PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-365.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 8, 2008
Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act of 2008 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to define: (1) "site characterization" as a process for monitoring and evaluating sediment contamination under the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance for the assessment of contaminated sediment in an area of concern in the United States; and (2) "potentially responsible party" to mean an individual or entity that may be liable under any federal or state authority used to facilitate the cleanup and protection of the Great Lakes.
Includes aquatic habitat restoration activities among activities the Great Lakes National Program Office is authorized to implement for the remediation of sediment contamination in areas of concern.
Prohibits the Administrator from implementing such a remediation project unless: (1) each nonfederal sponsor has entered into a written agreement under which each party agrees to carry out its responsibilities and requirements for the project; and (2) the Administrator provides assurance that EPA has conducted a reasonable inquiry to identify potentially responsible parties.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises provisions concerning the nonfederal share of project costs.
Requires the Administrator to implement, at federal expense, one site characterization per site within a project for the remediation of contaminated sediment. Repeals a prohibition against implementing a project unless the nonfederal sponsor agrees to maintain aggregate expenditures from all other sources for remediation programs in the area of concern or above the average level of such expenditures in the two fiscal years preceding the date the project is initiated.
Authorizes appropriations through FY2010 for: (1) such remediation projects; (2) a public information program to provide information relating to such remediation; and (3) the development and use of innovative approaches, technologies, and techniques for such remediation. Limits to 20% of the amount of funds appropriated for remediation projects that may be used for site characterization.
People & committees
Rep. Ehlers, Vernon J. [R-MI-3] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-365.
Became Public Law No: 110-365.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 9 (Roll no. 665). (consideration: CR H10305; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 9/27/2008 H10155)
House roll call 665 · Individual votesResolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 9 (Roll no. 665).(consideration: CR H10305; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 9/27/2008 H10155)
House roll call 665 · Individual votesAt the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 6460.
Mr. Oberstar moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H10155-10158)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S9473-9474)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 20 (Roll no. 615). (text: CR 9/17/2008 H8343-8344)
House roll call 615 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 20 (Roll no. 615).(text: CR 9/17/2008 H8343-8344)
House roll call 615 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8451-8452)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Boozman objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6460.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8343-8349)
Ms. Johnson, E. B. moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 549.
Committee on Science and Technology discharged.
Committee on Science and Technology discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-849, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-849, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Science and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Science and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Science and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.6460 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.
Examine H.R.6460 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.
Examine H.R.6460 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.
Examine H.R.6460 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.