Amendment makes technical and clarifying revisions to the bill.

Page 7, strike lines 1 through 8.

Page 11, line 14, strike “and” at the end.

Page 11, line 16, strike the period at the end and insert “; and”.

Page 11, after line 16, insert the following:

(7) reducing the costs of dredging and dredged material placement or disposal, such as projects that use dredged material for--

(A) construction or fill material;

(B) civic improvement objectives; and

(C) other innovative uses and placement alternatives that produce public economic or environmental benefits.

Page 69, after line 17, insert the following:

SEC. __. COST SHARE REQUIREMENT.

The Secretary shall carry out the project for ecosystem restoration and recreation, Los Angeles River, California, as authorized by this Act, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions described in the Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated December 18, 2015, including, notwithstanding section 2008(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1074), the recommended cost sharing.

SEC. __. PUBLIC ACCESS.

(a) Recreational Access Permitted.--The Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority may approve and allow the construction and use of a floating cabin on waters under the jurisdiction of the Tennessee Valley Authority if--

(1) the floating cabin is maintained by the owner to reasonable health, safety, and environmental standards, as required by the Board of Directors; and

(2) the Tennessee Valley Authority has authorized the use of recreational vessels on such waters.

(b) Fees.--The Board of Directors may levy fees on the owner of a floating cabin on waters under the jurisdiction of the Tennessee Valley Authority for purposes of ensuring compliance with subsection (a), so long as such fees are necessary and reasonable for such purposes.

(c) Continued Recreational Use.--With respect to a floating cabin located on waters under the jurisdiction of the Tennessee Valley Authority on the date of enactment of this Act, the Board of Directors--

(1) may not require the removal of such floating cabin--

(A) in the case of a floating cabin that was granted a permit by the Tennessee Valley Authority before the date of enactment of this Act, for a period of 15 years beginning on such date; and

(B) in the case of a floating cabin not granted a permit by the Tennessee Valley Authority before the date of enactment of this Act, for a period of 5 years beginning on such date; and

(2) shall approve and allow the use of the floating cabin on waters under the jurisdiction of the Tennessee Valley Authority at such time, and for such duration, as the floating cabin meets the requirements of subsection (a) and the owner of such cabin has paid any fee levied pursuant to subsection (b).

(d) New Construction.--The Tennessee Valley Authority may establish regulations to prevent the construction of new floating cabins.

(e) Floating Cabin Defined.--In this section, the term “floating cabin” means every description of watercraft or other floating structure primarily designed and used for human habitation or occupation and not primarily designed or used for navigation or transportation on water.

(f) Savings Provision.--Nothing in this section restricts the ability of the Tennessee Valley Authority to enforce reasonable health, safety, or environmental standards.

SEC. __. TRIBAL DISPLACEMENT.

(a) In General.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study related to any remaining Federal obligations to Indian people displaced by the construction of the Bonneville Dam, the Dalles Dam, or the John Day Dam on the Columbia River in Oregon and Washington.

(b) Factors.--The study shall include--

(1) a determination as to the number and location of Indian people displaced by the construction of the Bonneville Dam, the Dalles Dam, or the John Day Dam;

(2) a determination of the amounts and types of assistance provided by the Federal Government to Indian people displaced by the construction of such dams to the present; and

(3) a determination of whether and how much assistance is necessary to meet any remaining Federal obligations to compensate Indian people displaced by the construction of such dams.

(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study.

SEC. __. DROUGHT EMERGENCIES.

(a) Authorized Activities.--With respect to a State in which a drought emergency is in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, or was in effect at any time during the 1-year period ending on such date of enactment, and upon the request of the Governor of the State, the Secretary is authorized to--

(1) prioritize the updating of the water control manuals for control structures under the jurisdiction of the Secretary that are located in the State; and

(2) incorporate into the update seasonal operations for water conservation and water supply for such control structures.

(b) Coordination.--The Secretary shall carry out the update under subsection (a) in coordination with all appropriate Federal agencies, elected officials, and members of the public.

SEC. __. GAO STUDY.

(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives an analysis of the President's budget requests for the Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2017.

(b) Considerations.--The analysis to be submitted under subsection (a) shall evaluate--

(1) the extent to which there is geographic diversity among the projects included in such budget requests; and

(2) whether the methodologies used by the Corps of Engineers to calculate benefit-cost ratios for projects impact the geographic diversity of projects included in such budget requests.

Page 75, strike lines 9 and 10.

Page 75, strike lines 14 and 15 and insert the following:

(1) Project for flood damage reduction and environmental restoration, Hamilton City, California.

Page 75, line 23, strike “$5,000,000,000” and insert “$10,000,000,000”.

Page 78, line 17, strike “$5,000,000,000” and insert “$10,000,000,000”.

Page 92, after line 25, insert the following:

(c) Inventory.--In carrying out the update under subsection (a), the Secretary shall include an inventory of those lands that are not necessary to carry out the authorized purposes of the project.

Page 93, lines 14 and 15, strike “September 30, 2016, $31,233,401” and insert “December 31, 2016, $31,344,841.65”.

Page 106, strike line 6 and all that follows before line 7 and insert the following:

(1) Navigation.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Date of Report of

A. State B. Name Chief of D. Estimated Costs Engineers

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. TX Brazos Island Nov. 3, 2014 Federal: $116,116,000 Harbor Non-Federal: $88,471,000 Total: $204,587,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. LA Calcasieu Lock Dec. 2, 2014 Total: $16,700,000 (to be derived \1/2\ from the general fund of the Treasury and \1/2\ from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. NH, Portsmouth Harbor Feb. 8, 2015 Federal: $15,580,000

ME and Piscataqua Non-Federal: $5,190,000 River Total: $20,770,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. FL Port Everglades Jun. 25, 2015 Federal: $220,200,000 Non-Federal: $102,500,000 Total: $322,700,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. AK Little Diomede Aug. 10, 2015 Federal: $26,015,000 Harbor Non-Federal: $2,945,000 Total: $28,960,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. SC Charleston Harbor Sep. 8, 2015 Federal: $224,300,000 Non-Federal: $269,000,000 Total: $493,300,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. AK Craig Harbor Mar. 16, 2016 Federal: $29,062,000 Non-Federal: $3,255,000 Total: $32,317,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. PA Upper Ohio Sep. 12, 2016 Federal: $1,324,235,500 Non-Federal: $1,324,235,500 Total: $2,648,471,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 109, strike line 1 and all that follows before line 2 and insert the following:

(4) Ecosystem restoration.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Date of Report of

A. State B. Name Chief of D. Estimated Costs Engineers

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. FL Central Everglades Dec. 23, 2014 Federal: $976,375,000 Non-Federal: $974,625,000 Total: $1,951,000,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. WA Skokomish River Dec. 14, 2015 Federal: $12,782,000 Non-Federal: $6,882,000 Total: $19,664,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. WA Puget Sound Sep. 16, 2016 Federal: $293,558,000 Non-Federal: $158,069,000 Total: $451,627,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 110, before line 3, insert the following:

(8) Hurricane and storm damage risk reduction and ecosystem restoration.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Date of Report of

A. State B. Name Chief of D. Estimated Costs Engineers

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. LA Southwest Coastal Jul. 29, 2016 Federal: $2,011,280,000 Louisiana Non-Federal: $1,082,997,000 Total: $3,094,277,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 110, strike line 3 and all that follows through the end of the table following line 4 and insert the following:

(9) Deauthorizations, modifications, and other projects.--

------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Date of

A. State B. Name Decision D. Estimated Costs Document

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. TX Upper Trinity May 21, 2008 Federal: $526,500,000 River Non-Federal: $283,500,000 Total: $810,000,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. KY Green River Locks Apr. 30, 2015 Federal: $0 and Dams 3, 4, 5, Non-Federal: $0 6 and Barren Total: $0 River Lock and Dam 1 Disposition

------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. KS, Turkey Creek Basin May 13, 2016 Federal: $97,067,750

MO Non-Federal: $55,465,250 Total: $152,533,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. KY Ohio River May 13, 2016 Federal: $20,309,900 Shoreline Non-Federal: $10,936,100 Total: $31,246,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. MO Blue River Basin May 13, 2016 Federal: $34,860,000 Non-Federal: $11,620,000 Total: $46,480,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. FL Picayune Strand Jul. 15, 2016 Federal: $308,983,500 Non-Federal: $308,983,500 Total: $617,967,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. MO Swope Park Jul. 15, 2016 Federal: $20,205,250 Industrial Area, Non-Federal: $10,879,750 Blue River Total: $31,085,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------