33 U.S.C. § 701s

Small flood control projects; appropriations; amount limitation for single locality; conditions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar

The Secretary of the Army is authorized to allot from any appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for flood control, not to exceed $90,000,000 for any one fiscal year, for the implementation of small structural and nonstructural projects, and projects that use natural features or nature-based features (as those terms are defined in section 2289a(a) of this title), for flood control and related purposes not specifically authorized by Congress, which come within the provisions of section 701a of this title, when in the opinion of the Chief of Engineers such work is advisable. The amount allotted for a project shall be sufficient to complete Federal participation in the project. Not more than $15,000,000 shall be allotted under this section for a project at any single locality. The provisions of local cooperation specified in section 701c of this title shall apply. The work shall be complete in itself and not commit the United States to any additional improvement to insure its successful operation, except as may result from the normal procedure applying to projects authorized after submission of preliminary examination and survey reports.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1972–2012 · leading case: Jacques J. Creppel v. The United States Army Corps of Engineers, 670 F.2d 564 (5th Cir. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jacques J. Creppel v. The United States Army Corps of Engineers, 670 F.2d 564 (5th Cir. 1982). · cites it 3× “33 U.S.C. § 701s (1970) (amended 1976). Congressional approval for such an undertaking, commonly called a small flood control project, is not required.”

Snoqualmie Valley Pres. All. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 683 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2012). “Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 is codified at 33 U.S.C. § 701s. 2 . The Corps originally published the nationwide permits in the Code of Federal Regulations, but since 1996 it has published them in the Federal Register.”

Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Keys, 333 F.3d 1109 (10th Cir. 2003). “33 U.S.C. §§ 701s and 701f-2 authorized appropriated funds to specific projects for flood control as Congress broadly declared-in 33 U.”

Env't Def. Fund, Inc. v. Robert F. Froehlke, Sec'y of the Army, 473 F.2d 346 (8th Cir. 1972). “§ 426g; 33 U.S.C. § 701s. We see no reason why its action should not be as subject to judicial review as that of any other agency.”

Creppel v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 500 F. Supp. 1108 (E.D. La. 1980). “Plaintiffs also argue that the Wilson order is invalid because the Corps did not obtain binding assurances of cooperation from Jefferson Parish as required by 33 U.S.C. §§ 701s and 701c. In Akers v. Resor, 339 F.”

Oregon Nat. Resources Council v. Harrell, 52 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1995). “See 33 U.S.C. § 701s (Corps’ authority to implement projects without congressional authorization and appropriation limited to $5 million).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.