§2282g — Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters | U.S. Code

Summary

The Secretary must, when a non‑Federal interest asks, develop study alternatives that get the biggest overall benefit from lowering flood risk across the study area. Those alternatives must consider both separate and combined causes of flooding, including river flows, coastal storm surge, waves and erosion from hurricanes or storms, tidal flooding in rivers/bays/estuaries connected to the coast, rainfall, tides, seasonal water changes, groundwater emergence, sea level rise, subsidence, and any other flood drivers in the area. For any feasibility study, when requested by the non‑Federal interest, the Secretary must either (1) look for options that increase total net benefits for the study’s main purpose and for water supply or water conservation (including measures described in section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1639)), or (2) add one or more water supply or conservation measures if they may help reduce harm from extreme weather (including drought) to water resources in the study area. Study costs must be shared under the usual cost‑share rules that apply to the study.

Title 33, §2282g

Navigation and Navigable Waters — Source: USLM XML via OLRC

(a)In carrying out a feasibility study for a project for flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage risk reduction, the Secretary, at the request of the non-Federal interest for the study, shall formulate alternatives to maximize the net benefits from the reduction of the comprehensive flood risk within the geographic scope of the study from the isolated and compound effects of—

(1)a riverine discharge of any magnitude or frequency;

(2)inundation, wave attack, and erosion coinciding with a hurricane or coastal storm;

(3)flooding associated with tidally influenced portions of rivers, bays, and estuaries that are hydrologically connected to the coastal water body;

(4)a rainfall event of any magnitude or frequency;

(5)a tide of any magnitude or frequency;

(6)seasonal variation in water levels;

(7)groundwater emergence;

(8)sea level rise;

(9)subsidence; or

(10)any other driver of flood risk affecting the area within the geographic scope of the study.

(b)In carrying out a feasibility study for any purpose, the Secretary, at the request of the non-Federal interest for the study, shall formulate alternatives—

(1)to maximize combined net benefits for the primary purpose of the study and for the purposes of water supply or water conservation (including the use of water supply conservation measures described in section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1639)); or

(2)to include 1 or more measures for the purposes of water supply or water conservation if the Secretary determines that such measures may reduce potential adverse impacts of extreme weather events, including drought, on water resources within the geographic scope of the study.

(c)All costs to carry out a feasibility study in accordance with this section shall be shared in accordance with the cost share requirements otherwise applicable to the study.

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

References in Text

section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is section 1116 of Pub. L. 114–322, title I, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1639, which is not classified to the Code. Codification Section was enacted as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, and also as part of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, and not as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 which comprises this chapter.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

“Secretary” Defined Secretary means the Secretary of the Army, see section 8002 of Pub. L. 117–263, set out as a note under section 2201 of this title.

§2282g Scope of feasibility studies