33 U.S.C. § 2282g: Scope of feasibility studies

Summary

For flood risk or hurricane and storm damage studies, the Secretary must, if the local non‑Federal partner asks, create and compare project options that aim to get the biggest net benefit from cutting overall flood risk inside the study area. The options must address 10 kinds of flood drivers, such as river flooding, coastal storms (wave attack and erosion), tides and tide‑connected river or estuary flooding, rainfall, seasonal water changes, groundwater, sea level rise, subsidence, and other drivers. For any feasibility study, the Secretary must, if the non‑Federal partner asks, include options that either boost combined benefits for the study and for water supply or water conservation (including measures in section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1639)) or add one or more water supply/conservation measures if they may lower drought or extreme‑weather impacts. Study costs must be shared under the usual cost‑share rules that apply to that study.

Title 33, §2282g

Navigation and Navigable Waters, Source: USLM XML via OLRC

(a)Flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage risk reduction

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)

(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)Water supply, water conservation, and drought risk reduction

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)Cost sharing

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