A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.
Latest action · Feb 15, 2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Progress
Where this bill reached, and when. A stage with no date was not reached; one that failed a vote and later carried shows the date it carried.
- IntroducedFeb 15, 2017
- Passed SenateNot reached
- Passed HouseNot reached
- To the PresidentNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Summary
This bill directs the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to operate the federal water resources projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia in a manner that ensures the maintenance of freshwater flows.
The term "freshwater flows" is defined as the quality, quantity, timing, and variability of freshwater flows required to: (1) support and reestablish the ecological integrity of the rivers, commercial and recreational fisheries dependent on freshwater flows into Apalachicola Bay and adjacent waters, and thriving and diverse fish, wildlife, and plant populations similar to those found prior to construction of the projects; (2) restore and recover species that are endangered, threatened, or at risk; and (3) prevent significantly harmful adverse impacts to the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola River ecosystems.
The Corps of Engineers must enter into an arrangement for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to conduct a study that evaluates existing data related to freshwater flows and provides recommendations on how to maintain such flows.
The Corps shall not issue a final water control manual based on the final environmental impact statement titled "Update of the Water Control Manual for the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia and a Water Supply Storage Assessment," dated December 2016, but shall: (1) issue revised water control manuals for such projects that ensure the maintenance of freshwater flows, considering the findings of NOAA's study; (2) ensure that operational modifications needed to maintain freshwater flows are achieved while providing system-wide balance in conservation storage through the maintenance of water levels in the same action zone for each of the project reservoirs; (3) enter into an arrangement for the National Academy of Sciences to carry out an independent peer review of each revised manual; and (4) obtain written approval from the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA, and the U.S. Geological Survey of each manual developed before a final manual may be issued.
Cosponsors
Members who signed on, in the order they did.
Committees 1
Where it was sent and what each committee and subcommittee did with it, in order.
| Chamber | Committee | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| Senate | Environment and Public Works Committee | Referred Feb 15, 2017 |
Actions 2
Everything that happened, newest first.
- Feb 15, 2017Introduced in Senate
- Feb 15, 2017Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Titles 1
Every title it has carried, official and short, at each stage.
- Official Title as Introduced
- A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.
Subjects
Assigned by the Library of Congress. Policy area: Water Resources Development.
- Alabama
- Aquatic ecology
- Endangered and threatened species
- Environmental assessment, monitoring, research
- Florida
- Georgia
- Government studies and investigations
- Hunting and fishing
- Lakes and rivers
- Water Resources Development
- Water storage
- Water use and supply
- Wildlife conservation and habitat protection
Text 1
Each version as it was printed, newest first.
- Feb 15, 2017Introduced in Senate
Everything here is as published by Congress: the summary is the Congressional Research Service's, the action wording is the clerks', and the subjects are the Library of Congress's. How far it got is read from the actions themselves, taking the most recent one of each kind, so a bill that failed a vote and later passed is shown as having passed. Records come from this bill on Congress.gov and govinfo.gov; cost estimates are the Congressional Budget Office's, and the hearings are the printed hearings GovInfo publishes, which can appear months after the hearing.
