[House Report 106-560]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-560
======================================================================
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
_______
April 4, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2328]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 2328) to amend the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the Clean Lakes Program,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. GRANTS TO STATES
Section 314(c)(2) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1324(c)(2)) is amended by striking ``$50,000,000'' the first
place it appears and all that follows through ``1990'' and inserting
``$50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2005''.
SEC. 2. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
Section 314(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1324(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2) by inserting ``Otsego Lake, New York;
Oneida Lake, New York; Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania; Swan Lake,
Itasca County, Minnesota;'' after ``Sauk Lake, Minnesota;'';
(2) in paragraph (3) by striking ``By'' and inserting
``Notwithstanding section 3003 of the Federal Reports
Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 (31 U.S.C. 1113 note; 109
Stat. 734-736), by''; and
(3) in paragraph (4)(B)(i) by striking ``$15,000,000'' and
inserting ``$25,000,000''.
Summary and Purpose
H.R. 2328, a bill to reauthorize the Clean Lakes Program,
was introduced by Representative John Sweeney on June 23, 1999,
and was referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. The purpose of H.R. 2328 is to reauthorize
funding for the Clean Lakes program for fiscal year 2001
through fiscal year 2005 and to increase the authorized funding
level for the ``acidified waters'' component of the program.
Background and Need for Legislation
The Clean Lakes Program, established under Section 314 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to
as the Clean Water Act), provides financial and technical
assistance to States to restore publicly owned lakes. This is
the primary federal program that puts a national focus and
priority on lakes--their monitoring, protection, and
management.
Over the last century an array of anthropogenic forces has
led to significant water quality impairment in thousands of
North American lakes. In recognition of the unique water
quality challenges facing our Nation's lakes, Congress included
the Clean Lakes Program in the 1972 amendments to the Act.
Section 314 contains various state assessment and reporting
requirements, a national demonstration program, and an
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grant program for
assistance to States in carrying out projects and program
responsibilities.
Since 1976, the Clean Lakes Program has received
approximately $145 million for federal grants. The funding
authorization for the program expired in fiscal year 1990. EPA
has not requested funding for the Clean Lakes Program in recent
years and the program has not received appropriations since
fiscal year 1995. Through its May 1996 nonpoint source
guidance, EPA encouraged states to fund eligible Clean Lakes
activities through funds available pursuant to Section 319
(relating to nonpoint source management). Some funds for the
Clean Lakes program have been made available through Section
319. Most recently, EPA has encouraged states to set aside a
percentage of Section 319 funds for Section 314 activities.
Various public and private organizations involved in lake
water quality management have been seeking an increase in
funding for the Section 314 program. Over the past two decades,
lake restoration techniques have improved dramatically and are
viewed by many as an important component of meeting the Clean
Water Act's objective of having all our Nation's waters
``fishable and swimmable,'' including the 41 million acres of
freshwater lakes. In addition, there is growing concern about
the damaging effects of acid rain and acid mine drainage on the
Nation's lakes. The project funding needed to address the
problems of our Nation's largest and most nationally
significant lakes can overwhelm the resources any one state can
provide. Separate, adequate, and consistent funding for the
Section 314 program is necessary to meet the needs of the
states' lake programs.
Many have also viewed the Clean Lakes Program as an
excellent opportunity for watershed-based, community-driven
projects and activities. Since its inception, the program has
been popular with local ``grassroots'' organizations and
citizens. Section 314 offers the opportunity for necessary
partnerships among federal, state, and local entities and,
unlike Section 319, a focus on both prevention and remediation
of pollution. The framework of the program is also broad enough
to help communities address a wide range of issues, including
not only nonpoint source runoff but also atmospheric
deposition, degraded shoreline, mercury contamination, wetland
loss, lake use conflicts, fishery imbalances, invasive species,
and other threats to water quality and lake habitat. Many of
these problems have proven difficult or impossible to address
under Section 319 project guidelines. Separate Clean Lakes
Program funding is needed to focus attention and resources on
the special needs of the Nation's lakes.
H.R. 2328 responds to these needs by reauthorizing the
Clean Lakes Program (at $50 million per year for fiscal years
2001 through 2005) and increasing the funding authorization for
the acidified waters projects from $15 million to $25 million.
Discussion of Committee Bill and Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Grants to States
This section amends Section 314(c)(2) of the Clean Water
Act by authorizing $50 million per year for grants to States to
implement the Clean Lakes Program for each of fiscal years 2001
through 2005.
Section 2. Demonstration program
This section amends Section 314(d) of the Clean Water Act
as follows:
Paragraph (2) is amended by adding several lakes to the
list of lakes to receive priority consideration for
demonstration projects. The lakes added to this list are:
Otsego Lake in New York; Oneida Lake in New York; Raystown Lake
in Pennsylvania; and Swan Lake in Itasca County, Minnesota.
Otsego Lake in New York is at the headwaters of the
Susquehanna River, the largest single freshwater source for the
Chesapeake Bay. There is a national effort to clean up the
Chesapeake Bay, the success of which is important to the
nation. Otsego Lake is physically unique in the Susquehanna
River Basin because its size and shape result in high
concentrations of oxygen in its deep waters, but conversely
allow relatively minor amounts of polluting nutrients to remove
that oxygen annually. Otsego Lake is biologically unique in
that those deep water oxygen concentrations provide habitat for
cold water fisheries (lake trout, Atlantic salmon, brown trout,
whitefish and cisco) which are now in jeopardy because of the
sustained loss of bottom oxygen each late summer and fall. That
same sensitivity to pollutants means that Otsego Lake is very
responsive to pollutant removal through management activities.
Oneida Lake in New York is the largest inland lake in the
state and home to 74 species of fish. The lake watershed covers
five counties and more than 800,000 acres. This lake is
experiencing water quality problems and the use of the lake is
impaired. There are significant concerns regarding sediment and
nutrient runoff to the lake from tributaries, and agricultural
and urban land use trends. In addition, algal blooms, rooted
vegetation, and invasive species are problems for this lake.
With a length of 30 miles and covering 8,300 acres,
Raystown Lake is the largest lake on Pennsylvania's list of
significant lakes. Based on Pennsylvania's assessment of lakes
under the Clean Lakes Program, Raystown Lake has been
designated a high priority. At present, the lake supports a
wide variety of recreational activities and provides
significant economic benefits to the region. However, the lake
has been identified by Pennsylvania as threatened. This means
that, although the lake currently attains all of its designated
uses, there are data or assessment information that indicate an
existing or potential downward trend in water quality which may
impair designated uses if remedial actions are not initiated.
Swan Lake, in Itasca County, Minnesota, is a lake of
tremendous regional significance. The lake's watershed covers
approximately 100 square miles, including the City of Nashwauk,
located northeast of the lake. Swan Lake supports a wide range
of recreational activities, including boating and fishing, and
provides a significant economic benefit to the region. However,
water quality in the lake has diminished over the years due to
mining and industrial activities. In addition, because of the
poor soils surrounding the lake, the near shores of the lake
contain a high density of onsite sewage disposal systems, which
have caused further degradation of water quality.
The Committee intends that the Administrator also give
priority consideration to Lake George in New York. This lake is
subject to a variety of threats, including invasive species and
acid rain. In addition, the Committee intends that the
Administrator work with the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at
Portland State University in addressing the problems of
eutrophication and nonindigenous species management in Ten Mile
and Waldo Lakes in Oregon.
Paragraph (3) is amended to prevent the report to Congress
on the Clean Lakes demonstration program from expiring under
the Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995.
Paragraph (4) is amended to increase the special
authorization of financial assistance to States to carry out
methods and procedures to mitigate harmful effects of high
acidity from acid deposition or acid mine drainage from $15
million to $25 million. The Committee believes there is a
growing need to address water quality problems associated with
acid rain and acid mine drainage.
Hearings and Legislative History
On October 18, 1999, the Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee held a field hearing in Cooperstown, New York, on
``Clean Lakes and Water Quality Management,'' including H.R.
2328. Testimony was given by the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Corps of Engineers, the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation and representatives of lake
management, research, and academic organizations and
institutions.
Committee Consideration
On Wednesday, March 8, 2000, the Water Resources and
Environment Subcommittee approved by voice vote, H.R. 2328,
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Rep.
Sherwood Boehlert. The substitute amendment (a) adjusted the
authorization level for the Clean Lakes program to $50 million
annually; (b) added additional lakes to the list of lakes to
receive priority consideration for demonstration projects; (c)
increased the special authorization of financial assistance to
States to mitigate harmful effects of high acidity from acid
deposition or acid mine drainage from $15 million to $25
million; and (d) prevented the report to Congress on the Clean
Lakes demonstration program from expiring under the Federal
Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995.
On Thursday, March 16, 2000, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session and
approved by voice vote a motion to report the bill as amended.
Rollcall 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 rollcall 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 rollcall votes in the Committee.
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(d)(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 below.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 2328.
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 following cost estimate for H.R.
2328 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
congressional budget office cost estimate
H.R. 2328--A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to
reauthorize the Clean Lakes program
Summary: H.R. 2328 would reauthorize the Clean Lakes
program and authorize an appropriation of $50 million for each
of fiscal years 2001 through 2005 for the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to provide financial and technical
assistance to states in restoring publicly owned lakes. The
bill also would authorize a one-time appropriation of $25
million for grants to states to study the effects of acid rain
and mine drainage. CBO estimates that implementing this
legislation over the next five years would increase
discretionary spending by $239 million. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply.
H.R. 2328 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. The bill would authorize funding to continue
providing grants to states to carry out activities already
mandated under the Clean Lakes program.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For purposes of
this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized will be
appropriated for each fiscal year and that outlays will occur
at rates similar to those of past appropriations for EPA
activities associated with the Clean Lakes program. The
estimated impact of the H.R. 2328 is shown in the following
table. The costs of legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and the environment).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of
dollars--
---------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated authorization level 75 50 50 50 50
\1\............................
Estimated outlays............... 38 48 52 51 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Clean Lakes program has not received an appropriation since
1994.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental or private-sector impact: H.R. 2328
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments. The bill would authorize funding to
continue providing grants to states to carry out activities
already mandated under the Clean Lakes program.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Susanne S. Mehlman;
Impact on State, local, and tribal governments: Theresa Gullo;
Impact on the private sector: Jean Wooster.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
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. (Public Law 104-4.)
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were 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. (Public Law
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):
SECTION 314 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
clean lakes
Sec. 314. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) * * *
(2) There is authorized to be appropriated [$50,000,000 for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973; $100,000,000 for the
fiscal year 1974; $150,000,000 for the fiscal year 1975,
$50,000,000 for fiscal year 1977, $60,000,000 for fiscal year
1978, $60,000,000 for fiscal year 1979, $60,000,000 for fiscal
year 1980, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1981, $30,000,000 for
fiscal year 1982, such sums as may be necessary for fiscal
years 1983 through 1985, and $30,000,000 per fiscal year for
each of the fiscal years 1986 through 1990] $50,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2001 through 2005 for grants to States
under subsection (b) of this section which such sums shall
remain available until expended. The Administrator shall
provide for an equitable distribution of such sums to the
States with approved methods and procedures under subsection
(a) of this section.
(d) Demonstration Program.--
(1) * * *
(2) Geographical requirements.--Demonstration
projects authorized by this subsection shall be
undertaken to reflect a variety of geographical and
environmental conditions. As a priority, the
Administrator shall undertake demonstration projects at
Lake Champlain, New York and Vermont; Lake Houston,
Texas; Beaver Lake, Arkansas; Greenwood Lake and
Belcher Creek, New Jersey; Deal Lake, New Jersey;
Alcyon Lake, New Jersey; Gorton's Pond, Rhode Island;
Lake Washington, Rhode Island; Lake Bomoseen, Vermont;
Sauk Lake, Minnesota; Otsego Lake, New York; Oneida
Lake, New York; Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania; Swan Lake,
Itasca County, Minnesota; and Lake Worth, Texas.
(3) Reports.--[By] Notwithstanding section 3003 of
the Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995
(31 U.S.C. 1113 note; 109 Stat. 734-736), by January 1,
1997, and January 1 of every odd-numbered year
thereafter, the Administrator shall report to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on
Environment and Public Works of the Senate on work
undertaken pursuant to this subsection. Upon completion
of the program authorized by this subsection, the
Administrator shall submit to such committees a final
report on the results of such program, along with
recommendations for further measures to improve the
water quality of the Nation's lakes.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--
(A) * * *
(B) Special authorizations.--
(i) Amount.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out subsection
(b) with respect to subsection
(a)(1)(D) not to exceed [$15,000,000]
$25,000,000 for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 1986, to remain
available until expended.
* * * * * * *