Sec. 204. Assistance to non-Federal sponsors; feasibility analysis

1,443 words·~7 min read·/bill/116/s/1811/eah/section-204

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Subject to the availability of appropriations, during the period during which a non-Federal interest may submit a proposal to be considered for inclusion in an annual report pursuant to section 7001(b) of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 ( 33 U.S.C. 2282d(b) ), the Secretary is authorized to provide assistance in accordance with section 1104(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2018 ( 33 U.S.C. 2282d note) to the non-Federal interest of a project proposal described in paragraph (2). A project proposal referred to in paragraph

(1)is a proposal for any of the following: A feasibility study for a fish passage for ecosystem restoration, Lower Alabama River, Alabama. A feasibility study for dredged material disposal management activities, Port of Florence, Alabama. A feasibility study for a project for flood risk management, Sikorsky Memorial Airport, Bridgeport, Connecticut. A feasibility study for a project to design and construct the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail, a multiuse trail on Federal land between Torrington and Derby, Connecticut. A feasibility study for a project for coastal and flood risk management, Stratford, Connecticut. A feasibility study for projects for flood risk management, Woodbridge, Connecticut. The project for flood risk management, Bloomington, Indiana. The project for flood risk management, Gary, Indiana. Modification of the project for beach erosion and hurricane protection, Grand Isle, Louisiana, to include periodic beach nourishment. A feasibility study for a project for flood risk management, Cataouatche Subbasin area of the west bank of Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. A feasibility study for projects for flood risk management and storm damage reduction in the Hoey’s Basin area of the east bank of Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, including a study of the pump to the river concept. A feasibility study for a project for flood risk management, Hoosic River, Massachusetts. Modification of the project for navigation, River Rouge, Michigan. A project to extend dredging of the South Haven Harbor, Michigan, to include the former turning basin. Modification of the project for flood risk management, Upper Rouge River, Wayne County, Michigan. A project for aquatic and riparian ecosystem restoration, Line Creek, Riverside, Missouri. A feasibility study for projects for ecosystem restoration, Bangert Island, St. Charles, Missouri, related to channels and aquatic habitats. A study of the resiliency of the Allegheny Reservoir, New York, in consultation with the Seneca Nation. A feasibility study for the rehabilitation of the tainter gates and guard gate, Caughdenoy Dam, New York, including an evaluation of the rehabilitation work necessary to extend the service life of those structures, such as— improvements to the hydraulic efficiency of the gate systems; improvements to the concrete foundation and gate support structures; and any other improvements the Secretary determines to be necessary. A project for repairs to the West Pier and West Barrier Bar, Little Sodus Bay Harbor, Cayuga County, New York. A project for repair of a sheet pile wall and east breakwater, Great Sodus Bay, New York. A feasibility study for the project for navigation, Port of Oswego, New York. A feasibility study for potential projects for the rehabilitation of the Glens Falls Feeder Canal, which begins at the Feeder Dam intersection with the Hudson River in Queensbury, New York, and runs to the confluence of the Old Champlain Canal in Kingsbury, New York. A feasibility study to determine whether the purchase of additional flood easements, changes in lake level management, additional levee infrastructure, or implementation of other flood risk management or containment mechanisms in the Arkansas River Basin, Oklahoma, would benefit local communities by reducing flood risks around water resources development projects of the Corps of Engineers in a range of different flood scenarios. A feasibility study on increasing the frequency and depth of dredging assistance from the Corps of Engineers at the Port of Astoria, located at the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon. Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary is authorized to review a project proposal described in paragraph

(2)and issue a report to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives on whether a modification to the project that is the subject of the proposal is necessary and recommended to carry out the authorized purposes of such project. A project proposal referred to in paragraph

(1)is a proposal to modify any of the following: The project for environmental infrastructure, City of Sheffield, Alabama, authorized pursuant to section 219(f)(78) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1258; 130 Stat. 1687). The project for environmental infrastructure, Calaveras County, California, under section 219(f)(86) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1259). The project for environmental infrastructure, Charlotte County, Florida, authorized by section 219(f)(121) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1261). The Mississippi River and Tributaries project authorized by the first section of the Act of May 15, 1928 ( 33 U.S.C. 702a ), to include the portion of the Ouachita River Levee System at and below Monroe, Louisiana, to Caldwell Parish, Louisiana. The project for environmental infrastructure, Central New Mexico, authorized by section 593 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 380; 119 Stat. 2255). The project for environmental infrastructure, Village of Whitehall, New York, authorized pursuant to section 542 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2671; 121 Stat. 1150). The project for environmental infrastructure, Ohio and North Dakota, authorized by section 594 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 383; 121 Stat. 1140; 121 Stat. 1944). The project for flood risk management and water supply, Tenkiller Ferry Lake, Arkansas River Basin, Oklahoma, authorized by section 4 of the Act of June 28, 1938 (chapter 795, 52 Stat. 1218), to modify water storage to provide for a sufficient quantity of water supply storage space in the inactive pool storage to support the fishery downstream from Tenkiller Reservoir. The project for environmental infrastructure, Athens, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(254) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Blaine, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(255) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Claiborne County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(256) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Giles County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(257) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Grainger County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(258) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Hamilton County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(259) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Harrogate, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(260) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Johnson County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(261) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Knoxville, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(262) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Lewis, Lawrence, and Wayne Counties, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(264) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1268). The project for environmental infrastructure, Nashville, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(263) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1267). The project for environmental infrastructure, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(265) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1268). The project for environmental infrastructure, Plateau Utility District, Morgan County, Tennessee, authorized by section 219(f)(266) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1268). The authorized funding level for critical restoration projects, Lake Champlain watershed, Vermont and New York, authorized by section 542 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2671; 121 Stat. 1150). The project for environmental infrastructure, Eastern Shore and Southwest Virginia, authorized by section 219(f)(10) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 113 Stat. 335; 121 Stat. 1255).

Connectionstraces to 3

Traces to 3 documents

U.S. Code

statutes-at-large