19–010 

Calendar No. 284 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 112–122 

LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL ACT 

JANUARY 13, 2012.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of December 17, 2011 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1047] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 1047) 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 without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 1047 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 actions to improve environmental conditions in the vicinity of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel in Lake County, Colorado. 

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 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. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
2 

In 1992, to implement a settlement agreement 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 must 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 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. 1047 would clarify 

Reclamation’s authority to treat water delivered through the 

LMDT and to maintain the existing treatment plant. In addition 

the Bill authorizes the Secretary, upon entering into an agreement 

with the EPA or other entity or agency to provide funding, to improve or expand the plant. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Mark Udall introduced S. 1047 on May 23, 2011. The 

Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy 

and Natural Resources held a hearing on S. 1047 on June 23, 2011 

(S. Hrg. 112–129). The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 1047 favorably reported without amendment at 

its business meeting on November 10, 2011. 

During the 111th Congress, the Committee considered similar 

legislation, S. 3404, sponsored by Mark Udall. The Subcommittee 

on Water and Power held a hearing on S. 3404 on June 9, 2010 

(S. Hrg. 111–707). The Committee ordered S. 3404 favorably reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute on August 

27, 2010 (S. Rpt. 111–320). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on November 10, 2011, by voice vote of a 

quorum present recommends that the Senate pass S. 1047. 

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 the 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 reVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:56 Jan 19, 2012 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR122.XXX SR122

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3 

lease of water. Further, the Secretary of the Interior is provided 

with the authority to operate and maintain a water treatment 

plant. 

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(a) 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 authorizes appropriations for sections 703 and 709 of 

Public Law 102–575. 

Section 6 makes a conforming amendment to the table of contents of Public Law 102–575. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 1047—Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2011 

S. 1047 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. 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. Based on information from 

the Bureau of Reclamation and the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), 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. Enacting S. 1047 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

The Leadville Tunnel is located near the California Gulch Superfund site. EPA’s plan to clean up the site minimizes the use of the 

tunnel and treatment plant by avoiding diversion of water into 

those facilities except in cases of an emergency. Under the bill and 

subject to the availability of appropriated funds, EPA would be authorized to pay for any improvements and associated operation and 

maintenance costs to the tunnel and water treatment plant if such 

improvements are necessary. Under current law, costs to treat and 

manage contaminated water from the California Gulch are already 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
4 

a federal responsibility; therefore, this provision would not result 

in additional federal outlays. 

S. 1047 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. 1047. 

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. 1047, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 1047, 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. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at the 

June 23, 2011, Subcommittee hearing on S. 1047 follows: 

STATEMENT OF GRAYFORD F. PAYNE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR POLICY, ADMINISTRATION AND BUDGET, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I 

am Grayford Payne, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Administration and Budget at the Bureau of Reclamation 

(Reclamation). I am pleased to provide the views of the Department of the Interior (Department) on S. 1047, the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2011. 

The Department last testified before the Subcommittee 

on legislation related to the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel (LMDT) in June of 2010, and prior to that, in April of 

2008. Since the last Congress, the sponsor has continued 

to refine the specific language of this bill, and incorporated 

reference to new information from the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the Colorado Department of 

Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) regarding new 

management actions at the California Gulch National Priority List (Superfund) Site, which overlies the LMDT. S. 

1047 is consistent with the Department’s ongoing commitment to ensure that the LMDT poses no threat to public 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
5 

1The Committee-reported version of S. 3404 during the 111th Congress was amended to include reimbursement language that is similar to the language found in this session’s S. 1047; 

however, the reimbursement language was not part of S. 3404 at the time Reclamation testified 

on the bill on June 9, 2010. 

safety and the environment. The Department supports the 

revisions made to the bill to date and looks forward to 

working with the Committee on further refinements to 

clarify remaining concerns. 

The bill has been substantially improved to address the 

concerns raised by the Department related to reimbursement and liability. In our previous testimony, the Department was particularly concerned that the bill could have 

been understood to create a liability for Reclamation where 

none currently exists. S. 1047 ameliorates these concerns 

by appropriately identifying ongoing responsibilities of the 

Secretary of the Interior. S. 1047 contains new language 

not found in previously introduced versions of the 

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act.1 In particular, Section 3 of S. 1047 acknowledges the multi-agency nature of 

efforts underway at Leadville, and authorizes the Department to enter into agreements with other entities for reimbursement in the event of improvements or expansion of 

the treatment plant in Leadville. The bill language authorizes an agreement to cover costs for ‘‘any necessary capital 

improvement’’ as well as costs associated with ‘‘flows that 

are conveyed to the treatment plant,’’ including surface 

water. We note that the Department interprets section 3 

to affirm existing discretionary authority to improve or expand the treatment plant as well as to allow the Secretary 

to enter into reimbursement agreements with other entities with respect to the treatment plant. 

We continue to assert that the language in Section 2 of 

the bill, which calls on the Secretary of the Interior to 

‘‘take any action necessary to maintain the structural integrity of the [LMDT],’’ does not take into consideration 

Reclamation’s 2008 Risk Assessment on the LMDT. The 

Assessment’s purpose was to evaluate the stability and assess the risk associated with the LMDT. 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 

Risk Assessment’s independent peer review confirmed 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 Risk 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. In 2008, Reclamation also worked cooperatively with the EPA and CDPHE to install additional 

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

East Fork and others in the Leadville area to convey Reclamation’s findings that the LMDT is safe, and have continued an active dialogue with the EPA during the agenVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:56 Jan 19, 2012 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR122.XXX SR122

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
6 

cy’s revision of the proposed remedy for Operable Unit 6 

(OU6) of the California Gulch National Priority List 

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

with the remedy selected in EPA’s amended Record of Decision, published in 2010, which would implement actions 

to avoid diversion of water into the LMDT. 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. 

We have also had very productive interactions with Senator Mark Udall’s office and the Subcommittee on this legislation, and we appreciate those discussions. 

We recognize the desire of Congress to assure the residents of Leadville and the Village at East Fork that Reclamation will continue to manage its facilities appropriately, and be accountable. This legislation essentially 

codifies these ongoing actions for the long term. 

This concludes my written statement. I am pleased to 

answer any questions the Subcommittee may have. 

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. 

1047, 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. 4656) 

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. 

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.¿ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
7 

Sec. 703. Tunnel maintenance; operation and maintenance. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL, 

COLORADO 

* * * * * * * 

øSEC. 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 øDrainage Tunnel¿ Drainage Tunnel (which includes any surface water diverted 

into the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and water collected by the 

dewatering relief well installed in June 2008). 

(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)— 

make any necessary capital improvement to or expansion of the 

treatment plant. 

* * * * * * * 

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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
8 

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 for operable unit 6 of the California Gulch National 

Priorities List Site 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¿ 

(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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS