S. 898Senate112th Congress (2011-2013)In Committee

STOPS Runoff Act

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

2 earlier actions

SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Environment and Public Works Committee

May 5, 2011

View full timeline

SenateIntro Referral

Introduced in Senate

May 5, 2011

SenateIntro Referral

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2737-2738)

May 5, 2011

SenateIntro Referral

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Environment and Public Works Committee

May 5, 2011

Floor Debate

11 members

What members said about S. 898 on the floor

1 Republican10 Democrats

Sen. Benjamin L. CardinD-MD · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation that will help prevent millions of gallons of pollution from entering our Nation's precious water resources. The season we are in makes my…

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation that will help prevent millions of gallons of pollution from entering our Nation's precious water resources. The season we are in makes my legislation particularly timely. Spring is one of the wettest times of year, and with every Spring shower polluted stormwater runoff washes a myriad of chemicals pollutants, sediment, debris, oil and grease, and other contaminates from our nation's roads and highways into our lakes, rivers, streams, bays, and coastal waters.

Stormwater is the Nation's largest source of water pollution. While rain itself contains air pollution particulates that are deposited in every drop, most stormwater pollution is picked up on the surface and carried off as runoff. Stormwater washes contaminants like oil, grease, heavy metals, nutrients, asbestos, sediments, road salts and other de- icing agents, brake dust, and road debris from the millions of miles of America's roads and into storm drains that discharge into nearby waters. Almost all of this polluted stormwater is discharged without any treatment.

When rain falls on these hard, impervious surfaces it often has no where to go but down the channels created by curbs and retaining walls, into storm drains and into the nearest natural water body. According to research compiled by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's, NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center, the U.S. is covered by more than 112,600 square kilometers of impervious surfaces. That is a space larger than the State of Ohio. With 985,139 miles of Federal aid highways stretching from every corner of the country, polluted highway runoff is no small problem facing our Nation's waters.

The effects of polluted stormwater runoff are real. For example, the Anacostia River--Washington's ``other'' and often forgotten river--can be seen from the Capitol Dome as it flows out of Prince George's County, MD, and into the District and on to its confluence with the Potomac. Runoff from within the 176 square mile watershed of the Anacostia, most of which is in Maryland, but also includes the east side of D.C. and the entire Capitol complex, all makes its way into the Anacostia. The stormwater that enters the Anacostia is extremely polluted from the thousands of acres of road surfaces that cover the watershed, which exacerbates the incidence of combined sewer overflows and has impaired the Anacostia for many years. It is no coincidence that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has found the Anacostia's bottom- feeder catfish to have the highest incidence of liver tumors than any other population of catfish in the country. The cause of the tumors are the high levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a by-product of fuel combustion, that come from vehicle tailpipe emissions and are deposited on the road and in the air and then washed into the river with every shower or thunderstorm.

This is not a problem unique to Maryland or the Chesapeake Bay region, nor is it a problem unique to urban environments as opposed to rural environments. Polluted runoff is a problem that affects any watershed where impervious paved road and highway surfaces have altered the natural hydrology of a watershed. Over time, federal highway policy has come to recognize the drastic impacts highways and surface transportation can have on the environment and on water quality. Title 23 of the U.S. Code states: ``transportation should play a significant role in promoting economic growth, improving the environment, and sustaining the quality of life'' through the use of ``context sensitive solutions.'' The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, authorized using transportation enhancement funds for ``environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff.'' It is important to note, however, that this is just one of 12 types of eligible enhancement projects and only 1.1 percent of enhancement project funds have gone toward environmental mitigation projects since 1992.

In 2008, at the request of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, the Government Accountability Office issued a report examining key issues and challenges that need to be addressed in the next reauthorization of the transportation bill. That report highlighted the clear link between transportation policy and the environment. Taking a policy approach to require that the planning, design, and construction of highways are done in an environmentally responsible manner, with an eye toward mitigating the water quality impacts highways have on our Nation's water resources, will help address this issue and better meet our Nation's transportation goals. This legislation also helps advance the October 5, 2009, Executive Order affirming that Federal policy and Federal agencies shall ``conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse, and stormwater management; eliminate waste, recycle, and prevent pollution; and leverage agency acquisitions to foster markets for sustainable technologies and environmentally preferable materials, products and services.''

Over the years, The U.S. Department of Transportation has established design standards for federal-aid highways to improve the performance and safety of our highway infrastructure. These design standard improvements were the result of obvious safety and engineering problems that needed to be addressed. These design standard are essential to ensuring that the Federal Government's investment in transportation infrastructure is resulting in a well-designed, safe and reliable ``product'' for the benefit of the American people.

The same can be said for the need for establishing environmental design standards for Federal-aid highways as a means of protecting water quality. While stormwater runoff from highways may be classified as non-point source pollution, it is unquestionably the source of a wide range of contaminants that impair rivers, lakes, streams and coastal waters; create costly remedial situations; and detract from the value and health of our precious water resources. Requiring Federal-aid highways to meet an environmental standard for protecting water quality will improve the value of the Federal Government's investment in our Nation's highway infrastructure.

The approach my legislation takes to mitigate polluted highway runoff is through the implementation of a design standard, developed by the United States Department of Transportation, requiring the maintenance or restoration of the pre-development hydrology of a federal-aid highway project site. This same approach was made law by the Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007 for the development of new Federal buildings and facilities.

My bill would require that all substantial federal highway projects must be planned and designed ``to ensure that covered projects are sited, constructed and maintained in accordance with design standards intended to protect surface and ground water quality and ensure the long-term management of stormwater originating from Federal-aid highways.'' This would be achieved by approaches that avoid and minimize alteration of natural features and hydrology and maximize the use of onsite pollution control measures using existing terrain and natural features.

My bill also recognizes that geography and other physical characteristics of the land may not always allow on-site treatment of polluted highway runoff. When conditions are impracticable my legislation would allow for an ``appropriate off-site runoff pollution mitigation program'' within the watershed of a Federal-aid highway project site that can protect against the water quality impacts of the project.

The Clean Water Act requires that we protect the waters of the United States. As with most pollution abatement strategies, preventing stormwater pollution is cheaper, more effective, and easier to implement than trying to clean up and remediate the problem after contamination has occurred.

Not addressing stormwater pollution at its source just kicks the proverbial can down the road for someone else to deal with. When water resources are contaminated by polluted highway runoff, mitigating the pollution, which is a preventable discharge in the first place, should not be the responsibility of local goverments, wastewater treatment facilities, or drinking water utilities.

Water pollution has many sources and our nation's highways produce a tremendous volume of contaminated stormwater. Time and time again, experience has taught us that addressing pollution at its source is the most effective means of abating pollution. It is time we applied this principle to our Nation's Federal-aid highways. I urge my colleagues to support my legislation and help move our country closer to meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act and the goals of our national transportation policy.

Mr. President, today I am proud to reintroduce the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2011 along with my colleagues, Senator Landrieu, Senator Mikulski, Senator Merkley, and Senator Hagan. This legislation will build on the successful Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003. This program encourages habitat protection, education, research, monitoring, and capacity building to provide for the long- term protection of coastal wetlands from destruction caused by nutria.

Invasive species are one of the largest threats to biodiversity in the United States today. As invasive species go, the nutria is one of the most destructive creatures we have, especially in my home State of Maryland and in Louisiana.

The nutria is a large, semi-aquatic rodent that was originally brought to the United States to bolster the fur trade in the early 20th century. Unfortunately, we underestimated their strong appetite and high reproductive

potential. Since their introduction, the nutria have damaged millions of acres of wetlands and countless miles of shoreline and have even earned a spot among the International Union for Conservation of Nature's list of the world's 100 worst invasive alien species. By the early 1990s, the Chesapeake Bay/Delmarva Peninsula population was estimated to exceed 150,000 animals.

These ``eating machines'' can consume up to 25 percent of their body weight in plants per day, feasting directly on plant roots. This wrecks havoc on our wetlands, turning our once productive lands into barren mud flats. The destruction exacerbates the damaging impacts of ongoing land subsidence and sea level rise.

We understand how important our wetlands are and provide numerous ecosystem services to our society. They provide fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection, erosion control, and water quality preservation.

In my own State of Maryland, nutria invaded the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge nearly 6 decades ago, destroying vital habitat for native shorebirds, muskrats, and blue crabs. They are responsible for the loss of more than 5,000 acres of wetlands in this refuge alone.

We must remember this has a significant impact on people--people who depend on it for their livelihood and for people who use it for recreation. The loss of Blackwater wetlands, that are vital to the fishery, was estimated to cost Maryland's economy nearly $4 million annually. Millions of Americans spend billions of dollars pursuing their fishing, hunting and wildlife watching activities, which contribute to millions of jobs in industries and businesses that support wildlife-related recreation.

In 2000, Congress established a Federal funding source to develop a successful public-private partnership program to address nutria in Maryland. This financial support has directly led to the successful eradiation of nutria from 150,000 acres of the approximate 400,000 acres of wetland habitats that they infest. The project success is due to strategic planning, permanent and dedicated staff members, and cooperation with private landowners.

In Louisiana, an incentive program is used to encourage trappers to trap nutria. Since the implementation of the program, the damage to coastal wetlands has been reduced from 90,000 to 20,000 acres.

The management techniques developed in Maryland and Louisiana have already been exported to other states like Oregon and Washington to control their own nutria populations and minimize the damage done to their marsh habitats. Healthy wetlands are returning to places where nutria have been removed. But the job is not yet done.

Last Congress, I introduced the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2009 to continue and improve the successful nutria eradication program in Maryland and Louisiana and expand it to other significantly impacted states like Oregon and Washington. This bill passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in 2009 and had the support of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, and the Nature Conservancy.

Today, I proudly rise again and rededicate myself to passing the Nutria Eradication Control Act of 2011. This bill will authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance to the states of Maryland, Louisiana, Delaware, Oregon, Washington, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and North Carolina to eradicate and control nutria populations and restore nutria-damaged wetlands.

We know how valuable our wetlands are. We know how destructive the nutria is. We know what we can do to stop the nutria and that these programs work. I urge my colleagues to remember that we have a responsibility to be good stewards of the earth and to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Sen. Benjamin L. CardinD-MD · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation that will help prevent millions of gallons of pollution from entering our Nation's precious water resources. The season we are in makes my…

Sen. Robert MenendezD-NJ · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act. This important legislation would provide competitive grants for educational organizations to make…

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act. This important legislation would provide competitive grants for educational organizations to make Holocaust education more accessible and available throughout this Nation.

I would like to commend my former colleague in the House, Congresswoman Maloney, for her leadership on this issue. I also want to thank my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg, for agreeing to be an original cosponsor.

This past Monday, we solemnly commemorated Holocaust Remembrance Day, in memorial of perhaps the greatest crime ever perpetrated against humanity. As we reflect upon the tragedies of the events surrounding the Holocaust, the lives lost, the families destroyed, the potential unfulfilled, we must renew our oath to never forget, so this dark chapter in history will never be repeated.

We must forever remember the approximately six million Jewish men, women and children, as well as millions of others who faced persecution, displacement, and death at the hands of the Nazis. We must remember their stories not just to honor their lives, but more importantly, to educate the next generation about the dangers of intolerance, ignorance, and bigotry. I could not think of a better namesake for this bill, Simon Wiesenthal, who honored the memories of those lost by dedicating his life to bringing those responsible to justice.

Some people might ask why we need to learn more about something that happened over 65 years ago and an entire ocean away. The same critics might argue that anti-Semitism, while terrible, is a relic of the past that will never be repeated. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and we, as a Nation, must not ignore this appalling truth.

Even to this day, we do not have to go half way around the world to find examples of intolerance and hate; rather we can look into our own neighborhoods and communities. According to the FBI, there were 1,376 hate crimes motivated by religious bias in 2009. More than 7 out of 10 of these crimes were perpetrated against Jews because of their religion. In fact, even in my own State of New Jersey, a State of immense diversity, tolerance and understanding, we have seen a number of incidents that tear at the fabric of our society.

In July of 2010, a Rabbi and his 12 year old son were subject to anti-Semitic slurs from an unidentified man in a sedan as they walked towards their synagogue in Edison, NJ.

A few days after, the Edison Police Department investigated a second anti-Semitic incident at a Lexus dealership where eight cars had been vandalized with swastikas.

Last year in Chatham, New Jersey, anti-Semitic leaflets with the words ``Kill Jews'' were littered throughout the town. Local police found the culprit and arrested him. However, Chatham Township Police said they could only charge the offender with littering because he was not apparently targeting an individual.

New Jersey college students at Rutgers University have also experienced this terrible discrimination on numerous occasions. This past fall, when a guest speaker came to present at a Jewish event on campus, he was continually harassed by a large group of students that shouted slurs and disrupted his speech several times. Since then, there has been an escalation of anti-Semitic incidents. One of which included a student event this past January that attempted to exploit the Holocaust and accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing. When students showed up in peaceful protest, they were charged an admission fee, while supporters of the event were admitted for free.

These troubling events do not occur in a vacuum. They are fed by bigotry, hatred, and above all else: ignorance. This ignorance is fueled by provocative, dangerous, and bigoted rhetoric that both threaten the safety and well being of individuals, while also insulting the honor of millions of Jewish people. So called academics seek to rewrite history to minimize and spin the facts surrounding the Holocaust; the government of Iran has waged campaigns not just to rewrite, but to simply erase an inconvenient truth. This is not an academic issue shrouded in intellectualism; Holocaust denial is bald- faced anti-Semitism, rooted in hate, and it has no place in our society.

We cannot sit idly by and hope that time alone will heal these wounds. We must take proactive steps to ensure that our society may properly study and take lessons from the Holocaust. Holocaust education is essential for school children so that we may achieve this goal.

Although some States now require the Holocaust to be taught in public schools, the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act goes further and makes grants available to organizations that instruct students, teachers, and communities about the dangers of hate and the importance of tolerance in our society. This legislation would give educators the appropriate resources and training to teach accurate historical information about the Holocaust and convey the lessons that the Holocaust can teach us today.

However, while much growth and healing have come about in the 66 years since Auschwitz was liberated, there remains a significant barrier that we must break through. After 6 decades, many of our youth may view the Holocaust as an event that occurred in the distant past. Only by proper acknowledgement of the incredible loss of life during the Holocaust, will we ever be able to ensure that such an event never happens again.

It is in our common interest to raise our voices against anti- Semitism and against all hatred and discrimination. Funding accurate educational programs on the Holocaust is a step toward winning this battle.

So as America stands with Israel and all followers of the Jewish faith in condemning anti-Semitism, let us do everything in our power to end discrimination and educate future generations about the danger of hatred and bigotry.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Sen. Mary L. LandrieuD-LA · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will be a critical component in our efforts to recover and rebuild Louisiana's vast coastal wetlands. My bill works to address the threatening…

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will be a critical component in our efforts to recover and rebuild Louisiana's vast coastal wetlands. My bill works to address the threatening problem of coastal wetland deterioration in Louisiana caused by non-native, invasive feral swine populations. Few are aware that the marsh and wetlands along Louisiana's coast comprise some 40 percent of the Nation's total salt marshes. Louisiana's coastline is a national treasure. Yet, this national treasure is disappearing at an alarming rate due to a number of natural and man-made factors, including the destruction of wetlands caused by non-native feral pig populations that are literally eating away the coast.

Louisiana's coastline is an increasingly fragile and finite source of protection. It protects against storm surges, the varied effects of climate change, and it protects the many communities that thrive on the coastal plains of Louisiana. The survival of the affected acreage is crucial not only to the continued existence of my State and the states directly above mine--which will be affected if Louisiana's wetlands continue to deteriorate--but also to our Nation's energy independence and security. Forty percent of America's refining capacity flows from the Gulf Coast to service the rest of our Nation, and if Louisiana's coastline continues to disappear, our Nation's refiners and energy infrastructure will be jeopardized. As such, the loss of our

wetlands threatens not only our teeming wildlife, but also land, lives, energy infrastructure, and navigation.

That is why I rise today to introduce the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program Act of 2011, to address the challenges these species pose to our efforts to reverse coastal wetland deterioration.

Every 30 minutes, a portion of Louisiana's coast the size of a football field is converted from healthy marsh into open water. Since 1930, 1.2 million acres have been lost. That is an area roughly the size of Delaware. Scientists predict that Louisiana will lose another 700 square miles of coastal wetlands by 2050. That is an area the size of the greater Washington, D.C. and Baltimore metro areas.

Exacerbating this problem is the irresponsible introduction of the feral hog to Louisiana. This invasive species has caused extensive damage to our natural wildlife habitat. In Louisiana, the wild omnivores compete with native wildlife for food resources; prey on young domestic animals and wildlife; and carry diseases that can affect pets, livestock, wildlife and people. Scientists now believe that the feral hogs are not only imposing enormous damage to the marsh, but are also negatively impacting native freshwater mussels and insects by contributing E. coli to water systems.

According to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, the wild pig is the most prolific large mammal in North America and given adequate nutrition, its populations in an area can double in just four months.

Louisiana's landscape has already been ravaged by the nutria rodent. In 2002, the first program was created to combat the increasing nutria populations. This program, the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program, CNCP, incentivized trappers to catch nutria in return for monetary compensation. This program has proven successful at decreasing nutria populations and significantly reducing their impact to coastal wetlands.

However, more effort was needed to further reduce the nutria damage to wetlands, both in Louisiana and in other marshy environments, including Maryland's Chesapeake Bay. The Nutria Eradication and Control Act was enacted in 2003 to provide a critical supplement of funding to strengthen the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program. In July of 2009, I joined my friend and colleague Senator Cardin in introducing the re- authorization of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. These two measures to combat nutria populations have been instrumental in reducing the nutria damage to Louisiana's wetlands.

Unfortunately, now Louisiana has another pest eroding its marshes and wetlands. Feral swine are listed by the World Conservation Union, IUCN, as one of the top 100 invasive species worldwide. If action is not taken to control the feral swine population, our biologists fear these animals will undo much of the progress Louisiana has made in controlling the nutria population. It is my hope that with the help of my colleagues, we can pass this bill to help eradicate these pests from our vanishing coastline once and for all.

For these reasons, it is imperative that we control the feral swine in Louisiana. As such, the bill I am introducing today authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to allocate funding to create a pilot program modeled off of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. This program will assess the nature and extent of damage to the wetlands in Louisiana and develop methods to eradicate or control the feral swine population, and restore the coastal areas damaged by this invasive species. It is a small program, but the benefits are potentially vast. It is my hope that by creating this program, we can achieve similar success at combating feral hogs as we have had at controlling nutria populations.

It is for all of these reasons that this legislation is crucial. I ask that my colleagues support its prompt passage.

Sen. Patrick J. LeahyD-VT · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today, I am proud to join with Senator Grassley to introduce the Fighting Fraud to Protect Taxpayers Act of 2011. Combating fraud is a vital issue on which Senator Grassley and I have a long track record of working together, and with great success. In these trying economic times, cracking down on the fraud which has harmed so many hardworking Americans is more important than ever. I look forward to working with Senator Grassley, and with Senators from both parties, to quickly pass this crucial legislation.

In the last Congress, one of the first major bills the Senate Judiciary Committee considered, and one of the first bills President Obama signed into law, was the Leahy-Grassley Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act. That bill gave fraud investigators and prosecutors additional tools and resources to better hold those who commit fraud accountable. We heard about the significant success that has already resulted from the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act and other key fraud fighting provisions we championed in a Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this year, but it is clear that our work is not done.

In the past two years, we have learned much more about the scourges of financial fraud, mortgage fraud, government contracting fraud, health care fraud, and oil and gas fraud. I have also been very disturbed by the ongoing reports about inaccurate, forged, or fraudulent documents in the housing foreclosure process. Today's bill reflects the ongoing need to invest in enforcement to better protect hard-working taxpayers from all of these insidious types of fraud.

In the last fiscal year alone, the Department of Justice recovered well over $6 billion through fines, penalties, and recoveries from fraud cases--far more than it costs to investigate and prosecute these matters. The recovery of these vast sums of money demonstrates that investment in fraud enforcement pays for itself many times over.

The Fighting Fraud to Protect Taxpayers Act capitalizes on this rate of return by ensuring that a percentage of money recovered by the Government through fines and penalties in fraud cases and other criminal cases is reinvested in the investigation and prosecution of fraud cases. That means that we can ensure more fraud enforcement, more returns to the government, and more savings to taxpayers, all without spending new taxpayer money.

The bill also makes other modest changes to ensure that prosecutors and investigators have the tools they need to combat fraud. It extends the international money laundering bill statute to tax evasion crimes. This will deter individuals from evading our tax laws by hiding their money overseas. It also protects American consumers from identity theft by strengthening the prohibition against trafficking in passwords and the federal identity theft statute. As more and more business is conducted online, we must ensure that consumers' personal information remains protected.

The Secret Service has responsibility for investigating a variety of complex financial fraud crimes, including identity theft. This bill gives the Secret Service additional tools to conduct critical undercover investigations. Fraud cases are often complex and difficult to prove, so undercover investigations can be a key way to ferret out criminal activity.

In the last Congress, Senator Grassley and I worked together to strengthen the False Claims Act, which empowers whistleblowers to shine a light on fraud and recover stolen tax dollars that would otherwise go undiscovered. These new laws are already paying off. Since January 2009, the Department of Justice has recovered more than $6.8 billion in False Claims Act cases, far more than any other 2-year period. Today's legislation asks the Attorney General to report to Congress on False Claims Act settlements, which will help ensure that the False Claims Act remains a valuable tool for fighting fraud.

Finally, the bill promotes accountability within Government. Along with requiring reporting, it takes modest steps to ensure that the resources already entrusted to the Justice Department are used responsibly by strengthening oversight of the Department's Working Capital Fund.

Major fraud cases take time to investigate and prosecute. The renewed focus on fraud enforcement we have seen from this administration and from Congress will continue to yield significant results. But we must continue to give law enforcement agencies the tools and resources necessary to root out fraud so that they can continue to recoup losses and protect taxpayer funds. Everyday, taxpaying Americans deserve to know that their Government is doing all it can to hold responsible those who commit fraud and to prevent future fraud.

Americans are worried about their budgets at home. We need to protect their investment in their government. Fighting fraud and protecting taxpayer dollars are issues Democrats and Republicans have worked together to address in the past, and in these difficult economic times, we need to continue in that spirit of bipartisanship. I look forward to working with Senator Grassley, the administration, and Senators of both parties to crack down on fraud by passing the Fighting Fraud to Protect Taxpayers Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Show 7 more

Sen. Jeff BingamanD-NM · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill important to public health and safety and the environment. This legislation addresses an interpretation by the Department of the Interior, DOI, which…

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill important to public health and safety and the environment. This legislation addresses an interpretation by the Department of the Interior, DOI, which restricts the ability of states to use certain funds under the Abandoned Mine Land, AML, Program authorized by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, SMCRA, for non-coal abandoned mine reclamation and for the remediation of acid mine drainage. This bill is identical to legislation that was reported by voice vote by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources last Congress.

Amendments to SMCRA, passed as part of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-432, reauthorized collection of an AML fee on coal produced in the United States and made certain modifications to the AML program. The amendments also provided that so-called ``make- up'' funds, amounts that had accrued to the states and tribes for several years under the formula in SMCRA but had not been previously appropriated, be paid out to the states and tribes over a period of years as mandatory payments.

Under the AML program, which is administered by DOI, funds are expended to reclaim abandoned mine lands, with top priority for protecting public health, safety, general welfare, and property, and restoration of land and water resources adversely affected by past mining practices. The program is largely directed to abandoned coal mine reclamation, but beginning in 1977 when SMCRA was first enacted, funds have been available pursuant to section 409 to address abandoned non-coal mine sites. A review of the legislative history of this provision and the long-standing administrative interpretation of section 409 reveals that the section is intended to address ``non-coal mine reclamation'' on abandoned mine lands.

Western states such as New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah have prioritized the use of AML funds to undertake the most pressing reclamation work on both abandoned coal and non-coal mine sites. While activities on non-coal mine sites have consumed a relatively insignificant portion of the funding provided for the overall AML program, the results in terms of public health and safety in these states is considerable, and there is significant work yet to be done.

Similarly, the use of AML funds for remediation of acid mine drainage has been important in many areas, especially in the Appalachian states, such as Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Until enactment of the 2006 amendments to SMCRA, states and tribes with approved AML programs had been able to set aside up to 30 percent of their AML funds for acid mine drainage remediation without respect to time limitations that would otherwise apply.

In 2007, the Solicitor at the Department of the Interior interpreted the amendments as limiting the ability of uncertified states and tribes to use the ``make-up'' AML funds for priority non-coal abandoned mine reclamation and acid mine drainage set-aside programs. See Memorandum Opinion M-37014. The Solicitor found that these make-up funds cannot be used for priority non-coal mine reclamation in the case of states and tribes that had not certified completion of their coal reclamation work and likewise cannot be used for acid mine drainage set-aside programs.

The bill that I am introducing today would correct what I believe is an unfortunate and unintended interpretation of the 2006 amendments by modifying the language of SMCRA to clarify that the funding would be available for non-coal abandoned mine reclamation and acid mine drainage set-aside programs as it was prior to the passage of the amendments in 2006.

I want to underscore that the bill does not increase funding to the states and tribes. It simply clarifies that states and tribes can have flexibility to use AML funds that they receive under existing law for these two important uses, as was the case prior to the 2006 amendments. I hope that my colleagues will support this legislation, which has important implications nationwide.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Sen. Ron WydenD-OR · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce a bill that will address the cumbersome and time consuming process under existing law within the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This piece of legislation…

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce a bill that will address the cumbersome and time consuming process under existing law within the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This piece of legislation will streamline the land acquisition process for the Confederated Tribe of Siletz Indians. The current process for taking land into trust is not working, and I believe there are changes that need to be revived in the existing process. I am pleased to be joined by Senator Merkley in this effort.

The original Siletz Coastal Treaty Reservation, established by the Executive Order on November 9, 1955 was diminished and then eliminated by the Federal Government's allotment and termination policies. Tribal members and tribal government have worked to rebuild the Siletz community since the Western Oregon Termination Act of August 1954 stripped the Siletz people of Federal tribal recognition, and since then the tribe has been struggling to rebuild its land base. This legislation would work to facilitate the tribe's land into trust process within the original Siletz coast reservation to overcome the chronic Bureau of Indian Affairs, BIA, delay in processing applications. Instead of having two processes to bring each piece of former reservation land back into the reservation after purchase, one to bring the land into trust, and another, to make it reservation land, allows the tribe to combine the process.

In this case, because the original reservation was disassembled, the tribe terminated and provided a very small land base upon restoration, virtually every tract of land the tribe seeks to place into trust today is considered by BIA pursuant to ``off reservation'' procedures. ``Off reservation'' requests would mean that the ``. . . secretary gives greater scrutiny to the tribe's justification of anticipated benefits . . .''

By applying the on-reservation fee-to-trust criteria for lands within the Siletz Tribe's original reservation, this legislation allows the Tribe to take land into trust that will ultimately provide for vital tribal programs such as housing, government administration, and jobs-- for both tribal and county residents. In addition, the bill emphasizes the importance and the intent of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934--which allows the Secretary of Interior, in his or her discretion, to take land into trust for the benefit of an Indian tribe or of individual Indians. Essentially, reversing the loss of tribal lands and restoring some of the Tribe's original land base by allowing the Tribe to take land into trust under the same provisions as other Indian tribes within their reservations.

This bill underscores the importance of economic stability and self- determination for the confederated tribe of Siletz Indians and its members. Oregon Tribal communities suffer some of the greatest hurdles, whether it is health care, education, or crime on reservations, this bill would alleviate much of the cost and much needed resources associated with the bureaucratic hoops the tribe has had to jump through for years--which mean a significant savings of time and resources.

As a result of the great working relationships, the Siletz Tribe has approached all six involved counties, and obtained their support. This legislation establishes and confirms a positive and beneficial partnership between the Federal Government, Siletz Tribe and local counties Lincoln, Lane, Tillamook, Yamhill, Benton, and Douglas.

That is why I am introducing--the process has not sped up and we recognize the need for more action. It's always great to see Tribes and local counties work together to come up with proactive, inventive solutions for their communities to tackle challenging economic conditions.

I want to express my thanks to all the citizens and community and tribal leaders who have worked to build their communities. They represent the pioneering spirit and vision that defines my state.

Sen. Orrin G. HatchR-UT · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, I rise today to announce the introduction of a bill that, if enacted, would empower the States to more wisely spend the $31 billion in unemployment funds that have been allocated to…

Mr. President, I rise today to announce the introduction of a bill that, if enacted, would empower the States to more wisely spend the $31 billion in unemployment funds that have been allocated to them for the remainder of this year. This bill will allow states to avoid job-killing unemployment tax hikes while strengthening the safety net program for unemployed workers. I am honored to introduce this legislation simultaneously with a bill being introduced today in the House by The Honorable Dave Camp, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

The Jobs, Opportunity, Benefits and Services Act of 2011, or JOBS Act for short, is just that. A pro jobs bill that goes to the heart of what unemployment benefits are meant to be: not a permanent welfare payment, but a bridge to help unemployed workers until they can find a new job. A hand up, not a hand out. This bill is sorely needed. Since the recession began, 33 States have borrowed $48 billion in Federal funds to pay for unemployment benefits. These loans, if gone unpaid, will result in increased taxes on employers and job creators. Three States already have been forced to do so, and experts predict that 21 additional States will be required to raise taxes on jobs this year if nothing is done.

The JOBS Act allows states the flexibility to manage their unemployment funds to pay benefits, reduce their borrowings, or establish programs to help unemployed workers get jobs. The States can decide for themselves where their greatest needs lie. Under current law, States don't have the flexibility they need to adapt. The Federal Government pays for up to 73 weeks of unemployment, an all-time record. But not every state needs to spend the money the way Washington dictates. For example, North Dakota has only a 3.6 percent rate of unemployment, but the unemployed can collect up to 34 weeks of unemployment paid for with Federal funds, in addition to the normal 26 weeks under pre-recession law. This bill would allow States to more wisely direct those Federal funds.

How does the bill work? The $31 billion in Federal funds already allocated to the States will be advanced to them and will remain available for unemployment benefits or, if the State chooses, some or all can be used to repay their loans in order to avoid raising taxes, or enact programs that will lead to the rapid reemployment of unemployed workers. What this bill will not do is add any new Federal spending or reduce the amount of Federal funds a State is already scheduled to receive for unemployment insurance or mandate that States change the way they use those funds. It is up to the States to decide what is best for them and their citizens based on local conditions. This bill truly is a ``win, win'' for States, workers and the businesses struggling to expand and hire.

I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation.

Sen. Patty MurrayD-WA · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am proud to introduce the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2011. Effective December 1, 2011,…

Mr. President, today, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am proud to introduce the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2011.

Effective December 1, 2011, this measure directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to increase the rates of veterans' compensation to keep pace with a rise in the cost-of-living, should an adjustment be prompted by an increase in the Consumer Price Index, CPI. Referred to as the COLA, this important legislation would make an increase available to veterans at the same level as an increase provided to recipients of Social Security benefits.

All of my colleagues on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs: Senators Burr, Rockefeller, Akaka, Sanders, Brown of Ohio, Webb, Tester, Begich, Isakson, Wicker, Johanns, Brown of Massachusetts, Moran, and Boozman join me in introducing this important legislation. I look forward to our continued work together to improve the lives of our Nation's veterans.

Last year, Congress passed, and the President signed into law, Public Law 111-247, which would have increased veterans' compensation rates had there been an increase in the CPI. While there was no cost-of- living increase in 2011 due to a decline in the CPI, the 2012 adjustment was projected to be .9 percent in the President's fisal year 2012 budget submission.

The COLA affects so many important benefits, including veterans' disability compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation for surviving spouses and children. It is projected that over 3.5 million veterans and survivors will receive compensation benefits in fiscal year 2012.

As the daughter of a disabled veteran, I understand the critical nature of these benefits as many recipients depend upon these tax-free payments for their most basic needs, in addition to the needs of their spouses and children. We have an obligation to the men and women who have sacrificed so much to serve our country and who now deserve nothing less than the full support of a grateful Nation. The COLA brings us one step closer to fulfilling our Nation's promise to care for our brave veterans and their families.

I ask our colleagues to show their continued support for our Nation's veterans by working together to ensure this benefit remains available and is not diminished by the effects of inflation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Sen. Tom HarkinD-IA · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, safe, modern, healthy school buildings are essential to creating an environment where students can reach their full academic potential. Today, too many students in the United States, particularly those most at risk of being left behind, attend school in facilities that are old, overcrowded and run-down. The 2009 Infrastructure Report Card compiled by the American Society of Civil Engineers gives public schools a D grade. Too many of our Nation's schools were built over a half century ago, and are not equipped to meet the needs of 21st Century students and teachers. School-facility needs are impacting the preparedness of our children for work in critical fields, such as mathematics and science.

The National Center for Education Statistics reported in 2000 that the Nation's elementary and secondary

schools required approximately $127 billion to repair or upgrade their facilities. A 2008 State-by-State analysis by the American Federation of Teachers found that the Nation's school infrastructure needs total an estimated $255 billion. While the condition of public school buildings is primarily a state and local responsibility, the Federal Government can and should help, especially when it comes to closing disparities between affluent and disadvantaged school districts. The current economic environment makes it exceedingly difficult for States and school districts to renovate and in some cases build new schools to meet this important need.

That is why I am pleased to introduce the School Building Fairness Act. This legislation provides $1 billion to States for competitive matching grants to local educational agencies; LEAs, for school repair, renovation, and construction. In awarding the grants, States must consider poverty, condition of school facilities, capacity, adherence to green building standards, and likelihood of maintenance. I have seen this work in Iowa with the success of the Iowa Demonstration Construction Grant Program, which provided over $121 million in federal assistance to over 300 school districts and leveraged more than $600 million of additional local funding through the matching requirement. I am sure that it will work across the rest of the country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Sen. John D. Rockefeller IVD-WV · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Mother's Day Centennial Coin Commemorative Coin Act. I am proud to be joined by a bipartisan group of cosponsors including Senators Manchin, Cochran,…

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Mother's Day Centennial Coin Commemorative Coin Act. I am proud to be joined by a bipartisan group of cosponsors including Senators Manchin, Cochran, Stabenow, and Whitehouse.

With Mother's Day set for Sunday, May 8th, this is a special event for all of West Virginia because this annual tribute to our mothers began in West Virginia. In 1908, a West Virginian woman by the name of Anna Jarvis petitioned her local church to declare May 9th as Mother's Day. She hoped that this holiday would serve as a remembrance for mothers and a reminder for peace. Within a year, all 46 current States held some sort of Mother's Day and a mere 5 years later, Congress and the President declared the second Sunday of May national Mother's Day. The centennial for the national recognition of Mother's Day will occur in 2014, and this bill provides an opportunity to commemorate the centennial of this great holiday and further recognize the millions of American mothers whose essential role in life cannot be overstated.

The legislation I am introducing today would recognize the centennial of Mother's Day by authorizing the Treasury to mint commemorative Mother's Day coins. Profits generated from the sale of these coins would be donated to Susan G. Komen for the Cure and The National Osteoporosis Foundation. Susan G. Komen for the Cure has raised nearly $2 billion for breast cancer research since 1982, and the National Osteoporosis Foundation is considered our Nation's leading voluntary health organization.

Each year, more than 200,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer and nearly 40,000 die of this devastating disease. This legislation not only honors our Nation's mothers, but also helps to raise funds to fight the second most prevalent cancer in women. Thousands of mothers have benefited from the efforts of these organizations and they are well deserving of our support. Therefore, I encourage my colleagues' support for this legislation to honor every mother in our country and to prepare for the upcoming centennial. Celebrating Mother's Day by helping to promote the health of American mothers seems to be a fitting tribute.

Sen. Daniel K. InouyeD-HI · May 5, 2011

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to restore the 80 percent tax deduction for business meals and entertainment expenses. By way of background, business meals previously were fully…

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to restore the 80 percent tax deduction for business meals and entertainment expenses.

By way of background, business meals previously were fully deductible. In 1986, the Congress reduced the allowable tax deduction for business meals and entertainment from 100 percent to 80 percent. In 1993, the deduction was further reduced to its current level of 50 percent. The business meal deduction should be reformed to better reflect the basic principle that business expenses should be fully deductible. Increasing the limitation to 80 percent would better align the provision with these objectives.

More importantly, at a time when the Nation is getting back on stronger economic footing, the legislation is particularly critical especially for the small businesses and self-employed individuals that depend so heavily on the business meal to conduct business. Small companies often use restaurants as ``conference space'' to conduct meetings or close deals. Meals are their best, and sometimes only, marketing tool. Certainly, an increase in the meal and entertainment deduction would have a significant impact on a small business's bottom line.

In addition, the effects on the overall economy would be significant. Research has shown that increasing the business meal deduction to 80 percent would increase business meal sales by over $7 billion and increase the number of jobs by over 200,000. Moreover, restaurants service more than 130 million guests every day. Every dollar spent dining out generates $2.05 in business to other industries, totaling more than $1.7 trillion in overall economic impact.

The impact of the restaurant industry on the Nation's economy is considerable and felt in every State. Accompanying my statement is the National Restaurant Association's, NRA's, State-by-State chart reflecting the estimated economic impact of increasing the business meal deductibility from 50 percent to 80 percent.

I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this important legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a State-by-State chart be printed in the Record.

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF XML

Introduced in SenateIssued May 5, 2011

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 898

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

May 5, 2011

Mr. Cardin introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To amend title 23, United States Code, to direct the Secretary to establish a comprehensive design standard program to prevent, control, and treat polluted stormwater runoff from federally funded highways and roads, and for other purposes.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Safe Treatment of Polluted Stormwater Runoff Act or the STOPS Runoff Act.

Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management program

(a)

In general

Chapter 3 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

330.

Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management program

(a)

Definitions

In this section:

(1)

Control measure

The term control measure means a program, structural or nonstructural management practice, operational procedure, or policy on or off the project site that is intended to prevent, reduce, or control highway runoff pollution.

(2)

Covered project

The term covered project means a rehabilitation, reconfiguration, renovation, major resurfacing, or construction project carried out under this title that—

(A)

results in a 10-percent or greater increase in impervious surface of the aerial extent within the right-of-way of the project limit on a Federal-aid highway or associated facility; or

(B)

results in an increase of 1 acre or more in impervious surface coverage.

(3)

Highway runoff pollution

The term highway runoff pollution means, in relation to a Federal-aid highway, associated facility, or control measure retrofit project, one or more of the following:

(A)

A discharge of sediment, metals, chemicals, nitrogen and phosphorous, or oil and grease in runoff.

(B)

A discharge of peak flow rate, water temperature, or volume of runoff that exceeds predevelopment amounts.

(4)

Predevelopment hydrology

The term predevelopment hydrology means, for project sites covered by this section, that—

(A)

the precipitation from all rainfall events less than or equal to the 95th percentile rain event shall be managed on-site through stormwater management practices designed, constructed, and maintained to prevent off-site discharge, to the maximum extent technically feasible; or

(B)

runoff typical of natural conditions prior to anthropogenic disturbance, as determined by site-specific conditions, local meteorology, and continuous simulation modeling techniques, are preserved through stormwater management practices that are designed, constructed, and maintained to manage the volume, rate, and temperature of stormwater runoff following construction.

(5)

Watershed-based environmental management approach

The term watershed-based environmental management approach means an approach under which—

(A)

the selection of solutions that prevent or minimize the environmental impact of an individual project is made within the broader context of the environmental protection and restoration goals of any watershed that drains the project site, rather than selecting solutions solely based on site level considerations; and

(B)

priority consideration is given to—

(i)

protection of drinking water supplies;

(ii)

protection and restoration of waterways listed by a State as impaired in accordance with section 303(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d));

(iii)

preservation of aquatic ecosystems and fisheries; and

(iv)

cost-effective expenditure of Federal funds.

(b)

Establishment

The Secretary, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall establish a Federal-aid highway runoff pollution avoidance and management program to ensure that covered projects are sited, constructed, and maintained in accordance with design standards intended to protect surface and ground water quality and ensure the long-term management of stormwater originating from Federal-aid highways.

(c)

Project approval

The Secretary may approve a covered project of a State under section 106 only if the State provides assurances satisfactory to the Secretary that the State will site, design, and construct the covered project in accordance with the design standards described in subsection (d).

(d)

Design standards

(1)

In general

The post-construction condition of a covered project shall maintain or restore, to the maximum extent technically feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the project site with regard to the temperature, rate, chemical composition, volume, and duration of flow.

(2)

Covered projects in impaired watersheds

Any covered project carried out within a watershed that contains an impaired water listed under section 303(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)) shall be in accordance with—

(A)

the load or wasteload allocation requirements established by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency or the State; and

(B)

the requirements relating to predevelopment hydrology under paragraph (1).

(3)

Additional prioritized requirements

In addition to the requirements described in paragraphs (1) and (2), a covered project shall, in the following order of priority—

(A)

reduce the creation of highway runoff pollution from the covered project by—

(i)

avoiding or minimizing the alteration of natural features and hydrology; and

(ii)

maximizing the use of pollution source control measures that use existing terrain and natural features, including natural drainage ways, soils, and vegetation, to reduce creation of pollution from the covered project;

(B)

maximize the capture of highway runoff pollution created by the covered project through control measures, including environmental site design techniques and other control measures that promote evapotranspiration, infiltration, reuse, and retention; and

(C)

for highway runoff pollution remaining after the application of the onsite measures in subparagraphs (A) and (B), use a watershed-based environmental management or equivalent approach to avoid adverse water quality effects from the covered project through—

(i)

capture and treatment of highway runoff pollution with appropriate control measures on the site;

(ii)

discharge of highway runoff pollution directly to an off-site control measure under the control of the State with documented capacity to provide functionally and quantitatively equivalent management of runoff pollution to that required to achieve the minimum standards of this subsection for the design life of the project; and

(iii)

if the control measures described in clauses (i) and (ii) are found to be technically infeasible based on site conditions or other appropriate factors, and an appropriate off-site runoff pollution mitigation program exists, contribution to a mitigation program that would produce functionally and quantitatively equivalent or greater control and management of runoff pollution to that required by this subsection.

(4)

Off-site control measures

Of the control measures described in paragraph (3)(C)(iii), the Secretary shall give priority to off-site control measures that address the impacts of runoff pollution to waterways that are—

(A)

listed as impaired in accordance with section 303(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)); and

(B)

located in—

(i)

the same 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code as the covered project; or

(ii)

the lowest Hydrologic Unit Code that is the most protective of the waters receiving the discharge.

(e)

Guidance

(1)

In general

Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall publish guidance to assist States in complying with this section.

(2)

Contents of guidance

The guidance shall include guidelines for the establishment of State processes and programs that will be used to assist in avoiding, minimizing, and managing highway runoff pollution from covered projects in accordance with the design standards described in subsection (d), including guidelines—

(A)

to help States integrate the planning, selection, design, and long-term operation and maintenance of control measures consistent with the design standards in the overall project planning process;

(B)

for a watershed-based environmental management approach to assist projects in achieving consistency with the design standards;

(C)

for the development and use of off-site runoff pollution mitigation programs to achieve compliance with the design standards; and

(D)

for State inspection and reporting to document State compliance and project consistency with this section.

(3)

Updating standards

Not later than 5 years after the date of publication of the guidance, and every 5 years thereafter, the Secretary, with concurrence of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall update, as applicable, the guidance described in this subsection.

(f)

Limitation on statutory construction

Nothing in this section affects the applicability of any provision of Federal, State, or local law that is more stringent than the requirements of this section.

(g)

Reporting

(1)

In general

Except as provided in paragraph (2)(A), the Secretary shall require each State to submit to the Secretary an annual report that describes the highway runoff pollution reductions achieved for covered projects carried out by the State after the date of enactment of this section.

(2)

Reporting requirements under permit

(A)

In general

A State shall not be required to submit an annual report described in paragraph (1) if the State—

(i)

is operating Federal-aid highways in the State in a post-construction condition in accordance with a permit issued under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);

(ii)

is subject to an annual reporting requirement under such a permit (regardless of whether the permitting authority is a Federal or State agency); and

(iii)

carries out a covered project with respect to a Federal-aid highway in the State described in clause (i).

(B)

Transmission of report

A Federal or State permitting authority that receives an annual report described in subparagraph (A)(ii) shall, upon receipt of such a report, transmit a copy of the report to the Secretary.

(b)

Effective date

This Act and the amendments made by this Act apply to covered projects (as defined in section 330(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code) (as added by subsection (a)), the construction of which commences on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.

(c)

Clerical amendment

The analysis for chapter 3 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

330. Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management program.