Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act of 2008

GREAT LAKES LEGACY REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008 -- (House of Representatives - September 17, 2008)

Mr. BOOZMAN. Madam Speaker, I want to first commend our colleague from Michigan, Dr. Vern Ehlers, for his years of work with stakeholders from the Great Lakes to advance the Great Lakes Legacy Act.

The Great Lakes are a vital source for both the United States and Canada. The Great Lakes system provides a waterway to move goods; water supply for drinking, industrial and agricultural purposes; a source of hydroelectric power; and swimming and other recreational activities.

But the industrialization and development of the Great Lakes Basin over the past 200 years has had an adverse impact on the Great Lakes. Although safe for drinking and swimming, in many places fish caught from the Great Lakes are not safe to eat.

Lake sediments, contaminated from the history of industrialization and development in the region, are one of the primary causes of this problem. By treaty, the United States and Canada are developing clean-up plans for the Great Lakes and for specific areas of concern. The Great Lakes Legacy Act, passed in 2002, has helped citizens restore the water quality of the Great Lakes by taking action to manage contaminated sediments and to prevent further contamination.

The Great Lakes Legacy Act authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out qualified sediment remediation projects and conduct research and development of innovative approaches, technologies and techniques for the remediation of contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes.

Legacy Act funding must be matched with at least a 35 percent non-Federal share, encouraging local investment. By encouraging cooperative efforts through public-private partnerships, the Great Lakes Legacy Act provided a better way to address the problem of contaminated sediments. At some sites, removing sediments will be the best way to address short and long-term risks. At other sites, the last thing we want to do is go in and stir up contaminated sediments by dredging, causing more harm to the environment.

Obviously, how to address contaminated sediments at each Great Lakes area of concern will be very much a site-specific decision.

The Great Lakes Legacy Act does not try to presume any particular clean-up option. It simply encourages stakeholders to take action and to make sure that the action they take will make a real improvement to human health and the environment.

This legislation is strongly supported by both environmental groups and business groups in the Great Lakes region. The Great Lakes Legacy Act reflects a consensus approach to addressing sediment contamination in the Great Lakes.

While the authorization for the Great Lakes Legacy Act expires this year, I remain concerned over tripling the authorized level of spending. The Act has been funded at a level between $22 million and $35 million per year, far short of the current $50 million annual authorization. In addition, the bill authorizes that habitat restoration be included as one of the authorized purposes. Unfortunately, this may mean less clean-up of contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes.

By expanding this program to cover other purposes, there will be less money for the primary purpose of getting pollution out of the water. Again, by all measures, the Great Lakes Legacy Act has been a successful program. There is some concern that we might delay ultimate clean-up by spending some of the Federal funds on activities other than sediment remediation.

Again, I want to congratulate Dr. Ehlers so much for his hard work in this area. He has been a true champion in this and for his persistence in bringing it to the floor today.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BOOZMAN. Madam Speaker, I want to thank our chairwoman, EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON from Texas, for her leadership in this matter, for pushing this forward. Also, our chairman, Mr. Oberstar, who also has been very, very active on behalf of the Great Lakes, Ranking Member Mica, and again, as Mr. Ehlers mentioned earlier, which we probably don't mention enough, for our staffs that do a very, very good job of working hard and getting these very difficult things together so that we can bring them to the floor.

I also want to congratulate Dr. EHLERS for his hard work. This has been something that he's worked so hard on for so many years, for such a long time. It really is great that we're able to bring it to the floor and vote on it.

I look forward to coming back 5 years from now when we reauthorize again and hearing about, on both sides of the aisle, in a very bipartisan way, the people that live along the lake telling the story, telling the difference that this reauthorization has made and the tremendous improvement that we're going to make over the next 5 years.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Source