[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 189 (Wednesday, November 29, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17700-S17732]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now 
proceed to the consideration of S. 1316, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1316) to reauthorize and amend title XIV of the 
     Public Health Service Act (commonly known as the ``Safe 
     Drinking Water Act''), and for other purposes, which had been 
     reported from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 
     with amendments, as follows:

  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface 
brackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in 
italic.)

                                S. 1316

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS; REFERENCES.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Safe 
     Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents; references.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. State revolving loan funds.
Sec. 4. Selection of contaminants; schedule.
Sec. 5. Risk assessment, management, and communication.
Sec. 6. Standard-setting; review of standards.
Sec. 7. Arsenic.
Sec. 8. Radon.
Sec. 9. Sulfate.
Sec. 10. Filtration and disinfection.
Sec. 11. Effective date for regulations.
Sec. 12. Technology and treatment techniques; technology centers.
Sec. 13. Variances and exemptions.
Sec. 14. Small systems; technical assistance.
Sec. 15. Capacity development; finance centers.
Sec. 16. Operator and laboratory certification.
Sec. 17. Source water quality protection partnerships.
Sec. 18. State primacy; State funding.
Sec. 19. Monitoring and information gathering.
Sec. 20. Public notification.
Sec. 21. Enforcement; judicial review.
Sec. 22. Federal agencies.
Sec. 23. Research.
Sec. 24. Definitions.
Sec. 25. Ground water protection.
Sec. 26. Lead plumbing and pipes; return flows.
Sec. 27. Bottled water.
Sec. 28. Assessing environmental priorities, costs, and benefits.
Sec. 29. Other amendments.

       (c) References to Title XIV of the Public Health Service 
     Act.--Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in 
     this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an 
     amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the 
     reference shall be considered to be made to a section or 
     other provision of title XIV of the Public Health Service Act 
     (commonly known as the ``Safe Drinking Water Act'') (42 
     U.S.C. 300f et seq.).

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) safe drinking water is essential to the protection of 
     public health;
       (2) because the requirements of title XIV of the Public 
     Health Service Act (commonly known as the ``Safe Drinking 
     Water Act'') (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.) now exceed the 
     financial and technical capacity of some public water 
     systems, especially many small public water systems, the 
     Federal Government needs to provide assistance to communities 
     to help the communities meet Federal drinking water 
     requirements;
       (3) the Federal Government commits to take steps to foster 
     and maintain a genuine partnership with the States in the 
     administration and implementation of the Safe Drinking Water 
     Act;
       (4) States play a central role in the implementation of 
     safe drinking water programs, and States need increased 
     financial resources and appropriate flexibility to ensure the 
     prompt and effective development and implementation of 
     drinking water programs;
       (5) the existing process for the assessment and regulation 
     of additional drinking water contaminants needs to be revised 
     and improved to ensure that there is a sound scientific basis 
     for drinking water regulations 

[[Page S 17701]]
     and that the standards established address the health risks posed by 
     contaminants;
       (6) procedures for assessing the health effects of 
     contaminants and establishing drinking water standards should 
     be revised to provide greater opportunity for public 
     education and participation;
       (7) in setting priorities with respect to the health risks 
     from drinking water to be addressed and in selecting the 
     appropriate level of regulation for contaminants in drinking 
     water, risk assessment and benefit-cost analysis are 
     important and useful tools for improving the efficiency and 
     effectiveness of drinking water regulations to protect human 
     health;
       (8) more effective protection of public health requires--
       (A) a Federal commitment to set priorities that will allow 
     scarce Federal, State, and local resources to be targeted 
     toward the drinking water problems of greatest public health 
     concern; and
       (B) maximizing the value of the different and complementary 
     strengths and responsibilities of the Federal and State 
     governments in those States that have primary enforcement 
     responsibility for the Safe Drinking Water Act; and
       (9) compliance with the requirements of the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act continues to be a concern at public water systems 
     experiencing technical and financial limitations, and 
     Federal, State, and local governments need more resources and 
     more effective authority to attain the objectives of the Safe 
     Drinking Water Act.

     SEC. 3. STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS.

       The title (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

                  ``PART G--STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS


                          ``general authority

       ``Sec. 1471. (a) Capitalization Grant Agreements.--The 
     Administrator shall offer to enter into an agreement with 
     each State to make capitalization grants to the State 
     pursuant to section 1472 (referred to in this part as 
     `capitalization grants') to establish a drinking water 
     treatment State revolving loan fund (referred to in this part 
     as a `State loan fund').
       ``(b) Requirements of Agreements.--An agreement entered 
     into pursuant to this section shall establish, to the 
     satisfaction of the Administrator, that--
       ``(1) the State has established a State loan fund that 
     complies with the requirements of this part;
       ``(2) the State loan fund will be administered by an 
     instrumentality of the State that has the powers and 
     authorities that are required to operate the State loan fund 
     in accordance with this part;
       ``(3) the State will deposit the capitalization grants into 
     the State loan fund;
       ``(4) the State will deposit all loan repayments received, 
     and interest earned on the amounts deposited into the State 
     loan fund under this part, into the State loan fund;
       ``(5) the State will deposit into the State loan fund an 
     amount equal to at least 20 percent of the total amount of 
     each payment to be made to the State on or before the date on 
     which the payment is made to the State, except as provided in 
     subsection (c)(4);
       ``(6) the State will use funds in the State loan fund in 
     accordance with an intended use plan prepared pursuant to 
     section 1474(b);
       ``(7) the State and loan recipients that receive funds that 
     the State makes available from the State loan fund will use 
     accounting procedures that conform to generally accepted 
     accounting principles, auditing procedures that conform to 
     chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code (commonly known as 
     the `Single Audit Act of 1984'), and such fiscal procedures 
     as the Administrator may prescribe; and
       ``(8) the State has adopted policies and procedures to 
     ensure that loan recipients are reasonably likely to be able 
     to repay a loan.
       ``(c) Administration of State Loan Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--The authority to establish assistance 
     priorities for financial assistance provided with amounts 
     deposited into the State loan fund shall reside in the State 
     agency that has primary responsibility for the administration 
     of the State program under section 1413, after consultation 
     with other appropriate State agencies (as determined by the 
     State).
       ``(2) Financial administration.--A State may combine the 
     financial administration of the State loan fund pursuant to 
     this part with the financial administration of a State water 
     pollution control revolving fund established by the State 
     pursuant to title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), or other State revolving funds 
     providing financing for similar purposes, if the 
     Administrator determines that the grants to be provided to 
     the State under this part, and the loan repayments and 
     interest deposited into the State loan fund pursuant to this 
     part, will be separately accounted for and used solely for 
     the purposes of and in compliance with the requirements of 
     this part.
       ``(3) Transfer of funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, a Governor of a State may--
       ``(i) reserve up to 50 percent of a capitalization grant 
     made pursuant to section 1472 and add the funds reserved to 
     any funds provided to the State pursuant to section 601 of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1381); and
       ``(ii) reserve in any year a dollar amount up to the dollar 
     amount that may be reserved under clause (i) for that year 
     from capitalization grants made pursuant to section 601 of 
     such Act (33 U.S.C. 1381) and add the reserved funds to any 
     funds provided to the State pursuant to section 1472.
       ``(B) State match.--Funds reserved pursuant to this 
     paragraph shall not be considered to be a State match of a 
     capitalization grant required pursuant to this title or the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
       ``(4) Extended period.--Notwithstanding subsection (b)(5), 
     a State shall not be required to deposit a State matching 
     amount into the fund prior to the date on which each payment 
     is made for payments from funds appropriated for fiscal years 
     1994, 1995, and 1996, if the matching amounts for the 
     payments are deposited into the State fund prior to September 
     30, 1998.


                        ``capitalization grants

       ``Sec. 1472. (a) General Authority.--The Administrator may 
     make grants to capitalize State loan funds to a State that 
     has entered into an agreement pursuant to section 1471.
       ``(b) Formula for Allotment of Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (c) and paragraph 
     (2), funds made available to carry out this part shall be 
     allotted to States that have entered into an agreement 
     pursuant to section 1471 in accordance with--
       ``(A) for each of fiscal years 1995 through 1997, a formula 
     that is the same as the formula used to distribute public 
     water system supervision grant funds under section 1443 in 
     fiscal year 1995, except that the minimum proportionate share 
     established in the formula shall be 1 percent of available 
     funds and the formula shall be adjusted to include a minimum 
     proportionate share for the State of Wyoming; and
       ``(B) for fiscal year 1998 and each subsequent fiscal year, 
     a formula that allocates to each State the proportional share 
     of the State needs identified in the most recent survey 
     conducted pursuant to section 1475(c), except that the 
     minimum proportionate share provided to each State shall be 
     the same as the minimum proportionate share provided under 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Other jurisdictions.--The formula established 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) shall reserve 0.5 percent of the 
     amounts made available to carry out this part for a fiscal 
     year for providing direct grants to the jurisdictions, other 
     than Indian Tribes, referred to in subsection (f).
       ``(c) Reservation of Funds for Indian Tribes.--
       ``(1) In general.--For each fiscal year, prior to the 
     allotment of funds made available to carry out this part, the 
     Administrator shall reserve 1.5 percent of the funds for 
     providing financial assistance to Indian Tribes pursuant to 
     subsection (f).
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Funds reserved pursuant to paragraph 
     (1) shall be used to address the most significant threats to 
     public health associated with public water systems that serve 
     Indian Tribes, as determined by the Administrator in 
     consultation with the Director of the Indian Health Service 
     and Indian Tribes.
       ``(3) Needs assessment.--The Administrator, in consultation 
     with the Director of the Indian Health Service and Indian 
     Tribes, shall, in accordance with a schedule that is 
     consistent with the needs surveys conducted pursuant to 
     section 1475(c), prepare surveys and assess the needs of 
     drinking water treatment facilities to serve Indian Tribes, 
     including an evaluation of the public water systems that pose 
     the most significant threats to public health.
       ``(d) Technical Assistance for Small Systems.--
       ``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Small system.--The term `small system' means a public 
     water system that serves a population of 10,000 or fewer.
       ``(B) Technical assistance.--The term `technical 
     assistance' means assistance provided by a State to a small 
     system, including assistance to potential loan recipients and 
     assistance for planning and design, development and 
     implementation of a source water quality protection 
     partnership program, alternative supplies of drinking water, 
     restructuring or consolidation of a small system, and 
     treatment to comply with a national primary drinking water 
     regulation.
       ``(2) Reservation of funds.--To provide technical 
     assistance pursuant to this subsection, each State may 
     reserve from capitalization grants received in any year an 
     amount that does not exceed the greater of--
       ``(A) an amount equal to 2 percent of the amount of the 
     capitalization grants received by the State pursuant to this 
     section; or
       ``(B) $300,000.
       ``(e) Allotment Period.--
       ``(1) Period of availability for financial assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the sums allotted to a State pursuant to subsection (b) for a 
     fiscal year shall be available to the State for obligation 
     during the fiscal year for which the sums are authorized and 
     during the following fiscal year.
       ``(B) Funds made available for fiscal years 1995 and 
     1996.--The sums allotted to a State pursuant to subsection 
     (b) from funds that are made available by appropriations for 
     each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996 shall be available to the 
     State for obligation during each of fiscal years 1995 through 
     1998.
       ``(2) Reallotment of unobligated funds.--Prior to 
     obligating new allotments 

[[Page S 17702]]
     made available to the State pursuant to subsection (b), each State 
     shall obligate funds accumulated before a date that is 1 year 
     prior to the date of the obligation of a new allotment from 
     loan repayments and interest earned on amounts deposited into 
     a State loan fund. The amount of any allotment that is not 
     obligated by a State by the last day of the period of 
     availability established by paragraph (1) shall be 
     immediately reallotted by the Administrator on the basis of 
     the same ratio as is applicable to sums allotted under 
     subsection (b), except that the Administrator may reserve and 
     allocate 10 percent of the remaining amount for financial 
     assistance to Indian Tribes in addition to the amount 
     allotted under subsection (c). None of the funds reallotted 
     by the Administrator shall be reallotted to any State that 
     has not obligated all sums allotted to the State pursuant to 
     this section during the period in which the sums were 
     available for obligation.
       ``(3) Allotment of withheld funds.--All funds withheld by 
     the Administrator pursuant to subsection (g) and section 
     1442(e)(3) shall be allotted by the Administrator on the 
     basis of the same ratio as is applicable to funds allotted 
     under subsection (b). None of the funds allotted by the 
     Administrator pursuant to this paragraph shall be allotted to 
     a State unless the State has met the requirements of section 
     1418(a).
       ``(f) Direct Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator is authorized to make 
     grants for the improvement of public water systems of Indian 
     Tribes, the District of Columbia, the United States Virgin 
     Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
     American Samoa, and Guam and, if funds are appropriated to 
     carry out this part for fiscal year 1995, the Republic of 
     Palau.
       ``(2) Alaska native villages.--In the case of a grant for a 
     project under this subsection in an Alaska Native village, 
     the Administrator is also authorized to make grants to the 
     State of Alaska for the benefit of Native villages. An amount 
     not to exceed 4 percent of the grant amount may be used by 
     the State of Alaska for project management.
       ``(g) New System Capacity.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, 
     the Administrator shall withhold the percentage prescribed in 
     the following sentence of each capitalization grant made 
     pursuant to this section to a State unless the State has met 
     the requirements of section 1418(a). The percentage withheld 
     shall be 5 percent for fiscal year 1999, 10 percent for 
     fiscal year 2000, and 15 percent for each subsequent fiscal 
     year.


                         ``eligible assistance

       ``Sec. 1473. (a) In General.--The amounts deposited into a 
     State loan fund, including any amounts equal to the amounts 
     of loan repayments and interest earned on the amounts 
     deposited, may be used by the State to carry out projects 
     that are consistent with this section.
       ``(b) Projects Eligible for Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amounts deposited into a State loan 
     fund shall be used only for providing financial assistance 
     for capital expenditures and associated costs (but excluding 
     the cost of land acquisition unless the cost is incurred to 
     acquire land for the construction of a treatment facility or 
     for a consolidation project) for--
       ``(A) a project that will facilitate compliance with 
     national primary drinking water regulations promulgated 
     pursuant to section 1412;
       ``(B) a project that will facilitate the consolidation of 
     public water systems or the use of an alternative source of 
     water supply;
       ``(C) a project that will upgrade a drinking water 
     treatment system; and
       ``(D) the development of a public water system to replace 
     private drinking water supplies if the private water supplies 
     pose a significant threat to human health.
       ``(2) Operator training.--Associated costs eligible for 
     assistance under this part include the costs of training and 
     certifying the persons who will operate facilities that 
     receive assistance pursuant to paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Limitation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     no assistance under this part shall be provided to a public 
     water system that--
       ``(i) does not have the technical, managerial, and 
     financial capability to ensure compliance with the 
     requirements of this title; and
       ``(ii) has a history of--

       ``(I) past violations of any maximum contaminant level or 
     treatment technique established by a regulation or a 
     variance; or
       ``(II) significant noncompliance with monitoring 
     requirements or any other requirement of a national primary 
     drinking water regulation or variance.

       ``(B) Restructuring.--A public water system described in 
     subparagraph (A) may receive assistance under this part if--
       ``(i) the owner or operator of the system agrees to 
     undertake feasible and appropriate changes in operations 
     (including ownership, management, accounting, rates, 
     maintenance, consolidation, alternative water supply, or 
     other procedures) if the State determines that such measures 
     are necessary to ensure that the system has the technical, 
     managerial, and financial capability to comply with the 
     requirements of this title over the long term; and
       ``(ii) the use of the assistance will ensure compliance.
       ``(c) Eligible Public Water Systems.--A State loan fund, or 
     the Administrator in the case of direct grants under section 
     1472(f), may provide financial assistance only to community 
     water systems, publicly owned water systems (other than 
     systems owned by Federal agencies), and nonprofit 
     noncommunity water systems.
       ``(d) Types of Assistance.--Except as otherwise limited by 
     State law, the amounts deposited into a State loan fund under 
     this section may be used only--
       ``(1) to make loans, on the condition that--
       ``(A) the interest rate for each loan is less than or equal 
     to the market interest rate, including an interest free loan;
       ``(B) principal and interest payments on each loan will 
     commence not later than 1 year after completion of the 
     project for which the loan was made, and each loan will be 
     fully amortized not later than 20 years after the completion 
     of the project, except that in the case of a disadvantaged 
     community (as defined in subsection (e)(1)), a State may 
     provide an extended term for a loan, if the extended term--
       ``(i) terminates not later than the date that is 30 years 
     after the date of project completion; and
       ``(ii) does not exceed the expected design life of the 
     project;
       ``(C) the recipient of each loan will establish a dedicated 
     source of revenue for the repayment of the loan; and
       ``(D) the State loan fund will be credited with all 
     payments of principal and interest on each loan;
       ``(2) to buy or refinance the debt obligation of a 
     municipality or an intermunicipal or interstate agency within 
     the State at an interest rate that is less than or equal to 
     the market interest rate in any case in which a debt 
     obligation is incurred after October 14, 1993, or to 
     refinance a debt obligation for a project constructed to 
     comply with a regulation established pursuant to an amendment 
     to this title made by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments 
     of 1986 (Public Law 99-339; 100 Stat. 642);
       ``(3) to guarantee, or purchase insurance for, a local 
     obligation (all of the proceeds of which finance a project 
     eligible for assistance under subsection (b)) if the 
     guarantee or purchase would improve credit market access or 
     reduce the interest rate applicable to the obligation;
       ``(4) as a source of revenue or security for the payment of 
     principal and interest on revenue or general obligation bonds 
     issued by the State if the proceeds of the sale of the bonds 
     will be deposited into the State loan fund;
       ``(5) as a source of revenue or security for the payment of 
     interest on a local obligation (all of the proceeds of which 
     finance a project eligible for assistance under subsection 
     (b)); and
       ``(6) to earn interest on the amounts deposited into the 
     State loan fund.
       ``(e) Assistance for Disadvantaged Communities.--
       ``(1) Definition of disadvantaged community.--In this 
     subsection, the term `disadvantaged community' means the 
     service area of a public water system that meets 
     affordability criteria established after public review and 
     comment by the State in which the public water system is 
     located. The Administrator may publish information to assist 
     States in establishing affordability criteria.
       ``(2) Loan subsidy.--Notwithstanding subsection (d), in any 
     case in which the State makes a loan pursuant to subsection 
     (d) to a disadvantaged community or to a community that the 
     State expects to become a disadvantaged community as the 
     result of a proposed project, the State may provide 
     additional subsidization (including forgiveness of 
     principal).
       ``(3) Total amount of subsidies.--For each fiscal year, the 
     total amount of loan subsidies made by a State pursuant to 
     paragraph (2) may not exceed 30 percent of the amount of the 
     capitalization grant received by the State for the year.
       ``(f) Source Water Quality Protection and Capacity 
     Development.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (b)(1), a 
     State may--
       ``(A) provide assistance, only in the form of a loan, to--
       ``(i) any public water system described in subsection (c) 
     to acquire land or a conservation easement from a willing 
     seller or grantor, if the purpose of the acquisition is to 
     protect the source water of the system from contamination; or
       ``(ii) any community water system described in subsection 
     (c) to provide funding in accordance with section 
     1419(d)(1)(C)(i);
       ``(B) provide assistance, including technical and financial 
     assistance, to any public water system as part of a capacity 
     development strategy developed and implemented in accordance 
     with section 1418(c); and
       ``(C) make expenditures from the capitalization grant of 
     the State for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 to delineate and 
     assess source water protection areas in accordance with 
     section 1419, except that funds set aside for such 
     expenditure shall be obligated within 4 fiscal years.
       ``(2) Limitation.--For each fiscal year, the total amount 
     of assistance provided and expenditures made by a State under 
     this subsection may not exceed [10] 15 percent of the amount 
     of the capitalization grant received by the State for that 
     [year.] year and may not exceed 10 percent of that amount for 
     any one of the following activities:
       ``(A) To acquire land or conservation easements pursuant to 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i).

[[Page S 17703]]

       ``(B) To provide funding to implement recommendations of 
     source water quality protection partnerships pursuant to 
     paragraph (1)(A)(ii).
       ``(C) To provide assistance through a capacity development 
     strategy pursuant to paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(D) To make expenditures to delineate or assess source 
     water protection areas pursuant to paragraph (1)(C).


                    ``state loan fund administration

       ``Sec. 1474. (a) Administration, Technical Assistance, and 
     Management.--
       ``(1) Administration.--Each State that has a State loan 
     fund is authorized to expend from the annual capitalization 
     grant of the State a reasonable amount, not to exceed 4 
     percent of the capitalization grant made to the State, for 
     the costs of the administration of the State loan fund.
       ``(2) State program management assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each State that has a loan fund is 
     authorized to expend from the annual capitalization grant of 
     the State an amount, determined pursuant to this paragraph, 
     to carry out the public water system supervision program 
     under section 1443(a) and to--
       ``(i) administer, or provide technical assistance through, 
     source water quality protection programs, including a 
     partnership program under section 1419; and
       ``(ii) develop and implement a capacity development 
     strategy under section 1418(c) in the State.
       ``(B) Limitation.--Amounts expended by a State pursuant to 
     this paragraph for any fiscal year may not exceed an amount 
     that is equal to the amount of the grant funds available to 
     the State for that fiscal year under section 1443(a).
       ``(C) State funds.--For any fiscal year, funds may not be 
     expended pursuant to this paragraph unless the Administrator 
     determines that the amount of State funds made available to 
     carry out the public water system supervision program under 
     section 1443(a) for the fiscal year is not less than the 
     amount of State funds made available to carry out the program 
     for fiscal year 1993.
       ``(b) Intended Use Plans.--
       ``(1) In general.--After providing for public review and 
     comment, each State that has entered into a capitalization 
     agreement pursuant to this part shall annually prepare a plan 
     that identifies the intended uses of the amounts available to 
     the State loan fund of the State.
       ``(2) Contents.--An intended use plan shall include--
       ``(A) a list of the projects to be assisted in the first 
     fiscal year that begins after the date of the plan, including 
     a description of the project, the expected terms of financial 
     assistance, and the size of the community served;
       ``(B) the criteria and methods established for the 
     distribution of funds; and
       ``(C) a description of the financial status of the State 
     loan fund and the short-term and long-term goals of the State 
     loan fund.
       ``(3) Use of funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--An intended use plan shall provide, to 
     the maximum extent practicable, that priority for the use of 
     funds be given to projects that--
       ``(i) address the most serious risk to human health;
       ``(ii) are necessary to ensure compliance with the 
     requirements of this title (including requirements for 
     filtration); and
       ``(iii) assist systems most in need on a per household 
     basis according to State affordability criteria.
       ``(B) List of projects.--Each State shall, after notice and 
     opportunity for public comment, publish and periodically 
     update a list of projects in the State that are eligible for 
     assistance under this part, including the priority assigned 
     to each project and, to the extent known, the expected 
     funding schedule for each project.


                      ``state loan fund management

       ``Sec. 1475. (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of this part, and annually thereafter, 
     the Administrator shall conduct such reviews and audits as 
     the Administrator considers appropriate, or require each 
     State to have the reviews and audits independently conducted, 
     in accordance with the single audit requirements of chapter 
     75 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(b) State Reports.--Not later than 2 years after the date 
     of enactment of this part, and every 2 years thereafter, each 
     State that administers a State loan fund shall publish and 
     submit to the Administrator a report on the activities of the 
     State under this part, including the findings of the most 
     recent audit of the State loan fund.
       ``(c) Drinking Water Needs Survey and Assessment.--Not 
     later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this part, 
     and every 4 years thereafter, the Administrator shall submit 
     to Congress a survey and assessment of the needs for 
     facilities in each State eligible for assistance under this 
     part. The survey and assessment conducted pursuant to this 
     subsection shall--
       ``(1) identify, by State, the needs for projects or 
     facilities owned or controlled by community water systems 
     eligible for assistance under this part on the date of the 
     assessment (other than refinancing for a project pursuant to 
     section 1473(d)(2));
       ``(2) estimate the needs for eligible facilities over the 
     20-year period following the date of the assessment;
       ``(3) identify, by size category, the population served by 
     public water systems with needs identified pursuant to 
     paragraph (1); and
       ``(4) include such other information as the Administrator 
     determines to be appropriate.
       ``(d) Evaluation.--The Administrator shall conduct an 
     evaluation of the effectiveness of the State loan funds 
     through fiscal year 1999. The evaluation shall be submitted 
     to Congress at the same time as the President submits to 
     Congress, pursuant to section 1108 of title 31, United States 
     Code, an appropriations request for fiscal year 2001 relating 
     to the budget of the Environmental Protection Agency.


                             ``enforcement

       ``Sec. 1476. The failure or inability of any public water 
     system to receive funds under this part or any other loan or 
     grant program, or any delay in obtaining the funds, shall not 
     alter the obligation of the system to comply in a timely 
     manner with all applicable drinking water standards and 
     requirements of this title.


                       ``regulations and guidance

       ``Sec. 1477. The Administrator shall publish such guidance 
     and promulgate such regulations as are necessary to carry out 
     this part, including guidance and regulations to ensure 
     that--
       ``(1) each State commits and expends funds from the State 
     loan fund in accordance with the requirements of this part 
     and applicable Federal and State laws; and
       ``(2) the States and eligible public water systems that 
     receive funds under this part use accounting procedures that 
     conform to generally accepted accounting principles, auditing 
     procedures that conform to chapter 75 of title 31, United 
     States Code (commonly known as the `Single Audit Act of 
     1984'), and such fiscal procedures as the Administrator may 
     prescribe.


                   ``authorization of appropriations

       ``Sec. 1478. (a) General Authorization.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Environmental Protection 
     Agency to carry out this part $600,000,000 for fiscal year 
     1994 and $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 
     2003.
       ``(b) Health Effects Research.--From funds appropriated 
     pursuant to this section for each fiscal year, the 
     Administrator shall reserve $10,000,000 for health effects 
     research on drinking water contaminants authorized by section 
     1442. In allocating funds made available under this 
     subsection, the Administrator shall give priority to research 
     concerning the health effects of cryptosporidium, 
     disinfection byproducts, and arsenic, and the implementation 
     of a research plan for subpopulations at greater risk of 
     adverse effects pursuant to section 1442(l).
       ``(c) Monitoring for Unregulated Contaminants.--From funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this section for each fiscal year 
     beginning with fiscal year 1997, the Administrator shall 
     reserve $2,000,000 to pay the costs of monitoring for 
     unregulated contaminants under section 1445(a)(2)(D).
       ``(d) Small System Technical Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), from funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this section for each fiscal year 
     for which the appropriation made pursuant to subsection (a) 
     exceeds $800,000,000, the Administrator shall reserve to 
     carry out section 1442(g) an amount that is equal to any 
     amount by which the amount made available to carry out 
     section 1442(g) is less than the amount referred to in the 
     third sentence of section 1442(g).
       ``(2) Maximum amount.--For each fiscal year, the amount 
     reserved under paragraph (1) shall be not greater than an 
     amount equal to the lesser of--
       ``(A) 2 percent of the funds appropriated pursuant to this 
     section for the fiscal year; or
       ``(B) $10,000,000.''.

     SEC. 4. SELECTION OF CONTAMINANTS; SCHEDULE.

       (a) Standards.--Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) is 
     amended by striking ``(b)(1)'' and all that follows through 
     the end of paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Standards.--
       ``(1) Identification of contaminants for listing.--
       ``(A) General authority.--The Administrator shall publish a 
     maximum contaminant level goal and promulgate a national 
     primary drinking water regulation for each contaminant (other 
     than a contaminant referred to in paragraph (2) for which a 
     national primary drinking water regulation has been 
     promulgated as of the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act Amendments of 1995) if the Administrator 
     determines, based on adequate data and appropriate peer-
     reviewed scientific information and an assessment of health 
     risks, conducted in accordance with sound and objective 
     scientific practices, that--
       ``(i) the contaminant may have an adverse effect on the 
     health of persons; and
       ``(ii) the contaminant is known to occur or there is a 
     substantial likelihood that the contaminant will occur in 
     public water systems with a frequency and at levels of public 
     health concern.
       ``(B) Selection and listing of contaminants for 
     consideration.--
       ``(i) In general.--Not later than July 1, [1996] 1997, the 
     Administrator (after consultation with the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services) shall publish and periodically, 
     but not less often than every 5 years, 

[[Page S 17704]]
     update a list of contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in 
     drinking water provided by public water systems and that may 
     warrant regulation under this title.
       ``(ii) Research and study plan.--At such time as a list is 
     published under clause (i), the Administrator shall describe 
     available and needed information and research with respect 
     to--

       ``(I) the health effects of the contaminants;
       ``(II) the occurrence of the contaminants in drinking 
     water; and
       ``(III) treatment techniques and other means that may be 
     feasible to control the contaminants.

       ``(iii) Comment.--The Administrator shall seek comment on 
     each list and any research plan that is published from 
     officials of State and local governments, operators of public 
     water systems, the scientific community, and the general 
     public.
       ``(C) Determination.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), not 
     later than July 1, 2001, and every 5 years thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall take one of the following actions for not 
     fewer than 5 contaminants:

       ``(I) Publish a determination that information available to 
     the Administrator does not warrant the issuance of a national 
     primary drinking water regulation.
       ``(II) Publish a determination that a national primary 
     drinking water regulation is warranted based on information 
     available to the Administrator, and proceed to propose a 
     maximum contaminant level goal and national primary drinking 
     water regulation not later than 2 years after the date of 
     publication of the determination.
       ``(III) Propose a maximum contaminant level goal and 
     national primary drinking water regulation.

       ``(ii) Insufficient information.--If the Administrator 
     determines that available information is insufficient to make 
     a determination for a contaminant under clause (i), the 
     Administrator may publish a determination to continue to 
     study the contaminant. Not later than 5 years after the 
     Administrator determines that further study is necessary for 
     a contaminant pursuant to this clause, the Administrator 
     shall make a determination under clause (i).
       ``(iii) Assessment.--The determinations under clause (i) 
     shall be based on an assessment of--

       ``(I) the available scientific knowledge that is consistent 
     with the requirements of paragraph (3)(A) and useful in 
     determining the nature and extent of adverse effects on the 
     health of persons that may occur due to the presence of the 
     contaminant in drinking water;
       ``(II) information on the occurrence of the contaminant in 
     drinking water; and
       ``(III) the treatment technologies, treatment techniques, 
     or other means that may be feasible in reducing the 
     contaminant in drinking water provided by public water 
     systems.

       ``(iv) Priorities.--In making determinations under this 
     subparagraph, the Administrator shall give priority to those 
     contaminants not currently regulated that are associated with 
     the most serious adverse health effects and that present the 
     greatest potential risk to the health of persons due to the 
     presence of the contaminant in drinking water provided by 
     public water systems.
       ``(v) Review.--Each document setting forth the 
     determination for a contaminant under clause (i) shall be 
     available for public comment [before] at such time as the 
     determination is published.
       ``(vi) Judicial review.--Determinations made by the 
     Administrator pursuant to clause (i)(I) shall be considered 
     final agency actions for the purposes of section 1448. No 
     determination under clause (i)(I) shall be set aside by a 
     court pursuant to a review authorized under that section [or 
     other law,] unless the court finds that the determination is 
     arbitrary and capricious.
       ``(D) Urgent threats to public health.--The Administrator 
     may promulgate an interim national primary drinking water 
     regulation for a contaminant without listing the contaminant 
     under subparagraph (B) or publishing a determination for the 
     contaminant under subparagraph (C) to address an urgent 
     threat to public health as determined by the Administrator 
     after consultation with and written response to any comments 
     provided by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     acting through the director of the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention or the director of the National 
     Institutes of Health. A determination for any contaminant in 
     accordance with subparagraph (C) subject to an interim 
     regulation under this subparagraph shall be issued not later 
     than 3 years after the date on which the regulation is 
     promulgated and the regulation shall be repromulgated, or 
     revised if appropriate, not later than 5 years after that 
     date.
       ``(E) Monitoring data and other information.--The 
     Administrator may require, in accordance with section 
     1445(a)(2), the submission of monitoring data and other 
     information necessary for the development of studies, 
     research plans, or national primary drinking water 
     regulations.
       ``(2) Schedules and deadlines.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of the contaminants listed 
     in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in 
     volume 47, Federal Register, page 9352, and in volume 48, 
     Federal Register, page 45502, the Administrator shall publish 
     maximum contaminant level goals and promulgate national 
     primary drinking water regulations--
       ``(i) not later than 1 year after June 19, 1986, for not 
     fewer than 9 of the listed contaminants;
       ``(ii) not later than 2 years after June 19, 1986, for not 
     fewer than 40 of the listed contaminants; and
       ``(iii) not later than 3 years after June 19, 1986, for the 
     remainder of the listed contaminants.
       ``(B) Substitution of contaminants.--If the Administrator 
     identifies a drinking water contaminant the regulation of 
     which, in the judgment of the Administrator, is more likely 
     to be protective of public health (taking into account the 
     schedule for regulation under subparagraph (A)) than a 
     contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A), the 
     Administrator may publish a maximum contaminant level goal 
     and promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation 
     for the identified contaminant in lieu of regulating the 
     contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A). Substitutions 
     may be made for not more than 7 contaminants referred to in 
     subparagraph (A). Regulation of a contaminant identified 
     under this subparagraph shall be in accordance with the 
     schedule applicable to the contaminant for which the 
     substitution is made.
       ``(C) Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts.--
       ``(i) Information collection rule.--

       ``(I) In general.--Not later than December 31, 1995, the 
     Administrator shall, after notice and opportunity for public 
     comment, promulgate an information collection rule to obtain 
     information that will facilitate further revisions to the 
     national primary drinking water regulation for disinfectants 
     and disinfection byproducts, including information on 
     microbial contaminants such as cryptosporidium.
       ``(II) Extension.--The Administrator may extend the 
     deadline under subclause (I) for up to 180 days if the 
     Administrator determines that progress toward approval of an 
     appropriate analytical method to screen for cryptosporidium 
     is sufficiently advanced and approval is likely to be 
     completed within the additional time period.

       ``(ii) Additional deadlines.--The time intervals between 
     promulgation of a final information collection rule, an 
     Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Final 
     Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, a Stage I 
     Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and a Stage 
     II Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule shall be in 
     accordance with the schedule published in volume 59, Federal 
     Register, page 6361 (February 10, 1994), in table III.13 of 
     the proposed Information Collection Rule. If a delay occurs 
     with respect to the promulgation of any rule in the timetable 
     established by this subparagraph, all subsequent rules shall 
     be completed as expeditiously as practicable subject to 
     agreement by all the parties to the negotiated rulemaking, 
     but no later than a revised date that reflects the interval 
     or intervals for the rules in the timetable.
       ``(D) Prior requirements.--The requirements of 
     subparagraphs (C) and (D) of section 1412(b)(3) (as in effect 
     before the amendment made by section 4(a) of the Safe 
     Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995), and any obligation to 
     promulgate regulations pursuant to such subparagraphs not 
     promulgated as of the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act Amendments of 1995, are superseded by this 
     paragraph and paragraph (1).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1412(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(a)(3)) is amended 
     by striking ``paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (b)'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``paragraph (1) or (2) of 
     subsection (b)''.
       (2) Section 1415(d) (42 U.S.C. 300g-4(d)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 1412(b)(3)'' and inserting ``section 
     1412(b)(7)(A)''.

     SEC. 5. RISK ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT, AND COMMUNICATION.

       Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) (as amended by 
     section 4) is further amended by inserting after paragraph 
     (2) the following:
       ``(3) Risk assessment, management and communication.--
       ``(A) Use of science in decisionmaking.--In carrying out 
     this title, the Administrator shall use--
       ``(i) the best available, peer-reviewed science and 
     supporting studies conducted in accordance with sound and 
     objective scientific practices; and
       ``(ii) data collected by accepted methods or best available 
     methods (if the reliability of the method and the nature of 
     the decision justifies use of the data).
       ``(B) Public information.--In carrying out this section, 
     the Administrator shall ensure that the presentation of 
     information on public health effects is comprehensive, 
     informative and understandable. The Administrator shall, in a 
     document made available to the public in support of a 
     regulation promulgated under this section, specify, to the 
     extent practicable--
       ``(i) each population addressed by any estimate of public 
     health effects;
       ``(ii) the expected risk or central estimate of risk for 
     the specific populations;
       ``(iii) each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound 
     estimate of risk;
       ``(iv) each uncertainty identified in the process of the 
     assessment of public health effects and research that would 
     assist in resolving the uncertainty; and
       ``(v) peer-reviewed studies known to the Administrator that 
     support, are directly relevant to, or fail to support any 
     estimate of public health effects and the methodology 

[[Page S 17705]]
     used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.
       ``(C) Health risk reduction and cost analysis.--
       ``(i) Maximum contaminant levels.--Not later than 90 days 
     prior to proposing any national primary drinking water 
     regulation that includes a maximum contaminant level, the 
     Administrator shall, with respect to a maximum contaminant 
     level that would be considered in accordance with paragraph 
     (4) in a proposed regulation and each alternative maximum 
     contaminant level that would be considered in a proposed 
     regulation pursuant to paragraph (5) or (6)(A), publish, seek 
     public comment on, and use for the purposes of paragraphs 
     (4), (5), and (6) an analysis of--

       ``(I) the health risk reduction benefits (including non-
     quantifiable health benefits identified and described by the 
     Administrator, except that such benefits shall not be used by 
     the Administrator for purposes of determining whether a 
     maximum contaminant level is or is not justified unless there 
     is a factual basis in the rulemaking record to conclude that 
     such benefits are likely to occur) expected as the result of 
     treatment to comply with each level;
       ``(II) the health risk reduction benefits (including non-
     quantifiable health benefits identified and described by the 
     Administrator, except that such benefits shall not be used by 
     the Administrator for purposes of determining whether a 
     maximum contaminant level is or is not justified unless there 
     is a factual basis in the rulemaking record to conclude that 
     such benefits are likely to occur) expected from reductions 
     in co-occurring contaminants that may be attributed solely to 
     compliance with the maximum contaminant level, excluding 
     benefits resulting from compliance with other proposed or 
     promulgated regulations;
       ``(III) the costs (including non-quantifiable costs 
     identified and described by the Administrator, except that 
     such costs shall not be used by the Administrator for 
     purposes of determining whether a maximum contaminant level 
     is or is not justified unless there is a factual basis in the 
     rulemaking record to conclude that such costs are likely to 
     occur) expected solely as a result of compliance with the 
     maximum contaminant level, including monitoring, treatment, 
     and other costs and excluding costs resulting from compliance 
     with other proposed or promulgated regulations;
       ``(IV) the incremental costs and benefits associated with 
     each alternative maximum contaminant level considered;
       ``(V) the effects of the contaminant on the general 
     population and on groups within the general population such 
     as infants, children, pregnant women, the elderly, 
     individuals with a history of serious illness, or other 
     subpopulations that are identified as likely to be at greater 
     risk of adverse health effects due to exposure to 
     contaminants in drinking water than the general population;

       ``(VI) any increased health risk that may occur as the 
     result of compliance, including risks associated with co-
     occurring contaminants; and
       ``(VII) other relevant factors, including the quality and 
     extent of the information, the uncertainties in the analysis 
     supporting subclauses (I) through (VI), and factors with 
     respect to the degree and nature of the risk.

       ``(ii) Treatment techniques.--Not later than 90 days prior 
     to proposing a national primary drinking water regulation 
     that includes a treatment technique in accordance with 
     paragraph (7)(A), the Administrator shall publish and seek 
     public comment on an analysis of the health risk reduction 
     benefits and costs likely to be experienced as the result of 
     compliance with the treatment technique and alternative 
     treatment techniques that would be considered in a proposed 
     regulation, taking into account, as appropriate, the factors 
     described in clause (i).
       ``(iii) Approaches to measure and value benefits.--The 
     Administrator may identify valid approaches for the 
     measurement and valuation of benefits under this 
     subparagraph, including approaches to identify consumer 
     willingness to pay for reductions in health risks from 
     drinking water contaminants.
       ``(iv) Form of notice.--Whenever a national primary 
     drinking water regulation is expected to result in compliance 
     costs greater than $75,000,000 per year, the Administrator 
     shall provide the notice required by clause (i) or (ii) 
     through an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking.
       ``(v) Authorization.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Administrator, acting through the Office 
     of Ground Water and Drinking Water, to conduct studies, 
     assessments, and analyses in support of regulations or the 
     development of methods, $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     1996 through 2003.''.

     SEC. 6. STANDARD-SETTING; REVIEW OF STANDARDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by striking ``(4) Each'' and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Goals and standards.--
       ``(A) Maximum contaminant level goals.--Each'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A) (as so designated), by inserting 
     after the first sentence the following: ``The maximum 
     contaminant level goal for contaminants that are known or 
     likely to cause cancer in humans may be set at a level other 
     than zero, if the Administrator determines, based on the best 
     available, peer-reviewed science, that there is a threshold 
     level below which there is unlikely to be any increase in 
     cancer risk and the Administrator sets the maximum 
     contaminant level goal at that level with an adequate margin 
     of safety.'';
       (C) in the last sentence--
       (i) by striking ``Each national'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Maximum contaminant levels.-- Except as provided in 
     paragraphs (5) and (6), each national''; and
       (ii) by striking ``maximum level'' and inserting ``maximum 
     contaminant level''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Determination.--At the time the Administrator 
     proposes a national primary drinking water regulation under 
     this paragraph, the Administrator shall publish a 
     determination as to whether the benefits of the maximum 
     contaminant level justify, or do not justify, the costs based 
     on the analysis conducted under paragraph (3)(C).'';
       (2) by striking ``(5) For the'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(D) Definition of feasible.--For the'';
       (3) in the second sentence of paragraph (4)(D) (as so 
     designated), by striking ``paragraph (4)'' and inserting 
     ``this paragraph'';
       (4) by striking ``(6) Each national'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(E) Feasible technologies.--Each national'';
       (5) in paragraph (4)(E) (as so designated), by striking 
     ``this paragraph'' and inserting ``this subsection''; and
       (6) by inserting after paragraph (4) (as so amended) the 
     following:
       ``(5) Additional health risk considerations.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (4), the 
     Administrator may establish a maximum contaminant level for a 
     contaminant at a level other than the feasible level, if the 
     technology, treatment techniques, and other means used to 
     determine the feasible level would result in an increase in 
     the health risk from drinking water by--
       ``(i) increasing the concentration of other contaminants in 
     drinking water; or
       ``(ii) interfering with the efficacy of drinking water 
     treatment techniques or processes that are used to comply 
     with other national primary drinking water regulations.
       ``(B) Establishment of level.--If the Administrator 
     establishes a maximum contaminant level or levels or requires 
     the use of treatment techniques for any contaminant or 
     contaminants pursuant to the authority of this paragraph--
       ``(i) the level or levels or treatment techniques shall 
     minimize the overall risk of adverse health effects by 
     balancing the risk from the contaminant and the risk from 
     other contaminants the concentrations of which may be 
     affected by the use of a treatment technique or process that 
     would be employed to attain the maximum contaminant level or 
     levels; and
       ``(ii) the combination of technology, treatment techniques, 
     or other means required to meet the level or levels shall not 
     be more stringent than is feasible (as defined in paragraph 
     (4)(D)).
       ``(6) Additional health risk reduction and cost 
     considerations.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (4), if the 
     Administrator determines based on an analysis conducted under 
     paragraph (3)(C) that the benefits of a maximum contaminant 
     level promulgated in accordance with paragraph (4) would not 
     justify the costs of complying with the level, the 
     Administrator may, after notice and opportunity for public 
     comment, promulgate a maximum contaminant level for the 
     contaminant that maximizes health risk reduction benefits at 
     a cost that is justified by the benefits.
       ``(B) Exception.--The Administrator shall not use the 
     authority of this paragraph to promulgate a maximum 
     contaminant level for a contaminant, if the benefits of 
     compliance with a national primary drinking water regulation 
     for the contaminant that would be promulgated in accordance 
     with paragraph (4) experienced by--
       ``(i) persons served by large public water systems; and
       ``(ii) persons served by such other systems as are 
     unlikely, based on information provided by the States, to 
     receive a variance under section 1415(e);

     would justify the costs to the systems of complying with the 
     regulation. This subparagraph shall not apply if the 
     contaminant is found almost exclusively in small systems (as 
     defined in section 1415(e)).
       ``(C) Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts.--The 
     Administrator may not use the authority of this paragraph to 
     establish a maximum contaminant level in a Stage I or Stage 
     II national primary drinking water regulation for 
     contaminants that are disinfectants or disinfection 
     byproducts (as described in paragraph (2)), or to establish a 
     maximum contaminant level or treatment technique requirement 
     for the control of cryptosporidium. The authority of this 
     paragraph may be used to establish regulations for the use of 
     disinfection by systems relying on ground water sources as 
     required by paragraph (8).
       ``(D) Judicial Review.--A determination by the 
     Administrator that the benefits of a maximum contaminant 
     level or treatment requirement justify or do not justify the 
     costs of complying with the level shall be reviewed by the 
     court pursuant to section 1448 only as part of a review of a 
     final national primary drinking water regulation that has 

[[Page S 17706]]
     been promulgated based on the determination and shall not be set aside 
     by the court under that section, unless the court finds that 
     the determination is arbitrary and capricious.''.
       (b) Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts.--The 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may use 
     the authority of section 1412(b)(5) of the Public Health 
     Service Act (as amended by subsection (a)) to promulgate the 
     Stage I rulemaking for disinfectants and disinfection 
     byproducts as proposed in volume 59, Federal Register, page 
     38668 (July 29, 1994). Unless new information warrants a 
     modification of the proposal as provided for in the 
     ``Disinfection and Disinfection Byproducts Negotiated 
     Rulemaking Committee Agreement'', nothing in such section 
     shall be construed to require the Administrator to modify the 
     provisions of the rulemaking as proposed.
       (c) Review of Standards.--Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-
     1(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (9) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(9) Review and revision.--The Administrator shall, not 
     less often than every 6 years, review and revise, as 
     appropriate, each national primary drinking water regulation 
     promulgated under this title. Any revision of a national 
     primary drinking water regulation shall be promulgated in 
     accordance with this section, except that each revision shall 
     maintain or provide for greater protection of the health of 
     persons.''.

     SEC. 7. ARSENIC.

       Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(12) Arsenic.--
       ``(A) Schedule and standard.--Notwithstanding paragraph 
     (2), the Administrator shall promulgate a national primary 
     drinking water regulation for arsenic in accordance with the 
     schedule established by this paragraph and pursuant to this 
     subsection.
       ``(B) Research plan.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this paragraph, the Administrator shall 
     develop a comprehensive plan for research in support of 
     drinking water rulemaking to reduce the uncertainty in 
     assessing health risks associated with exposure to low levels 
     of arsenic. The Administrator shall consult with the Science 
     Advisory Board established by section 8 of the Environmental 
     Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 
     U.S.C. 4365), other Federal agencies, and interested public 
     and private entities.
       ``(C) Research projects.--The Administrator shall carry out 
     the research plan, taking care to avoid duplication of other 
     research in progress. The Administrator may enter into 
     cooperative research agreements with other Federal agencies, 
     State and local governments, and other interested public and 
     private entities to carry out the research plan.
       ``(D) Assessment.--Not later than 3\1/2\ years after the 
     date of enactment of this paragraph, the Administrator shall 
     review the progress of the research to determine whether the 
     health risks associated with exposure to low levels of 
     arsenic are sufficiently well understood to proceed with a 
     national primary drinking water regulation. The Administrator 
     shall consult with the Science Advisory Board, other Federal 
     agencies, and other interested public and private entities as 
     part of the review.
       ``(E) Proposed regulation.--The Administrator shall propose 
     a national primary drinking water regulation for arsenic not 
     later than January 1, 2000.
       ``(F) Final regulation.--Not later than January 1, 2001, 
     after notice and opportunity for public comment, the 
     Administrator shall promulgate a national primary drinking 
     water regulation for arsenic.''.

     SEC. 8. RADON.

       Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) (as amended by 
     section 7) is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(13) Radon in drinking water.--
       ``(A) Regulation.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2), not later 
     than 180 days after the date of enactment of this paragraph, 
     the Administrator shall promulgate a national primary 
     drinking water regulation for radon.
       ``(B) Maximum contaminant level.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the regulation shall provide for a maximum 
     contaminant level for radon of 3,000 picocuries per liter.
       ``(C) Revision.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), a revision to 
     the regulation promulgated under subparagraph (A) may be made 
     pursuant to this subsection. The revision may include a 
     maximum contaminant level less stringent than 3,000 
     picocuries per liter as provided in paragraphs (4) and (9) or 
     a maximum contaminant level more stringent than 3,000 
     picocuries per liter as provided in clause (ii).
       ``(ii) Maximum contaminant level.--

       ``(I) Criteria for revision.--The Administrator shall not 
     revise the maximum contaminant level for radon to a more 
     stringent level than the level established under subparagraph 
     (B) unless--

       ``(aa) the revision is made to reflect consideration of 
     risks from the ingestion of radon in drinking water and 
     episodic uses of drinking water;
       ``(bb) the revision is supported by peer-reviewed 
     scientific studies conducted in accordance with sound and 
     objective scientific practices; and
       ``(cc) based on the studies, the National Academy of 
     Sciences and the Science Advisory Board, established by 
     section 8 of the Environmental Research, Development, and 
     Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365), consider a 
     revision of the maximum contaminant level to be appropriate.

       ``(II) Amount of revision.--If the Administrator determines 
     to revise the maximum contaminant level for radon in 
     accordance with subclause (I), the maximum contaminant level 
     shall be revised to a level that is no more stringent than is 
     necessary to reduce risks to human health from radon in 
     drinking water to a level that is equivalent to risks to 
     human health from radon in outdoor air based on the national 
     average concentration of radon in outdoor air.''.

     SEC. 9. SULFATE.

       Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) (as amended by 
     section 8) is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(14) Sulfate.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the absence of scientific evidence 
     suggesting new or more serious health effects than are 
     suggested by the evidence available on the date of enactment 
     of this paragraph, for the purposes of promulgation of a 
     national primary drinking water regulation for sulfate, 
     notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (4) and (7), 
     the Administrator shall specify in the regulation--
       ``(i) a requirement for best technology or other means 
     under this subsection; and
       ``(ii) requirements for public notification and options for 
     the provision of alternative water supplies to populations at 
     risk as an alternative means of complying with the 
     regulation.
       ``(B) Schedule.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2), the 
     regulation referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be 
     promulgated not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph.
       ``(C) Authority.--Paragraph (6) shall apply to the national 
     primary drinking water regulation for sulfate first 
     promulgated after the date of enactment of this paragraph 
     only if the Administrator reproposes the national primary 
     drinking water regulation for sulfate after that date based 
     on evidence suggesting new or more serious health effects as 
     described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(D) Effect on other laws.--
       ``(i) Federal laws.--Notwithstanding part C, section 311 of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321), 
     subtitle C or D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6921 et seq.), or section 107 or 121(d) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607 and 9621(d)), no national primary 
     drinking water regulation for sulfate shall be--

       ``(I) used as a standard for determining compliance with 
     any provision of any law other than this subsection;
       ``(II) used as a standard for determining appropriate 
     cleanup levels or whether cleanup should be undertaken with 
     respect to any facility or site;
       ``(III) considered to be an applicable or relevant and 
     appropriate requirement for any such cleanup; or

       ``(IV) used for the purpose of defining injury to a natural 
     resource;

     unless the Administrator, by rule and after notice and 
     opportunity for public comment, determines that the 
     regulation is appropriate for a use described in subclause 
     (I), (II), (III), or (IV).
       ``(ii) State laws.--This subparagraph shall not affect any 
     requirement of State law, including the applicability of any 
     State standard similar to the regulation published under this 
     paragraph as a standard for any cleanup action, compliance 
     action, or natural resource damage action taken pursuant to 
     such a law.''.

     SEC. 10. FILTRATION AND DISINFECTION.

       (a) Filtration Technology for Small Systems.--Section 
     1412(b)(7)(C) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(7)(C)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(v) Filtration technology for small systems.--At the same 
     time as the Administrator proposes an Interim Enhanced 
     Surface Water Treatment Rule pursuant to paragraph 
     (2)(C)(ii), the Administrator shall propose a regulation that 
     describes treatment techniques that meet the requirements for 
     filtration pursuant to this subparagraph and are feasible for 
     community water systems serving a population of 3,300 or 
     fewer and noncommunity water systems.''.
       (b) Ground Water Disinfection.--The first sentence of 
     section 1412(b)(8) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(8)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Not later than 36 months after the 
     enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, 
     the Administrator shall propose and promulgate'' and 
     inserting [``At the time that] At any time after the end of 
     the 3-year period that begins on the date of enactment of the 
     Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995 but not later than 
     the date on which the Administrator promulgates a Stage II 
     rulemaking for disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (as 
     described in paragraph (2)), the Administrator shall also 
     promulgate''; and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``, including surface water systems and, as 
     necessary, ground water systems. After consultation with the 
     States, the Administrator shall (as part of the regulations) 
     promulgate criteria that the Administrator, or a State that 
     has primary enforcement responsibility under section 1413, 
     shall apply to determine whether disinfection shall be 
     required as a treatment technique for any public water system 
     served by ground water.''.

[[Page S 17707]]


     SEC. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE FOR REGULATIONS.

       Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
       ``(10) Effective date.--A national primary drinking water 
     regulation promulgated under this section shall take effect 
     on the date that is 3 years after the date on which the 
     regulation is promulgated unless the Administrator determines 
     that an earlier date is practicable, except that the 
     Administrator, or a State in the case of an individual 
     system, may allow up to 2 additional years to comply with a 
     maximum contaminant level or treatment technique if the 
     Administrator or State determines that additional time is 
     necessary for capital improvements.''.

     SEC. 12. TECHNOLOGY AND TREATMENT TECHNIQUES; TECHNOLOGY 
                   CENTERS.

       (a) System Treatment Technologies.--Section 1412(b) (42 
     U.S.C. 300g-1(b)) (as amended by section 9) is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(15) System treatment technologies.--
       ``(A) Guidance or regulations.--
       ``(i) In general.--At the same time as the Administrator 
     promulgates a national primary drinking water regulation 
     pursuant to this section, the Administrator shall issue 
     guidance or regulations describing all treatment technologies 
     for the contaminant that is the subject of the regulation 
     that are feasible with the use of best technology, treatment 
     techniques, or other means that the Administrator finds, 
     after examination for efficacy under field conditions and not 
     solely under laboratory conditions, are available taking cost 
     into consideration for public water systems serving--

       ``(I) a population of 10,000 or fewer but more than 3,300;
       ``(II) a population of 3,300 or fewer but more than 500; 
     and
       ``(III) a population of 500 or fewer but more than 25.

       ``(ii) Contents.--The guidance or regulations shall 
     identify the effectiveness of the technology, the cost of the 
     technology, and other factors related to the use of the 
     technology, including requirements for the quality of source 
     water to ensure adequate protection of human health, 
     considering removal efficiencies of the technology, and 
     installation and operation and maintenance requirements for 
     the technology.
       ``(iii) Limitation.--The Administrator shall not issue 
     guidance or regulations for a technology under this paragraph 
     unless the technology adequately protects human health, 
     considering the expected useful life of the technology and 
     the source waters available to systems for which the 
     technology is considered to be feasible.
       ``(B) Regulations and guidance.--Not later than 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this paragraph and after 
     consultation with the States, the Administrator shall issue 
     guidance or regulations under subparagraph (A) for each 
     national primary drinking water regulation promulgated prior 
     to the date of enactment of this paragraph for which a 
     variance may be granted under section 1415(e). The 
     Administrator may, at any time after a national primary 
     drinking water regulation has been promulgated, issue 
     guidance or regulations describing additional or new or 
     innovative treatment technologies that meet the requirements 
     of subparagraph (A) for public water systems described in 
     subparagraph (A)(i) that are subject to the regulation.
       ``(C) No specified technology.--A description under 
     subparagraph (A) of the best technology or other means 
     available shall not be considered to require or authorize 
     that the specified technology or other means be used for the 
     purpose of meeting the requirements of any national primary 
     drinking water regulation.''.
       (b) Technologies and Treatment Techniques for Small 
     Systems.--Section 1412(b)(4)(E) (as amended by section 6(a)) 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following: ``The 
     Administrator shall include in the list any technology, 
     treatment technique, or other means that is feasible for 
     small public water systems serving--
       ``(i) a population of 10,000 or fewer but more than 3,300;
       ``(ii) a population of 3,300 or fewer but more than 500; 
     and
       ``(iii) a population of 500 or fewer but more than 25;

     and that achieves compliance with the maximum contaminant 
     level, including packaged or modular systems and point-of-
     entry treatment units that are controlled by the public water 
     system to ensure proper operation and maintenance and 
     compliance with the maximum contaminant level and equipped 
     with mechanical warnings to ensure that customers are 
     automatically notified of operational problems.''.
       (c) Availability of Information on Small System 
     Technologies.--Section 1445 (42 U.S.C. 300j-4) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Availability of Information on Small System 
     Technologies.--For purposes of paragraphs (4)(E) and (15) of 
     section 1412(b), the Administrator may request information on 
     the characteristics of commercially available treatment 
     systems and technologies, including the effectiveness and 
     performance of the systems and technologies under various 
     operating conditions. The Administrator may specify the form, 
     content, and date by which information shall be submitted by 
     manufacturers, States, and other interested persons for the 
     purpose of considering the systems and technologies in the 
     development of regulations or guidance under paragraph (4)(E) 
     or (15) of section 1412(b).''.
       (d) Small Water Systems Technology Centers.--Section 1442 
     (42 U.S.C. 300j-1) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(h) Small Public Water Systems Technology Assistance 
     Centers.--
       ``(1) Grant program.--The Administrator is authorized to 
     make grants to institutions of higher learning to establish 
     and operate not fewer than 5 small public water system 
     technology assistance centers in the United States.
       ``(2) Responsibilities of the centers.--The 
     responsibilities of the small public water system technology 
     assistance centers established under this subsection shall 
     include the conduct of research, training, and technical 
     assistance relating to the information, performance, and 
     technical needs of small public water systems or public water 
     systems that serve Indian Tribes.
       ``(3) Applications.--Any institution of higher learning 
     interested in receiving a grant under this subsection shall 
     submit to the Administrator an application in such form and 
     containing such information as the Administrator may require 
     by regulation.
       ``(4) Selection criteria.--The Administrator shall select 
     recipients of grants under this subsection on the basis of 
     the following criteria:
       ``(A) The small public water system technology assistance 
     center shall be located in a State that is representative of 
     the needs of the region in which the State is located for 
     addressing the drinking water needs of rural small 
     communities or Indian Tribes.
       ``(B) The grant recipient shall be located in a region that 
     has experienced problems with rural water supplies.
       ``(C) There is available to the grant recipient for 
     carrying out this subsection demonstrated expertise in water 
     resources research, technical assistance, and training.
       ``(D) The grant recipient shall have the capability to 
     provide leadership in making national and regional 
     contributions to the solution of both long-range and 
     intermediate-range rural water system technology management 
     problems.
       ``(E) The grant recipient shall have a demonstrated 
     interdisciplinary capability with expertise in small public 
     water system technology management and research.
       ``(F) The grant recipient shall have a demonstrated 
     capability to disseminate the results of small public water 
     system technology research and training programs through an 
     interdisciplinary continuing education program.
       ``(G) The projects that the grant recipient proposes to 
     carry out under the grant are necessary and appropriate.
       ``(H) The grant recipient has regional support beyond the 
     host institution.
       ``(I) The grant recipient shall include the participation 
     of water resources research institutes established under 
     section 104 of the Water Resources Research Act of 1984 (42 
     U.S.C. 10303).
       ``(5) Alaska.--For purposes of this subsection, the State 
     of Alaska shall be considered to be a region.
       ``(6) Consortia of states.--At least 2 of the grants under 
     this subsection shall be made to consortia of States with low 
     population densities. In this paragraph, the term `consortium 
     of States with low population densities' means a consortium 
     of States, each State of which has an average population 
     density of less than 12.3 persons per square mile, based on 
     data for 1993 from the Bureau of the Census.
       ``(7) Additional considerations.--At least one center 
     established under this subsection shall focus primarily on 
     the development and evaluation of new technologies and new 
     combinations of existing technologies that are likely to 
     provide more reliable or lower cost options for providing 
     safe drinking water. This center shall be located in a 
     geographic region of the country with a high density of small 
     systems, at a university with an established record of 
     developing and piloting small treatment technologies in 
     cooperation with industry, States, communities, and water 
     system associations.
       ``(8) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to make grants under this 
     subsection $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 
     2003.''.

     SEC. 13. VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS.

       (a) Technology and Treatment Techniques for Systems Issued 
     Variances.--The second sentence of section 1415(a)(1)(A) (42 
     U.S.C. 300g-4(a)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``only be issued to a system after the 
     system's application of'' and inserting ``be issued to a 
     system on condition that the system install''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and based upon an evaluation satisfactory to 
     the State that indicates that alternative sources of water 
     are not reasonably available to the system''.
       (b) Exemptions.--Section 1416 (42 U.S.C. 300g-5) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) by inserting after ``(which may include economic 
     factors'' the following: ``, including qualification of the 
     public water system as a system serving a disadvantaged 
     community pursuant to section 1473(e)(1)''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``treatment technique requirement,'' 
     the following: ``or to implement measures to develop an 
     alternative source of water supply,'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)(A)--

[[Page S 17708]]

       (A) by striking ``(including increments of progress)'' and 
     inserting ``(including increments of progress or measures to 
     develop an alternative source of water supply)''; and
       (B) by striking ``requirement and treatment'' and inserting 
     ``requirement or treatment''; and
       (3) in subsection (b)(2)--
       (A) by striking ``(except as provided in subparagraph 
     (B))'' in subparagraph (A) and all that follows through ``3 
     years after the date of the issuance of the exemption if'' in 
     subparagraph (B) and inserting the following: ``not later 
     than 3 years after the otherwise applicable compliance date 
     established in section 1412(b)(10).
       ``(B) No exemption shall be granted unless'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ``within the period 
     of such exemption'' and inserting ``prior to the date 
     established pursuant to section 1412(b)(10)'';
       (C) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by inserting after ``such 
     financial assistance'' the following: ``or assistance 
     pursuant to part G, or any other Federal or State program is 
     reasonably likely to be available within the period of the 
     exemption'';
       (D) in subparagraph (C)--
       (i) by striking ``500 service connections'' and inserting 
     ``a population of 3,300''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, but not to exceed a total of 6 
     years,'' after ``for one or more additional 2-year periods''; 
     and
       (E) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Limitation.--A public water system may not receive an 
     exemption under this section if the system was granted a 
     variance under section 1415(e).''.

     SEC. 14. SMALL SYSTEMS; TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Small System Variances.--Section 1415 (42 U.S.C. 300g-
     4) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Small System Variances.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator (or a State with 
     primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems 
     under section 1413) may grant to a public water system 
     serving a population of 10,000 or fewer (referred to in this 
     subsection as a `small system') a variance under this 
     subsection for compliance with a requirement specifying a 
     maximum contaminant level or treatment technique contained in 
     a national primary drinking water regulation, if the variance 
     meets each requirement of this subsection.
       ``(2) Availability of variances.--A small system may 
     receive a variance under this subsection if the system 
     installs, operates, and maintains, in accordance with 
     guidance or regulations issued by the Administrator, 
     treatment technology that is feasible for small systems as 
     determined by the Administrator pursuant to section 
     1412(b)(15).
       ``(3) Conditions for granting variances.--A variance under 
     this subsection shall be available only to a system--
       ``(A) that cannot afford to comply, in accordance with 
     affordability criteria established by the Administrator (or 
     the State in the case of a State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413), with a national primary 
     drinking water regulation, including compliance through--
       ``(i) treatment;
       ``(ii) alternative source of water supply; or
       ``(iii) restructuring or consolidation (unless the 
     Administrator (or the State in the case of a State that has 
     primary enforcement responsibility under section 1413) makes 
     a written determination that restructuring or consolidation 
     is not feasible or appropriate based on other specified 
     public policy considerations); and
       ``(B) for which the Administrator (or the State in the case 
     of a State that has primary enforcement responsibility under 
     section 1413) determines that the terms of the variance 
     ensure adequate protection of human health, considering the 
     quality of the source water for the system and the removal 
     efficiencies and expected useful life of the treatment 
     technology required by the variance.
       ``(4) Applications.--An application for a variance for a 
     national primary drinking water regulation under this 
     subsection shall be submitted to the Administrator (or the 
     State in the case of a State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413) not later than the date 
     that is the later of--
       ``(A) 3 years after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection; or
       ``(B) 1 year after the compliance date of the national 
     primary drinking water regulation as established under 
     section 1412(b)(10) for which a variance is requested.
       ``(5) Variance review and decision.--
       ``(A) Timetable.--The Administrator (or the State in the 
     case of a State that has primary enforcement responsibility 
     under section 1413) shall grant or deny a variance not later 
     than 1 year after the date of receipt of the application.
       ``(B) Penalty moratorium.--Each public water system that 
     submits a timely application for a variance under this 
     subsection shall not be subject to a penalty in an 
     enforcement action under section 1414 for a violation of a 
     maximum contaminant level or treatment technique in the 
     national primary drinking water regulation with respect to 
     which the variance application was submitted prior to the 
     date of a decision to grant or deny the variance.
       ``(6) Compliance schedules.--
       ``(A) Variances.--A variance granted under this subsection 
     shall require compliance with the conditions of the variance 
     not later than 3 years after the date on which the variance 
     is granted, except that the Administrator (or the State in 
     the case of a State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413) may allow up to 2 
     additional years to comply with a treatment technique, secure 
     an alternative source of water, or restructure if the 
     Administrator (or the State) determines that additional time 
     is necessary for capital improvements, or to allow for 
     financial assistance provided pursuant to part G or any other 
     Federal or State program.
       ``(B) Denied applications.--If the Administrator (or the 
     State in the case of a State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413) denies a variance 
     application under this subsection, the public water system 
     shall come into compliance with the requirements of the 
     national primary drinking water regulation for which the 
     variance was requested not later than 4 years after the date 
     on which the national primary drinking water regulation was 
     promulgated.
       ``(7) Duration of variances.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator (or the State in the 
     case of a State that has primary enforcement responsibility 
     under section 1413) shall review each variance granted under 
     this subsection not less often than every 5 years after the 
     compliance date established in the variance to determine 
     whether the system remains eligible for the variance and is 
     conforming to each condition of the variance.
       ``(B) Revocation of variances.--The Administrator (or the 
     State in the case of a State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413) shall revoke a variance in 
     effect under this subsection if the Administrator (or the 
     State) determines that--
       ``(i) the system is no longer eligible for a variance;
       ``(ii) the system has failed to comply with any term or 
     condition of the variance, other than a reporting or 
     monitoring requirement, unless the failure is caused by 
     circumstances outside the control of the system; or
       ``(iii) the terms of the variance do not ensure adequate 
     protection of human health, considering the quality of source 
     water available to the system and the removal efficiencies 
     and expected useful life of the treatment technology required 
     by the variance.
       ``(8) Ineligibility for variances.--A variance shall not be 
     available under this subsection for--
       ``(A) any maximum contaminant level or treatment technique 
     for a contaminant with respect to which a national primary 
     drinking water regulation was promulgated prior to January 1, 
     1986; or
       ``(B) a national primary drinking water regulation for a 
     microbial contaminant (including a bacterium, virus, or other 
     organism) or an indicator or treatment technique for a 
     microbial contaminant.
       ``(9) Regulations and guidance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection and in consultation with the 
     States, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations for 
     variances to be granted under this subsection. The 
     regulations shall, at a minimum, specify--
       ``(i) procedures to be used by the Administrator or a State 
     to grant or deny variances, including requirements for 
     notifying the Administrator and consumers of the public water 
     system applying for a variance and requirements for a public 
     hearing on the variance before the variance is granted;
       ``(ii) requirements for the installation and proper 
     operation of treatment technology that is feasible (pursuant 
     to section 1412(b)(15)) for small systems and the financial 
     and technical capability to operate the treatment system, 
     including operator training and certification;
       ``(iii) eligibility criteria for a variance for each 
     national primary drinking water regulation, including 
     requirements for the quality of the source water (pursuant to 
     section 1412(b)(15)(A)); and
       ``(iv) information requirements for variance applications.
       ``(B) Affordability criteria.--Not later than 18 months 
     after the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     Amendments of 1995, the Administrator, in consultation with 
     the States and the Rural Utilities Service of the Department 
     of Agriculture, shall publish information to assist the 
     States in developing affordability criteria. The 
     affordability criteria shall be reviewed by the States not 
     less often than every 5 years to determine if changes are 
     needed to the criteria.
       ``(10) Review by the administrator.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall periodically 
     review the program of each State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility for public water systems under section 1413 
     with respect to variances to determine whether the variances 
     granted by the State comply with the requirements of this 
     subsection. With respect to affordability, the determination 
     of the Administrator shall be limited to whether the 
     variances granted by the State comply with the affordability 
     criteria developed by the State.
       ``(B) Notice and publication.--If the Administrator 
     determines that variances granted by a State are not in 
     compliance with affordability criteria developed by the State 
     and the requirements of this subsection, the Administrator 
     shall notify the State in writing of the deficiencies and 
     make public the determination.
       ``(C) Objections to variances.--
       ``(i) By the administrator.--The Administrator may review 
     and object to any variance proposed to be granted by a State, 
     if 

[[Page S 17709]]
     the objection is communicated to the State not later than 90 days after 
     the State proposes to grant the variance. If the 
     Administrator objects to the granting of a variance, the 
     Administrator shall notify the State in writing of each basis 
     for the objection and propose a modification to the variance 
     to resolve the concerns of the Administrator. The State shall 
     make the recommended modification or respond in writing to 
     each objection. If the State issues the variance without 
     resolving the concerns of the Administrator, the 
     Administrator may overturn the State decision to grant the 
     variance if the Administrator determines that the State 
     decision does not comply with this subsection.
       ``(ii) Petition by consumers.--Not later than 30 days after 
     a State with primary enforcement responsibility for public 
     water systems under section 1413 proposes to grant a variance 
     for a public water system, any person served by the system 
     may petition the Administrator to object to the granting of a 
     variance. The Administrator shall respond to the petition not 
     later than 60 days after the receipt of the petition. The 
     State shall not grant the variance during the 60-day period. 
     The petition shall be based on comments made by the 
     petitioner during public review of the variance by the 
     State.''.
       (b) Technical Assistance.--Section 1442(g) (42 U.S.C. 300j-
     1(g)) is amended--
       (1) in the second sentence, by inserting ``and multi-State 
     regional technical assistance'' after `` `circuit-rider' ''; 
     and
       (2) by striking the third sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``The Administrator shall ensure that funds made 
     available for technical assistance pursuant to this 
     subsection are allocated among the States equally. Each 
     nonprofit organization receiving assistance under this 
     subsection shall consult with the State in which the 
     assistance is to be expended or otherwise made available 
     before using the assistance to undertake activities to carry 
     out this subsection. There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this subsection $15,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 1992 through 2003.''.

     SEC. 15. CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT; FINANCE CENTERS.

       Part B (42 U.S.C. 300g et seq.) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:


                         ``CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT

       ``Sec. 1418. (a) State Authority for New Systems.--Each 
     State shall obtain the legal authority or other means to 
     ensure that all new community water systems and new 
     nontransient, noncommunity water systems commencing operation 
     after October 1, 1998, demonstrate technical, managerial, and 
     financial capacity with respect to each national primary 
     drinking water regulation in effect, or likely to be in 
     effect, on the date of commencement of operations.
       ``(b) Systems in Significant Noncompliance.--
       ``(1) List.--Beginning not later than 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this section, each State shall prepare, 
     periodically update, and submit to the Administrator a list 
     of community water systems and nontransient, noncommunity 
     water systems that have a history of significant 
     noncompliance with this title (as defined in guidelines 
     issued prior to the date of enactment of this section or any 
     revisions of the guidelines that have been made in 
     consultation with the States) and, to the extent practicable, 
     the reasons for noncompliance.
       ``(2) Report.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section and as part of the capacity 
     development strategy of the State, each State shall report to 
     the Administrator on the success of enforcement mechanisms 
     and initial capacity development efforts in assisting the 
     public water systems listed under paragraph (1) to improve 
     technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
       ``(c) Capacity Development Strategy.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, each State shall develop and 
     implement a strategy to assist public water systems in 
     acquiring and maintaining technical, managerial, and 
     financial capacity.
       ``(2) Content.--In preparing the capacity development 
     strategy, the State shall consider, solicit public comment 
     on, and include as appropriate--
       ``(A) the methods or criteria that the State will use to 
     identify and prioritize the public water systems most in need 
     of improving technical, managerial, and financial capacity;
       ``(B) a description of the institutional, regulatory, 
     financial, tax, or legal factors at the Federal, State, or 
     local level that encourage or impair capacity development;
       ``(C) a description of how the State will use the 
     authorities and resources of this title or other means to--
       ``(i) assist public water systems in complying with 
     national primary drinking water regulations;
       ``(ii) encourage the development of partnerships between 
     public water systems to enhance the technical, managerial, 
     and financial capacity of the systems; and
       ``(iii) assist public water systems in the training and 
     certification of operators;
       ``(D) a description of how the State will establish a 
     baseline and measure improvements in capacity with respect to 
     national primary drinking water regulations and State 
     drinking water law; and
       ``(E) an identification of the persons that have an 
     interest in and are involved in the development and 
     implementation of the capacity development strategy 
     (including all appropriate agencies of Federal, State, and 
     local governments, private and nonprofit public water 
     systems, and public water system customers).
       ``(3) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which a State first adopts a capacity development strategy 
     under this subsection, and every 3 years thereafter, the head 
     of the State agency that has primary responsibility to carry 
     out this title in the State shall submit to the Governor a 
     report that shall also be available to the public on the 
     efficacy of the strategy and progress made toward improving 
     the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of public 
     water systems in the State.
       ``(d) Federal Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall support the 
     States in developing capacity development strategies.
       ``(2) Informational assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall--
       ``(i) conduct a review of State capacity development 
     efforts in existence on the date of enactment of this section 
     and publish information to assist States and public water 
     systems in capacity development efforts; and
       ``(ii) initiate a partnership with States, public water 
     systems, and the public to develop information for States on 
     recommended operator certification requirements.
       ``(B) Publication of information.--The Administrator shall 
     publish the information developed through the partnership 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) not later than 18 months after the 
     date of enactment of this section.
       ``(3) Variances and exemptions.--Based on information 
     obtained under subsection (c)(2)(B), the Administrator shall, 
     as appropriate, modify regulations concerning variances and 
     exemptions for small public water systems to ensure 
     flexibility in the use of the variances and exemptions. 
     Nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted, construed, or 
     applied to affect or alter the requirements of section 1415 
     or 1416.
       ``(4) Promulgation of drinking water regulations.--In 
     promulgating a national primary drinking water regulation, 
     the Administrator shall include an analysis of the likely 
     effect of compliance with the regulation on the technical, 
     financial, and managerial capacity of public water systems.
       ``(5) Guidance for new systems.--Not later than 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this section, the 
     Administrator shall publish guidance developed in 
     consultation with the States describing legal authorities and 
     other means to ensure that all new community water systems 
     and new nontransient, noncommunity water systems demonstrate 
     technical, managerial, and financial capacity with respect to 
     national primary drinking water regulations.
       ``(e) Environmental Finance Centers.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall support the 
     network of university-based Environmental Finance Centers in 
     providing training and technical assistance to State and 
     local officials in developing capacity of public water 
     systems.
       ``(2) National capacity development clearinghouse.--Within 
     the Environmental Finance Center network in existence on the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall 
     establish a national public water systems capacity 
     development clearinghouse to receive, coordinate, and 
     disseminate research and reports on projects funded under 
     this title and from other sources with respect to developing, 
     improving, and maintaining technical, financial, and 
     managerial capacity at public water systems to Federal and 
     State agencies, universities, water suppliers, and other 
     interested persons.
       ``(3) Capacity development techniques.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Environmental Finance Centers shall 
     develop and test managerial, financial, and institutional 
     techniques--
       ``(i) to ensure that new public water systems have the 
     technical, managerial, and financial capacity before 
     commencing operation;
       ``(ii) to identify public water systems in need of capacity 
     development; and
       ``(iii) to bring public water systems with a history of 
     significant noncompliance with national primary drinking 
     water regulations into compliance.
       ``(B) Techniques.--The techniques may include capacity 
     assessment methodologies, manual and computer-based public 
     water system rate models and capital planning models, public 
     water system consolidation procedures, and regionalization 
     models.
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (e) 
     $2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 2003.''.

     SEC. 16. OPERATOR AND LABORATORY CERTIFICATION.

       Section 1442 (42 U.S.C. 300j-1) is amended by inserting 
     after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Certification of Operators and Laboratories.--
       ``(1) Requirement.--Beginning 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995--
       ``(A) no assistance may be provided to a public water 
     system under part G unless the system has entered into an 
     enforceable commitment with the State providing that any 
     person who operates the system will be trained and certified 
     according to requirements established by the Administrator or 


[[Page S 17710]]
     the State (in the case of a State with primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413) not later than the date of 
     completion of the capital project for which the assistance is 
     provided; and
       ``(B) a public water system that has received assistance 
     under part G may be operated only by a person who has been 
     trained and certified according to requirements established 
     by the Administrator or the State (in the case of a State 
     with primary enforcement responsibility under section 1413).
       ``(2) Guidelines.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
     1995 and after consultation with the States, the 
     Administrator shall publish information to assist States in 
     carrying out paragraph (1). In the case of a State with 
     primary enforcement responsibility under section 1413 or any 
     other State that has established a training program that is 
     consistent with the guidance issued under this paragraph, the 
     authority to prescribe the appropriate level of training for 
     certification for all systems shall be solely the 
     responsibility of the State. The guidance issued under this 
     paragraph shall also include information to assist States in 
     certifying laboratories engaged in testing for the purpose of 
     compliance with sections 1445 and 1401(1).
       ``(3) Noncompliance.--If a public water system in a State 
     is not operated in accordance with paragraph (1), the 
     Administrator is authorized to withhold from funds that would 
     otherwise be allocated to the State under section 1472 or 
     require the repayment of an amount equal to the amount of any 
     assistance under part G provided to the public water 
     system.''.

     SEC. 17. SOURCE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION PARTNERSHIPS.

       Part B (42 U.S.C. 300g et seq.) (as amended by section 15) 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following:


         ``source water quality protection partnership program

       ``Sec. 1419. (a) Source Water Area Delineations.--Except as 
     provided in subsection (c), not later than 5 years after the 
     date of enactment of this section, and after an opportunity 
     for public comment, each State shall--
       ``(1) delineate (directly or through delegation) the source 
     water protection areas for community water systems in the 
     State using hydrogeologic information considered to be 
     reasonably available and appropriate by the State; and
       ``(2) conduct, to the extent practicable, vulnerability 
     assessments in source water areas determined to be a priority 
     by the State, including, to the extent practicable, 
     identification of risks in source water protection areas to 
     drinking water.
       ``(b) Alternative Delineations and Vulnerability 
     Assessments.--For the purposes of satisfying the requirements 
     of subsection (a), a State may use delineations and 
     vulnerability assessments conducted for--
       ``(1) ground water sources under a State wellhead 
     protection program developed pursuant to section 1428;
       ``(2) surface or ground water sources under a State 
     pesticide management plan developed pursuant to the Pesticide 
     and Ground Water State Management Plan Regulation (subparts I 
     and J of part 152 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations), 
     promulgated under section 3(d) of the Federal Insecticide, 
     Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a(d)); or
       ``(3) surface water sources under a State watershed 
     initiative or to satisfy the watershed criterion for 
     determining if filtration is required under the Surface Water 
     Treatment Rule (section 141.70 of title 40, Code of Federal 
     Regulations).
       ``(c) Funding.--To carry out the delineations and 
     assessments described in subsection (a), a State may use 
     funds made available for that purpose pursuant to section 
     1473(f). If funds available under that section are 
     insufficient to meet the minimum requirements of subsection 
     (a), the State shall establish a priority-based schedule for 
     the delineations and assessments within available resources.
       ``(d) Petition Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--A State may establish a program under 
     which an owner or operator of a community water system in the 
     State, or a municipal or local government or political 
     subdivision of a government in the State, may submit a source 
     water quality protection partnership petition to the State 
     requesting that the State assist in the local development of 
     a voluntary, incentive-based partnership, among the owner, 
     operator, or government and other persons likely to be 
     affected by the recommendations of the partnership, to--
       ``(i) reduce the presence in drinking water of contaminants 
     that may be addressed by a petition by considering the 
     origins of the contaminants, including to the maximum extent 
     practicable the specific activities that affect the drinking 
     water supply of a community;
       ``(ii) obtain financial or technical assistance necessary 
     to facilitate establishment of a partnership, or to develop 
     and implement recommendations of a partnership for the 
     protection of source water to assist in the provision of 
     drinking water that complies with national primary drinking 
     water regulations with respect to contaminants addressed by a 
     petition; and
       ``(iii) develop recommendations regarding voluntary and 
     incentive-based strategies for the long-term protection of 
     the source water of community water systems.
       ``(B) State determination.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this section, each State shall provide 
     public notice and solicit public comment on the question of 
     whether to develop a source water quality protection 
     partnership petition program in the State, and publicly 
     announce the determination of the State thereafter. If so 
     requested by any public water system or local governmental 
     entity, prior to making the determination, the State shall 
     hold at least one public hearing to assess the level of 
     interest in the State for development and implementation of a 
     State source water quality partnership petition program.
       ``(C) Funding.--Each State may--
       ``(i) use funds set aside pursuant to section 1473(f) by 
     the State to carry out a program described in subparagraph 
     (A), including assistance to voluntary local partnerships for 
     the development and implementation of partnership 
     recommendations for the protection of [source water,] source 
     water such as source water quality assessment, contingency 
     plans, and demonstration projects for partners within a 
     source water area delineated under subsection (a); and
       ``(ii) provide assistance in response to a petition 
     submitted under this subsection using funds referred to in 
     subsections (e)(2)(B) and (g).
       ``(2) Objectives.--The objectives of a petition submitted 
     under this subsection shall be to--
       ``(A) facilitate the local development of voluntary, 
     incentive-based partnerships among owners and operators of 
     community water systems, governments, and other persons in 
     source water areas; and
       ``(B) obtain assistance from the State in directing or 
     redirecting resources under Federal or State water quality 
     programs to implement the recommendations of the partnerships 
     to address the origins of drinking water contaminants that 
     may be addressed by a petition (including to the maximum 
     extent practicable the specific activities) that affect the 
     drinking water supply of a community.
       ``(3) Contaminants addressed by a petition.--A petition 
     submitted to a State under this section may address only 
     those contaminants--
       ``(A) that are pathogenic organisms for which a national 
     primary drinking water regulation has been established or is 
     required under section 1412(b)(2)(C); or
       ``(B) for which a national primary drinking water 
     regulation has been promulgated or proposed and--
       ``(i) that are detected in the community water system for 
     which the petition is submitted at levels above the maximum 
     contaminant level; or
       ``(ii) that are detected by adequate monitoring methods at 
     levels that are not reliably and consistently below the 
     maximum contaminant level.
       ``(4) Contents.--A petition submitted under this subsection 
     shall, at a minimum--
       ``(A) include a delineation of the source water area in the 
     State that is the subject of the petition;
       ``(B) identify, to the maximum extent practicable, the 
     origins of the drinking water contaminants that may be 
     addressed by a petition (including to the maximum extent 
     practicable the specific activities contributing to the 
     presence of the contaminants) in the source water area 
     delineated under subparagraph (A);
       ``(C) identify any deficiencies in information that will 
     impair the development of recommendations by the voluntary 
     local partnership to address drinking water contaminants that 
     may be addressed by a petition;
       ``(D) specify the efforts made to establish the voluntary 
     local partnership and obtain the participation of--
       ``(i) the municipal or local government or other political 
     subdivision of the State with jurisdiction over the source 
     water area delineated under subparagraph (A); and
       ``(ii) each person in the source water area delineated 
     under subparagraph (A)--

       ``(I) who is likely to be affected by recommendations of 
     the voluntary local partnership; and
       ``(II) whose participation is essential to the success of 
     the partnership;

       ``(E) outline how the voluntary local partnership has or 
     will, during development and implementation of 
     recommendations of the voluntary local partnership, identify, 
     recognize and take into account any voluntary or other 
     activities already being undertaken by persons in the source 
     water area delineated under subparagraph (A) under Federal or 
     State law to reduce the likelihood that contaminants will 
     occur in drinking water at levels of public health concern; 
     and
       ``(F) specify the technical, financial, or other assistance 
     that the voluntary local partnership requests of the State to 
     develop the partnership or to implement recommendations of 
     the partnership.
       ``(e) Approval or Disapproval of Petitions.--
       ``(1) In general.--After providing notice and an 
     opportunity for public comment on a petition submitted under 
     subsection (d), the State shall approve or disapprove the 
     petition, in whole or in part, not later than 120 days after 
     the date of submission of the petition.
       ``(2) Approval.--The State may approve a petition if the 
     petition meets the requirements established under subsection 
     (d). The notice of approval shall, at a minimum, include--

[[Page S 17711]]

       ``(A) an identification of technical, financial, or other 
     assistance that the State will provide to assist in 
     addressing the drinking water contaminants that may be 
     addressed by a petition based on--
       ``(i) the relative priority of the public health concern 
     identified in the petition with respect to the other water 
     quality needs identified by the State;
       ``(ii) any necessary coordination that the State will 
     perform of the program established under this section with 
     programs implemented or planned by other States under this 
     section; and
       ``(iii) funds available (including funds available from a 
     State revolving loan fund established under title VI of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) 
     or part G and the appropriate distribution of the funds to 
     assist in implementing the recommendations of the 
     partnership;
       ``(B) a description of technical or financial assistance 
     pursuant to Federal and State programs that is available to 
     assist in implementing recommendations of the partnership in 
     the petition, including--
       ``(i) any program established under the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);
       ``(ii) the program established under section 6217 of the 
     Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (16 
     U.S.C. 1455b);
       ``(iii) the agricultural water quality protection program 
     established under chapter 2 of subtitle D of title XII of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3838 et seq.);
       ``(iv) the sole source aquifer protection program 
     established under section 1427;
       ``(v) the community wellhead protection program established 
     under section 1428;
       ``(vi) any pesticide or ground water management plan; [and]
       ``(vii) any voluntary agricultural resource management plan 
     or voluntary whole farm or whole ranch management plan 
     developed and implemented under a process established by the 
     Secretary of Agriculture; and
       [``(vii)] ``(viii) any abandoned well closure program; and
       ``(C) a description of activities that will be undertaken 
     to coordinate Federal and State programs to respond to the 
     petition.
       ``(3) Disapproval.--If the State disapproves a petition 
     submitted under subsection (d), the State shall notify the 
     entity submitting the petition in writing of the reasons for 
     disapproval. A petition may be resubmitted at any time if--
       ``(A) new information becomes available;
       ``(B) conditions affecting the source water that is the 
     subject of the petition change; or
       ``(C) modifications are made in the type of assistance 
     being requested.
       ``(f) Eligibility for Water Quality Protection 
     Assistance.--A sole source aquifer plan developed under 
     section 1427, a wellhead protection plan developed under 
     section 1428, and a source water quality protection measure 
     assisted in response to a petition submitted under subsection 
     (d) shall be eligible for assistance under the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), including 
     assistance provided under section 319 and title VI of such 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1329 and 1381 et seq.), if the project, 
     measure, or practice would be eligible for assistance under 
     such Act. In the case of funds made available under such 
     section 319 to assist a source water quality protection 
     measure in response to a petition submitted under subsection 
     (d), the funds may be used only for a measure that addresses 
     nonpoint source pollution.
       ``(g) Grants To Support State Programs.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator may make a grant to 
     each State that establishes a program under this section that 
     is approved under paragraph (2). The amount of each grant 
     shall not exceed 50 percent of the cost of administering the 
     program for the year in which the grant is available.
       ``(2) Approval.--In order to receive grant assistance under 
     this subsection, a State shall submit to the Administrator 
     for approval a plan for a source water quality protection 
     partnership program that is consistent with the guidance 
     published under paragraph (3). The Administrator shall 
     approve the plan if the plan is consistent with the guidance 
     published under paragraph (3).
       ``(3) Guidance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Administrator, in consultation 
     with the States, shall publish guidance to assist--
       ``(i) States in the development of a source water quality 
     protection partnership program; and
       ``(ii) municipal or local governments or political 
     subdivisions of the governments and community water systems 
     in the development of source water quality protection 
     partnerships and in the assessment of source water quality.
       ``(B) Contents of the guidance.--The guidance shall, at a 
     minimum--
       ``(i) recommend procedures for the approval or disapproval 
     by a State of a petition submitted under subsection (d);
       ``(ii) recommend procedures for the submission of petitions 
     developed under subsection (d);
       ``(iii) recommend criteria for the [delineation] assessment 
     of source water areas within a State;
       ``(iv) describe technical or financial assistance pursuant 
     to Federal and State programs that is available to address 
     the contamination of sources of drinking water and to develop 
     and respond to petitions submitted under subsection (d); and
       ``(v) specify actions taken by the Administrator to ensure 
     the coordination of the programs referred to in clause (iv) 
     with the goals and objectives of this title to the maximum 
     extent practicable.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.-- There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     such sums as are necessary for fiscal years 1995 through 
     2003. Each State with a plan for a program approved under 
     paragraph (2) shall receive an equitable portion of the funds 
     available for any fiscal year.
       ``(h) Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this section--
       ``(1)(A) creates or conveys new authority to a State, 
     political subdivision of a State, or community water system 
     for any new regulatory measure; or
       ``(B) limits any [existing] authority of a State, political 
     subdivision, or community water system; or
       ``(2) precludes a community water system, municipal or 
     local government, or political subdivision of a government 
     from locally developing and carrying out a voluntary, 
     incentive-based, source water quality protection partnership 
     to address the origins of drinking water contaminants of 
     public health concern.''.

     SEC. 18. STATE PRIMACY; STATE FUNDING.

       (a) State Primary Enforcement Responsibility.--Section 1413 
     (42 U.S.C. 300g-2) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (1) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(1) has adopted drinking water regulations that are no 
     less stringent than the national primary drinking water 
     regulations promulgated by the Administrator under section 
     1412 not later than 2 years after the date on which the 
     regulations are promulgated by the Administrator;''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Interim Primary Enforcement Authority.--A State that 
     has primary enforcement authority under this section with 
     respect to each existing national primary drinking water 
     regulation shall be considered to have primary enforcement 
     authority with respect to each new or revised national 
     primary drinking water regulation during the period beginning 
     on the effective date of a regulation adopted and submitted 
     by the State with respect to the new or revised national 
     primary drinking water regulation in accordance with 
     subsection (b)(1) and ending at such time as the 
     Administrator makes a determination under subsection (b)(2) 
     with respect to the regulation.''.
       (b) Public Water System Supervision Program.--Section 
     1443(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-2(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``(3) A grant'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(3) Amount of grant.--
       ``(A) In general.--A grant''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Determination of costs.--To determine the costs of a 
     grant recipient pursuant to this paragraph, the Administrator 
     shall, in cooperation with the States and not later than 180 
     days after the date of enactment of this subparagraph, 
     establish a resource model for the public water system 
     supervision program and review and revise the model as 
     necessary.
       ``(C) State cost adjustments.--The Administrator shall 
     revise cost estimates used in the resource model for any 
     particular State to reflect costs more likely to be 
     experienced in that State, if--
       ``(i) the State requests the modification; and
       ``(ii) the revised estimates ensure full and effective 
     administration of the public water system supervision program 
     in the State and the revised estimates do not overstate the 
     resources needed to administer the program.'';
       (2) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end a period and the 
     following:

     ``For the purpose of making grants under paragraph (1), there 
     are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary 
     for each of fiscal years 1992 and 1993 and $100,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 1994 through 2003.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) Reservation of funds by the administrator.--If the 
     Administrator assumes the primary enforcement responsibility 
     of a State public water system supervision program, the 
     Administrator may reserve from funds made available pursuant 
     to this subsection, an amount equal to the amount that would 
     otherwise have been provided to the State pursuant to this 
     subsection. The Administrator shall use the funds reserved 
     pursuant to this paragraph to ensure the full and effective 
     administration of a public water system supervision program 
     in the State.
       ``(9) State loan funds.--
       ``(A) Reservation of funds.--For any fiscal year for which 
     the amount made available to the Administrator by 
     appropriations to carry out this subsection is less than the 
     amount that the Administrator determines is necessary to 
     supplement funds made available pursuant to paragraph (8) to 
     ensure the full and effective administration of a public 
     water system supervision program in a State (based on the 
     resource model developed under paragraph (3)(B)), the 
     Administrator may reserve from the funds made available to 
     the State under section 1472 an amount that is equal to the 
     amount of the shortfall.

[[Page S 17712]]

       ``(B) Duty of administrator.--If the Administrator reserves 
     funds from the allocation of a State under subparagraph (A), 
     the Administrator shall carry out in the State--
       ``(i) each of the activities that would be required of the 
     State if the State had primary enforcement authority under 
     section 1413; and
       ``(ii) each of the activities required of the State by this 
     title, other than part C, but not made a condition of the 
     authority.''.

     SEC. 19. MONITORING AND INFORMATION GATHERING.

       (a) Regulated Contaminants.--
       (1) Review of existing requirements.--Section 1445(a)(1) 
     (42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)(1)) is amended--
       (A) by designating the first and second sentences as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Review.--The Administrator shall not later than 2 
     years after the date of enactment of this subparagraph, after 
     consultation with public health experts, representatives of 
     the general public, and officials of State and local 
     governments, review the monitoring requirements for not fewer 
     than 12 contaminants identified by the Administrator, and 
     promulgate any necessary modifications.''.
       (2) Alternative monitoring programs.--Section 1445(a)(1) 
     (42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)(1)) (as amended by paragraph (1)(B)) is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) State-established requirements.--
       ``(i) In general.--Each State with primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413 may, by rule, establish 
     alternative monitoring requirements for any national primary 
     drinking water regulation, other than a regulation applicable 
     to a microbial contaminant (or an indicator of a microbial 
     contaminant). The alternative monitoring requirements 
     established by a State under this clause may not take effect 
     for any national primary drinking water regulation until 
     after completion of at least 1 full cycle of monitoring in 
     the State satisfying the requirements of paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) of section 1413(a). The alternative monitoring 
     requirements may be applicable to public water systems or 
     classes of public water systems identified by the State, in 
     lieu of the monitoring requirements that would otherwise be 
     applicable under the regulation, if the alternative 
     monitoring requirements--

       ``(I) are based on use of the best available science 
     conducted in accordance with sound and objective scientific 
     practices and data collected by accepted methods;
       ``(II) are based on the potential for the contaminant to 
     occur in the source water based on use patterns and other 
     relevant characteristics of the contaminant or the systems 
     subject to the requirements;
       ``(III) in the case of a public water system or class of 
     public water systems in which a contaminant has been detected 
     at quantifiable levels that are not reliably and consistently 
     below the maximum contaminant level, include monitoring 
     frequencies that are not less frequent than the frequencies 
     required in the national primary drinking water regulation 
     for the contaminant for a period of 5 years after the 
     detection; and
       ``(IV) in the case of each contaminant formed in the 
     distribution system, are not applicable to public water 
     systems for which treatment is necessary to comply with the 
     national primary drinking water regulation.

       ``(ii) Compliance and enforcement.--The alternative 
     monitoring requirements established by the State shall be 
     adequate to ensure compliance with, and enforcement of, each 
     national primary drinking water regulation. The State may 
     review and update the alternative monitoring requirements as 
     necessary.
       ``(iii) Application of section 1413.--

       ``(I) In general.--Each State establishing alternative 
     monitoring requirements under this subparagraph shall submit 
     the rule to the Administrator as provided in section 
     1413(b)(1). Any requirements for a State to provide 
     information supporting a submission shall be defined only in 
     consultation with the States, and shall address only such 
     information as is necessary to make a decision to approve or 
     disapprove an alternative monitoring rule in accordance with 
     the following sentence. The Administrator shall approve an 
     alternative monitoring rule submitted under this clause for 
     the purposes of section 1413, unless the Administrator 
     determines in writing that the State rule for alternative 
     monitoring does not ensure compliance with, and enforcement 
     of, the national primary drinking water regulation for the 
     contaminant or contaminants to which the rule applies.
       ``(II) Exceptions.--The requirements of section 1413(a)(1) 
     that a rule be no less stringent than the national primary 
     drinking water regulation for the contaminant or contaminants 
     to which the rule applies shall not apply to the decision of 
     the Administrator to approve or disapprove a rule submitted 
     under this clause. Notwithstanding the requirements of 
     section 1413(b)(2), the Administrator shall approve or 
     disapprove a rule submitted under this clause within 180 days 
     of submission. In the absence of a determination to 
     disapprove a rule made by the Administrator within 180 days, 
     the rule shall be deemed to be approved under section 
     1413(b)(2).

       ``(III) Additional considerations.--A State shall be 
     considered to have primary enforcement authority with regard 
     to an alternative monitoring rule, and the rule shall be 
     effective, on a date (determined by the State) any time on or 
     after submission of the rule, consistent with section 
     1413(c). A decision by the Administrator to disapprove an 
     alternative monitoring rule under section 1413 or to withdraw 
     the authority of the State to carry out the rule under clause 
     (iv) may not be the basis for withdrawing primary enforcement 
     responsibility for a national primary drinking water 
     regulation or regulations from the State under section 1413.

       ``(iv) Oversight by the administrator.--The Administrator 
     shall review, not less often than every 5 years, any 
     alternative monitoring requirements established by a State 
     under clause (i) to determine whether the requirements are 
     adequate to ensure compliance with, and enforcement of, 
     national primary drinking water regulations. If the 
     Administrator determines that the alternative monitoring 
     requirements of a State are inadequate with respect to a 
     contaminant, and after providing the State with an 
     opportunity to respond to the determination of the 
     Administrator and to correct any inadequacies, the 
     Administrator may withdraw the authority of the State to 
     carry out the alternative monitoring requirements with 
     respect to the contaminant. If the Administrator withdraws 
     the authority, the monitoring requirements contained in the 
     national primary drinking water regulation for the 
     contaminant shall apply to public water systems in the State.
       ``(v) Nonprimacy states.--The Governor of any State that 
     does not have primary enforcement responsibility under 
     section 1413 on the date of enactment of this clause may 
     submit to the Administrator a request that the Administrator 
     modify the monitoring requirements established by the 
     Administrator and applicable to public water systems in that 
     State. After consultation with the Governor, the 
     Administrator shall modify the requirements for public water 
     systems in that State if the request of the Governor is in 
     accordance with each of the requirements of this subparagraph 
     that apply to alternative monitoring requirements established 
     by States that have primary enforcement responsibility. A 
     decision by the Administrator to approve a request under this 
     clause shall be for a period of 3 years and may subsequently 
     be extended for periods of 5 years.
       ``(vi) Guidance.--The Administrator shall issue guidance in 
     consultation with the States that States may use to develop 
     State-established requirements pursuant to this subparagraph 
     and subparagraph (E). The guidance shall identify options for 
     alternative monitoring designs that meet the criteria 
     identified in clause (i) and the requirements of clause 
     (ii).''.
       (3) Small system monitoring.--Section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 
     300j-4(a)(1)) (as amended by paragraph (2)) is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) Small system monitoring.--The Administrator or a 
     State that has primary enforcement responsibility under 
     section 1413 may modify the monitoring requirements for any 
     contaminant, other than a microbial contaminant or an 
     indicator of a microbial contaminant, a contaminant regulated 
     on the basis of an acute health effect, or a contaminant 
     formed in the treatment process or in the distribution 
     system, to provide that any public water system that serves a 
     population of 10,000 or fewer shall not be required to 
     conduct additional quarterly monitoring during any 3-year 
     period for a specific contaminant if monitoring conducted at 
     the beginning of the period for the contaminant fails to 
     detect the presence of the contaminant in the water supplied 
     by the public water system, and the Administrator or the 
     State determines that the contaminant is unlikely to be 
     detected by further monitoring in the period.''.
       (b) Unregulated Contaminants.--Section 1445(a) (42 U.S.C. 
     300j-4(a)) is amended by striking paragraphs (2) through (8) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Monitoring program for unregulated contaminants.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--The Administrator shall promulgate 
     regulations establishing the criteria for a monitoring 
     program for unregulated contaminants. The regulations shall 
     require monitoring of drinking water supplied by public water 
     systems and shall vary the frequency and schedule for 
     monitoring requirements for systems based on the number of 
     persons served by the system, the source of supply, and the 
     contaminants likely to be found.
       ``(B) Monitoring program for certain unregulated 
     contaminants.--
       ``(i) Initial list.--Not later than 3 years after the date 
     of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 1995 
     and every 5 years thereafter, the Administrator shall issue a 
     list pursuant to subparagraph (A) of not more than 20 
     unregulated contaminants to be monitored by public water 
     systems and to be included in the national drinking water 
     occurrence data base maintained pursuant to paragraph (3).
       ``(ii) Governors' petition.--The Administrator shall 
     include among the list of contaminants for which monitoring 
     is required under this paragraph each contaminant recommended 
     in a petition signed by the Governor of each of 7 or more 
     States, unless the Administrator determines that the action 
     would prevent the listing of other contaminants of a higher 
     public health concern.
       ``(C) Monitoring by large systems.--A public water system 
     that serves a population of more than 10,000 shall conduct 
     monitoring 

[[Page S 17713]]
     for all contaminants listed under subparagraph (B).
       ``(D) Monitoring plan for small and medium systems.--
       ``(i) In general.--Based on the regulations promulgated by 
     the Administrator, each State shall develop a representative 
     monitoring plan to assess the occurrence of unregulated 
     contaminants in public water systems that serve a population 
     of 10,000 or fewer. The plan shall require monitoring for 
     systems representative of different sizes, types, and 
     geographic locations in the State.
       ``(ii) Grants for small system costs.--From funds reserved 
     under section 1478(c), the Administrator shall pay the 
     reasonable cost of such testing and laboratory analysis as 
     are necessary to carry out monitoring under the plan.
       ``(E) Monitoring results.--Each public water system that 
     conducts monitoring of unregulated contaminants pursuant to 
     this paragraph shall provide the results of the monitoring to 
     the primary enforcement authority for the system.
       ``(F) Waiver of monitoring requirement.--The Administrator 
     shall waive the requirement for monitoring for a contaminant 
     under this paragraph in a State, if the State demonstrates 
     that the criteria for listing the contaminant do not apply in 
     that State.
       ``(G) Analytical methods.--The State may use screening 
     methods approved by the Administrator under subsection (h) in 
     lieu of monitoring for particular contaminants under this 
     paragraph.
       ``(H) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this paragraph 
     $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 2003.''.
       (c) National Drinking Water Occurrence Database.--Section 
     1445(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)) (as amended by subsection (b)) 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) National drinking water occurrence database.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, 
     the Administrator shall assemble and maintain a national 
     drinking water occurrence data base, using information on the 
     occurrence of both regulated and unregulated contaminants in 
     public water systems obtained under paragraph (2) and 
     reliable information from other public and private sources.
       ``(B) Use.--The data shall be used by the Administrator in 
     making determinations under section 1412(b)(1) with respect 
     to the occurrence of a contaminant in drinking water at a 
     level of public health concern.
       ``(C) Public recommendations.--The Administrator shall 
     periodically solicit recommendations from the appropriate 
     officials of the National Academy of Sciences and the States, 
     and any person may submit recommendations to the 
     Administrator, with respect to contaminants that should be 
     included in the national drinking water occurrence data base, 
     including recommendations with respect to additional 
     unregulated contaminants that should be listed under 
     paragraph (2). Any recommendation submitted under this clause 
     shall be accompanied by reasonable documentation that--
       ``(i) the contaminant occurs or is likely to occur in 
     drinking water; and
       ``(ii) the contaminant poses a risk to public health.
       ``(D) Public availability.--The information from the data 
     base shall be available to the public in readily accessible 
     form.
       ``(E) Regulated contaminants.--With respect to each 
     contaminant for which a national primary drinking water 
     regulation has been established, the data base shall include 
     information on the detection of the contaminant at a 
     quantifiable level in public water systems (including 
     detection of the contaminant at levels not constituting a 
     violation of the maximum contaminant level for the 
     contaminant).
       ``(F) Unregulated contaminants.--With respect to 
     contaminants for which a national primary drinking water 
     regulation has not been established, the data base shall 
     include--
       ``(i) monitoring information collected by public water 
     systems that serve a population of more than 10,000, as 
     required by the Administrator under paragraph (2);
       ``(ii) monitoring information collected by the States from 
     a representative sampling of public water systems that serve 
     a population of 10,000 or fewer; and
       ``(iii) other reliable and appropriate monitoring 
     information on the occurrence of the contaminants in public 
     water systems that is available to the Administrator.''.
       (d) Information.--
       (1) Monitoring and testing authority.--Subparagraph (A) of 
     section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)(1)) (as designated by 
     subsection (a)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``by accepted methods'' after ``conduct 
     such monitoring''; and
       (B) by striking ``such information as the Administrator may 
     reasonably require'' and all that follows through the period 
     at the end and inserting the following: ``such information as 
     the Administrator may reasonably require--
       ``(i) to assist the Administrator in establishing 
     regulations under this title or to assist the Administrator 
     in determining, on a case-by-case basis, whether the person 
     has acted or is acting in compliance with this title; and
       ``(ii) by regulation to assist the Administrator in 
     determining compliance with national primary drinking water 
     regulations promulgated under section 1412 or in 
     administering any program of financial assistance under this 
     title.

     If the Administrator is requiring monitoring for purposes of 
     testing new or alternative methods, the Administrator may 
     require the use of other than accepted methods.''.
       (2) Screening methods.--Section 1445 (42 U.S.C. 300j-4) (as 
     amended by section 12(c)) is further amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(h) Screening Methods.--The Administrator shall review 
     new analytical methods to screen for regulated contaminants 
     and may approve such methods as are more accurate or cost-
     effective than established reference methods for use in 
     compliance monitoring.''.

     SEC. 20. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.

       Section 1414 (42 U.S.C. 300g-3) is amended by striking 
     subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Notice to Persons Served.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each owner or operator of a public water 
     system shall give notice to the persons served by the 
     system--
       ``(A) of any failure on the part of the public water system 
     to--
       ``(i) comply with an applicable maximum contaminant level 
     or treatment technique requirement of, or a testing procedure 
     prescribed by, a national primary drinking water regulation; 
     or
       ``(ii) perform monitoring required by section 1445(a);
       ``(B) if the public water system is subject to a variance 
     granted under section 1415(a)(1)(A), 1415(a)(2), or 1415(e) 
     for an inability to meet a maximum contaminant level 
     requirement or is subject to an exemption granted under 
     section 1416, of--
       ``(i) the existence of the variance or exemption; and
       ``(ii) any failure to comply with the requirements of any 
     schedule prescribed pursuant to the variance or exemption; 
     and
       ``(C) of the concentration level of any unregulated 
     contaminant for which the Administrator has required public 
     notice pursuant to paragraph (2)(E).
       ``(2) Form, manner, and frequency of notice.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall, by regulation, 
     and after consultation with the States, prescribe the manner, 
     frequency, form, and content for giving notice under this 
     subsection. The regulations shall--
       ``(i) provide for different frequencies of notice based on 
     the differences between violations that are intermittent or 
     infrequent and violations that are continuous or frequent; 
     and
       ``(ii) take into account the seriousness of any potential 
     adverse health effects that may be involved.
       ``(B) State requirements.--
       ``(i) In general.--A State may, by rule, establish 
     alternative notification requirements--

       ``(I) with respect to the form and content of notice given 
     under and in a manner in accordance with subparagraph (C); 
     and
       ``(II) with respect to the form and content of notice given 
     under subparagraph (D).

       ``(ii) Contents.--The alternative requirements shall 
     provide the same type and amount of information as required 
     pursuant to this subsection and regulations issued under 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(iii) Relationship to section 1413.--Nothing in this 
     subparagraph shall be construed or applied to modify the 
     requirements of section 1413.
       ``(C) Violations with potential to have serious adverse 
     effects on human health.--Regulations issued under 
     subparagraph (A) shall specify notification procedures for 
     each violation by a public water system that has the 
     potential to have serious adverse effects on human health as 
     a result of short-term exposure. Each notice of violation 
     provided under this subparagraph shall--
       ``(i) be distributed as soon as practicable after the 
     occurrence of the violation, but not later than 24 hours 
     after the occurrence of the violation;
       ``(ii) provide a clear and readily understandable 
     explanation of--

       ``(I) the violation;
       ``(II) the potential adverse effects on human health;
       ``(III) the steps that the public water system is taking to 
     correct the violation; and
       ``(IV) the necessity of seeking alternative water supplies 
     until the violation is corrected;

       ``(iii) be provided to the Administrator or the head of the 
     State agency that has primary enforcement responsibility 
     under section 1413 as soon as practicable, but not later than 
     24 hours after the occurrence of the violation; and
       ``(iv) as required by the State agency in general 
     regulations of the State agency, or on a case-by-case basis 
     after the consultation referred to in clause (iii), 
     considering the health risks involved--

       ``(I) be provided to appropriate broadcast media;
       ``(II) be prominently published in a newspaper of general 
     circulation serving the area not later than 1 day after 
     distribution of a notice pursuant to clause (i) or the date 
     of publication of the next issue of the newspaper; or

       ``(III) be provided by posting or door-to-door notification 
     in lieu of notification by means of broadcast media or 
     newspaper.

       ``(D) Written notice.--

[[Page S 17714]]

       ``(i) In general.--Regulations issued under subparagraph 
     (A) shall specify notification procedures for violations 
     other than the violations covered by subparagraph (C). The 
     procedures shall specify that a public water system shall 
     provide written notice to each person served by the system by 
     notice--

       ``(I) in the first bill (if any) prepared after the date of 
     occurrence of the violation;
       ``(II) in an annual report issued not later than 1 year 
     after the date of occurrence of the violation; or
       ``(III) by mail or direct delivery as soon as practicable, 
     but not later than 1 year after the date of occurrence of the 
     violation.

       ``(ii) Form and manner of notice.--The Administrator shall 
     prescribe the form and manner of the notice to provide a 
     clear and readily understandable explanation of--

       ``(I) the violation;
       ``(II) any potential adverse health effects; and
       ``(III) the steps that the system is taking to seek 
     alternative water supplies, if any, until the violation is 
     corrected.

       ``(E) Unregulated contaminants.--The Administrator may 
     require the owner or operator of a public water system to 
     give notice to the persons served by the system of the 
     concentration levels of an unregulated contaminant required 
     to be monitored under section 1445(a).
       ``(3) Reports.--
       ``(A) Annual report by state.--
       ``(i) In general.--Not later than January 1, 1997, and 
     annually thereafter, each State that has primary enforcement 
     responsibility under section 1413 shall prepare, make readily 
     available to the public, and submit to the Administrator an 
     annual report on violations of national primary drinking 
     water regulations by public water systems in the State, 
     including violations with respect to--

       ``(I) maximum contaminant levels;
       ``(II) treatment requirements;
       ``(III) variances and exemptions; and
       ``(IV) monitoring requirements determined to be significant 
     by the Administrator after consultation with the States.

       ``(ii) Distribution.--The State shall publish and 
     distribute summaries of the report and indicate where the 
     full report is available for review.
       ``(B) Annual report by administrator.--Not later than July 
     1, 1997, and annually thereafter, the Administrator shall 
     prepare and make available to the public an annual report 
     summarizing and evaluating reports submitted by States 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A) and notices submitted by public 
     water systems serving Indian Tribes provided to the 
     Administrator pursuant to subparagraph (C) or (D) of 
     paragraph (2) and making recommendations concerning the 
     resources needed to improve compliance with this title. The 
     report shall include information about public water system 
     compliance on Indian reservations and about enforcement 
     activities undertaken and financial assistance provided by 
     the Administrator on Indian reservations, and shall make 
     specific recommendations concerning the resources needed to 
     improve compliance with this title on Indian reservations.''.

     SEC. 21. ENFORCEMENT; JUDICIAL REVIEW.

       (a) In General.--Section 1414 (42 U.S.C. 300g-3) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A)--

       (I) in clause (i), by striking ``any national primary 
     drinking water regulation in effect under section 1412'' and 
     inserting ``any applicable requirement''; and
       (II) by striking ``with such regulation or requirement'' 
     and inserting ``with the requirement''; and

       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``regulation or'' and 
     inserting ``applicable''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Enforcement in nonprimacy states.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, on the basis of information 
     available to the Administrator, the Administrator finds, with 
     respect to a period in which a State does not have primary 
     enforcement responsibility for public water systems, that a 
     public water system in the State--
       ``(i) for which a variance under section 1415 or an 
     exemption under section 1416 is not in effect, does not 
     comply with any applicable requirement; or
       ``(ii) for which a variance under section 1415 or an 
     exemption under section 1416 is in effect, does not comply 
     with any schedule or other requirement imposed pursuant to 
     the variance or exemption;

     the Administrator shall issue an order under subsection (g) 
     requiring the public water system to comply with the 
     requirement, or commence a civil action under subsection (b).
       ``(B) Notice.--If the Administrator takes any action 
     pursuant to this paragraph, the Administrator shall notify an 
     appropriate local elected official, if any, with jurisdiction 
     over the public water system of the action prior to the time 
     that the action is taken.'';
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by striking 
     ``a national primary drinking water regulation'' and 
     inserting ``any applicable requirement'';
       (3) in subsection (g)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``regulation, schedule, 
     or other'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``applicable'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in the first sentence--

       (I) by striking ``effect until after notice and opportunity 
     for public hearing and,'' and inserting ``effect,''; and
       (II) by striking ``proposed order'' and inserting 
     ``order''; and

       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``proposed to 
     be''; and
       (C) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Effect of penalty amounts.--In a case in which a 
     civil penalty sought by the Administrator under this 
     paragraph does not exceed $5,000, the penalty shall be 
     assessed by the Administrator after notice and opportunity 
     for a public hearing (unless the person against whom the 
     penalty is assessed requests a hearing on the record in 
     accordance with section 554 of title 5, United States Code). 
     In a case in which a civil penalty sought by the 
     Administrator under this paragraph exceeds $5,000, but does 
     not exceed $25,000, the penalty shall be assessed by the 
     Administrator after notice and opportunity for a hearing on 
     the record in accordance with section 554 of title 5, United 
     States Code.''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``paragraph exceeds 
     $5,000'' and inserting ``subsection for a violation of an 
     applicable requirement exceeds $25,000''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Consolidation Incentive.--
       ``(1) In general.--An owner or operator of a public water 
     system may submit to the State in which the system is located 
     (if the State has primary enforcement responsibility under 
     section 1413) or to the Administrator (if the State does not 
     have primary enforcement responsibility) a plan (including 
     specific measures and schedules) for--
       ``(A) the physical consolidation of the system with 1 or 
     more other systems;
       ``(B) the consolidation of significant management and 
     administrative functions of the system with 1 or more other 
     systems; or
       ``(C) the transfer of ownership of the system that may 
     reasonably be expected to improve drinking water quality.
       ``(2) Consequences of approval.--If the State or the 
     Administrator approves a plan pursuant to paragraph (1), no 
     enforcement action shall be taken pursuant to this part with 
     respect to a specific violation identified in the approved 
     plan prior to the date that is the earlier of the date on 
     which consolidation is completed according to the plan or the 
     date that is 2 years after the plan is approved.
       ``(i) Definition of Applicable Requirement.--In this 
     section, the term `applicable requirement' means--
       ``(1) a requirement of section 1412, 1414, 1415, 1416, 
     1417, 1441, [1442, 1445, 1447, 1463, 1464, or 1471;] or 1445;
       ``(2) a regulation promulgated pursuant to a section 
     referred to in paragraph (1);
       ``(3) a schedule or requirement imposed pursuant to a 
     section referred to in paragraph (1); and
       ``(4) a requirement of, or permit issued under, an 
     applicable State program for which the Administrator has made 
     a determination that the requirements of section 1413 have 
     been satisfied, or an applicable State program approved 
     pursuant to this part.''.
       (b) State Authority for Administrative Penalties.--Section 
     1413(a) (42 U.S.C. 300g-2(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) has adopted authority for administrative penalties 
     (unless the constitution of the State prohibits the adoption 
     of the authority) in a maximum amount--
       ``(A) in the case of a system serving a population of more 
     than 10,000, that is not less than $1,000 per day per 
     violation; and
       ``(B) in the case of any other system, that is adequate to 
     ensure compliance (as determined by the State);

     except that a State may establish a maximum limitation on the 
     total amount of administrative penalties that may be imposed 
     on a public water system per violation.''.
       (c) Judicial Review.--Section 1448(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-7(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2) of the first sentence, by inserting 
     ``final'' after ``any other'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``or issuance of 
     the order'' and inserting ``or any other final Agency 
     action''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following ``In any petition 
     concerning the assessment of a civil penalty pursuant to 
     section 1414(g)(3)(B), the petitioner shall simultaneously 
     send a copy of the complaint by certified mail to the 
     Administrator and the Attorney General. The court shall set 
     aside [or] and remand the penalty order if the court finds 
     that there is not substantial evidence in the record to 
     support the finding of a violation or that the assessment of 
     the penalty by the Administrator constitutes an abuse of 
     discretion.''.

     SEC. 22. FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Subsections (a) and (b) of section 1447 
     (42 U.S.C. 300j-6) are amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Compliance.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each Federal agency shall be subject to, 
     and comply with, all Federal, State, interstate, and local 
     substantive and procedural requirements, administrative 
     authorities, and process and sanctions concerning the 
     provision of safe drinking water 

[[Page S 17715]]
     or underground injection in the same manner, and to the same extent, as 
     any nongovernmental entity is subject to, and shall comply 
     with, the requirements, authorities, and process and 
     sanctions.
       ``(2) Administrative orders and penalties.--The Federal, 
     State, interstate, and local substantive and procedural 
     requirements, administrative authorities, and process and 
     sanctions referred to in paragraph (1) include all 
     administrative orders and all civil and administrative 
     penalties or fines, regardless of whether the penalties or 
     fines are punitive or coercive in nature or are imposed for 
     isolated, intermittent, or continuing violations.
       ``(3) Limited waiver of sovereign immunity.--The United 
     States expressly waives any immunity otherwise applicable to 
     the United States with respect to any requirement, 
     administrative authority, or process or sanction referred to 
     in paragraph (2) (including any injunctive relief, 
     administrative order, or civil or administrative penalty or 
     fine referred to in paragraph (2), or reasonable service 
     charge). The reasonable service charge referred to in the 
     preceding sentence includes--
       ``(A) a fee or charge assessed in connection with the 
     processing, issuance, renewal, or amendment of a permit, 
     variance, or exemption, review of a plan, study, or other 
     document, or inspection or monitoring of a facility; and
       ``(B) any other nondiscriminatory charge that is assessed 
     in connection with a Federal, State, interstate, or local 
     safe drinking water regulatory program.
       ``(4) Civil penalties.--No agent, employee, or officer of 
     the United States shall be personally liable for any civil 
     penalty under this subsection with respect to any act or 
     omission within the scope of the official duties of the 
     agent, employee, or officer.
       ``(5) Criminal sanctions.--An agent, employee, or officer 
     of the United States may be subject to a criminal sanction 
     under a State, interstate, or local law concerning the 
     provision of drinking water or underground injection. No 
     department, agency, or instrumentality of the executive, 
     legislative, or judicial branch of the Federal Government 
     shall be subject to a sanction referred to in the preceding 
     sentence.
       ``(b) Waiver of Compliance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The President may waive compliance with 
     subsection (a) by any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     in the executive branch if the President determines waiving 
     compliance with such subsection to be in the paramount 
     interest of the United States.
       ``(2) Waivers due to lack of appropriations.--No waiver 
     described in paragraph (1) shall be granted due to the lack 
     of an appropriation unless the President has specifically 
     requested the appropriation as part of the budgetary process 
     and Congress has failed to make available the requested 
     appropriation.
       ``(3) Period of waiver.--A waiver under this subsection 
     shall be for a period of not to exceed 1 year, but an 
     additional waiver may be granted for a period of not to 
     exceed 1 year on the termination of a waiver if the President 
     reviews the waiver and makes a determination that it is in 
     the paramount interest of the United States to grant an 
     additional waiver.
       ``(4) Report.--Not later than January 31 of each year, the 
     President shall report to Congress on each waiver granted 
     pursuant to this subsection during the preceding calendar 
     year, together with the reason for granting the waiver.''.
       (b) Administrative Penalty Orders.--Section 1447 (42 U.S.C. 
     300j-6) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Administrative Penalty Orders.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the Administrator finds that a 
     Federal agency has violated an applicable requirement under 
     this title, the Administrator may issue a penalty order 
     assessing a penalty against the Federal agency.
       ``(2) Penalties.--The Administrator may, after notice to 
     the agency, assess a civil penalty against the agency in an 
     amount not to exceed $25,000 per day per violation.
       ``(3) Procedure.--Before an administrative penalty order 
     issued under this subsection becomes final, the Administrator 
     shall provide the agency an opportunity to confer with the 
     Administrator and shall provide the agency notice and an 
     opportunity for a hearing on the record in accordance with 
     chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(4) Public review.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any interested person may obtain review 
     of an administrative penalty order issued under this 
     subsection. The review may be obtained in the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia or in the United 
     States District Court for the district in which the violation 
     is alleged to have occurred by the filing of a complaint with 
     the court within the 30-day period beginning on the date the 
     penalty order becomes final. The person filing the complaint 
     shall simultaneously send a copy of the complaint by 
     certified mail to the Administrator and the Attorney General.
       ``(B) Record.--The Administrator shall promptly file in the 
     court a certified copy of the record on which the order was 
     issued.
       ``(C) Standard of review.--The court shall not set aside or 
     remand the order unless the court finds that there is not 
     substantial evidence in the record, taken as a whole, to 
     support the finding of a violation or that the assessment of 
     the penalty by the Administrator constitutes an abuse of 
     discretion.
       ``(D) Prohibition on additional penalties.--The court may 
     not impose an additional civil penalty for a violation that 
     is subject to the order unless the court finds that the 
     assessment constitutes an abuse of discretion by the 
     Administrator.''.
       (c) Citizen Enforcement.--The first sentence of section 
     1449(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-8(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``, or'' and inserting a 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) for the collection of a penalty (and associated costs 
     and interest) against any Federal agency that fails, by the 
     date that is 1 year after the effective date of a final order 
     to pay a penalty assessed by the Administrator under section 
     1447(d), to pay the penalty.''.
       (d) Washington Aqueduct.--Section 1447 (42 U.S.C. 300j-6) 
     (as amended by subsection (b)) is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(e) Washington Aqueduct.--The Washington Aqueduct 
     Authority, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Secretary of 
     the Army shall not pass the cost of any penalty assessed 
     under this title on to any customer, user, or other purchaser 
     of drinking water from the Washington Aqueduct system, 
     including finished water from the Dalecarlia or McMillan 
     treatment plant.''.

     SEC. 23. RESEARCH.

       Section 1442 (42 U.S.C. 300j-1) (as amended by section 
     12(d)) is further amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) of subsection (b) as 
     paragraph (3) of subsection (d) and moving such paragraph to 
     appear after paragraph (2) of subsection (d);
       (2) by striking subsection (b) (as so amended);
       (3) by redesignating subparagraph (B) of subsection (a)(2) 
     as subsection (b) and moving such subsection to appear after 
     subsection (a);
       (4) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (2) (as so amended) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(2) Information and research facilities.--In carrying out 
     this title, the Administrator is authorized to--
       ``(A) collect and make available information pertaining to 
     research, investigations, and demonstrations with respect to 
     providing a dependably safe supply of drinking water, 
     together with appropriate recommendations in connection with 
     the information; and
       ``(B) make available research facilities of the Agency to 
     appropriate public authorities, institutions, and individuals 
     engaged in studies and research relating to this title.'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (3);
       (C) by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (3) and 
     moving such paragraph to appear before paragraph (4); and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator to carry 
     out research authorized by this section $25,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 1994 through 2003, of which $4,000,000 shall 
     be available for each fiscal year for research on the health 
     effects of arsenic in drinking water.'';
       (5) in subsection (b) (as so amended)--
       (A) by striking ``subparagraph'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``subsection''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following: ``There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 2003.'';
       (6) in the first sentence of subsection (c), by striking 
     ``eighteen months after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection'' and inserting ``2 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, 
     and every 5 years thereafter'';
       (7) in subsection (d) (as amended by paragraph (1))--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``, and'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (C) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and'';
       (D) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) develop and maintain a system for forecasting the 
     supply of, and demand for, various professional occupational 
     categories and other occupational categories needed for the 
     protection and treatment of drinking water in each region of 
     the United States.''; and
       (E) by adding at the end the following: ``There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1994 through 2003.''; 
     and
       (8) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Biological Mechanisms.--In carrying out this section, 
     the Administrator shall conduct studies to--
       ``(1) understand the mechanisms by which chemical 
     contaminants are absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and 
     eliminated from the human body, so as to develop more 
     accurate physiologically based models of the phenomena;
       ``(2) understand the effects of contaminants and the 
     mechanisms by which the contaminants cause adverse effects 
     (especially noncancer and infectious effects) and the 
     variations in the effects among humans, especially 
     subpopulations at greater risk of adverse effects, and 
     between test animals and humans; and
       ``(3) develop new approaches to the study of complex 
     mixtures, such as mixtures found in drinking water, 
     especially to determine the prospects for synergistic or 
     antagonistic 

[[Page S 17716]]
     interactions that may affect the shape of the dose-response 
     relationship of the individual chemicals and microbes, and to 
     examine noncancer endpoints and infectious diseases, and 
     susceptible individuals and subpopulations.
       ``(j) Research Priorities.--To establish long-term 
     priorities for research under this section, the Administrator 
     shall develop, and periodically update, an integrated risk 
     characterization strategy for drinking water quality. The 
     strategy shall identify unmet needs, priorities for study, 
     and needed improvements in the scientific basis for 
     activities carried out under this title. The initial strategy 
     shall be made available to the public not later than 3 years 
     after the date of enactment of this subsection.
       ``(k) Research Plan for Harmful Substances in Drinking 
     Water.--
       ``(1) Development of plan.--The Administrator shall--
       ``(A) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 
     of this subsection, after consultation with the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Agriculture, and, 
     as appropriate, the heads of other Federal agencies, develop 
     a research plan to support the development and implementation 
     of the most current version of the--
       ``(i) enhanced surface water treatment rule [(announced at 
     59 Fed. Reg. 6332 (February 10, 1994)] 59 Fed. Reg. 38832 
     (July 29, 1994));
       ``(ii) disinfectant and disinfection byproducts rule (Stage 
     2) [(announced at 59 Fed. Reg. 6332 (February 10, 1994)] 59 
     Fed. Reg. 38668 (July 29, 1994)); and
       ``(iii) ground water disinfection rule (availability of 
     draft summary announced at 57 Fed. Reg. 33960 (July 31, 
     1992)); and
       ``(B) carry out the research plan, after consultation and 
     appropriate coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture 
     and the heads of other Federal agencies.
       ``(2) Contents of plan.--
       ``(A) In general.--The research plan shall include, at a 
     minimum--
       ``(i) an identification and characterization of new 
     disinfection byproducts associated with the use of different 
     disinfectants;
       ``(ii) toxicological studies and, if warranted, 
     epidemiological studies to determine what levels of exposure 
     from disinfectants and disinfection byproducts, if any, may 
     be associated with developmental and birth defects and other 
     potential toxic end points;
       ``(iii) toxicological studies and, if warranted, 
     epidemiological studies to quantify the carcinogenic 
     potential from exposure to disinfection byproducts resulting 
     from different disinfectants;
       ``(iv) the development of practical analytical methods for 
     detecting and enumerating microbial contaminants, including 
     giardia, cryptosporidium, and viruses;
       ``(v) the development of reliable, efficient, and 
     economical methods to determine the viability of individual 
     cryptosporidium oocysts;
       ``(vi) the development of dose-response curves for 
     pathogens, including cryptosporidium and the Norwalk virus;
       ``(vii) the development of indicators that define treatment 
     effectiveness for pathogens and disinfection byproducts; and
       ``(viii) bench, pilot, and full-scale studies and 
     demonstration projects to evaluate optimized conventional 
     treatment, ozone, granular activated carbon, and membrane 
     technology for controlling pathogens (including 
     cryptosporidium) and disinfection byproducts.
       ``(B) Risk definition strategy.--The research plan shall 
     include a strategy for determining the risks and estimated 
     extent of disease resulting from pathogens, disinfectants, 
     and disinfection byproducts in drinking water, and the costs 
     and removal efficiencies associated with various control 
     methods for pathogens, disinfectants, and disinfection 
     byproducts.
       ``(3) Implementation of plan.--In carrying out the research 
     plan, the Administrator shall use the most cost-effective 
     mechanisms available, including coordination of research 
     with, and use of matching funds from, institutions and 
     utilities.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     $12,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1997 through 2003.
       ``(l) Subpopulations at Greater Risk.--
       ``(1) Research plan.--The Administrator shall conduct a 
     continuing program of peer-reviewed research to identify 
     groups within the general population that may be at greater 
     risk than the general population of adverse health effects 
     from exposure to contaminants in drinking water. Not later 
     than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, 
     the Administrator shall develop and implement a research plan 
     to establish whether and to what degree infants, children, 
     pregnant women, the elderly, individuals with a history of 
     serious illness, or other subpopulations that can be 
     identified and characterized are likely to experience 
     elevated health risks, including risks of cancer, from 
     contaminants in drinking water.
       ``(2) Contents of plan.--To the extent appropriate, the 
     research shall be--
       ``(A) integrated into the health effects research plan 
     carried out by the Administrator to support the regulation of 
     specific contaminants under this Act; and
       ``(B) designed to identify--
       ``(i) the nature and extent of the elevated health risks, 
     if any;
       ``(ii) the groups likely to experience the elevated health 
     risks;
       ``(iii) biological mechanisms and other factors that may 
     contribute to elevated health risks for groups within the 
     general population;
       ``(iv) the degree of variability of the health risks to the 
     groups from the health risks to the general population;
       ``(v) the threshold, if any, at which the elevated health 
     risks for a specific contaminant occur; and
       ``(vi) the probability of the exposure to the contaminants 
     by the identified group.
       ``(3) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection and periodically thereafter as 
     new and significant information becomes available, the 
     Administrator shall report to Congress on the results of the 
     research.
       ``(4) Use of research.--In characterizing the health 
     effects of drinking water contaminants under this Act, the 
     Administrator shall consider all relevant factors, including 
     the results of research under this subsection, the margin of 
     safety for variability in the general population, and sound 
     scientific practices (including the 1993 and 1994 reports of 
     the National Academy of Sciences) regarding subpopulations at 
     greater risk for adverse health effects.''.

     SEC. 24. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1401 (42 U.S.C. 300f) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``accepted methods 
     for'' before ``quality control''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:

     ``At any time after promulgation of a regulation referred to 
     in this paragraph, the Administrator may add equally 
     effective quality control and testing procedures by guidance 
     published in the Federal Register. The procedures shall be 
     treated as an alternative for public water systems to the 
     quality control and testing procedures listed in the 
     regulation.'';
       (2) in paragraph (13)--
       (A) by striking ``The'' and inserting ``(A) Except as 
     provided in subparagraph (B), the''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) For purposes of part G, the term `State' means each 
     of the 50 States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.'';
       (3) in paragraph (14), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``For purposes of part G, the term includes any Native 
     village (as defined in section 3(c) of the Alaska Native 
     Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(c))).''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       [``(15) The] (15) Community water system.--The term 
     `community water system' means a public water system that--
       ``(A) serves at least 15 service connections used by year-
     round residents of the area served by the system; or
       ``(B) regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.
       [``(16) The] (16) Noncommunity water system.--The term 
     `noncommunity water system' means a public water system that 
     is not a community water system.''.
       (b) Public Water System.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1401(4) (42 U.S.C. 300f(4)) is 
     amended--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``piped water for 
     human consumption'' and inserting ``water for human 
     consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances'';
       (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses 
     (i) and (ii), respectively;
       (C) by striking ``(4) The'' and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Public water system.--
       ``(A) In general.--The''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Connections.--
       ``(i) Residential use.--

       ``(I) In general.--A connection described in subclause (II) 
     shall not be considered to be a connection for determining 
     whether the system is a public water system under this title, 
     if--

       ``(aa) the Administrator or the State (in the case of a 
     State exercising primary enforcement responsibility for 
     public water systems) determines that alternative water to 
     achieve the equivalent level of public health protection 
     provided by the applicable national primary drinking water 
     regulation is provided for residential or similar uses for 
     drinking and cooking; or
       ``(bb) the Administrator or the State (in the case of a 
     State exercising primary enforcement responsibility for 
     public water systems) determines that the water provided for 
     residential or similar uses for drinking and cooking is 
     centrally treated or treated at the point of entry by the 
     provider, a pass-through entity, or the user to achieve the 
     equivalent level of protection provided by the applicable 
     national primary drinking water regulations.

       ``(II) Connections.--A connection referred to in this 
     subclause is a connection to a water system that conveys 
     water by a means other than a pipe principally for 1 or more 
     purposes other than residential use (which other purposes 
     include irrigation, stock watering, industrial use, or 
     municipal source water prior to treatment)--

       ``(aa) for a residential use (consisting of drinking, 
     bathing, cooking, or other similar use); or
       ``(bb) to a facility for a use similar to a residential 
     use.
       ``(ii) Irrigation districts.--An irrigation district in 
     existence prior to May 18, 1994, that provides primarily 
     agricultural service through a piped water system with only 
     incidental residential use shall not be considered to be a 
     public water system if the system 

[[Page S 17717]]
     and the residential users of the system comply with subclauses (I) and 
     (II) of clause (i).''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.

     SEC. 25. GROUND WATER PROTECTION.

       (a) State Ground Water Protection Grants.--Section 1443 (42 
     U.S.C. 300j-2) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) State Ground Water Protection Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator may make a grant to a 
     State for the development and implementation of a State 
     program to ensure the coordinated and comprehensive 
     protection of ground water resources within the State.
       ``(2) Guidance.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, 
     and annually thereafter, the Administrator shall publish 
     guidance that establishes procedures for application for 
     State ground water protection program assistance and that 
     identifies key elements of State ground water protection 
     programs.
       ``(3) Conditions of grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall award grants to 
     States that submit an application that is approved by the 
     Administrator. The Administrator shall determine the amount 
     of a grant awarded pursuant to this paragraph on the basis of 
     an assessment of the extent of ground water resources in the 
     State and the likelihood that awarding the grant will result 
     in sustained and reliable protection of ground water quality.
       ``(B) Innovative program grants.--The Administrator may 
     also award a grant pursuant to this paragraph for innovative 
     programs proposed by a State for the prevention of ground 
     water contamination.
       ``(C) Allocation of funds.--The Administrator shall, at a 
     minimum, ensure that, for each fiscal year, not less than 1 
     percent of funds made available to the Administrator by 
     appropriations to carry out this subsection are allocated to 
     each State that submits an application that is approved by 
     the Administrator pursuant to this subsection.
       ``(D) Limitation on grants.--No grant awarded by the 
     Administrator may be used for a project to remediate ground 
     water contamination.
       ``(4) Coordination with other grant programs.--The awarding 
     of grants by the Administrator pursuant to this subsection 
     shall be coordinated with the awarding of grants pursuant to 
     section 319(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1329(i)) and the awarding of other Federal grant 
     assistance that provides funding for programs related to 
     ground water protection.
       ``(5) Amount of grants.--The amount of a grant awarded 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not exceed 50 percent of the 
     eligible costs of carrying out the ground water protection 
     program that is the subject of the grant (as determined by 
     the Administrator) for the 1-year period beginning on the 
     date that the grant is awarded. The State shall pay a State 
     share to cover the costs of the ground water protection 
     program from State funds in an amount that is not less than 
     50 percent of the cost of conducting the program.
       ``(6) Evaluations and reports.--Not later than 3 years 
     after the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     Amendments of 1995, and every 3 years thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall evaluate the State ground water 
     protection programs that are the subject of grants awarded 
     pursuant to this subsection and report to Congress on the 
     status of ground water quality in the United States and the 
     effectiveness of State programs for ground water protection.
       ``(7) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 2003.''.
       (b) Critical Aquifer Protection.--Section 1427 (42 U.S.C. 
     300h-6) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``not later than 24 
     months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     Amendments of 1986''; and
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (n), by adding at 
     the end the following:

``1992-2003..............................................20,000,000.''.

       (c) Wellhead Protection Areas.--Section 1428(k) (42 U.S.C. 
     300h-7(k)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``1992-2003..............................................35,000,000.''.

       (d) Underground Injection Control Grant.--Section 
     1443(b)(5) (42 U.S.C. 300j-2(b)(5)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

``1992-2003..............................................20,850,000.''.

       (e) Report to Congress on Private Drinking Water.--Section 
     1450 (42 U.S.C. 300j-9) is amended by striking subsection (h) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(h) Report to Congress on Private Drinking Water.--The 
     Administrator shall conduct a study to determine the extent 
     and seriousness of contamination of private sources of 
     drinking water that are not regulated under this title. Not 
     later than 3 years after the date of enactment of the Safe 
     Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, the Administrator 
     shall submit to Congress a report that includes the findings 
     of the study and recommendations by the Administrator 
     concerning responses to any problems identified under the 
     study. In designing and conducting the study, including 
     consideration of research design, methodology, and 
     conclusions and recommendations, the Administrator shall 
     consult with experts outside the Agency, including 
     scientists, hydrogeologists, well contractors and suppliers, 
     and other individuals knowledgeable in ground water 
     protection and remediation.''.
       (f) National Center for Ground Water Research.--The 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, acting 
     through the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, 
     is authorized to reestablish a partnership between the 
     Laboratory and the National Center for Ground Water Research, 
     a university consortium, to conduct research, training, and 
     technology transfer for ground water quality protection and 
     restoration.

     SEC. 26. LEAD PLUMBING AND PIPES; RETURN FLOWS.

       (a) Fittings and Fixtures.--Section 1417 (42 U.S.C. 300g-6) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Prohibitions.--
       ``(A) In general.--No person may use any pipe, any pipe or 
     plumbing fitting or fixture, any solder, or any flux, after 
     June 19, 1986, in the installation or repair of--
       ``(i) any public water system; or
       ``(ii) any plumbing in a residential or nonresidential 
     facility providing water for human consumption,

     that is not lead free (within the meaning of subsection (d)).
       ``(B) Leaded joints.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to 
     leaded joints necessary for the repair of cast iron pipes.'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting after ``Each'' the 
     following: ``owner or operator of a''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Unlawful acts.--Effective 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph, it shall be unlawful--
       ``(A) for any person to introduce into commerce any pipe, 
     or any pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, that is not lead 
     free, except for a pipe that is used in manufacturing or 
     industrial processing;
       ``(B) for any person engaged in the business of selling 
     plumbing supplies, except manufacturers, to sell solder or 
     flux that is not lead free; or
       ``(C) for any person to introduce into commerce any solder 
     or flux that is not lead free unless the solder or flux bears 
     a prominent label stating that it is illegal to use the 
     solder or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing 
     providing water for human consumption.'';
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``lead, and'' and 
     inserting ``lead;'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``lead.'' and inserting 
     ``lead; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) when used with respect to plumbing fittings and 
     fixtures, refers to plumbing fittings and fixtures in 
     compliance with standards established in accordance with 
     subsection (e).''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Plumbing Fittings and Fixtures.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall provide accurate 
     and timely technical information and assistance to qualified 
     third-party certifiers in the development of voluntary 
     standards and testing protocols for the leaching of lead from 
     new plumbing fittings and fixtures that are intended by the 
     manufacturer to dispense water for human ingestion.
       ``(2) Standards.--
       ``(A) In general.--If a voluntary standard for the leaching 
     of lead is not established by the date that is 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator 
     shall, not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     this subsection, promulgate regulations setting a health-
     effects-based performance standard establishing maximum 
     leaching levels from new plumbing fittings and fixtures that 
     are intended by the manufacturer to dispense water for human 
     ingestion. The standard shall become effective on the date 
     that is 5 years after the date of promulgation of the 
     standard.
       ``(B) Alternative requirement.--If regulations are required 
     to be promulgated under subparagraph (A) and have not been 
     promulgated by the date that is 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, no person may import, 
     manufacture, process, or distribute in commerce a new 
     plumbing fitting or fixture, intended by the manufacturer to 
     dispense water for human ingestion, that contains more than 4 
     percent lead by dry weight.''.
       (b) Water Return Flows.--Section 3013 of Public Law 102-486 
     (42 U.S.C. 13551) is repealed.
       (c) Records and Inspections.--Subparagraph (A) of section 
     1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)(1)) (as designated by section 
     19(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ``Every person'' and all 
     that follows through ``is a grantee,'' and inserting ``Every 
     person who is subject to any requirement of this title or who 
     is a grantee''.

     SEC. 27. BOTTLED WATER.

       Section 410 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 
     U.S.C. 349) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Whenever'' and inserting ``(a) Except as 
     provided in subsection (b), whenever''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b)(1) After the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency publishes a 

[[Page S 17718]]
     proposed maximum contaminant level, but not later than 180 days after 
     the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     publishes a final maximum contaminant level, for a 
     contaminant under section 1412 of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 300g-1), the Secretary, after public notice 
     and comment, shall issue a regulation that establishes a 
     quality level for the contaminant in bottled water or make a 
     finding that a regulation is not necessary to protect the 
     public health because the contaminant is contained in water 
     in the public water systems (as defined under section 1401(4) 
     of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300f(4)) and not in water used for 
     bottled drinking water. In the case of any contaminant for 
     which a national primary drinking water regulation was 
     promulgated before the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act Amendments of 1995, the Secretary shall issue the 
     regulation or make the finding required by this paragraph not 
     later than 1 year after that date.
       ``(2) The regulation shall include any monitoring 
     requirements that the Secretary determines to be appropriate 
     for bottled water.
       ``(3) The regulation--
       ``(A) shall require that the quality level for the 
     contaminant in bottled water be as stringent as the maximum 
     contaminant level for the contaminant published by the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; and
       ``(B) may require that the quality level be more stringent 
     than the maximum contaminant level if necessary to provide 
     ample public health protection under this Act.
       ``(4)(A) If the Secretary fails to establish a regulation 
     within the 180-day period described in paragraph (1), the 
     regulation with respect to the final maximum contaminant 
     level published by the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency (as described in such paragraph) shall be 
     considered, as of the date on which the Secretary is required 
     to establish a regulation under paragraph (1), as the final 
     regulation for the establishment of the quality level for a 
     contaminant required under paragraph (1) for the purpose of 
     establishing or amending a bottled water quality level 
     standard with respect to the contaminant.
       ``(B) Not later than 30 days after the end of the 180-day 
     period described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall, with 
     respect to a maximum contaminant level that is considered as 
     a quality level under subparagraph (A), publish a notice in 
     the Federal Register that sets forth the quality level and 
     appropriate monitoring requirements required under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) and that provides that the quality level standard 
     and requirements shall take effect on the date on which the 
     final regulation of the maximum contaminant level takes 
     effect.''.

     SEC. 28. ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES, COSTS, AND 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
       (2) Adverse effect on human health.--The term ``adverse 
     effect on human health'' includes any increase in the rate of 
     death or serious illness, including disease, cancer, birth 
     defects, reproductive dysfunction, developmental effects 
     (including effects on the endocrine and nervous systems), and 
     other impairments in bodily functions.
       (3) Risk.--The term ``risk'' means the likelihood of an 
     occurrence of an adverse effect on human health, the 
     environment, or public welfare.
       (4) Source of pollution.--The term ``source of pollution'' 
     means a category or class of facilities or activities that 
     alter the chemical, physical, or biological character of the 
     natural environment.
       (b) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment are useful 
     but imperfect tools that serve to enhance the information 
     available in developing environmental regulations and 
     programs;
       (2) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment can also 
     serve as useful tools in setting priorities and evaluating 
     the success of environmental protection programs;
       (3) cost and risk are not the only factors that need to be 
     considered in evaluating environmental programs, as other 
     factors, including values and equity, must also be 
     considered;
       (4) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment should be 
     presented with a clear statement of the uncertainties in the 
     analysis or assessment;
       (5) current methods for valuing ecological resources and 
     assessing intergenerational effects of sources of pollution 
     need further development before integrated rankings of 
     sources of pollution based on the factors referred to in 
     paragraph (3) can be used with high levels of confidence;
       (6) methods to assess and describe the risks of adverse 
     human health effects, other than cancer, need further 
     development before integrated rankings of sources of 
     pollution based on the risk to human health can be used with 
     high levels of confidence;
       (7) periodic reports by the Administrator on the costs and 
     benefits of regulations promulgated under Federal 
     environmental laws, and other Federal actions with impacts on 
     human health, the environment, or public welfare, will 
     provide Congress and the general public with a better 
     understanding of--
       (A) national environmental priorities; and
       (B) expenditures being made to achieve reductions in risk 
     to human health, the environment, and public welfare; and
       (8) periodic reports by the Administrator on the costs and 
     benefits of environmental regulations will also--
       (A) provide Congress and the general public with a better 
     understanding of the strengths, weaknesses, and uncertainties 
     of cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment and the research 
     needed to reduce major uncertainties; and
       (B) assist Congress and the general public in evaluating 
     environmental protection regulations and programs, and other 
     Federal actions with impacts on human health, the 
     environment, or public welfare, to determine the extent to 
     which the regulations, programs, and actions adequately and 
     fairly protect affected segments of society.
       (c) Report on Environmental Priorities, Costs, and 
     Benefits.--
       (1) Ranking.--
       (A) In general.--The Administrator shall identify and, 
     taking into account available data (to the extent 
     practicable), rank sources of pollution with respect to the 
     relative degree of risk of adverse effects on human health, 
     the environment, and public welfare.
       (B) Method of ranking.--In carrying out the rankings under 
     subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall--
       (i) rank the sources of pollution considering the extent 
     and duration of the risk; and
       (ii) take into account broad societal values, including the 
     role of natural resources in sustaining economic activity 
     into the future.
       (2) Evaluation of regulatory and other costs.--In addition 
     to carrying out the rankings under paragraph (1), the 
     Administrator shall estimate the private and public costs 
     associated with each source of pollution and the costs and 
     benefits of complying with regulations designed to protect 
     against risks associated with the sources of pollution.
       (3) Evaluation of other federal actions.--In addition to 
     carrying out the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2), the 
     Administrator shall estimate the private and public costs and 
     benefits associated with major Federal actions selected by 
     the Administrator that have the most significant impact on 
     human health or the environment, including direct development 
     projects, grant and loan programs to support infrastructure 
     construction and repair, and permits, licenses, and leases to 
     use natural resources or to release pollution to the 
     environment, and other similar actions.
       (4) Risk reduction opportunities.--In assessing risks, 
     costs, and benefits as provided in paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     the Administrator shall also identify reasonable 
     opportunities to achieve significant risk reduction through 
     modifications in environmental regulations and programs and 
     other Federal actions with impacts on human health, the 
     environment, or public welfare.
       (5) Uncertainties.--In evaluating the risks referred to in 
     paragraphs (1) and (2), the Administrator shall--
       (A) identify the major uncertainties associated with the 
     risks;
       (B) explain the meaning of the uncertainties in terms of 
     interpreting the ranking and evaluation; and
       (C) determine--
       (i) the type and nature of research that would likely 
     reduce the uncertainties; and
       (ii) the cost of conducting the research.
       (6) Consideration of benefits.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Administrator shall consider and, to the extent 
     practicable, estimate the monetary value, and such other 
     values as the Administrator determines to be appropriate, of 
     the benefits associated with reducing risk to human health 
     and the environment, including--
       (A) avoiding premature mortality;
       (B) avoiding cancer and noncancer diseases that reduce the 
     quality of life;
       (C) preserving biological diversity and the sustainability 
     of ecological resources;
       (D) maintaining an aesthetically pleasing environment;
       (E) valuing services performed by ecosystems (such as flood 
     mitigation, provision of food or material, or regulating the 
     chemistry of the air or water) that, if lost or degraded, 
     would have to be replaced by technology;
       (F) avoiding other risks identified by the Administrator; 
     and
       (G) considering the benefits even if it is not possible to 
     estimate the monetary value of the benefits in exact terms.
       (7) Reports.--
       (A) Preliminary report.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall report 
     to Congress on the sources of pollution and other Federal 
     actions that the Administrator will address, and the 
     approaches and methodology the Administrator will use, in 
     carrying out the rankings and evaluations under this section. 
     The report shall also include an evaluation by the 
     Administrator of the need for the development of 
     methodologies to carry out the ranking.
       (B) Periodic report.--
       (i) In general.--On completion of the ranking and 
     evaluations conducted by the Administrator under this 
     section, but not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and every 3 years thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall report the findings of the rankings and 
     evaluations to Congress and make the report available to the 
     general public.

[[Page S 17719]]

       (ii) Evaluation of risks.--Each periodic report prepared 
     pursuant to this subparagraph shall, to the extent 
     practicable, evaluate risk management decisions under Federal 
     environmental laws, including title XIV of the Public Health 
     Service Act (commonly known as the ``Safe Drinking Water 
     Act'') (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), that present inherent and 
     unavoidable choices between competing risks, including risks 
     of controlling microbial versus disinfection contaminants in 
     drinking water. Each periodic report shall address the policy 
     of the Administrator concerning the most appropriate methods 
     of weighing and analyzing the risks, and shall incorporate 
     information concerning--

       (I) the severity and certainty of any adverse effect on 
     human health, the environment, or public welfare;
       (II) whether the effect is immediate or delayed;

       (III) whether the burden associated with the adverse effect 
     is borne disproportionately by a segment of the general 
     population or spread evenly across the general population; 
     and
       (IV) whether a threatened adverse effect can be eliminated 
     or remedied by the use of an alternative technology or a 
     protection mechanism.

       (d) Implementation.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Administrator shall--
       (1) consult with the appropriate officials of other Federal 
     agencies and State and local governments, members of the 
     academic community, representatives of regulated businesses 
     and industry, representatives of citizen groups, and other 
     knowledgeable individuals to develop, evaluate, and interpret 
     scientific and economic information;
       (2) make available to the general public the information on 
     which rankings and evaluations under this section are based; 
     and
       (3) establish, not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, methods for determining costs and 
     benefits of environmental regulations and other Federal 
     actions, including the valuation of natural resources and 
     intergenerational costs and benefits, by rule after notice 
     and opportunity for public comment.
       (e) Review by the Science Advisory Board.--Before the 
     Administrator submits a report prepared under this section to 
     Congress, the Science Advisory Board, established by section 
     8 of the Environmental Research, Development, and 
     Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365), shall conduct a 
     technical review of the report in a public session.

     SEC. 29. OTHER AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Capital Improvements for the Washington Aqueduct.--
       (1) Authorizations.--
       (A) Authorization of modernization.--Subject to approval 
     in, and in such amounts as may be provided in appropriations 
     Acts, the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps of Engineers 
     is authorized to modernize the Washington Aqueduct.
       (B) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Army Corps of Engineers borrowing 
     authority in amounts sufficient to cover the full costs of 
     modernizing the Washington Aqueduct. The borrowing authority 
     shall be provided by the Secretary of the Treasury, under 
     such terms and conditions as are established by the Secretary 
     of the Treasury, after a series of contracts with each public 
     water supply customer has been entered into under paragraph 
     (2).
       (2) Contracts with public water supply customers.--
       (A) Contracts to repay corps debt.--To the extent provided 
     in appropriations Acts, and in accordance with subparagraphs 
     (B) and (C), the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps of 
     Engineers is authorized to enter into a series of contracts 
     with each public water supply customer under which the 
     customer commits to repay a pro-rata share of the principal 
     and interest owed by the Army Corps of Engineers to the 
     Secretary of the Treasury under paragraph (1). Under each of 
     the contracts, the customer that enters into the contract 
     shall commit to pay any additional amount necessary to fully 
     offset the risk of default on the contract.
       (B) Offsetting of risk of default.--Each contract under 
     subparagraph (A) shall include such additional terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary of the Treasury may require so 
     that the value to the Government of the contracts is 
     estimated to be equal to the obligational authority used by 
     the Army Corps of Engineers for modernizing the Washington 
     Aqueduct at the time that each series of contracts is entered 
     into.
       (C) Other conditions.--Each contract entered into under 
     subparagraph (A) shall--
       (i) provide that the public water supply customer pledges 
     future income from fees assessed to operate and maintain the 
     Washington Aqueduct;
       (ii) provide the United States priority over all other 
     creditors; and
       (iii) include other conditions that the Secretary of the 
     Treasury determines to be appropriate.
       (3) Borrowing authority.--Subject to an appropriation under 
     paragraph (1)(B) and after entering into a series of 
     contracts under paragraph (2), the Secretary, acting through 
     the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps of Engineers, shall 
     seek borrowing authority from the Secretary of the Treasury 
     under paragraph (1)(B).
       (4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (A) Public water supply customer.--The term ``public water 
     supply customer'' means the District of Columbia, the county 
     of Arlington, Virginia, and the city of Falls Church, 
     Virginia.
       (B) Value to the government.--The term ``value to the 
     Government'' means the net present value of a contract under 
     paragraph (2) calculated under the rules set forth in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 502(5) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a(5)), 
     excluding section 502(5)(B)(i) of such Act, as though the 
     contracts provided for the repayment of direct loans to the 
     public water supply customers.
       (C) Washington aqueduct.--The term ``Washington Aqueduct'' 
     means the water supply system of treatment plants, raw water 
     intakes, conduits, reservoirs, transmission mains, and 
     pumping stations owned by the Federal Government located in 
     the metropolitan Washington, District of Columbia, area.
       (b) Drinking Water Advisory Council.--The second sentence 
     of section 1446(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-6(a)) is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, of 
     which two such members shall be associated with small, rural 
     public water systems''.
       (c) Short Title.--
       (1) In general.--The title (42 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after the title heading the following:


                             ``SHORT TITLE

       ``Sec. 1400. This title may be cited as the `Safe Drinking 
     Water Act'.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 1 of Public Law 93-523 
     (88 Stat. 1660) is amended by inserting ``of 1974'' after 
     ``Water Act''.
       (d) Technical Amendments to Section Headings.--
       (1) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1417 (42 U.S.C. 300g-6) are amended 
     to read as follows:


     ``PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES, FITTINGS, SOLDER, AND FLUX

       ``Sec. 1417. (a)''.
       (2) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1426 (42 U.S.C. 300h-5) are amended 
     to read as follows:


                     ``REGULATION OF STATE PROGRAMS

       ``Sec. 1426. (a)''.
       (3) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1427 (42 U.S.C. 300h-6) are amended 
     to read as follows:


              ``SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

       ``Sec. 1427. (a)''.
       (4) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1428 (42 U.S.C. 300h-7) are amended 
     to read as follows:


        ``STATE PROGRAMS TO ESTABLISH WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS

       ``Sec. 1428. (a)''.
       (5) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1432 (42 U.S.C. 300i-1) are amended 
     to read as follows:


                 ``TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

       ``Sec. 1432. (a)''.
       (6) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1451 (42 U.S.C. 300j-11) are 
     amended to read as follows:


                            ``INDIAN TRIBES

       ``Sec. 1451. (a)''.
       (7) The section heading and first word of section 1461 (42 
     U.S.C. 300j-21) are amended to read as follows:


                             ``DEFINITIONS

       ``Sec. 1461. As''.
       (8) The section heading and first word of section 1462 (42 
     U.S.C. 300j-22) are amended to read as follows:


        ``RECALL OF DRINKING WATER COOLERS WITH LEAD-LINED TANKS

       ``Sec. 1462. For''.
       (9) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1463 (42 U.S.C. 300j-23) are 
     amended to read as follows:


                ``DRINKING WATER COOLERS CONTAINING LEAD

       ``Sec. 1463. (a)''.
       (10) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1464 (42 U.S.C. 300j-24) are 
     amended to read as follows:


             ``LEAD CONTAMINATION IN SCHOOL DRINKING WATER

       ``Sec. 1464. (a)''.
       (11) The section heading and subsection designation of 
     subsection (a) of section 1465 (42 U.S.C. 300j-25) are 
     amended to read as follows:


``FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR STATE PROGRAMS REGARDING LEAD CONTAMINATION IN 
                         SCHOOL DRINKING WATER

       ``Sec. 1465. (a)''.

  Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, we now have before us the Safe Drinking 
Water Act amendments of 1995, which is S. 1316. I am pleased to join 
with my colleagues to bring this bill to reauthorize the Safe Drinking 
Water Act. This legislation has broad bipartisan support. It has been a 
high priority for the Environment and Public Works Committee and was 
reported by unanimous vote; Democrats and Republicans in the committee 
voted for it 16-0. 

[[Page S 17720]]

  We all agree that reform of the Safe Drinking Water Act is necessary. 
Public health protection has been strengthened by the many new 
standards that have been issued over the past few years. Of all the 
ways of keeping our public healthy, it seems to me few are more 
important than having the water that they drink be safe. But the pace 
of standard setting and the costs of new treatment and monitoring 
requirements have been a strain for water suppliers, especially smaller 
communities.
  This bill includes many provisions to ease that strain on the smaller 
communities. There is a new grant program for drinking water revolving 
loan funds, which President Clinton first recommended. The States are 
authorized to reduce monitoring costs by developing their own testing 
requirements, tailored to meet the conditions in their region. This is 
very important. The States have this authority in this legislation.
  Under this bill, States may also grant variances to the small systems 
that cannot afford to comply with national standards. Now, we are not 
rolling back health protections that are now provided. No existing 
standard will be weakened. The bill includes many new initiatives that 
will keep the national program moving forward. In the SRF grants--the 
State revolving loan fund grants--there are new programs to prevent 
pollution of source waters which are used for drinking water supply. 
There is a program to develop technical capacity in small systems.
  The bill pushes hard for more and better science, including a 
research program to determine whether some groups, like children, 
pregnant women, or people with particular illnesses, are more likely to 
experience adverse effects from drinking water contaminants.
  Mr. President, before describing the major provisions of the bill, I 
want to thank our colleagues for the hard work they have put into this 
legislation.

  Senator Kempthorne chairs the subcommittee that has jurisdiction over 
the drinking water program. Senator Kempthorne is the principal author 
of this reauthorization bill and has spent months going over every 
detail of the legislation. So Senator Kempthorne deserves tremendous 
credit for what we are bringing before the Senate today. I wish to take 
this opportunity to thank him.
  Senator Reid, the ranking member of the subcommittee, has been a 
partner in that effort and always has been very constructive.
  Senator Baucus, the ranking member of the full committee, blazed the 
trail for us last year with the safe drinking water bill that passed 
the Senate 95-3.
  The committee was assisted in the development of this bill by the 
fine staff of the Office of Water at EPA, including the Assistant 
Administrator for Water, Bob Perciasepe, and Cynthia Dougherty, who 
heads the drinking water office.
  We also thank the many State and local drinking water officials and 
the representatives of their organizations who worked long and hard on 
this bill. Their expertise has been very helpful.
  Mr. President, if we ask what is the one thing we can do that would 
most improve the safety of drinking water in the United States, I 
believe most of us would answer: Give some help to the small drinking 
water systems. If you can believe it, there are 54,000. I will repeat 
that. There are 54,000 small public water systems in our country.
  What is a small system? It is one that serves fewer than 3,300 
people. Some serve as few as 100 or 125 people, and some even 25 
people. Some of these drinking water systems are owned by homeowners 
associations or trailer parks. Some are operated by town governments.
  A significant number of these very small systems do not have the 
technical or financial resources to consistently provide safe drinking 
water. They cannot keep up with the testing and the treatment and the 
maintenance that is necessary to provide safe water every day. These 
are systems where the operator has no training, the consumers pay no 
fees for the water sometimes, and where the supply and distribution 
systems simply do not get the attention that is needed to keep 
contaminants out of the water.
  The bill we are bringing before the Senate addresses this is problem 
in several ways. First, it establishes a grant program to provide 
Federal assistance to build the treatment plants that are essential to 
the provision of safe drinking water. EPA estimates that capital 
expenditures needed nationwide to comply with current requirements of 
the Safe Drinking Water Act total approximately $8.6 billion, that is, 
if we brought all the systems up to snuff, and approximately 40 percent 
of these expenditures will be required of small systems. Many systems 
are not able to build the treatment facilities to comply with these 
regulations unless they get some help.

  Other Federal statutes mandating investment in local utility services 
have provided grant assistance to go along with the mandates. In other 
words, when we mandated from the Federal Government for clean water 
bills, for example, the Congress, which has provided help, and, indeed, 
in that particular example, the building of sewage treatment 
facilities, Congress has appropriated over the years $65 billion to 
meet the secondary treatment requirements required by 1972 amendments 
to the Clean Water Act. We have not provided any sort of similar 
assistance under the Safe Drinking Water Act in the past.
  In early 1993, President Clinton proposed creation of a State-
revolving loan fund for those funds for drinking water capital 
investments modeled after the Clean Water Act loans. This bill 
authorizes $600 million in fiscal year 1994 and $1 billion per year 
through fiscal year 2003 for this new SRF Program. This authorization 
is sufficient to cover the capital investments in treatment needed to 
comply with Federal health standards.
  Priority funding would go to projects to address the most serious 
public health problems and to communities most in need. Who will get 
the money? Those communities that most need the help as determined by 
the States--not by big brother in Washington, but by the States--and 
those projects that needed to address the most serious health problems.
  In contrast to the SRF Program under the Clean Water Act, States may 
provide grants to systems. In other words, from this State-revolving 
loan fund in this bill, in safe drinking water the State can give 
grants to systems that cannot afford to repay.
  As a second step to help small systems, the bill asks each State to 
adopt what is known as a capacity development strategy to help the 
small systems.
  What is this all about? A strategy might include training for the 
operators of drinking water systems, or technical assistance to develop 
new and safer water supplies, or it might encourage consolidation or 
regional management to make better use of the resources. We are relying 
on the States to take the lead in designing capacity strategies for the 
small systems.
  This is not some heavyhanded mandate from Washington to the States, 
but, instead, it is up to the States. We do not, from Washington, 
enforce the direction of operators who do not get training, for 
example. But we suggest it be done and we give assistance to do it.

  We are looking to the States, to the Governors, and to the 
legislatures to take the big steps. Here is a chance to show that a 
major problem can be resolved by the States through cooperation and 
incentives rather than by command and control from Washington. The 
ultimate judgment on the success or failure of this bill will depend in 
large part on what the States do with this opportunity.
  There are several other provisions to help small systems. States are 
authorized to grant variances to small systems that cannot afford to 
comply with national primary drinking water regulations. A portion of 
the SRF funds may be set aside for technical assistance, as I 
mentioned, to small systems, and the cost of training operators may be 
included in the SRF grants or loan.
  States may reduce monitoring requirements. This is very important. 
The States do not have to meet a certain steady monitoring system. They 
can reduce those requirements for many contaminants for small systems 
that do not detect a contaminant in the first test of a quarterly 
series.
  There are two other major provisions in this bill that I wish to 
describe briefly. The first relates to the criteria that EPA uses to 
select contaminants for 

[[Page S 17721]]
regulation. The second concerns considerations that go into 
establishing national health standards. Because EPA failed to take 
action to set national standards for contaminants that were of public 
health concern, the 1986 amendments listed 83 specific contaminants and 
required EPA to set standards for those by 1989.
  The legislation--here was a big problem with that legislation we 
passed--directed EPA to set standards for an additional 25 contaminants 
every 3 years beginning in 1991.
  This single provision--that is, adding 25 new contaminants every 3 
years--has provoked more critical comment than virtually any other 
element that we have dealt with in all the environmental laws we have. 
Some of the 83 contaminants for which standards are required occur so 
infrequently that the costs of monitoring far outweigh any health 
benefits that could be realized.
  The mandate that EPA set standards for an additional 25 contaminants 
every 3 years, regardless of the threat posed by those contaminants, 
was for many the quintessential example of an arbitrary Federal law 
imposing burdens on consumers and the taxpayers with no rational 
relationship to the public benefit that might be realized. This bill 
repeals the requirement that EPA regulate an additional 25 contaminants 
every 3 years. Instead, there is a selection process that gives EPA the 
discretion to identify contaminants that warrant regulation in the 
future.

  How do you do this selection process? Every 5 years EPA publishes a 
list of high-priority contaminants that should receive additional 
study.
  EPA may require monitoring at public water systems for up to 20 
unregulated contaminants, to gather information on the occurrence of 
these contaminants in public systems.
  Decisions made by EPA under the act are to be guided by new 
principles for sound science.
  EPA is to set aside $10 million from the annual appropriations for 
SRF, for the State-revolving fund grants, to conduct health effects 
research on contaminants that are candidates for regulation. In other 
words, EPA gives a hand with all of this.
  Every 5 years, EPA is to make regulatory decisions for at least 5 
contaminants, announcing whether they warrant regulation or not.
  Finally, let me turn to the issue of standard setting. This has been 
the most contentious issue in this reauthorization debate. I believe 
the committee has developed a sound compromise that deserves the 
support of all Senators.
  Under current law, EPA establishes drinking water standards through a 
two-step process. First, the administrator identifies the maximum 
contaminant level goal reflecting a concentration of the contaminants 
in drinking water at which no adverse effects will occur.
  Then, the administrator sets an enforceable standard as close to this 
absolutely safe goal as possible, as feasible. ``Feasible,'' what does 
that mean? That the level can be reached by large regional water 
systems applying best available technology.
  In other words, what is the policy to meet these goals. We do not use 
what the little systems can do, but what the big systems can do. EPA 
takes into account the costs to identify the best available technology.
  The treatment system must be affordable. What is affordable? Well, 
they use the standard that it costs less than $100 per household per 
year for the large systems.
  Now, this approach is all right because 80 percent of the 
population--this is a very important statistic--80 percent of the 
population of the United States receives its drinking water from large 
systems. Safe water can be provided to this 80 percent at an affordable 
cost. They can afford the best available technology. Indeed, the 
compliance cost for large cities average not $100 per household, but 
$20 per household per year.
  However, there is a problem with this system. There are three 
problems. First, the treatment technology affordable to the large 
systems may be unaffordable to the small system and would push the per 
household cost way up for these small systems.
  Second, for some contaminants, this approach to standard setting can 
impose large costs while producing only small gains in public health. 
Although the treatment technology may be entirely affordable for the 
large systems, the incremental health benefits of addressing the 
relatively small health risk presented by some contaminants do not 
justify the aggregate cost. It is just not worth it for the small 
systems because the benefit you get is so small for the cost.

  Third, the use of some treatment technologies may actually increase 
risk from some contaminants. For example, chlorine is used to kill 
pathogenic organisms, but that may result in increased cancer risk from 
disinfection byproducts. In other words, you take care of something and 
it causes a greater risk of something else.
  Now, read literally, the existing statute requires EPA to overcontrol 
some contaminants to a degree that overall public health risks from 
drinking water would be greater using this new technology. The bill we 
bring to the Senate today includes several provisions to respond to 
these problems in standard setting.
  The States may provide variances to small systems. If it is all right 
for the big system, not very expensive because you have so many 
households, the States can say to the small systems: No, you do not 
have to do that. We give you a variance. EPA may balance competing 
risks from several contaminants if the treatment technology to control 
one would increase the risk from the other, which I just previously 
mentioned.
  EPA may set standards at a level less stringent than ``feasible'' if 
the costs of a standard reflecting best available technology are not 
justified. In other words, this is not somebody in EPA saying you have 
to reach this standard even though the costs are astronomical. Costs 
can be figured in. There is a cost-benefit factor involved here. The 
unique characteristics and risks of some contaminants, including 
arsenic, radon, or sulfate, are addressed with special standard-setting 
provisions. Although the bill includes new risk assessment and cost-
benefit considerations to address unresolved problems, EPA may not use 
this authority to relax any existing standard unless new science 
indicates that a less stringent standard would be equally protective.
  It appears we have secured broad bipartisan support for a series of 
reforms to this act, a law that has, indeed, been controversial. 
Achieving this reflects the contributions of many Senators, as I 
mentioned. Reaching this degree of consensus has generated much 
controversy, and the fact that we have this unanimity so far is quite 
an achievement.
  So, again, I congratulate Senator Kempthorne for his work. I know he 
joins me in extending appreciation to Senator Reid, Senator Baucus, and 
all the others I previously mentioned.
  We are ready to go, Mr. President. I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, first of all, I want to inform the Senate 
that the manager of the bill, Senator Baucus, is temporarily away from 
the floor and will return shortly.
  The bill before this body is, of course, the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendments of this year, 1995. This legislation, I believe, is Congress 
at its finest. What I mean by that is that this is a bill that is 
brought to this point by building consensus. It was not easy. It was 
difficult. But I think the people in the State of Rhode Island, the 
people in the State of Montana, the people in the State of Idaho are 
well served with the way their Senators handled this legislation.
  Whether we like it or not, legislation is the art of compromise. 
Legislation is the art of consensus building, and that is what this 
legislation is all about. This bill is not everything that I like. It 
is not everything, I am sure, that my colleagues, the Senator from 
Idaho and the Senators from Montana and Rhode Island, think is a 
perfect bill. But it is a good bill. It is a tremendous improvement 
over anything we have been able to do before.
  Where there has been rancor among the parties on other items before 
the Senate, and even in our committee, this bill has been negotiated 
for the better part of a year and as a result of the negotiations, we 
have come up with this fine piece of legislation. This is a bipartisan 
effort. The Senate will address the drinking water problems of 

[[Page S 17722]]
this country in this legislation and, as a result of this bill 
passing--and I have every belief it will pass--the people of this 
country will be well served by having the assurance that the water they 
are drinking is safe.
  I recognize, as I have indicated, that not everyone is going to be 
totally happy with what is in this legislation. But it is a good, 
sound, reasonable, rational piece of reform legislation. This is truly 
reform legislation. I support the bill for lots of reasons, but let me 
mention just a few of them.
  This bill, all Members of the U.S. Senate should realize, represents 
a balance. It is a balance that has been reached, and I think it has 
been done with great thought and consideration. There is no question 
that we must begin with the presumption that water in the United States 
is not necessarily safe if you drink it. There are increasing threats 
of contamination and pollution.
  I can remember, as a young boy, we would drive once in a while down 
to the river, the Colorado River. My father told me something that was 
certainly true in those days, that if the water was running, it was 
safe, you could drink it, because as the water progressed it was 
cleansed as it proceeded through the rocks and the pebbles and the 
bushes--it was clean. That is not the case anymore. Things are put in 
water so that the mere fact that it is running no longer makes it safe. 
I cannot tell my children the same thing my father told me about having 
safe drinking water.
  So there are increasing threats of contamination and pollution. That 
is what this legislation is all about. The bill provides for drinking 
water standards and the means by which drinking water systems can meet 
the standards. Again, I repeat, this legislation is to allow people, 
when they drink water in the United States, to feel they are drinking 
safe water, that the contaminants have been removed and there are 
procedures to make that water safe.
  The bill incorporates sound science into the Administrator's 
decisionmaking and contaminant regulations. The bill establishes, 
importantly, as has been clearly explained by the chairman of the 
committee, a revolving loan fund to assist drinking water systems in 
complying with drinking water standards. In accordance with the 
Unfunded Mandates Act, which the Senator from Idaho worked so hard in 
accomplishing, it establishes money for States and drinking water 
systems to help comply with the act. I think we should all be very 
careful of amendments that come on the floor today, that we do not 
violate what we have worked so hard to accomplish in this legislation; 
that is, we are not going to force upon the States and local 
governments things that they do not have the money to comply with. I 
think that should be the watchword of the amendments that are offered 
here today. We truly meant what we said when we passed the unfunded 
mandates legislation very early this year.
  Even technical assistance funds for the small drinking water systems 
are provided for in set-asides. Additionally, States and local 
authorities are given greater flexibility, as, again, was explained so 
well by the chairman of the committee. States and local authorities are 
given greater flexibility in the implementation and development of 
their capacity development strategies. The bill also equips the 
Environmental Protection Agency with greater flexibility in setting 
drinking water standards that were based on peer-reviewed science, with 
the benefits and risks associated with contaminants. The Environmental 
Protection Agency will be focusing its scarce resources on important 
health risks that are grounded in valid science rather than spending 
all their time, effort and money on matters that really did not allow 
for us to arrive at the conclusion it was necessarily better water to 
drink.
  I also want to make a few observations about the Environmental 
Protection Agency. I believe this agency has served this country well. 
It has been maligned, but wrongfully so, in my estimation. I do not 
think we should be passing laws out of fear of antagonism to an agency. 
I think this agency has had a noble mission, one part of which is to 
make sure that we have safe drinking water. We all recognize that 
reform and change must occur, and that is what they are doing with this 
legislation. I emphasize to my colleagues, there are certain things the 
Administrator has already initiated, reforming the Environmental 
Protection Agency generally.
  The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of this year should not be 
about agency procedures and management, nor should the Safe Drinking 
Water Act be about regulatory reform issues that have dominated so much 
of the debate this year. This bill is about drinking water, about the 
water that we drink, our children drink, and our children's children 
will drink. That is what we should be talking about during this debate 
on this legislation: Will water be safer as a result of this 
legislation passing? That is, the drinking water that we all partake 
of, will it be safer as a result of this legislation?
  This bill, I think, should either protect the drinking water of the 
homes and communities of this Nation, or we should not be here. I 
believe the chairman of the full committee, the ranking member, the 
chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member, feel very strongly 
that this is good legislation that will make the water we drink safer.
  There are other reasons I support this legislation. There are many 
small systems in Nevada, hundreds of small systems in Nevada. These 
systems must also be such that the water that comes out of those 
systems is safe drinking water.
  Five years ago, on November 16, the President, President Bush, signed 
a very important bill. It settled a 100-year water war between the 
States of California and Nevada. It preserved the wetlands that had 
been in existence for up to 10,000 years, some 80,000 acres that had 
been drawn down to less than 1,000 acres and were very toxic in nature. 
We resolved that and resolved the problems of two Indian tribes, two 
endangered species, some agricultural problems we had, and solved some 
water problems for the cities of Reno and Sparks.
  I mention how complicated that was, but the most difficult problem we 
had in the entire legislation was not the things I mentioned. It was 
not endangered species. It was not the wetlands. It was not all the 
other things I talked about. It was in the Lake Tahoe basin, in 
California and Nevada--it was what we did about those little water 
companies. Some of them were so small, as the chairman of the committee 
mentioned, they served 25 people. In Lake Tahoe there were over 100 
water companies. In some of them the systems were so bad they had to 
leave the water running all year or the lines would freeze up. This 
legislation will allow those small water systems to have the assurance 
there will be safe drinking water. We are not going to force them into 
doing anything.
  Since that time, a number of those companies have merged. We do not 
have the myriad of problems we had before. But, even if we did, this 
legislation takes into consideration small water companies like are in 
the Tahoe basin. So this legislation really, I believe, addresses the 
problems of rural America.
  We, in Congress, address the problems of big cities. We spend almost 
all of our time on big cities. The State of Nevada, surprisingly, is 
the most urban State in America. Mr. President, 90 percent of the 
people in Nevada live in the metropolitan areas of Reno and Las Vegas. 
Yet we are the seventh largest State of all the 50 States. We have 73 
million acres. But most of the land is not where most of the people 
are. Those people outside Reno and Las Vegas need the assurance they 
are going to have safe drinking water. I was born and raised in 
Searchlight, NV. It is a very small place. It is getting bigger. If you 
take all the little communities around Searchlight, they have 1,000 
people. We want to make sure the people of Searchlight have safe 
drinking water. This legislation does that. This legislation really 
takes care of rural America. It does not neglect rural America or urban 
America as we do many times.

  Is this good legislation? I think it is important legislation. It is 
reasonable reform. It benefits the communities and ensures the health 
and safety of Americans. It is legislation that is--I repeat--
compromise legislation. This is not just a catchy phrase. But this is 
reasonable reform, and it is true reform.
  Mr. President, I extend my congratulations to the chairman of the 
full 

[[Page S 17723]]
committee, and ranking member, and also the chairman of the 
subcommittee that I have worked with. He has been very reasonable. We 
have not agreed on everything all year, but he has made every effort to 
reach out to the rest of the subcommittee to make sure that we have all 
the input that we feel is necessary.
  I say this with the tremendous difficulty which we are having now 
with all the money things--the continuing resolution and extending the 
debt limit. I think people, especially in the other body, can take a 
real lesson from what this legislation is all about. I do not think 
there is anyone that I have come across that has had stronger 
principles in the legislative process than the Senator from Rhode 
Island, and certainly the Senator from Idaho, but they have had to 
compromise in this legislation.
  I say to the people in the other body as we are grinding down trying 
to work things out in the last few weeks of this legislative session--
everyone, Democrat and Republican alike--that they can look at this 
legislation and say there is hope for the money problems we have in 
this country, if they follow as an example what we have done here.
  This is true reform, and I think it is legislation that is at its 
best. I am happy to have been a part in this bill arriving to the point 
where it is now. This is good legislation.
  I ask the Members, both Democrats and Republicans, to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. KEMPTHORNE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho is recognized.
  Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I am pleased to stand here today in 
support of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995. I believe 
that this is a strong bill, that will improve public health, give 
States and local governments the authority and flexibility they need to 
target their scarce resources on high priority health risks, and lay 
the foundation for a safe and affordable drinking water supply into the 
21st century.
  Mr. President, this legislation is long overdue. Over the past year, 
I have heard from dozens of State and local officials, consumers, 
representatives from industry and even EPA. Their perspectives are 
different, but their message was a shared one: Virtually everyone 
agrees that the current law simply does not work. It does not target 
those contaminants most likely to be found in drinking water; it does 
not ensure that standards are set based on the best available, peer-
reviewed science; and it does not provide States and local governments 
with the tools that they need to ensure that citizens have safe and 
affordable drinking water.
  Jeffrey Wennberg, the mayor of Rutland, VT, said it best.

       There is no public health responsibility of greater concern 
     to local elected officials than the provision of consistently 
     safe, plentiful, and affordable drinking water. This is the 
     only product or service that we provide that directly affects 
     the health and well-being of every one of our constituents 
     every day. Unfortunately, the Safe Drinking Water Act, as 
     amended in 1986, has often confounded our efforts to meet 
     this responsibility.

  Federal policy makers agree. Former EPA Deputy Administrator Robert 
Sussman summed it up when he acknowledged that:

       Safe Drinking Water Act implementation has harmed the 
     agency's credibility by becoming a potent symbol of the 
     rigidity and costliness of Federal mandates on local 
     governments and the overprotectiveness of the EPA standard 
     setting process. Reforms should strive for maintaining 
     environmental protection while achieving more flexibility in 
     priority setting, lower compliance costs, and greater state 
     and local involvement in decision making.

  Many of the concerns raised by critics of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
are the direct result of unrealistic and in many cases overzealous 
mandates imposed by the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act. 
These amendments, although well-intentioned, went too far to one 
extreme--command and control regulation took the place of common sense. 
With the Federal Government at the helm, we imposed rule after rule on 
State and local governments, requiring them to spend literally billions 
of dollars to comply with burdensome Federal standards, often with 
little or no consideration of the true nature of the risk to public 
health, the cost of compliance, or the availability of less intrusive 
alternatives.
  Yet, while we are asking States and local governments to devote 
scarce resources to safeguard against potentially remote risks, we are 
ignoring more immediate and real risks to public health and safety. In 
1993, for example, a known disease-causing agent--cryptosporidium--
contaminated the drinking water supply in Milwaukee, WI. Over 400,000 
people became sick and 104 people died from the cryptosporidium 
outbreak. There have been other outbreaks of cryptosporidium 
contamination since then. Cryptosporidium was not regulated in 1993 and 
it still is not in 1995. Clearly, current law is not adequately 
protecting the public from true health threats. We need to do better. 
Americans should not get sick from their drinking water. It is time to 
change direction.
  The bill we are here today to debate responds to the legitimate 
concerns that have been raised and provides important midterm 
corrections to a regulatory scheme mired in ill-focused, often 
unjustified and certainly costly mandates. It reflects months of 
negotiations with various stakeholders and the efforts of many of my 
colleagues, particularly Senator Chafee, the chairman of the Senate 
Environment and Public Works Committee, with whom it is a great 
pleasure for me to work, and I appreciated the comments he made in his 
opening statement this morning; Senator Baucus, the ranking member of 
the committee; Senator Reid, the ranking member of the Senate 
Subcommittee on Drinking Water, Fisheries and Wildlife, of which I am 
the chairman. The partnership that Harry Reid and I have been able to 
forge I think suggests that there will be other successes which will 
come forward from that subcommittee, and I greatly appreciated his kind 
words this morning.
  I also want to acknowledge Senator Kerrey of Nebraska, who has been 
instrumental in the negotiations over drinking water reform. He was a 
catalyst toward a bipartisan effort here today. I appreciate the 
efforts of all of these individuals and the assistance over the past 
year.
  In drafting this legislation, we were guided by three fundamental 
principles. First and most importantly, we wanted not only to preserve 
public health, but also to improve it. Second, we wanted to strengthen 
the partnership between the Federal Government and State and local 
officials who are primarily responsible for providing safe and 
affordable drinking water. And third, we would impose no unfunded 
mandates. The bill that is before the Senate today satisfies each of 
these principles.
  Let me highlight a few of the key concepts of the legislation.
  First, the legislation substantially strengthens current law to 
ensure that all Americans have safe and affordable drinking water. It 
revises the standard setting process so that the Administrator is no 
longer required arbitrarily to identify and regulate 25 new 
contaminants every 3 years. Instead, the Administrator is given the 
authority and flexibility to target her regulatory resources on those 
contaminants that are actually present, or likely to be present, in 
drinking water, and that, based upon the best available peer-reviewed 
science, are found to pose a real risk to public health. Once the 
Administrator has identified a contaminant of concern, the bill 
requires that she evaluate several regulatory options, taking into 
consideration both the benefits of each option and the real costs that 
will be borne by those responsible for complying with any new 
standards.
  Our intent was simple. Drinking water standards should not be set 
just because they are technologically feasible as they are under 
current law; they must also be justifiable. If we are going to demand 
that our states, counties and towns spend billions of dollars to comply 
with new chlorine standards, for example, at the very least, we owe 
them the assurance that these are dollars well spent. We must be 
particularly sensitive to this when we apply, as we do in the Drinking 
Water Act, new standards to small communities that must already comply 
with and pay for numerous other Federal regulations. For example, one 
town in my home State of Idaho, McCall, with a 

[[Page S 17724]]
population of approximately 2,000, must invest in a new wastewater 
treatment plant, a new filtration system, and make improvements in its 
infrastructure to deliver drinking water. As one community leader told 
me, ``We've seen a 500-percent increase in our sewer rates, and we're 
struggling. If we have to go back and raise rates again, or float a 
bond, or whatever it takes to finance compliance with Federal 
requirements, we need to know that what we're being asked to do makes 
sense in terms of public health protection.'' As a former Mayor, I 
share his concerns.
  By targeting scarce resources on regulating contaminants that truly 
threaten public health, and by tailoring drinking water standards to 
maximize the benefits of regulation for the cost, we increase the 
overall level of protection that we offer everyday users of drinking 
water.
  The legislation also recognizes that in many cases, it is easier and 
more cost effective to prevent contaminants from getting into source 
water for a drinking water system, rather than to try to remove them by 
regulation after they are in the system. This bill encourages States to 
develop source water protection partnerships between community water 
systems and upstream stakeholders to anticipate and solve source water 
problems before they occur. These are voluntary, incentive-based 
partnerships. Our experience in my home State of Idaho has repeatedly 
demonstrated that these kinds of programs work, and work well. Locally-
driven solutions that stakeholders themselves develop in a non-
regulatory, nonadversarial setting will often achieve a far greater 
level of protection than otherwise through mandatory restrictions on 
land use or other regulations dictated by Federal agencies within the 
beltway. The bill's voluntary source water protection program provides 
another tool for States and local governments to improve public health, 
target local risks, and maximize resources.
  The legislation also strengthens the existing partnership between the 
Federal Government and the States in implementing the Safe Drinking 
Water Act. It preserves the strong role for the Federal Government in 
developing drinking water standards, but for the first time gives 
States the flexibility to tailor Federal monitoring and other 
requirements to meet their specific needs. This is just good common 
sense. It makes no sense, for example, to require Idaho drinking water 
systems to spend thousands of dollars to monitor for a pesticide that 
may be used only on citrus crops.
  The legislation also provides needed relief through a variance 
process to small, financially strapped systems. These systems, in 
certain circumstances, may use alternative, affordable treatment 
technologies that do not achieve full compliance with federal 
standards, provided that they achieve an overall level of improvement 
in their drinking water. These types of system specific adjustments are 
important because they allow States and local governments to target 
their scarce resources to achieve the greatest overall level of 
protection.
  One of the most significant elements of this legislation is the 
commitment for the first time of Federal resources to assure that the 
nation's drinking water supply is safe. The legislation authorizes up 
to $1 billion annually for a State revolving loan fund, which the 
States then match with an additional 20 percent. These funds will be 
available to States and local drinking water systems to construct 
needed treatment facilities to comply with Federal standards. We 
recognize that many communities simply cannot advance the funds that 
are needed to respond to new regulations. The Federal loan fund gives 
them the initial boost that they need.
  Importantly, the legislation also authorizes approximately $53 
million for health effects research, including research on the health 
effects of cryptosporidium and disinfectants, and their potential 
effect on sensitive groups, like pregnant women, children, and those 
with serious illnesses. I believe that this research is essential to 
ensure that we continue to target our regulatory resources on true 
threats to public health, while making sure that we never let another 
cryptosporidium outbreak take us by surprise.
  While flexibility, sound science, and reduced costs may be the 
watchwords of this legislation, it bears noting that the one term that 
you will not hear in connection with this bill is ``unfunded mandate.'' 
The 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act, by way of contrast, is the classic 
example of a Federal unfunded mandate that this Congress overwhelmingly 
rejected when we passed the Kempthorne-Glenn Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act this year.
  Using the 1986 law as a case study of an unfunded mandate, the 
Congressional Budget Office just last month issued a report which found 
that:

       State and local officials have voiced strong opposition in 
     recent years to the growing number of Federal requirements. 
     At the local level, environmental requirements are perceived 
     to be particularly onerous, and the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     is often cited as one of the most burdensome requirements.

  The report concluded that the average cost of compliance with 
existing drinking standards is between $1.4 billion and $2.3 billion 
per year. It went on to note that compliance costs could increase 
substantially as a result of four proposed regulations that EPA is 
currently considering. In fact, compliance with just one of these 
proposed regulations alone--the so-called disinfectants and 
disinfection by-products rule--could cost drinking water systems as 
much as $2.6 billion dollars per year once it is fully implemented. 
Most systems cannot afford these kinds of costs, particularly since the 
CBO study makes it clear that it is extremely uncertain that these 
costs will reduce health risks.
   Even without the Federal commitment of funds, there are in fact 
fewer mandates to fund than under current law.
  The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this legislation 
does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act. In its analysis of this legislation, the CBO stated that the 
legislation's standard setting provisions, including the risk 
assessment and cost benefit language would ``lower the cost of 
compliance for local water systems.'' The CBO concluded that ``the bill 
would likely result in significant net savings to state and local 
governments.''
  Make no mistake about it. This bill will work. It will improve public 
health and reduce our costs at the same time. Do not just take my word 
for it, though. Listen to those who are responsible for providing safe 
drinking water. They overwhelmingly support this legislation.
  The National League of Cities has said that the legislation:

       will strengthen and revise the current law to assure that 
     limited government resources are targeted on contaminants of 
     public health concern that are actually found in the nation's 
     drinking water supplies . . . The measure is creative and 
     innovative in that for the first time it establishes a 
     funding source to assist communities.

  The American Water Works Association:

       believes that this legislation is a major step forward in 
     the direction of better public health; safer drinking water; 
     and more responsive government. The sensible reforms 
     contained in this bill represent a common sense solution that 
     supports both environmental protection and regulatory reform.

  The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies has praised the 
legislation, stating that it:

       opens the door on a new era of Federal lawmaking, where the 
     Federal Government, States, and local government and the 
     public entities responsible for implementing the law, can 
     work together to solve problems that impact the entire 
     Nation.

  Even the EPA agrees. EPA Administrator Carol Browner recently 
appeared before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and 
testified that the agency is looking for a new drinking water law that 
``will strengthen public health protection; provide improved regulatory 
flexibility; promote preventive efforts to keep the pollution and 
contamination out of our drinking water in the first place; and provide 
public funding to help communities upgrade their drinking water 
facilities.'' This legislation, in her words, provides a ``framework 
and is a step in the right direction'' to achieve these important 
goals.
  In conclusion, Mr. President, we have taken an important step forward 
in improving the way in which we regulate drinking water. Does this 
legislation solve all the problems? Of course not. But it will bring 
common sense back into the standard setting process, 

[[Page S 17725]]
make it easier for states to comply with the most important 
requirements, streamline the bureaucracy, and reduce overall costs to 
most systems. And it will do all of this without jeopardizing public 
health. That is an achievement that we should all be extremely proud 
of.
  I hope that you will join me and Senator Chafee, Senator Baucus, 
Senator Reid, and Senator Kerrey in taking this first step and support 
this legislation.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. BAUCUS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kempthorne). The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Levin 
be added as a cosponsor of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today, the Senate begins consideration of 
S. 1316, a bill to reauthorize and reform the Safe Drinking Water Act.
  We all understand the need to reform the Safe Drinking Water Act. It 
contains a number of provisions that are too rigid and too costly.
  At the same time, we must protect public health. After all, this is 
not some theoretical exercise. We are talking about the water that we 
and our children drink. Two quarts a day, every day of our lives.
  To my mind, this bill strikes the right balance.
  It will reduce regulatory burdens. Unnecessary regulations, redtape.
  At the same time, it will not jeopardize public health. In fact, in 
several important ways, it will increase protection of public health.
  Before turning to details, I would like to take a few minutes to put 
this legislation in perspective.
  Mr. President, Americans expect to be able to turn on the tap, fill a 
glass, and drink the water--without getting sick. They expect safe 
drinking water in their homes and in their local communities.
  They expect safe drinking water when they move to a new community. 
They expect safe drinking water when they travel.
  When people from Conrad, MT visit Billings, Spokane, or Boston, or 
when people come to visit their nation's capital, they expect to be 
able to drink the water without getting sick or without the worrying 
about getting sick.
  Ever since 1974, the Safe Drinking Water Act has guided Federal, 
State and local efforts to assure that the water Americans drink is 
clean and pure. In the last several years, however, there has been 
growing concern that some provisions of the act misdirect Federal 
resources.
  There also has been concern that the act imposes regulatory burdens 
that local water systems simply cannot comply with, no matter how hard 
they try. More specifically, critics of the act point to several flaws:
  Local officials who operate drinking water systems, especially small 
systems, are buried under a mountain of redtape. The operators of these 
systems are trying to provide a basic public service to their 
neighbors. The job is difficult enough without monitoring requirements 
that cannot be met.
  There is another problem: Technology costs have skyrocketed. Again, 
this is particularly a burden on those who operate small systems in 
rural areas.
  These small systems have what the economists call limited economies 
of scale. They cannot spread their costs across a large number of 
ratepayers. Nevertheless, in many cases, it costs them just as much to 
comply with the law as it costs large urban systems who do spread their 
costs.
  On top of all of this, the standards-setting system in current law 
keeps rolling along, with 25 new contaminants regulated every 3 years, 
whether they are needed or not. And we have not provided federal funds 
to help communities meet their increased obligations.
  Because of all these problems, it seems that the Safe Drinking Water 
Act has become the very symbol of concern about unfunded mandates.
  But we have to get beyond symbolism, to solutions.
  That is exactly what this bill does.
  Senator Chafee, Senator Kemp-thorne, Senator Reid and I have been 
working closely, with Senators on both sides of the aisle, with the 
Administration, with the environmental community, and with State and 
local groups.
  As a result of this work, the bill before us today, S. 1316, makes 
significant improvements in the law.
  It creates a new State revolving loan fund for drinking water. It 
reforms the standards-setting process and the monitoring requirements. 
It lightens the burdens on small communities, while continuing to 
protect public health.
  It also addresses risk. We have had a lot of debates about risk 
assessment this year.
  Risk assessment is not a magic answer to all our problems. But it can 
be an important tool, applied to specific problems.
  This bill does that, by applying risk-based concepts to contaminant 
selection and standard-setting.
  Mr. President, our Chairman, Senator Chafee, has described the 
provisions of the bill ably and in detail.
  I would simply like to emphasize three features of the bill that I 
consider particularly important.
  First, the bill creates a new revolving loan fund. We all talk about 
unfunded mandates. With this bill, we put some money where our mouths 
are.
  The biggest problem facing drinking water systems, especially small 
systems, is the lack of funding to build adequate treatment facilities. 
They simply cannot afford to comply with the current requirements of 
the act.
  To address this, the bill establishes a State Revolving Loan Fund 
similar to the Clean Water Act revolving fund.
  The money can be used by all States to help communities comply with 
drinking water standards, restructure their operations, or find 
alternative sources of water.
  The fund is authorized at a level of $600 million in fiscal year 
1994, and thereafter at $1 billion annually through fiscal year 2003.
  Initially, grants for the drinking water State revolving funds will 
be distributed according to the formula currently used to allocate 
Federal grants to States for drinking water oversight programs.
  Beginning in fiscal year 1998, funds will be distributed according to 
the results of an EPA survey of drinking water needs.
  Another thing about the SRF. It provides flexibility. States can 
respond to their own needs. They can provide grants to disadvantaged 
communities. They can offset a program shortfall.
  They can help local water systems develop customized monitoring 
programs and source water programs.
  And they can shift funds between their clean water or drinking water 
revolving loan funds, in order to meet their most pressing problems.
  So we provide both funding and flexibility.
  A second important feature is the bill's reform of the regulatory 
program.
  For example, one of the most troublesome requirements, in all of our 
environmental laws, is the requirement that EPA regulate 25 additional 
drinking water contaminants every 3 years, whether or not those 
contaminants really threaten public health.
  As a result, EPA is required to issue regulations that may impose 
high costs for little public health benefit.
  The bill replaces that requirement with a new provision requiring EPA 
to periodically review the need to regulate additional contaminants. 
That way, we can focus our limited resources on the most important 
problems.
  The bill also reforms monitoring requirements, the standard setting 
process, and other elements of the law.
  In each case, the objective is to focus our resources on the most 
important problems.
  The third important feature is special help for small community water 
systems.
  In the country as a whole, more than 85 percent of the drinking water 
systems in this country are small.
  In my home state of Montana, 688 of the 694 community water systems 
serve less than 10,000 people, and there is not one system serving more 
than 100,000 people.
  While small systems only serve about 10 percent of the people, they 
bear about 40 percent of the cost of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
  The bill provides special help to small systems that cannot afford to 


[[Page S 17726]]
comply with the drinking water regulations and can benefit from 
technologies geared specifically to the needs of small systems.
  Here is how it would work. Any system serving 10,000 people or fewer 
may request a variance to install special small system technology 
identified by EPA. What this means is that if a small system cannot 
afford to comply with current regulations through conventional 
treatment, the system can comply with the act by installing affordable 
small system technology.
  Small systems that seek a variance will be protected from financial 
penalties while their application is being reviewed, and they would 
have 3 years to install the affordable technology.
  States approve the variance, but only if the technology provides 
adequate water quality and public health protection.
  So small systems are not forced to use big city treatment. But they 
must fully protect public health.
  Another way that this bill provides help to small systems is through 
technical assistance. Many small systems just need some advice on how 
to meet some of the requirements of the law or operate equipment. For 
example, the Rapelje water system in Yellowstone County, MT was advised 
through the technical assistance program in our State to install a 
pressure relief valve in its system, an action that will save the 
system a considerable amount in repairs.
  This bill recognizes the importance of the technical assistance 
program for small systems by increasing the authorization for the 
program and allowing the States to use up to 2 percent of their SRF 
money for small system technical assistance.
  Mr. President, putting all this together, the bill provides funding, 
reforms regulations, and recognizes the special problems of small rural 
systems.
  But in doing so, it does not relax existing standards or weaken 
provisions of the act that are necessary to protect public health.
  In fact, in addition to allowing EPA, States, and local communities 
to target resources to the greatest threats, the bill improves the 
act's enforcement and compliance provisions.
  And it improves the important provisions that require water system 
operators to alert people about drinking water problems in their 
communities, especially problems that create health threats.
  In summary, Mr. President, this bill is good news indeed.
  And not only because it improves the Safe Drinking Water Act.
  There is another reason. This bill shows that we can get something 
done around here.
  During this Congress, most debates about the environment have 
deteriorated into pitched partisan battles. Both sides have hardened.
  As a result, we have missed several opportunities to enact 
reasonable, balanced reforms that reduce regulatory burdens while 
improving environmental protection.
  The bill before us today is a refreshing exception. Republicans and 
Democrats have worked together, cooperatively. Sure, it has taken time. 
There have been painstaking negotiations. There has been compromise.
  But look at the result. We have been able to develop a bill that will 
result in meaningful reforms.
  A bill that will protect public health. And a bill that the public 
can, with confidence, support.
  I want to thank Senators Chafee, Kempthorne, and Reid for the work 
they have done to get this bill where it is today--unanimously reported 
from the Environment and Public Works Committee with more than 30 
cosponsors.
  I also want to thank the Administration and others for their hard 
work and spirit of cooperation.
  And I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to pass this 
bill through the Senate and enact it into law.

  Mr. President, here we are passing a very complicated, very important 
bill which dramatically affects a lot of small communities, and 
certainly every American, and yet there are very few Senators on the 
floor. There does not seem to be a lot of interest by some Senators to 
be here on the floor for this bill. Why is that? Basically, Mr. 
President, it is because this legislation, in addressing a real need, 
is done the right way.
  What do I mean by the right way? I mean not demagoging the issue. 
Senators on both sides of the aisle have worked very, very hard, 
particularly with interest groups around the country that were very 
interested in addressing drinking water problems in our Nation--small 
communities, large communities, Governors, mayors, environmental 
groups. And these groups, in trying to find a solution to the tradeoff 
between, on the one hand, protection--making sure our water is safe 
and, on the other hand, regulation, that is, not requiring too much 
regulation, trying to find the balance. We have done just that; we have 
found a balance.
  They have worked very, very hard. They have rolled up their sleeves. 
They have worked together to get the job done. And we are here today 
basically ratifying, putting together, that mutual effort of a lot of 
compromise on the part of a lot of people. That is often what happens 
around here. Those who really work hard and get the job done are not 
praised as much as they should be.
  In this case, it is all the various groups and people. It is also the 
chairman of the committee, Senator Chafee, the present occupant of the 
Chair, Senator Kempthorne, who chairs the subcommittee, also Senator 
Reid, the ranking member of the subcommittee, and many other Senators 
who worked very hard, and their staffs particularly worked very hard to 
get their job done.
  Now, what is the problem? What is the problem that this legislation 
addresses? Essentially, Mr. President, the problem is this. Over the 
years, Americans have become more and more demanding, as they should, 
that their water is safe. In 1986, they became quite concerned that the 
EPA, the administration at that time, was not quite doing the job that 
should have been done to make sure that our water in our country was 
safe. So the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act were 
passed. They were well-intended. They were amendments which directed 
the Environmental Protection Agency and directed States to 
significantly increase their standards, impose many more monitoring 
requirements. There were many more contaminants of concern identified 
than the EPA was setting standards for.

  Essentially, to help reassure Americans, because the job was not 
getting done, we passed the 1986 amendments. I think it is fair to say 
that the 1986 amendments that Congress passed went too far. They went 
too far in requiring the Environmental Protection Agency and the States 
to set too many standards, to regulate too much, to monitor too much 
and, basically, did not address the essential problem, that is, how to 
assure safer water at an affordable cost.
  For example, one of the provisions in the 1986 amendments was 
essentially to say, ``OK, EPA, we want you to set standards for at 
least 83 different contaminants.'' Up to that point, I think there were 
about 22 contaminants regulated. ``We want you to set standards for a 
total of 83, and beyond that, we want you, EPA, to set standards for 25 
additional contaminants every 3 years.'' That is stupid. It is nuts. 
There is no way in the world any agency could begin to do that much, 
with a tremendous additional burden on the Environmental Protection 
Agency.
  In addition, Mr. President, what was another consequence? Another 
consequence was the dramatic disproportionate cost for smaller 
communities. Let us just think a minute. If the EPA tells a water 
system in a community to monitor certain contaminants, and to set 
certain standards, and to essentially apply certain technology, 
regardless of the size of the system, it is very clear that the large 
cities are able to spread those costs out among many, many more people, 
so the cost per household is much lower. But if the very same 
monitoring requirements, the very same standards, and the very same 
requirements are imposed on smaller communities, it is clear there is 
no way in the world that a smaller community is going to be able to 
meet those very same standards, those very same requirements, without 
imposing a tremendous cost on individual households in that small 
system.
  That is particularly a problem, Mr. President, in my State of 
Montana. We 

[[Page S 17727]]
have about 698--I think that is the figure--community water systems. Of 
those, I think about 660--I hope my figures are right--are communities 
of under 10,000 people. We are a small-system State, which means that 
the 1986 amendments imposed tremendous disproportionate requirements on 
small communities.
  These are communities that want safe water. Sure, they want clean 
water. They want to do their best to make sure the water in their 
communities is just as safe, if not safer, than in big cities. But, my 
gosh, they are required to monitor for contaminants that do not exist. 
I have to tell you, monitoring may not sound like much, but it is very, 
very expensive to monitor for an individual contaminant. You multiply 
that for additional contaminants that may not be there--the law 
requires you to monitor for them anyway, spend the money anyway. It 
does not make any sense. In addition, the technologies that have to be 
installed are that much more expensive.
  Another big problem that the 1986 amendments created is a problem 
that you heard many times from many people: unfunded mandates. That is 
Uncle Sam saying, ``OK, community, you do this, you are going to take 
these requirements, but we are not going to give you the money for 
it.'' It just was not fair.
  As the occupant of the chair knows, this Congress, quite correctly, 
over the months earlier this year passed legislation to prohibit 
unfunded mandates. If my memory serves me correctly, one of the chief 
proponents of that legislation is the Senator from Idaho, and I commend 
him for it.
  This bill tries to address that problem by setting up a State 
revolving loan fund. It is $600 million the first year, and then it 
gets to $1 billion. It basically says, ``OK, States, we are going to 
change some of the requirements we passed in 1986. In addition to that, 
we are going to provide funds in the State revolving loan funds so 
systems can pay for some of the costs to install these technologies.''
  We are also saying to the States, ``Boy, you have lots of 
flexibility. You can pass money between the Safe Drinking Water Act 
revolving loan fund and the clean water revolving loan fund. You also 
can set up a technical assistance program to help smaller communities, 
even a grant program for smaller communities.'' There is a lot of 
flexibility here, as it should be.
  I will not take too much more time. Let me say, this is an example 
where Government is working. Government does not always work--we all 
know that--but sometimes Government does work. Here is a situation 
where Government can work. It may not be perfect. There are probably 
some areas where this legislation could be improved upon on the margin, 
but mainly, it is a very good, solid effort to find a commonsense, 
balanced solution to assure Americans that their water in their 
communities is safe and affordable.

  That is what this bill does. It accomplishes this result, because a 
lot of very good people have worked very, very hard, and they have not 
demagogued it and gone to the media. They just rolled up their sleeves 
and got the job done.
  I particularly commend the chairman of the committee, Senator Chafee. 
He has been the captain of the ship. He is at the helm. He set the 
tone, the mood and the approach to all this. We are here because he has 
done that.
  I very much hope--and this is the point the Senator from Nevada made 
earlier--that we can take this as an example or a paradigm of how to 
deal with other problems around here. As the Senator from Nevada 
pointed out, we are now locked in budget negotiations, a pitched 
battle, Republicans and Democrats, the Congress and the White House.
  Basically, Americans just want us to get the job done. They want us 
to compromise. They want us to balance the budget within 7 years, but 
do it fairly, do it evenhandedly, so all Americans are participating 
together as we get the job done together, just as we have done in this 
bill.
  Mr. President, this bill is a basic, commonsense, balanced solution 
of compromises, give and take, on both sides. We are getting the job 
done. I very much hope that the White House, I hope that the Congress, 
and, to be totally candid about this, I particularly hope the other 
body, particularly the majority party of the other body, in good faith 
sits down in these budget negotiations and compromises to get the job 
done.
  In summary, Mr. President, I want to particularly thank some 
Montanans who have worked very hard on this legislation over the years. 
The first that comes to mind is Dan Kyle. Dan Kyle sat down with me at 
the Heritage Inn in Great Falls, MT, I guess 6, 7, 8 years ago, talking 
about how horrendously expensive it is, inappropriately expensive, for 
small systems to meet the Federal requirements. That was a long time 
ago. Dan Kyle has labored in the vineyards. He has worked very, very 
hard--I believe he is head of the Montana Rural Water Association--
along with Ray Wadsworth and the rest of the Montana crew, and Jim 
Melsted. I know these same people exist in other States. I only know 
those three in Montana, and they have been just terrific. I want to 
compliment them particularly for their hard work. They are pretty proud 
that finally we got the job done.

  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, first, I want to thank the distinguished 
ranking member of the committee, Senator Baucus, for his kind comments. 
I know that we all share the sentiments that we work together to get 
something done. We are very fortunate in this committee to have a 
heritage, if you will, of cooperation. It has extended way back to 
Jennings Randolph and then to Bob Stafford, to Senator Pat Moynihan, 
and to the distinguished Senator from Montana himself when he was 
chairman of this committee. We have always tried to bring things out 
with bipartisan consensus, so we can move ahead. This legislation 
represents that.
  I am very pleased to be chairman of this committee when we have this 
heritage that I mentioned, and I want to pledge to all that I will 
continue that effort to bring everybody together, listen to each side 
and then have something--we will not always be as successful as this, 
16 to 0 in the committee, not a single dissenting vote from either 
side. That is what we want to use as a standard for the future.
  When the distinguished ranking member was chairman of the committee 
and brought this bill to the floor a year ago, it passed 93 to 3. It is 
pretty hard to beat that. If we can emulate that today or tomorrow, I 
will be very, very happy.


                     Committee Amendments, En Bloc

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee 
amendments be adopted, en bloc, and that the bill, as amended, by the 
committee amendments then be considered original text for the purpose 
of additional amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  So, the committee amendments, en bloc, were agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3068

  (Purpose: To authorize listing of point-of-use treatment devices as 
best available technology, modify loan authorities for the SRF program, 
 clarify the definition of public water system, and for other purposes)

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I send a managers' amendment to the desk 
and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Chafee], for himself, 
     Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. Baucus, and Mr. Reid, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3068.

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 19, line 23, insert ``(or, in the case of 
     privately-owned system, demonstrate that there is adequate 
     security)'' after ``source of revenue''.
       On page 20, line 24, insert ``and'' after ``fund;''.
       On page 21, strike lines 1 through 4.
       On page 21, line 5, strike ``(6)'' and insert ``(5)''.
       On page 42, line 16, strike ``title'' and insert ``section, 
     and, to the degree that an Agency action is based on science, 
     in carrying out this title,''. 

[[Page S 17728]]

       On page 69, line 24, strike ``level,'' and insert ``level 
     or treatment technique,''.
       On page 69, line 25, insert ``or point-of-use'' after 
     ``point-of-entry''.
       On page 70, line 1, strike ``controlled by the public water 
     system'' and insert ``owned, controlled and maintained by the 
     public water system or by a person under contract with the 
     public water system''.
       On page 70, line 6, strike ``problems.'' and insert 
     ``problems. The Administrator shall not include in the list 
     any point-of-use treatment technology, treatment technique, 
     or other means to achieve compliance with a maximum 
     contaminant level or treatment technique requirement for a 
     microbial contaminant (or an indicator of a microbial 
     contaminant). If the American National Standards Institute 
     has issued product standards applicable to a specific type of 
     point-of-entry or point-of-use treatment device, individual 
     units of that type shall not be accepted for compliance with 
     a maximum contaminant level or treatment technique 
     requirement unless they are independently certified in 
     accordance with such standards.''
       Beginning on page 165, line 20, strike all through line 
     page 166, line 2, and insert the following:
       ``(i) In general.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), a 
     connection to a system that delivers water by a constructed 
     conveyance other than a pipe shall not be considered a 
     connection, if--
       ``(I) the water is used exclusively for purposes other than 
     residential uses (consisting of drinking, bathing, and 
     cooking, or other similar uses);''.
       On page 166, line 3, strike ``(aa)'' and insert ``(II)''.
       On page 166, line 15, strike ``(bb)'' and insert ``(III)''.
       Beginning on page 167, line 5, strike all through page 167, 
     line 19.
       On page 168, line 1, strike ``and'' and insert ``or''.
       On page 168, lines 2 and 3, strike ``(I) and (II)'' and 
     insert ``(II) and (III)''.
       On page 168, line 3, strike ``and'' and insert ``or''.
       On page 168, strike lines 4 through 6 and insert the 
     following:
       ``(C) Transition period.--A water supplier that would be a 
     public water system only as a result of modifications made to 
     this paragraph by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 
     1995 shall not be considered a public water system for 
     purposes of the Act until the date that is two years after 
     the date of enactment of this subparagraph, if during such 
     two-year period the water supplier complies with the 
     monitoring requirements of the Surface Water Treatment Rule 
     and no indicator of microbial contamination is exceeded 
     during that period. If a water supplier does not serve 15 
     service connections (as defined in subparagraphs (A) and (B)) 
     or 25 people at any time after the conclusion of the two-year 
     period, the water supplier shall not be considered a public 
     water system.''.
       On page 178, line 21, strike ``180-day''.
       On page 179, lines 6 and 7, strike ``180-day''.
       On page 179, line 15, strike ``effect.'' and insert 
     ``effect or 18 months after the notice is issued pursuant to 
     this subparagraph, whichever is later.''.
       On page 195, after line 20, insert the following:
       ``(e) Prevention and Control of Zebra, Mussel Infestation 
     of Lake Champlain.--
       ``(1) Findings.--Section 1002(a) of the Nonindigenous 
     Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 
     U.S.C. 4701(a)) is amended--
       ``(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
       ``(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       ``(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) the zebra mussel was discovered on Lake Champlain 
     during 1993 and the opportunity exists to act quickly to 
     establish zebra mussel controls before Lake Champlain is 
     further infested and management costs escalate.''.
       ``(2) Ex-officio members of aquatic nuisance species task 
     force.--Section 1201(c) of such Act (16 U.S.C. 4721(c)) is 
     amended by inserting ``, the Lake Champlain Basin Program,'' 
     after ``Great Lakes Commission''.
       ``(3) Aquatic nuisance species program.--Subsections (b)(6) 
     and (i)(1) of section 1202 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 4722) is 
     amended by inserting ``, Lake Champlain,'' after ``Great 
     Lakes'' each place it appears.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--Section 1301(b) of 
     such Act (16 U.S.C. 4741(b)) is amended--
       ``(A) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, and the Lake 
     Champlain Research Consortium,'' after ``Laboratory''; and
       ``(B) in paragraph (4)(A)--
       ``(i) by inserting after ``(33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq.)'' the 
     following: ``and grants to colleges for the benefit of 
     agriculture and the mechanic arts referred to in the first 
     section of the Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 417, chapter 
     841; 7 U.S.C. 322) ``; and
       ``(ii) by inserting ``and the Lake Champlain basin'' after 
     ``Great Lakes region''.
       On page 195, after line 20, insert the following:
       ``(f) Southwest Center for Environmental Research and 
     Policy.--
       ``(1) Establishment of center.--The Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency shall take such action as may 
     be necessary to establish the Southwest Center for 
     Environmental Research and Policy (hereinafter referred to as 
     `the Center').
       ``(2) Members of the center.--The Center shall consist of a 
     consortium of American and Mexican universities, including 
     New Mexico State University; the University of Utah; the 
     University of Texas at El Paso; San Diego State University; 
     Arizona State University; and four educational institutions 
     in Mexico.
       ``(3) Functions.--Among its functions, the Center shall--
       ``(A) conduct research and development programs, projects 
     and activities, including training and community service, on 
     U.S.-Mexico border environmental issues, with particular 
     emphasis on water quality and safe drinking water;
       ``(B) provide objective, independent assistance to the EPA 
     and other Federal, State and local agencies involved in 
     environmental policy, research, training and enforcement, 
     including matters affecting water quality and safe drinking 
     water throughout the southwest border region of the United 
     States; and
       ``(C) help to coordinate and facilitate the improvement of 
     environmental policies and programs between the United States 
     and Mexico, including water quality and safe drinking water 
     policies and programs.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator 
     $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1996 through 2003 to 
     carry out the programs, projects and activities of the 
     Center. Funds made available pursuant to this paragraph shall 
     be distributed by the Administrator to the university members 
     of the Center located in the United States.''.
       On page 195, after line 20, insert the following:
       ``(g) Estrogenic Substances Screening Program.--
       ``(1) Development.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall develop 
     a screening program, using appropriate validated test 
     systems, to determine whether certain substances may have an 
     effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a 
     naturally occurring estrogen, or such other endocrine effect 
     as the Administrator may designate.
       ``(2) Implementation.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, after obtaining review 
     of the screening program described in paragraph (1) by the 
     scientific advisory panel established under section 25(d) of 
     the Act of June 25, 1947 (chapter 125), and the Science 
     Advisory Board established by section 8 of the Environmental 
     Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 
     U.S.C. 4365), the Administrator shall implement the program.
       ``(3) Substances.--In carrying out the screening program 
     described in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall provide 
     for the testing of all active and inert ingredients used in 
     products described in section 103(e) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9603(e)), and may provide for the testing of 
     any other substance if the Administrator determines that a 
     widespread population may be exposed to the substance.
       ``(4) Exemption.--Notwithstanding paragraph (3), the 
     Administrator may, by regulation, exempt from the 
     requirements of this subsection a biologic substance or other 
     substance if the Administrator determines that the substance 
     does not have any effect in humans similar to an effect 
     produced by a naturally occurring estrogen.
       ``(5) Collection of information.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall issue an order 
     to a person that manufactures a substance for which testing 
     is required under this subsection to conduct testing in 
     accordance with the screening program described in paragraph 
     (1), and submit information obtained from the testing to the 
     Administrator, within a time period that the Administrator 
     determines is sufficient for the generation of the 
     information.
       ``(B) Failure to submit information.--
       ``(i) Suspension.--If a person referred to in subparagraph 
     (A) fails to submit the information required under such 
     subparagraph within the time period established by the order, 
     the Administrator shall issue a notice of intent to suspend 
     the sale or distribution of the substance by the person. Any 
     suspension proposed under this subparagraph shall become 
     final at the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date 
     that the person receives the notice of intent to suspend, 
     unless during that period a person adversely affected by the 
     notice requests a hearing or the Administrator determines 
     that the person referred to in subparagraph (A) has complied 
     fully with this paragraph.
       ``(ii) Hearing.--If a person requests a hearing under 
     clause (i), the hearing shall be conducted in accordance with 
     section 554 of title 5, United States Code. The only matter 
     for resolution at the hearing shall be whether the person has 
     failed to submit information required under this paragraph. A 
     decision by the Administrator after completion of a hearing 
     shall be considered to be a final agency action.
       ``(iii) Termination of suspensions.--The Administrator 
     shall terminate a suspension under this subparagraph issued 
     with respect to a person if the Administrator determines that 
     the person has complied with this paragraph.
       ``(6) Agency action.--In the case of any substance that is 
     found to have a potential adverse effect on humans as a 
     result of testing and evaluation under this subsection, the 
     Administrator shall take such action, including appropriate 
     regulatory action by rule or by order under statutory 
     authority 

[[Page S 17729]]
     available to the Administrator, as is necessary to ensure the 
     protection of public health.
       ``(7) Report to congress.--Not later than 4 years after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall 
     prepare and submit to Congress a report containing--
       ``(A) the findings of the Administrator resulting from the 
     screening program described in paragraph (1);
       ``(B) recommendations for further testing and research 
     needed to evaluate the impact on human health of the 
     substances tested under the screening program; and
       ``(C) recommendations for any further actions (including 
     any action described in paragraph (6)) that the Administrator 
     determines are appropriate based on the findings.''.

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, let me briefly say what this is. The 
managers' amendment does the following: It clarifies the new definition 
for the term ``public water system.'' It strengthens standard setting 
for bottled water as recommended by the bottled water industry. It 
allows EPA to list more cost-effective, point-of-use treatment devices 
as best available technology; it includes Lake Champlain in the program 
to control the infestation of zebra mussels in the Great Lakes; it 
authorizes assistance to a university consortium called the Southwest 
Center for Environmental Research and Policy; it requires EPA to 
conduct a screening program for the estrogenic effects of pesticides, 
and it makes two changes to the loan provisions of the new SRF program, 
State revolving loan fund program. Overall, it clears seven issues that 
Senators have brought to our attention.
  So, Mr. President, I urge adoption of the managers' amendment.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, these provisions under the managers' 
amendment are essentially technical and clarification amendments, which 
Senator Chafee, myself, Senator Reid, and the occupant of the chair I 
know has also looked at. I think they are good improvements to the 
bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3068) was agreed to.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3069

(Purpose: To require additional research prior to the promulgation of a 
                         standard for sulfate)

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I send an additional managers' amendment 
to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Chafee], for himself, 
     Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. Baucus, and Mr. Reid, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3069.

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       Beginning on page 61, line 11, strike all through page 62, 
     line 16, and insert:
       ``(A) Additional research.--Prior to promulgating a 
     national primary drinking water regulation for sulfate the 
     Administrator and the Director of the Centers for Disease 
     Control shall jointly conduct additional research to 
     establish a reliable dose-response relationship for the 
     adverse health effects that may result from exposure to 
     sulfate in drinking water, including the health effects that 
     may be experienced by groups within the general population 
     (including infants and travelers) that are potentially at 
     greater risk of adverse health effects as the result of such 
     exposure. The research shall be conducted in consultation 
     with interested States, shall be based on the best available, 
     peer-reviewed science and supporting studies conducted in 
     accordance with sound and objective scientific practices and 
     shall be completed not later than 30 months after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph.
       ``(B) Proposed and final rule.--Prior to promulgating a 
     national primary drinking water regulation for sulfate and 
     after consultation with interested States, the Administrator 
     shall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking that shall 
     supersede the proposal published in December, 1994. For 
     purposes of the proposed and final rule, the Administrator 
     may specify in the regulation requirements for public 
     notification and options for the provision of alternative 
     water supplies to populations at risk as a means of complying 
     with the regulation in lieu of a best available treatment 
     technology or other means. The Administrator shall, pursuant 
     to the authorities of this subsection and after notice and 
     opportunity of public comment, promulgate a final national 
     primary drinking water regulation for sulfate not later than 
     48 months after the date of enactment of this paragraph.''.

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, let me explain this amendment. What it 
does is it modifies the standard-setting provisions of the bill for one 
contaminant, sulfate.
  What is sulfate? It is a naturally occurring substance that 
contaminates some groundwater used for drinking water, particularly in 
the Western States.
  The 1986 amendments required EPA to issue a standard for sulfates. It 
is one of the 83 contaminants we previously discussed. But EPA has not 
completed the job yet. Part of the problem has been inadequate 
scientific information on the adverse health effects caused by sulfate. 
We know that adverse effects occur, but we do not know exactly what 
concentration levels must occur to cause the effects.
  This amendment requires EPA and the Centers for Disease Control to 
collect more information before a standard is set. The amendment also 
delays the deadline for issuing a standard so that this research might 
be completed. Senators Pressler and Daschle from South Dakota and 
Senator Grams from Minnesota have expressed particular interest in 
resolving the scientific questions associated with sulfate, and we 
thank them for their interest and help in preparing this amendment.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, we have examined the amendment and think 
it is a good improvement. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I rise today to commend Chairman Chafee, 
Subcommittee Chairman Kempthorne, and Senator Baucus, as ranking member 
of this committee, for their hard work in drafting this bill. 
Certainly, we need a uniform system of Federal laws and regulations to 
maintain the public health and safety of our drinking water. These laws 
must be reasonable. They must make sense.
  The bill before us, S. 1316, would go a long way to bring common 
sense to safe drinking water regulations. This is good news for small 
cities and rural communities. For example, S. 1316 would require the 
EPA to provide sound scientific background for future drinking water 
standards. In addition, this legislation would grant flexibility to 
small water systems that cannot always afford the expensive treatment 
technology to comply with Federal regulations.
  S. 1316 represents a reasonable approach to drinking water 
regulation.
  I am particularly pleased that my colleagues agreed to improve the 
original language in section 9, regarding the levels of sulfates 
allowed in drinking water supplies. This original provision would have 
required that communities provide bottled water as an alternative to 
water containing sulfate. This provision is similar to a proposed 
Environmental Protection Agency regulation that would require 
communities to limit sulfate in drinking water. However, there is no 
scientific study to prove that these low levels of sulfate in drinking 
water result in negative health affects.
  As originally drafted, the bill would have affected roughly one-
quarter of all the water systems in South Dakota--108 of the 483 water 
systems in the State. The South Dakota Department of Environment and 
Natural Resources [DENR], which opposed both section 9 and the EPA's 
proposed sulfate rule, has estimated that the costs of compliance for 
those affected water systems would have been 40 to 60 million. That was 
just the initial cost of compliance. Small, rural communities in South 
Dakota should not be forced to pay such a high price to enforce a 
regulation that has no valid scientific justification.
  Let me put these figures in real terms we can all understand. The 
largest of the 108 affected South Dakota communities would have been 
Madison, with a population of 6,395 people. Currently, the average 
water bill for each household in Madison is $13.75 per month. According 
to the South Dakota DENR, if the original section 9 were enacted, the 
additional cost to each household would have been almost $14 per month. 
That would have meant an average monthly water bill of $27.75--a 101 
percent increase. Remember, this figure is for the largest of the 
affected communities.

  Let us take Big Stone City, SD, as another example. With a population 
of 

[[Page S 17730]]
670 people, Big Stone City has the median population of the 108 
communities in South Dakota affected by the original sulfate proposal. 
Currently, the average monthly water bill per household in Big Stone 
City is $9.80. If the original section 9 were to become law, each 
household in that community would have seen its water bill rise about 
$12.00, for a total monthly bill of $21.80. That would be a dramatic 
122 percent increase. Just imagine the impact this provision could have 
on communities even smaller than Big Stone City.
  Mr. President, what would these communities have gotten in return for 
these shocking rate increases? Nothing. That is right. Nothing. For 
years, South Dakotans have been drinking water containing sulfate with 
no apparent adverse health effects.
  In response to the concerns of my constituents, my colleagues on the 
committee agreed to suspend the current EPA rule. Instead, additional 
research conducted jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and the 
EPA would be required on the health affects of various dose levels of 
sulfate in drinking water on the broader population. The EPA then would 
propose a new regulatory standard for sulfate based on the findings of 
this study, and on the standards set forth by this bill.
  I am convinced that this additional study will prove once and for all 
that the sulfate which occurs naturally in much of South Dakota's 
drinking water causes no harmful side affects. The revised sulfate 
provisions of section 9 also have received the endorsement of the South 
Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the South 
Dakota Municipal League.
  Mr. President, like all Americans, South Dakotans certainly want safe 
and healthy drinking water. But they also want Federal rules that are 
reasonable, understandable and flexible.
  By passing this bill, we are finally taking much-needed steps to 
solve the problems associated with the current safe drinking water law. 
I am happy that I was able to work with the chairman to develop 
sensible language to reduce the impact of burdensome sulfate 
regulations on small cities and rural water systems in South Dakota and 
other States.
  Again, I thank Chairman Chafee for his leadership and for 
accommodating the concerns of my constituents. I also want to thank my 
friend from Minnesota, Senator Grams, for working with me to ensure 
that we achieve a commonsense legislative solution on this matter.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3069) was agreed to.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, my staff has been working with the 
floor leaders on S. 1316, the Safe Drinking Water Act, relative to an 
amendment which has been discussed at some length. I am sure the 
chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee will respond to 
the status of the amendment. But it would authorize the administrator 
of the Environmental Protection Agency to make grants. May I check with 
the floor leader relative to the status of my amendment authorizing the 
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to make grants to 
Alaska to improve rural sanitation by paying the Federal share, 50 
percent, of the cost of those improvements?
  I would like to offer the amendment, if the leader has not offered it 
and speak very briefly on it.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the Senator from Alaska had two amendments 
and both of those, it is my understanding, could be resolved and 
accepted. Frankly, we are in the midst of working that out now.
  Why not go ahead and describe the amendment, and at the conclusion of 
the Senator's description maybe we can arrive at a position where the 
amendment could be accepted.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. President, my amendment authorizes the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency to make grants to Alaska because of the 
unique rural sanitation conditions in my State. It would improve rural 
sanitation by assisting with the Federal share--50 percent--of the 
costs of specifically two items. One, the development and construction 
of water and wastewater systems, and second, the training, technical 
assistance, and educational programs relating to the operation and 
management of sanitation services.
  The purpose of the amendment is to ensure future funds are provided 
to improve Alaska's rural sanitation conditions. Our delegation--
Senator Stevens, Representative Young, and myself--have supported $15 
million in the EPA's budget this year for rural sanitation, and Senator 
Stevens on the Appropriations Committee has obtained appropriations in 
previous years. The problem we have is that the residents of rural 
Alaska simply do not have adequate drinking water or sanitation 
facilities. As a consequence, we have an abnormally high amount of 
sickness and disease, and on some occasions, conditions can be compared 
to some Third World countries, unfortunately.
  It is estimated that about one-fourth of Alaska's 86,000 Native 
residents live without running water and use plastic buckets for 
toilets. These are commonly called ``honey buckets.'' As a consequence, 
Mr. President, we have had numerous cases of hepatitis A among 
villagers, in some instances causing death.
  I have a chart here which depicts the level of existing wastewater 
services in rural Alaska communities, and as the Chair will note the 
area in dark blue indicates about 49 percent of the chart, which is the 
area of the population dependent on pit privies or honey buckets; 37 
percent have flush toilets; 14 percent have a haul system where the 
honey bucket man comes once a week and hauls the sewage away.
  In over half of the villages in Alaska, water is hauled to the home 
by hand from a washeteria, watering points, or from a creek or river. A 
washeteria is a centrally located community building with washing and 
drying machines, showers, and so forth. Often times, Mr. President, the 
trash can is used as a water storage tank. Water for drinking, hand 
washing, and doing dishes comes from this household trash can, and you 
can imagine the potential for disease as a consequence of that type of 
transmission. Existing water service levels in rural Alaska have 
improved, but they have a long way to go. Only 40 percent of rural 
Alaska has piped water to residents; 30 percent use a washeteria; 20 
percent use a year round watering point; 7 percent have individual 
wells, and 3 percent have no system at all. One can imagine the 
residents of this city living without the convenience of running water 
or toilets that flush.
  In conclusion, I will continue to work to provide safe drinking water 
to rural Alaska and along with my colleague, Senator Stevens, we want 
to see the elimination of the honey bucket in rural Alaska. That is a 
goal. And as the country moves toward the 21st century, Alaska's rural 
residents should not have to live in these conditions, again often 
compared to Third World countries.
  I wish to especially acknowledge Carol Spils of my staff who has been 
working with the Environment and Public Works Committee for a long time 
on this legislation.
  I would ask that the amendment be considered at this time by the 
committee. If there are additional details to be worked out, I would be 
happy to pursue them currently or if the floor managers are satisfied 
with them, why, I would ask they be included in the package. I would 
send up the amendment and modification, if it is appropriate.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, as I understand the modification, it is to 
set a time limit on the authorization, am I correct, to the year 2003, 
and thus be in conformity with the rest of the legislation? 

[[Page S 17731]]

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. The floor manager is correct. I thank my friend from 
Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. That would be fine. If we could make that modification, 
and if the Senator would submit that, then that would be accepted. Then 
we would proceed to accept his amendment.


                           Amendment No. 3070

     (Purpose: To authorize the Administrator of the Environmental 
  Protection Agency to make grants to the State of Alaska to improve 
                sanitation in rural and Native villages)

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Then, Mr. President, I would send the modification to 
the desk and ask for its consideration at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ashcroft). The clerk will report the 
amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Murkowski] for himself, Mr. 
     Chafee, Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. Baucus, and Mr. Reid, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3070:

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 195, after line 20, insert the following:
       ``(g) Grant To Alaska To Improve Sanitation in Rural and 
     Native Villages.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency may make grants to the State of Alaska for 
     the benefit of rural and Native villages in Alaska to pay the 
     Federal share of the cost of--
       ``(A) the development and construction of water and 
     wastewater systems to improve the health and sanitation 
     conditions in the villages; and
       ``(B) training, technical assistance, and educational 
     programs relating to the operation and management of 
     sanitation services in rural and Native villages.
       ``(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of the 
     activities described in paragraph (1) shall be 50 percent.
       ``(3) Administrative expenses.--The State of Alaska may use 
     an amount not to exceed 4 percent of any grant made available 
     under this subsection for administrative expenses necessary 
     to carry out the activities described in paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Consultation with the state of alaska.--The 
     Administrator shall consult with the State of Alaska on a 
     method of prioritizing the allocation of grants under 
     paragraph (1) according to the needs of, and relative health 
     and sanitation conditions in, each eligible village.
       ``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary for 
     each of the fiscal years 1996 through 2003 to carry out this 
     subsection.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, as I understand it, this sets the time 
limit of 2003?
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. That is my understanding and my intent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3070) was agreed to.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CHAFEE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Let me take this opportunity to thank my colleagues 
for their accommodation on this matter. It is very meaningful to 
Alaska. Rural Alaska will be extremely pleased to see this continued 
progress.
  I also wish to again thank Carol Spils.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I want to alert my colleagues to a 
provision of this bill which we are negotiating which I think could be 
very pernicious and go well beyond anything that has to do with safe 
drinking water, would expand potentially the authority of EPA to 
evaluate and issue cost-benefit ratios which, in turn, could affect 
Federal actions, across the broad spectrum of Federal action.
  I am referring to section 28, beginning on page 179 of the bill. 
Under this provision, the Administrator of the EPA can select major 
Federal actions, and we know that a major Federal action can be 
anything from drilling in ANWR, building a highway, having a timber 
sale, granting a loan--most anything. The Administrator of EPA would 
determine what he thinks would have a significant impact upon the 
environment and then would do a benefit-cost ratio on that major 
Federal action.
  It tells him how to consider the benefits, and under section 6 on 
page 185, he is told to ``estimate the monetary value, and such other 
values as the Administrator determines to be appropriate, of the 
benefits associated with reducing risk'', for example, of ``(C) 
preserving biological diversity,'' ``(D) maintaining aesthetically 
pleasing environment,'' and other things with respect to regulating the 
chemistry of the air, so that, under this provision, the Administrator 
of the EPA has the specific authority to come up with a rating and a 
benefit-cost ratio to deal with, for example, a timber sale regarding 
the spotted owl.
  So that the Administrator of the EPA, who is now not in the loop on 
determining a lot of these things, before you know it, there would be a 
benefit-cost ratio that would say this timber sale or this drilling in 
ANWR or the building of this highway or the granting of this loan has a 
benefit-cost ratio of only 50 percent and does not pass anybody's 
muster in terms of benefit-cost ratio.
  There is no requirement of peer review. There is no requirement of 
making a rulemaking where the interested parties would be brought in. 
There is just simply a broad mandate to the Administrator of EPA to go 
look around at any place in the Federal Government where there is a 
major Federal action that may affect pollution--``pollution'' being 
broadly defined--in which the Administrator of EPA can then take into 
consideration everything from aesthetics to biodiversity. Mr. 
President, this could be a very, very bad provision.
  The intent of the provision, of course, is good. The intent of the 
provision is to rank various sources of pollution, to look at the 
relative risks of different sources of pollution. Everyone agrees with 
that. But the grant of authority under section 28 under this bill is so 
broad that many Federal Departments will wake up one day and find out 
something that they had been working on for a long time, let us say the 
building of a highway, suddenly becomes not feasible because EPA has 
determined that it had a benefit-cost ratio of only 50 percent and, 
therefore, should not be built.
  I suppose the determination that EPA made could be the basis of 
declaring a regulation or major Federal action to be arbitrary and 
capricious. It could affect major Federal actions all across the board 
including, presumably, the Department of Defense, Department of the 
Interior, Department of Energy. You name it, the Administrator of EPA 
could make that determination that it does not pass benefit-cost ratio.
  Again, as the author of the original bill on risk assessment in the 
last Congress, I very strongly support the idea of relative risk and 
risk assessment, but I believe in an attempt to deal with this issue. 
This bill imperfectly does it, and I hope before this bill is finished 
that we can strike these provisions.
  S. 343, the regulatory reform bill, deals with this issue, I believe, 
in a better way, because with respect to benefit-cost ratios, S. 343 
provides for a rulemaking and peer review, a rulemaking in which all 
interested parties would be involved, a rulemaking in which the agency 
itself, which is putting out the regulation, would have the 
responsibility of running the rulemaking.
  Under this, EPA does not have to peer review, does not have to give 
notice to interested parties. They can simply select around throughout 
the Federal establishment any Federal action which they wish to deal 
with and declare it to be not passing the cost-benefit analysis, 
because it fails to preserve biodiversity or fails to ``maintain an 
aesthetically pleasing environment.''
  That is what it says, Mr. President. It may not be the intent. It may 
be correctable. I hope it is. But I believe section 28 ought to be 
stricken.
  Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair. 

[[Page S 17732]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I want to thank the distinguished Senator 
from Louisiana for his thoughts on this. What we are doing now is 
seeking out and we are going to discuss this with the principal 
proponent of section 28. It is possible that we can do what the Senator 
from Louisiana suggests.
  The Senator from Louisiana has some proposals that, in effect, deal 
with regulatory reform in section 5, as I understand it. My question 
is, would he be prepared to drop those provisions?
  As I understand, he has another amendment that deals with section 5. 
What I would like to do is, frankly, get all references to regulatory 
reform out of this bill. We could discuss it now, or we could meet and 
have a quorum call. I know the Senator from Texas has comments on 
another subject. But I would like to discuss with the Senator from 
Louisiana what I previously suggested, namely dropping the section 5 
proposals he has suggested.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, the section 5 is a slightly different 
subject matter. I would certainly be very interested in talking to the 
Senator about that. I do believe section 28 ought to be dropped in its 
entirety. The problem is, if we do not drop it in its entirety, that 
will engender amendments to put in the reg reform S. 343 provisions, 
and that is going to engender a huge debate. It seems to me that that 
debate ought to be put off until another day and not be engrafted upon 
the Safe Drinking Water Act.
  The risk assessment on section 5 does have to do with safe drinking 
water because it determines how you do risk assessment with respect to 
drinking water. Section 28 really does not deal with safe drinking 
water at all. That is why I think section 28 ought to be dealt with 
separately. We would be prepared to discuss section 5 at any time the 
Senator wishes to.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, what I suggest is that we have those 
discussions now. I know the Senator from Texas is ready to go. There is 
a gap here, and I do not know how long the Senator would like.
  Mr. GRAMM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, whenever I can serve the good of the Senate 
by speaking on another subject so that the discussion can occur, I leap 
to the opportunity.
  Mr. CHAFEE. I was going to suggest 20, 30 minutes.
  Mr. GRAMM. I do not know that I will go that long, but I will suggest 
the absence of a quorum when I finish.
  Mr. CHAFEE. That will be fine.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Will the Senator yield for a unanimous-consent request?
  Mr. GRAMM. Yes.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Carl Mazza, a 
fellow with Senator Moynihan's office, be permitted to have floor 
privileges during consideration of this bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________