[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 204 (Thursday, December 3, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H6108-H6110]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1800
        GREAT LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY INDEX ACT OF 2020

  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(S. 1342) to require the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere to 
update periodically the environmental sensitivity index products of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for each coastal area 
of the Great Lakes, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1342

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Environmental 
     Sensitivity Index Act of 2020''.

     SEC. 2. UPDATE TO ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY INDEX PRODUCTS OF 
                   NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION 
                   FOR GREAT LAKES.

       (a) Update Required for Environmental Sensitivity Index 
     Products for Great Lakes.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary for 
     Oceans and Atmosphere shall commence updating the 
     environmental sensitivity index products of the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for each coastal area 
     of the Great Lakes.
       (b) Periodic Updates for Environmental Sensitivity Index 
     Products Generally.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations and the priorities set forth in subsection 
     (c), the Under Secretary shall--
       (1) periodically update the environmental sensitivity index 
     products of the Administration; and
       (2) endeavor to do so not less frequently than once every 7 
     years.
       (c) Priorities.--When prioritizing geographic areas to 
     update environmental sensitivity index products, the Under 
     Secretary shall consider--
       (1) the age of existing environmental sensitivity index 
     products for the areas;
       (2) the occurrence of extreme events, be it natural or man-
     made, which have significantly altered the shoreline or 
     ecosystem since the last update;
       (3) the natural variability of shoreline and coastal 
     environment; and
       (4) the volume of vessel traffic and general vulnerability 
     to spilled pollutants.
       (d) Environmental Sensitivity Index Product Defined.--In 
     this section, the term

[[Page H6109]]

     ``environmental sensitivity index product'' means a map or 
     similar tool that is utilized to identify sensitive 
     shoreline, coastal or offshore, resources prior to an oil 
     spill event in order to set baseline priorities for 
     protection and plan cleanup strategies, typically including 
     information relating to shoreline type, biological resources, 
     and human use resources.
       (e) Funding.--Funds to carry out the activities under this 
     section shall be derived from amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated for the Under Secretary that are enacted after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Hawaii (Mr. Case) and the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-
Colon) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Hawaii.


                             General Leave

  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Hawaii?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very happy today to rise in support of S. 1342, the 
Great Lakes Environmental Sensitivity Index Act. I commend my 
colleagues, Senators Peters and Young and Representatives Kildee and 
Joyce, for their bipartisan, bicameral efforts on this legislation.
  The Great Lakes are the largest freshwater system by area in the 
world and are home to highly productive commercial and recreational 
fisheries, thriving coastal communities, and unique aquatic and 
terrestrial species.
  This legislation ensures that the Great Lakes are not left behind in 
environmental planning. The bill requires that the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, update at least once every 7 years 
its environmental sensitivity index products for each coastal area of 
the Great Lakes.
  These environmental sensitivity indexes, or ESI maps, are crucial 
tools used in identifying sensitive coastal shorelines, biological 
resources, and human-use resources prior to a disaster like an oil 
spill. In emergencies, coastal managers and responders can then use 
these ESI maps to properly assess the situation, allocate and 
prioritize resources, and plan cleanups.
  The last time the Great Lakes environmental sensitivity indexes were 
updated was in the 1980s. As we all know, between the climate crisis 
and human development, our environment has changed dramatically across 
our country and world in that time.
  In the Great Lakes, for example, we are seeing record-setting water 
levels and harmful algal blooms. How these environmental factors would 
interact with a disaster like an oil spill is, unfortunately, largely 
guesswork with our outdated information.
  It is so important that we pass this much-needed, commonsense 
legislation so that the Great Lakes region is prepared in the event of 
an unthinkable oil spill or other natural disaster.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Great 
Lakes Environmental Sensitivity Index Act, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Miss GONZALEZ-COLON of Puerto Rico. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, in the midst of a divided Washington, 
D.C., it is important that Congress comes together to prioritize the 
protection of the Great Lakes.
  As co-chair of the bipartisan Great Lakes Task Force, building 
bipartisan consensus that preserves the Great Lakes, strengthens their 
economy, and protects them for future generations has been one of my 
top priorities.
  While the environmental sensitivity index maps may not be the 
headline-grabbing legislation that we are sometimes used to, these maps 
are critical to the communities across the Great Lakes.
  We must have accurate assessments of coastal resources that are at 
risk of severe damage from an emergency or a natural disaster. These 
environmental assessments include information on endangered and 
threatened species, vulnerable shorelines, and widely used community 
resources, such as beaches, parks, and boat ramps.
  The maps are vital to disaster planning, as well as recovery, 
research, and restoration efforts. It is essential that we have an 
accurate representation of vulnerable locations and areas in the Great 
Lakes that are in need of protection in the event of an emergency.
  While maps for the East Coast, the West Coast, and the Gulf Coast 
have all been updated recently, maps for the Great Lakes have not been 
updated in over 20 years.
  To be clear, while the Great Lakes holds over 20 percent of the 
world's fresh water, providing drinking water to more than 48 million 
people, it supports over 1.3 million jobs, and generates billions upon 
billions of dollars in economic activity. Yet, as I stated before, our 
region hasn't had a proper environmental map update in more than two 
decades.
  This legislation, of which I am a proud cosponsor, would solve this 
problem by modernizing and updating our maps of the Great Lakes.
  Along Lake Michigan and throughout the Great Lakes shoreline, the 
current state of erosion and high water damage is at a crisis point.
  In my district, along the shores of Lake Michigan, the high water 
levels are threatening not only people's homes and public 
infrastructure but the overall ecology and the economy of the Great 
Lakes.
  Communities throughout the region have declared states of emergency 
as roads, bridges, harbors, and wastewater treatment facilities, just 
to name a few, are in danger due to these high water levels.
  As we continue to see disasters and emergencies in the Great Lakes 
region, government, at all levels, must be prepared and have up-to-date 
information to act upon. This bipartisan bill would accomplish that, 
while demonstrating another way my Michigan colleagues and I, and 
really all of us from the Great Lakes region, are making sure the 
Federal Government prioritizes and protects and preserves the Great 
Lakes.
  Whether it is responding to rapidly evolving events, such as a 
natural disaster, or planning long-term projects, such as habitat 
restoration, we need to have reliable and accurate information 
available to all the players.
  When it comes to protecting our lakes, habitats, and shorelines, 
these updated maps will allow us to better prepare to face natural 
disasters or emergencies.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Miss GONZALEZ-COLON of Puerto Rico. Mr. Speaker, I yield an 
additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, having this updated information will help 
us analyze and assess the threats facing the Great Lakes and allow us 
to be more proactive instead of 100 percent reactive.
  The Great Lakes are a way of life for many of us in west Michigan and 
throughout the Great Lakes system, and these pristine resources help 
define who we are as a community and a people. I will continue to work, 
support, and advocate for commonsense reforms like today's legislation 
that will protect these incredible natural resources for generations to 
come.
  I do want to thank my fellow colleagues who have been working on 
this, Mr. Kildee from Michigan, Mr. Joyce from Ohio, and the rest of 
the Great Lakes Task Force. This has been a great, true bipartisan 
success story, as we have looked at increasing funding for protecting 
the Great Lakes through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the 
GLRI, as well as initiatives like this.
  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the co-introducer of this important legislation.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise also in support of S. 1342, the Great 
Lakes Environmental Sensitivity Index Act of 2020.
  I was proud to introduce this legislation here in the House with my 
Michigan colleagues and also with Senator Gary Peters, a Great Lakes 
champion on the other side of the building. During his time in the 
House and the Senate, Gary Peters has been a staunch advocate for the 
Great Lakes, and I appreciate his efforts over there.

[[Page H6110]]

  Mr. Chairman, I represent 118 miles of beautiful Lake Huron 
shoreline. In Congress, I am proud to lead the bipartisan effort on 
this legislation to protect the Great Lakes.
  This legislation, as has been stated, would update and prioritize 
environmental sensitivity index maps for the Great Lakes. These 
environmental sensitivity maps are detailed guides that highlight 
vulnerable locations, structures, and natural resources along our 
lakeshore.
  First responders use these maps to respond in case of emergency and 
to protect habitat, species, and structures that are most likely to be 
impacted by an oil spill or some other disaster.
  If one of those disasters occurs in the Great Lakes, our emergency 
responders must have the most up-to-date maps and information in order 
to respond quickly and effectively.
  These maps are maintained by NOAA. Some maps in the Great Lakes, 
however, have not been updated in decades. That is why this legislation 
is necessary, so that our first responders have the most up-to-date 
information to do their jobs effectively. We can't have one hand tied 
behind our back when protecting the Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes are important to all of us. They support many jobs, 
generate billions of dollars in economic activity, and provide drinking 
water to 40 million people. We have to do everything we can to protect 
them.
  It also defines literally who we are. If you are from Michigan, you 
can hold up your hand, and the contour of the lakes really defines the 
shape of our State.
  I would like to thank Chairman Grijalva and Chairman Huffman for 
their help in getting this to the floor today. I want to thank my own 
staff, Jordan Dickinson. I want to thank Rachel Gentile from the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, finally, I want to thank my colleagues, the 
cosponsors on this legislation, Representative Huizenga, who we have 
heard from; Representative Dingell; Representative Joyce; and 
Representative Stevens.
  This is, as Mr. Huizenga said, one of those issues that allows us to 
cut across the normal divides. We work well together in a bipartisan 
fashion to protect the Great Lakes. This legislation is another example 
of that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Miss GONZALEZ-COLON of Puerto Rico. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Joyce).
  Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Great 
Lakes Environmental Sensitivity Index Act of 2020.
  I was proud to join Representative Kildee in introducing this bill to 
direct the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to update 
the environmental sensitivity index maps for the Great Lakes for the 
first time in many years.
  ESI maps document the potential impacts from coastal resiliency 
threats such as oil spills, coastal flooding, and storm damage from 
high lake levels, which have recently plagued many communities in my 
district.
  Having grown up and lived my entire life along the shores of Lake 
Erie, I know that the Great Lakes are a national treasure, an economic 
powerhouse, and one of the United States' greatest natural resources.
  As the largest system of surface fresh water on Earth, the Great 
Lakes provide drinking water for an estimated 48 million people, 
support more than 1.5 million jobs, and generate $60 billion in wages 
annually. That is why it is important that we work together to protect 
and preserve the lakes and the communities they sustain. This 
legislation will help us do that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill today.
  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Miss GONZALEZ-COLON of Puerto Rico. Mr. Speaker, the Senate passed 
this bill twice, without even holding a hearing. The House has not 
taken any action on its version of the bill, H.R. 2551, even though it 
has been referred to the Natural Resources Committee since last May.

  The Senate Committee report on S. 1342 justified its need by stating 
that the environmental sensitivity index maps for the Great Lakes 
haven't been updated since the 1980s. It also states the maps haven't 
been updated since between 1985 and 2004. It just depends on which 
paragraph of the report you read.
  Clearly, no one knows or could be bothered to find out when these 
maps were updated. Apparently, it doesn't matter for some people.
  CBO scores this bill as costing taxpayers $2 million, but we have no 
idea where the administration is on this issue. No money was 
appropriated for these indexes in 2019, and, clearly, we don't have an 
answer to those questions still in this report.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Case) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, S. 1342, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________