89–010 

Calendar No. 606 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–320 

LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL ACT 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3404] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 3404) to amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to require the Secretary of 

the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to take actions to improve environmental conditions in the vicinity of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel in Lake County, Colorado, and for 

other purposes, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2010.’’. 

SEC. 2. TUNNEL MAINTENANCE; OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. 

Section 703 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 

(Public Law 102–575; 106 Stat. 4656) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 703. TUNNEL MAINTENANCE; OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. 

‘‘(a) LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL—The Secretary shall take any action 

necessary to maintain the structural integrity of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel— 

‘‘(1) to maintain public safety; and 

‘‘(2) to prevent an uncontrolled release of water. 

‘‘(b) WATER TREATMENT PLANT.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to section 705, the Secretary shall be responsible 

for the operation and maintenance of the water treatment plant authorized 

under section 701, including any sludge disposal authorized under this title. 

‘‘(2) AUTHORITY TO OFFER TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary may offer to enter into 1 or more contracts with any 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
2 

appropriate individual or entity for the conduct of any service required under 

paragraph (1).’’. 

SEC. 3. REIMBURSEMENT. 

Section 705 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 

(Public Law 102–575; 106 Stat. 4656) is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘The treatment plant’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (b), the treatment plant’’; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(b) EXCEPTION.—The Secretary may— 

‘‘(1) enter into an agreement with any other entity or government agency to 

provide funding for an increase in any operation, maintenance, replacement, 

capital improvement, or expansion cost that is necessary to improve or expand 

the treatment plant; and 

‘‘(2) upon entering into an agreement under paragraph (1)— 

‘‘(A) make any necessary capital improvement to or expansion of the 

treatment plant; and 

‘‘(B) treat flows that are conveyed to the treatment plant, including any— 

‘‘(i) surface water diverted into the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel; 

and 

‘‘(ii) water collected by the dewatering relief well installed in June 

2008.’’. 

SEC. 4. USE OF LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL AND TREATMENT PLANT. 

Section 708(a) of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 

1992 (Public Law 102–575; 106 Stat. 4657) is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘(a) The Secretary’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.— 

‘‘(1) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary’’; 

(2) by striking ‘‘Neither’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(2) LIABILITY.—Neither’’; 

(3) by striking ‘‘The Secretary shall have’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(3) FACILITIES COVERED UNDER OTHER LAWS.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary 

shall have’’; 

(4) by inserting after ‘‘Recovery Act.’’ the following: 

‘‘(B) EXCEPTION.—If the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency proposes to amend or issue a new Record of Decision for operable 

unit 6 of the California Gulch National Priorities List Site, the Administrator shall consult with the Secretary with respect to each feature of the 

proposed new or amended Record of Decision that may require any alteration to, or otherwise affect the operation and maintenance of— 

‘‘(i) the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel; or 

‘‘(ii) the water treatment plant authorized under section 701. 

‘‘(4) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY.—The Secretary may implement any improvement to, or new operation of, the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel or water 

treatment plant authorized under section 701 as a result of a new or amended 

Record of Decision only upon entering into an agreement with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency or any other entity or government agency to provide funding for the improvement or new operation.’’; and 

(5) by striking ‘‘For the purpose of’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(5) DEFINITION OF UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN.—In’’. 

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

Section 708(f) of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 

1992 (Public Law 102–575; 106 Stat. 4657) is amended by striking ‘‘sections 707 and 

708’’ and inserting ‘‘this section and sections 703, 705, and 707’’. 

SEC. 6. CONFORMING AMENDMENT. 

The table of contents of title VII of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and 

Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–575; 106 Stat. 4601). is amended by striking the item relating to section 703 and inserting the following: 

‘‘Sec. 703. Tunnel maintenance; operation and maintenance.’’. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 3404 is to amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to require the Secretary of 

the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to take acVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:52 Oct 01, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR320.XXX SR320

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
3 

tions to improve environmental conditions in the vicinity of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel in Lake County, Colorado, and for 

other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Bureau of Mines (BOM) constructed the Leadville Mine 

Drainage Tunnel (LMDT) in the 1940s and 1950s to drain water 

from mines in the Leadville, Colorado area. In 1959, the Bureau of 

Reclamation, (‘‘Reclamation’’) took ‘‘full custody, accountability, and 

future responsibility’’ for the LMDT. Reclamation’s original purpose 

in acquiring the LMDT was to obtain additional water for the 

Fryingpan-Arkansas Reclamation Project, which was authorized in 

1962, but this plan never materialized. 

In 1992, to implement a settlement of litigation involving Clean 

Water Act violations related to discharge from the LMDT, through 

title VII of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment 

Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–575), Congress authorized Reclamation to construct a treatment plant to clean up discharge from the 

LMDT. The 1992 law specified that Reclamation’s treatment plant 

shall be constructed to treat the quantity and quality of effluent 

‘‘historically discharged’’ from the LMDT. 

In 1983, a significant portion of the Leadville area, known as the 

California Gulch National Priority List Site, was designated as a 

Superfund site. The LMDT is hydraulically connected to certain 

Superfund units within the site. In 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) issued a Record of Decision for one of the 

Superfund units that implicated the operations of the treatment 

plant and led to uncertainty with respect to Reclamation’s authority to treat additional water at the plant. EPA is in the process of 

developing a revised water management plan and Record of Decision that may reduce the long term need to utilize the treatment 

plant and drainage tunnel. 

In 2008, Reclamation and EPA developed a short-term plan to 

drill a relief well to dewater the LMDT and treat the pooled water 

at Reclamation’s existing treatment plant. S. 3404 would clarify 

Reclamation’s authority to treat water delivered through the 

LMDT and to maintain and expand the existing treatment plant. 

During the legislative hearing on the bill the Bureau of Reclamation indicated a commitment to ensuring that the facility remain 

safe, but was opposed to moving forward with legislation prior to 

development of the new Record of Decision and expressed the need 

to avoid expanding Reclamation’s potential liability under 

CERCLA. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Mark Udall introduced S. 3404 on May 24, 2010. The 

House companion measure, H.R. 3123, sponsored by Representative 

Lamborn, passed the House of Representatives by voice vote on 

September 29, 2009. The Subcommittee on Water and Power held 

a hearing on S. 3404 on June 9, 2010. At its business meeting on 

August 5, 2010, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

ordered S. 3404 favorably reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
4 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on August 5, 2010, by voice vote of a quorum present, 

recommends that the Senate pass S. 3404, if amended as described 

herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 3404, the Committee adopted an 

amendment. The amendment clarifies that the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to improve or expand the treatment plant as 

necessary to treat additional water above historical flows that are 

being conveyed to and treated by the existing treatment plant only 

if the secretary has entered into a funding agreement with another 

entity or governmental agency. The amendment also provides that 

the EPA shall consult with the Secretary regarding a proposed new 

or amended Record of Decision that affects the operation and maintenance of the drainage tunnel or treatment plant. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides the short title of the bill. 

Section 2 amends section 703 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–575) to specify 

that the Secretary of Interior shall take any action necessary to 

maintain the structural integrity of the Leadville Mine Drainage 

Tunnel to maintain public safety and prevent an uncontrolled release of water. Section 2 also provides authority to the Secretary 

of Interior to operate and maintain a water treatment plant to contract for such services subject to certain requirements. 

Section 3 amends section 705 of Public Law 102–575 to specify 

that the Secretary may enter into an agreement with any other entity or government agency to provide funding for increased operation, maintenance, replacement, capital improvement, or expansion cost that is necessary to improve or expand the treatment 

plant. Upon entering into such agreement, the Secretary may make 

necessary capital improvements or expansions and may treat flows 

conveyed to the water treatment plant that are in excess of the 

quantities historically discharged into the tunnel, including surface 

water diverted into the tunnel and water collected by the 

dewatering relief well installed in June 2008. 

Section 4 amends section 708 of Public Law 102–575 to require 

the Administrator of the EPA to consult with Reclamation on a 

new or amended Record of Decision that affects the operation and 

maintenance of the drainage tunnel or the water treatment plant. 

Section 4 also specifies that the Secretary may implement any improvement to or new operation of the tunnel or treatment plant 

only upon entering into an agreement with the EPA or other entity 

or agency to provide funding for the improvement or new operation. 

Section 5 adds additional appropriation authority. 

Section 6 provides for a conformed table of contents. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
5 

S. 3404—Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2010 

CBO estimates that implementing S. 3404 would have no significant impact on the federal budget. The bill would require the Secretary of the Interior to maintain the structural integrity of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, located one mile north of 

Leadville, Colorado. Based on information from the Bureau of Reclamation, CBO does not anticipate that any costs would be incurred 

under the bill beyond what the bureau will spend under current 

law to repair and maintain the tunnel over the next several years. 

The bill also would authorize the Secretary, if necessary, to seek 

reimbursements from private or public entities for the cost of expanding and operating the water treatment plant associated with 

the Leadville Tunnel to handle any increased water volumes. 

Under the bill and subject to the availability of appropriated 

funds, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also would be 

authorized to pay for any additional improvements to the tunnel 

and water treatment plant as well as any increase in associated operations and maintenance costs if such improvements are required 

as part of EPA’s plan to clean up the California Gulch, a Superfund 

site located near the tunnel. Under current law, any costs to treat 

and manage contaminated water from the California Gulch would 

stern from an existing federal responsibility; therefore, this provision would not result in additional federal outlays. 

Enacting S. 3404 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

S. 3404 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Aurora Swanson. The 

estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 3404. 

The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government-established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 3404, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 3404, as ordered reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 

benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
6 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL L. CONNOR, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, 

I am Michael Connor, Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). I am pleased to provide the views 

of the Department of the Interior (Department) on S. 3404, 

the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2010. The Administration supports the sponsors’ intent with this bill to 

ensure that the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel (LMDT) 

poses no threat to public safety and the environment, and 

to facilitate the clean-up of a Superfund site in the vicinity. For reasons described below, however, the Administration has both policy and technical concerns about this bill 

and does not believe that legislation is warranted at this 

time. We will continue to work with Federal, State, and 

non-Federal parties on water resource issues at the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel (LMDT). 

The Department last testified before this Subcommittee 

on legislation pertaining to the Leadville Mine Drainage 

Tunnel (LMDT) on April 24, 2008. Since that time, Reclamation completed a Risk Assessment analyzing potential 

dangers posed by water blockages inside the tunnel, and 

worked cooperatively with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Colorado Department of Public 

Health and Environment (CDPHE) to install additional 

drainage capability into the LMDT. We have also held several public meetings with residents living near the 

Leadville area to convey Reclamation’s findings that the 

LMDT is safe, and have continued an active dialogue with 

the EPA as it revises the proposed remedy for Operable 

Unit 6 of the California Gulch National Priority List 

(Superfund) Site, which lies above the LMDT. We have 

also had very productive interactions with Senator Udall’s 

office on this legislation, and we appreciate those discussions. 

The Department has three principal concerns with the 

language in S. 3404. First, we do not believe that the requirement in Section 2 of the bill, which calls on the Secretary of the Interior to take ‘‘such steps to repair and 

maintain the structural integrity of the LMDT as may be 

necessary,’’ takes into consideration Reclamation’s 2008 

Risk Assessment. The Risk Assessment, completed in the 

Fall of 2008, is described in greater detail below. Second, 

a determination by the EPA and CDPHE was made in 

June of 2009 that portions of the current remedy for Operable Unit 6 of the California Gulch Superfund site are not 

efficient or sustainable, and the agencies are proposing to 

change that remedy this year. EPA and CDPHE jointly 

concluded that ‘‘using the mine workings and the [LMDT] 

to convey water cannot be relied on for the long-term.’’ In 

view of this ongoing process, the Department also does not 

believe that Section 3 of the bill, which contemplates new 

responsibilities for the Secretary of the Interior to treat adVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:52 Oct 01, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR320.XXX SR320

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
7 

ditional flows of water diverted from the surface of Operable Unit 6 into the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, is 

appropriate. Finally, Section 3 of the bill amends Section 

708(a) of Public Law 102–575 in a manner that could be 

construed as conferring responsibility on the Secretary for 

facilities which have been listed under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

(CERCLA), or are subject to the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA). Reclamation is not a Potentially 

Responsible Party for contamination at the Leadville 

Superfund site, and believes that this language serves to 

create that impression and could be construed as creating 

liability where none currently exists. 

The LMDT is located in Lake County, Colorado, and was 

originally constructed by the Bureau of Mines from 1943 

to 1952. It was intended to remove water from portions of 

the Leadville Mining District to facilitate the extraction of 

lead and zinc ore for the WWII and Korean War efforts. 

Reclamation acquired the LMDT in 1959 with the intention of using the tunnel as a source of water for what was 

then the proposed Fryingpan-Arkansas project. Due to 

more senior existing claims on the water, no water rights 

for the discharge were ever obtained by Reclamation. The 

LMDT drainage discharges into the East Fork of the Arkansas River. 

In 1983, EPA listed the California Gulch Site on the National Priorities List of Superfund sites. The 18-squaremile area was divided into 12 areas called Operable Units 

(OU). The LMDT is located beneath a portion of a surface 

unit, OU6, that covers approximately 3.4 square miles in 

the northeastern quadrant of the Site. Groundwater in the 

California Gulch area is within a separate operable unit— 

designated OU12. Reclamation holds title to the LMDT on 

behalf of the United States, but does not own or operate 

any sources of contamination on the surface of OU6 (i.e., 

waste rock or tailings), or any portion of the surface itself. 

As part of the implementation of an OU6 remedy proposed in 2003, EPA has been collecting surface runoff from 

mine waste piles and discharging that surface runoff into 

the Marion Shaft, where it moves through the mine workings to the LMDT. This water is seasonal and totals approximately 3 to 5 million gallons a year. It has proven to 

be possible for the Reclamation plant to treat limited 

amounts of waters from OU6 for EPA pursuant to agreement and EPA’s reimbursement. After reviewing technical 

data suggesting that the remedy proposed in 2003 was neither effective nor sustainable, EPA in June 2009 announced that, in 2010, it planned to revise this proposed 

2003 remedy, a process that is nearing completion today. 

The new data sheds additional light on the complex site 

hydrogeology, and suggests that the collection of water at 

the surface and the diversion of portions of the water into 

existing shafts, and to the LMDT, is not effective in the 

long term. Seasonally, groundwater levels fluctuate near 

the LMDT. Groundwater flows into the LMDT at numerVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:52 Oct 01, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR320.XXX SR320

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
8 

ous locations, and flows out of the LMDT at the portal and 

also into surrounding rock formations. In addition, EPA 

and CDPHE have determined that the new remedy should 

prevent the generation of contaminated surface waters in 

the first instance, thereby alleviating the additional 3 to 5 

million gallons of contaminated surface water that is currently diverted through shafts into the LMDT. 

These characteristics also heavily influenced the findings 

of Reclamation’s 2008 Risk Assessment. The assessment’s 

purpose was to evaluate the stability and assess the risk 

associated with the LMDT. Reclamation began its scientific Risk Assessment in 2007, and when initial findings 

were available, they were independently peer reviewed. 

The Risk Assessment utilized a similar process to the one 

Reclamation uses to assess risk at its dams, a model that 

is an international standard for conducting risk assessments. The independent peer review confirmed Reclamation’s analysis that it is highly unlikely that a sudden release of water could occur from either a blockage in the 

LMDT, or through the bulkheads installed in the tunnel. 

Moreover, the assessment concluded that even if an existing natural blockage in the upper part of the LMDT failed 

rapidly, a sudden release of water through the lower blockage and bulkheads is unlikely. 

When the Risk Assessment was published in the early 

Fall of 2008, it was posted on the Internet and distributed 

to the media. Reclamation conducted three public meetings 

and sought public comment on the findings. We remain 

confident in the value of the Risk Assessment and the validity of its findings. 

There are three sources of LMDT water currently entering the treatment plant. First, the natural rate of drainage 

from the tunnel portal is 500 gallons per minute (gpm), or 

1.1 cubic feet per second (cfs). Second, there is a well in 

the LMDT about 1000 feet in from the portal that pumps 

about 500 gpm or 1.1 cfs directly to the treatment plant. 

And third, since June of 2008, Reclamation has been receiving another 700 gpm or 1.6 cfs, accommodating the additional drainage capability via another well installed by 

EPA about 4,700 feet in from the portal. This well was installed in response to public concern about rising water 

levels in the vicinity of the LMDT. 

Reclamation has a maximum treatment plant capability 

to process water at a rate of nearly 2,100 gpm from the 

LMDT or 4.8 cubic feet per second cfs. The NPDES permit 

for the facility states that the 30-day Average LMDT discharge cannot exceed 1,736 gpm or 3.89 cfs with a Daily 

Maximum ceiling of 2,313 gpm or 5.2 cfs. 

As these actions illustrate, Reclamation is currently 

managing safely all waters discharged to the LMDT. Nevertheless, Reclamation has an Emergency Action Plan for 

the LMDT and water treatment facility that has been in 

place since 2001 and is regularly updated. Water level indicators and other warning systems near the LMDT are 

tied into the water treatment plant’s auto-dialer for emVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:52 Oct 01, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR320.XXX SR320

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
9 

ployees, and an audible warning system was installed in 

2002 to alert the Village at East Fork residents in the 

event of an emergency. The system plays an alert message 

in Spanish and English. 

We understand the concern of some in Colorado that 

Reclamation may one day ‘‘walk away’’ from the work at 

Leadville. I would like to affirm that Reclamation is committed to assuring that the treatment plant, pumps and 

pipelines are operated in a manner so as to protect public 

safety at the LMDT. In addition to these actions, we support the process of CDPHE and EPA to determine a water 

management portion of the remedy at OU6 that is more effective than actions the agency proposed in 2003. Recent 

studies conducted by EPA conclude that using the mine 

workings and the LMDT to convey water cannot be relied 

on for the long term, and that it is neither cost effective 

nor efficient to treat diluted acid rock drainage this way in 

perpetuity. Reclamation is awaiting the publication by 

EPA of a revised Record of Decision, and believes no legislation should be enacted until that process is complete. As 

such, the Administration does not believe that S. 3404 is 

warranted at this time. 

At a minimum, if any legislation were to proceed, it 

should be amended to address the issues raised herein. 

This concludes my written statement. I am pleased to 

answer any questions from the Subcommittee. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of Rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

3404, as ordered 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): 

RECLAMATION PROJECTS AUTHORIZATION AND 

ADJUSTMENT ACT OF 1992 

Public Law 102–575 (106 Stat. 4663) 

AN ACT To authorize additional appropriations for the construction of the Buffalo 

Bill Dam and Reservoir, Shoshone Project, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, 

Wyoming. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 

United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reclamation Projects Authorization 

and Adjustment Act of 1992’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2. DEFINITION AND TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

For purposes of this Act, the term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of the Interior. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
10 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sec. 1. Short title. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE 

TUNNEL, COLORADO 

Sec. 701. Authorization. 

Sec. 702. Costs nonreimbursable. 

øSec. 703. Operation and maintenance.¿ 

Sec. 703. Tunnel maintenance; operation and maintenance. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE 

TUNNEL, COLORADO 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 703. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. 

øThe Secretary shall be responsible for operation and maintenance of the water treatment plant, including sludge disposal authorized by this title. The Secretary may contract for these services.¿ 

SEC. 703. TUNNEL MAINTENANCE; OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. 

(a) LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL.—The Secretary shall 

take any action necessary to maintain the structural integrity of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel— 

(1) to maintain public safety; and 

(2) to prevent an uncontrolled release of water. 

(b) WATER TREATMENT PLANT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to section 705, the Secretary shall 

be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the water 

treatment plant authorized under section 701, including any 

sludge disposal authorized under this title. 

(2) AUTHORITY TO OFFER TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary may offer to enter into 

1 or more contracts with any appropriate individual or entity 

for the conduct of any service required under paragraph (1). 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 705. LIMITATION. 

øThe treatment plant¿ (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 

subsection (b), the treatment plant authorized by this title shall be 

designed and constructed to treat the quantity and quality of effluent historically discharged from the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. 

(b) EXCEPTION.—The Secretary may— 

(1) enter into an agreement with any other entity or government agency to provide funding for an increase in any operation, maintenance, replacement, capital improvement, or expansion cost that is necessary to improve or expand the treatment plant; and 

(2) upon entering into an agreement under paragraph (1)— 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
11 

(A) make any necessary capital improvement to or expansion of the treatment plant; and 

(B) treat flows that are conveyed to the treatment plant, 

including any— 

(i) surface water diverted into the Leadville Mine 

Drainage Tunnel; and 

(iii) water collected by the dewatering relief well installed in June 2008. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 708. WATER QUALITY RESTORATION. 

ø(a) The Secretary¿ (a) IN GENERAL—. 

(1) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary is authorized, in consultation with the State of Colorado, the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency, and other Federal entities, 

to conduct investigations of water pollution sources and impacts attributed to mining-related and other development in 

the Upper Arkansas River basin, to develop corrective action 

plans, and to implement corrective action demonstration 

projects. øNeither¿ 

(2) LIABILITY.—Neither the Secretary nor any person participating in a corrective action demonstration project shall be liable under section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act for costs or damages 

as a result of actions taken or omitted in the course of implementing an approved work plan developed under this section; 

Provided, That this subsection shall not preclude liability for 

costs or damages which result from negligence on the part of 

such persons. øThe Secretary shall have¿ 

(3) FACILITIES COVERED UNDER OTHER LAWS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph 

(B), the Secretary shall have no authority under this section at facilities which have been listed or proposed for 

listing on the National Priorities List, or are subject to or 

covered by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

(B) EXCEPTION.—If the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency proposes to amend or issue a new 

Record of Decision for operable unit 6 of the California 

Gulch National Priorities List Site, the Administrator shall 

consult with the Secretary with respect to each feature of 

the proposed new or amended Record of Decision that may 

require any alteration to, or otherwise affect the operation 

and maintenance of— 

(i) the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel; or 

(ii) the water treatment plant authorized under 

section 701. 

(4) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY.—The Secretary may implement any improvement to, or new operation of, the Leadville 

Mine Drainage Tunnel or water treatment plant authorized 

under section 701 as a result of a new or amended Record of 

Decision only upon entering into an agreement with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency or any other 

entity or government agency to provide funding for the improvement or new operation. øFor the purpose of¿ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
12 

(5) DEFINITION OF UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN.—IN this 

section, the term ’Upper Arkansas River basin’ means the Arkansas River hydrologic basin in Colorado extending from 

Pueblo Dam upstream to its headwaters. 

* * * * * * * 

(f) There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 

required to fulfill the provisions of øsections 707 and 708¿ this section and sections 703, 705, and 707 of this title. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING