[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 44 (Friday, March 19, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3001-S3002]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. COVERDELL (for himself, Mr. Breaux, Mr. DeWine, and Mr. 
        Grams):
  S. 669. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
ensure compliance by Federal facilities with pollution control 
requirements; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


       the federal facilities clean water compliance act of 1999

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
with the senior Senator from Louisiana, the senior Senator from Ohio, 
and the junior Senator from Minnesota. This legislation--the Federal 
Facilities Clean Water Compliance Act of 1999--will guarantee that the 
federal government is held to the same full range of enforcement 
mechanisms available under the Clean Water Act as private entities, 
states, and localities. Each federal department, agency, and 
instrumentality will be subject to and comply with all Federal, State, 
and local requirements with respect to the control and abatement of 
water pollution and management in the same manner and extent as any 
person is subject to such requirements, including the payment of 
reasonable service charges.
  It has been over twenty-six years since the enactment of the Clean 
Water Act. This Act has been an effective tool in improving the quality 
of our nation's rivers, lakes, and streams. Over that period of time, 
however, states have not had the ability to impose certain fines and 
penalties against federal agencies for violations of the Clean Water 
Act. This is a double standard that should not be continued.
  In 1972, Congress included provisions on federal facility compliance 
with our nation's water pollution laws in section 313 of the Clean 
Water Act. Section 313 called for federal facilities to comply with all 
federal, state, and local water pollution requirements. However, in 
1992, the United States Supreme Court ruled in U.S. Dept. of Energy v. 
Ohio, that States could not impose certain fines and penalties against 
federal agencies for violations of the Clean Water Act and the Resource 
Conservation Recovry Act (RCRA). Because of this decision, the Federal 
Facilities Compliance Act (H.R. 2194) was enacted to clarify that 
Congress intended to waive sovereign immunity for agencies in violation 
of RCRA. Federal agencies in violation of the RCRA are now subject to 
State levied fines and penalties. However, this legislation did not 
address the Supreme Court's decision with regard to the Clean Water 
Act. The Federal Facilities Clean Water Compliance Act of 1999 makes it 
unequivocally clear that the federal government waives its claim to 
sovereign immunity in the Clean Water Act.
  The federal government owns hundreds of thousands of buildings, 
located on millions of acres of land, none of which have to abide by 
the same standards as a private entity does under the Clean Water Act. 
This legislation simply ensures that the federal government lives by 
the same rules it imposes on everyone else.
  I would like to thank Senator Breaux, Senator DeWine, and Senator 
Grams for cosponsoring this important legislation, and look forward to 
working with them and my other colleagues in the United States Senate 
on its speedy consideration.
  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I'm pleased to join Senator Coverdell, 
Senator DeWine and Senator Grams in introducing the ``Federal 
Facilities Clean Water Compliance Act of 1999.''
  My primary reason for sponsoring the bill is to make the federal 
Clean Water Act equitable by requiring that it apply to and be enforced 
against the federal government.
  Currently, states, local governments and the private sector do not 
have immunity from the act's enforcement. By the same principle, the 
federal government should not be granted such immunity from the clean 
water statute and this bill provides that parity.
  The bill also provides that the federal government would be subject 
to all the same enforcement mechanisms that apply to states, local 
governments and the private sector under the Clean Water Act.
  Fairness, safety, public health and environmental protection all 
dictate that Federal agencies should be held to the same standards for 
water pollution prevention and control as apply to states, local 
governments and the private sector.
  Equity is ensured by our bill because all levels of government and 
the private sector would be treated the same under the Clean Water 
Act's enforcement programs. No one would be allowed immunity.
  To paraphrase a well-known adage, what's good for states, local 
governments and the private sector in terms of clean water should be 
good for the federal government.
  In addition to the provisions stated previously, the bill reflects 
the adage's fairness principle in another fashion.
  The bill would hold the federal government accountable to comply not 
only with its own clean water statute, but also with state and local 
clean water laws. Again, equity would be upheld. And, safety, public 
health and environmental protection would be strengthened.
  Other provisions are contained as well in the legislation which 
Senator Coverdell, Senator DeWine, Senator Grams and I are introducing 
today. For example, the EPA administrator, the Secretary of the Army 
and the Secretary of Transportation would be authorized to pursue 
administrative enforcement actions under the Clean Water Act against 
any non-complying federal agencies. It also includes provisions for 
federal employees' personal liability under the act's civil and 
criminal penalty provisions and a requirement that the federal 
government pay reasonable service charges when complying with clean 
water laws.
  Over the years, the United States has made dramatic advances in 
protecting the environment as a result of the Clean Water Act. We have 
all benefitted as a result.
  Today, I encourage other Senators to join Senator Coverdell, Senator 
DeWine, Senator Grams and me as cosponsors of the bill to bring equity 
to the clean water program and to make possible the expansion of its 
public and private benefits.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senators Coverdell, 
Breaux, and Grams in introducing the Federal Facilities Clean Water 
Compliance Act of 1999. This legislation would

[[Page S3002]]

hold the Federal Government accountable under the Nation's Federal 
water laws. Today, states, local governments and the private sector 
must all comply with each and every Federal, State, and local water 
requirement. The Federal Government does not.
  Although Congress included provisions requiring Federal facilities to 
comply with the Nation's water pollution laws in 1972, the United 
States Supreme Court ruled that State governments could not impose 
certain fines and penalties against Federal agencies for violations of 
the Clean Water Act. While other legislation has forced the Federal 
Government to comply with other environmental statutes, Congress has 
not yet brought Federal facilities into compliance with the 
requirements on the prevention and control of water pollution.
  This legislation, however, guarantees that the Federal Government is 
(1) held to the same enforcement mechanisms under the Clean Water Act 
as private entities, states, and localities; (2) complies with all of 
the Federal, State, and local requirements on the prevention and 
control of water pollution; and (3) is responsible for the payment of 
reasonable service charges.
  The Clean Water Act celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary two years 
ago. As a result, the entire nation has benefitted from cleaner water. 
In the interests of fairness, the Federal Government should not be 
granted immunity from the Nation's clean water laws any longer. For the 
sake of fairness, public safety and health, and environmental 
protection, the Federal Government should be held to the same standards 
for water pollution prevention and control as states, local governments 
and the private sector.
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Federal 
Facilities Clean Water Compliance Act of 1999. I would like to thank 
Senator Coverdell for bringing this important legislation forward again 
in the 106th Congress.
  Quite simply, this legislation would force federal agencies to comply 
with the provisions of the Clean Water Act--something I believe most 
citizens assume already takes place. Unfortunately, when Congress 
passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, it left an out for federal agency 
compliance with the law by allowing them to claim ``sovereign 
immunity'' for protection against state actions or fines. So when 
federal agencies are not complying with provisions of the Clean Water 
Act, they can state in court that they are above the law.
  I have always believed that the government must live under the same 
rules that it forces everyone else to live under. Any government which 
attempts to subvert the law or hide from responsibility by claiming 
``sovereign immunity'' from environmental protection requirements, is a 
government that is above the people it serves, rather than a servant of 
the people. This legislation would reverse that trend, and force the 
federal government to waive sovereign immunity when a state brings an 
action under the Clean Water Act. And the bill ensures that any money 
that state receives as a result of such an action is placed back into 
programs that protect the environment or defray the costs of 
environmental protection or enforcement.
  I believe it is important that federal agencies comply with the 
environmental standards Congress mandates everyone else must comply. By 
passing the legislation we are offering today, we can restore a degree 
of certainty to the American people and to our states and localities 
that their federal government is not exempt from protecting the 
environment and that their federal government is not above the law. 
That is why I am proud to cosponsor this legislation. I look forward to 
working with Senators Coverdell, DeWine, and Breaux over the coming 
weeks and months in bringing this matter before the full Senate for 
debate and a vote.
                                 ______