[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 99 (Tuesday, June 29, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5539-S5544]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mrs. HAGAN (for herself and Mr. Franken):
S. 3543. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
expand access to medication therapy management services under the
Medicare prescription drug program; to the Committee on Finance.
Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, today, I am proud to introduce the
Medication Therapy Management, MTM, Expanded Benefits Act of 2010, with
my colleague from Minnesota, Senator Franken.
A recent analysis conducted by the New England Healthcare Institute
estimates that the overall cost of medication nonadherence is as much
as $290 billion per year. According to a recent article published in
the New England Journal of Medicine, over $100 billion is spent
annually on avoidable hospitalizations because patients do not take
their medications correctly.
Not only does nonadherence cost our system billions of dollars,
nonadherence to medication regimens also affects the quality of life
for seniors and may lead to early death. The elderly typically take
many more prescription medicines than the general population and
therefore are at greater risk for problems associated with improper use
of medications. For example, the same New England Journal of Medicine
article I just reference found that better adherence to
antihypertensive treatment alone could prevent 89,000 premature deaths
in the U.S. annually.
With as much as one half of all patients in the U.S. not following
their doctors' orders regarding their medications, medication therapy
management could help reduce some of the wasted health care costs in
our system.
North Carolina has implemented some very successful MTM programs.
The Asheville Project, which focuses on diabetes, asthma, and
cardiovascular disease, has seen improved health outcomes and
significant savings among city employees since it began in 1997. For
example, in the Asheville Project's diabetes MTM Project, they have
seen a decrease in medical costs of between $1,622 to $3,356 per
patient per year; a decrease in insurance claims of $2,704 per patient
in year 1 and a $6,502 decrease in year 5; a 50 percent decrease in use
of sick days; and increased productivity gains estimated at $18,000
annually.
In 2007, the North Carolina Health and Wellness Trust Fund Commission
launched an innovative statewide program, Checkmeds NC, to provide MTM
services to North Carolina seniors. During the program's first year,
more than 15,000 North Carolina seniors and 285 pharmacists
participated. The seniors bring all of their prescriptions, over-the-
counter medicines, vitamins and supplements to the pharmacy to be
thoroughly reviewed in a one-on-one session. The pharmacist follows up
and educates the patient about his or her medication regimen. The
program saved an estimated $10 million, and countless health problems
were avoided.
During consideration of health care reform, I was pleased to have
successfully secured language in the bill that built off these North
Carolina models and implemented MTM nationally for seniors suffering
from two or more chronic conditions.
The bill I am introducing today takes MTM one step further.
Specifically, this bill would expand MTM eligibility to seniors with
any chronic condition that accounts for high spending in our health
care system, such as heart failure and diabetes. Currently, only 12.9
percent of Part D beneficiaries are eligible under the MTM criteria for
multiple chronic conditions. However, of those, more than 85 percent
have chosen to participate in the benefit. Clearly this program is very
popular and widely utilized by those who are already eligible. By
expanding eligibility to more seniors, MTM will certainly result in
Medicare savings.
The bill also ensures access to MTM for seniors at a pharmacy or with
a qualified health care provider of their choice.
To ensure pharmacists and health care providers are able to provide
MTM to seniors, this bill ensures they are appropriately reimbursed for
their time and service. This provision will permit pharmacies and other
health care providers to spend considerable time and resources
evaluating a person's drug routine and educating them on proper usage--
all critical components of a successful MTM program.
Finally, this bill would establish standards for data collection to
evaluate and improve the Part D MTM benefit.
The value of MTM is widely known and discussed. I am proud that North
Carolina is a leader in this arena. Expansion of MTM to more seniors
will no doubt improve their overall health, while at the same time
reducing waste in our health care system.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, I am proud today to be joining Senator
Hagan in introducing the MTM Expanded Benefits Act.
We all know that prescription drugs are an essential part of health
care. What a lot of people don't know is that only about 50 percent of
Americans typically take their medicines as prescribed. This means that
too often, the benefits of these important therapies aren't fully
realized. According to a recent article in the New England Journal of
Medicine, over $100 billion is spent annually on avoidable
hospitalizations because patients don't take their medications
correctly.
The MTM Expanded Benefits Act would help improve the care for seniors
by increasing access to the medication therapy management benefit--also
known as MTM--in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program.
Medication therapy management is a proven set of services that helps
patients get the best possible results from their medications. MTM
services are provided by pharmacists who work with patients and their
health care providers to make sure that seniors are taking medications
as they should be. Through MTM, patients get focused education to make
sure they understand their medications--what conditions the drugs treat
and how to avoid drug interactions that can make medications less
effective or even dangerous.
It is not uncommon for a Minnesota senior who has diabetes to be
taking 10 or more medications that are prescribed by multiple
providers. But right now under Medicare, you would have to have at
least four chronic conditions before you would become eligible for MTM.
That just doesn't make sense to me.
Under the MTM Expanded Benefits Act, seniors with any chronic
condition could benefit from MTM. The bill would increase the number of
people eligible for MTM, helping more seniors to access the life saving
and money-saving services.
Congress recognized the value of MTM when it required Medicare Part D
drug plans to offer the service as part of the Medicare Modernization
Act of 2003. Furthermore, State Medicaid Programs, including ours in
Minnesota, use MTM to maximize the value of their pharmacy benefits. As
we reform our health care system and provide insurance coverage to more
Americans, it makes sense to ensure that MTM becomes more widely
adopted throughout our health care system.
And MTM isn't just good for patient health, it also saves money. A
University of Minnesota study showed that when patients were able to
consult with a pharmacist to determine their optimal medication
regimen, total health expenditures decreased from $11,965 to $8,197 per
patient. The reduction in total health expenditures exceeded the cost
of providing MTM services by more than 12 to 1. That is huge.
[[Page S5540]]
The elderly typically take many more prescription medicines than the
general population and therefore are at greater risk for problems
associated with improper use of medications. Improving the Medicare MTM
benefit will help our Nation's seniors get the most out of their
medications while also helping to reduce costs through appropriate
medication use and improved outcomes. I urge my colleagues to support
the MTM Expanded Benefits Act and help support efforts to improve the
prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.
______
By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Tester,
and Mr. Wyden):
S. 3550: A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to
establish within the Environmental Protection Agency a Columbia Basin
Restoration Program; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I rise to speak to legislation I am
introducing today, with my colleagues, Senator Crapo of Idaho, Senators
Baucus and Tester of Montana, and Senator Wyden, from my home state of
Oregon, to protect and restore the Columbia River Basin.
The Columbia River Basin is the great river system that defines the
Pacific Northwest. It runs 1,243 miles from Columbia Lake in British
Columbia to its mouth at Astoria, OR, the first permanent European
settlement west of the Rocky Mountains. Its basin drains 258,000 acres
in seven states, including many of great geological provinces of the
West: the Yellowstone Plateau; the Rocky Mountains; the volcanic Snake
River Plain; Hells Canyon, America's deepest canyon; the basalt plains
and high desert of eastern Oregon and Washington; the majestic Columbia
River Gorge; the volcanic slopes of the Cascade Mountains; and the
temperate rain forests of the Coast Range.
The Columbia River's tributaries are the major rivers of the
Northwest. The Snake River, its longest tributary, runs more than 1,000
miles from near the continental divide in Wyoming's Yellowstone Park to
its mouth with the Columbia in eastern Washington. The Clark Fork is
Montana's largest river by volume, draining much of western Montana and
turning into the Pend Oreille River in Idaho before it flows into the
Columbia just across the border in Canada.
It is also the lifeblood of our economy and has been the foundation
of a trade-based economy stretching back thousands of years, even
before European settlement. Today it is the cornerstone of the region's
shipping network, with ports dotting the river as far upstream as
Lewiston, Idaho, the farthest inland seaport in the west. It was once
the world's largest wild salmon run, with as many as 30 million salmon
returning to spawn in our rivers, and is still a foundation for much of
our commercial and recreational fishing industries and an important
source of fish for many of our Indian tribes.
The Columbia River Basin is the backbone of our energy system, with a
network of dams that provide the majority of the region's electricity,
more electricity than any other river in the country generates. Indeed,
when we measure generating capacity, we talk about 100- and 200-
Megawatt capacity wind farms and we talk about 600- and 800-Megawatt
coal plants. Well, the Grand Coulee dam in central Washington state has
a capacity of 6,800 Megawatts. It was the availability of low-cost
power that brought the industrial era to the Northwest and brought a
host of benefits to our rural residents, from rural electrification to
irrigation for agriculture, as memorialized in the 1940s by Woody
Guthrie. About four million acres of income-producing farm and ranch
land across the Pacific Northwest are irrigated by the Columbia River,
contributing $10 billion to our economy every year.
Unfortunately, the Columbia River Basin is also a river basin that
faces serious challenges. Our rivers are severely polluted. When EPA
completed its Columbia River Basin Fish Contaminant Survey, the agency
looked for 131 chemicals in fish tissues that could be taken up by
humans because of contamination entering the food chain. The study
detected 70 percent of the chemicals EPA was looking for. All 11
species of fish they tested had some level of contamination in their
tissue.
The contamination in these fish poses a health problem for people
throughout our region, but it is the Indian tribes, our neighbors who
have made this basin their home for thousands of years--including the
Warm Springs, the Nez Perce, the Umatilla, and the Yakama--who are
among the most affected. A survey conducted by the Columbia River
Intertribal Fish Commission found that tribal members consume between 6
and 10 times as much fish as the national average. High consumption
rates exist among all tribal members consuming fish as well as among
specific high-risk groups, including breastfeeding women.
In addition, the salmon and steelhead, upon which the tribes and the
fishing communities of the Northwest have so long depended, are in
serious decline.
The good news is that stakeholders across the region are working to
clean up and restore the river. Since the Lower Columbia River estuary
was added to the National Estuary Program, a robust partnership
involving 28 cities, 9 counties, and the states of Oregon and
Washington has come together to coordinate habitat restoration and
toxic contamination reduction in that part of the basin. The EPA has
coordinated stakeholders throughout the basin, including the states of
Idaho and Montana and tribal governments, working to improve toxic
pollution monitoring and reduce and clean up contamination.
But more needs to be done.
While EPA has designated the Columbia River Basin as one of the
nation's Great Water Bodies and has an active program in the basin, it
is the only one of these Great Water Bodies that doesn't receive
designated appropriations to support its restoration. Unlike the
Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes, where Congress has authorized and
funded restoration programs, the Columbia River Basin has no such
program.
It is in that context that I introduce today, along with Senate
colleagues from the Northwest, the Columbia River Basin Restoration Act
of 2010. The bill establishes a clear stakeholder-driven process to
oversee implementation of toxic contamination reduction plans. It
directs EPA to provide technical support to a Working Group of
stakeholders representing important constituencies and representing
every geographic area in the Basin, and it allows those stakeholders to
prioritize projects to implement toxic contamination reduction and to
propose those projects to the EPA for funding.
We have also included an important component related to the Flathead
River Basin in this bill. As my colleague the senior Senator from
Montana can tell you, the Flathead is an amazing pristine gem of a
water body on the far eastern edge of our basin. It forms the western
and southern boundaries of the world's first international peace park,
Glacier-Waterton, and it contains Flathead Lake, the largest freshwater
lake in the West. Senator Baucus has made protecting the Flathead Basin
a major focus and has discussed it many times in our work together on
the Environment and Public Works Committee, and we have been working
together for several months now to make sure we could protect the
Flathead River Basin in this bill. I am glad we were able to include
his provision to do so.
I would particularly like to thank my colleague Senator Crapo from
our neighboring State to the east. Senator Crapo and I have been able
to work together in a true collaborative partnership to propose what we
believe will be an effective, stakeholder-driven program to help our
constituents reduce toxic contamination in waterways that matter so
much to them, and to do so in ways that our constituents design and
prioritize. This bill reflects the interests and concerns of people
from every State in the Northwest, and we will continue to hear and
address their interests and concerns as the legislative process
continues.
I am proud to stand with my colleagues from the Northwest today as we
introduce this bill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
[[Page S5541]]
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3550
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 ``Columbia River Basin
Restoration Act of 2010''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the Columbia River is the largest river in the Pacific
Northwest by volume;
(2) the river is 1,253 miles long, with a drainage basin
that includes 259,000 square miles, extending to 7 States and
British Columbia, Canada, and including all or part of--
(A) multiple national parks;
(B) components of the National Wilderness Preservation
System;
(C) National Monuments;
(D) National Scenic Areas;
(E) National Recreation Areas; and
(F) other areas managed for conservation.
(3) the Columbia River Basin and associated tributaries
(referred to in this Act as the ``Basin'') provide
significant ecological and economic benefits to the Pacific
Northwest and the entire United States;
(4) traditionally, the Basin includes more than 6,000,000
acres of irrigated agricultural land and produces more
hydroelectric power than any other North American river;
(5) the Basin--
(A) historically constituted the largest salmon-producing
river system in the world, with annual returns peaking at as
many as 30,000,000 fish; and
(B) as of the date of enactment of this Act--
(i) supports economically important commercial and
recreational fisheries; and
(ii) is home to 13 species of salmonids and steelhead that
area listed as threatened species or endangered species under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);
(6) the Lower Columbia River Estuary stretches 146 miles
from the Bonneville Dam to the mouth of the Pacific Ocean,
and much of that area is contaminated with toxic chemicals;
(7) the Middle and Upper Columbia River Basin includes
1,050 miles of the mainstem Columbia River upstream of the
Bonneville Dam, including the 1,040 miles of the largest
tributary, the Snake River, and all of the tributaries to
both rivers;
(8) toxic contamination in the Basin poses a significant
threat to the environment and human health;
(9) the nuclear and toxic contamination at the Hanford
Nuclear Reservation and the toxic contamination at Superfund
sites throughout the Basin present an ongoing risk of
contamination throughout the Basin;
(10) polychlorinated biphenyls (commonly known as ``PCBs'')
and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that have been found in
the tissues of salmonids and their prey at concentrations
exceeding levels of concern;
(11) legacy contaminants, including PCBs and
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, the pesticide commonly known
as ``DDT'', were banned in 1972, but are still detected in
river water, sediments, and juvenile Chinook salmon;
(12) pesticides and emerging contaminants, such as
pharmaceutical and personal care products, have been detected
in river water and may have effects including hormone
disruption and impacts on behavior and reproduction;
(13) the Environmental Protection Agency's Columbia River
Basin Fish Contaminant Survey detected the presence of 92
priority pollutants, including PCBs and DDE (a breakdown of
DDT), in fish that are consumed by members of Indian tribes
in the Columbia River Basin, as well as by other individuals
consuming fish throughout the Columbia River Basin, and a
fish consumption survey by the Columbia River Intertribal
Fish Commission showed that tribal members were eating 6 to
11 times more fish than the estimated national average of the
Environmental Protection Agency;
(14) toxic contamination in the Middle and Upper Columbia
River Basins have a direct impact on water quality in the
Lower Columbia River Estuary, and reducing toxic
contamination in the Middle and Upper Columbia River Basin
can have significant benefits for human health and for fish
and wildlife throughout the entire Basin; and
(15) with regard to the Flathead River Basin, in the
easternmost portion of the Columbia River Basin--
(A) the Flathead River Basin--
(i) has high water quality and aquatic biodiversity;
(ii) supports endangered species and species of special
concern listed under United States and Canadian law;
(iii) contains Flathead Lake, the largest freshwater lake
in the western United States;
(iv) is an important wildlife corridor that is home to the
highest density of large and mid-sized carnivores and the
highest diversity of vascular plant species in the United
States; and
(v) supports traditional uses such as hunting, fishing,
recreation, guiding and outfitting, and logging;
(B) the Flathead River originates in British Columbia and
drains into the State of Montana;
(C) such transboundary waters are protected from pollution
under the Treaty Relating to the Boundary Waters and
Questions Arising Along the Boundary Between the United
States and Canada, signed at Washington on January 11, 1909
(36 Stat. 2448; TS 548) (commonly known as the ``Boundary
Waters Treaty of 1909'');
(D) in 1988, the International Joint Commission determined
that the impacts of mining proposals on the environmental
values of the Flathead River Basin, including on water
quality, sport fish populations, and habitat, could not be
fully mitigated;
(E) the Flathead River forms the western and southern
boundaries of the world's first International Peace Park,
Waterton-Glacier, which was inscribed as a World Heritage
Site in 1995 under the auspices of the World Heritage
Convention, adopted by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization General Conference on
November 16, 1972;
(F) at the 33rd session of the World Heritage Committee in
2009, Decision 33 COM 7B.22 (Annex 3) 2009, the World
Heritage Committee urged Canada in 2009 not to permit any
mining or energy development in the Upper Flathead River
Basin until the relevant environmental assessment processes
have been completed and to provide timely opportunities for
the United States to participate in environmental assessment
processes; and
(G) on February 18, 2010, British Columbia and Montana
entered into a memorandum of understanding--
(i) to remove mining and oil and gas development as
permissible land uses in the Flathead River Basin;
(ii) to cooperate on fish and wildlife management;
(iii) to collaborate on environmental assessment of
projects of cross border significance with the potential to
degrade land or water resources; and
(iv) to share information proactively.
SEC. 3. COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.
Title I of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 123. COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN RESTORATION.
``(a) Definitions.--
``(1) Administrator.--The term `Administrator' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
``(2) Columbia river basin.--The term `Columbia River
Basin' means the entire United States portion of the Columbia
River watershed.
``(3) Columbia river basin provinces.--The term `Columbia
River Basin Provinces' means the United States portion of
each of the Columbia River Basin Provinces identified in the
Fish and Wildlife Plan of the Northwest Power and
Conservation Council.
``(4) Columbia river basin toxics reduction action plan.--
``(A) In general.--The term `Columbia River Basin Toxics
Reduction Action Plan' means the plan developed by the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Columbia River Toxics
Reduction Working Group in 2010.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `Columbia River Basin Toxics
Reduction Action Plan' includes any amendments to the plan.
``(5) Estuary partnership.--The term `Estuary Partnership'
means the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, an entity
created by the States of Oregon and Washington and the
Environmental Protection Agency under section 320.
``(6) Estuary plan.--
``(A) In general.--The term `Estuary Plan' means the
Estuary Partnership Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Governors of Oregon and Washington on October 20, 1999, under
section 320.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `Estuary Plan' includes any
amendments to the plan.
``(7) Lower columbia river estuary.--The term `Lower
Columbia River Basin and Estuary' means the mainstem Columbia
River from the Bonneville Dam to the Pacific Ocean and
tidally influenced portions of tributaries to the Columbia
River in that region.
``(8) Middle and upper columbia river basin.--
``(A) In general.--The term `Middle and Upper Columbia
River Basin' means the region consisting of the United States
portion of the Columbia River Basin above Bonneville Dam.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `Middle and Upper Columbia
River Basin' includes--
``(i) the Snake River and associated tributaries; and
``(ii) the Clark Fork and Pend Oreille Rivers and
associated tributaries.
``(9) North fork of the flathead river.--The term `North
Fork of the Flathead River' means the region consisting of
the North Fork of the Flathead River watershed, beginning in
British Columbia, Canada, ending at the confluence of the
North Fork and the Middle Fork of the Flathead River in the
State of Montana.
``(10) Program.--The term `Program' means the Columbia
River Basin Restoration Program established under subsection
(b)(1).
``(11) Transboundary flathead river basin.--The term
`transboundary Flathead River Basin' means the region
consisting of the Flathead River watershed, beginning in
British Columbia, Canada, and ending at Flathead Lake,
Montana.
``(12) Working group.--The term `Working Group' means--
[[Page S5542]]
``(A) the Columbia River Basin Toxics Reduction Working
Group established under subsection (c); and
``(B) with respect to the Lower Columbia River Estuary, the
Estuary Partnership.
``(b) Columbia River Basin Restoration Program.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Administrator shall establish
within the Environmental Protection Agency a Columbia Basin
Restoration Program.
``(2) Delegation of authority; staffing.--The Administrator
shall delegate such authority and provide such additional
staff as are necessary to carry out the Program.
``(3) Scope of program.--
``(A) In general.--The Program shall consist of a
collaborative stakeholder-based approach to reducing toxic
contamination throughout the Columbia River Basin.
``(B) Relationship to existing activities.--The Program
shall--
``(i) build on the work and collaborative structure of the
existing Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group
representing the Federal Government, State, tribal, and local
governments, industry, and nongovernmental organizations,
which was convened in 2005 to develop a collaborative toxic
contamination reduction approach for the Columbia River
Basin;
``(ii) in the Lower Columbia River Basin and Estuary, build
on the work and collaborative structure of the Estuary
Partnership; and
``(iii) coordinate with other efforts, including activities
of other Federal agencies in the Columbia River Basin, to
avoid duplicating activities or functions.
``(C) No effect on existing authority.--The Program shall
not modify any legal or regulatory authority or program in
effect as of the date of enactment of this section, including
the roles of Federal agencies in the Columbia River Basin.
``(4) Duties.--The Administrator shall--
``(A) provide the Working Group with data, analysis,
reports, or other information;
``(B) provide technical assistance to the Working Group,
and to States, local government entities, and Indian tribes
participating in the Working Group, to assist those agencies
and entities in--
``(i) planning or evaluating potential projects;
``(ii) implementing plans;
``(iii) implementing projects; and
``(iv) monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of
projects and the implementation of plans and projects;
``(C) provide information to the Working Group on plans
already developed by the Administrator or by other Federal
agencies to enable the Working Group to avoid unnecessary or
duplicative projects or activities;
``(D) provide coordination with other Federal agencies to
avoid duplication of activities or functions;
``(E)(i) complete and periodically update the Columbia
River Basin Toxics Reduction Action Plan and the Estuary
Plan; and
``(ii) ensure that those plans, when considered together
and in light of relevant plans developed by other Federal or
State agencies, form a coherent toxic contamination reduction
strategy for the entire Columbia River Basin; and
``(F) implement, including by providing grants pursuant to
subsection (e), projects and conduct activities, including
monitoring, assessment, and toxic contamination reduction
activities, that are--
``(i) identified by the Working Group;
``(ii) included in the Columbia River Basin Toxics
Reduction Action Plan and the Estuary Plan; or
``(iii) identified under subsection (d) and located in the
Transboundary Flathead River Basin.
``(c) Stakeholder Working Group.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Administrator shall establish a
Columbia River Basin Toxics Reduction Working Group.
``(2) Membership.--The members of the Working Group shall
include, at a minimum, representatives of--
``(A) each State located in whole or in part within the
Columbia River Basin;
``(B) each Indian tribe with legally defined rights and
authorities in the Columbia River Basin that elects to
participate on the Working Group;
``(C) local governments located in the Columbia River
Basin;
``(D) industries operating in the Columbia River Basin that
affect or could affect water quality;
``(E) electric, water, and wastewater utilities operating
in the Columba River Basin;
``(F) private landowners in the Columbia River Basin;
``(G) soil and water conservation districts in the Columbia
River Basin;
``(H) environmental organizations that have a presence in
the Columbia River Basin; and
``(I) the general public in the Columbia River Basin.
``(3) Geographic representation.--The Working Group shall
include representation from each of the Columbia River Basin
Provinces located in the Columbia River Basin.
``(4) Appointment.--
``(A) Nontribal members.--The Administrator, with the
consent of the Governor of each State located in whole or in
part within the Columbia River Basin, shall appoint nontribal
members of the Working Group not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this section.
``(B) Tribal members.--The governing body of each Indian
tribe described in paragraph (2)(B) shall appoint tribal
members of the Working Group not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this section.
``(5) Duties.--The Working Group shall--
``(A) assess trends in water quality and toxic
contamination or toxics reduction, including trends that
affect uses of the water of the Columbia River Basin;
``(B) collect, characterize, and assess data on toxics and
water quality to identify possible causes of environmental
problems;
``(C) develop periodic updates to the Columbia River Basin
Toxics Reduction Action Plan and, in the Estuary, the Estuary
Plan;
``(D) submit to the Administrator annually a prioritized
list of projects, including monitoring, assessment, and toxic
contamination reduction projects, that would implement the
Columbia River Basin Toxics Reduction Action Plan or, in the
Lower Columbia River Estuary, the Estuary Plan, for
consideration for funding pursuant to subsection (e); and
``(E) monitor the effectiveness of actions taken pursuant
to this section.
``(6) Lower columbia river estuary.--In the Lower Columbia
River Estuary, the Estuary Partnership shall function as the
Working Group and execute the duties of the Working Group
described in this subsection for such time as the Estuary
Partnership is the management conference for the Lower
Columbia River National Estuary Program.
``(7) Participation by states.--At the discretion of the
Governor of a State, the State--
``(A) may elect not to participate in the Working Group
established under this paragraph; and
``(B) may provide comments to the Administrator on the
prioritized list of projects submitted pursuant to paragraph
(5)(D).
``(d) Transboundary Flathead River Basin.--
``(1) Short title.--This subsection may be cited as the
`Transboundary Flathead River Basin Protection Act of 2010'.
``(2) Action by president.--The President shall take steps
to preserve and protect the unique, pristine area of the
transboundary Flathead River, with a particular focus on the
North Fork of the Flathead River.
``(3) Transboundary cooperation.--In taking such steps, the
President may engage in negotiations with the Government of
Canada to establish an executive agreement, or other
appropriate tool, to ensure permanent protection for the
North Fork of the Flathead River watershed and the adjacent
area of Glacier-Waterton National Park.
``(4) Participation in cooperative efforts.--
``(A) In general.--The President may participate in cross-
border collaborations with Canada on environmental
assessments of any project of cross-border significance that
has the potential to degrade land or water resources by
providing for on-going involvement of appropriate Federal
agencies of the United States in such assessments.
``(B) Collaboration.--In carrying out subparagraph (A), the
President shall include in collaborations under that
subparagraph appropriate Federal agencies, such as--
``(i) the Environmental Protection Agency;
``(ii) the Department of Interior;
``(iii) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
``(iv) the National Park Service;
``(v) the Forest Service; and
``(vi) such other agencies as the President determines to
be appropriate.
``(5) Assessments and projects.--The President, acting
through the Administrator, may provide grants under
subsection (e) for the following purposes:
``(A) Developing baseline environmental conditions in the
transboundary Flathead River Basin.
``(B) Assessing the impact of any proposed projects on the
natural resources, water quality, wildlife, or environmental
conditions in the transboundary Flathead River Basin.
``(C) Implementation of transboundary cooperative efforts
identified by the governments of the United States and Canada
under subsection (b)(2).
``(D) Projects to protect and preserve the natural
resources, water quality, wildlife, and environmental
conditions in the transboundary Flathead River Basin.
``(e) Grants.--
``(1) In general.--The Administrator may provide grants to
State and regional water pollution control agencies and
entities, other State and local government entities, Indian
tribes, nonprofit private agencies, institutions,
organizations, and individuals for use in paying costs
incurred in carrying out activities that would develop or
implement plans or projects updated, developed, or authorized
under this section (including for purposes described in
subsection (d)(4)).
``(2) Federal share.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the Federal share of the cost of any project or activity
carried out using funds from a grant provided to any person
(including a State, interstate, or regional agency, an Indian
tribe, or a local government entity) under this subsection
for a fiscal year--
``(i) shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of the
project or activity; and
``(ii) shall be made on condition that the non-Federal
share of that total cost shall be provided from non-Federal
sources.
[[Page S5543]]
``(B) Exceptions.--With respect to cost-sharing for a grant
provided under this subsection--
``(i) an Indian tribe may use Federal funds for the non-
Federal share; and
``(ii) the Administrator may increase the Federal share
under such circumstances as the Administrator determines to
be appropriate.
``(3) Allocation.--In making grants using funds
appropriated to carry out this section for fiscal years 2012
and 2013, the Administrator shall use--
``(A) not less than \1/3\ of the funds to make grants for
projects, programs, and studies in the Lower Columbia River
Estuary; and
``(B) not less than \1/3\ of the funds to make grants for
projects, programs, and studies in the Middle and Upper
Columbia River Basin.
``(4) Reporting.--Not later than 18 months after the date
of receipt of a grant under this subsection, and biennially
thereafter for the duration of the grant, a person (including
a State, interstate, or regional agency, an Indian tribe, or
a local government entity) that receives a grant under this
subsection shall submit to the Administrator a report that
describes the progress being made in achieving the purposes
of this section using funds from the grant.
``(f) Annual Budget Plan.--The President, as part of the
annual budget submission of the President to Congress under
section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, shall submit
information regarding each Federal agency involved in
protection and restoration of the Columbia River Basin,
including an interagency crosscut budget that displays for
each Federal agency--
``(1) the amounts obligated for the preceding fiscal year
for protection and restoration projects, programs, and
studies relating to the Columbia River Basin;
``(2) the estimated budget for the current fiscal year for
protection and restoration projects, programs, and studies
relating to the Columbia River Basin; and
``(3) the proposed budget for protection and restoration
projects, programs, and studies relating to the Columbia
River Basin.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Administrator to carry out this
section $33,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 through
2017, to remain available until expended.''.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Merkley, Senator
Tester, Senator Crapo, and others to introduce the Columbia River Basin
Restoration Act of 2010. The bill authorizes much needed funds to
implement toxics reduction projects throughout the basin, and it
authorizes next steps in our longstanding effort to protect and
preserve the transboundary Flathead Basin. The Columbia River Basin is
one of the great water basins along our border with Canada that binds
our two nations together. The river spans about 1,200 miles and travels
through 14 dams from Columbia Lake, British Columbia all the way to the
Pacific Ocean. Several of the major subasins of the Columbia are
located in Montana, including the Kootenai, the Flathead, the Clark
Fork, the Blackfoot, and the Bitterroot. Toxics contamination is a
problem in several of these subasins, and I am very pleased to be a
cosponsor of the Columbia River Basin Restoration Act of 2010, which
will authorize much needed resources to address toxics contamination.
The Columbia River Basin Restoration Act of 2010 also includes the
Transboundary Flathead Basin Protection Act of 2010. This part of the
bill addresses the unique needs of one of the areas that I love about
Montana. Everyone who experiences the North Fork of the Flathead in
northwestern Montana is awed by its pristine waters, larger-than-life
landscapes, and breathtaking views. With its headwaters in British
Columbia, the North Fork of the Flathead River forms the western
boundary of Glacier National Park--it is one of the last untouched
places on our continent.
For decades, the North Fork has been threatened by oil and gas and
mining proposals in British Columbia. For the last 35 years, I have
battled these proposals, one by one. After 35 years of work, we are
beginning a new chapter of international cooperation in our efforts to
protect the North Fork.
In February of this year, British Columbia and Montana announced
their intent to prevent mining, oil and gas, and coalbed methane
development in the North Fork on the lands they control. This
memorandum of understanding was a great foundation for additional
efforts to establish protections that are permanent. Since 90 percent
of the North Fork watershed is Federally-owned, Federal action is
needed on the southern side of the U.S.-Canadian border.
So, on March 4, Senator Tester and I introduced the North Fork
Watershed Protection Act, S. 3075, which bans future mining, oil and
gas, and coalbed methane development on Federal lands in the watershed.
The bill enjoys support from business and conservation interests alike
from all over the State, including the Kalispell Chamber, Whitefish
Mountain Resort, the Billings Rod and Gun Club, and a long list of
others. This breadth of support shows the importance of the North Fork
for Montana's economy as well as our State's outdoor heritage.
There are some current leases in the area that have been dormant
since the late 1980s, when a court decision found that they were
improperly issued. Senator Tester and I have been engaged in active
discussions with the current owners to retire these old leases. On
April 28, I was proud to announce that ConocoPhillips, the primary
leaseholder in the North Fork watershed, elected to voluntarily
relinquish its interest in 108 Federal oil and gas leases covering
approximately 169,000 acres, representing 71 percent of the leased area
in the North Fork watershed. On June 2, we announced that Chevron
decided to voluntarily relinquish its interest in 11,000 acres of
leases in the Flathead watershed. To date, we have managed to retire
the primary interest in 180,000 acres in the North Fork watershed, free
of charge to the American taxpayer.
These actions are further evidence of the consensus that exists
between the United States and Canada and among businesses and
conservationists, that the withdrawal of these Federal lands from
leasing is the only path forward.
The transboundary Flathead section of the Columbia River Restoration
Act of 2010 authorizes the next phase of our efforts to protect the
Flathead. Just yesterday, the White House issued a statement that
during the G20 meeting in Toronto, President Obama and Prime Minister
Harper discussed the transboundary Flathead, recognizing the memorandum
of understanding between British Columbia and Montana and exploring
ways that the two governments can cooperate to ensure sustained
protection of the North Fork. Senator Tester and I asked the President
to discuss this issue with the Prime Minister on June 9th, and we are
very pleased that the two made this a priority in light of the agenda
at the G20. This commitment from the highest levels of government sets
the stage for four-party talks between the United States, Canada,
British Columbia, and Montana to establish permanent protections.
The Columbia River Basin Restoration Act of 2010 takes three key
steps to move things forward in the Flathead. Before I walk through
those, it is important to recognize that this is an authorization bill.
It authorizes specific actions by the Federal Government and authorizes
appropriations in support of those actions. It is important to remember
that Congress works in a two-step process--first the authorization,
then, once signed into law, appropriations follow.
The bill authorizes the President to take steps to preserve and
protect the transboundary Flathead River Basin. It is clear that the
President has authority under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, the
Clean Water Act, and other statutes to take steps to prevent water
pollution and protect wildlife in the transboundary Flathead. This
section requires that the President act to meet these goals and
provides explicit authority for the President to negotiate with Canada
to ensure permanent protection for the North Fork and Glacier-Waterton
National Park.
The bill authorizes the President, acting through appropriate
agencies, to participate in cross-border collaborations and
environmental assessments with Canada. Federal agency participation in
such assessments is anticipated in the MOU between British Columbia and
Montana, and our bill provides the authority for this to occur.
Finally, the bill authorizes grants for baseline environmental studies,
analysis of environmental impacts of any proposed projects,
implementation of transboundary cooperative efforts, and other projects
to protect and preserve the transboundary Flathead River Basin.
Funds for these and other purposes in the Columbia River Restoration
Act of 2010 would be provided through the appropriations process, once
this bill is signed into law.
[[Page S5544]]
Mr. President, I want to reflect for a moment on how far we have come
in Montana in efforts to protect the North Fork. In 1975, during my
very first term in the House of Representatives, I introduced a bill to
designate the Flathead River as a Wild and Scenic River. It was
designated a Wild and Scenic River in 1976.
For me, that began a lifelong effort to protect the North Fork. At
that time I said:
A hundred years from now, and perhaps much sooner, those
who follow us will survey what we have left behind.
The retirement of current oil and gas leases in the Flathead, the
Energy Committee's very positive hearing on April 28 on S. 3075, the
North Fork Watershed Protection Act 2010, President Obama's action
yesterday with Prime Minister Harper, our introducing of this
bipartisan legislation today and its eventual passage are all steps in
a decades-long process to protect this gem of the continent.
I know that if we continue to cooperate with Canada, that if we can
all keep our eye on the ball of long-term protection for the North
Fork, that every Montanan, every American, and every Canadian who
follows us will have the opportunity to share our feeling of awestruck
wonder that such a place still exists, almost untouched by the modern
world.
____________________