Browse Arkansas Code titles and sections
33 U.S.C. § 2252 — Remote and subsistence harbors
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) In general** In conducting a study of harbor and navigation improvements, the Secretary may recommend a project without the need to demonstrate that the project is justified solely by national economic development benefits if the Secretary determines that—
(1) the project would be located in the State of Hawaii or Alaska, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, or American Samoa; and
(2)
(A) over 80 percent of the goods transported through the harbor would be consumed within the United States, as determined by the Secretary, including consideration of information provided by the non-Federal interest; or
(B) the long-term viability of the community in which the project is located, or the long-term viability of a community that is located in the region that is served by the project and that will rely on the project, would be threatened without the harbor and navigation improvement.
**(b) Justification** In considering whether to recommend a project under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the benefits of the project to any of—
(1) public health and safety of the local community and communities that are located in the region to be served by the project and that will rely on the project, including access to facilities designed to protect public health and safety;
(2) access to natural resources for subsistence purposes;
(3) local and regional economic opportunities;
(4) welfare of the regional population to be served by the project; or
(5) social and cultural value to the local community and communities that are located in the region to be served by the project and that will rely on the project.
**(c) Prioritization** Projects recommended by the Secretary under
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 33 U.S.C. § 2252
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. A text match is a research starting point; applicability is not established.
Original supplied file — preserved unchanged
Download original Markdown file
File SHA-256: 6e77f2b6344f9df26b28bc92f33d873c2f9d96c465c7b8dee8c70f651f0f0296. The original may include catalog metadata, neighboring provisions, or embedded records outside this collection's scope. Search shows only the selected federal record. Historical editions and unverified snapshots are not a statement of current law.
Authority boundary: historical or unconfirmed source not current law verified.
Open the recorded source website ↗
Record provenance
Stable record: federal_law:legal_authorities:record_usc_bc119706a36a8040a8afe5ea
Source file: Laws/federal/codes/united-states-code/title-33/section-2252-remote-and-subsistence-harbors--679b87e891.md
Pages: Not recorded – Not recorded
Passage SHA-256: 8b224a8c31217821317fa9ccf6472d6120334c8ea37f508847df7607e5659fd5
Source location: Title 33, Chapter 36, § 2252; chapter-036-water-resources-development.md
Stored source content
**(a) In general** In conducting a study of harbor and navigation improvements, the Secretary may recommend a project without the need to demonstrate that the project is justified solely by national economic development benefits if the Secretary determines that—
(1) the project would be located in the State of Hawaii or Alaska, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, or American Samoa; and
(2)
(A) over 80 percent of the goods transported through the harbor would be consumed within the United States, as determined by the Secretary, including consideration of information provided by the non-Federal interest; or
(B) the long-term viability of the community in which the project is located, or the long-term viability of a community that is located in the region that is served by the project and that will rely on the project, would be threatened without the harbor and navigation improvement.
**(b) Justification** In considering whether to recommend a project under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the benefits of the project to any of—
(1) public health and safety of the local community and communities that are located in the region to be served by the project and that will rely on the project, including access to facilities designed to protect public health and safety;
(2) access to natural resources for subsistence purposes;
(3) local and regional economic opportunities;
(4) welfare of the regional population to be served by the project; or
(5) social and cultural value to the local community and communities that are located in the region to be served by the project and that will rely on the project.
**(c) Prioritization** Projects recommended by the Secretary under subsection (a) shall be given equivalent budget consideration and priority as projects recommended solely by national economic development benefits.
**(d) Disposition**
(1) **In general** — The Secretary may carry out any project identified in the study carried out pursuant to subsection (a) in accordance with the criteria for projects carried out under the authority of the Secretary under [section 577 of this title](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title33-section577&num=0&edition=prelim).
(2) **Non-Federal interests** — In evaluating and implementing a project under this section, the Secretary shall allow a non-Federal interest to participate in the financing of a project in accordance with the criteria established for flood control projects under section 903(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–662; 100 Stat. 4184).
**(e) Annual report** For a project that cannot be carried out under the authority specified in subsection (d), on a determination by the Secretary of the feasibility of the project under subsection (a), the Secretary may include a recommendation concerning the project in the annual report submitted to Congress under [section 2282d of this title](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title33-section2282d&num=0&edition=prelim).
Cross-references
Connections may be documented source relationships, shared citations or nearby passages. Each explains its basis; a connection alone does not establish applicability to your situation.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
In any case in which a project under the jurisdiction of the Secretary is budgeted under a different business line than the business line under which the project was originally authorized, the Secretary shall ensure that the project is carried out in accordance with any requirements that apply to the business line under which the project was originally authorized.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 33 U.S.C. § 2201
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Omitted**
**(b) Planning process improvements** The Chief of Engineers—
(1) shall adopt a risk analysis approach to project cost estimates for water resources projects; and
(2) not later than one year after November 8, 2007, shall—
(A) issue procedures for risk analysis for cost estimation for water resources projects; and
(B) submit to Congress a report that includes any recommended amendments to [section 2280 of this title](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title33-section2280&num=0&edition=prelim).
**(c) Benchmarks**
(1) **In general** — Not later than 12 months after November 8, 2007, the Chief of Engineers shall establish benchmarks for determining the length of time it should take to conduct a feasibility study for a water resources project and its associated review process under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ([42 U.S.C. 4321](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section4321&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.). The Chief of Engineers shall use such benchmarks as a management tool to make the feasibility study process more efficient in all districts of the Corps of Engineers.
(2) **Benchmark goals** — The Chief of Engineers shall establish, to the extent practicable, under paragraph (1) benchmark goals for completion of feasibility studies for water resources projects generally within 2 years. In the case of feasibility studies that the Chief of Engineers determines may require additional time based on the project type, size, cost, or complexity, the benchmark goal for completion shall be generally within 4 years.
**(d) Calculation of benefits and costs for flood damage reduction projects** A feasibility study for a project for flood damage reduction shall include, as part of t
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 33 U.S.C. § 2282d
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Allotment from appropriations for construction** The Secretary of the Army is authorized to allot from any appropriations hereafter made for rivers and harbors not to exceed $62,500,000 for any one fiscal year for the construction of small river and harbor improvement projects not specifically authorized by Congress which will result in substantial benefits to navigation and which can be operated consistently with appropriate and economic use of the waters of the Nation for other purposes, when in the opinion of the Chief of Engineers such work is advisable, if benefits are in excess of the cost.
**(b) Limitation on allotment** Not more than $15,000,000 shall be allotted for the construction of a project under this section at any single locality and the amount allotted shall be sufficient to complete the Federal participation in the project under this section.
**(c) Lands, easements, and rights-of-way; indemnification; assurances of local cooperation** Local interests shall provide without cost to the United States all necessary lands, easements and rights-of-way for all projects to be constructed under the authority of this section. In addition, local interests may be required to hold and save the United States free from damages that may result from the construction and maintenance of the project and may be required to provide such additional local cooperation as the Chief of Engineers deems appropriate. A State, county, municipality or other responsible local entity shall give assurance satisfactory to the Chief of Engineers that such conditions of cooperation as are required will be accomplished.
**(d) Sharing of costs by non-Federal interests** Non-Federal interests may be required to share in the cost of the project to the extent that the Chief of Engineer
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 33 U.S.C. § 577
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 744
TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
§ 2252
ties away from their homes or regular places
of business, may be allowed travel expenses,
including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as
authorized by section 5703 of title 5.
(Pub. L. 99–662, title III, § 302, Nov. 17, 1986, 100
Stat. 4111; Pub. L. 106–109, § 8(a), Nov. 24, 1999, 113
Stat. 1495; Pub. L. 113–121, title II, § 2002(d), June
10, 2014, 128 Stat. 1262; Pub. L. 117–286, § 4(a)(202),
Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4328.)
Editorial Notes
AMENDMENTS
2022—Subsec. (f)(1). Pub. L. 117–286, § 4(a)(202)(A), sub-
stituted ‘‘chapter 10 of title 5, other than section 1013,’’
for ‘‘the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
App.), other than section 14,’’.
Subsec. (f)(2). Pub. L. 117–286, § 4(a)(202)(B), sub-
stituted ‘‘chapter 10 of title 5,’’ for ‘‘the Federal Advi-
sory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.),’’.
2014—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–121, § 2002(d)(1), added
subsec. (b) and struck out former subsec. (b). Prior to
amendment, text read as follows: ‘‘The Users Board
shall meet at least semi-annually to develop and make
recommendations to the Secretary regarding construc-
tion and rehabilitation priorities and spending levels
on the commercial navigational features and compo-
nents of the inland waterways and inland harbors of the
United States for the following fiscal years. Any advice
or recommendation made by the Users Board to the
Secretary shall reflect the independent judgment of the
Users Board. Notwithstanding section 3003 of Public
Law 104–66 (31 U.S.C. 1113 note; 109 Stat. 734), the Users
Board shall, by December 31, 1987, and annually there-
after file such recommendations with the Secretary
and with the Congress.’’
Subsecs. (c) to (f). Pub. L. 113–121, § 2002(d)(2), added
subsecs. (c
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 33 U.S.C. § 2252
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. Same stored citation; legal effect and authority still require review.