[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 83 (Thursday, June 14, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6323-S6328]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Warner, and Mr. 
        Allen):
  S. 1045. A bill to amend the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration Authorization Act of 1992 to revise and enhance 
authorities, and to authorize appropriations, for the Chesapeake Bay 
Office, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing two measures to 
expand restoration and protection efforts in the Chesapeake Bay 
watershed. Joining me in sponsoring these measures are my colleagues 
Senators Warner, Allen, and Mikulski.
  Nearly two decades ago, the Bay area States and the Federal 
Government signed an historic agreement to work together to restore the 
Chesapeake Bay, our Nation's largest estuary and one of the most 
productive ecosystems in the world. In 1987, the Governors of Maryland, 
Virginia, Pennsylvania, the Chesapeake Bay Commission, the Mayor of the 
District of Columbia and the Administrator of the EPA, on behalf of the 
Federal Government, reaffirmed their commitment to that compact and 
agreed to 29 specific goals and action plans including the 
unprecedented goal of a 40 percent reduction of nitrogen and 
phosphorous loads to the main stem of the Bay by the year 2000. Last 
year, the State and the Federal Government conducted an extensive 
evaluation of cleanup progress since the 1980s and determined that, 
despite important advances, efforts must be redoubled to restore the 
integrity of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. A new Chesapeake 2000 
agreement was signed to serve as a blueprint for the restoration effort 
over the next decade.
  To meet the goals established in the new agreement, it is estimated 
that the local, State and Federal Governments must invest $8.5 billion 
over the course of the next ten years. Thousands of acres of watershed 
property must be preserved, buffer zones to protect rivers and streams 
need to be created, and pollution from all sources will have to be 
further reduced. While $8.5 billion seems like an enormous sum, we 
should remember that the health of Chesapeake is vital not only to the 
more than 15 million people who live in the watershed, but to the 
nation. The Chesapeake Bay watershed is one of our Nation's and the 
world's greatest natural resources covering 64,000 square miles within 
six States. It is a world-class fishery that still produces a 
significant portion of the fin fish and shellfish catch in the United 
States. It provides vital habitat for living resources, including more 
than 3600 species of plants, fish and animals. It is a major resting 
area for migratory waterfowls and birds along the Atlantic including 
many endangered and threatened species. It is also a one-of-a-kind 
recreational asset enjoyed by millions of people, a major commercial 
waterway and shipping center for much of the eastern United States, and 
provides jobs for thousands of people. In short, the Chesapeake Bay is 
a magnificent, multifaceted resource worthy of the highest levels of 
protection and restoration.
  Over the years, human activities have profoundly impacted the Bay. 
Untreated sewage, deforestation, toxic chemicals, runoff and increased 
development have degraded the Bay's water quality and contributed to 
the decline of such key species as oysters and blue crabs and the 
underwater grasses they favor for habitat. We have lost not only 
thousands of jobs in the fishing industry but much of the wilderness 
that defined the watershed. By the year 2020, an additional three 
million people are expected to settle in the watershed and this growth 
could eclipse the nutrient reduction and habitat protection gains of 
the past. Not meeting the investment needs of the next 10 years risks 
reversing all that has been achieved over the past two decades in 
cleaning up the Bay.
  The first measure we are introducing would establish a grant program 
in the Environmental Protection Agency to support the installation of 
nutrient reduction technologies at major wastewater treatment 
facilities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Despite important water 
quality improvements over the past decade, nutrient over-enrichment 
remains the most serious pollution problem facing the Bay. The 
overabundance of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorous continues to 
rob the Bay of life sustaining oxygen. Recent modeling of EPA's Bay 
Program has found that total nutrient discharges must be reduced by 
more than 35 percent from current levels to restore the Chesapeake Bay 
and its major tributaries to health. To do so, nitrogen discharges from 
all sources must be reduced drastically below current levels. Annual 
nitrogen discharges into the Bay will need to be cut by at least 110 
million pounds from the current 300 million pounds to less than 190 
million pounds. Municipal wastewater treatment plants, in particular, 
will have to reduce nitrogen discharges by nearly 75 percent.
  There are 288 major wastewater treatment plants in the Chesapeake Bay 
watershed: Pennsylvania, 124, Maryland, 62, Virginia, 70, New York, 18, 
Delaware, 3, Washington, D.C., 2, and West Virginia, 9. These plants 
contribute about 60 million pounds of nitrogen per year, one fifth, of 
the total loads of nitrogen to the Bay. Upgrading these plants with 
nutrient removal technologies to achieve nitrogen reductions of 3 mg/
liter would remove 46 million pounds of nitrogen in the Bay each year 
or 40 percent of the total nitrogen reductions needed. Nutrient removal 
technologies have other benefits as well, they provide significant 
savings in energy usage, 20 to 30 percent, in chemical usage, more than 
50 percent, and in the amount of sludge produced, five to 15 percent. 
They are one of the

[[Page S6324]]

most cost-effective methods of reducing nutrients discharged to the 
Bay.
  My legislation would provide grants for 55 percent of the capital 
cost of upgrading all 288 plants with nutrient removal technologies 
capable of achieving nitrogen reductions of 3 mg/liter. The total cost 
of these upgrades is estimated at $1.2 billion, with a federal share of 
$660 million. Any publically owned wastewater treatment plant which has 
a permitted design capacity to threat an annual average of 0.5 million 
gallons per day within the Chesapeake Bay watershed portion of New 
York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, Delaware, Virginia and the 
District of Columbia would be eligible to receive these grants. As a 
signatory to the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the EPA has an important 
responsibility to assist the states with financing these water 
infrastructure needs.
  The second measure would reauthorize the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric, NOAA, Chesapeake Bay Office. I first introduced a similar 
measure in June, 2000, but unfortunately it was not acted upon prior to 
the adjournment of the 106th Congress.
  The NOAA Chesapeake Bay office, NCBO, was first established in 1992 
pursuant to Public Law 102-567. It serves as the focal point for all of 
NOAA's activities within the Chesapeake Bay watershed and is a vital 
part of the effort to achieve the long-term goal of the Bay Program, 
restoring the Bay's living resources to healthy and balanced levels. 
During the past nine years, the NCBO has made great strides in 
realizing the objectives of the NOAA Authorization Act of 1992 and the 
overall Bay Program living resource goals. Working with other Bay 
Program partners, important progress has been made in surveying and 
assessing fishery resources in the Bay, developing fishery management 
plans for selected species, undertaking habitat restoration projects, 
removing barriers to fish passage, and undertaking important remote 
sensing and data analysis activities.

  NOAA's responsibilities to the Bay restoration effort are far from 
complete, however. Some populations of major species of fish and 
shellfish in Chesapeake Bay such as shad and oysters, remain severely 
depressed, while others, such as blue crab are at risk. Bay-wide, some 
16 of 25 ecologically important species are in decline or severe 
decline, due to disease, habitat loss, over-fishing and other factors. 
The underwater grasses that once sustained these fisheries are only at 
a fraction of their historic levels. Research and monitoring must be 
continued and enhanced to track living resource trends, evaluate the 
responses of the estuary's biota to changes in their environment and 
establish clear management goals and progress indicators for restoring 
the productivity, diversity and abundance of these species. Chesapeake 
2000, the new Bay Agreement, has identified several living resource 
goals which will require strong NOAA involvement to achieve.
  The legislation which we are introducing would provide NOAA with 
additional resources and authority necessary to ensure its continued 
full participation in the Bay's restoration and in meeting with goals 
and objectives of Chesapeake 2000. First, the legislation authorizes 
and directs NOAA to undertake a special five-year study, in cooperation 
with the scientific community of the Chesapeake Bay and appropriate 
other federal agencies, to develop the knowledge base required for 
understanding multi-species interactions and developing multi-species 
management plans. To date, fisheries management in Chesapeake Bay and 
other waters, has been largely based upon single-species plans that 
often ignore the critical relationships between water and habitat 
quality, ecosystem health and the food webs that support the Bay's 
living resources. There is a growing consensus between scientific 
leaders and managers alike that we must move beyond the one-species-at-
a-time approach toward a wider, multi-species and ecosystem 
perspective. Chesapeake 2000 calls for developing multi-species 
management plans for targeted species by the year 2005 and implementing 
the plans by 2007. In order to achieve these goals, NOAA must take a 
leadership role and support a sustained research and monitoring 
program.
  Second, the legislation authorizes NOAA to carry out a small-scale 
fishery and habitat restoration grant and technical assistance program 
to help citizens organizations and local governments in the Chesapeake 
Bay watershed undertake habitat, fish and shellfish restoration 
projects. Experience has shown that, with the proper tools and 
training, citizens' groups and local communities can play a tremendous 
role in fisheries and habitat protection and restoration efforts. The 
Chesapeake Bay Foundation's oyster gardening program, for example, has 
proven to be highly successful in training citizens to grow oysters at 
their docks to help restore oysters' populations in the Bay. The new 
Bay Agreement has identified a critical need to not only to expand and 
promote community-based programs but to restore historic levels of 
oyster production, restore living resource habitat and submerged 
aquatic vegetation. The NOAA small-grants program, which this bill 
would authorize, would complement EPA's Chesapeake Bay small watershed 
program, and make ``seed'' grants available on a competitive, cost-
sharing basis to local governments and nonprofit organizations to 
implement hands-on projects such as improvement of fish passageways, 
creating artificial or natural reefs, restoring wetlands and seagrass 
beds, and producing oysters for restoration projects.

  Third, the legislation would establish an internet-based Coastal 
Predictions Center for the Chesapeake Bay. Resource managers and 
scientists alike agree that we must make better use of the various 
modeling and monitoring systems and new technologies to improve 
prediction capabilities and response to physical and chemical events 
within the Bay and tributary rivers. There are substantial amounts of 
data collected and compiled by Federal, state and local government 
agencies and academic institutions including information on weather, 
tides, currents, circulation, climate, land use, coastal environmental 
quality, aquatic living resources and habitat conditions. 
Unfortunately, little of this data is coordinated and organized in a 
manner that is useful to the wide range of potential users. The Coastal 
Predictions Center would serve as a knowledge bank for assembling 
monitoring and modeling data from relevant government agencies and 
academic institutions, interpreting that data, and organizing it into 
products that are useful to resource managers, scientists and the 
public.
  Finally, the legislation would direct NOAA to implement an education 
program targeted toward the 3 million pupils in kindergarten through 
12th grade in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. One of the key goals of the 
Chesapeake 2000 Agreement is to expand education and public awareness 
of the Bay and local watersheds. Among other activities, the Agreement 
calls for providing meaningful Bay or stream outdoor experiences for 
every school student in the watershed before graduation from high 
school, incorporating the Chesapeake Bay watershed into school 
curricula, and providing students and teachers alike with information 
to increase awareness of Bay living resource and other issues. Our 
legislation would enable NOAA to enter into partnerships with non-
profit environmental organizations in the region experienced in 
conducting environmental education programs, the Chesapeake Bay 
Foundation and the Living Classrooms Foundation, for example, and to 
expand opportunities for students and teachers to participate in Bay 
and other field and classroom learning experiences which support 
Chesapeake Bay restoration and protection efforts.
  The legislation increases the authorization for the NOAA Bay Program 
from the current level of $2.5 million to $8.5 million per year to 
enhance current activities and to carry out these new initiatives. For 
more than a decade, funding for NOAA's Bay Program has remained static 
at an annual average of $1.9 million. If we are to achieve the 
ultimate, long-term goal of the Bay Program, protecting, restoring and 
maintaining the health of the living resources of the Bay, additional 
financial resources must be provided.
  These two measures would provide an important boost to our efforts to 
save the Chesapeake Bay. They are strongly supported by the Chesapeake 
Bay Commission, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and other organizations 
in the

[[Page S6325]]

watershed. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the measures 
and supporting letters be printed in the Record. I urge my colleagues 
to join with us in supporting the two measures and continue the 
momentum contributing to the improvement and enhancement of our 
Nation's most valuable and treasured natural resource.
  There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1044

       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 ``Chesapeake Bay Watershed 
     Nutrient Removal Assistance Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) nutrient pollution from point sources and nonpoint 
     sources continues to be the most significant water quality 
     problem in the Chesapeake Bay watershed;
       (2) a key commitment of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement, an 
     interstate agreement among the Administrator, the Chesapeake 
     Bay Commission, the District of Columbia, and the States of 
     Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, is to achieve the goal 
     of correcting the nutrient-related problems in the Chesapeake 
     Bay by 2010;
       (3) by correcting those problems, the Chesapeake Bay and 
     its tidal tributaries may be removed from the list of 
     impaired bodies of water designated by the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency under section 303(d) of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d));
       (4) nearly 300 major sewage treatment plants located in the 
     Chesapeake Bay watershed annually discharge approximately 
     60,000,000 pounds of nitrogen, or the equivalent of 20 
     percent of the total nitrogen load, into the Chesapeake Bay; 
     and
       (5) nutrient removal technology is 1 of the most reliable, 
     cost-effective, and direct methods for reducing the flow of 
     nitrogen from point sources into the Chesapeake Bay.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to authorize the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to provide financial assistance to States 
     and municipalities for use in upgrading publicly-owned 
     wastewater treatment plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed 
     with nutrient removal technologies; and
       (2) to further the goal of restoring the water quality of 
     the Chesapeake Bay to conditions that are protective of human 
     health and aquatic living resources.

     SEC. 3. SEWAGE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY GRANT PROGRAM.

       The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

                       ``TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

     ``SEC. 701. SEWAGE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY GRANT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Definition of Eligible Facility.--In this section, 
     the term `eligible facility' means a municipal wastewater 
     treatment plant that--
       ``(1) as of the date of enactment of this title, has a 
     permitted design capacity to treat an annual average of at 
     least 500,000 gallons of wastewater per day; and
       ``(2) is located within the Chesapeake Bay watershed in any 
     of the States of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, 
     Virginia, or West Virginia or in the District of Columbia.
       ``(b) Grant Program.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this title, the Administrator shall establish 
     a program within the Environmental Protection Agency to 
     provide grants to States and municipalities to upgrade 
     eligible facilities with nutrient removal technologies.
       ``(2) Priority.--In providing a grant under paragraph (1), 
     the Administrator shall--
       ``(A) consult with the Chesapeake Bay Program Office;
       ``(B) give priority to eligible facilities at which 
     nutrient removal upgrades would--
       ``(i) produce the greatest nutrient load reductions at 
     points of discharge; or
       ``(ii) result in the greatest environmental benefits to 
     local bodies of water surrounding, and the main stem of, the 
     Chesapeake Bay; and
       ``(iii) take into consideration the geographic distribution 
     of the grants.
       ``(3) Application.--
       ``(A) In general.--On receipt of an application from a 
     State or municipality for a grant under this section, if the 
     Administrator approves the request, the Administrator shall 
     transfer to the State or municipality the amount of 
     assistance requested.
       ``(B) Form.--An application submitted by a State or 
     municipality under subparagraph (A) shall be in such form and 
     shall include such information as the Administrator may 
     prescribe.
       ``(4) Use of funds.--A State or municipality that receives 
     a grant under this section shall use the grant to upgrade 
     eligible facilities with nutrient removal technologies that 
     are designed to reduce total nitrogen in discharged 
     wastewater to an average annual concentration of 3 milligrams 
     per liter.
       ``(5) Cost sharing.--
       ``(A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     upgrading any eligible facility as described in paragraph (1) 
     using funds provided under this section shall not exceed 55 
     percent.
       ``(B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the 
     costs of upgrading any eligible facility as described in 
     paragraph (1) using funds provided under this section may be 
     provided in the form of funds made available to a State or 
     municipality under--
       ``(i) any provision of this Act other than this section 
     (including funds made available from a State revolving fund 
     established under title VI); or
       ``(ii) any other Federal or State law.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this section $132,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2003 through 2007, to remain available until expended.
       ``(2) Administrative costs.--The Administrator may use not 
     to exceed 4 percent of any amount made available under 
     paragraph (1) to pay administrative costs incurred in 
     carrying out this section.''.
                                  ____


                                S. 1045

       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 ``NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office 
     Reauthorization Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. CHESAPEAKE BAY OFFICE.

       (a) Establishment.--Section 307(a) of the National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 
     U.S.C. 1511d(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Estuarine Resources''; 
     and
       (2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
       ``(2) The Secretary of Commerce shall appoint as Director 
     of the Office an individual who has knowledge of and 
     experience in research or resource management efforts in the 
     Chesapeake Bay.''.
       (b) Functions.--
       (1) Section 307(b)(3) of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 
     U.S.C. 1511d(b)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) facilitate coordination of the programs and 
     activities of the various organizations and facilities within 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 
     Chesapeake Bay units of the National Estuarine Research 
     Reserve System, the Chesapeake Bay Regional Sea Grant 
     Programs, and the Cooperative Oxford Lab, including--
       ``(A) programs and activities in--
       ``(i) coastal and estuarine research, monitoring, and 
     assessment;
       ``(ii) fisheries research and stock assessments;
       ``(iii) data management;
       ``(iv) remote sensing;
       ``(v) coastal management;
       ``(vi) habitat conservation and restoration; and
       ``(vii) atmospheric deposition; and
       ``(B) programs and activities of the Cooperative Oxford 
     Laboratory of the National Ocean Service with respect to--
       ``(i) nonindigenous species;
       ``(ii) marine species pathology;
       ``(iii) human pathogens in marine environments; and
       ``(iv) ecosystems health;''.
       (2) Section 307(b)(7) of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 
     U.S.C. 1511d(b)(7)) is amended by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting the following: ``, which report shall 
     include an action plan consisting of--
       ``(A) a list of recommended research, monitoring, and data 
     collection activities necessary to continue implementation of 
     the strategy described in paragraph (2); and
       ``(B) proposals for--
       ``(i) continuing and new National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration activities in the Chesapeake Bay; and
       ``(ii) the integration of those activities with the 
     activities of the partners in the Chesapeake Bay Program to 
     meet the commitments of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement and 
     subsequent agreements.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 307 of the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 
     1992 (15 U.S.C. 1511d) is amended by striking the section 
     heading and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 307. CHESAPEAKE BAY OFFICE.''.

     SEC. 3. MULTIPLE SPECIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGY; CHESAPEAKE BAY 
                   FISHERY AND HABITAT RESTORATION SMALL GRANTS 
                   PROGRAM; COASTAL PREDICTION CENTER.

       The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     Authorization Act of 1992 is amended by inserting after 
     section 307 (15 U.S.C. 1511d) the following:

     ``SEC. 307A. MULTIPLE SPECIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGY.

       ``(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Director of the Chesapeake 
     Bay Office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration shall commence a 5-year study, in cooperation 
     with the scientific community of the Chesapeake Bay and 
     appropriate Federal agencies--
       ``(1) to determine and expand the understanding of the role 
     and response of living resources in the Chesapeake Bay 
     ecosystem; and
       ``(2) to develop a multiple species management strategy for 
     the Chesapeake Bay.

[[Page S6326]]

       ``(b) Required Elements of Study.--In order to improve the 
     understanding necessary for the development of the strategy 
     under subsection (a), the study shall--
       ``(1) determine the current status and trends of fish and 
     shellfish that live in the Chesapeake Bay estuary and are 
     selected for study;
       ``(2) evaluate and assess interactions among the fish and 
     shellfish described in paragraph (1) and other living 
     resources, with particular attention to the impact of changes 
     within and among trophic levels; and
       ``(3) recommend management actions to optimize the return 
     of a healthy and balanced ecosystem for the Chesapeake Bay.

     ``SEC. 307B. CHESAPEAKE BAY FISHERY AND HABITAT RESTORATION 
                   SMALL GRANTS PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of the Chesapeake Bay 
     Office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     (referred to in this section as the `Director'), in 
     cooperation with the Chesapeake Executive Council (as defined 
     in section 307(e)), shall carry out a community-based fishery 
     and habitat restoration small grants and technical assistance 
     program in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
       ``(b) Projects.--
       ``(1) Support.--The Director shall make grants under the 
     program under subsection (a) to pay the Federal share of the 
     cost of projects that are carried out by eligible entities 
     described in subsection (c) for the restoration of fisheries 
     and habitats in the Chesapeake Bay.
       ``(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of a 
     project under paragraph (1) shall not exceed 75 percent of 
     the total cost of that project.
       ``(3) Types of projects.--Projects for which grants may be 
     made under the program include--
       ``(A) the improvement of fish passageways;
       ``(B) the creation of natural or artificial reefs or 
     substrata for habitats;
       ``(C) the restoration of wetland or sea grass;
       ``(D) the production of oysters for restoration projects; 
     and
       ``(E) the identification and characterization of 
     contaminated habitats, and the development of restoration 
     plans for those habitats in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
       ``(c) Eligible Entities.--The following entities are 
     eligible to receive grants under the program under this 
     section:
       ``(1) The government of a political subdivision of a State 
     in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and the Government of the 
     District of Columbia.
       ``(2) An organization in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (such 
     as an educational institution or a community organization) 
     that is described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 and is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) 
     of the Code.
       ``(d) Additional Requirements.--The Director may prescribe 
     any additional requirements, including procedures, that the 
     Director considers necessary to carry out the program under 
     this section.

     ``SEC. 307C. COASTAL PREDICTION CENTER.

       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Director of the Chesapeake Bay 
     Office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     (referred to in this section as the `Director'), in 
     collaboration with regional scientific institutions, shall 
     establish a coastal prediction center for the Chesapeake Bay 
     (referred to in this section as the `center').
       ``(2) Purpose of center.--The center shall serve as a 
     knowledge bank for--
       ``(A) assembling, integrating, and modeling coastal 
     information and data from appropriate government agencies and 
     scientific institutions;
       ``(B) interpreting the data; and
       ``(C) organizing the data into predictive products that are 
     useful to policy makers, resource managers, scientists, and 
     the public.
       ``(b) Activities.--
       ``(1) Information and prediction system.--The center shall 
     develop an Internet-based information system for integrating, 
     interpreting, and disseminating coastal information and 
     predictions concerning--
       ``(A) climate;
       ``(B) land use;
       ``(C) coastal pollution;
       ``(D) coastal environmental quality;
       ``(E) ecosystem health and performance;
       ``(F) aquatic living resources and habitat conditions; and
       ``(G) weather, tides, currents, and circulation that affect 
     the distribution of sediments, nutrients, and organisms, 
     coastline erosion, and related physical and chemical events 
     within the Chesapeake Bay and the tributaries of the 
     Chesapeake Bay.
       ``(2) Agreements to provide data, information, and 
     support.--The Director may enter into agreements with other 
     entities of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, other appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     government agencies, and academic institutions, to provide 
     and interpret data and information, and provide appropriate 
     support, relating to the activities of the center.
       ``(3) Agreements relating to information products.--The 
     Director may enter into grants, contracts, and interagency 
     agreements with eligible entities for the collection, 
     processing, analysis, interpretation, and electronic 
     publication of information products for the center.''.

     SEC. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION.

       The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     Authorization Act of 1992 is amended by inserting after 
     section 307C (as added by section 3) the following:

     ``SEC. 307D. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PILOT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Pilot Program Established.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this section, the Director, in 
     cooperation with the Chesapeake Executive Council, shall 
     establish the Chesapeake Bay Environmental Education Program 
     to improve the understanding of elementary and secondary 
     school students and teachers of the living resources of the 
     ecosystem of the Chesapeake Bay, and to meet the educational 
     goals of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement.
       ``(b) Grant Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director, through the pilot program 
     established under subsection (a), shall make grants to not-
     for-profit institutions (or consortia of such institutions) 
     to pay the federal share of the cost of programs described in 
     paragraph (3).
       ``(2) Criteria.--The Director shall award grants under this 
     subsection based on the experience of the applicant in 
     providing environmental education and training programs 
     regarding the Chesapeake Bay watershed to a range of 
     participants and in a range of settings.
       ``(3) Functions and Activities.--Grants awarded under this 
     subsection may be used to support education and training 
     programs that--
       ``(A) provide classroom education, including the use of 
     distance learning technologies, on the issues, science, and 
     problems of the living resources of the Chesapeake Bay 
     watershed;
       ``(B) provide meaningful outdoor experience on the 
     Chesapeake Bay, or on a stream or in a local watershed of the 
     Chesapeake Bay, in the design and implementation of field 
     studies, monitoring and assessments, or restoration 
     techniques for living resources;
       ``(C) provide professional development for teachers related 
     to the science of the Chesapeake Bay watershed and the 
     dissemination of pertinent education materials oriented to 
     varying grade levels;
       ``(D) demonstrate or disseminate environmental educational 
     tools and materials related to the Chesapeake Bay watershed;
       ``(E) demonstrate field methods, practices and techniques 
     including assessment of environmental and ecological 
     conditions and analysis of environmental problems; and
       ``(F) develop or disseminate projects designed to--
       ``(i) enhance understanding and assessment of a specific 
     environmental problem in the Chesapeake Bay watershed or of a 
     goal of the Chesapeake Bay Program; or
       ``(ii) protect or restore living resources of the 
     Chesapeake Bay watershed.
       ``(4) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of a 
     program under paragraph (1) shall not exceed 75 percent of 
     the total cost of that program.
       ``(5) Program review.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     on which the Director awards the first grant under this 
     subsection, and annually thereafter, the Director shall 
     conduct a detailed review and evaluation of the programs 
     supported by grants awarded under this subsection to 
     determine whether the quality of the content, delivery, and 
     outcome of the program warrants continued support.
       ``(c) Procedures.--The Director shall establish procedures, 
     including safety protocols, as necessary for carrying out the 
     purposes of this section.
       ``(d) Termination and Report.--
       ``(1) Termination.--The program established under this 
     section shall be effective during the 4-year period beginning 
     on October 1, 2001.
       ``(2) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2005, the 
     Director, in consultation with the Chesapeake Executive 
     Council, shall submit a report through the Administrator of 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to Congress 
     regarding this program and, on the appropriate role of 
     Federal, State and local governments in continuing the 
     program established under this section.
       ``(e) Definition.--In this section, the term `Chesapeake 
     2000 agreement' means the agreement between the United 
     States, the States of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, 
     and the District of Columbia entered into on June 28, 
     2000.''.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 307(d) of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 
     U.S.C. 1511d(d)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Department of Commerce for the Chesapeake Bay Office 
     $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
       ``(2) Amounts for programs.--Of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for each fiscal year under paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) not more than $2,500,000 shall be available to 
     operate the Chesapeake Bay Office and to carry out section 
     307A;
       ``(B) not more than $1,000,000 shall be available to carry 
     out section 307B; and
       ``(C) not more than $500,000 shall be available to carry 
     out section 307C.
       ``(D) not more than $2,000,000 shall be available to carry 
     out section 307D.

[[Page S6327]]

       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2 of the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Fisheries 
     Program Authorization Act (97 Stat. 1409) is amended by 
     striking subsection (e), as added by section 307(d) of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization 
     Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4285).

     SEC. 6. TECHNICAL CORRECTION.

       Section 307(b) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 U.S.C. 1511d(b)) 
     is amended by striking ``Chesapeake Bay Executive Council'' 
     and inserting ``Chesapeake Executive Council''.
                                  ____



                                    Chesapeake Bay Foundation,

                                      Annapolis, MD, May 15, 2001.
     Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Sarbanes: Last year, a few Members claimed 
     that the Florida Everglades was a national treasure. I know 
     you agree with me that the Chesapeake Bay, which drains six 
     states and the District, has more claim to being a national 
     treasure than the Florida Everglades.
       I am writing to thank you for your steadfast support for 
     the Bay. I am also writing to urge you to pass new 
     legislation that will fund wastewater treatment plant 
     upgrades to reduce nutrient pollution in the Bay. Nutrient 
     pollution is the Bay's number one problem. The Bay and its 
     tributaries receive about twice as much nitrogen and 
     phosphorus as they should. Sewage plants are not the sole 
     source, but new technology makes them the low-hanging fruit 
     as we seek reductions.
       First, let me give credit where it is due. Over 70 large 
     wastewater treatment plants have been upgraded with 
     technology that dramatically reduces the amount of nitrogen 
     and phosphorus in the treated discharge. Some plants, like 
     the Blue Plains facility in DC, have gone beyond what was 
     asked of them. Virginia and Maryland and the local 
     municipalities have shouldered that cost so far.
       Nevertheless, to make a real dent in nutrient pollution, we 
     need to get serious about getting all the major plants to 
     remove nitrogen and phosphorus from the effluent. Another 218 
     major plants await upgrades. These plants need to install 
     state-of-the-art technology, which would cut 85% of the 
     nitrogen and phosphorus pollution from the treated discharge. 
     That would slash nutrients in the Bay by more than 50 million 
     pounds each year. I've attached a copy of a letter from my 
     staff to yours that provides a detailed background briefing 
     on this subject.
       The Clean Water Act promised citizens that they would have 
     clean waters by now. Sadly, the Bay is still polluted thirty 
     years later. If we fail to greatly reduce nutrient pollution 
     in the next few years, the Bay will not be the only loser. 
     Commercial fishermen and their families will suffer. 
     Waterfront property owners will not realize a gain in their 
     investment. Recreational opportunities--so important in this 
     workaholic world--will be diminished. And certainly, an 
     unhealthy Bay imperils human health.
       The Chesapeake Bay Foundation stands ready to galvanize 
     public support behind your effort to fund these upgrades. 
     With 92,000 members, a dedicated professional staff and a 
     volunteer board, we are determined to do whatever it takes to 
     save the Bay. Thank you again for all of your hard work on 
     behalf of the Bay.
           Sincerely,
                                                 William C. Baker,
     President.
                                  ____



                                    Chesapeake Bay Commission,

                                      Annapolis, MD, May 23, 2001.
     Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Sarbanes: We write in support of your efforts 
     to reduce the environmental and public health impacts of one 
     of the major point sources of nutrient pollution to the 
     Chesapeake Bay--municipal wastewater treatment plants. As you 
     know, nearly 300 major sewerage treatment plants located in 
     the Chesapeake Bay watershed discharge approximately 60 
     million pounds of nitrogen, amounting to 20 percent of the 
     total nitrogen load, into the Chesapeake Bay.
       Nutrient pollution has been a particularly difficult and 
     persistent problem in our efforts to protect and restore the 
     Chesapeake Bay's ecosystem. In 1987, the Chesapeake Bay 
     Commission and our Bay partners committed to achieving a 40 
     percent reduction in controllable nutrient loads to the Bay 
     by the year 2000. While measurable pollution reductions were 
     achieved despite continued population growth and development, 
     the Chesapeake Bay Program estimates that at least an 
     additional 100 million lbs. of nitrogen must be removed in 
     order to correct the Bay's nutrient-related problems by 2010.
       Fortunately, the Bay states have led the way in the 
     application of advanced nutrient removal technologies. For 
     example, of Maryland's 66 wastewater treatment plants, 
     biological nutrient removal (BNR) technology is in operation 
     at 34 plants, under construction at 9 plants, and all but one 
     of the remaining wastewater treatment plants have signed 
     cost-share agreements for implementation of BNR. While this 
     technology is one of the most reliable and cost-effective 
     means of reducing nutrient loads to the Bay, it is 
     prohibitively expensive without the combined contribution of 
     local, state, and Federal funds. To date, the financial 
     burden for upgrading aging sewerage infrastructure has rested 
     largely upon local governments, which have a limited capacity 
     to support such expensive capital improvements. The 
     Chesapeake Bay Foundation has derived a rough estimate of 
     $1.2 billion for the application of BNR at treatment plants 
     within the Bay watershed over a 10-year period.
       By establishing the proposed grant program under the 
     ``Chesapeake Bay Watershed Nutrient Removal Assistance Act,'' 
     state and local funds could be matched with Federal funds to 
     initiate urgently needed upgrades to eligible wastewater 
     treatment facilities. By prioritizing those facilities that 
     would produce the greatest nutrient load reductions at points 
     of discharge and the greatest environmental benefits to local 
     bodies of water, this program would ensure significant and 
     measurable improvements to the water quality and living 
     resources of the Chesapeake Bay. We commend you and your 
     colleagues for addressing this important issue and offer our 
     assistance in your endeavor.
           Sincerely,
     Brian E. Frosh,
       Chairman (Senate of Maryland).
     Robert S. Bloxom,
       Vice-Chairman (Virginia House of Delegates).
     Russ Fairchild,
       Vice-Chairman (Pennsylvania House of Representatives).
                                  ____

                                               Maryland Department


                                           of the Environment,

                                     Baltimore, MD, June 12, 2001.
     Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Sarbanes: The State of Maryland has been 
     pursuing an aggressive program of reducing nutrients from 
     publicly owned wastewater treatment plants through its 
     Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Cost-Share Program. This 
     State funded program provides 50% of the costs to upgrade 
     existing wastewater treatment plants with pollutant removal 
     technologies that go beyond regulatory requirements to help 
     meet the goal of cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay and its 
     tributaries.
       This State funded program has benefited from your efforts 
     as well as those of Senator Mikulski through the earmarking 
     of special federal appropriations to some of the wastewater 
     treatment plants targeted for these BNR upgrades. This 
     assistance has made the needed improvements affordable to the 
     citizens served by these treatment plants and advanced the 
     goals of the Chesapeake Bay Program.
       I am writing to you today to request your continued support 
     of the BNR Program. Maryland has accomplished much in this 
     program. Of the 66 targeted plants, 34 are in operation and 9 
     are under construction. The remaining plants are in planning 
     and design. Maryland has provided $163 million to fund these 
     improvements, with another $73 to $100 million estimated to 
     be needed to complete the program. The local governments have 
     committed an equal share, and have the need for additional 
     funding to implement BNR. With full implementation of the BNR 
     Program, nitrogen loadings to the Bay will be reduced from 32 
     to 15.2 million pounds per year.
       Achieving this level of nutrient reduction is more critical 
     than ever, as the new goals being evaluated for the 
     Chesapeake 2000 Agreement are refined. It is already clear 
     that we will have to do much more to reduce both point 
     sources and non-point sources of nutrient pollution to 
     restore the Bay.
       BNR will remain the cornerstone of the point survey 
     strategy to achieve the needed nutrient reductions. While the 
     BNR program has targeted a nitrogen concentration of 8 mg/l, 
     many of the plants designed with BNR will be able to achieve 
     even lower concentrations. The plants currently in planning 
     and design are being evaluated and designed to be able to 
     achieve lower concentrations, in anticipation of more 
     ambitious Bay goals. In some cases, this may increase project 
     costs, but is a reasonable investment to protect the Bay and 
     its tributaries.
       In the interest of maintaining the leadership of the 
     Chesapeake Bay restoration effort by providing a nationally 
     significant demonstration effort, I am asking for your 
     continuing assistance in helping Maryland, and the other 
     jurisdictions in the Chesapeake Bay region, meet these 
     ambitious yet critical nutrient reduction goals. The creation 
     of a special grant program to help local governments upgrade 
     their wastewater treatment plants to reach the lowest 
     possible nutrient discharge levels would ensure that the 
     large publicly owned wastewater treatment plants in the 
     region are maximizing pollutant removals to the benefit of 
     the Chesapeake Bay.
       The beneficiaries of this capital investment will be not 
     only the future residents in the Chesapeake Bay region, who 
     will be able to enjoy the environment and economic wealth of 
     the Bay and the living resources with which we share this 
     unique resource, but also the nation which will benefit from

[[Page S6328]]

     the knowledge gained from the Chesapeake Bay restoration 
     effort.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Jane Nishida,
                                                        Secretary.
                                 ______