WATER ISSUES : September 22, 2008

WATER nationwide: Important: H.R.1495 -
Water Resources Development Act of 2007

Hey Roni, May 16, 2007

Thanks for your letter. I greatly appreciated it and I have sent a response with just a couple clarifications.

I do not know if TNC is involved in anyway in the Water Resources Development Act. If I find something out I will certainly let you know.

Bill Ulfelder TNC
-----Original Message-----
From: Roni Sylvester [mailto:wpduck@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 9:46 AM
To:
Subject: WATER nationwide: Important: H.R.1495 - Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)

Hi Bill,
Do you know if TNC is involved in any of this?
Roni

H.R.1495 - Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)
(Note: This is a massive bill aimed at virtually all water. Due to the time constraints placed visitors to the Library of Congress, Julie Smithson has pasted the entire contents of the bill below, although each section appears to end with a sentence fragment. This makes one wonder how much of the bill's text is not available for public scrutiny... Some, but certainly not all, of the Language Deception is in red bold. Section 8004, subheadings M and N, should get everyone's attention. Do a search of the bill's contents for your state. This piece of legislation has already passed the House and is soon to come up for a Senate vote. Please let your Senators know what you think of this. Call toll-free: 800-459-1887 or 202-224-2131. Winter recreationists: snow is still frozen water!)

http://thomas.loc.gov (all search results yield temporary website addresses/URLs)

Beginning
April 23, 2007

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

TITLE I--WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

SEC. 1002. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.

SEC. 1003. SMALL PROJECTS FOR EMERGENCY STREAMBANK PROTECTION.

SEC. 1004. SMALL PROJECTS FOR NAVIGATION.

SEC. 1005. SMALL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

SEC. 1006. SMALL PROJECTS FOR AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

SEC. 1007. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SHORELINE PROTECTION.

SEC. 1008. SMALL PROJECTS FOR SNAGGING AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL.

TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 2001. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

SEC. 2002. HARBOR COST SHARING.

SEC. 2003. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.

SEC. 2004. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

SEC. 2005. SMALL SHORE AND BEACH RESTORATION AND PROTECTION PROJECTS.

SEC. 2006. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

SEC. 2007. SMALL FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECTS.

SEC. 2008. MODIFICATION OF PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

SEC. 2009. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.

`SEC. 221. WRITTEN AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.';

SEC. 2010. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RESTORATION, AND REUSE.

SEC. 2011. COMPILATION OF LAWS.

SEC. 2012. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL.

SEC. 2013. WETLANDS MITIGATION.

SEC. 2014. MITIGATION FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE LOSSES.

SEC 2015. REMOTE AND SUBSISTENCE HARBORS.

SEC. 2016. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL.

SEC. 2017. COST-SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN AREAS.

`SEC. 1156. COST-SHARING PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN AREAS.

SEC 2018. USE OF OTHER FEDERAL FUNDS.

SEC. 2019. REVISION OF PROJECT PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.

SEC. 2020. COST SHARING.

SEC. 2021. EXPEDITED ACTIONS FOR EMERGENCY FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.

SEC. 2022. WATERSHED AND RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENTS.

SEC. 2023. TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.

SEC. 2024. WILDFIRE FIREFIGHTING.

SEC. 2025. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 2026. LAKES PROGRAM.

SEC. 2027. COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL ACTIONS.

SEC. 2028. PROJECT STREAMLINING.

SEC. 2029. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.

SEC. 2030. TRAINING FUNDS.

SEC. 2031. ACCESS TO WATER RESOURCE DATA.

SEC. 2032. SHORE PROTECTION PROJECTS.

SEC. 2033. ABILITY TO PAY.

SEC. 2034. LEASING AUTHORITY.

SEC. 2035. COST ESTIMATES.

SEC. 2036. PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.

SEC. 2037. INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW.

SEC. 2038. STUDIES AND REPORTS FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.

SEC. 2039. OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS FABRICATION PORT.

SEC. 2040. USE OF FIRMS EMPLOYING LOCAL RESIDENTS.

SEC. 2041. SUPPORT OF ARMY CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM.

SEC. 2042. FEDERAL HOPPER DREDGES.

SEC. 2043. CRITERIA FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF HARBOR DREDGING PROJECTS.

TITLE III--PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS

SEC. 3001. COOK INLET, ALASKA.

SEC. 3002. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA.

SEC. 3003. SITKA, ALASKA.

SEC. 3004. TATITLEK, ALASKA.

SEC. 3005. RIO DE FLAG, FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA.

SEC. 3006. OSCEOLA HARBOR, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 3007. PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 3008. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3009. COMPTON CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3010. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER'S CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3011. HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3012. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCKTON SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3013. KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3014. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3015. LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3016. MAGPIE CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC 3017. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3018. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3019. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3020 SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS FLOOD CONTROL, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3021 SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3022. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3023. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA.

SEC 3024. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3025. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3026. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3027. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3028. YUBA RIVER BASIN PROJECT, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 3029. SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO.

SEC. 3030. INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DELAWARE AND MARYLAND.

SEC. 3031. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3032. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO INLET, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3033. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3034. GASPARILLA AND ESTERO ISLANDS, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3035. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3036. LIDO KEY BEACH, SARASOTA, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3037. MIAMI HARBOR, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3038. PEANUT ISLAND, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3039. TAMPA HARBOR-BIG BEND CHANNEL, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3040. TAMPA HARBOR CUT B, FLORIDA.

SEC. 3041. ALLATOONA LAKE, GEORGIA.

SEC. 3042. LATHAM RIVER, GLYNN COUNTY, GEORGIA.

SEC. 3043. DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS, IDAHO.

SEC. 3044. BEARDSTOWN COMMUNITY BOAT HARBOR, BEARDSTOWN, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3045. CACHE RIVER LEVEE, ILLINOIS.

SEC 3046. CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3047. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIERS PROJECT, ILLINOIS.

`SEC. 345. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3048. EMIQUON, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3049. LASALLE, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3050. SPUNKY BOTTOMS, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 3051. FORT WAYNE AND VICINITY, INDIANA.

SEC. 3052. KOONTZ LAKE, INDIANA.

SEC. 3053. WHITE RIVER, INDIANA.

SEC. 3054. DES MOINES RIVER AND GREENBELT, IOWA.

SEC. 3055. RATHBUN LAKE, IOWA.

SEC. 3056. PRESTONSBURG, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 3057. AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, LOUISIANA, EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH WATERSHED.

SEC. 3058. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3059. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3060. BAYOU PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3061. J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, MISSISSIPPI RIVER TO SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3062. MELVILLE, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3063. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3064. NEW ORLEANS TO VENICE, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3065. WEST BANK OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (EAST OF HARVEY CANAL), LOUISIANA.

SEC. 3066. CAMP ELLIS, SACO, MAINE.

SEC. 3067. DETROIT RIVER SHORELINE, DETROIT, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 3068. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHIGAN.

`SEC. 426. ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 3069. ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 3070. SAULT SAINTE MARIE, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 3071. ADA, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3072. DULUTH HARBOR, MCQUADE ROAD, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3073. GRAND MARAIS, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3074. GRAND PORTAGE HARBOR, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3075. GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3076. KNIFE RIVER HARBOR, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3077. RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3078. SILVER BAY, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3079. TACONITE HARBOR, MINNESOTA.

SEC 3080. TWO HARBORS, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 3081. DEER ISLAND, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI.

SEC. 3082. PEARL RIVER BASIN, MISSISSIPPI.

SEC 3083. FESTUS AND CRYSTAL CITY, MISSOURI.

SEC. 3084. L-15 LEVEE, MISSOURI.

SEC. 3085. MONARCH-CHESTERFIELD, MISSOURI.

SEC. 3086. RIVER DES PERES, MISSOURI.

SEC. 3087. ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

SEC. 3088. SAND CREEK WATERSHED, WAHOO, NEBRASKA.

SEC. 3089. WESTERN SARPY AND CLEAR CREEK, NEBRASKA.

SEC. 3090. LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 3091. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN FLOOD MANAGEMENT, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 3092. BUFFALO HARBOR, NEW YORK.

SEC. 3093. ORCHARD BEACH, BRONX, NEW YORK.

SEC. 3094. PORT OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 3095. NEW YORK STATE CANAL SYSTEM.

SEC. 3096. LOWER GIRARD LAKE DAM, OHIO.

SEC. 3097. MAHONING RIVER, OHIO.

SEC. 3098. DELAWARE RIVER, PENNSYLVANIA, NEW JERSEY, AND DELAWARE.

SEC. 3099. RAYSTOWN LAKE, PENNSYLVANIA

SEC 3100. SHERADEN PARK STREAM AND CHARTIERS CREEK, ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 3101. SOLOMON'S CREEK, WILKES-BARRE, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 3102. SOUTH CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 3103. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 3104. CEDAR BAYOU, TEXAS.

SEC. 3105. FREEPORT HARBOR, TEXAS.

SEC. 3106. LAKE KEMP, TEXAS.

SEC. 3107. LOWER RIO GRANDE BASIN, TEXAS.

SEC. 3108. NORTH PADRE ISLAND, CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TEXAS.

SEC. 3109. PAT MAYSE LAKE, TEXAS.

SEC. 3110. PROCTOR LAKE, TEXAS.

SEC. 3111. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.

SEC. 3112. TANGIER ISLAND SEAWALL, VIRGINIA.

SEC. 3113. DUWAMISH/GREEN, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 3114. YAKIMA RIVER, PORT OF SUNNYSIDE, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 3115. BLUESTONE LAKE, OHIO RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 3116. GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 3117. LESAGE/GREENBOTTOM SWAMP, WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 3118. NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 3119. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WISCONSIN.

SEC. 3120. MISSISSIPPI RIVER HEADWATERS RESERVOIRS.

SEC. 3121. CONTINUATION OF PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.

SEC. 3122. PROJECT REAUTHORIZATIONS.

SEC. 3123. PROJECT DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

SEC. 3124. LAND CONVEYANCES.

SEC. 3125. EXTINGUISHMENT OF REVERSIONARY INTERESTS AND USE RESTRICTIONS.

TITLE IV--STUDIES

SEC. 4001. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM.

SEC. 4002. LAKE ERIE DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES.

SEC. 4003. SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES DROUGHT STUDY.

SEC. 4004. DELAWARE RIVER.

SEC. 4005 KNIK ARM, COOK INLET, ALASKA.

SEC. 4006. KUSKOKWIM RIVER, ALASKA.

SEC. 4007. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA.

SEC. 4008. SUSITNA RIVER, ALASKA.

SEC. 4009. GILA BEND, MARICOPA, ARIZONA.

SEC. 4010. SEARCY COUNTY, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 4011. ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4012. ELKHORN SLOUGH ESTUARY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4013. FRESNO, KINGS, AND KERN COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4014. LOS ANGELES RIVER REVITALIZATION STUDY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4015. LYTLE CREEK, RIALTO, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4016. MOKELUMNE RIVER, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4017. NAPA RIVER, ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4018. ORICK, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4019. RIALTO, FONTANA, AND COLTON, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4020. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4021. SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4022. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4023. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORELINE STUDY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4024. TWENTYNINE PALMS, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4025. YUCCA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 4026. ROARING FORK RIVER, BASALT, COLORADO.

SEC 4027. DELAWARE AND CHRISTINA RIVERS AND SHELLPOT CREEK, WILMINGTON, DELAWARE.

SEC. 4028. COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES, FLORIDA.

SEC. 4029. LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA.

SEC. 4030. VANDERBILT BEACH LAGOON, FLORIDA.

SEC. 4031. MERIWETHER COUNTY, GEORGIA.

SEC. 4032. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA.

SEC. 4033. BOISE RIVER, IDAHO.

SEC. 4034. BALLARD'S ISLAND SIDE CHANNEL, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 4035. SALEM, INDIANA.

SEC. 4036 BUCKHORN LAKE, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 4037. DEWEY LAKE, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 4038. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 4039. CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 4040. HAMBURG AND GREEN OAK TOWNSHIPS, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 4041. DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN.

SEC. 4042. NORTHEAST MISSISSIPPI.

SEC. 4043. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.

SEC. 4044. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 4045. BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 4046. CARTERET, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 4047. GLOUCESTER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 4048. PERTH AMBOY, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 4049. BATAVIA, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4050. BIG SISTER CREEK, EVANS, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4051. FINGER LAKES, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4052. LAKE ERIE SHORELINE, BUFFALO, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4053. NEWTOWN CREEK, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4054. NIAGARA RIVER, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4055. SHORE PARKWAY GREENWAY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK

SEC 4056. UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, NEW YORK.

SEC. 4057. LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4058. WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4059. YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4060. LAKE ERIE, OHIO.

SEC. 4061. OHIO RIVER, OHIO.

SEC. 4062. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AND FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS, OREGON.

SEC. 4063. WALLA WALLA RIVER BASIN, OREGON.

SEC. 4064. CHARTIERS CREEK WATERSHED, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 4065. KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 4066. WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 4067. WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 4068. YARDLEY BOROUGH, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 4069. RIO VALENCIANO, JUNCOS, PUERTO RICO.

SEC. 4070. CROOKED CREEK, BENNETTSVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4071. BROAD RIVER, YORK COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4072. CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 4073. CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 4074. CUMBERLAND RIVER, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 4075. LEWIS, LAWRENCE, AND WAYNE COUNTIES, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 4076. WOLF RIVER AND NONCONNAH CREEK, MEMPHIS TENNESSEE.

SEC. 4077. ABILENE, TEXAS.

SEC. 4078. COASTAL TEXAS ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND RESTORATION, TEXAS.

SEC. 4079. PORT OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

SEC. 4080. GRAND COUNTY AND MOAB, UTAH.

SEC. 4081. SOUTHWESTERN UTAH.

SEC. 4082. CHOWAN RIVER BASIN, VIRGINIA AND NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 4083. ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 4084. MONONGAHELA RIVER BASIN, NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 4085. KENOSHA HARBOR, WISCONSIN.

SEC. 4086. WAUWATOSA, WISCONSIN.

SEC. 4087. JOHNSONVILLE DAM, JOHNSONVILLE, WISCONSIN.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 5001. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS.

SEC. 5002. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT.

SEC. 5003 DAM SAFETY.

SEC. 5004. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATIONS.

SEC. 5005 FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS.

SEC. 5006. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AUTHORIZED PROJECTS.

SEC. 5007. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS AND CONSTRUCTION FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.

SEC. 5008. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.

SEC. 5009. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT.

SEC. 5010. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.

SEC. 5011. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.

SEC. 5012. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

SEC. 5013. GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS AND SEDIMENT REMEDIATION.

SEC. 5014. GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODELS.

SEC. 5015. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION.

SEC. 5016. GREAT LAKES PILOT PROJECT.

SEC. 5017. SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY.

SEC. 5018. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER DISPERSAL BARRIER PROJECT.

SEC. 5019. SUSQUEHANNA, DELAWARE, AND POTOMAC RIVER BASINS, DELAWARE, MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA, AND VIRGINIA.

SEC. 5020. CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM.

SEC. 5021. HYPOXIA ASSESSMENT.

SEC. 5022. POTOMAC RIVER WATERSHED ASSESSMENT AND TRIBUTARY STRATEGY EVALUATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM.

SEC. 5023. LOCK AND DAM SECURITY.

SEC. 5024. REHABILITATION.

SEC. 5025. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON SURVIVAL

SEC 5026. AUBURN, ALABAMA.

SEC. 5027. PINHOOK CREEK, HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA.

SEC. 5028. ALASKA.

SEC. 5029. BARROW, ALASKA.

SEC. 5030. COFFMAN COVE, ALASKA.

SEC. 5031. FIRE ISLAND, ALASKA.

SEC. 5032. FORT YUKON, ALASKA.

SEC. 5033. KOTZEBUE HARBOR, ALASKA.

SEC. 5034. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, ALASKA.

SEC. 5035. ST. HERMAN AND ST. PAUL HARBORS, KODIAK, ALASKA.

SEC. 5036. TANANA RIVER, ALASKA.

SEC. 5037. VALDEZ, ALASKA.

SEC. 5038. WHITTIER, ALASKA.

SEC. 5039. WRANGELL HARBOR, ALASKA.

SEC. 5040. AUGUSTA AND CLARENDON, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 5041. DES ARC LEVEE PROTECTION, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 5042. LOOMIS LANDING, ARKANSAS.

SEC. 5043. ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI.

SEC. 5044. CAMBRIA, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5045. CONTRA COSTA CANAL, OAKLEY AND KNIGHTSEN, CALIFORNIA; MALLARD SLOUGH, PITTSBURG, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5046. DANA POINT HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5047. EAST SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5048. EASTERN SANTA CLARA BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5049. LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5050. LOS OSOS, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5051. PINE FLAT DAM AND RESERVOIR, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5052. RAYMOND BASIN, SIX BASINS, CHINO BASIN, AND SAN GABRIEL BASIN, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5053. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.

SEC 5054. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, WATERFRONT AREA.

SEC. 5055. SAN PABLO BAY, CALIFORNIA, WATERSHED AND SUISUN MARSH ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION

SEC. 5056. STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA.

SEC. 5057. CHARLES HERVEY TOWNSHEND BREAKWATER, NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.

SEC. 5058. FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS.

SEC. 5059. LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA.

SEC. 5060. EAST CENTRAL AND NORTHEAST FLORIDA.

SEC. 5061. LAKE LANIER, GEORGIA.

SEC. 5062. RILEY CREEK RECREATION AREA, IDAHO.

SEC. 5063. RECONSTRUCTION OF ILLINOIS FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECTS.

SEC. 5064. ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.

SEC. 5065. KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, ILLINOIS, RESTORATION.

SEC. 5066. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 5067. PROMONTORY POINT, LAKE MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS.

SEC. 5068. SOUTHWEST ILLINOIS.

SEC. 5069. BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, INDIANA.

SEC. 5070. CALUMET REGION, INDIANA.

SEC. 5071. FLOODPLAIN MAPPING, MISSOURI RIVER, IOWA.

SEC. 5072. PADUCAH, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 5073. SOUTHERN AND EASTERN KENTUCKY.

SEC. 5074. WINCHESTER, KENTUCKY.

SEC. 5075. BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 5076. CALCASIEU SHIP CHANNEL, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 5077. EAST ATCHAFALAYA BASIN AND AMITE RIVER BASIN REGION, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 5078. WEST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOUISIANA.

SEC. 5079. CHARLESTOWN, MARYLAND.

SEC. 5080. ANACOSTIA RIVER, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MARYLAND.

SEC. 5081. DELMARVA CONSERVATION CORRIDOR, DELAWARE AND MARYLAND.

SEC. 5082. MASSACHUSETTS DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES.

SEC. 5083. ONTONAGON HARBOR, MICHIGAN.

SEC. 5084. CROOKSTON, MINNESOTA

SEC 5085. GARRISON AND KATHIO TOWNSHIP, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 5086. ITASCA COUNTY, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 5087. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 5088. NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA.

SEC. 5089. WILD RICE RIVER, MINNESOTA.

SEC. 5090. HARRISON, HANCOCK, AND JACKSON COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI.

SEC. 5091. MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS.

SEC. 5092. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.

SEC. 5093. HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS AREA, NEW JERSEY.

SEC. 5094 ATLANTIC COAST OF NEW YORK.

SEC. 5095. COLLEGE POINT, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK.

SEC. 5096. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK.

SEC. 5097. HUDSON RIVER, NEW YORK.

SEC. 5098. MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NEW YORK.

SEC. 5099. JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 5100. STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.

SEC. 5101. CINCINNATI, OHIO.

SEC. 5102. TOUSSAINT RIVER, OHIO.

SEC. 5103. EUGENE, OREGON.

SEC. 5104. FERN RIDGE DAM, OREGON.

SEC. 5105. ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 5106. CLINTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 5107. KEHLY RUN DAMS, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 5108. LEHIGH RIVER, LEHIGH COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 5109. NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA.

SEC. 5110. UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW YORK.

SEC. 5111. CANO MARTIN PENA, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO.

SEC. 5112. CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE, AND TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORATION, SOUTH DAKOTA.

SEC. 5113. EAST TENNESSEE.

SEC. 5114. FRITZ LANDING, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 5115. J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 5116. TOWN CREEK, LENOIR CITY, TENNESSEE.

SEC. 5117. TENNESSEE RIVER PARTNERSHIP.

SEC. 5118. UPPER MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT, TENNESSEE, ARKANSAS, AND MISSISSIPPI.

SEC. 5119. BOSQUE RIVER WATERSHED, TEXAS.

SEC. 5120. DALLAS COUNTY REGION, TEXAS.

SEC. 5121. DALLAS FLOODWAY, DALLAS TEXAS.

SEC. 5122. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.

SEC. 5123. JOHNSON CREEK, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.

SEC. 5124. ONION CREEK, TEXAS.

SEC. 5125. EASTERN SHORE AND SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 5126. DYKE MARSH, FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA.

SEC. 5127. BAKER BAY AND ILWACO HARBOR, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 5128. HAMILTON ISLAND CAMPGROUND, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 5129. PUGET ISLAND, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 5130. WILLAPA BAY, WASHINGTON.

SEC. 5131. WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA FLOOD CONTROL.

SEC. 5132. CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 5133. SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA.

SEC. 5134. CONSTRUCTION OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS BY NON-FEDERAL INTERESTS.

SEC. 5135. WAGE SURVEYS.

SEC. 5136. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CRITICAL PROJECTS.

TITLE VI--FLORIDA EVERGLADES

SEC. 6001. HILLSBORO AND OKEECHOBEE AQUIFER, FLORIDA.

SEC. 6002. PILOT PROJECTS.

SEC. 6003. INITIAL PROJECTS.

SEC. 6004. MAXIMUM COSTS.

SEC. 6005. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.

SEC. 6006. CREDIT.

SEC. 6007. OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 6008. CRITICAL RESTORATION PROJECTS.

SEC. 6009. MODIFIED WATER DELIVERIES.

SEC. 6010. DEAUTHORIZATIONS.

SEC. 6011. REGIONAL ENGINEERING MODEL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION.

TITLE VII--LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA

SEC. 7001. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 7002. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SEC. 7003. LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA.

SEC. 7004. COASTAL LOUISIANA ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND RESTORATION TASK FORCE.

SEC. 7005. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS.

SEC. 7006. CONSTRUCTION.

SEC. 7007. NON-FEDERAL COST SHARE.

SEC. 7008. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION.

SEC. 7009. INDEPENDENT REVIEW.

SEC. 7010. EXPEDITED REPORTS.

SEC. 7011. REPORTING.

SEC. 7012. NEW ORLEANS AND VICINITY.

SEC. 7013. MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET.

TITLE VIII--UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ILLINOIS WATER-WAY SYSTEM

SEC. 8001. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 8002. NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS AND RESTORATION

SEC 8003. AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS

SEC 8004. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AUTHORIZATION.

SEC. 8005. COMPARABLE PROGRESS.

April 30, 2007

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
In this Act, the term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Army.

SEC. 1001. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.
Except as otherwise provided in this section, the following projects for water resources development and conservation and other purposes are authorized to be carried out by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions, described in the respective reports designated in this section:
(1) HAINES, ALASKA- The project for navigation, Haines, Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 20, 2004, at a total cost of $14,040,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,232,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,808,000.
(2) PORT LIONS, ALASKA- The project for navigation, Port Lions, Alaska: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated June 14, 2006, at a total cost of $9,530,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,624,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $1,906,000.
(3) RIO SALADO OESTE, ARIZONA- The project for environmental restoration, Rio Salado Oeste, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $166,650,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $106,629,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $60,021,000.
(4) SANTA CRUZ RIVER, PASEO DE LAS IGLESIAS, ARIZONA- The project for environmental restoration, Santa Cruz River, Pima County, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated March 28, 2006, at a total cost of $97,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $63,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $34,400,000.
(5) TANQUE VERDE CREEK, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA- The project for environmental restoration, Tanque Verde Creek, Pima County, Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $5,906,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,836,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $2,070,000.
(6) SALT RIVER (VA SHLYAY' AKIMEL), MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA- The project for environmental restoration, Salt River (Va Shlyay' Akimel), Arizona: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 3, 2005, at a total cost of $162,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $105,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $56,900,000.
(7) MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS- The project for flood damage reduction, May Branch, Fort Smith, Arkansas, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $30,850,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $15,010,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,840,000.
(8) HAMILTON CITY, CALIFORNIA- The project for flood damage reduction and environmental restoration, Hamilton City, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $52,400,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $34,100,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of $18,300,000.
(9) IMPERIAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA- The project for storm damage reduction, Imperial Beach, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of $13,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $8,521,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,179,000, and at an estimated total cost of $42,500,000 for periodic beach nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of $21,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $21,250,000.
(10) MATILIJA DAM, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA- The project for environmental restoration, Matilija Dam, Ventura County, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 20, 2004, at a total cost of $144,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $89,700,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $54,800,000.
(11) MIDDLE CREEK, LAKE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA- The project for flood damage reduction and environmental restoration, Middle Creek, Lake County, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated November 29, 2004, at a total cost of $45,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $29,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,700,000.
(12) NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CALIFORNIA-
(A) IN GENERAL- The project for environmental restoration, Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, Napa, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $134,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $87,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $47,000,000.
(B) ADMINISTRATION- In carrying out the project authorized by this paragraph, the Secretary shall--
(i) construct a recycled water pipeline extending from the Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District Waste Water Treatment Plant and the Napa Sanitation District Waste Water Treatment Plant to the project; and
(ii) restore or enhance Salt Ponds 1, 1A, 2, and 3.
(13) DENVER COUNTY REACH, SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, DENVER, COLORADO- The project for environmental restoration, Denver County Reach, South Platte River, Denver, Colorado: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated May 16, 2003, at a total cost of $21,050,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $13,680,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,370,000.
(14) MIAMI HARBOR, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA-
(A) IN GENERAL- The project for navigation, Miami Harbor, Miami-Dade County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 25, 2005, at a total cost of $125,270,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $75,140,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $50,130,000.
(B) GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT- The non-Federal share of the cost of the general reevaluation report that resulted in the report of the Chief of Engineers referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be the same percentage as the non-Federal share of cost of construction of the project.
(C) AGREEMENT- The Secretary shall enter into a new partnership with the non-Federal interest to reflect the cost sharing required by subparagraph (B).
(15) EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, ILLINOIS- The project for environmental restoration and recreation, East St. Louis and Vicinity, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 22, 2004, at a total cost of $208,260,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $134,910,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $73,350,000.
(16) PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, ILLINOIS- The project for environmental restoration, Peoria Riverfront Development, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 28, 2003, at a total cost of $18,220,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,380,000.
(17) WOOD RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM RECONSTRUCTION, MADISON COUNTY, ILLINOIS- The project for flood damage reduction, Wood River Levee System Reconstruction, Madison County, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 18, 2006, at a total cost of $17,220,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,193,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,027,000.
(18) DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, DES MOINES, IOWA- The project for flood damage reduction, Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers, Des Moines, Iowa: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated March 28, 2006, at a total cost of $10,780,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $6,967,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,813,000.
(19) LICKING RIVER BASIN, CYNTHIANA, KENTUCKY- The project for flood damage reduction, Licking River Basin, Cynthiana, Kentucky: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at a total cost of $18,200,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,830,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $6,370,000.
(20) BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LOUISIANA- The project for navigation, Bayou Sorrel Lock, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 3, 2005, at a total cost of $9,680,000. The costs of construction of the project are to be paid 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
(21) MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOUISIANA-
(A) IN GENERAL- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana: Reports of the Chief of Engineers dated August 23, 2002, and July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $886,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $576,355,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $310,345,000.
(B) CREDIT- The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of design and construction work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
(C) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE- The operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of the Houma Navigation Canal lock complex and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway floodgate features that provide for inland waterway transportation shall be a Federal responsibility in accordance with section 102 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2212).
(22) PORT OF IBERIA, LOUISIANA- The project for navigation, Port of Iberia, Louisiana, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost of $131,250,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $105,315,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,935,000.
(23) SMITH ISLAND, SOMERSET COUNTY, MARYLAND- The project for environmental restoration, Smith Island, Somerset County, Maryland: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 29, 2001, at a total cost of $15,580,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $10,127,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,453,000.
(24) ROSEAU RIVER, ROSEAU, MINNESOTA- The project for flood damage reduction, Roseau River, Roseau, Minnesota, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $25,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $13,820,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,280,000.
(25) MISSISSIPPI COASTAL, MISSISSIPPI- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction and environmental restoration, Mississippi Coastal, Mississippi, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost of $107,690,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $70,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $37,690,000.
(26) KANSAS CITYS LEVEES, MISSOURI AND KANSAS- The project for flood damage reduction, Kansas Citys levees, Missouri and Kansas, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $65,430,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $42,530,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $22,900,000.
(27) SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, BLUE RIVER, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI- The project for flood damage reduction, Swope Park Industrial Area, Blue River, Kansas City, Missouri: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of $16,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,037,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $5,943,000.
(28) GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NEW JERSEY- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Great Egg Harbor Inlet to Townsends Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at a total cost of $54,360,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $35,069,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $19,291,000, and at an estimated total cost of $202,500,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of $101,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $101,250,000.
(29) HUDSON RARITAN ESTUARY, LIBERTY STATE PARK, NEW JERSEY-
(A) IN GENERAL- The project for environmental restoration, Hudson Raritan Estuary, Liberty State Park, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 25, 2006, at a total cost of $34,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $22,200,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $11,900,000.
(B) RESTORATION TEAMS- In carrying out the project, the Secretary shall establish and utilize watershed restoration teams composed of estuary restoration experts from the Corps of Engineers, the New Jersey department of environmental protection, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and other experts designated by the Secretary for the purpose of developing habitat restoration and water quality enhancement.
(30) MANASQUAN INLET TO BARNEGAT INLET, NEW JERSEY- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 30, 2003, at a total cost of $71,900,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $46,735,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $25,165,000, and at an estimated total cost of $119,680,000 for periodic beach nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of $59,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $59,840,000.
(31) RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NEW JERSEY- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Union Beach, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 4, 2006, at a total cost of $115,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $74,800,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $40,200,000, and at an estimated total cost of $6,500,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,250,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,250,000.
(32) SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NEW JERSEY- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction and environmental restoration, South River, Raritan River Basin, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $122,300,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $79,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $42,800,000.
(33) SOUTHWEST VALLEY, BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO- The project for flood damage reduction, Southwest Valley, Bernalillo County, New Mexico: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated November 29, 2004, at a total cost of $24,840,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $16,150,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $8,690,000.
(34) MONTAUK POINT, NEW YORK- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Montauk Point, New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated March 31, 2006, at a total cost of $14,600,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $7,300,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,300,000.
(35) HOCKING RIVER, MONDAY CREEK SUB-BASIN, OHIO- The project for environmental restoration, Hocking River, Monday Creek Sub-basin, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 24, 2006, at a total cost of $20,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $13,440,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $7,540,000.
(36) TOWN OF BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA- The project for flood damage reduction, town of Bloomsburg, Columbia County, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 25, 2006, at a total cost of $44,500,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $28,925,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,575,000.
(37) Pawley's ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA- The project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Pawley's Island, South Carolina, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 19, 2006, at a total cost of $8,980,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $5,840,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $3,140,000, and at an estimated total cost of $21,200,000 for periodic nourishment over the 50-year life of the project, with an estimated Federal cost of $10,600,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $10,600,000.
(38) CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS- The project for navigation and ecosystem restoration, Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated June 2, 2003, at a total cost of $188,110,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $87,810,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $100,300,000.
(39) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, MATAGORDA BAY RE-ROUTE, TEXAS- The project for navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Matagorda Bay Re-Route, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 24, 2002, at a total cost of $17,280,000. The costs of construction of the project are to be paid 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
(40) GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER, TEXAS- The project for navigation, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, High Island to Brazos River, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 16, 2004, at a total cost of $14,450,000. The costs of construction of the project are to be paid 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury and 1/2 from amounts appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
(41) LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN PHASE I, TEXAS- The project for flood damage reduction and environmental restoration, Lower Colorado River Basin Phase I, Texas, Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, at a total cost of $110,730,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $69,640,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $41,090,000.
(42) RIVERSIDE OXBOW, TEXAS- The project for environmental restoration, Riverside Oxbow, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 29, 2003, at a total cost of $27,110,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $11,210,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $15,900,000.
(43) ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, DEEP CREEK, CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA- The project for Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Bridge Replacement, Deep Creek, Chesapeake, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated March 3, 2003, at a total cost of $37,200,000.
(44) CRANEY ISLAND EASTWARD EXPANSION, NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS, VIRGINIA- The project for navigation, Craney Island Eastward Expansion, Norfolk Harbor and Channels, Virginia: Report of Chief of Engineers dated October 24, 2006, at a total cost of $712,103,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $31,229,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $680,874,000.
SEC. 1002. SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study for each of the following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is feasible, may carry out the project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s):
(1) HALEYVILLE, ALABAMA- Project for flood damage reduction, Haleyville, Alabama.
(2) WEISS LAKE, ALABAMA- Project for flood damage reduction, Weiss Lake, Alabama.
(3) LITTLE COLORADO RIVER LEVEE, ARIZONA- Project for flood damage reduction, Little Colorado River Levee, Arizona.
(4) CACHE RIVER BASIN, GRUBBS, ARKANSAS- Project for flood damage reduction, Cache River Basin, Grubbs, Arkansas.
(5) BARREL SPRINGS WASH, PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Barrel Springs Wash, Palmdale, California.
(6) BORREGO SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Borrego Springs, California
(7) COLTON, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Colton, California.
(8) DUNLAP STREAM, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Dunlap Stream, Yucaipa, California.
(9) HUNTS CANYON WASH, PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Hunts Canyon Wash, Palmdale, California.
(10) ONTARIO AND CHINO, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Ontario and Chino, California.
(11) SANTA VENETIA, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Santa Venetia, California.
(12) WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Whittier, California.
(13) WILDWOOD CREEK, YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA- Project for flood damage reduction, Wildwood Creek, Yucaipa, California.
(14) ST.

SEC. 2001. NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(n) Non-Federal Contributions-
`(1) PROHIBITION ON SOLICITATION OF EXCESS CONTRIBUTIONS- The Secretary may not--
`(A) solicit contributions from non-Federal interests for costs of constructing authorized water resources projects or measures in excess of the non-Federal share assigned to the appropriate project purposes listed in subsections (a), (b), and (c); or
`(B) condition Federal participation in such projects or measures on the receipt of such contributions.
`(2) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect the Secretary's authority under section 903(c).'.
SEC. 2002. HARBOR COST SHARING.
(a) Payments During Construction- Section 101(a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211(a)(1); 100 Stat. 4082) is amended in each of subparagraphs (B) and (C) by striking `45 feet' and inserting `53 feet'.
(b) Operation and Maintenance- Section 101(b)(1) of such Act (33 U.S.C 2211(b)(1)) is amended by striking `45 feet' and inserting `53 feet'.
(c) Definitions- Section 214 of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2241; 100 Stat. 4108) is amended in each of paragraphs (1) and (3) by striking `45 feet' and inserting `53 feet'.
(d) Applicability- The amendments made by subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall apply only to a project, or separable element of a project, on which a contract for physical construction has not been awarded before October 1, 2003.
(e) Revision of Partnership Agreement- The Secretary shall revise any partnership agreement entered into after October 1, 2003, for any project to which the amendments made by subsections (a), (b), and (c) apply to take into account the change in non-Federal participation in the project as a result of such amendments.
SEC. 2003. FUNDING TO PROCESS PERMITS.
Section 214(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (33 U.S.C. 2201 note; 114 Stat. 2594; 117 Stat. 1836; 119 Stat. 2169; 120 Stat. 318; 120 Stat. 3197) is amended by striking `2008' and inserting `2010'
SEC. 2004. NATIONAL SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
(a) Extension of Program- Section 5(a) of the Act entitled `An Act authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned property', approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426h(a)), is amended by striking `7 years' and inserting `10 years'.
(b) Extension of Planning, Design, and Construction Phase- Section 5(b)(1)(A) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking `3 years' and inserting `6 years'.
(c) Cost Sharing; Removal of Projects- Section 5(b) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(b)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
`(3) COST SHARING- The Secretary may enter into a cost sharing agreement with a non-Federal interest to carry out a project, or a phase of a project, under the erosion control program in cooperation with the non-Federal interest.
`(4) REMOVAL OF PROJECTS- The Secretary may pay all or a portion of the costs of removing a project, or an element of a project, constructed under the erosion control program if the Secretary determines during the term of the program that the project or element is detrimental to the environment, private property, or public safety.'.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations- Section 5(e)(2) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 426h(e)(2)) is amended by striking `$25,000,000' and inserting `$31,000,000'.
SEC. 2005. SMALL SHORE AND BEACH RESTORATION AND PROTECTION PROJECTS.
Section 3 of the Act entitled `An Act authorizing Federal participation in the cost of protecting the shores of publicly owned property', approved August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426g), is amended by striking `$3,000,000' and inserting `$5,000,000'.
SEC. 2006. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
Section 206(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330) is amended by striking `$25,000,000' and inserting `$40,000,000'.
SEC. 2007. SMALL FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECTS.
Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s) is amended by striking `$50,000,000' and inserting `$60,000,000'.
SEC. 2008. MODIFICATION OF PROJECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
Section 1135(h) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a(h)) is amended by striking `$25,000,000' and inserting `$30,000,000'.
SEC. 2009. WRITTEN AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.
(a) In General- Section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) is amended--
(1) by striking `Sec. 221' and inserting the following:
`SEC. 221. WRITTEN AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.';
(2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
`(a) Cooperation of Non-Federal Interest-
`(1) IN GENERAL- After December 31, 1970, the construction of any water resources project, or an acceptable separable element thereof, by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, or by a non-Federal interest where such interest will be reimbursed for such construction under any provision of law, shall not be commenced until each non-Federal interest has entered into a written partnership agreement with the Secretary (or, where appropriate, the district engineer for the district in which the project will be carried out) under which each party agrees to carry out its responsibilities and requirements for implementation or construction of the project or the appropriate element of the project, as the case may be; except that no such agreement shall be required if the Secretary determines that the administrative costs associated with negotiating, executing, or administering the agreement would exceed the amount of the contribution required from the non-Federal interest and are less than $25,000.
`(2) LIQUIDATED DAMAGES- A partnership agreement described in paragraph (1) may include a provision for liquidated damages in the event of a failure of one or more parties to perform.
`(3) OBLIGATION OF FUTURE APPROPRIATIONS- In any partnership agreement described in paragraph (1) and entered into by a State, or a body politic of the State which derives its powers from the State constitution, or a governmental entity created by the State legislature, the agreement may reflect that it does not obligate future appropriations for such performance and payment when obligating future appropriations would be inconsistent with constitutional or statutory limitations of the State or a political subdivision of the State.
`(4) CREDIT FOR IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS-
`(A) IN GENERAL- A partnership agreement described in paragraph (1) may provide with respect to a project that the Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project, including a project implemented without specific authorization in law, the value of in-kind contributions made by the non-Federal interest, including--
`(i) the costs of planning (including data collection), design, management, mitigation, construction, and construction services that are provided by the non-Federal interest for implementation of the project;
`(ii) the value of materials or services provided before execution of the partnership agreement, including efforts on constructed elements incorporated into the project; and
`(iii) the value of materials and services provided after execution of the partnership agreement.
`(B) CONDITION- The Secretary shall credit an in-kind contribution under subparagraph (A) if the Secretary determines that the material or service provided as an in-kind contribution is integral to the project.
`(C) WORK PERFORMED BEFORE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT- In any case in which the non-Federal interest is to receive credit under subparagraph (A)(ii) for the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest and such work has not been carried out as of the date of enactment of this subparagraph, the Secretary and the non-Federal interest shall enter into an agreement under which the non-Federal interest shall carry out such work, and only work carried out following the execution of the agreement shall be eligible for credit.
`(D) LIMITATIONS- Credit authorized under this paragraph for a project--
`(i) shall not exceed the non-Federal share of the cost of the project;
`(ii) shall not alter any other requirement that a non-Federal interest provide lands, easements or rights-of-way, or areas for disposal of dredged material for the project;
`(iii) shall not alter any requirement that a non-Federal interest pay a portion of the costs of construction of the project under sections 101 and 103 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2211; 33 U.S.C. 2213); and
`(iv) shall not exceed the actual and reasonable costs of the materials, services, or other things provided by the non-Federal interest, as determined by the Secretary.
`(E) APPLICABILITY-
`(i) IN GENERAL- This paragraph shall apply to water resources projects authorized after November 16, 1986, including projects initiated after November 16, 1986, without specific authorization in law.
`(ii) LIMITATION- In any case in which a specific provision of law provides for a non-Federal interest to receive credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of a study for, or construction or operation and maintenance of, a water resources project, the specific provision of law shall apply instead of this paragraph.'.
(b) Non-Federal Interest- Section 221(b) of such Act is amended to read as follows:
`(b) Definition of Non-Federal Interest- The term `non-Federal interest' means a legally constituted public body (including a federally recognized Indian tribe), and a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local government, that has full authority and capability to perform the terms of its agreement and to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of failure to perform.'.
(c) Program Administration- Section 221 of such Act is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
`(e) Delegation of Authority- Not later than September 30, 2008, the Secretary shall issue policies and guidelines for partnership agreements that delegate to the district engineers, at a minimum--
`(1) the authority to approve any policy in a partnership agreement that has appeared in an agreement previously approved by the Secretary;
`(2) the authority to approve any policy in a partnership agreement the specific terms of which are dictated by law or by a final feasibility study, final environmental impact statement, or other final decision document for a water resources project;
`(3) the authority to approve any partnership agreement that complies with the policies and guidelines issued by the Secretary; and
`(4) the authority to sign any partnership agreement for any water resources project unless, within 30 days of the date of authorization of the project, the Secretary notifies the district engineer in which the project will be carried out that the Secretary wishes to retain the prerogative to sign the partnership agreement for that project.
`(f) Report to Congress- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this subsection, and every year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report detailing the following:
`(1) The number of partnership agreements signed by district engineers and the number of partnership agreements signed by the Secretary.
`(2) For any partnership agreement signed by the Secretary, an explanation of why delegation to the district engineer was not appropriate.
`(g) Public Availability- Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Chief of Engineers shall--
`(1) ensure that each district engineer has made available to the public, including on the Internet, all partnership agreements entered into under this section within the preceding 10 years and all partnership agreements for water resources projects currently being carried out in that district; and
`(2) make each partnership agreement entered into after such date of enactment available to the public, including on the Internet, not later than 7 days after the date on which such agreement is entered into.'.
(d) Local Cooperation- Section 912(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (101 Stat. 4190) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking `shall' the first place it appears and inserting `may'; and
(B) by striking the last sentence; and
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by inserting after `injunction, for' the following: `payment of damages or, for';
(B) by striking `to collect a civil penalty imposed under this section,'; and
(C) by striking `any civil penalty imposed under this section,' and inserting `any damages,'.
(e) Applicability- The amendments made by subsections (a), (b), and (d) only apply to partnership agreements entered into after the date of enactment of this Act; except that, at the request of a non-Federal interest for a project, the district engineer for the district in which the project is located may amend a project partnership agreement entered into on or before such date and under which construction on the project has not been initiated as of such date of enactment for the purpose of incorporating such amendments.
(f) Partnership and Cooperative Arrangements; References-
(1) IN GENERAL- A goal of agreements entered into under section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) shall be to further partnership and cooperative arrangements, and the agreements shall be referred to as `partnership agreements'.
(2) REFERENCES TO COOPERATION AGREEMENTS- Any reference in a law, regulation, document, or other paper of the United States to a `cooperation agreement' or `project cooperation agreement' shall be deemed to be a reference to a `partnership agreement' or a `project partnership agreement', respectively.
(3) REFERENCES TO PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS- Any reference to a `partnership agreement' or `project partnership agreement' in this Act (other than this section) shall be deemed to be a reference to a `cooperation agreement' or a `project cooperation agreement', respectively.
SEC. 2010. ASSISTANCE FOR REMEDIATION, RESTORATION, AND REUSE.
(a) In General- The Secretary may provide to State and local governments assessment, planning, and design assistance for remediation, environmental restoration, or reuse of areas located within the boundaries of such State or local governments where such remediation, environmental restoration, or reuse will contribute to the improvement of water quality or the conservation of water and related resources of drainage basins and watersheds within the United States.
(b) Non-Federal Share- The non-Federal share of the cost of assistance provided under subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 2011. COMPILATION OF LAWS.
(a) Compilation of Laws Enacted After November 8, 1966- Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Chief of Engineers shall prepare a compilation of the laws of the United States relating to the improvement of rivers and harbors, flood damage reduction, beach and shoreline erosion, hurricane and storm damage reduction, ecosystem and environmental restoration, and other water resources development enacted after November 8, 1966, and before January 1, 2008, and have such compilation printed for the use of the Department of the Army, Congress, and the general public.
(b) Reprint of Laws Enacted Before November 8, 1966- The Secretary shall have the volumes containing the laws referred to in subsection (a) enacted before November 8, 1966, reprinted.
(c) Index- The Secretary shall include an index in each volume compiled, and each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section.
(d) Congressional Copies- Not later than December 1, 2008, the Secretary shall transmit at least 25 copies of each volume compiled, and of each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section to each of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate.
(e) Availability- The Secretary shall ensure that each volume compiled, and each volume reprinted, pursuant to this section are available through electronic means, including the Internet.
SEC. 2012. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
Section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2326a) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d);
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
`(c) Dredged Material Facility-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may enter into a partnership agreement under section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b) with one or more non-Federal interests with respect to a water resources project, or group of water resources projects within a geographic region, if appropriate, for the acquisition, design, construction, management, or operation of a dredged material processing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or disposal facility (including any facility used to demonstrate potential beneficial uses of dredged material, which may include effective sediment contaminant reduction technologies) using funds provided in whole or in part by the Federal Government.
`(2) PERFORMANCE- One or more of the parties to a partnership agreement under this subsection may perform the acquisition, design, construction, management, or operation of a dredged material processing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or disposal facility.
`(3) MULTIPLE PROJECTS- If a facility to which this subsection applies serves to manage dredged material from multiple water resources projects located in the geographic region of the facility, the Secretary may combine portions of such projects with appropriate combined costsharing between the various projects in a partnership agreement for the facility under this subsection.
`(4) SPECIFIED FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES AND COST SHARING-
`(A) SPECIFIED FEDERAL FUNDING- A partnership agreement with respect to a facility under this subsection shall specify--
`(i) the Federal funding sources and combined cost-sharing when applicable to multiple water resources projects; and
`(ii) the responsibilities and risks of each of the parties relating to present and future dredged material managed by the facility.
`(B) MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENTS-
`(i) IN GENERAL- A partnership agreement under this subsection may include the management of sediments from the maintenance dredging of Federal water resources projects that do not have partnership agreements
`(ii) PAYMENTS- A partnership agreement under this subsection may allow the non-Federal interest to receive reimbursable payments from the Federal Government for commitments made by the non-Federal interest for disposal or placement capacity at dredged material processing, treatment, contaminant reduction, or disposal facilities.
`(C) CREDIT- A partnership agreement under this subsection may allow costs incurred by the non-Federal interest before execution of the partnership agreement to be credited in accordance with section 221(a)(4) of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C.

SEC. 3001. COOK INLET, ALASKA.
Section 118(a)(3) of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (title I of division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005; 118 Stat. 2945) is amended by inserting `as part of the operation and maintenance of such project modification' after `by the Secretary'.
SEC. 3002. KING COVE HARBOR, ALASKA.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the project for navigation, King Cove Harbor, Alaska, being carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be $8,000,000.
SEC. 3003. SITKA, ALASKA.
The Sitka, Alaska, element of the project for navigation, Southeast Alaska Harbors of Refuge, Alaska, authorized by section 101(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4801), is modified to direct the Secretary to take such action as is necessary to correct design deficiencies in the Sitka Harbor Breakwater, at full Federal expense. The estimated cost is $6,300,000.
SEC. 3004. TATITLEK, ALASKA.
The maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the project for navigation, Tatitlek, Alaska, being carried out under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), shall be $10,000,000.
SEC. 3005. RIO DE FLAG, FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA.
The project for flood damage reduction, Rio De Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2576), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total cost of $54,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $35,000,000 and a non-Federal cost of $19,100,000.
SEC. 3006. OSCEOLA HARBOR, ARKANSAS.
(a) In General- The project for navigation, Osceola Harbor, Arkansas, constructed under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), is modified to allow non-Federal interests to construct a mooring facility within the existing authorized harbor channel, subject to all necessary permits, certifications, and other requirements.
(b) Limitation on Statutory Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed as affecting the responsibility of the Secretary to maintain the general navigation features of the project at a bottom width of 250 feet.
SEC. 3007. PINE MOUNTAIN DAM, ARKANSAS.
The Pine Mountain Dam feature of the project for flood protection, Lee Creek, Arkansas and Oklahoma, authorized by section 204 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1078), is modified--
(1) to add environmental restoration as a project purpose; and
(2) to direct the Secretary to finance the non-Federal share of the cost of the project over a 30-year period in accordance with section 103(k) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2213(k)).
SEC. 3008. AMERICAN AND SACRAMENTO RIVERS, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The project for flood control, American and Sacramento Rivers, California, authorized by section 101(a)(6)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 274), as modified by section 128 of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (119 Stat. 2259), is further modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the auxiliary spillway generally in accordance with the Post Authorization Change Report, American River Watershed Project (Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam Raise Projects), dated December 2006, at a total cost of $683,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $444,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $239,000,000.
(b) Dam Safety Activities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out dam safety activities in connection with the auxiliary spillway in accordance with the Bureau of Reclamation Safety of Dams Program.
(c) Transfer of Funds- The Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior are authorized to transfer between their respective agencies appropriated amounts and other available funds (including funds contributed by non-Federal interests) for the purpose of planning, design, and construction of the auxiliary spillway. Any transfer made pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to such terms and conditions as agreed upon by the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior.
SEC. 3009. COMPTON CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control, Los Angeles Drainage Area, California, authorized by section 101(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611), is modified to add environmental restoration and recreation as project purposes.
SEC. 3010. GRAYSON CREEK/MURDERER'S CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Grayson Creek/Murderer's Creek, California, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified--
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project; and
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project.
SEC. 3011. HAMILTON AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA.
The project for environmental restoration, Hamilton Airfield, California, authorized by section 101(b)(3) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 279), is modified to direct the Secretary to construct the project substantially in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated July 19, 2004, at a total cost of $228,100,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $171,100,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $57,000,000.
SEC. 3012. JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL AND STOCKTON SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, San Francisco to Stockton, California, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1091) is modified--
(1) to provide that the non-Federal share of the cost of the John F Baldwin Ship Channel and Stockton Ship Channel element of the project may be provided in the form of in-kind services and materials; and
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of such element the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of an agreement for such planning and design if the Secretary determines that such work is integral to such element.
SEC. 3013. KAWEAH RIVER, CALIFORNIA
The project for flood control, Terminus Dam, Kaweah River, California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3658), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project, or provide reimbursement not to exceed $800,000, for the costs of any work carried out by the non-Federal interest before, on, or after the date of the project partnership agreement if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3014. LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California, authorized by section 601(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4148), is modified to direct the Secretary to determine whether maintenance of the project is feasible, and if the Secretary determines that maintenance of the project is feasible, to carry out such maintenance.
SEC. 3015. LLAGAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The project for flood damage reduction, Llagas Creek, California, authorized by section 501(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 333), is modified to authorize the Secretary to carry out the project at a total cost of $105,000,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $65,000,000, and an estimated non-Federal cost of $40,000,000.
(b) Special Rule- In evaluating and implementing the project, the Secretary shall allow the non-Federal interest to participate in the financing of the project in accordance with section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4184) to the extent that the Secretary's evaluation indicates that applying such section is necessary to implement the project.
SEC. 3016. MAGPIE CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The project for Magpie Creek, California, authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), is modified to direct the Secretary to apply the cost-sharing requirements of section 103(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4085) for the portion of the project consisting of land acquisition to preserve and enhance existing floodwater storage.
(b) Credit- The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3017. PACIFIC FLYWAY CENTER, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Pacific Flyway Center, Sacramento, California, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to authorize the Secretary to expend $2,000,000 to enhance public access to the project.
SEC. 3018. PINOLE CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, Pinole Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC 3019. PRADO DAM, CALIFORNIA.
Upon completion of the modifications to the Prado Dam element of the project for flood control, Santa Ana River Mainstem, California, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113), the Memorandum of Agreement for the Operation for Prado Dam for Seasonal Additional Water Conservation between the Department of the Army and the Orange County Water District (including all the conditions and stipulations in the memorandum) shall remain in effect for volumes of water made available prior to such modifications.
SEC. 3020. SACRAMENTO AND AMERICAN RIVERS FLOOD CONTROL, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall provide credit to the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, in the amount of $20,503,000, for the non-reimbursed Federal share of costs incurred by the Agency in connection the project for flood control and recreation, Sacramento and American Rivers, California (Natomas Levee features), authorized by section 9159 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1993 (106 Stat. 1944).
(b) Allocation of Credit- The Secretary shall allocate the amount to be credited under subsection (a) toward the non-Federal share of such projects as are requested by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency.
SEC. 3021. SACRAMENTO DEEP WATER SHIP CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel, California, authorized by section 202(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4092), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of planning and design work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC 3022. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIFORNIA.
The project for navigation, Santa Cruz Harbor, California, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1958 (72 Stat. 300) and modified by section 809 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) and section 526 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 346), is modified to direct the Secretary--
(1) to renegotiate the memorandum of agreement with the non-Federal interest to increase the annual payment to reflect the updated cost of operation and maintenance that is the Federal and non-Federal share as provided by law based on the project purpose; and
(2) to revise the memorandum of agreement to include terms that revise such payments for inflation.
SEC. 3023. SEVEN OAKS DAM, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood control, Santa Ana Mainstem, authorized by section 401(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4113) and modified by section 104 of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1988 (101 Stat. 1329-11), section 102(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4611), and section 311 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3713), is further modified to direct the Secretary to conduct a study of water conservation and water quality at the Seven Oaks Dam, California, for water conservation.
SEC. 3024. UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood damage reduction and recreation, Upper Guadalupe River, California, authorized by section 101(a)(9) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modified to authorize the Secretary to construct the project generally in accordance with the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Damage Reduction, San Jose, California, Limited Reevaluation Report, dated March, 2004, at a total cost of $244,500,000.
SEC. 3025. WALNUT CREEK CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Walnut Creek Channel, California, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified--
(1) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project; and
(2) to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project.
SEC. 3026. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE I, CALIFORNIA.
The project for improvement of the quality of the environment, Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase I, California, being carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C 2309a), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3027. WILDCAT/SAN PABLO CREEK PHASE II, CALIFORNIA.
The project for aquatic ecosystem restoration, Wildcat/San Pablo Creek Phase II, California, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project and to authorize the Secretary to consider national ecosystem restoration benefits in determining the Federal interest in the project.
SEC. 3028. YUBA RIVER BASIN PROJECT, CALIFORNIA.
The project for flood damage reduction, Yuba River Basin, California, authorized by section 101(a)(10) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 275), is modified--
(1) to authorize the Secretary to construct the project at a total cost of $107,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $70,000,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $37,700,000; and
(2) to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3029. SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO.
Section 808 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4168) is amended by striking `agriculture,' and inserting `agriculture, environmental restoration,'.
SEC. 3030. INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DELAWARE AND MARYLAND.
The project for navigation, Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, authorized by the first section of the Rivers and Harbors Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1030), and section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 1249), is modified to add recreation as a project purpose.
SEC. 3031. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(a) Shoreline- The project for shoreline protection, Brevard County, Florida, authorized by section 101(b)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3667), is modified--
(1) to direct the Secretary to establish the reach of the project as the reach between the Florida department of environmental protection monuments 75.4 to 118.3, a distance of 7.6 miles; and
(2) to direct the Secretary to expedite the general reevaluation report required by section 418 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2637).
(b) Credit- Section 310 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(d) Credit- After completion of the study, the Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project for shore protection the cost of nourishment and renourishment associated with the project for shore protection incurred by the non-Federal interest to respond to damages to Brevard County beaches that are the result of a Federal navigation project, as determined in the final report for the study.'.
SEC. 3032. BROWARD COUNTY AND HILLSBORO INLET, FLORIDA.
The project for shore protection, Broward County and Hillsboro Inlet, Florida, authorized by section 301 of the River and Harbor Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 1090), and modified by section 311 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 301), is further modified to direct the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the project the cost of mitigation construction and derelict erosion control structure removal carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 3033. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA.
In carrying out the project for navigation, Canaveral Harbor, Florida, authorized by section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat.

SEC. 4001. JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES BASIN PROGRAM.
Section 455 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-21) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(g) In-Kind Contributions for Study- The non-Federal interest may provide up to 100 percent of the non-Federal share required under subsection (f) in the form of in-kind services and materials.'.
SEC. 4002. LAKE ERIE DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITES.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the nature and frequency of avian botulism problems in the vicinity of Lake Erie associated with dredged material disposal sites and shall make recommendations to eliminate the conditions that result in such problems.
SEC. 4003. SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES DROUGHT STUDY.
(a) In General- The Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, and other appropriate agencies, shall conduct, at Federal expense, a comprehensive study of drought conditions in the southwestern United States, with particular emphasis on the Colorado River basin, the Rio Grande River basin, and the Great Basin.
(b) Inventory of Actions- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall assemble an inventory of actions taken or planned to be taken to address drought-related situations in the southwestern United States.
(c) Purpose- The purpose of the study shall be to develop recommendations to more effectively address current and future drought conditions in the southwestern United States.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $7,000,000. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 4004. DELAWARE RIVER.
The Secretary shall review, in consultation with the Delaware River Basin Commission and the States of Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, the report of the Chief of Engineers on the Delaware River, published as House Document Numbered 522, 87th Congress, Second Session, as it relates to the Mid-Delaware River Basin from Wilmington to Port Jervis, and any other pertinent reports (including the strategy for resolution of interstate flow management issues in the Delaware River Basin dated August 2004 and the National Park Service Lower Delaware River Management Plan (1997-1999)), with a view to determining whether any modifications of recommendations contained in the first report referred to are advisable at the present time, in the interest of flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, and other related problems.
SEC. 4005. KNIK ARM, COOK INLET, ALASKA
The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal expense, a study to determine the potential impacts on navigation of construction of a bridge across Knik Arm, Cook Inlet, Alaska.
SEC. 4006. KUSKOKWIM RIVER, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for navigation, Kuskokwim River, Alaska, in the vicinity of the village of Crooked Creek.
SEC. 4007. ST. GEORGE HARBOR, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal expense, a study to determine the feasibility of providing navigation improvements at St. George Harbor, Alaska.
SEC. 4008. SUSITNA RIVER, ALASKA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for hydropower, recreation, and related purposes on the Susitna River, Alaska.
SEC. 4009. GILA BEND, MARICOPA, ARIZONA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Gila Bend, Maricopa, Arizona.
(b) Review of Plans- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall review plans and designs developed by non-Federal interests and shall incorporate such plans and designs into the Federal study if the Secretary determines that such plans and designs are consistent with Federal standards.
SEC. 4010. SEARCY COUNTY, ARKANSAS.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of using Greers Ferry Lake as a water supply source for Searcy County, Arkansas.
SEC. 4011. ALISO CREEK, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for streambank protection and environmental restoration along Aliso Creek, California.
SEC. 4012. ELKHORN SLOUGH ESTUARY, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the Elkhorn Slough estuary, California, to determine the feasibility of conserving, enhancing, and restoring estuarine habitats by developing strategies to address hydrological management issues.
SEC. 4013. FRESNO, KINGS, AND KERN COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply for Fresno, Kings, and Kern Counties, California.
SEC. 4014. LOS ANGELES RIVER REVITALIZATION STUDY, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary, in coordination with the city of Los Angeles, shall--
(1) prepare a feasibility study for environmental restoration, flood control, recreation, and other aspects of Los Angeles River revitalization that is consistent with the goals of the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan published by the city of Los Angeles; and
(2) consider any locally-preferred project alternatives developed through a full and open evaluation process for inclusion in the study.
(b) Use of Existing Information and Measures- In preparing the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall use, to the maximum extent practicable--
(1) information obtained from the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan; and
(2) the development process of that plan.
(c) Demonstration Projects-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary is authorized to construct demonstration projects in order to provide information to develop the study under subsection (a)(1).
(2) FEDERAL SHARE- The Federal share of the cost of any project under this subsection shall be not more than 65 percent.
(3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $20,000,000.
SEC. 4015. LYTLE CREEK, RIALTO, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and groundwater recharge, Lytle Creek, Rialto, California.
SEC. 4016. MOKELUMNE RIVER, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply along the Mokelumne River, San Joaquin County, California.
(b) Limitation on Statutory Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed to invalidate, preempt, or create any exception to State water law, State water rights, or Federal or State permitted activities or agreements.
SEC. 4017. NAPA RIVER, ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study of the Napa River in the vicinity of St. Helena, California, for the purposes of improving flood management through reconnecting the river to its floodplain; restoring habitat, including riparian and aquatic habitat; improving fish passage and water quality; and restoring native plant communities.
(b) Plans and Designs- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall review plans and designs developed by non-Federal interests and shall incorporate such plans and designs into the Federal study if the Secretary determines that such plans and designs are consistent with Federal standards.
SEC. 4018. ORICK, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration, Orick, California.
(b) Feasibility of Restoring or Rehabilitating Redwook Creek Levees- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall determine the feasibility of restoring or rehabilitating the Redwood Creek Levees, Humboldt County, California.
SEC. 4019. RIALTO, FONTANA, AND COLTON, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply for Rialto, Fontana, and Colton, California.
SEC. 4020. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study to determine the feasibility of, and alternatives for, measures to protect water diversion facilities and fish protective screen facilities in the vicinity of river mile 178 on the Sacramento River, California.
SEC. 4021. SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply, San Diego County, California, including a review of the feasibility of connecting 4 existing reservoirs to increase usable storage capacity.
SEC. 4022. SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of the beneficial use of dredged material from the San Francisco Bay in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, including the benefits and impacts of salinity in the Delta and the benefits to navigation, flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, water quality, salinity control, water supply reliability, and recreation.
(b) Cooperation- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall cooperate with the California Department of Water Resources and appropriate Federal and State entities in developing options for the beneficial use of dredged material from San Francisco Bay for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area.
(c) Review- The study shall include a review of the feasibility of using Sherman Island as a rehandling site for levee maintenance material, as well as for ecosystem restoration. The review may include monitoring a pilot project using up to 150,000 cubic yards of dredged material and being carried out at the Sherman Island site, examining larger scale use of dredged materials from the San Francisco Bay and Suisun Bay Channel, and analyzing the feasibility of the potential use of saline materials from the San Francisco Bay for both rehandling and ecosystem restoration purposes.
SEC. 4023. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORELINE STUDY, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General- In conducting the South San Francisco Bay shoreline study, the Secretary shall--
(1) review the planning, design, and land acquisition documents prepared by the California State Coastal Conservancy, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and other local interests in developing recommendations for measures to provide flood protection of the South San Francisco Bay shoreline, restoration of the South San Francisco Bay salt ponds (including lands owned by the Department of the Interior), and other related purposes; and
(2) incorporate such planning, design, and land acquisition documents into the Federal study if the Secretary determines that such documents are consistent with Federal standards.
(b) Report- Not later than December 31, 2008, the Secretary shall transmit a feasibility report for the South San Francisco Bay shoreline study to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate.
(c) Credit-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of any project authorized by law as a result of the South San Francisco Bay shoreline study the cost of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
(2) LIMITATION- In no case may work that was carried out more than 5 years before the date of enactment of this Act be eligible for credit under this subsection.
SEC. 4024. TWENTYNINE PALMS, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, Pinto Cove Wash, in the vicinity of Twentynine Palms, California.
SEC. 4025. YUCCA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, West Burnt Mountain basin, in the vicinity of Yucca Valley, California.
SEC. 4026. ROARING FORK RIVER, BASALT, COLORADO.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and other purposes for the Roaring Fork River, Basalt, Colorado.
SEC. 4027. DELAWARE AND CHRISTINA RIVERS AND SHELLPOT CREEK, WILMINGTON, DELAWARE.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction and related purposes along the Delaware and Christina Rivers and Shellpot Creek, Wilmington, Delaware.
SEC. 4028. COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES, FLORIDA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for hurricane and storm damage reduction and flood damage reduction in the vicinity of Vanderbilt, Park Shore, and Naples beaches, Collier County, Florida.
SEC. 4029. LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental protection and restoration, including improved water quality, and related purposes, Lower St. Johns River, Florida.
SEC. 4030. VANDERBILT BEACH LAGOON, FLORIDA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, water supply, and improvement of water quality at Vanderbilt Beach Lagoon, Florida.
SEC. 4031. MERIWETHER COUNTY, GEORGIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for water supply, Meriwether County, Georgia.
SEC. 4032. TYBEE ISLAND, GEORGIA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of including the northern end of Tybee Island extending from the north terminal groin to the mouth of Lazaretto Creek as a part of the project for beach erosion control, Tybee Island, Georgia, carried out under section 201 of the Flood Control Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5).
SEC. 4033. BOISE RIVER, IDAHO.
The study for flood control, Boise River, Idaho, authorized by section 414 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 324), is modified--
(1) to add ecosystem restoration and water supply as project purposes to be studied; and
(2) to require the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of the cost of the study the cost, not to exceed $500,000, of work carried out by the non-Federal interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the project if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project.
SEC. 4034. BALLARD'S ISLAND SIDE CHANNEL, ILLINOIS
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for ecosystem restoration, Ballard's Island, Illinois.
SEC. 4035. SALEM, INDIANA.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project to provide an additional water supply source for Salem, Indiana.
SEC. 4036. BUCKHORN LAKE, KENTUCKY.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of modifying the project for flood damage reduction, Buckhorn Lake, Kentucky, authorized by section 2 of the Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), to add ecosystem restoration, recreation, and improved access as project purposes, including permanently raising the winter pool elevation of the project.
(b) In-Kind Contributions- The non-Federal interest may provide the non-Federal share of the cost of the study in the form of in-kind services and materials.
SEC. 4037. DEWEY LAKE, KENTUCKY.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of modifying the project for Dewey Lake, Kentucky, to add water supply as a project purpose.
SEC. 4038. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY.
The Secretary shall conduct a study of the project for flood control, Louisville, Kentucky, authorized by section 4 of the Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1217), to investigate measures to address the rehabilitation of the project.
SEC. 4039. CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, Clinton River, Michigan.
SEC. 4040. HAMBURG AND GREEN OAK TOWNSHIPS, MICHIGAN.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction on Ore Lake and the Huron River for Hamburg and Green Oak Townships, Michigan.
SEC. 4041. DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct a study and prepare a report to evaluate the integrity of the bulkhead system located on and in the vicinity of Duluth-Superior Harbor, Duluth, Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin.
(b) Contents- The report shall include--
(1) a determination of causes of corrosion of the bulkhead system;
(2) recommendations to reduce corrosion of the bulkhead system;
(3) a description of the necessary repairs to the bulkhead system; and
(4) an estimate of the cost of addressing the causes of the corrosion and carrying out necessary repairs.
SEC. 4042. NORTHEAST MISSISSIPPI.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of modifying the project for navigation, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, Alabama and Mississippi, to provide water supply for northeast Mississippi.
SEC. 4043. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for flood damage reduction, St. Louis, Missouri, to restore or rehabilitate the levee system feature of the project for flood protection, St. Louis, Missouri, authorized by the first section of the Act entitled `An Act authorizing construction of certain public works on the Mississippi River for the protection of Saint Louis, Missouri', approved August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 540).
SEC. 4044. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL, NEW JERSEY.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project in the vicinity of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, New Jersey, for the construction of a dredged material disposal transfer facility to make dredged material available for beneficial reuse.
SEC. 4045. BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the feasibility of carrying out a project for environmental restoration, including improved water quality, enhanced public access, and recreation, on the Kill Van Kull, Bayonne, New Jersey.

SEC. 5001. MAINTENANCE OF NAVIGATION CHANNELS.
(a) In General- Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the Secretary shall be responsible for maintenance of the following navigation channels and breakwaters constructed or improved by the non-Federal interest if the Secretary determines that such maintenance is economically justified and environmentally acceptable and that the channel or breakwater was constructed in accordance with applicable permits and appropriate engineering and design standards:
(1) Manatee Harbor basin, Florida.
(2) West turning basin, Canaveral Harbor, Florida.
(3) Bayou LaFourche Channel, Port Fourchon, Louisiana.
(4) Calcasieu River at Devil's Elbow, Louisiana.
(5) Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, Pidgeon Industrial Park, Memphis Harbor, Tennessee.
(6) Pix Bayou Navigation Channel, Chambers County, Texas.
(7) Racine Harbor, Wisconsin.
(b) Completion of Assessment- Not later than 6 months after the date of receipt of a request from a non-Federal interest for Federal assumption of maintenance of a channel listed in subsection (a), the Secretary shall make a determination as provided in subsection (a) and advise the non-Federal interest of the Secretary's determination.
SEC. 5002. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
(a) In General- The Secretary may provide technical, planning, and design assistance to non-Federal interests for carrying out watershed management, restoration, and development projects at the locations described in subsection (d).
(b) Specific Measures- Assistance provided under subsection (a) may be in support of non-Federal projects for the following purposes:
(1) Management and restoration of water quality.
(2) Control and remediation of toxic sediments.
(3) Restoration of degraded streams, rivers, wetlands, and other waterbodies to their natural condition as a means to control flooding, excessive erosion, and sedimentation.
(4) Protection and restoration of watersheds, including urban watersheds.
(5) Demonstration of technologies for nonstructural measures to reduce destructive impacts of flooding.
(c) Non-Federal Share- The non-Federal share of the cost of assistance provided under subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
(d) Project Locations- The locations referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
(1) Charlotte Harbor watershed, Florida.
(2) Big Creek watershed, Roswell, Georgia.
(3) Those portions of the watersheds of the Chattahoochee, Etowah, Flint, Ocmulgee, and Oconee Rivers lying within the counties of Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Paulding, Rockdale, and Walton, Georgia.
(4) Kinkaid Lake, Jackson County, Illinois.
(5) Amite River basin, Louisiana.
(6) East Atchafalaya River basin, Iberville Parish and Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana.
(7) Red River watershed, Louisiana.
(8) Lower Platte River watershed, Nebraska.
(9) Rio Grande watershed, New Mexico.
(10) Taunton River basin, Massachusetts.
(11) Marlboro Township, New Jersey.
(12) Esopus, Plattekill, and Rondout Creeks, Greene, Sullivan, and Ulster Counties, New York.
(13) Greenwood Lake watershed, New York and New Jersey.
(14) Long Island Sound watershed, New York.
(15) Tuscarawas River basin, Ohio.
(16) Ramapo River watershed, New York.
(17) Western Lake Erie basin, Ohio.
(18) Those portions of the watersheds of the Beaver, Upper Ohio, Connoquenessing, Lower Allegheny, Kiskiminetas, Lower Monongahela, Youghiogheny, Shenango, and Mahoning Rivers lying within the counties of Beaver, Butler, Lawrence, and Mercer, Pennsylvania.
(19) Otter Creek watershed, Pennsylvania.
(20) Unami Creek watershed, Milford Township, Pennsylvania.
(21) Sauk River basin, Washington.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.
SEC. 5003. DAM SAFETY.
(a) Assistance- The Secretary may provide assistance to enhance dam safety at the following locations:
(1) Fish Creek Dam, Blaine County, Idaho.
(2) Hamilton Dam, Flint River, Flint, Michigan.
(3) State Dam, Auburn, New York.
(4) Whaley Lake Dam, Pawling, New York.
(5) Ingham Spring Dam, Solebury Township, Pennsylvania.
(6) Leaser Lake Dam, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania.
(7) Stillwater Dam, Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
(8) Wissahickon Creek Dam, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
(b) Special Rule- The assistance provided under subsection (a) for State Dam, Auburn, New York, shall be for a project for rehabilitation in accordance with the report on State Dam Rehabilitation, Owasco Lake Outlet, New York, dated March 1999, if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (a) $6,000,000.
SEC. 5004. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATIONS.
(a) In General- Upon request of a non-Federal interest, the Secretary shall evaluate the structural integrity and effectiveness of a project for flood damage reduction and, if the Secretary determines that the project does not meet such minimum standards as the Secretary may establish and, absent action by the Secretary, the project will fail, the Secretary may take such action as may be necessary to restore the integrity and effectiveness of the project.
(b) Priority- The Secretary shall evaluate under subsection (a) the following projects:
(1) Project for flood damage reduction, Arkansas River Levees, Arkansas.
(2) Project for flood damage reduction, Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee.
SEC. 5005. FLOOD MITIGATION PRIORITY AREAS.
(a) In General- Section 212(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2332(e); 114 Stat. 2599) is amended--
(1) by striking `and' at the end of paragraphs (23) and (27);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (28) and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(29) Ascension Parish, Louisiana;
`(30) East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana;
`(31) Iberville Parish, Louisiana;
`(32) Livingston Parish, Louisiana; and
`(33) Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana.'.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations- Section 212(i)(1) of such Act (33 U.S.C. 2332(i)(1)) is amended by striking `section--' and all that follows before the period at the end and inserting `section $20,000,000'.
SEC. 5006. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR AUTHORIZED PROJECTS.
(a) In General- Section 219(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113 Stat. 334) is amended--
(1) by striking `and' at the end of paragraph (7);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (8) and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(9) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(18);
`(10) $27,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(19);
`(11) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(20);
`(12) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(23);
`(13) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(25);
`(14) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(26);
`(15) $35,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(27);
`(16) $20,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(28); and
`(17) $30,000,000 for the project described in subsection (c)(40).'.
(b) East Arkansas Enterprise Community, Arkansas- Federal assistance made available under the rural enterprise zone program of the Department of Agriculture may be used toward payment of the non-Federal share of the costs of the project described in section 219(c)(20) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (114 Stat. 2763A-219) if such assistance is authorized to be used for such purposes.
SEC. 5007. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS AND CONSTRUCTION FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.
The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports and, if the Secretary determines that the project is feasible, shall expedite completion of construction for the following projects:
(1) Daytona Beach shore protection project, Florida.
(2) Flagler Beach shore protection project, Florida.
(3) St. Johns County shore protection project, Florida.
(4) False River, Louisiana, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330).
(5) Fulmer Creek, Village of Mohawk, New York, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).
(6) Moyer Creek, Village of Frankfort, New York, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).
(7) Steele Creek, Village of Ilion, New York, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C 701s).
(8) Oriskany Wildlife Management Area, Rome, New York, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330).
(9) Whitney Point Lake, Otselic River, Whitney Point, New York, being carried out under section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2309a).
(10) North River, Peabody, Massachusetts, being carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).
(11) Chenango Lake, Chenango County, New York, being carried out under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330).
SEC. 5008. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF REPORTS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall expedite completion of the reports for the following projects and, if the Secretary determines that a project is justified in the completed report, proceed directly to project preconstruction, engineering, and design:
(1) Project for water supply, Little Red River, Arkansas.
(2) Project for shoreline stabilization at Egmont Key, Florida.
(3) Project for ecosystem restoration, University Lake, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
(4) Project for navigation, Sabine-Neches Waterway, Texas and Louisiana.
(b) Special Rule for Egmont Key, Florida- In carrying out the project for shoreline stabilization at Egmont Key, Florida, referred to in subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall waive any cost share to be provided by non-Federal interests for any portion of the project that benefits federally owned property.
SEC. 5009. SOUTHEASTERN WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT.
(a) In General- The Secretary shall conduct, at Federal expense, an assessment of the water resources needs of the river basins and watersheds of the southeastern United States.
(b) Cooperative Agreements- In carrying out the assessment, the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with State and local agencies, non-Federal and nonprofit entities, and regional researchers.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be appropriated $7,000,000 to carry out this section.
SEC. 5010. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
Section 1103(e)(7) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 652(e)(7)) is amended--
(1) by adding at the end of subparagraph (A) the following: `The non-Federal interest may provide the non-Federal share of the cost of the project in the form of in-kind services and materials.'; and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
`(C) Notwithstanding section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-5b), a non-Federal interest may include for any project undertaken under this section, a nonprofit entity with the consent of the affected local government.'.
SEC. 5011. MISSOURI AND MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.
Section 514(g) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 343; 117 Stat. 142) is amended by striking `and 2004' and inserting `through 2015'.
SEC. 5012. GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.
Section 506(f)(3)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 1962d-22; 114 Stat. 2