[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 82 (Wednesday, June 13, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6227-S6231]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. STABENOW (for herself, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Levin, Mr. 
        Kohl, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Bayh, and Mrs. 
        Clinton):
  S. 1035. A bill to establish programs to protect the resources of and 
areas surrounding the Great Lakes; to the Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce three bills 
called the Great Lakes Initiative which are designed to protect the 
five Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes are one of our Nation's most precious natural 
resources. They contain one-fifth of the world's fresh water supply and 
provide safe drinking water to millions of people every day.
  The Great Lakes also play a vital role in the economies of the Great 
Lakes States, including recreation, tourism, commercial shipping, 
industrial and agriculture. That is why I am introducing legislation 
today to protect this vital resource for the use, benefit, and 
enjoyment of present and future generations of Americans.
  Three bills make up this new Great Lakes Initiative: (1) the Great 
Lakes Water Protection Act; (2) the Great Lakes Ecology Protection Act; 
and (3) the Great Lakes Preservation Act.
  The first bill, the Great Lakes Water Protection Act, would protect 
the Great Lakes from environmentally dangerous oil and gas drilling. I 
am pleased that this bill has strong bipartisan support in both the 
House and the Senate, with Senators Fitzgerald, Levin, Chafee, Kohl, 
Feingold, Dayton, Clinton, Durbin, Wellstone, Bayh, Corzine, and Boxer 
as original cosponsors.
  The Great Lakes support many fragile coastlines and wetlands. Lake 
Michigan alone contains over 417 coastal wetlands, the most of any 
Great Lake. These shorelines are also home to many rare and endangered 
plant and wildlife species, including the rare piping plover, Michigan 
monkey flower, Pitcher's thistle, and the dwarf lake iris.
  The Great Lakes also play a vital role in the economies of the Great 
Lakes States. In particular, coastal communities rely heavily on the 
Great Lake's resources and natural beauty to support tourism and 
recreation activities. The most recent estimate shows that recreational 
fishing totaled $1.5 billion in expenditures in Michigan alone.
  Drilling in the Great Lakes could expose our valuable fresh water 
supply to serious contamination, cause serious environmental damage to 
the water and shoreline of the Great Lakes, and have crippling effects 
on Great Lakes communities that depend on tourism and recreation for 
their local economies. The Great Lakes Water Protection Act would 
prohibit new oil and gas drilling in the Great Lakes.
  During the ban, the Environmental Protection Agency and National 
Academy of Sciences would conduct a two-year study examining the 
impacts on drilling on the environment, public health, the water 
supply, and local economies. Once the study is completed, Congress can 
analyze the results of the study and lift the ban on oil and gas 
drilling if it deems appropriate.
  This bill would also provide $50 million per year for park and 
shoreline conservation to the Great Lakes States to offset any lost oil 
royalty revenues during the ban on drilling.
  The second bill, Great Lakes Ecology Protection Act, seeks to curb 
the influx of invasive species into the Great Lakes. I am pleased that 
this bill also has strong bipartisan support with Senators Fitzgerald, 
Levin, Voinovich, Kohl, Feingold, Durbin, DeWine, Dayton, Wellstone, 
Schumer, and Bayh as original cosponsors. The bill would

[[Page S6228]]

try to stop the importation of invasive species by prohibiting ballast 
water discharges in the Great Lakes and requiring sophisticated 
sterilization of ballast water tanks as well. This is based on a 
bipartisan bill in the House introduced by Congressman Hoekstra and 
Congressman Barcia.
  Invasive species have already damaged the Great Lakes in a number of 
ways. They have destroyed thousands of fish and threatened clean 
drinking water.
  For example, Lake Michigan once housed the largest self-reproducing 
lake trout fishery in the entire world. The invasive sea lamprey, which 
was introduced from ballast water almost 80 years ago, has contributed 
greatly to the decline of trout and whitefish in the Great Lakes by 
feeding on and killing native trout species.
  Today, lake trout must be stocked because they cannot naturally 
reproduce in the lake. Many Great Lakes States have had to place severe 
restrictions on catching yellow perch because invasive species such as 
the zebra mussel disrupt the Great Lakes' ecosystem and compete with 
yellow perch for food. The zebra mussel's filtration also increases 
water clarity, which may be making it easier for predators to prey upon 
the yellow perch. Moreover, tiny organisms like zooplankton that help 
form the base of the Great Lakes food chain, have declined due to 
consumption by exploding populations of zebra mussels.
  The Great Lakes Ecology Protection Act would ban ballast water 
discharges in the Great Lakes. The bill would require ships to 
discharge ballast water and sterilize the ballast water tanks before 
entering the Great Lakes to prevent the introduction of any non-
indigenous species. The act also would significantly increase funding 
for invasive species research and ballast water technology, by 
providing $100 million in research grants over the next five years.
  The research grants would encourage collaboration between the 
colleges and universities, and the shipping industry to help develop 
new and better ballast water purification technologies.
  The third bill, the Great Lakes Preservation Act, would ban dangerous 
bulk water diversions while the Great Lakes Compact makes 
recommendations on how specifically to implement appropriate governing 
standards. This bill also has strong bipartisan support with Senators 
Fitzgerald, Levin, Kohl, Feingold, Dayton, Schumer, and Bayh as 
original co-sponsors.
  Bulk water diversion could become a serious threat to the fresh water 
supplies of the Great Lakes in the future. We must stop this in our 
countries and negotiate with Canada to do the same.
  Global water demand is doubling every 21 years, while only 1 percent 
of the water in the Great Lakes is renewed each year by precipitation 
or runoff. At the same time, scientists predict that by the end of the 
century, Great Lakes water levels could decline by 1.5 to 8 feet due to 
increased evaporation; and within the next three decades we may see a 
decline by as much as 3 feet. This of course is in addition to the 
historic fluctuations in lake levels that can vary by as much as 6.5 
feet.
  The bill also would help provide new funding sources to preserve and 
restore historic Great Lakes lighthouses. Great Lakes lighthouses have 
helped mariners navigate the Great Lakes and find safe harbors for 
decades, and are an important part of the maritime history of the Great 
Lakes. Many of these lighthouses have historical or architectural 
significance, but are unfortunately in poor condition because of 
neglect and deterioration.
  The Act would help find new funding sources to preserve the 
lighthouses by directing the National Park Service to Study the Great 
Lakes lighthouses and recommend the best course of action for 
preserving and restoring the lighthouses.
  The Great Lakes are a precious natural resource not just to their 
neighboring States, but to the entire country. I urge my Senate 
colleagues to join me and protect this vital resource for the use, 
benefit, and enjoyment of present and future generations of Americans.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bills were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1033

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Water Protection 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Great Lakes contain \1/5\ of the world's fresh 
     water supply;
       (2) the Great Lakes basin is home to over 33,000,000 people 
     and is a vital source of safe drinking water for millions of 
     people;
       (3) the Great Lakes support many wetlands, sand dunes, and 
     other fragile coastal habitats;
       (4) those coastal habitats are home to many endangered and 
     threatened wildlife and plant species, including the piping 
     plover, Pitcher's thistle, and the dwarf lake iris;
       (5) the Great Lakes are crucial to the economies of the 
     Great Lakes States for recreation, commercial shipping, and 
     industrial and agriculture uses; and
       (6) oil and gas development beneath the water in any of the 
     Great Lakes could--
       (A) expose a valuable fresh water supply of the United 
     States to serious contamination; and
       (B) cause serious environmental damage to the water and 
     shoreline of the Great Lakes.

     SEC. 3. EFFECTS OF OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT ON THE GREAT 
                   LAKES.

       The Federal Water Pollution Control Act is amended by 
     inserting after section 108 (33 U.S.C. 1258) the following:

     ``SEC. 108A. EFFECTS OF OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT ON THE GREAT 
                   LAKES.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Academy.--The term `Academy' means the National 
     Academy of Sciences.
       ``(2) Drilling activity.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `drilling activity' means any 
     drilling to extract oil or gas from land beneath the water in 
     any of the Great Lakes.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `drilling activity' includes--
       ``(i) directional drilling (also known as `slant 
     drilling'); and
       ``(ii) offshore drilling.
       ``(3) Great lake.--The term `Great Lake' means--
       ``(A) Lake Erie;
       ``(B) Lake Huron (including Lake Saint Clair);
       ``(C) Lake Michigan;
       ``(D) Lake Ontario (including the Saint Lawrence River from 
     Lake Ontario to the 45th parallel of latitude); and
       ``(E) Lake Superior.
       ``(4) Great lakes state.--The term `Great Lakes State' 
     means each of the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, 
     Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
       ``(b) Incentives To Prevent Drilling Activity.--
       ``(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive an incentive 
     grant under paragraph (2), a grant under section 601(a), or a 
     grant under section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 
     U.S.C. 300j-12), a Great Lakes State shall not issue any oil 
     or gas permit or lease for drilling activity.
       ``(2) Incentive grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--For each fiscal year or portion of a 
     fiscal year in which paragraph (1) is in effect, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall make grants to Great Lakes 
     States.
       ``(B) Use of grants.--A Great Lakes State shall use a grant 
     under this paragraph to carry out conservation activities in 
     the State, including activities to conserve parkland and 
     protect shores.
       ``(C) Amount of grants.--For each fiscal year or portion of 
     a fiscal year, the amount of a grant to a Great Lakes State 
     under subparagraph (A) shall be equal to the product obtained 
     by multiplying--
       ``(i) the amount available for grants under this paragraph 
     for the fiscal year or portion of a fiscal year; and
       ``(ii) the ratio that--

       ``(I) the amount of funds that the Great Lakes State would 
     have received, but for paragraph (1), from the sale of oil 
     and gas from the Great Lakes during the fiscal year; bears to
       ``(II) the amount of funds that all Great Lakes States 
     would have received, but for paragraph (1), from the sale of 
     oil and gas from the Great Lakes during the fiscal year.

       ``(D) Maximum amount of grants.--For each fiscal year, the 
     Secretary of the Interior may make grants under this 
     paragraph in an aggregate amount not to exceed $50,000,000.
       ``(c) Study.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Administrator shall conduct a 
     study to examine the known and potential environmental 
     effects of drilling activity, including any effects on--
       ``(A) water quality (including the quality of drinking 
     water);
       ``(B) the sediments and shorelines of the Great Lakes;
       ``(C) fish and other aquatic species, plants, and wildlife 
     that are dependent on Great Lakes resources;
       ``(D) competing uses of water and shoreline areas of the 
     Great Lakes; and
       ``(E) public health of local communities.
       ``(2) Consultation.--In designing and conducting the study, 
     the Administrator shall consult with--

[[Page S6229]]

       ``(A) the Secretary of Energy;
       ``(B) the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration;
       ``(C) the Chief of Engineers;
       ``(D) the Great Lakes States; and
       ``(E) as appropriate, representatives of environmental, 
     industry, academic, scientific, public health, and other 
     relevant organizations.
       ``(3) Independent review.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator 
     shall enter into an agreement with the Academy under which 
     the Administrator shall submit to the Academy, and the 
     Academy shall review, the results of the study.
       ``(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     submission to the Academy of the study under paragraph (3), 
     the Academy shall submit to the Administrator and Congress--
       ``(A) the study; and
       ``(B) a report that describes the results of the review by 
     the Academy (including any recommendations concerning the 
     results of the study).
       ``(5) Action by congress.--It is the sense of Congress 
     that, after receiving the study and report under paragraph 
     (4), Congress should--
       ``(A) review the study and report;
       ``(B) conduct hearings concerning the impact of drilling 
     activity; and
       ``(C) determine whether to eliminate the condition under 
     subsection (b)(1).
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this section.''.
                                  ____


                                S. 1034

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Ecology 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. BALLAST WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1101(b) of the Nonindigenous 
     Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 
     U.S.C. 4711(b)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (2) by striking ``(3) Additional regulations.--In 
     addition'' and inserting the following:
       ``(3) Regulations concerning aquatic nuisance species.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation shall, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, the 
     Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Defense, the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the 
     Governors of States that border the Great Lakes, and in 
     accordance with this paragraph, promulgate and review 
     regulations to prevent, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     the introduction and spread of aquatic nuisance species in 
     the Great Lakes.
       ``(B) Contents of regulations.--The regulations promulgated 
     under subparagraph (A)--
       ``(i) shall apply to all vessels capable of discharging 
     ballast water (including vessels equipped with ballast water 
     tank systems or other water tank systems) that enter the 
     Great Lakes after operating on water outside of the Exclusive 
     Economic Zone;
       ``(ii) shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     that ballast water containing aquatic nuisance species is not 
     discharged into the Great Lakes (including by establishing 
     the standard described in clause (iii));
       ``(iii) shall include a ballast water treatment standard 
     for vessels that elect to carry out ballast water management 
     or treatment that, at a minimum, requires--

       ``(I) a demonstrated 95 percent volumetric exchange of 
     ballast water; or
       ``(II) a ballast treatment that destroys not less than 95 
     percent of all animal fauna in a standard ballast water 
     intake, as approved by the Secretary;

       ``(iv) shall protect the safety of each vessel (including 
     crew and passengers);
       ``(v) shall include requirements on new vessel construction 
     to ensure that vessels entering service after January 1, 
     2005, minimize the transfer of organisms;
       ``(vi) shall require vessels to carry out any discharge or 
     exchange of ballast water within the Great Lakes only in 
     compliance with the regulations;
       ``(vii) shall be promulgated after taking into 
     consideration a range of vessel operating conditions, from 
     normal to extreme;
       ``(viii) shall--

       ``(I) ensure that technologies and practices implemented 
     under this section are environmentally sound treatment 
     methods for ballast water and ballast sediments that prevent 
     and control infestations of aquatic nuisance species; and
       ``(II) include a detailed timetable for--

       ``(aa) the implementation of treatment methods determined 
     to be technologically available and cost-effective at the 
     time of the publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking; 
     and
       ``(bb) the development, testing, evaluation, approval, and 
     implementation of additional technologically innovative 
     treatment methods;
       ``(ix) shall provide for certification by the master of 
     each vessel entering the Great Lakes that the vessel is in 
     compliance with the regulations;
       ``(x) shall ensure compliance with the regulations, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, through--

       ``(I) sampling or monitoring procedures;
       ``(II) the inspection of records;
       ``(III) the imposition of sanctions in accordance with 
     subsection (g)(1); and
       ``(IV) the certification of ballast water treatment vendors 
     and vessel vendors;

       ``(xi) shall be based on the best scientific information 
     available;
       ``(xii) shall not supersede or adversely affect any 
     requirement or prohibition pertaining to the discharge of 
     ballast water into water of the United States under the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); 
     and
       ``(xiii) shall include such other requirements as the 
     Secretary of Transportation considers appropriate.
       ``(C) Regulatory schedule.--
       ``(i) Notice of proposed rulemaking.--

       ``(I) In general.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
     of enactment of the Great Lakes Ecology Protection Act, the 
     Secretary of Transportation shall publish, in the Federal 
     Register and through other means designed to reach persons 
     likely to be subject to or affected by the regulations 
     (including publication in local newspapers and by electronic 
     means), a notice of proposed rulemaking concerning the 
     regulations proposed to be promulgated under this paragraph.
       ``(II) Final regulations.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     shall promulgate final regulations under this paragraph--

       ``(aa) with respect to the implementation of treatment 
     methods described in subparagraph (B)(vii)(II)(aa), not later 
     than 270 days after the date of enactment of the Great Lakes 
     Ecology Protection Act; and
       ``(bb) with respect to the additional technologically 
     innovative treatment methods described in subparagraph 
     (B)(vii)(II)(bb), not later than the earlier of--
       ``(AA) the date established by the timetable under 
     subparagraph (B)(vii)(II) for implementation of those 
     methods; or
       ``(BB) 720 days after the date of enactment of the Great 
     Lakes Ecology Protection Act.

       ``(III) Review and revision of regulations.--Not later than 
     3 years after the date on which final regulations are 
     promulgated under this subparagraph, and every 3 years 
     thereafter, the Secretary shall review and revise as 
     necessary, the regulations--

       ``(aa) to improve the effectiveness of the regulations; and
       ``(bb) to incorporate better management practices and 
     ballast water treatment standards and methods.

       ``(IV) Public participation.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall--

       ``(aa) provide not less than 120 days for public comment on 
     the proposed regulations; and
       ``(bb) provide for an effective date that is not less than 
     30 days after the date of publication of the final 
     regulations.
       ``(4) Additional regulations.--In addition''.
       (b) Definition of Treatment Method.--Section 1003 of the 
     Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 
     1990 (16 U.S.C. 4702) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (13), (14), (15), (16), and 
     (17) as paragraphs (14), (15), (16), (17), and (18), 
     respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (12) the following:
       ``(13) `treatment method' means a method for treatment of 
     the contents of a ballast water tank (including the sediments 
     within the tank) to remove or destroy nonindigenous organisms 
     through--
       ``(A) filtration;
       ``(B) the application of biocides or ultraviolet light;
       ``(C) thermal methods; or
       ``(D) other treatment techniques that meet applicable 
     ballast water treatment standards, as approved by the 
     Secretary;''.

     SEC. 3. INVASIVE SPECIES AND BALLAST WATER TECHNOLOGIES 
                   RESEARCH GRANTS.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary of Commerce, through 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Transportation, 
     and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     is authorized to award Invasive Species and Ballast Water 
     Technologies Research Grants.
       (b) Use of Funds.--Grants awarded under subsection (a) may 
     be used to--
       (1) study the impact of invasive species on the environment 
     of the Great Lakes region; and
       (2) develop technologies and treatment methods, including 
     ballast water tank technology, designed to destroy or remove 
     invasive species.
       (c) Eligible Recipients.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may award grants under 
     subsection (a) to any post-secondary educational institution 
     in the United States.
       (2) Special consideration for institutions collaborating 
     with industry.--In awarding grants under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall give special consideration to post-secondary 
     educational institutions that work collaboratively with 
     members of the United States shipping industry to carry out 
     an activity for which grant funds may be used under 
     subsection (b).
       (d) Availability and Marketing of Technology.--In awarding 
     grants under subsection (a), the Secretary shall ensure that

[[Page S6230]]

     to the greatest extent practicable, technologies and 
     treatments developed as the result of a grant awarded under 
     subsection (a) are made commercially available.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out the provisions of this 
     section $100,000,000 for the period of fiscal year 2002 
     through fiscal year 2006.
                                  ____


                                S. 1035

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Preservation 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Great Lakes are precious public natural resources, 
     and are renewable but finite bodies of water that should be 
     protected, conserved, and managed for the use, benefit, and 
     enjoyment of all present and future generations of people of 
     the United States;
       (2) the Great Lakes are crucial to the economies of the 
     Great Lakes States for recreation, commercial shipping, 
     industrial, and agricultural uses;
       (3) the Great Lakes contain \1/5\ of the world's fresh 
     water supply and are a vital source of safe drinking water 
     for millions of people;
       (4) the Great Lakes Charter of 1985 is a voluntary 
     international agreement that provides the procedural 
     framework for notice and consultation by the Great Lakes 
     States and the Great Lakes Provinces concerning the diversion 
     of the water of the Great Lakes basin;
       (5) the Governors of the Great Lakes States and the 
     Premiers of the Great Lakes Provinces have based decisions on 
     proposals to withdraw, divert, or use Great Lakes water on 
     the extent to which the proposals conserve and protect water 
     and water-dependent natural resources of the Great Lakes 
     basin; and
       (6) decisionmaking concerning Great Lakes water should 
     remain vested in the Governors of the Great Lakes States, who 
     manage the water and resources on a day-to-day basis.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
       (2) Bulk fresh water.--The term ``bulk fresh water'' means 
     fresh water extracted in quantities intended for 
     transportation by tanker or similar form of mass 
     transportation, without further processing.
       (3) From the great lakes basin.--The term ``from the Great 
     Lakes basin'', with respect to water, means--
       (A) water from Lake Erie, Lake Huron, Lake Michigan, Lake 
     Ontario, Lake St. Clair, or Lake Superior;
       (B) water from any interconnecting waterway within any 
     watercourse that drains into or between any of those lakes; 
     and
       (C) water from a tributary surface or underground channel 
     or area that drains into or comprises part of any watershed 
     that drains into any of those lakes.
       (4) Great lake.--The term ``Great Lake'' means--
       (A) Lake Erie;
       (B) Lake Huron (including Lake Saint Clair);
       (C) Lake Michigan;
       (D) Lake Ontario (including the Saint Lawrence River from 
     Lake Ontario to the 45th parallel of latitude); and
       (E) Lake Superior.
       (5) Great lakes province.--The term ``Great Lakes 
     Province'' means the Province of Ontario or Quebec, Canada.
       (6) Great lakes state.--The term ``Great Lakes State'' 
     means the State of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, 
     New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin.
       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National 
     Park Service.

     SEC. 4. MORATORIUM ON EXPORT OF BULK FRESH WATER.

       (a) In General.--Bulk fresh water from the Great Lakes 
     basin shall not be exported from the United States.
       (b) Sunset Provision.--Subsection (a) shall cease to be 
     effective on the date of enactment of an Act of Congress 
     approving the operation of a mechanism and conservation 
     standard for making decisions concerning the withdrawal, 
     diversion, and use of water of the Great Lakes that has been 
     agreed to by each of the Governors of the Great Lakes States, 
     acting in cooperation with the Premiers of the Great Lakes 
     Provinces.
       (c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Federal Government should enter into an agreement with 
     the Government of Canada stating that the United States and 
     Canada shall abide by the terms of the moratorium under 
     subsection (a) until the date specified in subsection (b).

     SEC. 5. PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC GREAT LAKES LIGHTHOUSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Great Lakes have greatly influenced settlement, 
     commerce, transportation, industry, and recreation throughout 
     the rich maritime history of the Great Lakes States;
       (2) lighthouses in Great Lakes States have helped mariners 
     navigate dangerous shoals and find safe harbors for decades 
     and are an important part of the maritime history of the 
     Great Lakes;
       (3) many of the lighthouses have historical or 
     architectural significance; and
       (4) the future of the lighthouses is uncertain because many 
     are in poor condition because of neglect and deterioration.
       (b) Study.--Not later than 3 years after the date on which 
     funds are made available to carry out this section, the 
     Secretary shall conduct and submit to Congress a study to 
     identify options to preserve the lighthouses in the Great 
     Lakes States.
       (c) Procedure.--In conducting the study under subsection 
     (b), the Secretary shall--
       (1) review programs, policies, and standards of the 
     National Park Service to determine the most appropriate means 
     of ensuring that the lighthouses (including any associated 
     natural, cultural, and historical resources) are preserved; 
     and
       (2) consult with--
       (A) State and local historical associations and societies 
     in the Great Lakes States;
       (B) historic preservation agencies in the Great Lakes 
     States;
       (C) the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and
       (D) other appropriate entities.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     this section.

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Stabenow, in 
introducing 3 pieces of legislation to help protect the nation's 
largest source of fresh water--the Great Lakes.
  The first bill, The Great Lakes Water Protection Act, will prevent 
new oil and gas drilling beneath the lakes until the EPA, in 
cooperation with the National Academy of Science, the Great Lakes 
States, and other interested parties, is able to study the impacts that 
drilling may have to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, drinking 
water, and other coastal land-use activities.
  It is just not worth taking a chance on harming this critical 
resource for a small amount of oil and natural gas.
  Slant drilling, while a more environmentally friendly method than the 
traditional drilling methods, is imperfect. Wells can blow out and 
equipment can be damaged. Because just one quart of oil can contaminate 
up to two million gallons of drinking water, the risk of drilling is 
especially acute when these wells are located directly next to the 
Great Lakes which serve as the source of drinking water for so many 
communities. According to a recent study by the Lake Michigan 
Federation, the normal slant drilling process could result in ground 
water contamination, surface water pollution, and the release of 
hazardous gases. If an accident were to occur, an oil or natural gas 
spill could impact Michigan's sensitive wetlands, sand dunes, and 
wildlife habitat. Oil leaked or washed into the Lakes would affect fish 
species, especially in the sensitive near-shore spawning and nursery 
areas, detrimentally impacting the Great Lakes commercial and 
recreational fisheries. We surely need to thoroughly review all 
possible risks before making decisions that could chance these 
irreplaceable natural resources.
  Additionally, there are existing human activities along the Great 
Lakes' coasts, and we need to find out how drilling activities could 
impact those communities. Even advocates of drilling admit that some 
damage at shore-line drilling sites is inevitable. Drilling requires 
the construction of new infrastructure such as drilling rigs and sites, 
storage tanks, and new pipelines. These facilities can deter tourism 
and hinder local community development.
  Our pristine Great Lakes coastline is valuable to the tourism 
industry in Michigan while the Great Lakes' energy potential is very 
small. Since the first U.S. well was drilled under Lake Michigan in 
1979, only 438,000 barrels of oil and about 17.5 billion cubic feet of 
natural gas have been produced. This is not even a drop in the bucket 
compared to the Nation's annual energy consumption of 20 million 
barrels of oil per day and 65 billion cubic feet of natural gas per 
day. In contrast, Great Lakes recreational fishers spend $1.4 billion 
annually on gear and lake trips. The thousands of hikers, birdwatchers, 
beach-goers and other recreational users enjoying the Great Lakes 
shoreline and coastal waters contribute millions of dollars to local 
economies.
  I believe that if this country should focus more on advancing 
alternative fuels. In Michigan, we can advance environmental quality 
and economic growth by supporting research into advanced technology 
vehicles.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this important legislation. 
There is

[[Page S6231]]

simply too much at stake to risk the Great Lakes and their shoreline.
  The second piece of legislation, The Great Lakes Water Protection 
Act, prohibits bulk fresh water from the Great Lakes basin to be 
exported from the United States until a conservation standard governing 
withdrawals, diversion, and use of Great Lakes water is in place. The 
Great Lakes hold nearly 20% of the world's supply of freshwater.
  As this legislation clearly states, the Great Lakes Governors 
currently have the authority to veto proposals to divert water from the 
Great Lakes outside the basin. However, the existing process over out-
of-basin water diversions may be subject to an international trade 
dispute. So as the global water demand doubles every 21 years, we need 
a back up conservation strategy.
  Additionally, this legislation authorizes the National Park Service 
to complete a resource study outlining options for the preservation of 
lighthouses in the Great Lakes. There are 120 Michigan lighthouses, and 
approximately 70 of these structures will be surplus property over the 
next 10 years. Under legislation that I sponsored last year, these 
historic treasures will be smoothly transferred from government 
ownership, and the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, through 
the National Park Service, is authorized to establish a historic 
lighthouse preservation program. The bill we are introducing today 
reinforces the government's commitment to preserving these historic 
structures.
  Lastly, I am cosponsoring the Great Lakes Ecology Protection Act to 
attempt to control one of the most expensive and environmentally 
dangerous problems facing the Great Lakes-aquatic nuisance species.
  Nearly 150 nonindigenous aquatic species have been accidently 
introduced into the Great Lakes in the past century. Most of the recent 
invasive species have been transported to the Lakes in commercial 
ships' ballast water. In 1990 and 1996 Congress enacted legislation 
which slowed down the introduction of aquatic nuisance species in the 
Great Lakes, however, approximately 1 new non-native organism enters 
the Lakes each year.
  This legislation that I am cosponsoring is designed to prevent these 
invaders from coming into the Great Lakes and to control the movement 
of organisms once they have been introduced into the Lakes. The Coast 
Guard needs to design a standard for vessels capable of discharging 
ballast water in the Great Lakes that ensures that ballast water 
containing aquatic species are not discharged in the Great Lakes. The 
Coast Guard needs to establish a Ballast Treatment Performance Standard 
which will provide flexibility for industry to utilize and improve 
technology in order to meet that standard in whatever manner they want. 
Additionally, this legislation authorizes up to $100 million for 
invasive species and ballast water technologies research grants.
  I encourage the rest of my colleagues to support legislative efforts 
to control aquatic nuisance species. In 2002, the National Invasive 
Species Act of 1996 expires, and Congress will be tasked with improving 
and reauthorizing this legislation. I believe that a national 
reauthorization is important to create a unified approach rather than 
forcing the States to enact individual standards for ships in an 
attempt to control aquatic nuisance species. However, if efforts to 
reauthorize a national program should stall, I believe that this 
legislation will help protect the Great Lakes from aquatic invaders.
                                 ______