations, maintenance, and reha- restoration and protection of the Salton Sea, tion with the University of Iowa, shall conduct bilitation on 37 miles of levees in and around California. a study and develop a Comprehensive Flood Im- (b) STUDY.—The Secretary, in coordination Augusta and Devalls Bluff, Arkansas. pact Response Modeling System for Coralville with other Federal, State, and local agencies, Reservoir and the Iowa River watershed, Iowa. (b) REIMBURSEMENT.—After performing the shall conduct a study to determine the most ef- operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation (b) CONTENTS OF STUDY.—The study shall fective plan for the Corps of Engineers to assist under subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek include— in the environmental restoration and protection (1) an evaluation of the combined hydrologic, reimbursement from the Secretary of the Interior of the Salton Sea, California. geomorphic, environmental, economic, social, of an amount equal to the costs allocated to and recreational impacts of operating strategies benefits to a Federal wildlife refuge of such op- SEC. 530. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA. within the Iowa River watershed; erations, maintenance, and rehabilitation. The Secretary is authorized to modify the co- operative agreement with the Santa Cruz Port (2) development of an integrated, dynamic SEC. 524. BEAVER LAKE, ARKANSAS. District, California, to reflect unanticipated ad- flood impact model; and (a) WATER SUPPLY STORAGE REALLOCATION.— ditional dredging effort and to extend such (3) development of a rapid response system to The Secretary shall reallocate approximately agreement for 10 years. be used during flood and other emergency situa- 31,000 additional acre-feet at Beaver Lake, Ar- SEC. 531. POINT BEACH, MILFORD, CONNECTICUT. tions. kansas, to water supply storage at no additional (c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 5 (a) MAXIMUM FEDERAL EXPENDITURE.—The cost to the Beaver Water District or the Carroll- years after the date of enactment of this Act, maximum amount of Federal funds that may be Boone Water District above the amount that has the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report expended for the project for hurricane and already been contracted for. At no time may the containing the results of the study and modeling storm damage reduction, Point Beach, Milford, bottom of the conservation pool be at an ele- system together with such recommendations as Connecticut, shall be $3,000,000. vation that is less than 1,076 feet NGVD. the Secretary determines to be appropriate. (b) REVISION OF PROJECT COOPERATION (b) CONTRACT PRICING.—The contract price (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— AGREEMENT.—The Secretary shall revise the for additional storage for the Carroll-Boone There is authorized to be appropriated to carry project cooperation agreement for the project re- Water District beyond that which is provided for out this section $900,000 for each of fiscal years ferred to in subsection (a) to take into account in subsection (a) shall be based on the original 2000 through 2004. the change in the Federal participation in such construction cost of Beaver Lake and adjusted project. SEC. 536. ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ASSIST- to the 1998 price level net of inflation between ANCE IN ILLINOIS. (c) COST SHARING.—Nothing in this section the date of initiation of construction and the shall be construed to affect any cost-sharing re- The Secretary may carry out the project for date of enactment of this Act. quirement applicable to the project referred to in Georgetown, Illinois, and the project for Olney, SEC. 525. BEAVER LAKE TROUT PRODUCTION FA- subsection (a) under section 101 of the Water Illinois, referred to in House Report Number CILITY, ARKANSAS. Resources Development Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 104–741, accompanying Public Law 104–182. (a) EXPEDITED CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary 2211). SEC. 537. KANOPOLIS LAKE, KANSAS. shall construct, under the authority of section SEC. 532. LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER BASIN, FLOR- (a) WATER STORAGE.—The Secretary shall 105 of the Water Resources Development Act of IDA. offer to the State of Kansas the right to pur- 1976 (90 Stat. 2921) and section 1135 of the Water (a) COMPUTER MODEL.— chase water storage in Kanopolis Lake, Kansas, Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may apply the at a price calculated in accordance with and in 4251–4252), the Beaver Lake trout hatchery as computer model developed under the St. Johns a manner consistent with the terms of the memo- expeditiously as possible, but in no event later River basin feasibility study to assist non-Fed- randum of understanding entitled ‘‘Memo- than September 30, 2002. eral interests in developing strategies for im- randum of Understanding Between the State of (b) MITIGATION PLAN.—Not later than 2 years proving water quality in the Lower St. Johns Kansas and the U.S. Department of the Army after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- River basin, Florida. Concerning the Purchase of Municipal and In- retary, in conjunction with the State of Arkan- (2) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of dustrial Water Supply Storage’’, dated Decem- sas, shall prepare a plan for the mitigation of the cost of assistance provided under this sub- ber 11, 1985. effects of the Beaver Dam project on Beaver section shall be 50 percent. (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—For the purposes of this Lake. Such plan shall provide for construction (b) TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY.—The Secretary is section, the effective date of that memorandum of the Beaver Lake trout production facility and authorized to provide 1-foot contour topo- of understanding shall be deemed to be the date related facilities. graphic survey maps of the Lower St. Johns of enactment of this Act. SEC. 526. CHINO DAIRY PRESERVE, CALIFORNIA. River basin, Florida, to non-Federal interests SEC. 538. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY. (a) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary, in for analyzing environmental data and estab- Section 531(h) of the Water Resources Devel- coordination with the heads of other Federal lishing benchmarks for subbasins. opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3774) is amended April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2505 by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting United States, to Federal interests)’’ after ‘‘in- SEC. 550. WOODLAWN, NEW YORK. ‘‘$25,000,000’’. terests’’; (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide SEC. 539. SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA. (3) in subsection (a)(3) by inserting ‘‘or in planning, design, and other technical assistance Section 533(c) of the Water Resources Develop- conjunction’’ after ‘‘consultation’’; and to non-Federal interests for identifying and ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3775) is amended by (4) by inserting at the end of subsection (d) mitigating sources of contamination at striking ‘‘$100,000,000’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘Funds authorized to be appro- Woodlawn Beach in Woodlawn, New York. ‘‘$200,000,000’’. priated to carry out section 340 of the Water Re- (b) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of sources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856) the cost of assistance provided under this sec- SEC. 540. SNUG HARBOR, MARYLAND. are authorized for projects undertaken under tion shall be 50 percent. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordina- subsection (a)(1)(B).’’. SEC. 551. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, NEW YORK. tion with the Director of the Federal Emergency SEC. 544. CAPE COD CANAL RAILROAD BRIDGE, (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide Management Agency, is authorized— BUZZARDS BAY, MASSACHUSETTS. assistance for a project to develop maps identi- (1) to provide technical assistance to the resi- (a) ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION.—The Sec- fying 100- and 500-year flood inundation areas dents of Snug Harbor, in the vicinity of Berlin, retary is authorized to provide up to $300,000 for in the State of New York. Maryland, for purposes of flood damage reduc- alternative transportation that may arise as a (b) REQUIREMENTS.—Maps developed under tion; result of the operation, maintenance, repair, the project shall include hydrologic and hy- (2) to conduct a study of a project for non- and rehabilitation of the Cape Cod Canal Rail- draulic information and shall accurately show structural measures for flood damage reduction road Bridge. the flood inundation of each property by flood in the vicinity of Snug Harbor, Maryland, tak- (b) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACT risk in the floodplain. The maps shall be pro- ing into account the relationship of both the RENEGOTIATION.—Not later than 60 days after duced in a high resolution format and shall be Ocean City Inlet and Assateague Island to the the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary made available to all flood prone areas in the flooding; and shall enter into negotiation with the owner of State of New York in an electronic format. (3) after completion of the study, to carry out the railroad right-of-way for the Cape Cod (c) PARTICIPATION OF FEMA.—The Secretary the project under the authority of section 205 of Canal Railroad Bridge for the purpose of estab- and the non-Federal sponsor of the project shall the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s). lishing the rights and responsibities for the op- work with the Director of the Federal Emer- (b) FEMA ASSISTANCE.—The Director, in co- eration and maintenance of the Bridge. The Sec- gency Management Agency to ensure the valid- ordination with the Secretary and under the au- retary is authorized to include in any new con- ity of the maps developed under the project for thorities of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Re- tract the termination of the prior contract num- flood insurance purposes. lief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. bered ER–W175–ENG–1. (d) FORMS OF ASSISTANCE.—In carrying out 5121 note), may provide technical assistance and SEC. 545. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. the project, the Secretary may enter into con- nonstructural measures for flood damage mitiga- (a) DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.—The Secretary, tracts or cooperative agreements with the non- tion in the vicinity of Snug Harbor, Maryland. in consultation with local officials, shall con- Federal sponsor or provide reimbursements of (c) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the duct a demonstration project to improve water project costs. cost of assistance under this section shall not quality in the vicinity of St. Louis, Missouri. (e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the exceed $3,000,000. The non-Federal share of such (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— cost of the project shall be 75 percent. cost shall be determined in accordance with the There is authorized to be appropriated $1,700,000 (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— Water Resources Development Act of 1986 or the to carry out this section. There is authorized to be appropriated to carry Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- SEC. 546. BEAVER BRANCH OF BIG TIMBER out this section $12,000,000 for fiscal years be- gency Assistance Act, as appropriate. CREEK, NEW JERSEY. ginning after September 30, 1998. SEC. 541. WELCH POINT, ELK RIVER, CECIL COUN- Upon request of the State of New Jersey or a SEC. 552. WHITE OAK RIVER, NORTH CAROLINA. TY, AND CHESAPEAKE CITY, MARY- political subdivision thereof, the Secretary may The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- LAND. compile and disseminate information on floods mine if water quality deterioration and sedi- (a) SPILLAGE OF DREDGED MATERIALS.—The and flood damages, including identification of mentation of the White Oak River, North Caro- Secretary shall carry out a study to determine if areas subject to inundation by floods, and pro- lina, are the result of the Atlantic Intracoastal the spillage of dredged materials that were re- vide technical assistance regarding floodplain Waterway navigation project. If the Secretary moved as part of the project for navigation, In- management for Beaver Branch of Big Timber determines that the water quality deterioration land Waterway from Delaware River to Chesa- Creek, New Jersey. and sedimentation are the result of the project, peake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, authorized SEC. 547. LAKE ONTARIO AND ST. LAWRENCE the Secretary shall take appropriate measures to by the first section of the Act of August 30, 1935 RIVER WATER LEVELS, NEW YORK. mitigate the deterioration and sedimentation. (49 Stat. 1030), is a significant impediment to Upon request, the Secretary shall provide SEC. 553. TOUSSAINT RIVER, CARROLL TOWN- vessels transiting the Elk River near Welch technical assistance to the International Joint SHIP, OTTAWA COUNTY, OHIO. Point, Maryland. If the Secretary determines Commission and the St. Lawrence River Board The Secretary is authorized to provide tech- that the spillage is an impediment to navigation, of Control in undertaking studies on the effects nical assistance for the removal of military ord- the Secretary may conduct such dredging as of fluctuating water levels on the natural envi- nance from the Toussaint River, Carroll Town- may be required to permit navigation on the ronment, recreational boating, property flood- ship, Ottawa County, Ohio. river. ing, and erosion along the shorelines of Lake SEC. 554. SARDIS RESERVOIR, OKLAHOMA. (b) DAMAGE TO WATER SUPPLY.—The Sec- Ontario and the St. Lawrence River in New (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall accept retary shall carry out a study to determine if York. The Commission and Board are encour- from the State of Oklahoma or an agent of the additional compensation is required to fully aged to conduct such studies in a comprehensive State an amount, as determined under sub- compensate the city of Chesapeake, Maryland, and thorough manner before implementing any section (b), as prepayment of 100 percent of the for damage to the city’s water supply resulting change to water regulation Plan 1958–D. water supply cost obligation of the State under from dredging of the Chesapeake and Delaware SEC. 548. NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NEW Contract No. DACW56–74–JC–0314 for water Canal project. If the Secretary determines that YORK AND NEW JERSEY. supply storage at Sardis Reservoir, Oklahoma. such additional compensation is required, the The Secretary may enter into cooperative (b) DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT.—The amount Secretary may provide the compensation to the agreements with non-Federal interests to inves- to be paid by the State of Oklahoma under sub- city of Chesapeake. tigate, develop, and support measures for sedi- section (a) shall be subject to adjustment in ac- SEC. 542. WEST VIEW SHORES, CECIL COUNTY, ment management and reduction of contami- cordance with accepted discount purchase meth- MARYLAND. nant sources which affect navigation in the ods for Federal Government properties as deter- Not later than 1 year after the date of enact- Port of New York-New Jersey and the environ- mined by an independent accounting firm des- ment of this Act, the Secretary shall carry out mental conditions of the New York-New Jersey ignated by the Director of the Office of Manage- an investigation of the contamination of the Harbor estuary. Such investigation shall include ment and Budget. The cost of such determina- well system in West View Shores, Cecil County, an analysis of the economic and environmental tion shall be paid for by the State of Oklahoma Maryland. If the Secretary determines that the benefits and costs of potential sediment manage- or an agent of the State. disposal site from any Federal navigation ment and contaminant reduction measures. (c) EFFECT.—Nothing in this section affects project has contributed to the contamination of SEC. 549. SEA GATE REACH, CONEY ISLAND, NEW any of the rights or obligations of the parties to the wells, the Secretary may provide alternative YORK, NEW YORK. the contract referred to in subsection (a). water supplies, including replacement of wells, The Secretary is authorized to construct a SEC. 555. WAURIKA LAKE, OKLAHOMA, WATER at full Federal expense. project for shoreline protection which includes a CONVEYANCE FACILITIES. SEC. 543. RESTORATION PROJECTS FOR MARY- beachfill with revetment and T-groin for the Sea For the project for construction of the water LAND, PENNSYLVANIA, AND WEST Gate Reach on Coney Island, New York, as conveyances authorized by the first section of VIRGINIA. identified in the March 1998 report prepared for Public Law 88–253 (77 Stat. 841), the requirement Section 539 of the Water Resources Develop- the Corps of Engineers, New York District, enti- for the Waurika Project Master Conservancy ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3776–3777) is tled ‘‘Field Data Gathering, Project Perform- District to repay the $2,900,000 in costs (includ- amended— ance Analysis and Design Alternative Solutions ing interest) resulting from the October 1991 set- (1) in subsection (a)(1) by striking ‘‘tech- to Improve Sandfill Retention’’, at a total cost tlement of the claim before the United States nical’’; of $9,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of Claims Court, and the payment of $1,190,451 of (2) in subsection (a)(1) by inserting ‘‘(or in the $5,850,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of the final cost representing the difference be- case of projects located on lands owned by the $3,150,000. tween the 1978 estimate of cost and the actual H2506 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 cost determined after completion of such project water-dock combination at the entrance to (2) Study and develop strategies and plans in 1991, are waived. Seven Points’ Harbor, Pennsylvania. that restore, preserve, and protect the State’s SEC. 556. SKINNER BUTTE PARK, EUGENE, OR- (b) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS.—All and planning region’s natural ecosystems. EGON. operation and maintenance costs associated (3) Facilitate public communication and par- (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a with the facility constructed under this section ticipation. study of the south bank of the Willamette River, shall be the responsibility of the lessee of the (4) Integrate such activities with other ongo- in the area of Skinner Butte Park from Ferry marina complex at Seven Points’ Harbor. ing Federal and State projects and activities as- Street Bridge to the Valley River footbridge, to (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— sociated with the State of Texas water plan and determine the feasibility of carrying out a There is authorized to be appropriated $850,000 the State of Texas legislation. project to stabilize the river bank, and to restore to carry out this section. (c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of and enhance riverine habitat, using a combina- SEC. 562. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. the cost of assistance provided under subsection tion of structural and bioengineering tech- Section 566(b) of the Water Resources Devel- (a) shall be 50 percent, of which up to 1⁄2 of the niques. opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3786) is amended non-Federal share may be provided as in kind (b) CONSTRUCTION.—If, upon completion of by inserting ‘‘environmental restoration,’’ after services. the study, the Secretary determines that the ‘‘water supply and related facilities,’’. (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— project is feasible, the Secretary shall partici- SEC. 563. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA-LACKAWANNA There is authorized to be appropriated to carry pate with non-Federal interests in the construc- WATERSHED RESTORATION INITIA- out this section, $10,000,000 for the fiscal years tion of the project. TIVE. beginning after September 30, 1999. (c) COST SHARE.—The non-Federal share of (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coopera- SEC. 567. BOLIVAR PENINSULA, JEFFERSON, the cost of the project shall be 35 percent. tion with appropriate Federal, State, and local CHAMBERS, AND GALVESTON COUN- (d) LANDS, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF- agencies and nongovernmental institutions, is TIES, TEXAS. WAY.—The non-Federal interest shall provide authorized to prepare a watershed plan for the (a) SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT.—The Sec- lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna Watershed retary is authorized to design and construct a and dredged material disposal areas necessary (USGS Cataloguing Unit 02050107). The plan shore protection project between the south jetty for construction of the project. The value of shall utilize geographic information system and of the Sabine Pass Channel and the north jetty such items shall be credited toward the non- shall include a comprehensive environmental as- of the Galveston Harbor Entrance Channel in Federal share of the cost of the project. sessment of the watershed’s ecosystem, a com- Jefferson, Chambers, and Galveston Counties, (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— prehensive flood plain management plan, a Texas, including beneficial use of dredged mate- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry flood plain protection plan, water resource and rial from Federal navigation projects. out this section $1,000,000 for fiscal years begin- environmental restoration projects, water qual- (b) APPLICABILITY OF BENEFIT-COST RATIO ning after September 30, 1999. ity improvement, and other appropriate infra- WAIVER AUTHORITY.—In evaluating and imple- SEC. 557. WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREGON. structure and measures. menting the project, the Secretary shall allow The Secretary, Director of the Federal Emer- (b) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal the non-Federal interest to participate in the fi- gency Management Agency, Administrator of share of the cost of preparation of the plan nancing of the project in accordance with sec- the Environmental Protection Agency, and under this section shall be 50 percent. Services tion 903(c) of the Water Resources Development heads of other appropriate Federal agencies and materials instead of cash may be credited Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184), notwithstanding any shall, using existing authorities, assist the State toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the limitation on the purpose of projects to which of Oregon in developing and implementing a plan. such section applies, to the extent that the Sec- comprehensive basin-wide strategy in the Wil- (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— retary’s evaluation indicates that applying such lamette River basin of Oregon for coordinated There is authorized to be appropriated to carry section is necessary to implement the project. and integrated management of land and water out this section $5,000,000 for fiscal years begin- resources to improve water quality, reduce flood SEC. 568. GALVESTON BEACH, GALVESTON COUN- ning after September 30, 1999. TY, TEXAS. hazards, ensure sustainable economic activity, SEC. 564. AGUADILLA HARBOR, PUERTO RICO. The Secretary is authorized to design and and restore habitat for native fish and wildlife. The Secretary shall conduct a study to deter- construct a shore protection project between the The heads of such Federal agencies may provide mine if erosion and additional storm damage Galveston South Jetty and San Luis Pass, Gal- technical assistance, staff and financial support risks that exist in the vicinity of Aguadilla Har- veston County, Texas, using innovative nourish- for development of the basin-wide management bor, Puerto Rico, are the result of a Federal ment techniques, including beneficial use of strategy. The heads of Federal agencies shall navigation project. If the Secretary determines dredged material from Federal navigation seek to exercise flexibility in administrative ac- that such erosion and additional storm damage projects. tions and allocation of funding to reduce bar- risks are the result of the project, the Secretary riers to efficient and effective implementing of SEC. 569. PACKERY CHANNEL, CORPUS CHRISTI, shall take appropriate measures to mitigate the TEXAS. the strategy. erosion and storm damage. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall con- SEC. 558. BRADFORD AND SULLIVAN COUNTIES, SEC. 565. OAHE DAM TO LAKE SHARPE, SOUTH PENNSYLVANIA. struct a navigation and storm protection project DAKOTA, STUDY. at Packery Channel, Mustang Island, Texas, The Secretary is authorized to provide assist- Section 441 of the Water Resources Develop- ance for water-related environmental infrastruc- consisting of construction of a channel and a ment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3747) is amended— channel jetty and placement of sand along the ture and resource protection and development (1) by inserting ‘‘(a) INVESTIGATION.—’’ before length of the seawall. projects in Bradford and Sullivan Counties, ‘‘The Secretary’’; and COLOGICAL AND RECREATIONAL BENE- Pennsylvania, using the funds and authorities (2) by adding at the end the following: (b) E FITS provided in title I of the Energy and Water De- ‘‘(b) REPORT.—Not later than September 30, .—In evaluating the project, the Secretary velopment Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 1999, the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a shall include the ecological and recreational 105–245) under the heading ‘‘CONSTRUCTION, report on the results of the investigation under benefits of reopening the Packery Channel. GENERAL’’ (112 Stat. 1840) for similar projects in this section. The report shall include the exam- (c) APPLICABILITY OF BENEFIT-COST RATIO Lackawanna, Lycoming, Susquehanna, Wyo- ination of financing options for regular mainte- WAIVER AUTHORITY.—In evaluating and imple- ming, Pike, and Monroe Counties, Pennsyl- nance and preservation of the lake. The report menting the project, the Secretary shall allow vania. shall be prepared in coordination and coopera- the non-Federal interest to participate in the fi- SEC. 559. ERIE HARBOR, PENNSYLVANIA. tion with the Natural Resources Conservation nancing of the project in accordance with sec- The Secretary may reimburse the appropriate Service, other Federal agencies, and State and tion 903(c) of the Water Resources Development non-Federal interest not more than $78,366 for local officials.’’. Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184), notwithstanding any limitation on the purpose of projects to which architect and engineering costs incurred in con- SEC. 566. INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT nection with the Erie Harbor basin navigation PLANNING, TEXAS. such section applies, to the extent that the Sec- project, Pennsylvania. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coopera- retary’s evaluation indicates that applying such section is necessary to implement the project. SEC. 560. POINT MARION LOCK AND DAM, PENN- tion with other Federal agencies and the State SYLVANIA. of Texas, shall provide technical, planning, and SEC. 570. NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA. The project for navigation, Point Marion Lock design assistance to non-Federal interests in de- The projects described in the following reports and Dam, Borough of Point Marion, Pennsyl- veloping integrated water management plans are authorized to be carried out by the Secretary vania, as authorized by section 301(a) of the and projects that will serve the cities, counties, substantially in accordance with the plans, and Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 water agencies, and participating planning re- subject to the conditions, recommended in such Stat. 4110), is modified to direct the Secretary, in gions under the jurisdiction of the State of reports: the operation and maintenance of the project, to Texas. (1) PARKERSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA.—Report of mitigate damages to the shoreline, at a total cost (b) PURPOSES OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance pro- the Corps of Engineers entitled ‘‘Parkersburg/ of $2,000,000. The cost of the mitigation shall be vided under subsection (a) shall be in support of Vienna Riverfront Park Feasibility Study’’, allocated as an operation and maintenance cost non-Federal planning and projects for the fol- dated June 1998, at a total cost of $8,400,000, of a Federal navigation project. lowing purposes: with an estimated Federal cost of $4,200,000, and SEC. 561. SEVEN POINTS’ HARBOR, PENNSYL- (1) Plan and develop integrated, near- and an estimated non-Federal cost of $4,200,000. VANIA. long-term water management plans that address (2) WEIRTON, WEST VIRGINIA.—Report of the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized, the planning region’s water supply, water con- Corps of Engineers entitled ‘‘Feasibility Master at full Federal expense, to construct a break- servation, and water quality needs. Plan for Weirton Port and Industrial Center, April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2507

West Virginia Public Port Authority’’, dated De- mental Protection Agency and the National (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— cember 1997, at a total cost of $18,000,000, with Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, other There is authorized to be appropriated to carry an estimated Federal cost of $9,000,000, and an appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, out this section $5,000,000 for fiscal years begin- estimated non-Federal cost of $9,000,000. and affected private entities, in the development ning after September 30, 1998. (3) ERICKSON/WOOD COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA.— of a management strategy to address problems SEC. 576. SITE DESIGNATION. Report of the Corps of Engineers entitled ‘‘Fea- associated with toxic microorganisms and the re- Section 102(c)(4) of the Marine Protection, Re- sibility Master Plan for Erickson/Wood County sulting degradation of ecosystems in the tidal search, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. Port District, West Virginia Public Port Author- and nontidal wetlands and waters of the United 1412(c)(4)) is amended by striking ‘‘January 1, ity’’, dated July 7, 1997, at a total cost of States for the States along the Atlantic Ocean. 2000’’ and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2005’’. $28,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of As part of such management strategy, the Sec- SEC. 577. LAND CONVEYANCES. $14,000,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost retary may provide planning, design, and other (a) EXCHANGE OF LAND IN PIKE COUNTY, MIS- of $14,000,000. technical assistance to each participating State SOURI.— (4) MONONGAHELA RIVER, WEST VIRGINIA.— in the development and implementation of non- (1) EXCHANGE OF LAND.—Subject to para- Monongahela River, West Virginia, Comprehen- regulatory measures to mitigate environmental graphs (3) and (4), at such time as Holnam Inc. sive Study Reconnaissance Report, dated Sep- problems and restore aquatic resources. conveys all right, title, and interest in and to tember 1995, consisting of the following ele- (b) COST SHARING.—The Federal share of the the land described in paragraph (2)(A) to the ments: cost of measures undertaken under this section United States, the Secretary shall convey all (A) Morgantown Riverfront Park, Morgan- shall not exceed 65 percent. right, title, and interest in the land described in town, West Virginia, at a total cost of $1,600,000, (c) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non- paragraph (2)(B) to Holnam Inc. with an estimated Federal cost of $800,000 and Federal share of operation and maintenance (2) DESCRIPTION OF LANDS.—The lands re- an estimated non-Federal cost of $800,000. costs for projects constructed with assistance ferred to in paragraph (1) are the following: (B) Caperton Rail to Trail, Monongahela provided under this section shall be 100 percent. (A) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—152.45 acres with ex- County, West Virginia, at a total cost of (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.— isting flowage easements situated in Pike Coun- $4,425,000, with an estimated Federal cost of There is authorized to be appropriated to carry ty, Missouri, described a portion of Government $2,212,500 and an estimated non-Federal cost of out this section $7,000,000 for fiscal years begin- Tract Number FM–9 and all of Government $2,212,500. ning after September 30, 1999. Tract Numbers FM–11, FM–10, FM–12, FM–13, (C) Palatine Park, Fairmont, West Virginia, SEC. 574. ABANDONED AND INACTIVE NONCOAL and FM–16, owned and administered by the at a total cost of $1,750,000, with an estimated MINE RESTORATION. Holnam Inc. Federal cost of $875,000 and an estimated non- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (B) FEDERAL LAND.—152.61 acres situated in Federal cost of $875,000. to provide technical, planning, and design as- Pike County, Missouri, known as Government SEC. 571. URBANIZED PEAK FLOOD MANAGEMENT sistance to Federal and non-Federal interests Tract Numbers FM–17 and a portion of FM–18, RESEARCH. for carrying out projects to address water qual- administered by the Corps of Engineers. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop ity problems caused by drainage and related ac- (3) CONDITIONS OF EXCHANGE.—The exchange and implement a research program to evaluate tivities from abandoned and inactive noncoal of land authorized by paragraph (1) shall be opportunities to manage peak flood flows in ur- mines. subject to the following conditions: banized watersheds located in the State of New (b) SPECIFIC MEASURES.—Assistance provided (A) DEEDS.— Jersey. under subsection (a) may be in support of (i) FEDERAL LAND.—The instrument of convey- (b) SCOPE OF RESEARCH.—The research pro- projects for the following purposes: ance used to convey the land described in para- gram authorized by subsection (a) shall be ac- (1) Management of drainage from abandoned graph (2)(B) to Holnam Inc. shall contain such complished through the New York District. The and inactive noncoal mines. reservations, terms, and conditions as the Sec- (2) Restoration and protection of streams, riv- research shall specifically include the following: retary considers necessary to allow the United ers, wetlands, other waterbodies, and riparian (1) Identification of key factors in urbanized States to operate and maintain the Mississippi areas degraded by drainage from abandoned watersheds that are under development and im- River 9-Foot Navigation Project. and inactive noncoal mines. pact peak flows in the watersheds and (ii) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of (3) Demonstration of management practices downsteam of the watersheds. the land described in paragraph (2)(A) to the and innovative and alternative treatment tech- (2) Development of peak flow management Secretary shall be by a warranty deed accept- nologies to minimize or eliminate adverse envi- models for 4 to 6 watersheds in urbanized areas able to the Secretary. ronmental effects associated with drainage from located with widely differing geology, areas, (B) REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS.—Holnam abandoned and inactive noncoal mines. shapes, and soil types that can be used to deter- Inc. may remove any improvements on the land (c) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Federal mine optimal flow reduction factors for indi- described in paragraph (2)(A). The Secretary share of the cost of assistance under subsection vidual watersheds. may require Holnam Inc. to remove any im- (a) shall be 50 percent; except that the Federal (3) Utilization of such management models to provements on the land described in paragraph share with respect to projects located on lands determine relationships between flow and reduc- (2)(A). In either case, Holnam Inc. shall hold owned by the United States shall be 100 percent. tion factors and change in imperviousness, soil the United States harmless from liability, and (d) EFFECT ON AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY types, shape of the drainage basin, and other the United States shall not incur cost associated OF THE INTERIOR.—Nothing in this section shall with the removal or relocation of any such im- pertinent parameters from existing to ultimate be construed as affecting the authority of the conditions in watersheds under consideration provements. Secretary of the Interior under title IV of the (C) TIME LIMIT FOR EXCHANGE.—The land ex- for development. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of (4) Development and validation of an inexpen- change authorized by paragraph (1) shall be 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1231 et seq.). completed not later than 2 years after the date sive accurate model to establish flood reduction (e) TECHNOLOGY DATABASE FOR RECLAMATION factors based on runoff curve numbers, change of enactment of this Act. OF ABANDONED MINES.—The Secretary is au- (D) LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—The Secretary shall in imperviousness, the shape of the basin, and thorized to provide assistance to non-Federal other pertinent factors. provide the legal description of the land de- and non-profit entities to develop, manage, and scribed in paragraph (2). The legal description (c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary maintain a database of conventional and inno- shall be used in the instruments of conveyance shall evaluate policy changes in the planning vative, cost-effective technologies for reclama- process for flood control projects based on the of the land. tion of abandoned and inactive noncoal mine (E) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—The Secretary results of the research authorized by this section sites. Such assistance shall be provided through shall require Holnam Inc. to pay reasonable ad- and transmit to Congress a report not later than the rehabilitation of abandoned mine sites pro- ministrative costs associated with the exchange. 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act. gram, managed by the Sacramento District Of- (4) VALUE OF PROPERTIES.—If the appraised (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— fice of the Corps of Engineers. fair market value, as determined by the Sec- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry- (f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— retary, of the land conveyed to Holnam Inc. by out this section $3,000,000 for fiscal years begin- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry the Secretary under paragraph (1) exceeds the ning after September 30, 1999. out this section $5,000,000. appraised fair market value, as determined by (e) FLOW REDUCTION FACTORS DEFINED.—In SEC. 575. BENEFICIAL USE OF WASTE TIRE RUB- the Secretary, of the land conveyed to the this section, the term ‘‘flow reduction factors’’ BER. United States by Holnam Inc. under paragraph means the ratio of estimated allowable peak (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized (1), Holnam Inc. shall make a payment equal to flows of stormwater after projected development to conduct pilot projects to encourage the bene- the excess in cash or a cash equivalent to the when compared to pre-existing conditions. ficial use of waste tire rubber, including crumb United States. SEC. 572. MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION. rubber, recycled from tires. Such beneficial use (b) CANDY LAKE PROJECT, OSAGE COUNTY, Section 8 of the Flood Control Act of May 15, may include marine pilings, underwater fram- OKLAHOMA.— 1928 (Public Law 391, 70th Congress), is amend- ing, floating docks with built-in flotation, util- (1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection, the fol- ed by striking ‘‘$7,500’’ and inserting ‘‘$21,500.’’ ity poles, and other uses associated with trans- lowing definitions apply: SEC. 573. COASTAL AQUATIC HABITAT MANAGE- portation and infrastructure projects receiving (A) FAIR MARKET VALUE.—The term ‘‘fair mar- MENT. Federal funds. The Secretary shall, when ap- ket value’’ means the amount for which a will- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may cooper- propriate, encourage the use of waste tire rub- ing buyer would purchase and a willing seller ate with the Secretaries of Agriculture and the ber, including crumb rubber, in such federally would sell a parcel of land, as determined by a Interior, the Administrators of the Environ- funded projects. qualified, independent land appraiser. H2508 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

(B) PREVIOUS OWNER OF LAND.—The term bounded to the south by a line 50 north on the be paid by the Summerfield Cemetery Associa- ‘‘previous owner of land’’ means a person (in- centerline of Road B of Sawyer Bluff Public Use tion, Oklahoma. cluding a corporation) that conveyed, or a de- Area and to the north by the 1⁄2 quarter section (5) OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The con- scendant of a deceased individual who con- line forming the south boundary of Wilson Point veyance under this subsection shall be subject to veyed, land to the Corps of Engineers for use in Public Use Area; and such other terms and conditions as the Sec- the Candy Lake project in Osage County, Okla- (B) a parcel of property at Lake Hugo, Okla- retary considers necessary and appropriate to homa. homa, commencing at the NE corner of the SE1⁄4 protect the interests of the United States. (2) LAND CONVEYANCES.— SW1⁄4 of Section 13, R 18 E, T 6 S, 100 feet north, (f) DEXTER, OREGON.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey, then east approximately 1⁄2 mile to the county (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey in accordance with this subsection, all right, line road between Section 13, R 18 E, T 6 S, and to the Dexter Sanitary District all right, title, title, and interest of the United States in and to Section 18, R 19 E, T 6 S. and interest of the United States in and to a the land acquired by the United States for the (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The conveyances parcel of land consisting of approximately 5 Candy Lake project in Osage County, Okla- under this subsection shall be subject to such acres located at Dexter Lake, Oregon, under homa. terms and conditions, including payment of rea- lease to the Dexter Sanitary District. (B) PREVIOUS OWNERS OF LAND.— sonable administrative costs and compliance (2) CONSIDERATION.—Land to be conveyed (i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall give a with applicable Federal floodplain management under this section shall be conveyed without previous owner of land the first option to pur- and flood insurance programs, as the Secretary consideration. If the land is no longer held in chase the land described in subparagraph (A). considers necessary and appropriate to protect public ownership or no longer used for waste- (ii) APPLICATION.— the interests of the United States. water treatment purposes, title to the land shall (I) IN GENERAL.—A previous owner of land (d) CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY IN MARSHALL revert to the Secretary. that desires to purchase the land described in COUNTY, OKLAHOMA.— (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The conveyance subparagraph (A) that was owned by the pre- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey by the United States shall be subject to such vious owner of land, or by the individual from to the State of Oklahoma all right, title, and in- terms and conditions as the Secretary considers whom the previous owner of land is descended, terest of the United States to real property lo- appropriate to protect the interests of the United shall file an application to purchase the land cated in Marshall County, Oklahoma, and in- States. with the Secretary not later than 180 days after cluded in the Lake Texoma (Denison Dam), (4) DESCRIPTION.—The exact acreage and de- the official date of notice to the previous owner Oklahoma and Texas, project consisting of ap- scription of the land to be conveyed under para- of land under paragraph (3). proximately 1,580 acres and leased to the State graph (1) shall be determined by such surveys as (II) FIRST TO FILE HAS FIRST OPTION.—If more of Oklahoma for public park and recreation the Secretary considers necessary. The cost of than 1 application is filed to purchase a parcel purposes. the surveys shall be borne by the Dexter Sani- of land described in subparagraph (A), the first (2) CONSIDERATION.—Consideration for the tary District. option to purchase the parcel of land shall be conveyance under paragraph (1) shall be the (g) RICHARD B. RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, determined in the order in which applications fair market value of the real property, as deter- SOUTH CAROLINA.— for the parcel of land were filed. mined by the Secretary. All costs associated (1) IN GENERAL.—Upon execution of an agree- (iii) IDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUS OWNERS OF with the conveyance under paragraph (1) shall ment under paragraph (4) and subject to the re- LAND.—As soon as practicable after the date of be paid by the State of Oklahoma. quirements of this subsection, the Secretary enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, to the (3) DESCRIPTION.—The exact acreage and legal shall convey, without consideration, to the State extent practicable, identify each previous owner description of the real property to be conveyed of South Carolina all right, title, and interest of of land. under paragraph (1) shall be determined by a the United States to the lands described in para- (iv) CONSIDERATION.—Consideration for land survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost of graph (2) that are managed, as of the date of conveyed under this paragraph shall be the fair the survey shall be paid by the State of Okla- enactment of this Act, by the South Carolina market value of the land. homa. Department of Natural Resources for fish and (C) DISPOSAL.—Any land described in sub- (4) ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE.—Before wildlife mitigation purposes in connection with paragraph (A) for which an application to pur- making the conveyance under paragraph (1), the Richard B. Russell Dam and Lake, South chase the land has not been filed under sub- the Secretary shall— Carolina, project. paragraph (B)(ii) within the applicable time pe- (A) conduct an environmental baseline survey (2) DESCRIPTION.— riod shall be disposed of in accordance with law. to determine if there are levels of contamination (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (D) EXTINGUISHMENT OF EASEMENTS.—All for which the United States would be respon- (B), the lands to be conveyed under paragraph flowage easements acquired by the United States sible under the Comprehensive Environmental (1) are described in Exhibits A, F, and H of for use in the Candy Lake project in Osage Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of Army Lease Number DACW21–1–93–0910 and as- County, Oklahoma, are extinguished. 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.); and sociated Supplemental Agreements or are des- (3) NOTICE.— (B) ensure that the conveyance complies with ignated in red in Exhibit A of Army License (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall notify— the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Number DACW21–3–85–1904; except that all des- (i) each person identified as a previous owner (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). ignated lands in the license that are below ele- of land under paragraph (2)(B)(iii), not later (5) OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The con- vation 346 feet mean sea level or that are less than 90 days after identification, by United veyance under paragraph (1) shall be subject to than 300 feet measured horizontally from the top States mail; and such other terms and conditions as the Sec- of the power pool are excluded from the convey- (ii) the general public, not later than 90 days retary considers necessary and appropriate to ance. Management of the excluded lands shall after the date of enactment of this Act, by publi- protect the interests of the United States, in- continue in accordance with the terms of Army cation in the Federal Register. cluding reservation by the United States of a License Number DACW21–3–85–1904 until the (B) CONTENTS OF NOTICE.—Notice under this flowage easement over all portions of the real Secretary and the State enter into an agreement paragraph shall include— property to be conveyed that are at or below ele- under paragraph (4). (i) a copy of this subsection; vation 645.0 NGVD. (B) SURVEY.—The exact acreage and legal de- (ii) information sufficient to separately iden- (e) SUMMERFIELD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION, scription of the lands to be conveyed under tify each parcel of land subject to this sub- OKLAHOMA, LAND CONVEYANCE.— paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey section; and (1) IN GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after satisfactory to the Secretary, with the cost of (iii) specification of the fair market value of the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary the survey to be paid by the State. The State each parcel of land subject to this subsection. shall transfer to the Summerfield Cemetery As- shall be responsible for all other costs, including (C) OFFICIAL DATE OF NOTICE.—The official sociation, Oklahoma, all right, title, and inter- real estate transaction and environmental com- date of notice under this paragraph shall be the est of the United State in and to the land de- pliance costs, associated with the conveyance. later of— scribed in paragraph (3) for use as a cemetery. (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— ANAGEMENT OF LANDS (i) the date on which actual notice is mailed; (2) REVERSION.—If the land to be transferred (A) M .—All lands that or under this subsection ever cease to be used as a are conveyed under paragraph (1) shall be re- (ii) the date of publication of the notice in the not-for-profit cemetery or for other public pur- tained in public ownership and shall be man- Federal Register. poses the land shall revert to the United States. aged in perpetuity for fish and wildlife mitiga- (c) LAKE HUGO, OKLAHOMA, AREA LAND CON- (3) DESCRIPTION.—The land to be conveyed tion purposes in accordance with a plan ap- VEYANCE.— under this subsection is the approximately 10 proved by the Secretary. If the lands are not (1) IN GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after acres of land located in Leflore County, Okla- managed for such purposes in accordance with the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary homa, and described as follows: the plan, title to the lands shall revert to the shall convey at fair market value to Choctaw United States. If the lands revert to the United INDIAN BASIN MERIDIAN County Industrial Authority, Oklahoma, the States under this subparagraph, the Secretary property described in paragraph (2). Section 23, Township 5 North, Range 23 East shall manage the lands for such purposes. (2) DESCRIPTION.—The property to be con- SW SE SW NW (B) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The Secretary veyed under paragraph (1) is— NW NE NW SW may require such additional terms and condi- (A) that portion of land at Lake Hugo, Okla- N1⁄2 SW SW NW. tions in connection with the conveyance as the homa, above elevation 445.2 located in the N1⁄2 (4) CONSIDERATION.—The conveyance under Secretary considers appropriate to protect the of the NW1⁄4 of Section 24, R 18 E, T 6 S, and the this subsection shall be without consideration. interests of the United States. S1⁄2 of the SW1⁄4 of Section 13, R 18 E, T 6 S All costs associated with the conveyance shall (4) PAYMENTS.— April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2509

(A) AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary is author- 51°52′ East 81.8 feet from an iron pin and cap North 38°40′ West 14 feet to the point of begin- ized to pay to the State of South Carolina not marked M–12 on the boundary of the Matewan ning, containing 0.53 acre, more or less. The more than $4,850,000 if the Secretary and the Area Structural Project, on the north right-of- bearings and coordinate used herein are ref- State enter into a binding agreement for the way line of said street, at a corner common to erenced to the West Virginia State Plane Coordi- State to manage for fish and wildlife mitigation designated U.S.A. Tracts Nos. 834 and 836; nate System, South Zone. purposes, in perpetuity, the lands conveyed thence, leaving the right-of-way of said street, (C) A certain parcel of land in the State of under this subsection and the lands not covered with the line common to the land of said Tract West Virginia, Mingo County, Town of by the conveyance that are designated in red in No. 834, and the land of said Tract No. 837. Matewan, and being more particularly bounded Exhibit A of Army License Number DACW21–3– South 14°37′ West 46 feet to the corner common and described as follows: 85–1904. to the land of said Tract No. 834, and the land Beginning at a point on the southerly right- (B) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The agreement of said Tract No. 837; thence, leaving the land of-way line of the Norfolk and Western Rail- shall specify the terms and conditions under of said Tract No. 837, severing the lands of said road, having an approximate coordinate value which the payment will be made and the rights Project. of N228,936 E1,661,672, and being at the intersec- of, and remedies available to, the Federal Gov- South 14°37′ West 46 feet. tion of the easterly right-of-way line of State ernment to recover all or a portion of the pay- South 68°07′ East 239 feet. Route 49/10 with the boundary of the Matewan ment in the event the State fails to manage the North 26°05′ East 95 feet to a point on the Area Structural Project; thence, leaving the lands in a manner satisfactory to the Secretary. southerly right-of-way line of said street; right-of-way of said road, and with said Project (h) CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.—The Sec- thence, with the right-of-way of said street, con- boundary, and the southerly right-of-way of retary is authorized to convey the property of tinuing to sever the lands of said Project. said Railroad. the Corps of Engineers known as the ‘‘Equip- South 63°55′ East 206 feet; thence, leaving the North 77°49′ East 89 feet to an iron pin and ment and Storage Yard’’, located on Meeting right-of-way of said street, continuing to sever cap designated as U.S.A. Corner No. M–4. Street in Charleston, South Carolina, in as-is the lands of said Project. North 79°30′ East 74 feet to an iron pin and condition for fair-market value with all proceeds South 26°16′ West 63 feet; thence, with a curve cap designated as U.S.A. Corner No. M–5–1; from the conveyance to be applied by the Corps to the left having a radius of 70 feet, a delta of thence, leaving the southerly right-of-way of of Engineers, Charleston District, to offset a 33°58′, an arc length of 41 feet, the chord bear- said Railroad, and continuing with the bound- portion of the costs of moving or leasing (or ing. ary of said Project. both) an office facility in the city of Charleston. South 09°17′ West 41 feet; thence, leaving said South 06°33′ East 102 to an iron pipe and cap (i) CLARKSTON, WASHINGTON.— curve, continuing to sever the lands of said designated U.S.A. Corner No. M–6–1 on the (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey Project. northerly right-of-way line of State Route 49/28; to the Port of Clarkston, Washington, all right, South 07°42′ East 31 feet to a point on the thence, leaving the boundary of said Project, title, and interest of the United States in and to right-of-way line of the floodwall; thence, with and with the right-of-way of said road, severing a portion of the land described in Army Lease the right-of-way of said floodwall, continuing to the lands of said Project. Number DACW68–1–97–22, consisting of approxi- sever the lands of said Project. North 80°59′ West 171 feet to a point at the mately 31 acres, the exact boundaries of which South 77°04′ West 71 feet. intersection of the Northerly right-of-way line of shall be determined by the Secretary and the North 77°10′ West 46 feet. said State Route 49/28 with the easterly right-of- Port of Clarkston. North 67°07′ West 254 feet. way line of said State Route 49/10; thence, leav- (2) ADDITIONAL LAND.—The Secretary may North 67°54′ West 507 feet. ing the right-of-way of said State Route 49/28 ° ′ convey to the Port of Clarkston, Washington, at North 57 49 West 66 feet to the intersection of and with the right-of-way of said State Route fair market value as determined by the Sec- the right-of-way line of said floodwall with the 49/10. retary, such additional land located in the vi- southerly right-of-way line of said street; North 03°21′ West 42 feet to the point of begin- cinity of Clarkston, Washington, as the Sec- thence, leaving the right-of-way of said ning, containing 0.27 acre, more or less. The retary determines to be excess to the needs of the floodwall and with the southerly right-of-way bearings and coordinate used herein are ref- Columbia River Project and appropriate for con- of said street, continuing to sever the lands of erenced to the West Virginia State Plane Coordi- veyance. said Project. nate System, South Zone. ° ′ (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The conveyances North 83 01 East 171 feet. (D) A certain parcel of land in the State of ° ′ made under paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be sub- North 89 42 East 74 feet. West Virginia, Mingo County, Town of ° ′ ject to such terms and conditions as the Sec- South 83 39 East 168 feet. Matewan, and being more particularly bounded ° ′ retary determines to be necessary to protect the South 83 38 East 41 feet. and described as follows: South 77°26′ East 28 feet to the point of begin- interests of the United States, including a re- Beginning at a point at the intersection of the ning, containing 2.59 acres, more or less. The quirement that the Port of Clarkston pay all ad- easterly right-of-way line of State Route 49/10 bearings and coordinate used herein are ref- ministrative costs associated with the convey- with the right-of-way line of the floodwall, hav- erenced to the West Virginia State Plane Coordi- ances (including the cost of land surveys and ing an approximate coordinate value of N228,826 nate System, South Zone. appraisals and costs associated with compliance E1,661,679; thence, leaving the right-of-way of (B) A certain parcel of land in the State of with applicable environmental laws, including said floodwall, and with the right-of-way of West Virginia, Mingo County, Town of regulations). said State Route 49/10. (4) USE OF LAND.—The Port of Clarkston shall Matewan, and being more particularly bounded North 03°21′ West 23 feet to a point at the be required to pay the fair market value, as de- and described as follows: intersection of the easterly right-of-way line of termined by the Secretary, of any land conveyed Beginning at an iron pin and cap designated said State Route 49/10 with the southerly right- pursuant to paragraph (1) that is not retained Corner No. M2–2 on the southerly right-of-way of-way line of State Route 49/28; thence, leaving in public ownership or is used for other than line of the Norfolk and Western Railroad, hav- the right-of-way of said State Route 49/10 and public park or recreation purposes, except that ing an approximate coordinate value of N228,755 with the right-of-way of said State Route 49/28. the Secretary shall have a right of reverter to re- E1,661,242, and being at the intersection of the South 80°59′ East 168 feet. claim possession and title to any such land. right-of-way line of the floodwall with the North 82°28′ East 45 feet to an iron pin and (j) LAND CONVEYANCE TO MATEWAN, WEST boundary of the Matewan Area Structural cap designated as U.S.A. Corner No. M–8–1 on VIRGINIA.— Project; thence, leaving the right-of-way of said the boundary of the Western Area Structural (1) IN GENERAL.—The United States shall con- floodwall and with said Project boundary, and Project; thence, leaving the right-of-way of said vey by quit claim deed to the Town of Matewan, the southerly right-of-way of said Railroad. State Route 49/28, and with said Project bound- West Virginia, all right, title, and interest of the North 59°45′ East 34 feet. ° ′ ary. United States in and to four parcels of land North 69 50 East 44 feet. ° ′ deemed excess by the Secretary of the Army, act- North 58°11′ East 79 feet. South 08 28 East 88 feet to an iron pin and ing through the Chief of the U.S. Army Corps of North 66°13′ East 102 feet. cap designated as U.S.A. Corner No. M–9–1 Engineers, to the structural project for flood North 69°43′ East 98 feet. point on the northerly right-of-way line of a control constructed by the Corps of Engineers North 77°39′ East 18 feet. street (known as McCoy Alley); thence, leaving along the Tug Fork River pursuant to section North 72°39′ East 13 feet to a point at the said Project boundary and with the northerly intersection of said Project boundary, and the right-of-way of said street. 202 of Public Law 96–367. ° ′ (2) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.—The parcels of southerly right-of-way of said Railroad, with South 83 01 West 38 feet to a point on the land referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows: the westerly right-of-way line of State Route 49/ right-of-way line of said floodwall; thence, leav- (A) A certain parcel of land in the State of 10; thence, leaving said Project boundary, and ing the right-of-way of said street, and with the West Virginia, Mingo County, Town of the southerly right-of-way of said Railroad, and right-of-way of said floodwall. ° ′ Matewan, and being more particularly bounded with the westerly right-of-way of said road. North 57 49 West 180 feet. ° ′ and described as follows: South 03°21′ East 100 feet to a point at the South 79 30 West 34 feet to a point of begin- Beginning at a point on the southerly right- intersection of the westerly right-of-way of said ning, containing 0.24 acre, more or less. The of-way line of a 40-foot-wide street right-of-way road with the right-of-way of said floodwall; bearings and coordinate used herein are ref- (known as McCoy Alley), having an approxi- thence, leaving the right-of-way of said road, erenced to the West Virginia State Plane Coordi- mate coordinate value of N228,695, E1,662,397, in and with the right-of-way line of said floodwall. nate System, South Zone. the line common to the land designated as South 79°30′ West 69 feet. SEC. 578. NAMINGS. U.S.A. Tract No. 834, and the land designated South 78°28′ West 222 feet. (a) FRANCIS BLAND FLOODWAY DITCH, ARKAN- as U.S.A. Tract No. 837, said point being South South 80°11′ West 65 feet. SAS.— H2510 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 (1) DESIGNATION.—8-Mile Creek in Paragould, to a demand for division of the ques- In section 101(b)(12) of the bill, strike all Arkansas, shall be known and designated as the tion. after ‘‘$1,740,000’’ and insert a period. ‘‘Francis Bland Floodway Ditch’’. The Chairman of the Committee of In section 101(b) of the bill, strike para- graph (4) and insert the following: (2) LEGAL REFERENCE.—Any reference in a the Whole may postpone a request for a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other (4) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE record of the United States to the creek referred recorded vote on any amendment and AND NEW JERSEY: OAKWOOD BEACH, NEW JER- to in paragraph (1) shall be deemed to be a ref- may reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes SEY.—The project for shore protection, Dela- erence to the ‘‘Francis Bland Floodway Ditch’’. the time for voting on any postponed ware Bay Coastline, Delaware and New Jer- (b) LAWRENCE BLACKWELL MEMORIAL BRIDGE, question that immediately follows an- sey: Oakwood Beach, New Jersey, at a total ARKANSAS.— other vote, provided that the time for cost of $3,360,000, with an estimated Federal (1) DESIGNATION.—The bridge over lock and voting on the first question shall be a cost of $2,184,000 and an estimated non-Fed- dam numbered 4 on the Arkansas River, Arkan- eral cost of $1,176,000. minimum of 15 minutes. In section 101(b) of the bill, strike para- sas, constructed as part of the project for navi- It is now in order to consider amend- gation on the Arkansas River and tributaries, graphs (6) and (7) and redesignate accord- shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Law- ment No. 1 printed in part 2 of House ingly. rence Blackwell Memorial Bridge’’. Report 106–120. At the end of section 104 of the bill, insert (2) LEGAL REFERENCE.—Any reference in a AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY MR. SHUSTER the following: law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I (18) FAIRPORT HARBOR, OHIO.—Project for record of the United States to the bridge referred offer an amendment. navigation, Fairport Harbor, Ohio, including to in paragraph (1) shall be deemed to be a ref- a recreation channel. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- At the end of title II of the bill, insert the erence to the ‘‘Lawrence Blackwell Memorial ignate the amendment. Bridge’’. following: The text of the amendment is as fol- SEC. 229. WETLANDS MITIGATION. SEC. 579. FOLSOM DAM AND RESERVOIR ADDI- TIONAL STORAGE AND ADDITIONAL lows: In carrying out a water resources project FLOOD CONTROL STUDIES. Amendment No. 1 printed in part 2 of that involves wetlands mitigation and that (a) FOLSOM FLOOD CONTROL STUDIES.— House Report 106–120 offered by Mr. SHUSTER: has an impact that occurs within the service (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consulta- In section 101(a)(6) of the bill, strike ‘‘at a area of a mitigation bank, the Secretary, to tion with the State of California and local water total cost of’’ and all that follows and insert the maximum extent practicable and where resources agencies, shall undertake a study of the following: appropriate, shall give preference to the use of the mitigation bank if the bank contains increasing surcharge flood control storage at the at a total cost of $140,328,000, with an esti- sufficient available credits to offset the im- Folsom Dam and Reservoir. mated Federal cost of $70,164,000 and an esti- pact and the bank is approved in accordance (2) LIMITATIONS.—The study of the Folsom mated non-Federal cost of $70,164,000. with the Federal Guidance for the Establish- Dam and Reservoir undertaken under para- In section 101(a)(8) of the bill, strike all ment, Use and Operation of Mitigation graph (1) shall assume that there is to be no in- after ‘‘$3,375,000’’ and insert a period. Banks (60 Fed. Reg. 58605 (November 28, 1995)) crease in conservation storage at the Folsom In section 101(a)(9) of the bill, strike all or other applicable Federal law (including Reservoir. after ‘‘$2,675,000’’ and insert a period. regulations). (3) REPORT.—Not later than March 1, 2000, In section 101(a)(10) of the bill, strike all Conform the table of contents of the bill the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report after ‘‘$773,000’’ and insert a period. accordingly. on the results of the study under this sub- In section 101(a)(18) of the bill, strike all In section 304 of the bill, insert ‘‘River’’ section. after ‘‘$3,834,000’’ and insert a period. after ‘‘St. Francis’’. (b) AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS In section 101(a)(19) of the bill, strike all In section 310 of the bill— FLOOD CONTROL STUDY.— after ‘‘$19,776,000’’ and insert a period. (1) insert ‘‘, Potomac River, Washington, (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall under- In section 101(a) of the bill, after paragraph District of Columbia,’’ after ‘‘for flood con- take a study of all levees on the American River (4) insert the following: trol’’; and on the Sacramento River downstream and (5) OAKLAND HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.—The (2) strike ‘‘as’’ and insert ‘‘and’’; and immediately upstream of the confluence of such project for navigation, Oakland Harbor, Cali- (3) strike ‘‘$5,965,000’’ and insert Rivers to access opportunities to increase poten- fornia: Report of the Chief of Engineers ‘‘$6,129,000’’. tial flood protection through levee modifica- dated April 21, 1999, at a total cost of In section 326 of the bill, strike ‘‘cannal’’ tions. $252,290,000, with an estimated Federal cost and insert ‘‘Canal’’. (2) DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION.—Not later of $128,081,000 and an estimated non-Federal In section 351 of the bill— than March 1, 2000, the Secretary shall transmit cost of $124,209,000. (1) insert ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPRO- to Congress a report on the results of the study In section 101(a) of the bill, after paragraph PRIATIONS.—’’ before ‘‘Section’’; and undertaken under this subsection. (10) insert the following: (2) add at the end the following: SEC. 580. WALLOPS ISLAND, VIRGINIA. (11) DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, DELAWARE (b) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—Sec- (a) EMERGENCY ACTION.—The Secretary shall AND NEW JERSEY-VILLAS AND VICINITY, NEW tion 313(g) of such Act (106 Stat. 4846) is take emergency action to protect Wallops Is- JERSEY.—The project for shore protection amended by adding at the end the following: land, Virginia, from damaging coastal storms, and ecosystem restoration, Delaware Bay ‘‘(4) CORPS OF ENGINEERS EXPENSES.—10 per- by improving and extending the existing sea- coastline, Delaware and New Jersey-Villas cent of the amounts appropriated to carry wall, replenishing and renourishing the beach, and vicinity, New Jersey: Report of the Chief out this section for each of fiscal years 2000 and constructing protective dunes. of Engineers dated April 21, 1999, at a total through 2002 may be used by the Corps of En- (b) REIMBURSEMENT.—The Secretary shall cost of $7,520,000, with an estimated Federal gineers district offices to administer and im- seek reimbursement from other Federal agencies cost of $4,888,000 and an estimated non-Fed- plement projects under this section at 100 whose resources are protected by the emergency eral cost of $2,632,000. percent Federal expense.’’. action taken under subsection (a). (12) DELAWARE COAST FROM CAPE HENELOPEN Strike section 354 of the bill and insert the (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— TO FENWICK ISLAND, BETHANY BEACH/SOUTH following: There is authorized to be appropriated to carry BETHANY BEACH, DELAWARE.—The project for SEC. 354. CLEAR CREEK, TEXAS. out this section $8,000,000. hurricane and storm damage reduction, Section 575 of the Water Resources Devel- SEC. 581. DETROIT RIVER, DETROIT, MICHIGAN. Delaware Coast from Cape Henelopen to opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3789) is (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized Fenwick Island, Bethany Beach/South Beth- amended— to repair and rehabilitate the seawalls on the any Beach, Delaware: Report of the Chief of (1) in subsection (a)— Detroit River in Detroit, Michigan. Engineers dated April 21, 1999, at a total cost (A) by inserting ‘‘or nonstructural (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— of $22,205,000, with an estimated Federal cost (buyout) actions’’ after ‘‘flood control works There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal of $14,433,000 and an estimated non-Federal constructed’’; and years beginning after September 30, 1999, cost of $7,772,000. (B) by inserting ‘‘or nonstructural (buyout) $1,000,000 to carry out this section. In section 101(a) of the bill, insert after actions’’ after ‘‘construction of the project’’; paragraph (17) the following (and redesignate and The CHAIRMAN. No amendment paragraphs accordingly): (2) in subsection (b)— shall be in order except those printed (18) TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MIS- (A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- in part 2 of that report. Each amend- SOURI, AND KANSAS CITY, KANSAS.—The graph (3); ment may be offered only in the order project for flood damage reduction, Turkey (B) by striking the period at the end of specified, may be offered only by a Creek Basin, Kansas City, Missouri, and paragraph (3) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and Member designated in the report, shall Kansas City, Kansas: Report of the Chief of (C) by adding at the end the following: be considered read, debatable for the Engineers dated April 21, 1999, at a total cost ‘‘(4) the project for flood control, Clear of $42,875,000, with an estimated Federal cost time specified in the report, equally di- Creek, Texas, authorized by section 203 of of $25,596,000 and an estimated non-Federal the Flood Control Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 742).’’. vided and controlled by the proponent cost of $17,279,000. In section 356 of the bill, strike ‘‘modi- and an opponent, shall not be subject In section 101(b)(7) of the bill, strike all fied—’’ and all that follows and insert the to amendment, and shall not be subject after ‘‘$7,772,000’’ and insert a period. following: April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2511

modified to add environmental restoration gation channel, dredged material disposal (b) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after and recreation as project purposes. areas, and other areas directly impacted by the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- In section 363(d) of the bill, strike ‘‘(1) IN construction of the project. Notwithstanding retary shall transmit to Congress a report GENERAL.—’’. section 906 of the Water Resources Develop- that includes the plan developed under sub- In section 363(d) of the bill, strike para- ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283), the Sec- section (a), together with recommendations graph (2). retary may construct the project prior to ac- of potential restoration measures. In section 364(a) of the bill, after paragraph quisition of the mitigation lands if the Sec- (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— (5) insert the following (and redesignate retary takes such actions as may be nec- There is authorized to be appropriated to paragraph (6) as paragraph (7)): essary to ensure that any required mitiga- carry out this section $400,000. (6) CARVERS HARBOR, VINALHAVEN, MAINE.— tion lands will be acquired not later than 2 SEC. 430. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, TENNESSEE. That portion of the project for navigation, years after initiation of construction of the Carvers Harbor, Vinalhaven, Maine, author- new channel and such acquisition will fully The Secretary shall conduct a study to de- ized by the Act of June 3, 1896 (commonly mitigate any adverse environmental impacts termine the feasibility of improvements to known as the ‘‘River and Harbor Appropria- resulting from the project. regional water supplies for Cumberland tions Act of 1896’’) (29 Stat. 202, chapter 314), SEC. 369. TROPICANA WASH AND FLAMINGO County, Tennessee. consisting of the 16-foot anchorage beginning WASH, NEVADA. In the matter proposed to be inserted in at a point with coordinates N137,502.04, Any Federal costs associated with the section 219(e) of the Water Resources Devel- E895,156.83, thence running south 6 degrees 34 Tropicana and Flamingo Washes, Nevada, opment Act of 1992 by section 502 of the bill, authorized by section 101(13) of the Water minutes 57.6 seconds west 277.660 feet to a strike ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (7) and Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. point N137,226.21, E895,125.00, thence running all that follows through paragraph (8) and in- 4803), incurred by the non-Federal interest to north 53 degrees, 5 minutes 42.4 seconds west sert the following: accelerate or modify construction of the 127.746 feet to a point N137,302.92, E895022.85, ‘‘(8) $30,000,000 for the project described in project, in cooperation with the Corps of En- thence running north 33 degrees 56 minutes subsection (c)(17); gineers, shall be considered to be eligible for ‘‘(9) $20,000,000 for the project described in 9.8 seconds east 239.999 feet to the point of or- reimbursement by the Secretary. igin. subsection (c)(19); SEC. 370. COMITE RIVER, LOUISIANA. In section 364(a) of the bill, after paragraph ‘‘(10) $15,000,000 for the project described in The Comite River Diversion Project for (7), (as so redesignated) insert the following subsection (c)(20); flood control, authorized as part of the ‘‘(11) $11,000,000 for the project described in (redesignate subsequent paragraphs accord- project for flood control, Amite River and ingly): subsection (c)(21); Tributaries, Louisiana, by section 101(11) of ‘‘(12) $2,000,000 for the project described in (8) SEARSPORT HARBOR, SEARSPORT, the Water Resources Development Act of MAINE.—That portion of the project for navi- subsection (c)(22); 1992 (106 Stat. 4802–4803) and modified by sec- ‘‘(13) $3,000,000 for the project described in gation, Searsport Harbor, Searsport, Maine, tion 301(b)(5) of the Water Resources Devel- subsection (c)(23); authorized by section 101 of the River and opment Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3709–3710), is ‘‘(14) $1,500,000 for the project described in Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1173), consisting further modified to authorize the Secretary subsection (c)(24); of the 35-foot turning basin beginning at a to include the costs of highway relocations ‘‘(15) $2,000,000 for the project described in point with coordinates N225,008.38, to be cost shared as a project construction E395,464.26, thence running north 43 degrees feature if the Secretary determines that subsection (c)(25); 49 minutes 53.4 seconds east 362.001 feet to a such treatment of costs is necessary to fa- ‘‘(16) $8,000,000 for the project described in point N225,269.52, E395,714.96, thence running cilitate construction of the project. subsection (c)(26); ‘‘(17) $8,000,000 for the project described in south 71 degrees 27 minutes 33.0 seconds east SEC. 371. ST. MARY’S RIVER, MICHIGAN. 1,309.201 feet to a point N224,853.22, The project for navigation, St. Mary’s subsection (c)(27), of which $3,000,000 shall be E396,956.21, thence running north 84 degrees 3 River, Michigan, is modified to direct the available only for providing assistance for minutes 45.7 seconds west 1,499.997 feet to the Secretary to provide an additional foot of the Montoursville Regional Sewer Author- point of origin. overdraft between Point Louise Turn and the ity, Lycoming County; In section 364(c) of the bill— Locks and Sault Saint Marie, Michigan, con- ‘‘(18) $10,000,000 for the project described in (1) strike ‘‘(a)(7)’’ each place it appears and sistent with the channels upstream of Point subsection (c)(28); and insert ‘‘(a)(9)’’; Louise Turn. The modification shall be car- ‘‘(19) $1,000,000 for the project described in (2) strike ‘‘project for navigation,’’ each ried out as operation and maintenance to im- subsection (c)(29).’’. place it appears; and prove navigation safety. At the end of section 517 of the bill, insert (3) add at the end the following: At the end of section 408 of the bill, add the the following: (5) ADDITIONAL ACTIONS.—In carrying out following: (c) NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE.—Section the operation and the maintenance of the (c) CONSULTATION AND USE OF EXISTING 219(c) of such Act is amended by adding at Wells Harbor, Maine, navigation project re- DATA.—The Secretary shall consult with ap- the end the following: ferred to in subsection (a)(9), the Secretary propriate State and Federal agencies and ‘‘(19) NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE.—A sewer shall undertake each of the actions of the shall make maximum use of existing data and drainage system separation and Corps of Engineers specified in section IV(B) and ongoing programs and efforts of States rehabiliation program for Nashua, New of the memorandum of agreement relating to and Federal agencies in conducting the Hampshire.’’. study. the project dated January 20, 1998, including (d) FALL RIVER AND NEW BEDFORD, MASSA- In section 425(a) of the bill, strike ‘‘Such those actions specified in such section IV(B) CHUSETTS.—Section 219(c) of such Act is fur- that the parties agreed to ask the Corps of study’’ and all that follows. In section 425(c) of the bill, strike ther amended by adding at the end the fol- Engineers to undertake. ‘‘$1,400,000’’ and insert ‘‘$1,000,000’’. lowing: In section 364(d) of the bill, strike ‘‘(a)(9)’’ At the end of title IV of the bill, insert the ‘‘(20) FALL RIVER AND NEW BEDFORD, MASSA- and insert ‘‘(a)(11)’’. following (and conform the table of contents CHUSETTS.—Elimination or control of com- At the end of title III of the bill, add the of the bill accordingly): bined sewer overflows in the cities of Fall following (and conform the table of contents SEC. 428. DEL NORTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. River and New Bedford, Massachusetts.’’. of the bill accordingly): The Secretary shall undertake and com- (e) ADDITIONAL PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS.— SEC. 367. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA PILOT PRO- plete a feasibility study for designating a Section 219(c) of such Act is further amended GRAM. permanent disposal site for dredged mate- by adding at the end the following: Section 340(g) of the Water Resources De- rials from Federal navigation projects in Del ‘‘(21) FINDLAY TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.— velopment Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4856) is Norte County, California. Water and sewer lines in Findlay Township, amended to read as follows: SEC. 429. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. ‘‘(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— MICHIGAN. ‘‘(22) DILLSBURG BOROUGH AUTHORITY, PENN- There is authorized to be appropriated to (a) PLAN.—The Secretary, in coordination SYLVANIA.—Water and sewer systems in carry out the pilot program under this sec- with State and local governments and appro- Franklin Township, York County, Pennsyl- tion $40,000,000 for fiscal years beginning priate Federal and provincial authorities of vania. after September 30, 1992. Such sums shall re- Canada, shall develop a comprehensive man- ‘‘(23) HAMPTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA.— main available until expended.’’. agement plan for St. Clair River and Lake Water, sewer, and stormsewer improvements SEC. 368. BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIV- St. Clair. Such plan shall include the fol- in Hampton Township, Cumberland County, ERS, JACKSON, ALABAMA. lowing elements: Pennsylvania. The project for navigation, Black Warrior (1) The causes and sources of environ- ‘‘(24) TOWAMENCIN TOWNSHIP, PENNSYL- and Tombigbee Rivers, vicinity of Jackson, mental degradation. VANIA.—Sanitary sewer and water lines in Alabama, as authorized by section 106 of the (2) Continuous monitoring of organic, bio- Towamencin Township, Montgomery Coun- Energy and Water Development Appropria- logical, metallic, and chemical contamina- ty, Pennsylvania. tions Act, 1987 (100 Stat. 3341–199), is modi- tion levels. ‘‘(25) DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.— fied to authorize the Secretary to acquire (3) Timely dissemination of information of Combined sewer and water system rehabili- lands for mitigation of the habitat losses at- such contamination levels to public authori- tation for the City of Harrisburg, Dauphin tributable to the project, including the navi- ties, other interested parties, and the public. County, Pennsylvania. H2512 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999

‘‘(26) LEE, NORTON, WISE, AND SCOTT COUN- SEC. 585. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA. with recommendations concerning whether TIES, VIRGINIA.—Water supply and waste- (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- or not such program should be implemented water treatment in Lee, Norton, Wise, and retary may establish a pilot program for pro- on a national basis. Scott Counties, Virginia. viding environmental assistance to non-Fed- (g) NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA DEFINED.—In ‘‘(27) NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA.—Water-re- eral interests in northeastern Minnesota. this section, the term ‘‘northeastern Min- lated infrastructure in Lackawanna, (b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under nesota’’ means the counties of Cook, Lake, Lycoming, Susquehanna, Wyoming, Pike, this section may be in the form of design and St. Louis, Koochiching, Itasca, Cass, Crow and Monroe Counties, Pennsylvania, includ- construction assistance for water-related en- Wing, Aitkin, Carlton, Pine, Kanabec, Mille ing assistance for the Montoursville Re- vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- Lacs, Morrison, Benton, Sherburne, Isanti, gional Sewer Authority, Lycoming County. tection and development projects in north- and Chisago, Minnesota. ‘‘(28) CALUMET REGION, INDIANA.—Water-re- eastern Minnesota, including projects for (h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— lated infrastructure in Lake and Porter wastewater treatment and related facilities, There is authorized to be appropriated to Counties, Indiana. water supply and related facilities, environ- carry out this section $40,000,000 for fiscal ‘‘(29) CLINTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.— mental restoration, and surface water re- years beginning after September 30, 1999. Water-related infrastructure in Clinton source protection and development. Such sums shall remain available until ex- (c) PUBLIC OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The County, Pennsylvania.’’. pended. At the end of section 518 of the bill, insert Secretary may provide assistance for a project under this section only if the project SEC. 586. ALASKA. the following: (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- (4) Columbia Slough, Portland, Oregon, is publicly owned. (d) LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT.— retary may establish a pilot program for pro- project for ecosystem restoration. (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- viding environmental assistance to non-Fed- (5) Ohio River Greenway, Indiana, project ance under this section, the Secretary shall eral interests in Alaska. for environmental restoration and recre- enter into a local cooperation agreement (b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under ation. with a non-Federal interest to provide for de- this section may be in the form of design and In section 523(b) of the bill, strike ‘‘the construction assistance for water-related en- Secretary shall’’ and insert ‘‘the Secretary sign and construction of the project to be carried out with the assistance. vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- may’’. tection and development projects in Alaska, After section 573 of the bill, insert the fol- (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each local cooperation including projects for wastewater treatment lowing: agreement entered into under this sub- section shall provide for the following: and related facilities, water supply and re- SEC. 574. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOU- lated facilities, and surface water resource ISIANA. (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, The Secretary shall expedite completion of in consultation with appropriate Federal and protection and development. WNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS.—The Sec- the report for the West Baton Rouge Parish, State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- (c) O retary may provide assistance for a project Louisiana, project for waterfront and tection and development plan, including ap- under this section only if the project is pub- riverine preservation, restoration, and en- propriate engineering plans and specifica- licly owned or is owned by a native corpora- hancement modifications along the Mis- tions. tion as defined by section 1602 of title 43, sissippi River. (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- Conform the table of contents of the bill TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- United States Code. accordingly. stitutional structures as are necessary to en- (d) LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENTS.— At the end of section 578 of the bill, add the sure the effective long-term operation of the (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- following: project by the non-Federal interest. ance under this section, the Secretary shall (k) MERRISACH LAKE, ARKANSAS COUNTY, (3) COST SHARING.— enter into a local cooperation agreement ARKANSAS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of with a non-Federal interest to provide for de- (1) LAND CONVEYANCE.—Notwithstanding project costs under each local cooperation sign and construction of the project to be any other provision of law, the Secretary agreement entered into under this sub- carried out with the assistance. shall convey to eligible private property section shall be 75 percent. The Federal (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each local cooperation owners at fair market value, as determined share may be in the form of grants or reim- agreement entered into under this sub- by the Secretary, all right, title, and inter- bursements of project costs. section shall provide for the following: est of the United States in and to certain (B) CREDIT FOR DESIGN WORK.—The non- (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, lands acquired for Navigation Pool No. 2, Federal interest shall receive credit for the in consultation with appropriate Federal and McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation reasonable costs of design work completed State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- System, Merrisach Lake Project, Arkansas by the non-Federal interest prior to entering tection and development plan, including ap- County, Arkansas. into a local cooperation agreement with the propriate engineering plans and specifica- (2) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.—The lands to Secretary for a project. The credit for the de- tions. be conveyed under paragraph (1) include sign work shall not exceed 6 percent of the (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- those lands lying between elevation 163, Na- total construction costs of the project. TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- tional Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, and (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In the event of a stitutional structures as are necessary to en- the Federal Government boundary line for delay in the funding of the non-Federal share sure the effective long-term operation of the Tract Numbers 102, 129, 132–1, 132–2, 132–3, 134, of a project that is the subject of an agree- project by the non-Federal interest. 135, 136–1, 136–2, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, ment under this section, the non-Federal in- (3) COST SHARING.— and 145, located in sections 18, 19, 29, 30, 31, terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the and 32, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, and terest incurred in providing the non-Federal project costs under each local cooperation the SE1⁄4 of Section 36, Township 7 South, share of a project’s cost. agreement entered into under this sub- Range 3 West, Fifth Principal Meridian, with (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY section shall be 75 percent. The Federal the exception of any land designated for pub- CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- share may be in the form of grants or reim- lic park purposes. ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- bursements of project costs. (3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Any lands con- way, and relocations toward its share of (B) CREDIT FOR DESIGN WORK.—The non- veyed under paragraph (1) shall be subject project costs (including all reasonable costs Federal interest shall receive credit for the to— associated with obtaining permits necessary reasonable costs of design work completed (A) a perpetual flowage easement prohib- for the construction, operation, and mainte- by the non-Federal interest prior to entering iting human habitation and restricting con- nance of the project on publicly owned or into a local cooperation agreement with the struction activities; controlled land), but not to exceed 25 percent Secretary for a project. The credit for the de- (B) the reservation of timber rights by the of total project costs. sign work shall not exceed 6 percent of the United States; and (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The total construction costs of the project. (C) such additional terms and conditions as non-Federal share of operation and mainte- (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In the event of a the Secretary considers appropriate to pro- nance costs for projects constructed with as- delay in the funding of the non-Federal share tect the interests of the United States. sistance provided under this section shall be of a project that is the subject of an agree- (4) ELIGIBLE PROPERTY OWNER DEFINED.—In 100 percent. ment under this section, the non-Federal in- this subsection, the term ‘‘eligible private (e) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- property owner’’ means the owner of record STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section shall terest incurred in providing the non-Federal of land contiguous to lands owned by the be construed as waiving, limiting, or other- share of a project’s cost. United States in connection with the project wise affecting the applicability of any provi- (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY referred to in paragraph (1). sion of Federal or State law that would oth- CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- In section 583(b) of the bill, strike ‘‘The erwise apply to a project to be carried out ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- Secretary shall’’ and insert ‘‘The Secretary with assistance provided under this section. way, and relocations toward its share of may’’. (f) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, project costs (including all reasonable costs At the end of title V of the bill, add the fol- 2001, the Secretary shall transmit to Con- associated with obtaining permits necessary lowing (and conform the table of contents of gress a report on the results of the pilot pro- for the construction, operation, and mainte- the bill accordingly): gram carried out under this section, together nance of the project on publicly owned or April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2513

controlled land), but not to exceed 25 percent (D) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY (c) COST SHARING.—The non-Federal share of total project costs. CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- of the cost of a project constructed under (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The ceive credit for land, easements, rights-of- subsection (a) shall be not less than 30 per- non-Federal share of operation and mainte- way, and relocations toward its share of cent of the total cost of the project and may nance costs for projects constructed with as- project costs (including all reasonable costs be provided through in-kind services. sistance provided under this section shall be associated with obtaining permits necessary (d) EFFECT ON LIABILITY.—Financial assist- 100 percent. for the construction, operation, and mainte- ance provided under this section shall not re- (e) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND nance of the project on publicly owned or lieve from liability any person who would STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section shall controlled land), but not to exceed 25 percent otherwise be liable under Federal or State be construed as waiving, limiting, or other- of total project costs. law for damages, response costs, natural re- wise affecting the applicability of any provi- (E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The source damages, restitution, equitable relief, sion of Federal or State law that would oth- non-Federal share of operation and mainte- or any other relief. (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— erwise apply to a project to be carried out nance costs for projects constructed with as- There is authorized to be appropriated with assistance provided under this section. sistance provided under this section shall be $10,000,000 to carry out the purposes of this (f) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, 100 percent. section. 2001, the Secretary shall transmit to Con- (e) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER FEDERAL AND SEC. 590. EAST LYNN LAKE, WEST VIRGINIA. gress a report on the results of the pilot pro- STATE LAWS.—Nothing in this section shall The Secretary shall defer any decision re- gram carried out under this section, together be construed as waiving, limiting, or other- lating to the leasing of mineral resources un- with recommendations concerning whether wise affecting the applicability of any provi- derlying East Lynn Lake, West Virginia, or not such program should be implemented sion of Federal or State law that would oth- project lands to the Federal entity vested on a national basis. erwise apply to a project to be carried out (g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— with such leasing authority. with assistance provided under this section. There is authorized to be appropriated to SEC. 591. EEL RIVER, CALIFORNIA. (f) REPORT.—Not later than December 31, carry out this section $25,000,000 for fiscal The Secretary shall conduct a study to de- 2001, the Secretary shall transmit to Con- years beginning after September 30, 1999. termine if flooding in the city of Ferndale, gress a report on the results of the pilot pro- Such sums shall remain available until ex- California, is the result of a Federal flood gram carried out under this section, together pended. control project on the Eel River. If the Sec- with recommendations concerning whether retary determines that the flooding is the re- SEC. 587. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA. or not such program should be implemented (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—The Sec- sult of the project, the Secretary shall take on a national basis. retary may establish a pilot program for pro- appropriate measures (including dredging of (g) CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA DEFINED.—In viding environmental assistance to non-Fed- the Salt River and construction of sediment this section, the term ‘‘central West Vir- eral interests in central West Virginia. ponds at the confluence of Francis, Reas, and ginia’’ means the counties of Mason, Jack- (b) FORM OF ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under Williams Creeks) to mitigate the flooding. son, Putnam, Kanawha, Roane, Wirt, Cal- this section may be in the form of design and SEC. 592. NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS. houn, Clay, Nicholas, Braxton, Gilmer, construction assistance for water-related en- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall re- Lewis, Upshur, Randolph, Pendleton, Hardy, vironmental infrastructure and resource pro- view a report prepared by the non-Federal Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, and Jefferson, tection and development projects in central interest concerning flood protection for the West Virginia. West Virginia, including projects for waste- Dark Hollow area of North Little Rock, Ar- (h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— water treatment and related facilities, water kansas. If the Secretary determines that the There is authorized to be appropriated to supply and related facilities, and surface report meets the evaluation and design carry out this section $10,000,000 for fiscal water resource protection and development. standards of the Corps of Engineers and that (c) PUBLIC OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT.—The years beginning after September 30, 1999. the project is economically justified, tech- Secretary may provide assistance for a Such sums shall remain available until ex- nically sound, and environmentally accept- project under this section only if the project pended. able, the Secretary shall carry out the is publicly owned. SEC. 588. SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AREA project. (d) LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENTS.— WATERSHED RESTORATION, CALI- (b) TREATMENT OF DESIGN AND PLAN PREPA- (1) IN GENERAL.—Before providing assist- FORNIA. RATION COSTS.—The costs of design and prep- ance under this section, the Secretary shall (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is author- aration of plans and specifications shall be enter into a local cooperation agreement ized to undertake environmental restoration included as project costs and paid during with a non-Federal interest to provide for de- activities included in the Sacramento Metro- construction. sign and construction of the project to be politan Water Authority’s ‘‘Watershed Man- SEC. 593. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSISSIPPI carried out with the assistance. agement Plan’’. These activities shall be PLACE, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA. (2) REQUIREMENTS.—Each local cooperation limited to cleanup of contaminated ground- (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter agreement entered into under this sub- water resulting directly from the acts of any into a cooperative agreement to participate section shall provide for the following: Federal agency or Department of the Federal in a project for the planning, design, and (A) PLAN.—Development by the Secretary, government at or in the vicinity of McClel- construction of infrastructure and other im- in consultation with appropriate Federal and lan Air Force Base, California; Mather Air provements at Mississippi Place, St. Paul, State officials, of a facilities or resource pro- Force Base, California; Sacramento Army Minnesota. tection and development plan, including ap- Depot, California; or any location within the (b) COST SHARING.— propriate engineering plans and specifica- watershed where the Federal government (1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the tions. would be a responsible party under any Fed- cost of the project shall be 50 percent. The Federal share may be provided in the form of (B) LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL STRUC- eral environmental law. grants or reimbursements of project costs. TURES.—Establishment of such legal and in- (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— stitutional structures as are necessary to en- There is authorized to be appropriated to (2) CREDIT FOR NON-FEDERAL WORK.—The sure the effective long-term operation of the carry out this section $5,000,000 for fiscal non-Federal interest shall receive credit to- project by the non-Federal interest. years beginning after September 30, 1999. ward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for reasonable costs incurred by the (3) COST SHARING.— SEC. 589. ONONDAGA LAKE. non-Federal interests as a result of partici- (A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is author- project costs under each local cooperation ized to plan, design, and construct projects pation in the planning, design, and construc- agreement entered into under this sub- for the environmental restoration, conserva- tion of the project. section shall be 75 percent. The Federal tion, and management of Onondaga Lake, (3) LAND, EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY share may be in the form of grants or reim- New York, and to provide, in coordination CREDIT.—The non-Federal interest shall re- bursements of project costs. with the Administrator of the Environ- ceive credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for land, easements, (B) CREDIT FOR DESIGN WORK.—The non- mental Protection Agency, financial assist- Federal interest shall receive credit for the ance to the State of New York and political rights-of-way, and relocations provided by reasonable costs of design work completed subdivisions thereof for the development and the non-Federal interest with respect to the by the non-Federal interest prior to entering implementation of projects to restore, con- project. into a local cooperation agreement with the serve, and manage Onondaga Lake. (4) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The non- Federal share of operation and maintenance Secretary for a project. The credit for the de- (b) PARTNERSHIP.—In carrying out this sec- sign work shall not exceed 6 percent of the tion, the Secretary shall establish a partner- costs for the project shall be 100 percent. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— total construction costs of the project. ship with appropriate Federal agencies (in- There is authorized to be appropriated (C) CREDIT FOR INTEREST.—In the event of a cluding the Environmental Protection Agen- $3,000,000 to carry out this section. delay in the funding of the non-Federal share cy) and the State of New York and political of a project that is the subject of an agree- subdivisions thereof for the purpose of MODIFICATION OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED ment under this section, the non-Federal in- project development and implementation. BY MR. SHUSTER terest shall receive credit for reasonable in- Such partnership shall be dissolved not later Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I terest incurred in providing the non-Federal than 15 years after the date of enactment of ask unanimous consent that the man- share of a project’s cost. this Act. ager’s amendment be modified with the H2514 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 modification I have placed at the desk. Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I MEMORANDUM My modification would correct a tech- yield myself such time as I may con- To: Marcy. nical mistake in the amendment. sume. This is a bipartisan, non- From: George. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- controversial package. It makes tech- Subject: Western Lake Erie Basin Watershed port the modification. nical and conforming changes. It Study Talking Points. Date: April 29, 1999. The Clerk read as follows: makes modifications to several Modification of amendment No. 1 printed The 1999 Water Resources Development projects in the reported bill. It includes Act, H.R. 1480, includes a provision author- in part 2 of House Report 106–120 offered by environmental restoration and infra- Mr. SHUSTER: izing the Western Lake Erie Watershed On page 1, after line 3, strike the next five structure projects. It includes flood study. sentences. control and navigation projects. It in- The Western Lake Erie Basin is the cross- On page 2, line 22, strike the period and add cludes studies. It includes provisions roads of the Great Lakes. at the end ‘‘, and at an estimated average an- based on discussions with other com- The Maumee River, which empties into Lake Erie at Toledo is the largest tributary nual cost of $1,584,000 for periodic nourish- mittees. ment over the 50-year life of the project, to the Great Lakes. My District and the City with an estimated annual Federal cost of I urge my colleagues to support this of Toledo sit at the mouth of the Maumee. $1,030,000 and an estimated annual non-Fed- amendment. The Corps of Engineers and other govern- eral cost of $554,000.’’ ment agencies have conducted numerous On page 3, after line 8, strike the next two Madam Chairman, I reserve the bal- studies in the Western Lake Erie basin, but sentences. ance of my time. no one has ever looked at the watershed as a On page 5, after ‘‘$6,129,000’’.’’ and before whole. Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I We understand now the indispensable the next sentence, insert the following: yield myself such time as I may con- ‘‘In section 314 of the bill, strike ‘‘(Amelia interrelationship between the various ele- fIsland)’’ and insert ‘‘(Amelia Island)’’. sume. The amendment continues the ments of the watershed’s ecosystem, the On page 7, strike the first two sentences. tradition of addressing the urgent con- water, the farmland, the cities, the suburbs. On page 32, after line 14, insert the fol- cerns of Members by including several If we are going to sustain the productive lowing: high priority, time-sensitive projects resources of the Western Lake Erie Basin, we (f) REPEAL.—Section 401 of the Great Lakes and provisions that could not be con- must understand how all these elements Critical Programs Act of 1990 (104 Stat 3010) work together. and section 411 of the Water Resources De- sidered in their ordinary and cus- I hope and expect that this study will lead velopment Act of 1990 (104 Stat 4648) are re- tomary time. to an understanding of our region on which pealed as of the date of the enactment of this I do want to thank the chairman of we can plan a sustainable future. Act. the committee for being so fully coop- Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I At the end of title III of the bill, add the erative and responsive and partici- want to say to the gentlewoman from following new section: Ohio, I have not heard such kind words SEC. 367. CITY OF CHARLEVOIX REIMBURSE- pating in the time-honored tradition of MENT, MICHIGAN. our committee in a bipartisan manner. in 6 months. It is good to have those comments. The Secretary shall review and, if con- Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to sistent with authorized project purposes, re- Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes imburse the city of Charlevoix, Michigan, for the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. KAP- to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. the Federal share of costs associated with TUR). MENENDEZ). construction of the new revetment connec- Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chairman, I Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam Chairman, I tion to the Federal navigation project at thank the gentleman for yielding time thank the distinguished ranking mem- Charlevoix Harbor, Michigan. ber for yielding me this time. Conform the table of contents of the bill to me. I wanted to especially on this accordingly. bill come down here to the floor and Let me try to continue the kind words as we go along here. To the gen- Mr. SHUSTER (during the reading). compliment the chairman of the full tleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBERSTAR) Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous committee, the gentleman from Penn- sylvania (Mr. SHUSTER) and the rank- and to the chairman of the full com- consent that the modification be con- mittee and to the chairman of the Sub- sidered as read and printed in the ing member, the gentleman from Min- nesota (Mr. OBERSTAR), for including committee on Water Resources and En- RECORD. vironment on which I serve as well as The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection language in this bill relative to a study to our ranking member, let me thank to the request of the gentleman from by the Corps of Engineers on the West- them for finally getting this bill to the Pennsylvania? ern Lake Erie Basin Watershed at the floor. This is unfinished business from Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, crossroads of the Great Lakes. the 105th Congress. It is certainly one reserving the right to object, I do so for I want to just put on the record, that is important to the people I rep- the purpose of yielding to the gen- without the help of these two gentle- resent and the region in which I come tleman for an explanation. men, our part of America could not from. I want to thank particularly my Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gen- solve the significant water problem tleman for yielding. side of the aisle for working with me as that we have crossing several jurisdic- Madam Chairman, this amendment well as with the majority to make cer- tions. This bill is so important. I hope corrects provisions in the manager’s tain that East Coast residents will con- amendment that were found to have every Member understands how hard tinue to have access to the goods that unintended effects. And it adds two these men have worked to really help ships carry and the jobs our ports other noncontroversial items. The every single corner of America. We produce. modification has been worked out with have waited for years for this bill as When we talk about international the minority. our cities flood and our rural areas get trade, 95 percent of all of the Nation’s Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I devastated by extra water because of commerce moves through ports like withdraw my reservation of objection. all of the development that has oc- that of the Port of New York and New The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection curred in our region. Jersey. If we are to take advantage of that trade, then we have to have ocean- to the request of the gentleman from We cannot solve this problem with- going ports that can take care of the Pennsylvania? out them and without the help of the next generation of ocean-going ships. There was no objection. Corps being the umbrella entity that This project and the bill that encom- The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, brings all these multiple jurisdictions passes the project that I am talking the amendment is modified. together across Indiana, Ohio and There was no objection. about will help my region fight off eco- Michigan. I just want to thank them The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House nomic trouble and ensure healthy for being men of the future and paying Resolution 154, the gentleman from growth by making the port receptive attention to places like Toledo, Ohio Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER) and the for more and larger ships for years to and the crossroads of the Great Lakes. gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. OBER- come. It will widen, deepen and align Our hats are off to them. STAR) each will control 5 minutes. the harbor’s channels to improve navi- The Chair recognizes the gentleman Madam Chairman, I include the fol- gational safety to make way for the from Pennsylvania (Mr. SHUSTER). lowing memorandum for the RECORD: new generation of ocean-going ships. April 29, 1999 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2515

The bill also contains important en- portant project will receive attention HERGER) having assumed the chair, vironmental considerations insofar as by the committee in the future. Mrs. EMERSON, Chairman of the Com- it contains provisions on sediment de- Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, mittee of the Whole House on the State contamination and sediment manage- will the gentleman yield? of the Union, reported that that Com- ment which are enormous issues in the Mr. PICKETT. I yield to the gen- mittee, having had under consideration Port of New York and New Jersey and tleman from Pennsylvania. the bill (H.R. 1480) to provide for the for that fact in other parts of the coun- Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I conservation and development of water try. And it demonstrates the Federal thank the gentleman for withholding and related resources, to authorize the commitment to deepening our harbors his amendment. I will state that it is United States Army Corps of Engineers and channels which is unfortunately in my intention to consider his proposal to construct various projects for im- direct contrast to some of the signals on the Sandbridge Beach project as we provements to rivers and harbors of the we have been getting within the region move forward with water resources leg- United States, and for other purposes, from the Governor of New York who islation including our WRDA 2000 bill pursuant to House Resolution 154, he has been holding us hostage on issues which we anticipate moving quickly in reported the bill back to the House not related to the port’s mission and the next session. with an amendment adopted by the the Port Authority. Mr. PICKETT. I thank the gen- Committee of the Whole. We believe that it is important for tleman. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the 20 million consumers in the region The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman the rule, the previous question is or- to get products that will be cheaper. from Virginia offering amendment No. dered. We believe for the 180,000 jobs and $20 5? Is a separate vote demanded on the billion of economic activity that the Mr. PICKETT. No, Madam Chairman, amendment to the committee amend- Port of New York and New Jersey pres- I am not. ment in the nature of a substitute ently enjoys and which all the projec- The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to adopted by the Committee of the tions are that will grow dramatically, consider amendment No. 6 printed in Whole? If not, the question is on the we believe that in essence for all of the part 2 of House Report 106–120. committee amendment in the nature of economic opportunity yet to come as a Does any Member rise to offer that a substitute. result of international trade that this amendment? The committee amendment in the bill, the Water Resources Development Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I nature of a substitute was agreed to. Act, is an appropriate Federal response ask unanimous consent to strike the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The that will inure to the benefit of the re- last word. question is on the engrossment and gion and to our country as this port is The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection third reading of the bill. one of the vital natural resources that to the request of the gentleman from The bill was ordered to be engrossed we have in this country in the pro- Minnesota? and read a third time, and was read the motion of international trade. There was no objection. third time. I want to thank again the chairman Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I The SPEAKER pro tempore. The of both the full committee and the sub- take this time to express my apprecia- question is on the passage of the bill. committee and the ranking member of tion to the gentleman from Pennsyl- The question was taken; and the the full committee and subcommittee vania for the splendid cooperation that Speaker pro tempore announced that for making this a reality. we have always enjoyed on this com- the ayes appeared to have it. Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Chairman, I mittee in working out matters. But for Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, on that have no further requests for time, and a little half billion dollar bump in the I demand the yeas and nays. I yield back the balance of my time. road over this California project, this The yeas and nays were ordered. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on bill would have been disposed of 2 years The vote was taken by electronic de- the amendment offered by the gen- ago. vice, and there were—yeas 418, nays 5, tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. SHU- I appreciate the continuing good will not voting 11, as follows: on the part of the gentleman from STER), as modified. [Roll No. 104] Pennsylvania and understanding of The amendment, as modified, was YEAS—418 agreed to. these problems as well as the chairman of the subcommittee. I also want to ex- Abercrombie Borski Cox The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is ad- Ackerman Boswell Coyne vised that amendment No. 2 will not be press my great appreciation for his pa- Allen Boucher Cramer offered. tience to the gentleman from Pennsyl- Andrews Boyd Crane It is now in order to consider amend- vania (Mr. BORSKI). Archer Brady (PA) Crowley Armey Brady (TX) Cubin ment No. 3 printed in part 2 of House I do want to cite for extraordinary Bachus Brown (FL) Cummings Report 106–120. commendable service Ken Kopocis, our Baird Brown (OH) Cunningham Does any Member rise to offer that chief staff member on the Sub- Baker Bryant Danner amendment? committee on Waters Resources and Baldacci Burr Davis (FL) Baldwin Burton Davis (IL) If not, it is now in order to consider Environment who has done yeoman’s Ballenger Buyer Davis (VA) amendment No. 4 printed in part 2 of service. The chairman was kind enough Barcia Callahan Deal House Report 106–120. to mention him, but I want to reinforce Barr Calvert DeFazio Barrett (NE) Camp DeGette Does any Member rise to offer that my appreciation for Ken’s devoted en- Barrett (WI) Campbell Delahunt amendment? deavors, and that of Ward McCarragher Bartlett Canady DeLauro Mr. PICKETT. Madam Chairman, I and Dave Heymsfeld and Art Chan on Barton Cannon DeLay ask unanimous consent to strike the our committee who all have given such Bass Capps DeMint Bateman Capuano Deutsch last word. enormous time and effort to the un- Becerra Cardin Diaz-Balart The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection folding of this legislation and bringing Bentsen Carson Dickey to the request of the gentleman from us to this point today. We can pass this Bereuter Castle Dicks Virginia? Berkley Chabot Dingell bill relatively uncontroversial. Berman Chambliss Dixon There was no objection. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Berry Chenoweth Doggett Mr. PICKETT. Madam Chairman, I the committee amendment in the na- Biggert Clay Dooley rise to engage the chairman of the ture of a substitute, as modified, as Bilbray Clayton Doolittle Bilirakis Clement Doyle Committee on Transportation and In- amended. Bishop Clyburn Dreier frastructure in a colloquy. The committee amendment in the Bliley Coble Duncan I had intended to offer an amendment nature of a substitute, as modified, as Blumenauer Coburn Dunn today concerning a project at amended, was agreed to. Blunt Collins Edwards Boehlert Combest Ehlers Sandbridge Beach in the City of Vir- The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Boehner Condit Ehrlich ginia Beach, Virginia. I have decided Committee rises. Bonilla Conyers Emerson not to offer the amendment if the Accordingly, the Committee rose; Bonior Cook English chairman can assure me that this im- and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Bono Costello Eshoo H2516 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE April 29, 1999 Etheridge LaHood Radanovich Weygand Wilson Woolsey House will consider a number of bills Evans Lampson Rahall Whitfield Wise Wu Everett Lantos Ramstad Wicker Wolf Young (AK) under suspension of the rules, a list of Ewing Largent Rangel which will be distributed to Members’ Farr Larson Regula NAYS—5 offices. Members should note that we Fattah Latham Reyes Hefley Sanford Sununu anticipate votes after 2 p.m. on Tues- Filner LaTourette Reynolds Paul Sensenbrenner Fletcher Lazio Riley day. Foley Leach Rivers NOT VOTING—11 On Wednesday, May 5, and Thursday, Forbes Lee Rodriguez Aderholt Engel Tauzin May 6, the House will take up the fol- Ford Levin Roemer Blagojevich Slaughter Wynn Fossella Lewis (CA) Rogan Brown (CA) Smith (MI) Young (FL) lowing measures, both of which will be Fowler Lewis (GA) Rogers Cooksey Strickland subject to rules: The emergency Frank (MA) Lewis (KY) Rohrabacher Kosovo supplemental bill for fiscal Franks (NJ) Linder Ros-Lehtinen b 1219 Frelinghuysen Lipinski Rothman year 1999 and H.R. 833, the Bankruptcy Frost LoBiondo Roukema Mr. SENSENBRENNER changed his Reform Act of 1999. It is our hope that Gallegly Lofgren Roybal-Allard vote from ‘‘yea’’ to ‘‘nay.’’ the conference report on H.R. 4, the Ganske Lowey Royce So the bill was passed. National Missile Defense bill, will also Gejdenson Lucas (KY) Rush The result of the vote was announced Gekas Lucas (OK) Ryan (WI) be available next week. as above recorded. Gephardt Luther Ryun (KS) Madam Speaker, we should finish Gibbons Maloney (CT) Sabo A motion to reconsider was laid on legislative business and have Members Gilchrest Maloney (NY) Salmon the table. on their way home to their families on Gillmor Manzullo Sanchez Stated for: Gilman Markey Sanders Thursday, May 6. Gonzalez Martinez Sandlin Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I Goode Mascara Sawyer missed the vote on H.R. 1480, the Water Re- Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam Speaker, if Goodlatte Matsui Saxton sources Development Act because I was de- the majority leader would allow a ques- Goodling McCarthy (MO) Scarborough tion, could the majority leader tell us Gordon McCarthy (NY) Schaffer tained away from the Capitol and the vote Goss McCollum Schakowsky closed as I returned. Had I been present, I on which day next week the Kosovo Graham McCrery Scott would have voted ``yes.'' supplemental will be on the floor and Granger McDermott Serrano for what amount it will be? Green (TX) McGovern Sessions f Green (WI) McHugh Shadegg Mr. ARMEY. Madam Speaker, I Greenwood McInnis Shaw PERSONAL EXPLANATION thank the gentleman for his inquiry. Gutierrez McIntosh Shays Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was un- Let me say I can say with a high de- Gutknecht McIntyre Sherman Hall (OH) McKeon Sherwood able to be present for rollcall votes 103 and gree of certainty that the legislation Hall (TX) McKinney Shimkus 104. will be on the floor on Thursday of Hansen McNulty Shows Had I been present, I would have voted next week, and, of course, it will be up Hastert Meehan Shuster to the Committee on Appropriations to Hastings (FL) Meek (FL) Simpson ``yes'' or ``aye'' on rollcall votes 103 and 104. Hastings (WA) Meeks (NY) Sisisky f report it. I cannot give the figure in Hayes Menendez Skeen terms of its amount until after the Hayworth Metcalf Skelton GENERAL LEAVE committee has its markup, I think Herger Mica Smith (NJ) Hill (IN) Millender- Smith (TX) Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Speaker, I later today. Hill (MT) McDonald Smith (WA) ask unanimous consent that all Mem- Mr. MENENDEZ. If the majority Hilleary Miller (FL) Snyder bers may have 5 legislative days within leader would answer one other ques- Hilliard Miller, Gary Souder Hinchey Miller, George Spence which to revise and extend their re- tion: Is it the majority leader’s inten- Hinojosa Minge Spratt marks and include extraneous material tion, or does he know if that supple- Hobson Mink Stabenow on H.R. 1480. mental will include a supplemental for Hoeffel Moakley Stark The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Hoekstra Mollohan Stearns Central America and for the farming Holden Moore Stenholm EMERSON). Is there objection to the re- community in the country? Holt Moran (KS) Stump quest of the gentleman from Pennsyl- Mr. ARMEY. I thank the gentleman Hooley Moran (VA) Stupak vania? for his inquiry. As the gentleman Horn Morella Sweeney There was no objection. Hostettler Murtha Talent knows, we had that legislation pass Houghton Myrick Tancredo f through the House. We have gone to Hoyer Nadler Tanner Hulshof Napolitano Tauscher LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM conference with the Senate. We wait Hunter Neal Taylor (MS) upon the Senate with respect to that Hutchinson Nethercutt Taylor (NC) (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was earlier supplemental report that has Hyde Ney Terry given permission to address the House the inclusions that the gentleman Inslee Northup Thomas for 1 minute and to revise and extend Isakson Norwood Thompson (CA) speaks of. It is our anticipation that Istook Nussle Thompson (MS) his remarks.) the week following next we would have Jackson (IL) Oberstar Thornberry Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam Speaker, I that back in conference, as well as the Jackson-Lee Obey Thune take this time to inquire about next Kosovo work, and we should be able to (TX) Olver Thurman week’s schedule from the distinguished Jefferson Ortiz Tiahrt complete all supplemental work on Jenkins Ose Tierney majority leader. both bills by the end of the week fol- John Owens Toomey Mr. ARMEY. Madam Speaker, will lowing next. Johnson (CT) Oxley Towns the gentleman yield? Johnson, E.B. Packard Traficant Mr. MENENDEZ. I thank the major- Johnson, Sam Pallone Turner Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam Speaker, I Jones (NC) Pascrell Udall (CO) yield to the distinguished majority ity leader. For many of us it is a real Jones (OH) Pastor Udall (NM) leader for purposes of discussing next concern, the Central American farming Kanjorski Payne Upton week’s schedule. package. While we face one emergency, Kaptur Pease Velazquez we have another emergency with 1 mil- Kasich Pelosi Vento Mr. ARMEY. Madam Speaker, I Kelly Peterson (MN) Visclosky thank the gentleman for yielding. lion people to the south of our border Kennedy Peterson (PA) Walden Madam Speaker, I am pleased to an- who we are concerned about in the con- Kildee Petri Walsh text of immigration and in the context Kilpatrick Phelps Wamp nounce that we have concluded our leg- Kind (WI) Pickering Waters islative business for the week. On Mon- of disease and the context of helping to King (NY) Pickett Watkins day, May 3, the House will meet at 2 rebuild their countries. We would cer- Kingston Pitts Watt (NC) o’clock p.m. for a pro forma session. tainly hope that we could in a bipar- Kleczka Pombo Watts (OK) tisan way work expeditiously to make Klink Pomeroy Waxman There will be no legislative business Knollenberg Porter Weiner and no votes on that day. sure that that emergency is equally as Kolbe Portman Weldon (FL) On Tuesday, May 4, the House will resolved. Kucinich Price (NC) Weldon (PA) Kuykendall Pryce (OH) Weller meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour Mr. ARMEY. Madam Speaker, I ap- LaFalce Quinn Wexler and 2 p.m. for legislative business. The preciate the gentleman’s remarks.