```

[House Report 112-634]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     112-634

======================================================================

 
              MILLE LACS LAKE FREEDOM TO FISH ACT OF 2012

                                _______
                                

 July 31, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Mica, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5797]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 5797) to amend title 46, United 
States Code, with respect to Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon with amendment and recommend that the bill as 
amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose of the Legislation and Summary...........................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Legislative History..............................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     4
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Advisory of Earmarks.............................................     5
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     5
Preemption Clarification.........................................     5
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     5
Applicability to the Legislative Branch..........................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     5
    The amendments are as follows:
    Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Mille Lacs Lake Freedom To Fish Act of 
2012''.

SEC. 2. MILLE LACS LAKE, MINNESOTA.

  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the owner or operator of 
a vessel operating on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, shall not, with 
respect to such vessel, be subject to any Federal requirement under 
subtitle II of title 46, United States Code, relating to licensing or 
vessel inspection.

  Amend the title so as to read:

    A bill to exempt the owners and operators of vessels 
operating on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, from certain Federal 
requirements.

                 PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act of 2012 
exempts the owners or operators of vessels operating on Mille 
Lacs Lake, Minnesota from compliance with federal law and 
regulations governing the licensing of vessel operators and the 
inspection of vessels.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Mille Lacs Lake is located approximately 100 miles north of 
the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. It is Minnesota's 
second-largest lake, spanning 132,000 surface acres or slightly 
more than 200 square miles. The area surrounding the lake is 
home to several dozen charter boat fishing and tour operators. 
These operators take passengers on the lake in groups in sizes 
from less than six on small motorized vessels, to as large a 50 
on vessels as long as 70 feet. In addition, several canoe 
guides operate on the lake carrying as few as one passenger per 
canoe. Finally, many companies also rent canoes and motorized 
boats to individuals for daily excursions on the lake.
    The State of Minnesota regulates vessels operating on its 
inland lakes including Mille Lacs Lake. The state requires 
motorized or sailing vessels greater than 21 feet in length and 
carrying more than six passengers for hire to undergo an annual 
safety inspection and a drydock inspection once every three 
years (annually for wooden hulled vessels). Vessels that 
maintain a certificate of inspection with the Coast Guard 
pursuant to Chapter 33 of title 46, United States Code, are 
exempt from Minnesota requirements.
    The state also requires operators of motorized or sailing 
vessels, regardless of size, carrying more than six passengers 
to obtain a Boat Master license. To obtain a Boat Master 
license, the state requires individuals to be at least 18 years 
of age, have 18 hours of supervised training on the vessel, pay 
a series of fees, and pass a license examination with a score 
of at least 70 percent. Individuals carrying a current Coast 
Guard issued license to operate an uninspected or small 
passenger vessel pursuant to chapter 89 of title 46, United 
States Code, are exempt from Minnesota licensing requirements.
    On March 3, 2010, the Coast Guard determined the lake was a 
``navigable waterway of the United States'' pursuant to the 
criteria set forth in 33 CFR 2.36. The Coast Guard made the 
determination based on the fact that the lake ``has been used 
in the past as a highway for interstate commerce''. In the 18th 
Century, the lake supported the international fur trade, and 
from 1848 to 1904, it was used in the transportation of logs to 
mills outside the state. The determination that the lake is a 
navigable waterway enables the Coast Guard to enforce 
applicable federal laws and regulations on the lake.
    H.R. 5797, as reported, would exempt the owners and 
operators of vessels operating on the Lake from compliance with 
the licensing and vessel inspection requirements of subtitle II 
of title 46, United States Code. H.R. 5797 would not affect the 
authority of the Coast Guard to conduct search and rescue and 
other missions on the lake, or change the state's regulatory 
program.

                                HEARINGS

    On May 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation held a hearing on ``Creating U.S. 
Maritime Industry Jobs by Reducing Regulatory Burdens''. 
Questions regarding the Coast Guard's navigability 
determination of Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota were raised by Mr. 
Cravaack at the hearing.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    On May 17, 2012, Representative Cravaack introduced H.R. 
5797, the Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act of 2012. On July 
27, 2012, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
met in open session to consider H.R. 5797, and ordered the 
bill, as amended, reported favorably to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote with a quorum present. Mr. 
Cravaack offered a substitute amendment to exempt owners and 
operators of vessels operating on Mille Lacs Lake from 
compliance with federal laws and regulations requiring the 
licensing of individuals to operate vessels and the inspection 
of certain vessels to ensure they meet federal safety 
standards. The Cravaack substitute amendment passed by voice 
vote.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report to include the total number of 
votes cast for and against on each recorded vote on a motion to 
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, 
and the names of those members voting for and against. During 
consideration of H.R. 5797, no recorded votes were taken. The 
bill, as amended, was reported favorably to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in this report.

               NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its 
own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement 
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the 
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974, included below.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 
received the following cost estimate for H.R. 5797 from the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, July 27, 2012.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5797, the Mille 
Lacs Freedom to Fish Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Sarah Pura.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 5797--Mille Lacs Freedom to Fish Act

    H.R. 5797 would eliminate a requirement that certain vessel 
owners who operate boats on a lake in the state of Minnesota 
purchase federal licenses and pay a fee to have their boats 
inspected annually. Because most of those amounts are deposited 
in the general fund of the Treasury, enacting H.R. 5797 would 
decrease revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. 
However, CBO estimates that the effects would be insignificant 
for each year. Enacting H.R. 5797 would not affect direct 
spending.
    In 2010, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) determined 
that Mille Lacs Lake in Minnesota is a navigable waterway. As a 
result, USCG is developing regulations that will require all 
vessel owners who wish to use their boats on that lake to 
obtain federal captains' licenses and to submit their boats to 
annual USCG inspections. Most of those revenues will be 
deposited into the general fund of the Treasury. Licenses will 
cost $240 per person, and annual inspections will cost between 
$300 and $600 each. By enacting H.R. 5797, the government would 
not collect those revenues. Based on information from the USCG, 
CBO estimates that there are fewer than 50 owner-operators who 
will have to comply with the licensing and inspection 
regulations. Assuming regulations are finalized by 2013, CBO 
estimates that enacting the bill would result in an 
insignificant loss of annual revenue beginning that year.
    H.R. 5797 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Sarah Puro. The 
estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
performance goals and objectives of this legislation are to 
address navigation safety on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota.

                          ADVISORY OF EARMARKS

    In compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, H.R. 5797 does not contain any 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (Public Law 104-4).

                        PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint 
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the 
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local, 
or tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 5797 does not 
preempt any state, local, or tribal law.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committee within the meaning of section 5(b) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act was created by this 
legislation.

                APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    ``Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act of 2012''.

Sec. 2. Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota

    Section 2 exempts the owners and operators of vessels 
operating on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota from compliance with 
federal laws and regulations requiring the licensing of 
individuals to operate vessels and the inspection of certain 
vessels to ensure they meet federal safety standards.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H.R. 5797 makes no changes in existing law.

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

    The manner in which this bill was taken up by the 
Committee, and the absence of a clear understanding of the 
implications of the amendment that was adopted by voice vote, 
gives me pause.
    No one disputes the validity of the Coast Guard's 2010 
determination that Mille Lacs Lake is a navigable water of the 
United States. In fact, the Coast Guard's determination is 
simply the latest affirmation in a line of navigability 
determinations by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This 
legislation completely sidesteps that fundamental question, and 
accordingly, the Coast Guard's 2010 determination stands.
    Rather than vacate the Coast Guard's determination, 
however, the legislation, as ordered reported, exempts the 
owners and operators of uninspected passenger vessels operating 
on Mille Lacs Lake from Coast Guard license and inspection 
requirements under subtitle II of title 46, United States Code. 
Although this approach provides the regulatory relief desired 
by the bill's sponsor, all other applicable aspects of Coast 
Guard authority remain in effect on Mille Lacs Lake.
    As a result, in the interest of solving one problem, this 
legislation may very well be creating additional unintended 
problems. Unfortunately, there was no practical way that the 
Committee could have known in advance what the unintended 
consequences of this legislation might be because the bill was 
never heard and considered by the Subcommittee on Coast Guard 
and Maritime Transportation.
    We do know that the Coast Guard objects to the type of 
``partial navigability'' determination embodied in this 
legislation. It could lead to uncertainty and confusion among 
the boating public concerning the Coast Guard's management 
responsibilities. Suffice to say, it would have been far better 
to have known in advance the implications of this legislation 
prior to the Committee passing and reporting the bill to the 
House of Representatives.
    In the absence of that knowledge, I urge that we sit down 
with the Coast Guard prior to consideration of this bill by the 
House. We should thoroughly discuss the bill's implications, 
and, if need be, shape whatever modifications may be necessary 
to achieve the sponsor's objectives while also eliminating the 
likelihood of unintended consequences falling on the Coast 
Guard.

                                                       Rick Larsen.

                                  

```