[House Report 111-442]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     111-442

======================================================================



 
                      CLEAN ESTUARIES ACT OF 2010

                                _______
                                

 March 17, 2010.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Oberstar, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 4715]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 4715) to amend the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the National Estuary 
Program, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that 
the bill do pass.

                       Purpose of the Legislation

    H.R. 4715, the ``Clean Estuaries Act of 2010'', amends the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act or Act) to 
reauthorize appropriations for the National Estuary Program 
through fiscal year 2016, and to make programmatic changes.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    Estuaries are bodies of water that receive both outflows 
from rivers and tidal inflows from the ocean. They are 
transition zones between fresh water from rivers and saline 
water from the ocean. The mixing of fresh and salt water 
provides a unique environment that supports diverse habitats 
for a wide variety of living resources, including plants, fish, 
and wildlife. Many fish and shellfish species depend on the 
sheltered habitat provided by estuaries, as well as the mix of 
saline and fresh water. Estuaries are often used as places for 
these species to spawn, and for their young to grow and 
develop. These areas also serve as habitat and breeding areas 
for hundreds of species of birds and other wildlife, including 
marine mammals.
    Estuaries and associated coastal areas are major economic 
drivers for this nation. From a resource standpoint alone, 
healthy estuaries are very economically productive. Coastal 
areas of the United States account for 28 million jobs. The 
coastal areas surrounding estuaries are among the most 
populated areas in the nation. Collectively, the nation's 
coastal counties account for only 13 percent of the total 
contiguous land area of the United States. However, 43 percent 
of the population lives in these coastal areas.\1\ Furthermore, 
while estuarine counties constitute only 13 percent of the 
nation's land area, they account for 49 percent of the gross 
domestic product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\These figures are based on only marine coastal counties. 
Counties bordering the Great Lakes were considered non-coastal 
counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Most commercially and recreationally important fish and 
shellfish species, such as striped bass, shad, salmon, 
sturgeon, shrimp, crabs, lobster, clams, oysters, mussels, and 
bay scallops, depend on estuaries for stages of their life 
cycles. Commercial and recreational fishing annually accounts 
for $185 billion in revenues, and more than two million jobs. 
According to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) and the National Research Council (NRC), 
estuaries provide habitat for 75 percent of the U.S. commercial 
fish catch and 80 to 90 percent of the recreational fish catch. 
The University of Maryland has found that a significant 
proportion of the ten billion pounds of commercial fish 
landings in 2004, worth over $3.8 billion (unprocessed), are 
dependent on estuaries.
    In addition to fishing, estuaries also produce significant 
economic value for the nation, including through sectors such 
as tourism, energy production, and navigation. Estuaries also 
provide cultural and recreational opportunities that include 
boating, fishing, swimming, surfing, and bird watching, and 
provide locations for ports and harbors. The University of 
California and the Ocean Foundation have determined that, on an 
annual basis, beach-going generates up to $30 billion of 
economic value, recreational fishing generates up to $26 
billion, and coastal wildlife viewing generates up to $49 
billion. Louisiana State University's Center for Energy Studies 
reports that 30 percent of U.S. crude oil production, 20 
percent of U.S. natural gas production, and 45 percent of U.S. 
petroleum refining capacity lies within a few miles of the Gulf 
of Mexico coastal zone, which includes numerous estuaries. 
Finally, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute's Marine Policy 
Center reports that U.S. ports handled over $800 billion in 
trade in 2003.
    Many of the nation's estuaries are in poor ecological 
health. An impaired estuary not only impacts commercial and 
recreational fishing, it can also result in decreased tourism 
revenues, among other factors. Degraded habitat, like coastal 
wetlands, can also result in increased flooding, shoreline 
erosion, and damaged infrastructure. The Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) has identified the following 
environmental concerns among the 28 approved estuaries in EPA's 
National Estuary Program (NEP): habitat loss and alteration; 
declines in fish and wildlife populations; excessive nutrients; 
toxic chemical contaminations; pathogenic microorganisms; 
alteration of freshwater flows; and the introduction of 
invasive species. EPA rates estuary health and the following 
table includes EPA's most recent ratings of estuaries included 
in the NEP.


                      THE NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM

    EPA's National Estuary Program was authorized in 1987 as an 
amendment to the Clean Water Act (section 320 of the Act). The 
NEP promotes comprehensive planning efforts to help protect 
nationally significant estuaries in the United States that are 
deemed to be threatened by pollution, development, and overuse. 
The NEP is a stakeholder-driven, collaborative program to 
address water quality problems and target habitat restoration. 
The NEP is composed of approved estuary programs that are, for 
the most part, non-Federal programs administered by state or 
local governments or non-governmental entities. Under the 
program, the Governor of any state may nominate to the EPA 
Administrator an estuary lying in whole or in part within the 
state as an estuary of national significance and request a 
management conference to develop a comprehensive management 
plan for the estuary. The estuary program in Long Island Sound 
is the only Federally-administered program it is run by EPA. 
Through a process of wide-ranging stakeholder engagement, each 
approved estuary program conducts long-term planning and 
management activities to address the complex factors that 
contribute to the degradation of estuaries. Each estuary 
program relies on the consensus-based participation of a whole 
range of stakeholders located in the area: local, state, and 
Federal governments; commercial entities; members of the 
agricultural community; and non-governmental entities, such as 
environmental organizations. To date, EPA has approved 28 
estuaries as part of the program.
    Under section 320, each approved estuary program is 
required to develop a Comprehensive Conservation and Management 
Plan (CCMP). The CCMP is the implementation framework for 
protecting and restoring the estuary. The CCMP identifies 
discrete activities to address priority problems. Developed by 
estuary stakeholders, the activities prescribed through the 
CCMP are based on consensus and will often involve coordination 
and collaboration between different stakeholder entities. EPA 
must approve the CCMP.
    EPA provides each approved estuary program with financial 
and technical assistance. Section 320 authorized $35 million 
annually for fiscal years 2001 through 2010 for the NEP. Some 
of this funding has been used to set up individual program 
offices at each of the 28 approved estuaries. Each program 
office usually consists of a small staff that is housed in, and 
is an entity of, a state or local government agency, 
university, or non-governmental organization. Because each 
approved estuary program can be located in a number of 
different types of organizations, the program structure and 
character of each of the 28 local estuary programs is unique. 
With the exception of the Long Island Sound estuary program, 
none of the staff in any of the approved estuary programs are 
EPA employees. They are usually either employed by non-
governmental organizations or state or local government 
entities (but supported through NEP grants).

                    NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM FUNDING

    Congress has appropriated the following amounts for the NEP 
program over the past three years: $26.7 million in fiscal year 
(FY) 2008; $27.1 million in FY 2009; and $32.6 million in FY 
2010.
    To leverage Federal resources, EPA requires approved 
estuary programs to have a specific finance plan and to provide 
a non-Federal match of between 25 percent and 50 percent for 
funding provided under the program. EPA also encourages non-
Federal funding for projects in approved estuaries because it 
promotes buy-in of non-Federal partners (e.g., state and local 
governments, non-governmental organizations) and further 
fosters the collaborative process under the NEP. Estuaries 
under the program have attracted funding from a variety of 
sources including the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program, 
stormwater utility fees, municipal bond funding, fines and 
settlements, tax abatements and incentives, and sales fees. 
According to EPA, between 2003 and 2007, the approved estuary 
programs were collectively able to leverage nearly $1.3 billion 
in funding from sources other than appropriations for section 
320. The investment ratio of non-NEP funds to NEP funds is 15.5 
to 1.

                          PROGRAMMATIC RESULTS

    On the whole, the NEP has resulted in improved estuarine 
conditions for participating estuaries. For instance, on a 
national scale, the NEP estuaries (collectively) score slightly 
higher than non-NEP estuaries for water quality indices. The 
reforms included in H.R. 4715 will make the NEP more effective 
by providing additional needed resources for improved 
management of estuaries and requiring transparency, performance 
measures and goals, and accountability to determine the impact 
of the program.
    While no new estuaries have been formally included in the 
program since 1995, EPA reports that numerous states, 
localities, and non-governmental organizations have expressed 
interest in 38 additional estuaries being included within the 
NEP. These estuaries include:

           Alaska: Cook Inlet; Kenai River
           California: Humboldt Bay; Tomales Bay; San 
        Pedro Bay; Newport Bay; San Diego Bay; Tijuana River
           Florida: Lower St. Johns River; Lake Worth; 
        Biscayne Bay; Florida Bay; Crystal River/Homosassa 
        Spring; Apalachicola Bay; St. Andrews Bay; 
        Choctawhatchee Bay; Pensacola Bay
           Georgia: Savannah River
           Hawaii: Hanalei Bay; Kaneohe Bay
           Louisiana: Calcasieu Lake; Atchafalaya Bay; 
        Lake Pontchartrain
           Maine: Penobscot Bay; Gulf of Maine
           Massachusetts: Martha's Vineyard
           Mississippi: Mississippi Sound
           New York: Great South Bay
           North Carolina: Cape Fear River
           Oregon: Coos Bay
           Puerto Rico: Mayaguez Bay
           South Carolina: Charleston Harbor; Port 
        Royal Sound; Savannah River
           Texas: Lavaca Bay-Tres Palacios Bay
           Virginia: Virginia Coastal Bays
           Washington: Grays Harbor; Willapa Bay

    If Congress appropriates funding for the NEP at the 
increased authorization amounts included in H.R. 4715, EPA will 
be able to add 12 new estuaries to the National Estuary 
Program.

                       Summary of the Legislation


Section 1. Short title

    This section designates the title of the bill as the 
``Clean Estuaries Act of 2010''.

Sec. 2. National Estuary Program amendments

    This section amends section 320 of the Clean Water Act to 
modify and add new requirements to estuary programs 
participating in the NEP.
    Subsection (a)(1) amends section 320(b)(4) of the Act to 
add additional requirements in the development and revision of 
an approved estuary's CCMP.
    First, each estuary program must identify the estuary and 
upstream waters that will be addressed by the program. Given 
the scope of the NEP program, the area addressed by a given 
approved estuary program may not include the entire watershed 
that ultimately drains into the estuary. For program management 
purposes, and to educate the public and stakeholders, approved 
estuary programs should clearly identify the areas covered by a 
CCMP. This requirement will help to focus and prioritize 
resources, and create a better sense of estuary identity.
    Second, each estuary program must consider current and 
future sustainable commercial activities in the estuary. Given 
the location of all estuaries in the NEP program, commercial 
activities are a necessary and permanent component. Commercial 
activity can impact the ecological health of estuaries. 
Similarly, the ecological health of estuaries can impact the 
viability of commercial activities. Each approved estuary 
program must include commercial entities in its CCMP process, 
and work with such entities to create commercial operations 
that impact the estuary in a sustainable manner.
    Third, each estuary program must address the impacts of 
climate change on the estuary by identifying vulnerabilities in 
the estuary and developing and implementing adaptation 
strategies. On June 19, 2008, EPA announced a new pilot program 
for NEP estuaries, entitled ``Climate Ready Estuaries''. 
According to EPA, each NEP estuary in the Climate Ready 
Estuaries program received technical assistance to assess and 
reduce its vulnerability to climate change. This section 
requires each NEP estuary to address the climate change impacts 
unique to its region.
    Fourth, each estuary program must increase public education 
and awareness of the ecological health and water quality 
conditions of the estuary. Many impairments suffered by 
estuaries are a function of activities by individuals in the 
watershed. Similarly, only changes in behavior--at the 
individual level--will decrease some of these harmful 
activities. Approved estuary programs are well-situated to 
promote educational activities that will demonstrate to members 
of surrounding communities the ecological and economic 
importance of estuaries, and identify activities that can help 
to restore estuaries, as well as activities that will degrade 
them.
    Fifth, each estuary program must identify and assess 
impairments that impact the estuary but that are located 
outside of the immediate area addressed by the estuary. Given 
the scope of the NEP program, the area addressed by a given 
approved estuary program may not include the entire watershed 
that ultimately drains into the estuary. As a result, 
impairments from upstream sources, as well as those from 
outside of the watershed, such as atmospheric deposition, may 
degrade the estuary. Nevertheless, because these sources of 
impairment lie outside of the formal estuary program area, 
these sources are outside of the purview of the program. Each 
estuary program is charged with identifying these sources of 
impairment to enable stakeholders to better understand the 
connectivity between the upstream elements of the watershed and 
the potential downstream impacts to the estuary. In addition, 
the identification and assessment of these sources of 
impairment will enable the estuary program to better determine 
the impairment reduction for which it is ultimately 
responsible.
    Finally, each CCMP must include performance measures and 
goals to track the degree to which the plan is being 
implemented successfully. Performance measurement is a tool to 
determine the effectiveness of a program in achieving program 
goals. Each estuary program must include program goals and 
priorities in its CCMP and the performance measures that will 
be used to track the effectiveness of program implementation.
    Subsection (a)(2) amends section 320(b)(6) to clarify and 
enhance the monitoring requirements related to an estuary CCMP. 
Each approved estuary program must monitor water quality and 
habitat conditions in the estuary and its upstream waters. The 
estuary programs must also monitor the effectiveness of actions 
taken pursuant to the CCMP. All monitoring results must be made 
available to the public. To track progress in estuary 
restoration and protection, estuary programs must monitor water 
quality and habitat conditions around the estuary. Not only 
does this approach provide more information for program 
managers, it also provides information to nearby communities 
about the state of their estuaries.
    Subsection (a)(3) amends section 320(b) to require that 
each estuary program provide information and educational 
activities on the ecological health and water quality 
conditions of the estuary to the public. This provision ensures 
that the approved estuary program, itself, is participating in 
educating the public about estuarine conditions and the 
ecological and economic importance of estuaries, and is 
identifying activities that can help to restore estuaries, as 
well as those that will degrade them.
    Subsection (b) makes a technical change to section 
320(c)(5) and adds not-for-profit organizations to the list of 
entities that can participate in the management conference.
    Subsection (c) amends section 320(f) to require the 
periodic update and approval of a CCMP. Within four years of 
the date of enactment of H.R. 4715, the ``Clean Estuaries Act 
of 2010'', the EPA Administrator shall evaluate the 
implementation of each approved estuary program's CCMP to 
determine whether, and the degree to which, the goals of the 
CCMP have been met. Following the initial evaluation, each 
estuary program shall be subject to a subsequent evaluation 
every four years. The evaluations may be completed by EPA or, 
at the request of the Administrator, by a third party. However, 
an approved estuary program may not be involved in evaluating 
its own program. Following the completion of an estuary program 
evaluation, the Administrator shall submit the evaluation 
results to the estuary program for review and comment. Each 
estuary program shall be provided the opportunity to respond to 
EPA's program evaluation. EPA shall issue a report on the 
results of the evaluation, including the findings and 
recommendations of the Administrator, as well as any comments 
received from the estuary program. This report shall be made 
available to the public through publication in the Federal 
Register and on the Internet. If an estuary program is accepted 
into the NEP after passage of this Act, that program will be 
evaluated within four years of the submission of its CCMP to 
the Administrator, and every four years thereafter.
    EPA currently reviews each of the NEP estuary programs 
through a process known as the implementation review process. 
Each estuary program is reviewed every three years. This 
process is intended to assess how well each estuary program 
supports the core goals of the Clean Water Act, as well as to 
evaluate the extent and effectiveness of each estuary program's 
contribution to meeting the goals of EPA's Strategic Plan. The 
evaluation requirement instituted by H.R. 4715 is intended to 
require that more rigorous program evaluations be conducted of 
the estuary programs. Program implementation and program 
evaluation will be facilitated through the identification, 
inclusion, and use of performance measures and goals, as 
required by this legislation. The evaluation is intended to 
assist program managers, in both EPA and the approved estuary 
program, and identify if the goals of the CCMP are being 
achieved. It will provide insights as to whether the management 
plan is successful, whether the management approaches are 
appropriate, whether efforts in particular areas should be 
intensified, and whether impairments coming from unanticipated 
sources are hindering positive results.
    Each approved estuary program is required to update its 
CCMP no later than 18 months after the public release of its 
evaluation. The updated plan shall reflect, to the maximum 
extent practicable, the results of the program evaluation. The 
Administrator shall, within 120 days after receiving an updated 
CCMP, approve that CCMP if the Administrator determines that 
the updated CCMP meets both the goals of the NEP and reflects 
the results of the program evaluation.
    The CCMP evaluation and update serves a number of purposes. 
First, it addresses the fact that a number of estuary programs 
have never updated their CCMPs. Second, it ensures that each 
estuary program acknowledges and accounts for new impairments 
and new sources of impairments in its CCMP. Third, it ensures 
that stakeholders will continue to be active partners in the 
restoration and protection of the estuary, through involvement 
in the CCMP updating process. Finally, it provides 
accountability by linking the evaluation process to 
implementation of evaluation results. In other words, approval 
of a CCMP update is contingent upon incorporation by the 
estuary of evaluation results into its plan.
    If the evaluation results indicate that the goals of the 
CCMP have been achieved, or that the program is headed in the 
right direction, the update may be de minimis. However, if the 
evaluation results indicate that CCMP goals are not being met, 
and recommends that programmatic changes are necessary, the 
update may be significant. An update, in these circumstances, 
might require that new stakeholders be incorporated into the 
planning process, that a new CCMP be adopted, or that a new 
management and implementation strategy be applied to ensure 
that the goals of the NEP program--the restoration and 
protection of the estuary--are achieved.
    The Administrator may consider an estuary program to be in 
probationary status if the estuary program has not received 
approval for an updated CCMP on or before the last day of the 
three-year period beginning on the date on which the 
Administrator makes an evaluation available to the public. As 
described later in this Committee Report, the designation of 
probationary status entails a reduction in grant funding to the 
estuary program by the Administrator. The Committee believes 
that this designation, in combination with subsequent 
penalties, provides the estuary programs with an incentive to 
incorporate evaluation recommendations into their CCMP update, 
in order to receive approval of an updated CCMP by the 
Administrator.
    Subsection (d) amends section 320 by adding a new 
subsection that places new requirements on Federal agencies 
whose actions or activities affect estuaries in the National 
Estuary Program. The legislation requires that, following 
approval of a CCMP, any Federal action or activity affecting an 
estuary in the NEP shall be conducted, to the maximum extent 
practicable, in a manner consistent with the CCMP. Federal 
agencies are also required, to the maximum extent practicable, 
to cooperate and coordinate their activities related to the 
implementation of an approved CCMP. The legislation requires 
that EPA shall serve as the lead agency in these inter-agency 
coordination and cooperation efforts. In making their annual 
budget requests, Federal agencies shall consider their CCMP 
responsibilities. Finally, this subsection requires that 
Federal agencies collaborate in the development of tools and 
methodologies for monitoring the ecological health and water 
quality conditions of estuaries included in the National 
Estuary Program.
    The Committee recognizes that the strength of the National 
Estuary Program lies in its being a consensus-based, locally 
driven program. As a result, to fulfill the goals of the 
program, the Committee expects that Federal agencies not only 
take part in the CCMP planning process, but also, as 
stakeholders in the respective estuaries, take part in 
implementing their responsibilities under approved estuary 
plans. In instances where the actions or activities of multiple 
Federal agencies affect the estuary, the Committee expects 
these agencies to coordinate their activities. Not only will 
this approach result in administrative efficiencies, 
coordinated planning and implementation will yield results that 
will facilitate the protection and restoration of the estuary 
in question.
    Subsection (e) amends section 320(h) by adding new grant 
conditions. The Administrator shall be required to reduce grant 
funding for those approved estuary programs that are considered 
to be in probationary status. The grant reduction amount shall 
be determined by the Administrator. The Administrator shall 
also terminate an estuary program from the National Estuary 
Program, and cease its grant funding, if the Administrator 
determines that the program has been in probationary status for 
two consecutive years.
    The Committee believes that estuary programs must be held 
accountable for updating, receiving approval for, and 
implementing updated CCMPs. Decreasing funding and, if 
necessary, expulsion from the National Estuary Program for a 
lack of an approved CCMP update will provide such 
accountability.
    Subsection (f) amends section 320(j), as redesignated, and 
authorizes an increase in appropriations. This subsection 
increases the authorization of appropriations for the National 
Estuary Program from $35 million to $50 million annually for 
fiscal years 2011 through 2016. This subsection directs the 
Administrator to provide grant funding, subject to 
appropriations, of at least $1.25 million for each approved 
estuary program in the National Estuary Program. The Committee 
believes that a funding level of $1.25 million per approved 
estuary program will provide the resources for each estuary 
program to properly oversee the implementation of its CCMP. 
This level of funding is a significant increase over existing 
appropriations to estuaries under the program; in 2008, each 
estuary received approximately $592,000 under the program. An 
authorization level of $50 million will allow each existing 
estuary to receive $1.25 million, and provide enough funding to 
add 12 new estuaries under the program. If the NEP is funded at 
fully authorized levels, the Committee expects that an 
additional 12 estuary programs will be added to the National 
Estuary Program.
    Subsection (g) makes a technical amendment to section 
320(k)(1)(A), as redesignated by this legislation.
    Subsection (h) amends section 320 by adding a new 
subsection that requires a periodic evaluation of EPA's 
National Estuary Program. The legislation requires that the 
Administrator, or a third party at the request of the 
Administrator, evaluate the overall NEP program (in addition to 
the requirement that each participating estuary be evaluated) 
within four years of passage of this legislation, and every 
four years thereafter. The evaluation shall determine whether 
the NEP program has resulted in improved water quality, 
improved natural resources, and improvements in sustainable 
uses of the estuaries covered by estuary programs that are part 
of the NEP. The findings and recommendations of this evaluation 
shall be issued by the Administrator in a report on both the 
Internet and in the Federal Register.
    The Committee believes that this evaluation will assist EPA 
program managers and Congress in determining whether the goals 
of the National Estuary Program are being achieved. The 
evaluation results will provide insights as to whether the 
program is successful, and whether new tools, policies, or 
funding is needed to better implement the program--with the 
ultimate objective of restoring and protecting estuaries.

            Legislative History and Committee Consideration

    In the 110th Congress, on June 26, 2008, the Subcommittee 
on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on 
``Protecting and Restoring America's Great Waters, Part 1: 
Coasts and Estuaries''. The Subcommittee received testimony 
from Representative Norman D. Dicks, EPA, the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration, the State of Washington, the 
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, and representatives 
of non-governmental organizations.
    In the 111th Congress, on October 6, 2009, the Subcommittee 
on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on 
``Protecting and Restoring America's Great Waters: The Long 
Island Sound''. The Long Island Sound Study is an approved NEP 
estuary program. The Subcommittee received testimony from EPA, 
the States of Connecticut and New York, the Stamford Water 
Pollution Control Authority (CT), and representatives of non-
governmental organizations.
    On March 2, 2010, Representative Timothy H. Bishop 
introduced H.R. 4715, the ``Clean Estuaries Act of 2010''.
    On March 3, 2010, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 4715. The 
Committee ordered H.R. 4715 reported favorably to the House by 
voice vote with a quorum present.

                              Record Votes

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report to include the total number of 
votes cast for and against on each record vote on a motion to 
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, 
and the names of those members voting for and against. There 
were no recorded votes taken in connection with consideration 
of H.R. 4715 or ordering the bill reported. A motion to order 
H.R. 4715 reported favorably to the House was agreed to by 
voice vote with a quorum present.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in this report.

                          Cost of Legislation

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the 
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is 
included in this report.

                    Compliance With House Rule XIII

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee 
references the report of the Congressional Budget Office 
included in the report.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
performance goals and objectives of this legislation are to 
facilitate the protection and restoration of estuaries within 
the National Estuary Program, including through the use of 
program evaluations.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4715 
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, March 9, 2010.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4715, the Clean 
Estuaries Act of 2010.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susanne S. 
Mehlman.
            Sincerely,
                                      Douglas W. Elmendorf,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 4715--Clean Estuaries Act of 2010

    Summary: H.R. 4715 would extend the authorization of 
appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency's 
(EPA's) National Estuary Program through fiscal year 2016. 
Under current law, $35 million is authorized to be appropriated 
each year through 2010, and enacting this legislation would 
increase that authorized annual funding level to $50 million in 
subsequent years. Under the National Estuary Program, EPA 
develops plans for attaining or maintaining water quality in an 
estuary. CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would 
cost $216 million over the 2011-2015 period, assuming 
appropriation of the authorized amounts.
    Enacting H.R. 4715 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    H.R. 4715 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: The estimated 
budgetary impact of this legislation 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--
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2011      2012      2013      2014      2015    2011-2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
 
Authorization Level................................        50        5O        5O        50        50        250
Estimated Outlays..................................        23        43        50        50        50        216
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
bill will be enacted in 2010 and that the amounts authorized 
will be appropriated each fiscal year beginning in 2011. 
Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for 
the National Estuary Program.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 4715 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susanne S. Mehlman; 
Impact on state, local, and tribal governments: Ryan Miller; 
Impact on the Private Sector: Amy Petz.
    Estimate approved by:
    Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.

                     Compliance With House Rule XXI

    Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the Committee is required to include a list 
of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited 
tariff benefits, as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of 
rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. H.R. 
4715 does not contain any earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits under clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of 
rule XXI.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or 
joint resolution of a public character shall include a 
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in 
the Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the 
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted 
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (P.L. 104-4).

                        Preemption Clarification

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint 
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the 
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt State, local, 
or tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 4715 does not 
preempt any state, local, or tribal law.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this 
legislation.

                Applicability to the Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (P.L. 104-1).

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, 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




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE III--STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 320. NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Purposes of Conference.--The purposes of any management 
conference convened with respect to an estuary under this 
subsection shall be to--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) develop a comprehensive conservation and 
        management plan that recommends priority corrective 
        actions and compliance schedules addressing point and 
        nonpoint sources of pollution to restore and maintain 
        the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the 
        estuary, including restoration and maintenance of water 
        quality, a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, 
        fish and wildlife, and recreational activities in the 
        estuary, and assure that the designated uses of the 
        estuary are protected;]
          (4) develop and submit to the Administrator a 
        comprehensive conservation and management plan that--
                  (A) identifies the estuary and its associated 
                upstream waters to be addressed by the plan, 
                with consideration given to hydrological 
                boundaries;
                  (B) recommends priority corrective actions 
                and compliance schedules addressing point and 
                nonpoint sources of pollution to restore and 
                maintain the chemical, physical, and biological 
                integrity of the estuary, including restoration 
                and maintenance of water quality, a resilient 
                and diverse indigenous population of shellfish, 
                fish, and wildlife, and recreational activities 
                in the estuary, and assure that the designated 
                uses of the estuary are protected;
                  (C) considers current and future sustainable 
                commercial activities in the estuary;
                  (D) addresses the impacts of climate change 
                on the estuary, including--
                          (i) the identification and assessment 
                        of vulnerabilities in the estuary; and
                          (ii) the development and 
                        implementation of adaptation 
                        strategies;
                  (E) increases public education and awareness 
                of the ecological health and water quality 
                conditions of the estuary;
                  (F) identifies and assesses impairments, 
                including upstream impairments, coming from 
                outside of the area addressed by the plan, and 
                the sources of those impairments; and
                  (G) includes performance measures and goals 
                to track implementation of the plan.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(6) monitor the effectiveness of actions taken 
        pursuant to the plan; and]
          (6) monitor (and make results available to the public 
        regarding)--
                  (A) water quality conditions in the estuary 
                and its associated upstream waters, as 
                identified under paragraph (4)(A);
                  (B) habitat conditions that relate to the 
                ecological health and water quality conditions 
                of the estuary; and
                  (C) the effectiveness of actions taken 
                pursuant to the comprehensive conservation and 
                management plan developed for the estuary under 
                this subsection;
          (7) provide information and educational activities on 
        the ecological health and water quality conditions of 
        the estuary; and
          [(7)] (8) review all Federal financial assistance 
        programs and Federal development projects in accordance 
        with the requirements of Executive Order 12372, as in 
        effect on September 17, 1983, to determine whether such 
        assistance program or project would be consistent with 
        and further the purposes and objectives of the plan 
        prepared under this section.
For purposes of [paragraph (7)] paragraph (8) , such programs 
and projects shall not be limited to the assistance programs 
and development projects subject to Executive Order 12372, but 
may include any programs listed in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance which may have an effect on the 
purposes and objectives of the plan developed under this 
section.
  (c) Members of Conference.--The members of a management 
conference convened under this section shall include, at a 
minimum, the Administrator and representatives of--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) affected industries, public and private 
        educational institutions, not-for-profit organizations, 
        and the general public, as determined appropriate by 
        the Administrator.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Approval and Implementation of Plans.--
          [(1) Approval.--Not later than 120 days after the 
        completion of a conservation and management plan and 
        after providing for public review and comment, the 
        Administrator shall approve such plan if the plan meets 
        the requirements of this section and the affected 
        Governor or Governors concur.
          [(2) Implementation.--Upon approval of a conservation 
        and management plan under this section, such plan shall 
        be implemented. Funds authorized to be appropriated 
        under titles II and VI and section 319 of this Act may 
        be used in accordance with the applicable requirements 
        of this Act to assist States with the implementation of 
        such plan.]
  (f) Administration of Plans.--
          (1) Approval.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
        on which a management conference submits to the 
        Administrator a comprehensive conservation and 
        management plan under this section, and after providing 
        for public review and comment, the Administrator shall 
        approve the plan if the Administrator determines that 
        the plan meets the requirements of this section and the 
        affected Governor or Governors concur.
          (2) Implementation.--Upon approval of a comprehensive 
        conservation and management plan under this section, 
        the plan shall be implemented. Funds authorized to be 
        appropriated under titles II and VI and section 319 may 
        be used in accordance with the applicable requirements 
        of this Act to assist States with the implementation of 
        the plan.
          (3) Evaluation.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than 4 years after 
                the date of enactment of this paragraph, and 
                every 4 years thereafter, the Administrator 
                shall complete an evaluation of the 
                implementation of each comprehensive 
                conservation and management plan developed 
                under this section to determine the degree to 
                which the goals of the plan have been met.
                  (B) Review and comment by management 
                conference.--In completing an evaluation under 
                subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall 
                submit the results of the evaluation to the 
                appropriate management conference for review 
                and comment.
                  (C) Report.--
                          (i) In general.--In completing an 
                        evaluation under subparagraph (A), and 
                        after providing an opportunity for a 
                        management conference to submit 
                        comments under subparagraph (B), the 
                        Administrator shall issue a report on 
                        the results of the evaluation, 
                        including the findings and 
                        recommendations of the Administrator 
                        and any comments received from the 
                        management conference.
                          (ii) Availability to public.--The 
                        Administrator shall make a report 
                        issued under this subparagraph 
                        available to the public, including 
                        through publication in the Federal 
                        Register and on the Internet.
                  (D) Special rule for new plans.--
                Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), if a 
                management conference submits a new 
                comprehensive conservation and management plan 
                to the Administrator after the date of 
                enactment of this paragraph, the Administrator 
                shall complete the evaluation of the plan 
                required by subparagraph (A) not later than 4 
                years after the date of such submission and 
                every 4 years thereafter.
          (4) Updates.--
                  (A) Requirement.--Not later than 18 months 
                after the date on which the Administrator makes 
                an evaluation of a comprehensive conservation 
                and management plan available to the public 
                under paragraph (3)(C), a management conference 
                convened under this section shall submit to the 
                Administrator an update of the plan. The 
                updated plan shall reflect, to the maximum 
                extent practicable, the results of the program 
                evaluation.
                  (B) Approval of updates.--Not later than 120 
                days after the date on which a management 
                conference submits to the Administrator an 
                updated comprehensive conservation and 
                management plan under subparagraph (A), and 
                after providing for public review and comment, 
                the Administrator shall approve the updated 
                plan if the Administrator determines that the 
                updated plan meets the requirements of this 
                section.
          (5) Probationary status.--The Administrator may 
        consider a management conference convened under this 
        section to be in probationary status if the management 
        conference has not received approval for an updated 
        comprehensive conservation and management plan under 
        paragraph (4)(B) on or before the last day of the 3-
        year period beginning on the date on which the 
        Administrator makes an evaluation of the plan available 
        to the public under paragraph (3)(C).
  (g) Federal Agencies.--
          (1) Activities conducted within estuaries with 
        approved plans.--After approval of a comprehensive 
        conservation and management plan by the Administrator, 
        any Federal action or activity affecting the estuary 
        shall be conducted, to the maximum extent practicable, 
        in a manner consistent with the plan.
          (2) Coordination and cooperation.--The Secretary of 
        the Army (acting through the Chief of Engineers), the 
        Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration, the Director of the United States Fish 
        and Wildlife Service, the Chief of the Natural 
        Resources Conservation Service, and the heads of other 
        appropriate Federal agencies, as determined by the 
        Administrator, shall, to the maximum extent 
        practicable, cooperate and coordinate activities 
        related to the implementation of a comprehensive 
        conservation and management plan approved by the 
        Administrator. The Environmental Protection Agency 
        shall serve as the lead coordinating agency under this 
        paragraph.
          (3) Consideration of plans in agency budget 
        requests.--In making an annual budget request for a 
        Federal agency referred to in paragraph (2), the head 
        of such agency shall consider the responsibilities of 
        the agency under this section, including under 
        comprehensive conservation and management plans 
        approved by the Administrator.
          (4) Monitoring.--The heads of the Federal agencies 
        referred to in paragraph (2) shall collaborate on the 
        development of tools and methodologies for monitoring 
        the ecological health and water quality conditions of 
        estuaries covered by a management conference convened 
        under this section.
  [(g)] (h) Grants.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) Effects of probationary status.--
                  (A) Reductions in grant amounts.--The 
                Administrator shall reduce, by an amount to be 
                determined by the Administrator, grants for the 
                implementation of a comprehensive conservation 
                and management plan developed by a management 
                conference convened under this section if the 
                Administrator determines that the management 
                conference is in probationary status under 
                subsection (f)(5).
                  (B) Termination of management conferences.--
                The Administrator shall terminate a management 
                conference convened under this section, and 
                cease funding for the implementation of the 
                comprehensive conservation and management plan 
                developed by the management conference, if the 
                Administrator determines that the management 
                conference has been in probationary status for 
                2 consecutive years.
  [(h)] (i) Grant Reporting.--Any person (including a State, 
interstate, or regional agency or entity) that receives a grant 
under [subsection (g)] subsection (h) shall report to the 
Administrator not later than 18 months after receipt of such 
grants and biennially thereafter on the progress being made 
under this section.
  [(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to the Administrator not to exceed 
$35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2010 for--
          [(1) expenses related to the administration of 
        management conferences under this section, not to 
        exceed 10 percent of the amount appropriated under this 
        subsection;
          [(2) making grants under subsection (g); and
          [(3) monitoring the implementation of a conservation 
        and management plan by the management conference or by 
        the Administrator, in any case in which the conference 
        has been terminated.
The Administrator shall provide up to $5,000,000 per fiscal 
year of the sums authorized to be appropriated under this 
subsection to the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration to carry out subsection (j).]
  (j) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) In general.--There is authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Administrator $50,000,000 for each 
        of fiscal years 2011 through 2016 for--
                  (A) expenses related to the administration of 
                management conferences under this section, 
                except that such expenses shall not exceed 10 
                percent of the amount appropriated under this 
                subsection;
                  (B) making grants under subsection (h); and
                  (C) monitoring the implementation of a 
                conservation and management plan by the 
                management conference, or by the Administrator 
                in any case in which the conference has been 
                terminated.
          (2) Allocations.--Of the sums authorized to be 
        appropriated under this subsection, the Administrator 
        shall provide--
                  (A) at least $1,250,000 per fiscal year, 
                subject to the availability of appropriations, 
                for the development, implementation, and 
                monitoring of each conservation and management 
                plan eligible for grant assistance under 
                subsection (h); and
                  (B) up to $5,000,000 per fiscal year to carry 
                out subsection (k).
  [(j)] (k) Research.--
          (1) Programs.--In order to determine the need to 
        convene a management conference under this section or 
        at the request of such a management conference, the 
        Administrator shall coordinate and implement, through 
        the National Marine Pollution Program Office and the 
        National Marine Fisheries Service of the National 
        Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as appropriate, 
        for one or more estuarine zones--
                  (A) a long-term program of trend assessment 
                monitoring measuring variations in pollutant 
                concentrations, marine ecology, and other 
                physical or biological environmental 
                [paramenters] parameters which may affect 
                estuarine zones, to provide the Administrator 
                the capacity to determine the potential and 
                actual effects of alternative management 
                strategies and measures;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (l) National Estuary Program Evaluation.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the 
        date of enactment of this paragraph, and every 4 years 
        thereafter, the Administrator shall complete an 
        evaluation of the national estuary program established 
        under this section.
          (2) Specific assessments.--In conducting an 
        evaluation under this subsection, the Administrator 
        shall assess the effectiveness of the national estuary 
        program in improving water quality, natural resources, 
        and sustainable uses of the estuaries covered by 
        management conferences convened under this section.
          (3) Report.--In completing an evaluation under this 
        subsection, the Administrator shall issue a report on 
        the results of the evaluation, including the findings 
        and recommendations of the Administrator.
          (4) Availability to public.--The Administrator shall 
        make a report issued under this subsection available to 
        the public, including through publication in the 
        Federal Register and on the Internet.
  [(k)] (m) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
terms ``estuary'' and ``estuarine zone'' have the meanings such 
terms have in section 104(n)(4) of this Act, except that the 
term ``estuarine zone'' shall also include associated aquatic 
ecosystems and those portions of tributaries draining into the 
estuary up to the historic height of migration of anadromous 
fish or the historic head of tidal influence, whichever is 
higher.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                  
