[Senate Report 110-488]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 1059
110th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 110-488
======================================================================
GREAT LAKES LEGACY ACT OF 2008
_______
September 24 (legislative day, September 17), 2008.--Ordered to be
printed
_______
Mrs. Boxer, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2994]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred a bill (S. 2994) to amend the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act to provide for the remediation of sediment
contamination in areas of concern, reports favorably thereon
and recommends that the bill do pass.
Purposes of the Legislation
S. 2994 reauthorizes the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002. S.
2994 expands the existing program to improve environmental and
water quality in the Great Lakes by reducing contaminated
sediments in the Lakes.
General Statement and Background
The Great Lakes hold one-fifth of the world's freshwater
and comprise 95 percent of America's fresh surface water. They
supply drinking water to millions of people and provide a $5
billion fishery. However, as the Midwest industrialized over
the last two centuries, contaminated sediments accumulated in
the Great Lakes. Over time, contaminated sediments release
pollutants degrading water quality and harming fish and other
wildlife.
To help address this problem, Congress enacted the Great
Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 to remove contaminated sediments from
Areas of Concern--sites in the Great Lakes that fail to meet
the water quality goals established by agreement between the
United States and Canada in the Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement. Since this cleanup program was created in 2002, an
estimated 800,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments have
been removed from the Lakes.
To continue tackling this considerable problem and removing
contaminated sediments from the remaining Areas of Concern,
this bill would expand the program. Specifically, the bill
increases authorizations for the program from $50 million to
$150 million for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013. It
also includes provisions to give the EPA greater flexibility to
manage and distribute funds, and will make some projects
eligible for habitat restoration under the program.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the ``Great
Lakes Legacy Act of 2008''.
Sec. 2. Remediation of sediment contamination in areas of concern
Section 2 makes certain demonstration or pilot projects
eligible under the program; makes aquatic habitat restoration
eligible under the program after remediation; prioritizes
certain projects for funding; and permits advance payment by
the non-federal sponsor in certain circumstances; authorizes
$150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to
carry out the program.
Sec. 3. Public information program
Section 3 authorizes the Administrator to carry out a
public information and participation program, including by
providing grants to States, Indian tribes, corporations,
nongovernmental organizations, and other appropriate entities,
for public information and outreach activities relating to the
remediation of contaminated sediment in areas of concern that
are located wholly or partially in the United States.
Sec. 4. Research and development program
Section 4 authorizes a research and development program
through 2013.
Legislative History
S. 2994 was introduced by Senator Levin of Michigan. The bill was read
twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works. The Committee met on July 31, 2008, when S. 2994
was ordered favorably reported without amendment by voice vote.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee notes that the
Congressional Budget Office has found that the bill ``contains
no private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.'' In other words, its costs on private entities
would be below the UMRA threshold.
Mandates Assessment
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4), the Committee notes that the Congressional
Budget Office has said that ``S. 2994 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in
UMRA. The bill would benefit state, local, and tribal
governments by extending EPA programs to clean up sediment
contamination in the Great Lakes and by continuing an existing
grant program to provide public information about such
contamination. Any costs those governments might incur,
including matching funds, would result from complying with
conditions of federal aid.''
Congressional Budget Office Estimate
September 17, 2008.
Hon. Barbara Boxer,
Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2994, the Great
Lakes Legacy Act of 2008.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susanne S.
Mehlman.
Sincerely,
Peter R. Orszag.
Enclosure.
S. 2994--Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2008
Summary: S. 2994 would reauthorize the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), in conjunction with nonfederal
sponsors, to carry out projects aimed at cleaning up certain
areas of the Great Lakes where contamination has settled into
sediment at the bottom of the lakes. The bill would authorize
the appropriation of $750 million over the 2009-2013 period to
EPA for that purpose. In addition, the bill would authorize the
appropriation of $15 million over the five-year period for EPA
to conduct research on the development and use of innovative
methods for cleaning up the Great Lakes.
Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing this legislation would cost $629
million over the 2009-2013 period. Enacting S. 2994 would not
affect direct spending or receipts.
S. 2994 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates
that implementing the bill would cost $629 million over the
2009-2013 period, assuming appropriation of the amounts
authorized for each year. Those estimated outlays are based on
historical spending patterns for similar activities. The
estimated budgetary impact of S. 2994 is shown in the following
table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget
function 300 (natural resources and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------------
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2009-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
EPA Funding for Clean-up Projects:
Authorization Level...................................... 150 150 150 150 150 750
Estimated Outlays........................................ 60 120 138 147 150 615
Research and Development:
Authorization Level...................................... 3 3 3 3 3 15
Estimated Outlays........................................ 2 3 3 3 3 14
Total Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level...................................... 153 153 153 153 153 765
Estimated Outlays........................................ 62 123 141 150 153 629
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 2994
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. The bill would benefit state, local, and
tribal governments by extending EPA programs to clean up
sediment contamination in the Great Lakes and by continuing an
existing grant program to provide public information about such
contamination. Any costs those governments might incur,
including matching funds, would result from complying with
conditions of federal aid.
Previous CBO estimate: On August 8, 2008, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 6460 as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on July 31,
2008. Both S. 2994 and H.R. 6460 would reauthorize EPA's grant
program for the remediation of sediment contamination in the
Great Lakes. However, S. 2994 would authorize the appropriation
of a smaller amount for research and development activities.
This difference between the two bills is reflected in the cost
estimates.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susanne S. Mehlman.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Burke Doherty
and Neil Hood. Impact on the Private Sector: Amy Petz.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill
as reported are shown as follows: Existing law proposed to be
omitted is enclosed in [black brackets], new matter is printed
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown
in roman:
* * * * * * *
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 101. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
SEC. 118. GREAT LAKES.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Great Lakes Management.--
(1) Functions.--* * *
* * * * * * *
(12) Remediation of sediment contamination in areas
of concern.--
(A) In general.--In accordance with this
paragraph, the Administrator, acting through
the Program Office, may carry out projects that
meet the requirements of subparagraph (B).
(B) Eligible projects.--A project meets the
requirements of this subparagraph if the
project is to be carried out in an area of
concern located wholly or partially in the
United States and the project--
[(ii)] (i) subject to subparagraph
(D), implements a plan to remediate
contaminated sediment; [or]
[(iii)] (ii) prevents further or
renewed contamination of sediment.
(iii) is a demonstration or pilot
project that uses innovative
approaches, technologies, or techniques
for the remediation of sediment
contamination;
(iv) restores aquatic habitat after
remediation; or
[(i)] (v) monitors or evaluates
contaminated sediment;
[(C) Priority.--In selecting projects to
carry out under this paragraph, the
Administrator shall give priority to a project
that--
[(i) constitutes remedial action for
contaminated sediment;
[(ii)(I) has been identified in a
Remedial Action Plan submitted under
paragraph (3); and
[(II) is ready to be implemented;
[(iii) will use an innovative
approach, technology, or technique that
may provide greater environmental
benefits, or equivalent environmental
benefits at a reduced cost; or
[(iv) includes remediation to be
commenced not later than 1 year after
the date of receipt of funds for the
project.]
(C) Priority.--
(i) In general.--In selecting
projects to carry out under this
paragraph, the Administrator shall give
priority to a project that--
(I) constitutes remedial
action for contaminated
sediment;
(II)(aa) has been identified
in a remedial action plan
submitted under paragraph (3);
and
(bb) is ready to be
implemented;
(III) will use an innovative
approach, technology, or
technique that may provide
greater environmental benefits,
or equivalent environmental
benefits at a reduced cost; or
(IV) includes remediation to
be commenced not later than 1
year after the date of receipt
of funds for the project.
(ii) Environmental significance.--
Notwithstanding any regulation
promulgated or guidance issued to
implement this section, the
Administrator may provide additional
consideration to a project that is--
(I) funded by a potentially
responsible party; and
(II) determined to be of
greater environmental
significance than a competing
proposal.
(D) Limitation.--The Administrator may not
carry out a project under this paragraph for
remediation of contaminated sediments located
in an area of concern--
(i) if an evaluation of remedial
alternatives for the area of concern
has not been conducted, including a
review of the short-term and long-term
effects of the alternatives on human
health and the environment; or
(ii) if the Administrator determines
that the area of concern is likely to
suffer significant further or renewed
contamination from existing sources of
pollutants causing sediment
contamination following completion of
the project.
(E) Non-federal share.--
(i) In general.--The non-Federal
share of the cost of a project carried
out under this paragraph shall be at
least 35 percent.
(ii) In-kind contributions.--The non-
Federal share of the cost of a project
carried out under this paragraph may
include the value of in-kind services
contributed by a non-Federal sponsor.
(iii) Non-federal share.--The non-
Federal share of the cost of a project
carried out under this paragraph--
(I) may include monies paid
pursuant to, or the value of
any in-kind service performed
under, an administrative order
on consent or judicial consent
decree (including any in-kind
services or funds provided in
implementing the administrative
order on consent or judicial
consent decree); [but]
(II) may include funds paid,
or the value of any in-kind
service performed, by a
potentially responsible party,
subject to the condition that
the eligibility of the
potentially responsible party
to contribute to the non-
Federal share is evaluated on
the merits on a site-specific
basis, in the context of added
value, such as at sites at
which an orphan share exists or
the remedy will be enhanced
(such as where the qualitative
or quantitative scope of the
remediation is improved,
innovative methods are
employed, or the remediation
will be accelerated); but
[(II)] (III) may not include
any funds paid pursuant to, or
the value of any in-kind
service performed under, a
unilateral administrative order
or court order.
(iv) Operation and maintenance.--The
non-Federal share of the cost of the
operation and maintenance of a project
carried out under this paragraph shall
be 100 percent.
(v) Payment and retention of non-
federal share.--The non-Federal sponsor
for a project under this paragraph may
pay to the Administrator, for retention
and use by the Administrator in
carrying out the project, the non-
Federal share of the cost of the
project.
[(F) Maintenance of effort.--The
Administrator may not carry out a project under
this paragraph unless the non-Federal sponsor
enters into such agreements with the
Administrator as the Administrator may require
to ensure that the non-Federal sponsor will
maintain its aggregate expenditures from all
other sources for remediation programs in the
area of concern in which the project is located
at or above the average level of such
expenditures in the 2 fiscal years preceding
the date on which the project is initiated.]
[(G)] (F) Coordination.--In carrying out
projects under this paragraph, the
Administrator shall coordinate with the
Secretary of the Army, and with the Governors
of States in which the projects are located, to
ensure that Federal and State assistance for
remediation in areas of concern is used as
efficiently as practicable.
(G) Advance payment and reimbursement
costs.--The Administrator, acting through the
Program Office, may enter into an agreement
with a non-Federal sponsor to carry out a
project under this paragraph under which the
non-Federal sponsor may, as appropriate--
(i) pay in advance the non-Federal
share of the cost of the project; and
(ii) receive from the Administrator
reimbursement for amounts (other than
the non-Federal share) expended by the
non-Federal sponsor for the project.
(H) Definition of potentially responsible
party.--In this paragraph, the term
``potentially responsible party'' means an
individual or entity that may be liable under
any Federal or State environmental remediation
law (including regulations) with respect to a
project carried out under this paragraph.
[(H)] (I) Authorization of appropriations.--
(i) In general.--In addition to other
amounts authorized under this section,
there is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this paragraph
[$50,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2004 through 2008] $150,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
(ii) Availability.--Funds made
available under clause (i) shall remain
available until expended.
(13) Public information and participation program.--
[(A) In general.--The Administrator, acting
through the Program Office and in coordination
with States, Indian tribes, local governments,
and other entities, may carry out a public
information program to provide information
relating to the remediation of contaminated
sediment to the public in areas of concern that
are located wholly or partially in the United
States.]
(A) In general.--The Administrator, acting
through the Program Office and in coordination
with States, Indian tribes, local governments,
and other entities, shall carry out a public
information and participation program,
including by providing grants to States, Indian
tribes, corporations, nongovernmental
organizations, and other appropriate entities,
for the provision to the public of information
and outreach activities relating to the
remediation of contaminated sediment in areas
of concern that are located wholly or partially
in the United States.
(B) Authorization of appropriations.--There
is authorized to be appropriated to carry out
this paragraph $1,000,000 for each of fiscal
years [2004 through 2008] 2009 through 2013.
* * * * * * *
TITLE I--GREAT LAKES
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Legacy Act of
2002''.
SEC. 102. REPORT ON REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 106. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--In coordination with other Federal, State,
and local officials, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency may conduct research on the development and
use of innovative approaches, technologies, and techniques for
the remediation of sediment contamination in areas of concern
that are located wholly or partially in the United States.
(b) Authorization of appropriations.--
(1) In general.--In addition to amounts authorized
under other laws, there is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000 for
each of fiscal years [2004 through 2008] 2009 through
2013.
(2) Availability.--Funds appropriated under paragraph
(1) shall remain available until expended.
* * * * * * *