text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/646

 100 STAT. 4120

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

on the Saddle River beginning at Grove Street in Ridgewood, New Jersey, and continuing downstream to the Passaic River, on Sprout Brook from the Garden State Parkway to the Saddle River, and on Hohokus Brook from Grove Street downstream to the Saddle River. A3J?!

RAMAPO RIVER AT OAKLAND, N E W JERSEY '^^-'^^

The project for flood control, Ramapo River at Oakland, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated January 28, 1986, at a total cost of $6,450,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,840,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,610,000. RAMAPO A N D MAHWAH RIVERS, N E W JERSEY A N D N E W YORK

The project for flood control, Ramapo and Mahwah Rivers, New Jersey and New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated November 27, 1984, at a total cost of $6,260,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,630,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,630,000. -fZmm

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE, N E W MEXICO

Tiao.

Fish and fishing. The project for fiood control. Middle Rio Grande Flood Protection, Wildlife. Bernalillo to Belen, New Mexico: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 23, 1981, at a total cost of $44,900,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $33,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $11,200,000. The Secretary is authorized also to increase flood protection through the dredging of the bed of the Rio Grande in the vicinity of Albuquerque, New Mexico, to an elevation lower than existed on the date of enactment of this Act. The project shall include the establishment of 75 acres of wetlands for fish and wildlife habitat and the acquisition of 200 acres of land for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, as recommended by the District Engineer, Albuquerque District, in his report dated June 13, 1979. PUERCO RIVER A N D TRIBUTARIES, N E W MEXICO

The project for flood control, Puerco River and Tributaries, Gallup, New Mexico: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 4, 1981, at a total cost of $4,190,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $3,140,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,050,000. CAZENOVIA CREEK, N E W YORK

^mjfeu ban.lieII

The project for flood control, Cazenovia Creek Watershed, New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 8, 1977, House Document Numbered 96-126, at a total cost of $2,050,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $1,540,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $510,000. Such project shall include features necessary to enable the project to serve as a part of a streamside trail system if the Secretary determines such features are compatible with the project purposes. Nothing in this paragraph affects the authority of the Secretary to carry out a project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/647

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4121

MAMARONECK, SHELDRAKE, AND BYRAM RIVERS, NEW YORK AND CONNECTICUT

The project for flood control, Mamaroneck and Sheldrake River Basins, New York and Connecticut, and B3rram River Basin, New York and Connecticut: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 4, 1979, at a total cost of $68,500,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $51,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $17,100,000. Such project shall include flood protection for the town of Mamaroneck as recommended in the report of the Division Engineer, North Atlantic Division, dated March 28, 1978.

t-' '^

SUGAR CREEK BASIN, NORTH CAROUNA AND SOUTH CAROUNA

^ The project for flood control. Sugar Creek Basin, North Carolina and South Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated February 1, 1985, at a total cost of $29,700,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $19,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $10,200,000. '^^" -

fiideli

SHEYENNE RIVER, NORTH DAKOTA

The project for flood control, Sheyenne River, North Dakota: Dams. Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 22, 1984, at a total cost of $56,300,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $39,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $16,800,000. Such project shall include a dam and reservoir of approximately 35,000 acre-feet of storage for the purpose of flood protection on the Maple River. Modification of the Baldhill Dam for dam safety considerations shall not preclude the implementation of those project features not dependent on such safety modifications. ,

•

PARK RIVER, GRAFTON, NORTH DAKOTA

The project for flood control, Park River, Grafton, North Dakota: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 17, 1984, at a total cost of $19,100,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $14,300,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $4,800,000. MUSKINGUM RIVER, KILLBUCK, OHIO

The project for flood control, Muskingum River, Killbuck, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 3, 1978, House Document Numbered 96-117, at a total cost of $6,420,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,820,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $1,600,000. The Congress finds that the overall benefits of the project exceed the costs of the project. MUSKINGUM RIVER, MANSFIELD, OHIO

The project for flood control, Muskingum River, Mansfield, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 3, 1978, House Document Numbered 96-117, at a total cost of $4,260,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,960,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $1,300,000. Nothing in this paragraph affects the authority of the Secretary to carry out a project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s).

' '^'-^

�

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/648

 100 STAT. 4122

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 HOCKING RIVER, LOGAN, OHIO

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control, Hocking River at Logan, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 23, 1978, at a total cost of $7,760,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $5,870,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,890,000. The Secretary shall review potential sites for disposal of dredged material from the project and shall select such sites as he determines necessary and appropriate with a view toward minimizing adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat areas. HOCKING RIVER, NELSONVILLE, OHIO

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control, Hocking River at Nelsonville, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 23, 1978, at a total cost of $8,020,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $6,090,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,930,000. The Secretary shall review potential sites for disposal of dredged material from the project and shall select such sites as he determines necessary and appropriate with a view toward minimizing adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat areas.

TflBCf

iBivJ i?

SCIOTO RIVER, OHIO

The project for flood control, Scioto River at North Chillicothe, Ohio: Reports of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 4, 1981 and February 1, 1985, at a total cost of $10,700,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $8,080,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $2,620,000. JijJ3s/iiJLJJiV-

UTTLE MIAMI RIVER, OHIO

SOf"

isSliJ•'&'":

^3fp-

The project for flood control, Miami River, Little Miami River, Interim Report Number 2, West CarroUton-Holes Creek, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 23, 1981, at a total cost of $8,910,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $6,230,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $2,680,000. MIAMI RIVER, FAIRFIELD, OHIO Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control, Miami River, Fairfield, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 22, 1983, at a total cost of $14,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $9,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $5,000,000. To the extent the Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, determines necessary and appropriate, the project shall include additional measures for mitigation of losses of fish and wildlife habitat, including seeding and planting in disturbed areas, limiting removal of riparian vegetation to the minimum amount necessary for project objectives, performing work along the north streambank where construction is planned on only one side of the channel, limiting construction activities to the right streambank in the reach of Pleasant Run extending from mile 2.75 to mile 3.1*^ the use of gabions and riprap for bank protection in lieu of concrete and the inclusion of pool-riffle complexes at bridges. In applying section 104 to such project, the Secretary shall consider work carried out by non-Federal interests after July 1, 1979, and before the date of the

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/649

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4123

enactment of this Act that otherwise meets the requirements of such section. rq MINGO CREEK, OKLAHOMA

The project for flood control, Mingo Creek, Tulsa, Oklahoma: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated November 16, 1981, at a total cost of $134,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $94,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $40,000,000. The project shall include measures determined appropriate by the Secretary, after consultation with the city of Tulsa, to minimize adverse effects associated with the use of flood water detention sites for the project.

,!ii—.^i'^C'.i CiCj-J i i ^

FRY CREEKS, OKLAHOMA

The project for flood control. Fry Creeks, Oklahoma: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 7, 1983, at a total cost of $13,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $9,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,800,000, except that the Secretary shall acquire a total of 20 acres of land for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses and such lands, to the extent feasible, shall be contiguous and shall be in a corridor not less than 50 feet wide.

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA

The project for flood control, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 16, 1979, at a total cost of $133,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $99,800,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $33,200,000, including such (1) modifications as the Secretary determines to be feasible and appropriate to construct a floodway along Paxton Creek between Wildwood Lake and Maclay Street as an alternative to the recommended plan, and (2) additional measures as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to reduce fish and wildlife habitat losses in the project area. The Secretary shall study the feasibility of providing a floodway along Paxton Creek between Wildwood Lake and Maclay Street as an alternative to the recommended plan and shall reexamine fish and wildlife habitat mitigation measures recommended in the report of the Chief of Engineers. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such study and rexamination. LOCK HAVEN, PENNSYLVANIA

The project for flood control. Lock Haven, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 14, 1981, at a total cost of $82,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $61,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $20,500,000. The project shall be constructed to provide protection at least sufficient to prevent any future flood losses to the city of Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, from flooding equivalent to a level of flooding 50 percent greater than the level of flooding which occurred as a result of tropical storm Agnes in 1972. Notwithstanding section 104 of this Act, work carried out by non-Federal interests on such project after January 1, 1973, and before the date of the enactment of this Act shall be taken into account in analyzing the costs and benefits of the project and

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/650

 100 STAT. 4124

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

shall be credited against the non-Federal share of the cost of the project. SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, POTTSTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA I.

42 USC 1962-2.

ar-in- ' fV.J

The project for flood control and other purposes for Pottstown and vicinity, Schuylkill River Basin, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 7, 1974, House Document Numbered 93321, at a total cost of $5,540,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,180,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,360,000. The Congress hereby finds that the application of the provisions of section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 result in the benefits from flood control measures authorized by this paragraph exceeding their economic costs. SAW MILL RUN, PENNSYLVANIA

i'yi,("«*"

The project for flood control. Saw Mill Run, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated January 30, 1978, House Document Numbered 96-25, at a total cost of $7,850,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $5,890,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,960,000. WYOMING VALLEY, PENNSYLVANIA rtivis?

The project for flood control, Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October 19, 1983, at a total cost of $241,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $181,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $60,000,000. NONCONNAH CREEK AND JOHNS CREEK, TENNESSEE AND MISSISSIPPI

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control, Nonconnah Creek, Tennessee and Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 23, 1982, at a total cost of $28,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $19,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $8,500,000. The improvements for Johns Creek and tributaries shall be included as a separate part of the project and shall be constructed by the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, at a total cost of $34,700,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $26,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $8,700,000, in accordance with the recommendations of the State Conservationist as contained in the report, Nonconnah Creek and Tributaries, Tennessee and Mississippi, dated September 1981. The project shall include an evaluation of fish and wildlife losses which may result from construction of the project and such additional measures as the Secretary deems necessary and appropriate to mitigate such losses. The Secretary shall adopt and implement guidelines in connection with clearing and snagging as the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate to minimize adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat. HORN LAKE CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, TENNESSEE AND MISSISSIPPI

Fish and fishing. The project for flood control, Horn Lake Creek and Tributaries, Wildlife. including Cow Pen Creek, Tennessee and Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated January 4, 1983, at a total cost of $3,890,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,190,000, including such addi-

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/651

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4125

tional measures as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on fish and wildlife habitat. The Secretary shall (1) reexamine the adequacy and feasibility of the recommended measures for fish and wildlife habitat, and (2) reexamine upland dredged disposal alternatives. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such rexamination. The Secretary shall also adopt and implement such guidelines in connection with channel clearing and drift removal for the project as the Secretary, in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, determines are necessary and appropriate to minimize adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat. BOGGY CREEK, TEXAS

The project for flood control. Boggy Creek, Austin, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated January 19, 1981, and the Supplemental Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 13, 1986, at a total cost of $24,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $16,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $7,500,000. In applying section 104 to such project, the Secretary shall consider work carried out by non-Federal interests after September 30, 1979, and before the date of the enactment of this Act that otherwise meets the requirements of such section. BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TEXAS

The project for flood control, Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries (Upper White Oak Bayou), Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 13, 1978, House Document Numbered 96-182, at a total cost of $92,100,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $69,100,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $23,000,000. LAKE WICHITA, HOLUDAY CREEK, TEXAS

The project for flood control. Lake Wichita, Holliday Creek, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 9, 1979, at a total cost of $39,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $27,300,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $11,700,000. LOWER RIO GRANDE, TEXAS

The project for flood control. Lower Rio Grande Basin, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 13, 1986, at a total cost of $196,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $137,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $59,000,000. ^

SIMS BAYOU, TEXAS

The project for flood control, Sims Bayou, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 17, 1984, at a total cost of $126,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $94,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $31,300,000.

ArimFi br.** ii& • -M^bLW

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/652

 100 STAT. 4126

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 JAMES RIVER BASIN, VIRGINIA

The project for flood control, James River Basin, Richmond, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated November 16, 1981, at a total cost of $91,800,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $68,900,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $22,900,000. Such project shall include flood protection for the Richmond municipal wastewater treatment facility, as recommended in the report of the District Engineer, Norfolk District, dated September 1980. ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, VIRGINIA

The project for flood control, Roanoke River Upper Basin, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated August 5, 1985, at a total cost of $21,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $12,600,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $8,400,000. YAKIMA-UNION GAP, WASHINGTON

Fish and fishing. The project for flood control, Yakima-Union Gap, Washington: Wildlife. Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 7, 1980, at a total cost of $8,760,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $6,570,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $2,190,000, including such additional measures as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on fish and wildlife habitat. The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, shall review the probable effects of the project on fish and wildlife resources and the feasibility of including recreation as a project purpose. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such review. CHEHALIS RIVER, W A S H I N G TO N

- ''

•«. ^ •

."

The project for flood control, Chehalis River at South Aberdeen and Cosmopolis, Washington: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 8, 1977, House Document Numbered 96-27, at a total cost of $22,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $16,800,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $5,600,000. Before beginning the actual construction of the project, the Secretary shall perform additional studies relating to foundation materials in the project area and with regard to dredged spoil disposal sites and make such modifications as the Secretary determines appropriate. ^.^^ rv'im^' ^ii'V CENTRAUA, WASHINGTON

The project for flood control, Centralia-Chehalis Flood Damage Reduction Study, Chehalis River and Tributaries, Washington: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 20, 1984, at a total cost of $19,900,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $15,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $4,900,000. ISLAND CREEK BASIN, WEST VIRGINIA

'

'.^

The project for flood control. Island Creek Basin, in and round Logan, West Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers dated

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/653

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4127

April 25, 1986, at a total cost of $86,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $62,200,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $23,800,000. PORTAGE, WISCONSIN

The project for flood control, Wisconsin River at Portage, Wisconsin: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 20, 1985, at a total cost of $7,590,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $5,660,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,930,000. AGANA RIVER, GUAM

The project for flood control, Agana River, Guam: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 14, 1977, House Document Numbered 96-16, at a total cost of $4,880,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $3,860,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,020,000. ''

RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PUERTO RICO

The project for flood control, Rio Puerto Nuevo, Puerto Rico: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 25, 1986, at a total cost of $234,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $151,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $83,000,000. 01)) AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION SUBJECT TO FAVORABLE

REPORT.—The following projects are authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions recommended in the respective reports cited, with such modifications as are recommended by the Chief of Engineers and approved by the Secretary, and with such other modifications as ^re recommended by the Secretary. If no report is cited for a project, the project is authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary in accordance with a final report of the Chief of Engineers, and with such other modifications as are recommended by the Secretary, and no construction on such project may be initiated until such a report is issued and approved by the Secretary. GUADALUPE RIVER, SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA

Local flood control protection measures along the Guadalupe River in the vicinity of San Jose, California: Report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, dated June 29, 1986, at a total cost of $32,600,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $22,800,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $9,800,000. MEREDOSIA, ILUNOIS

Flood control works for the protection of Meredosia, Illinois, at a total cost of $80,000, with a Federal cost of $60,000 and a nonFederal cost of $20,000. Such project shall be carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948. Such project shall 33 USC 70ls. include, but not be limited to, a levee which is approximately onefifth of a mile long. For purposes of analyzing the costs and benefits of any project recommended by the Secretary as a result of any study on the Illinois River, authorized by resolution of the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate or the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives, the Secretary shall take into account the costs and benefits of any measures undertaken by the Secretary pursuant to

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/654

 100 STAT. 4128

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

this paragraph in the interest of preventing flood damages along the Illinois River in the vicinity of Meredosia, Illinois. MUSCATINE ISLAND, IOWA

Fish and fishing. The project for flood control, Muscatine Island Levee District and Wildlife. Muscatine-Louisa County Drainage District No. 13, Iowa: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 22, 1977, at a total cost of $14,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $10,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,900,000, including such modifications as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to minimize adverse effects of the project on Spring Lake and on fish and wildlife habitat. The Secretary shall reexamine the drainage system recommended in the report of the Chief of Engineers and the feasibility of obtaining material for the levee from upland rather than aquatic sources in order to minimize adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such rexamination. PEARL RIVER BASIN, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA

Structural and nonstructural measures to prevent flood damage to communities in the Pearl River Basin, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, at a total cost of $33,300,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $25,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $8,300,000. For purposes of analyzing the costs and benefits of any project recommended by the Secretary as a result of the study entitled Pearl River Basin, Mississippi and Louisiana, the Secretary shall take into account the costs and benefits of measures undertaken pursuant to this paragraph. WEST BANK HURRICANE PROTECTION LEVEE, JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUISIANA

Structural and nonstructural measures to prevent flood damage to those areEus identified in the February 1984 draft environmental impact statement for the West Bank Hurricane Protection Levee, Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, at a total cost of $61,500,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $40,000,000 and an estimated firs non-Federal cost of $21,500,000. Funds provided by non-Federa interests for interim hurricane protection may be considered beneficial expenditures and may be credited as part of the non-Federa contribution of the project pursuant to section 104 of this Act. ^.•? t, • x

grot 03V f

JAMES RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA

A project consisting of channel restoration and improvements on the James River in South Dakota, which may include consideration of offstream storage, small impoundments on tributaries, and other features identified by the Secretary to alleviate flood damage and to regulate flows on such river, at a total cost of $20,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $15,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $5,000,000. The Secretary is authorized to participate with appropriate non-Federal sponsors in the project to demonstrate, on an expedited basis, the feasibility of non-Federa.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/655

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4129

cost sharing for rural flood protection under the provisions of section 916 and title I of this Act and section 134 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976. The Secretary shall report to Congress no later than September 30, 1989, on the extent to which additional features may be required to alleviate flood damage and regulate flows on such river. (c) PRE-CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary is

au-

thorized to carry out planning, engineering, and design for the following projects: GOLD GULCH, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Flood damage prevention in the community of Gold Gulch, near Felton, Santa Cruz County, California, at a total cost of $800,000. CALLEGUAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA

Flood control works along the lower portion of Calleguas Creek, Conejo Creek to the Pacific Ocean, California, at a total cost of $2,000,000. COYOTE CREEK, CAUFORNIA

A project for local flood control protection measures along the lower portion of Coyote Creek adjacent to and in the vicinity of Alviso, California, at a total cost of $750,000. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY

Measures to correct flooding problems in the south end of Louisville, Kentucky, within an area bounded by New Cut Road west to the city limits and Palatka Road south to the city limits, at a total cost of $300,000. The Secretary is authorized to provide technical assistance to the city of Louisville, Kentucky, to assist such city in the correction of flooding caused by drainage problems in such city. LOUISIANA

A project to provide a level of protection sufficient to prevent recurring flood damages along the following rivers, at a total cost of $10,000,000: (1) Amite River, Louisiana; (2) Comite River, Louisiana; , (3) Tangipahoa River, Louisiana; lo fe (4) Tchefuncte River, Louisiana; (5) Tickfaw River, Louisiana; $ (6) Bogue Chitto River, Louisiana; and 3-1 i (7) Natalbany River, Louisiana; BAYOU RIGOLETTE, LOUISIANA

A project to construct six additional floodgates at Bayou Rigolette, Louisiana, adjacent to the existing drainage structure, at a total cost of $2,300,000. BROCKTON, MASSACHUSETTS

Flood control works for the protection of Brockton, Massachusetts, at a total cost of $1,500,000. The plans for such project shall include, but not be limited to, improvements to ponds in the D. W. Field Park area and the existing Brockton-Avon Reservoir to provide additional

90 Stat. 2928.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/656

 100 STAT. 4130

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

storage, improvements to the drainage system under E. B. Keith Field, new culverts, improvements to miscellaneous bridges and SSt;;: JB# oe utilities, and such other downstream improvements as the Secretary deems necessary. LAS VEGAS VALLEY AND TRIBUTARIES AREA, NEVADA

A comprehensive project for flood control in the Las Vegas Valley and tributaries area, Nevada, at a total cost of $2,000,000. MANALAPAN TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY a,jt.,;

Local flood protection measures, including such channel widening and deepening and environmental measures as the Secretary and the Governor of the State of New Jersey may agree, to prevent flood damage to the residents of the Pine Brook section of Manalapan Township, New Jersey, substantially in accordance with the report of the Division Engineer, North Atlantic Division, entitled "Expanded Reconnaissance Report for Flood Control on Pine Brook, New Jersey, Manalapan, New Jersey", dated September 8, 1977, at a total cost of $400,000. PASSAIC RIVER BASIN, NEW JERSEY

" *

A project for flood damage protection and allied purposes in the Passaic River Basin, New Jersey and New York, at a total cost of $3,750,000, consisting of the following: (1) Upper Rockaway River Basin, New Jersey, at a total cost of $2,750,000. (2) Nakoma Brook Sloatsburg, New York, at a total cost of $500,000. (3) The project for flood protection in the Third River, Passaic • Basin, New Jersey, at a total cost of $500,000. MALHAUER AND HARNEY LAKES, OREGON

Structural and nonstructural measures to prevent flood damage resulting from rising lake levels at Malhauer and Harney Lakes, Oregon, at a total cost of $3,370,000. MILTON, PENNSYLVANIA

A flood control project at Milton, Pennsylvania, at a total cost of $2,500,000. (d) SECTION 205 PROJECTS.—The Secretary is authorized and directed to carry out the following projects under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s): SAN FRANCISCO RIVER AT CUFTON, ARIZONA

A project for flood control on the San Francisco River at Clifton, Arizona, for the purpose of protecting residential and commercial properties on the east side of the river downstream of the State Highway 666 Bridge, at a total cost of $8,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,500,000. Such work shall be considered to complete all studies and proposals of the Secretary for such area.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/657

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4131

MISSION ZANJA CREEK, REDLANDS, CAUFORNIA

i f

-^S-

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, a project for flood control works along Mission Zanja Creek within the city of Redlands, California, in accordance with the plan developed by the District Engineer based on studies pursuant to section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948, at a total cost of $10,400,000, with an estimated 33 USC 70ls. first Federal cost of $4,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $5,900,000. ^

SALT AND EEL RIVERS, CAUFORNIA

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, such measures, including silt removal and channel modification, in the vicinity of the confluence of the Salt and Eel Rivers, California, as the Secretary determines necessary to prevent recurring floods along the Eel River and its tributaries, at a total cost of $800,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $600,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $200,000. MONROE AND WEST MONROE, LOUISIANA, AND OUACHITA PARISH, LOUISIANA

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, such structural and nonstructural measures as he deems feasible to prevent flood damage to the cities of Monroe and West Monroe, Louisiana, and Ouachita Parish, Louisiana. For purposes of analyzing the costs and benefits of any project recommended by the Secretary as a result of the study entitled Monroe-West Monroe Interim Study of the Ouachita Basin Study, Ouachita River Basin, Arkansas and Louisiana, the Secretary shall take into account the costs and benefits of measures undertaken pursuant to this subsection. NOYES, MINNESOTA

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the purchase of such land along Highway 75 in Minnesota as may be required for the construction of the International Levee segment of the Emerson, Manitoba flood control project and the upgrading of existing flood control levees in the vicinity of Noyes, Minnesota, at a total cost of $250,000. The Secretary is authorized to accept funds from a project cosponsor in connection with construction of such project and to include as part of the Federal share of project costs those costs which the Secretary determines are attributable to protection of Federal property, t

' J ^ f ^

(e) ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED PROJECTS.— (1) SALYERSVILLE, KENTUCKY.—Subject

to section 903(a) of this Act, the Secretary is authorized and directed to design and construct such flood control measures at or in the vicinity of Salyersville, Kentucky, on Licking River as the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate to afford the city of Salyersville, Kentucky, and its immediate environs a level of protection against flooding at least sufficient to prevent any future losses to such city from the likelihood of flooding such as occurred in December 1978, at a total cost of $7,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $5,250,000 and an estimated nonFederal cost of $1,750,000. With respect to such project. Congress finds that the benefits determined in accordance with

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/658

 100 STAT. 4132 42 USC 1962-2.

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 1970 and attributable to the flood measures authorized for such project exceed the cost of such mecisures. (2) POPLAR BROOK, NEW JERSEY.—Subject to section 903(a) of

.; Hvnaj 1 ?

this Act, the Secretary is authorized to construct a project for flood control for Poplar Brook, New Jersey, including reconstruction of the brook through the Borough of Deal, New Jersey, to accommodate the runoff from a storm having an average frequency of occurrence of once every 15 years, replacement of the culvert through the Conrail railroad embankment with a new culvert designed to pass a maximum flow equivalent to the peak flow from a storm having an average frequency of occurrence of once every 15 years, use of the area upstream of the embankment as an on-stream detention basin, and gabion or other lining as determined appropriate by the Secretary, at a total cost of $2,300,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $1,725,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $575,000. (3) PEARL RIVER BASIN, INCLUDING SHOCCOE, MISSISSIPPI.—The

Secretary is authorized to construct a project for the purpose of providing flood control for the Pearl River Basin in Mississippi, including, but not limited to, Carthage, Jackson, Monticello, and Columbia, Mississippi, consisting of— „^ (A) the project for flood control. Pearl River Basin, Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 17, 1986, at a total cost of $80,100,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $56,070,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $24,030,000; and (B) for the purpose of providing flood control for the upstream areas of the Pearl River Basin in Mississippi— i ST irf<i * ^^^ ^ combination roadway crossing of the Pearl River urf<5 4.; t ^ ^ j floodwater detention and storage facility in east central Leake County, Mississippi; (ii) a levee system in the south part of Carthage, Mississippi, which will upgrade, extend, and improve 1, »;^f „•,. V the protective levee system on the south side of Highway 16 in Leake County and the city of Carthage; (iii) appropriate drainage structure and bridge modifications to expand and improve the stormwater conduits under Mississippi Highway 35, south of Carthage, Mississippi, for the purposes of reducing backwater influence for areas upstream of such highway; (iv) upstream reservoirs on the Pearl River; (v) such other structures as may be necessary to alleviate unforeseen flooding in the Leake County area as a result of the construction of the Shoccoe Dry Dam; mdi I© vv and ^ (vi) channel improvements on the upstream Pearl River. • For purposes of analyzing the costs and benefits of those por"!,) tions of the project described in subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall take into account the costs and benefits of that portion of the project described in subparagraph (A). (4) GREAT SALT LAKE, UTAH.—Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the Secretary is authorized to construct the Newfoundland and Bonneville Dikes located along the west side of the Great Salt Lake, Utah, at a total cost of $7,500,000, with an estimated
 * .,v first Federal cost of $5,250,000 and an estimated first non-

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/659

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

.

100 STAT. 4133

Federal cost of $1,750,000. The non-Federal share of the cost of the project authorized by this section shall be 25 percent. (5) TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS.—The Secretary is authorized and directed to develop detailed plans and specifications and to construct measures in Tarrant County, Texas, to eliminate flood damage in the historical stockyards along Tony's Creek and Marine Creek, at a total cost of $20,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $15,000,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $5,000,000. The non-Federal share of the cost of the project authorized by this section shall be 25 percent.

SEC. 402. COMPLIANCE WITH FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT AND INSURANCE PROGRAMS.

33 USC 701b-12.

Before construction of any project for local flood protection, the non-Federal interests shall agree to participate in and comply with applicable Federal flood plain management and flood insurance programs. SEC. 403. GROUNDWATER INDUCED DAMAGES.

Section 2 of the Act entitled "An Act authorizing the construction of certain public works on rivers and harbors for flood control, and for other purposes", approved December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 889; 33 U.S.C. 701a-l), is amended by inserting after "drainage improvements" the following: "and flood prevention improvements for protection from groundwater-induced damages". TITLE V—SHORELINE PROTECTION

,:

ts

SEC. 501. AUTHORIZATION OF PROJECTS.

Reports.

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION.—The following works of improvement for the benefit of shoreline protection are adopted and authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions recommended in the respective reports designated in this subsection, except as otherwise provided in this subsection. Construction of the projects authorized in this title shall be subject to determinations of the Secretary, after consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, that the construction will be in compliance with the Coastal Barrier 16 USC 3501 Resources Act (Public Law 97-348). note.

PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FLORIDA

The project for shoreline protection, Panama City Beaches, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 8, 1977, House Document Numbered 96-65, at a total cost of $48,500,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $22,800,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $25,700,000. ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA

The project for shoreline protection, St. Johns County, Florida: Wildlife. Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 26, 1980, at a total cost of $18,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $11,100,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $7,100,000. To the maximum extent feasible, the Secretary shall construct such project so as to avoid adverse effects on sea turtle nesting.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/660

 100 STAT. 4134

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA

The project for shoreline protection, Charlotte County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 2, 1982, at a total cost of $3,950,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,220,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,730,000. To the maximum extent feasible, the Secretary shall construct such project so as to minimize the harm to marine borrow areas and reefs. ''^ *

Wildlife. j»T f K K

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA

"

^

>

The project for shoreline protection, Indian River County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 21, 1981, House Document Numbered 98-154, at a total cost of $11,100,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $6,800,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $4,300,000. To the maximum extent feasible, the Secretary shall construct such project so as to avoid adverse effects on sea turtle nesting. DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

' ''^v ^

jt

/

The project for shoreline protection, Dade County, north of Haulover Beach Park, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 27, 1983, at a total cost of $21,600,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $12,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $9,600,000. To the maximum extent feasible, the Secretary shall construct the project so as to minimize adverse effects on coral reefs. ?:h':-aiaH

Il3fi J3IJ

MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA

The project for shoreline protection, Monroe County, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 22, 1984, at a total cost of $7,420,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,150,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,270,000, including such modifications as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to minimize the adverse effects of construction, operation, and maintenance of the project (other than the portion of the project consisting of Smathers Beach) on the seagrass community in the project area. The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, shall study the effects that construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project (other than the portion of the project consisting of Smathers Beach) may have on the seagrass community in the project area. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the results of such study. SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA

The project for shoreline protection, Sarasota County Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 28, 1986, at a total cost of $30,100,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $17,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $12,700,000.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/661

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 f,, ^

,,.,

100 STAT. 4135

CASINO BEACH, CHICAGO, ILUNOIS

The project for shoreline protection, Interim II, Casino Beach, Chicago, Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 26, 1984, at a total cost of $5,480,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,880,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $2,600,000. INDIANA SHOREUNE, INDIANA

The project for shoreline protection, Indiana Shoreline Erosion, Indiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated November 18, 1983, at a total cost of $20,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $15,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $5,000,000. f

ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND (OCEAN CITY)

The project for shoreline protection, Atlantic Coast of Maryland and Assateague Island, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 29, 1981, at a total cost of $58,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $26,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $31,500,000. ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NEW YORK

The project for shoreline protection, Atlantic Coast of New York City from Rockaway Inlet to Norton Point: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 18, 1976, House Document Numbered 9623, including beach fill up to 250 feet beyond the historical shoreline as described in the report of the District Engineer, New York District, dated August 1973, at a total cost of $22,500,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $11,900,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $10,600,000. The non-Federal share of the cost of construction and nourishment of the additional beach fill shall be 50 percent. HEREFORD INLET TO CAPE MAY CANAL, DELAWARE BAY, NEW JERSEY

The projects for beach erosion control, navigation, and storm protection, Hereford Inlet to Cape May Canal, Delaware Bay, New Jersey: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 30, 1975, House Document Numbered 94-641, at a total cost of $177,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $104,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $73,000,000. The beach erosion, navigation, and storm protection features of the project may be constructed separately or in combination with any other features of the project. WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NORTH CAROUNA

The project for shore and hurricane wave protection, Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 19, 1983, at a total cost of $9,120,000, with a Federal cost of $5,470,000 and a non-Federal cost of $3,650,000, including periodic beach nourishment of Figure Eight Island. MAUMEE BAY, LAKE ERIE, OHIO

The project for shoreline protection for the southeast shore of Maumee Bay State Park, Ohio: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 9, 1984, at a total cost of $15,900,000, with an estimated

Virginia.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/662

 100 STAT. 4136

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

first Federal cost of $7,950,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $7,950,000. PRESQUE ISLE PENINSULA, ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA

The project for shoreline protection, Presque Isle Peninsula, Erie, Pennsylvania: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October 2, 1981, at a total cost of $34,800,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $18,900,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $15,900,000. FOLLY BEACH, SOUTH CAROUNA

' •" '

The project for shoreline protection. Folly Beach, South Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 17, 1981, at a total cost of $7,040,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $3,870,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,170,000. WILLOUGHBY SPIT, VIRGINIA

The project for shoreline protection, Willoughby Spit and Vicinity, Norfolk, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 17, 1984, at a total cost of $5,690,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,250,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,440,000. VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA

The project for beach erosion control and hurricane protection, Virginia Beach, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 22, 1985, at a total cost of $42,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $27,600,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $14,800,000. (b)

AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION SUBJECT TO FAVORABLE

REPORT.—The following projects are authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions recommended in the respective reports cited, with such modifications as are recommended by the Chief of Engineers and approved by the Secretary, and with such other modifications as are recommended by the Secretary. If no report is cited for a project, the project is authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary in accordance with a final report of the Chief of Engineers, and with such modifications as are recommended by the Secretary, and no construction on such project may be initiated until such a report is issued and approved by the Secretary. PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA

The project for beach erosion control for Pinellas County, Florida: Report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, dated April 23, 1985, at a total cost of $52,600,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $32,700,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $19,900,000. ....._.,..,„ ILLINOIS BEACH STATE PARK, ILUNOIS

The project for shoreline protection, Illinois Beach State Park, Illinois described as alternative 3A in Interim Report 1, IllinoisWisconsin Stateline to Waukegan of the District Engineer, Chicago District, dated June 1982, at a total cost of $13,400,000, with an

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/663

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4137

estimated first Federal cost of $9,390,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $4,010,000. jfiibii

COCONUT POINT, TUTUILA ISLAND, AMERICAN SAMOA

The project for shore protection at Coconut Point, Tutuila Island, American Samoa, including a 3,600-foot long rock revetment to protect communal lands and public facilities, at a total cost of $2,810,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,030,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $780,000. (c)

PRECONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION.—The

Secretary

is

au-

thorized to carry out planning, engineering, and design for projects for shoreline erosion control at the following communities in New Jersey: Fort Elsinboro, Sea Breeze, Gandys Beach, Reeds Beach, Pierces Point, and Fortescue, at a total cost of $1,000,000. (d) SECTION 103 PROJECTS.—The Secretary is authorized to carry out the following project under section 103 of the River and Harbor
 * Act of 1962.

76 Stat. 1178.

ORCHARD BEACH, N E W YORK

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the project for beach erosion control. Orchard Beach, New York: Draft Report of the District Engineer, New York District, dated July 1985, at a total cost of $2,480,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $1,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,480,000. (e) TANGIER ISLAND, VIRGINIA.—Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the Secretary is authorized and directed to design and construct an erosion control structure approximately 8,200 feet in length on the western shore of Tangier Island, Virginia, adequate to protect such island from further erosion, at a total cost of $3,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,080,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,120,000. Such project shall be carried out on an emergency basis, in view of the national, historic, and cultural value of the island and in order to protect the Federal investment in public facilities. Cost sharing applicable to hurricane and storm damage reduction shall apply to the project under this subsection. I SEC. 502. WESTHAMPTON BEACH, NEW YORK.

I The Secretary shall apply the cost sharing provisions of section . 31(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-251) to periodic nourishment of the continuing construction 88 Stat. 21. project at Westhampton Beach, New York, for a period of 20 years after the date of enactment of this Act. TITLE VI—WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT SEC. 601. AUTHORIZATION OF PROJECTS.

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION.—The following works of s improvement for water resources development and conservation and b for other purposes are adopted and authorized to be prosecuted by i the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions recommended in the respective reports designated in this subsection, except as otherwise provided in this subsection:

Reports.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/664

 100 STAT. 4138

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI

Wildlife.

•BTf f

Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Wildlife Mitigation, Alabama and Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 31, 1985, at a total cost of $60,200,000. The Secretary is authorized to acquire from willing sellers in a timely manner at fair market value 88,000 acres of land for mitigation of wildlife losses resulting from construction and operation of the project for the TennesseeTombigbee Waterway, Alabama and Mississippi. Such lands shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, lands currently owned by the United States in the project area which are designated as wildlife mitigation lands for such project. Of the lands acquired under this section, not less than 20,000 acres shall be acquired in the area of the Mobile-Tensaw River delta, Alabama, and not less than 25,000 acres shall be acquired in the areas of the Pascagoula River, the Pearl River, and the Mississippi River delta, Mississippi. Other lands acquired under this section may be acquired anywhere in the States of Alabama and Mississippi. The Secretary shall select lands to be acquired under this section in consultation with appropriate State and Federal officials. Emphasis shall be placed on acquisition of lands which are predominantly flood plain forest, except that the 34,000 acres of bottomland hardwood lost as a result of the construction of the navigation project shall be replaced in-kind. The States of Alabama and Mississippi shall provide for the management for wildlife purposes of lands acquired under this section and lands currently owned by the United States in the project area which are designated as wildlife mitigation lands for such project. Subject to such amounts as are provided in appropriation Acts, the Secretary shall reimburse such States for such management and initial development costs as specified in a plan for management of mitigation lands to be developed by the Secretary, the United States Fish and BETHEL BANK STABIUZATION, ALASKA
 * Wildlife Service, and the States of Alabama and Mississippi.

The project for bank stabilization. Bethel, Alaska: Report of the Chief of the Engineers, dated July 30, 1983, at a total cost of $19,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $14,600,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $4,800,000, including such modifications as may be necessary to accommodate related work ''' undertaken and carried out by non-Federal interests. SCAMMON BAY, ALASKA

Vi. -^ S"^.

';M

-.- V

Scammon Bay, Alaska (hydropower): Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 9, 1983, at a total cost of $1,700,000, with a first Federal cost of $1,700,000. ,83-i:;

^^ „!.,,.„. ^..,:

SOUTH CENTRAL RAILBELT AREA, ALASKA

^ South Central Railbelt Area, Alaska, hydroelectric power, Valdez ' and Copper River Basin: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated ' October 29, 1982, at a total cost of $45,000,000, with a first Federal • cost of $45,000,000.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/665

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4139

HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, ARKANSAS

The project for navigation, Helena Harbor, Phillips County, Arkansas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October 17, 1980, including such modifications as the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on fish and wildlife habitat, at a total cost of $59,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $35,800,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $23,200,000. The Secretary, in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, shall evaluate the adequacy of the recommended measures for mitigation of losses of wildlife habitat. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such evaluation.

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, ARKANSAS

(1) The project for navigation, White River Navigation to Fish and fishing. Batesville, Arkansas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 23, 1981, at a total cost of $29,300,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $20,500,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $8,800,000, except that the project shall include 1,865 acres of habitat mitigation lands. The project shall include modifications (A) for additional measures which the Secretary determines to be necessary > '" and appropriate to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on the Fat Pocketbook Pearly Mussel, and (B) for weirs in tributary areas which the Secretary determines to be necessary and appropriate to benefit aquatic habitat. The Secretary shall deposit no spoil from such project onto lands of the White River National Wildlife Refuge without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and without mitigating fully the adverse impacts of such spoil. The Secretary, in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, shall evsduate the effect of the project on the Fat Pocketbook Pearly Mussel. The Secretary, in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, shall also evaluate the feasibility of including weirs in tributary areas to benefit aquatic habitat and is authorized to include them as he determines appropriate. Not later than one year after the date of ' '] enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such evaluations. Nothing in this paragraph or such report shall be construed to affect the requirements of Public Law 89-669, as amended. 80 Stat. 1073. SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION, CALIFORNIA
 * n c.nf si-i

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Sacramento River Bank Protection Project, California: Reports of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 1, 1981, at a total cost of $1,410,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $890,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $520,000. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR (MILL COVE), FLORIDA

The project for navigation, Jacksonville Harbor, Mill Cove, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 12, 1982, at a

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/666

 100 STAT. 4140

 * ig,sii1r?!

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

total cost of $4,000,000, with a first Federal cost of $4,000,000, including such modifications as the Secretary considers necessary and appropriate to assure that adequate dredged material disposal areas are available for construction, operation, and maintenance of the project. The Secretary, in consultation with the State of Florida, shall study the adequacy of available dredged material disposal areas for construction, operation, and maintenance of the project and the potential of such disposal areas for recreational development. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the results of such study. fiOIfp 10 trCK

.^mdBxi '>fi£>

PORT CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLORIDA

l^i

•

0

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses at the Port Canaveral West Turning Basin Project, Florida: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October 1985 at a total cost of $276,000, with estimated first Federal cost of $126,000 and an estimated first nonFederal cost of $150,000. RICHARD B. RUSSELL DAM A N D LAKE, GEORGIA A N D SOUTH CAROLINA

Fish and fishing. The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses at Richard B. Wildlife. Russell Dam and Lake Project, Savannah River, Georgia and South Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 11, 1982, House Document Numbered 97-244, at a total cost of $20,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $20,150,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $50,000, including utilization for purposes of fish and wildlife habitat mitigation of such Federal lands as may be identified by the Secretary. The Secretary and the State of South Carolina, in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, shall identify those Federal lands at Clarks Hill Lake to be utilized for purposes of fish and wildlife habitat mitigation. METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA, GEORGIA

Dams. Fish and fishing.

.8VCf

62 Stat. 1155.

-f

The project for construction of a reregulating dam for water supply purposes on the Chattahoochee River downstream of Buford Dam, Georgia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 1982, at a total cost of $28,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $7,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $21,000,000, including such additional measures as may be recommended or warranted by the General Design Memorandum and supplemental environmental impact statement approved under this paragraph. Before construction of the reregulation dam is initiated, the results of the Corps of Engineers' General Design Memorandum and supplemental environmental impact statement resulting from the continued planning and engineering studies must show that— (1) the quality and quantity of water delivery to the State DSii trout hatchery is maintained or improved and the hatchery can continue to operate satisfactorily; (2) all water quality standards under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and corresponding State law for the . Chattahoochee River will be met, or, if such standards are not -VM currently being met, neither the degree nor the frequency of ® ^^ violation will be increased;

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/667

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4141

(3) the design, construction, and operation of the reregulation project will facilitate and be compatible with downstream recreation, fisheries, and fisheries management and will include such measures as may be necessary to mitigate adverse effects of the project on turbidity, water temperature, and other water quality parameters, and water flow regimes; (4) the project analysis evaluated the impact of the reregulation dam on— (A) instream flows below the proposed dam for the current situation and proposed dam operation plans, under 'j various hydrologic conditions and several demand rates; r (B) recreational use within the Chattahoochee River NaP tional Recreation Area, within the river corridor, and on the river itself; and (C) economic issues. Before construction of the reregulation dam is initiated, a generax design memorandum and a supplemental environmental impact statement based on the continued planning and engineering studies shall be prepared and jointly approved by the Secretary and the Governor of Georgia. The authorization, design, construction, and operation of the reregulation dam by the Secretary or any other Federal or State body or agency must be in compliance with all applicable existing laws and with this paragraph without waiver of any conditions, requirements, or provisions contained therein. The reregulation dam may be constructed by the State of Georgia or its subdivisions at local cost.

.;„ - ;

'il

DAVENPORT, IOWA (NAHANT MARSH)

The Davenport, Iowa Local Protection Project—Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 9, 1979, House Document Numbered 97-218, at a total cost of $517,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $388,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $129,000. r

- ; n lii eifiijIiW

OBION CREEK, KENTUCKY

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. West Ken- Fish and fishing, tucky Tributaries Project, Obion Creek, Kentucky: Report of the Wildlife. Chief of Engineers, dated September 16, 1980, at a total cost of $4,900,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $4,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $900,000, except that (1) the Secretary, in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, shall acquire and preserve not less than 6,000 nor more than 9,000 acres of woodland for mitigation of project-induced woodland and wetland habitat losses, and (2) the land for mitigation of damages to fish and wildlife shall be acquired as soon as possible from available funds, including the Environmental Protection and Mitigation Fund established by section 908 of this Act. Nothing in this paragraph affects the authority of the Secretary to carry out a project under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 701s), in lieu of the West Kentucky Tributaries Project, Obion Creek.
 * If such a project is carried out under section 205, the Secretary need

only implement measures to mitigate fish and wildlife damages which are attributable to the project undertaken under section 205.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/668

 100 STAT. 4142

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN NORTH SHORE, LOUISIANA

The project for navigation, Lake Pontchartrain North Shore, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 14, 1979, at a total cost of $1,310,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $655,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $655,000. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LOUISIANA Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control, Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 28, 1983, at a total cost of $250,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $223,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $27,000,000: Provided, That fish and wildlife enhancement benefits provided by this project shall be considered to be national for the purposes of section 906 of this Act. RED RIVER WATERWAY, LOUISIANA

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. Red River Waterway, Louisiana: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 28, 1984, at a total cost of $9,420,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $8,860,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $560,000, except that the land the Secretary may purchase for such project may include all or such portion of any land referred to in the report or all or such portion of any land adjacent to the Loggy Bayou Wildlife Management Area in Bossier Parish, Louisiana, which the Secretary determines is appropriate. ^/^ hf

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

Arkansas.

YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MISSISSIPPI

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses at the Yazoo Backwater Project, Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 12, 1984, at a total cost of $17,700,000 with a first Federal cost of $17,700,000. The project shall include acquisition of 40,000 acres for mitigation of project-induced fish and wildlife losses as recommended in the report of the District Engineer, Vicksburg District, dated July 1982. The Secretary may acquire a portion of such 40,000 acres from willing sellers in the State of Arkansas, after consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Governors of the States of Mississippi and Arkansas. GREENVILLE HARBOR, MISSISSIPPI

The project for navigation, Greenville Harbor, Mississippi: Reports of the Chief of Engineers, dated November 15, 1977, and February 22, 1982, at a total cost of $43,700,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $28,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $15,700,000. VICKSBURG HARBOR, MISSISSIPPI

The project for navigation, Vicksburg Harbor, Mississippi: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 13, 1979, at a total cost of $79,200,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $55,900,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $23,300,000.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/669

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4143

HARRY S TRUMAN DAM A N D RESERVOIR, MISSOURI

The project for modification of the Harry S Truman Dam and Reservoir Project, Missouri: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 21, 1981, at a total cost of $2,100,000, with a first Federal cost of $2,100,000. The Secretary, in consultation with the State of Missouri and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, shall acquire lands, or designate project joint-use lands, for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses in addition to those lands recommended for such purposes by such report; except that the total acreage of all mitigation lands shall not exceed 1,000 acres. j

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

jisicj

i't

TRIMBLE W I L D U F E AREA, SMITHVILLE LAKE, LITTLE PLATTE RIVER, MISSOURI

The project for replacement of the Trimble Wildlife Area, Smithville Lake, Little Platte River, Missouri: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated September 22, 1977, at a total cost of $1,570,000, with a first Federal cost of $1,570,000, except that the Secretary shall participate with the State of Missouri in the development of wildlife management measures and facilities on State lands rather than the acquisition of lands and the development of Jackass Bend.

Wildlife.

ST. LOUIS HARBOR, MISSOURI A N D ILLINOIS

The project for navigation, St. Louis Harbor, Missouri and Illinois: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 30, 1984, at a total cost of $31,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $10,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $20,600,000.

Yni'^raSf

MISSOURI RIVER MITIGATION, MISSOURI, KANSAS, IOWA, A N D NEBRASKA

The project for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 24, 1984, at a total cost of $51,900,000, with a first Federal cost of $51,900,000. The Secretary shall study the need for additional measures for mitigation of losses of aquatic and terrestrial habitat caused by such project and shall report to Congress, within three years after the date of enactment of this Act, on the results of such study and any recommendations for additional measures needed for mitigation of such losses.

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

OLCOTT HARBOR, N E W YORK

The project for navigation, Olcott Harbor, New York: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 11, 1980, at a total cost of $12,600,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $6,300,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $6,300,000. The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, shall conduct additional studies of the effects of the project on fish and wildlife resources. The Secretary is authorized to undertake any additional measures which he determines necessary and appropriate to minimize any adverse effects of the project on fish and wildlife production and habitat.

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/670

 100 STAT. 4144

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGES, NORTH C A R O U N A

!^,Tfrfai] ";;: ' )t='b i

84 Stat. 1818.

"^h® project for replacement of Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Bridges, North Carolina: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October 1, 1975, House Document Numbered 94-597, at a total cost of $9,100,000, with a first Federal cost of $9,100,000, which shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any amounts authorized to be appropriated for such project under section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1970. MUDDY BOGGY CREEK, PARKER LAKE, OKLAHOMA

.•sftflb'

The project for flood control and water supply, Parker Lake, Muddy Boggy Creek, Oklahoma: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 30, 1980, at a total cost of $46,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $3,410,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $42,590,000. ^ ^ FORT GIBSON LAKE, OKLAHOMA

The project for Fort Gibson Lake, Oklahoma: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 16, 1984, at a total cost of $24,600,000, with a first Federal cost of $24,600,000. ,,., imiliiJ.ps itii BLUE RIVER LAKE, OREGON Energy.

.Hiiirigl* ttna

Blue River Lake, hydroelectric power, Willamette River Basin, Oregon: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated August 9, 1983, at a total cost of $30,700,000, with a first Federal cost of $30,700,000. The authorization under this paragraph shall not preclude development of hydroelectric power by a non-Federal interest if, within three years of the date of enactment of this Act, such non-Federal interest obtains a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for non-Federal development of hydroelectric power at the Blue River Lake project. BIG RIVER RESERVOIR, RHODE ISLAND

Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

The project for flood control. Big River Reservoir, Rhode Island: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 9, 1983, at a total cost of $86,700,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $8,360,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $78,340,000, including the acquisition of such additional lands as determined by the Secretary to be necessary and appropriate for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, shall reevaluate the acquisition of mitigation lands recommended in the report of the Chief of Engineers for purposes of determining the need for additional lands for mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the results of such reevaluation. GREGORY COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA

Gregory County hydroelectric pumped storage facility, stages I and II, South Dakota: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated April 26, 1983, together with such additional associated multipur-

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/671

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4145

pose water supply and irrigation features as are generally described in the final feasibility report of the District Engineer, at a total cost of $1,390,000,000, with a first Federal cost of $1,390,000,000, not to exceed $100,000,000 of which may be used to construct such associated water supply and irrigation features: Provided, That the additional associated multipurpose water supply and irrigation features shall be undertaken concurrently by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with the Federal reclamation laws (Act of June 17, 1902, 32 Stat. 388, and Acts amendatory thereof and supplemental thereto), as a unit of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program: Provided further, That the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to undertake a feasibility study of the additional associated multipurpose water supply and irrigation features of the Gregory County hydroelectric pumped storage facility and that construction of the Gregory County hydroelectric pumped storage facility and such additional associated multipurpose water supply and irrigation features shall not be undertaken until the Secretary of the Interior has completed the feasibility report on such additional features and submitted such report to the Congress along with his certification that, in his judgment, the benefits of such features will exceed the costs and that such additional features are physically and financially feasible, and the Congress has authorized the appropriation of funds for the construction thereof. MEMPHIS HARBOR, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE

The project for navigation, Memphis Harbor, Memphis, Tennessee: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 25, 1981, at a total cost of $110,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $38,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $71,600,000, including acquisition of such additional lands for mitigation of losses of bottomland hardwood habitat as may be recommended by the Secretary and including such additional measures which the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate to prevent adverse effects on water quality. The Secretary shall reevaluate, in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, the need for mitigation of project-induced losses of bottomland hardwood habitat. The Secretary, in consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, shall conduct further studies of the quality of the water in the project area and the need for measures to prevent adverse effects on the quality of the water. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report of such reevaluation and study. COOPER LAKE AND CHANNELS, TEXAS

The project for the mitigation of fish and wildlife resource losses, Cooper Lake and Channels, Texas: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated May 21, 1982, at a total cost of $14,800,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $8,160,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $6,640,000. ,1--...

HAMPTON ROADS DEBRIS REMOVAL, VIRGINIA

The project for the removal of debris from Hampton Roads and Vicinity, Virginia: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated October

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/672

 100 STAT. 4146

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

19, 1983, at a total cost of $7,030,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,330,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $4,700,000. MC NARY LOCK AND DAM, WASHINGTON AND OREGON

The project for McNary Lock and Dam, Second Powerhouse, Columbia River, Washington and Oregon, Phase I, General Design Memorandum: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 24, 1981, at a total cost of $667,000,000, with a first Federal cost of $667,000,000. CABIN CREEK, WEST VIRGINIA

That portion of the Cabin Creek, West Virginia, demonstration reclamation project providing for flood damage prevention measures: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated March 1, 1979, at a total cost of $6,800,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $3,400,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $3,400,000, including channel improvement for 10.5 miles on Cabin Creek, establishment of flood plain management guidelines, and supplemental flood proofing. The construction of such features shall be coordinated with any construction by other Federal agencies of other features described in such report under applicable Federal laws. (b)

AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION SUBJECT TO FAVORABLE

REPORT.—The following projects are authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary substantially in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions recommended in the respective reports cited, with such modifications as are recommended by the Chief of Engineers and approved by the Secretary, and with such other modifications as are recommended by the Secretary. If no report is cited for a project, the project is authorized to be prosecuted by the Secretary in accordance with a final report of the Chief of Engineers, and with such modifications as are recommended by the Secretary, and no construction on such project may be initiated until such a report is issued and approved by the Secretary. RILLITO RIVER, TUCSON, ARIZONA

The project for bank erosion control, Rillito River in the vicinity of Tucson, Arizona: Report of the Division Engineer, dated July 14, 1986, for the purpose of providing protection against the level of flooding that occurred in October 1983, at a total cost of $26,000,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $19,550,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $6,450,000. Section 104 of this Act shall apply to the project authorized by this paragraph. WAILUA FALLS, WAILUA RIVER, KAUAI, HAWAII

The project for hydroelectric power generation at Wailua Falls, Wailua River, Kauai, Hawaii, at a total cost of $13,500,000, with a first Federal cost of $13,500,000. YAZOO RIVER, MISSISSIPPI

- ' ^ - ,., »

-«: -.

A project to perform intermittent dredging and such other work as may be required on the Yazoo River in Mississippi, from Greenwood south, to remove natural shoals as they occur, at an annual

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/673

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4147

average cost of $200,000, so as to allow commerce to continue. Responsible local interests shall agree to (1) provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements, and rights-of-way required for dredging and disposal of dredged materials; (2) accomplish without cost to the United States such alterations, relocations, and rearrangement of facilities as required for dredging and disposal of dredged materials; and (3) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the dredging and disposal of dredged materials. ^

TRINITY RIVER, TEXAS

The project for the mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. Trinity Fish and fishing. River, Texas: Report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Wildlife. Harbors, dated October 4, 1982, at a total cost of $10,400,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $10,000,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $400,000. (c) PRE-CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary

is

au-

thorized to carry out planning, engineering, and design for the following projects: NEPONSET RIVER, MILTON TOWN LANDING TO PORT NORFOLK, MASSACHUSETTS

The project for dredging, Neponset River, Milton Town Landing to Port Norfolk, Massachusetts, including the disposal of the dredged material at sea, at a total cost of $450,000. MERRIMACK RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS •J

•

The project for navigation, Merrimack River, Massachusetts, consisting of (1) improvements along the Merrimack River from Lowell, Massachusetts, to Lawrence, Massachusetts (including a concrete weir running eeistward from the confluence of the Concord River and the Merrimack River parallel to the southern bank of the Merrimack River), (2) a lock at the end of the channel created by the weir, and (3) such other measures as the Secretary deems necessary in the interest of navigation, at a total cost of $800,000. In addition, the Secretary is authorized and directed to conduct necessary reconnaissance studies and feasibility studies on extending such project from Lawrence, Massachusetts, to Haverhill, Massachusetts, and from Haverhill, Massachusetts, to the mouth of the Merrimack River. BUFFALO HARBOR, N E W YORK

The project to replace the dike at the Small Boat Harbor, Buffalo Harbor, New York, at a total cost of $900,000. •'

'^

WHEEUNG CREEK WATERSHED, OHIO

The project to prevent or reduce flooding problems in the Wheeling Creek Watershed, Ohio, including control of erosion of coal mine areas to reduce deposition of sediments in Wheeling Creek, removal of sediment deposits in Wheeling Creek, and other measures deemed appropriate by the Secretary, in consultation with the Soil Conservation Service of the Department of Agriculture, the United States Geological Survey, the Office of Surface Mining of the Department of the Interior, the State of Ohio, and other appropriate Federal and non-Federal agencies.

^ si w ' «; cM ms^siy w?H

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/674

 100 STAT. 4148

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986 FIVE MILE CREEK, DALLAS, TEXAS

The project for flood protection along Five Mile Creek, Dallas, Texas, including dredging of a channel at the lower end of such creek and developing a retention structure at the upper end of such creek, at a total cost of $1,460,000. FOX RIVER CHANNEL, GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN

33 USC 577.

The project to deepen the Fox River Channel, Green Bay, Wisconsin, to a depth of twenty-seven feet, at a total cost of $3,460,000. (d) SECTION 107 PROJECTS.—The Secretary is authorized and directed to carry out the following projects under section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 1960: LARKSPUR FERRY CHANNEL, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the project to maintain the Larkspur Ferry Channel, Larkspur, California, at a depth sufficient for ferry boat service between Marin County and San Francisco, California, at a total cost of $3,340,000. SHELBURNE BAY, VERMONT

The project for navigation at LaPlatte River, Shelburne Bay, Vermont, at a total cost of $250,000. RUDEE INLET, VIRGINIA

The project for navigation and shoreline protection, Rudee Inlet, Virginia Beach, Virginia: Report of the Division Engineer, dated February 4, 1983, at a total cost of $1,270,000. AGAT SMALL BOAT HARBOR, GUAM

Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the project to construct the Agat small boat harbor in Guam, at a total cost of $4,040,000, with an estimated first Federal cost of $2,816,000 and an estimated first non-Federal cost of $1,224,000. SEC. 602. LAKES PROGRAM.

Minnesota. Indiana.

New Jersey. Minnesota.

New Jersey.

(a) Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the Secretary shall carry out programs for the removal of silt, aquatic growth, and other material in the following lakes: (1) Albert Lea Lake, Freeborn County, Minnesota, removal of silt and aquatic growth; (2) Lake George, Hobart, Indiana, and in that part of Deep River upstream of such lake through Lake Station, Indiana, removal of silt, aquatic growth, and other material and construction of silt traps or other devices to prevent and abate the deposit of sediment in Lake George and such part of Deep River; (3) Greenwood Lake and Belcher Creek, New Jersey, removal of silt and stamps; (4) Sauk Lake and its tributary streams in the vicinity of Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minnesota, removal of silt and aquatic growth; (5) Deal Lake, Monmouth County, New Jersey, removal of silt and stumps and the control of pollution from nonpoint sources;

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/675

 PUBLIC I AW 99-662-NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4149

" ^

(6) Lake Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, removal of silt and Texas. <- aquatic growth, including construction of silt traps and provid^' " ing other devices or equipment to prevent and abate the further deposit of sediment in Lake Worth; such project shall also provide for the use of dredged material from Lake Worth for the '- reclamation of despoiled land; (7) Hamlet City Lake, Hamlet, North Carolina, removal of North Carolina. "' accumulated silt and debris including construction of silt traps i and providing other devices or equipment to prevent and abate the further deposit of sediment in Hamlet City Lake; f ' (8) Lake Herman, Lake County, South Dakota, removal of South Dakota, excess silt; and ? (9) Gorton's Pond, Warwick, Rhode Island, mitigation activi- Rhode Island, ties recommended in the 1982 Environmental Protection Agency diagnostic feasibility study, including the installation of retention beisins, the dredging of inlets and outlets in recommended areas and the disposal of dredge material, and weed '^ harvesting and nutrient inactivation. (b) The non-Federal share of the cost of each project carried out under this section shall be 25 percent. (c) The Secretary shall report to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency the plans for and results of the program under subsection (a), together with such recommendations as the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the program for freshwater lakes under section 314 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 33 USC 1324. (d) There is authorized to be appropriated $40,000,000 for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1986, to carry out this section. Not more than $8,000,000 may be obligated for any project under .muunn subsection (a). SEC. 603. STREAMBANK EROSION CONTROL PROGRAM.

(a) Subject to section 903(a) of this Act, the Secretary is authorized to carry out a program to plan, design, and construct streambank erosion control projects listed in subsection (f) when, in the opinion of the Secretary, such work is economically justified and environmentally acceptable. Prior to construction of any projects for this purpose, non-Federal interests shall agree to provide, without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for construction and subsequent operation of the project; hold and save the United States free from damages due to construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, except damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors; and operate and maintain the project upon completion. The non-Federal share of the cost of each project carried out under this section shall be 25 percent. Lands, easements, and rights-of-way provided by nonFederal interests shall be credited to the non-Federal share. (b) For the purposes of this section, $30,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for each of the fiscal years 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991. Not more than $5,000,000 shall be allotted for the construction of a project under this section at any single locality and such amount shall be sufficient to complete Federal participation in the project. (c) The program of projects under this section shall— (1) identify streambank erosion measures likely to provide the < highest degree of protection technically and economically feasible for both high and low flow conditions;

.8t«</cf||iH a^afarra

jsntutrj hoc^f?

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/676

 100 STAT. 4150 Research and development.

Flood control. Fish and fishing. Wildlife.

Highways. Bridges.

Flood control.

PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

(2) conduct necessary research on the interaction of erodible boundaries with flowing water in order to more accurately predict the behavior and optimum design of protective works; (3) define and test optimum designs of bed slopes and grade s-i control structures for a wide range of soil and flow conditions; (4) develop, field test, and evaluate new erosion protection products or methods, including but not limited to earth or rockfilled grids, reinforced earth bulkheads, stabilized mattings for vegetation seeding, and patterned schemes using manufactured blocks in loose, matted, or interconnected configurations; to (5) develop and evaluate engineering techniques to control overbank drainage; and • 5ap; (6) identify and quantify economic losses occurring along rivers due to streambank erosion. (d) The Secretary shall report to Congress each year of the demonstration program under this section on work undertaken pursuant to such program. (e) For each project carried out under this section, the Secretary shall evaluate the environmental impacts of such project with respect to both riverine and adjacent land-use values, with the view of minimizing environmental losses. (f) The program authorized by this section shall be undertaken at the following locations: (1) LITTLE RIVER, ARKANSAS.—Little River in the vicinity of the Highway 41 bridge, Horatio, Arkansas, protection against streambank erosion. (2) SACRAMENTO RIVER, CAUFORNIA.—Sacramento River and its tributaries from Red Bluff to Shasta Dam, and from Chico Landing downstream along each bank to the head of the Sacramento River flood control project levees, construction of bank protection works, including mitigation of fish and wildlife losses induced by the project. (3) WABASH RIVER, ILUNOIS.—Wabash River at Grayville, Illinois, construction of a low-level weir across the cutoff channel to restore the river flow to its original channel and prevent streambank erosion and damage to public and private facilities. (4) RED LAKE RIVER, MINNESOTA.—Red Lake River, Minnesota, approximately one and one-half miles west of Gentilly, Minnesota, correction of erosion problems adequate to protect the nearby highway and bridge. (5) CANEY CREEK, MISSISSIPPI.—(A) Caney Creek in the vicinity of Jackson, Mississippi, between McDowell Road and Raymond Road, construction of such bank stabilization measures as the Secretary determines necessary for flood damage prevention and erosion control along approximately 3,000 feet of the creek. (B) The Secretary shall complete his study of flood and soil erosion problems along Caney Creek and its tributaries in the vicinity of Jackson, Mississippi. For purposes of analyzing cost and benefits of any project recommended by the Secretary as a result of such study, the Secretary shall take into account the cost and benefits of measures undertaken pursuant to subpara-£ i graph (A). (6) PLATTE RIVER, NEBRASKA.—(A) Sites on the Platte River and its tributaries in Nebraska, projects for flood control and SA^* streambank erosion prevention. The program shall have as its •tssi objectives the protection of property, environmental enhancement, and social well-being.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 100 Part 5.djvu/677

 PUBLIC LAW 99-662—NOV. 17, 1986

100 STAT. 4151

(B) Flood control projects carried out under this paragraph shall include projects for the construction, operation, and maintenance of flood damage reduction measures, including but not limited to bank protection and stabilization works, embankments, clearing, snagging, dredging, and all other appropriate flood control measures, and shall also include recreational facilities deemed appropriate by the Secretary. Such projects shall be carried out substantially in accordance with the plan of action of the Chief of Engineers, dated February 6, 1984, and ^: i; with the Platte River and Tributaries, Nebraska, study of 1978 and the Platte River Basin, Nebraska, Level B Study of 1976. (C) For each project under this paragraph, the Secretary shall Wildlife. evaluate the environmental impacts of such project with respect to both riverine and adjacent land-use values, with the view of enhancing wildlife and wildlife habitat as a major purpose coequal with all other purposes and objectives, and with the view of minimizing environmental losses. (D) Projects authorized by this paragraph shall be undertaken to reflect a variety of geographical and environmental conditions, including naturally occurring erosion problems and erosion caused or incurred by man-made structures or activities. At a minimum, projects shall be conducted at sites on— (i) that reach of the Platte River between Hershey, Nebraska, and the boundary between Lincoln and Dawson Counties, Nebraska; and (ii) that reach of the Platte River from the boundary between Colfax and Dodge Counties, Nebraska, to its confluence with the Missouri River and that portion of the Elkhorn River from the boundary between Antelope and Madison Counties, Nebraska, to its confluence with the Platte River. (E) The Secretary shall condition the construction, operation, and maintenance of any project under this paragraph upon the availability to the United States of such land and interests in land as he deems necessary to carry out such project and to protect and enhance the river in accordance with the purposes of this paragraph. Lands and interests in land for any project under this paragraph shall not be acquired without the consent of the owner, except that not to exceed five percent of the lands acquired for such a project may be acquired in less than fee title without the consent of the owner if determined necessary by the Secretary because of flooding or streambank erosion problems causing or threatening to cause serious damage in the Platte River Basin. (F) The Secretary shall establish a Platte River Advisory Group consisting of representatives of the State of Nebraska and political subdivisions thereof, affected Federal agencies, and such private organizations as the Secretary deems desirable. Projects under this paragraph shall be carried out in coordination and consultation with such Advisory Group. (7) ELM CREEK, DECATUR, NEBRASKA.—Elm Creek in the vicinity of Decatur, Nebraska, such emergency bank stabilization measures as are necessary to protect bridges. (8) PASSAIC RIVER, NEW JERSEY.—(A) East bank of the Passaic River, New Jersey, from Dundee Dam to Kearney Point, bank stabilization and development, operation, and maintenance of a recreation and greenbelt area on public properties on, and along

�