Coeur d'Alene Basin and Spokane River Restoration Act of 1994
Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 12, 1994
Coeur d'Alene Basin and Spokane River Restoration Act of 1994 - Establishes the Coeur d'Alene Basin Restoration Corporation and the Coeur d'Alene Basin Advisory Committee. Directs the Board of the Corporation to adopt a Basin Restoration Plan for the Coeur d'Alene Basin, Idaho, and the Spokane River, Idaho and Washington State. Requires the Plan to: (1) identify all sources of mining waste and other discharges into the Basin and River; (2) inventory existing projects and activities to restore, remediate, or prevent damages from mining waste and other pollution; and (3) identify additional projects needed to carry out such activities. Preempts any conflicting Federal, State, or local laws. Exempts the Corporation from liability for the costs of removing or remediating releases of hazardous materials, including liability under provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund) Prohibits a project from proceeding until the Board determines that the project meets all requirements under Federal, or more stringent State and tribal, environmental laws. Funds the Corporation's activities through congressional appropriations and private contributions from companies that have been involved with mining activities in the Basin. Establishes the Coeur d'Alene Basin Restoration Fund. Authorizes appropriations. Expresses the intent of the Congress that the mining companies of the Basin that contributed to the release of hazardous materials should: (1) contribute a fair portion of the cost of restoring natural resources; and (2) upon payment of a fair contribution, be assured that no further liability for response costs or natural resource damages may be imposed upon them. Deems such companies to have satisfied liability that may otherwise be imposed by CERCLA if they contribute at least 25 percent of the amount appropriated by the Congress to carry out this Act. Grants such companies an offset against liabilities if they contribute less than the required amount. Authorizes the Corporation, the State of Idaho, the Coeur d'Alene Tribe, and the United States to pursue all actions under CERCLA unless the companies satisfy their liabilities regardless of whether the Basin Restoration Plan is implemented. Tolls all statutes of limitation for cost recovery and natural resource damage actions against the mining companies until January 1, 2018.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4961 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4961 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4961 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4961 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.