[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6873-6874]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999. This bill has passed the Senate under 
unanimous consent thanks to the leadership of its sponsor Senator 
Warner, and Senator Chafee, Chair of the Environment and Public Works 
Committee and Senator Baucus, the ranking member on the Committee. I 
want to thank the Senators for their work.
  Included in this legislation is a request that the Army Corps of 
Engineers evaluate plans to alleviate flooding and make other 
improvements to the Muddy River, which runs through Brookline and 
Boston, Massachusetts. This is an urgently needed project.
  The Muddy River flows through mostly urban-residential areas in 
Brookline and Boston before emptying into the Charles River. The River 
has flooded several times in the past, with two particularly severe 
floods in 1996 and 1998. The 1996 flood was a presidentially declared 
disaster. It lasted three days, submerged parts of Brookline and Boston 
in knee-deep water, flooded underground Massachusetts Bay 
Transportation Authority stations and halted commuter train traffic, 
and extensively damaged homes and businesses. Massachusetts Governor 
Paul Cellucci estimates that the cost of these two floods exceeded 
$100,000,000. Preventing future damage from floods is a top priority 
for the Town of Brookline, the City of Boston and the State of 
Massachusetts, and each has pledged to do their part to find a 
solution.
  Specifically, the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 asks the 
Secretary of the Army to evaluate a study called the ``Emerald Necklace 
Environmental Improvement Master Plan: Phase I Muddy River Flood 
Control, Water Quality and Environmental Enhancement'', and to report 
its findings to Congress by December 31, 1999. The Plan was 
commissioned by the Boston Parks and Recreation Department and issued 
in January 1999. It presents a solution that has broad community 
support. Residents and businesses joined with the Town of Brookline, 
City of Boston, State of Massachusetts and the federal government to 
develop this plan. It draws on research by the Army Corps of Engineers, 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency and others to recommend 
comprehensive improvements to end destructive flooding, enhance water 
quality and protect habitat. I believe this project embodies the kind 
of citizen-government partnership that is necessary for an efficient 
and successful use of federal resources.
  The Massachusetts delegation, the Town of Brookline, the City of 
Boston and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts all look forward to 
working with the Army Corps in Boston and Washington over the coming 
months to complete this evaluation by the end of the year, and to move 
ahead with the work of ending these destructive floods and making other 
needed improvements.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1999, passed by the Senate yesterday, incorporates 
so many projects of importance to the Great Lakes region. I am 
especially pleased that so many of these projects serve to reinforce 
the pre-eminent leadership of the Chicago regional office in meeting 
the environmental responsibilities assigned to the Army Corps of 
Engineers in past reauthorizations of the Water Resources Development 
Act.
  Mr. President, the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 
incorporates a very important matter which I have considered a priority 
for some time. The subject is contaminated sediments and they are a 
potential threat to public and environmental health across the country. 
Persistent, bioaccumulative toxic substances in contaminated sediment 
can poison the food chain, making fish and shellfish unsafe for humans 
and wildlife to eat. Contamination of sediments can also interfere with 
recreational uses and increase the costs of and time needed for 
navigational dredging and subsequent disposal of dredged material.
  Unfortunately, the resources of the federal government have not been 
brought to bear on these problems in a well coordinated fashion. 
Section 222 of this Act will require the Environmental Protection 
Agency and Army Corps of Engineers to finally activate the National 
Contaminated Sediment Task Force that was mandated by the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1992. I am hopeful that convening this 
Task Force will encourage the Federal agencies to work together to 
combat this problem and create greater public awareness of the need to 
address contaminated sediments. We also need a better understanding of 
the quantities and sources of sediment contamination, to prevent 
recontamination and minimize the recurrence of these costs and impacts, 
and to get a handle on the extent of the public health threat. To

[[Page 6874]]

that end, the Act requires the Task Force to report on the status of 
remedial action on contaminated sediments around the country, including 
a description of the authorities used in cleanup, the nature and 
sources of sediment contamination, the methods for determining the need 
for cleanup, the fate of dredged materials and barriers to swift 
remediation.
  Mr. President, as the Democratic Co-Chair of the Senate Great Lakes 
Task Force, I would like to take this opportunity to highlight several 
specific programs included in this bill which were developed through 
the bipartisan and bicameral cooperation of the members of this Task 
Force. Extension of cost-sharing rules to allow non-traditional 
partners such as non-profit organizations to partner with the Army 
Corps of Engineers on restoration activities will greatly expand the 
potential uses of these authorities in the Great Lakes basin (Sections 
205 and 206). Section 224(2) will enhance the authority of the Corps to 
work cooperatively with the Great Lakes Fishery Commission to make more 
efficient use of Corps' engineering expertise in constructing barriers 
and traps to reduce these aggressive invaders. Section 225 authorizes a 
special study on the watershed of the western basin of Lake Erie to 
enhance the integration of disparate elements of the Corps' program in 
this region. Section 223, the Great Lakes Basin Program incorporates 
three high-profile elements critical to the region as a whole which 
were developed through extensive negotiations among Task Force members 
at the end of the 105th Congress.
  The first element of the Great Lakes Basin Program (Section 223a) 
directs the Army Corps of Engineers to develop a framework for their 
activities in the Great Lakes basin to be updated biennially. Many Army 
Corps of Engineers divisions have developed and use such strategic 
plans. Among other strengths, such plans allow greater programatic 
coordination--especially among projects conducted for such disparate 
purposes as navigation, environmental restoration, water quality, and 
flood control. Development of such a strategic plan for the Great Lakes 
basin has never been more important than at present, given the recent 
restructuring of the Army Corps of Engineers which leaves the Great 
Lakes and Ohio River division as the only Army Corps of Engineers 
division maintaining two regional offices (Chicago and Cincinnati).
  The second element of the Great Lakes Basin Program (Section 223b) 
directs the Army Corps of Engineers to inventory existing information 
relevant to the Great Lakes biohydrological system and sustainable 
water use management. The Corps is to report to Congress, as well as to 
the International Joint Commission and the eight Great Lakes states, on 
the results of this inventory and recommendations on how to improve the 
information base. This information is crucial to the ongoing debate 
regarding attempts to export or divert Great Lakes surface and ground 
water out of the basin. The closely related provision, contained in 
subsection (e), on water use activities and policies, allows the 
Secretary to provide technical assistance to the Great Lakes states in 
development of interstate guidelines to improve consistency and 
efficiency of State-level water use activities and policies.
  The third major element of the Great Lakes Basin Program (Section 
223c) directs the Army Corps of Engineers to submit to Congress a 
report based on existing information detailing the economic benefits of 
recreational boating in the Great Lakes basin. As many of my colleagues 
may know, despite Congress' repeated objections, consecutive 
Administrations have unwisely sought to limit the Corps' role in 
dredging recreational harbors. Clearly these harbors' value to the 
regional economy should be recognized in the cost-benefit analyses used 
in making dredging decisions. For the Great Lakes region, dredging of 
these recreational harbors will be of increasing importance in the 
coming year as Great Lakes water levels decline from the high of the 
past several years.
  Mr. President, I also wish to take a moment in closing to highlight 
the several specific projects included in the recently passed bill 
which will benefit my home state of Michigan. They include an Army 
Corps feasibility study of improvements to the Detroit River waterfront 
as part of the ongoing revitalization of the area. The Corps will 
prepare studies for flood control projects in St. Clair Shores and 
along the Saginaw River in Bay City. The Corps will consider 
reconstruction of the Hamilton Dam flood control project and review its 
denial of the city of Charlevoix's request for reimbursement of 
construction costs incurred in building a new revetment connection to 
the Federal navigation project at Charlevoix Harbor. Finally, the bill 
includes a unique provision which will allow the use of materials 
dredged from Toledo Harbor in Ohio for environmental restoration on the 
Woodtick Peninsula in Michigan.
  Mr. President, I appreciate the hard work of my colleagues on the 
Environment and Public Works Committee in incorporating these important 
provisions into this bill and look forward to working with them to get 
these important provisions signed into law.

                          ____________________