[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 82 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1119-E1120]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. ROBERT A. BORSKI

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 21, 2000

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4635) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
     agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other 
     purposes,

  Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Hinchey-Waxman 
amendment and to express my opposition to the anti-environment 
provisions contained in the bill and its report.
  Mr. Chairman, it seems as though we go down this road every year--
fighting riders and report language designed specifically to stop the 
Environmental Protection Agency from advancing the protection of human 
health and the environment.
  Just a few short weeks ago, the Majority claimed to have adopted a 
policy of no anti-environmental riders in appropriations bills. 
Unfortunately for human health and the environment, this is not the 
case. Instead, the Majority has determined to place anti-environmental 
provisions in the Committee Report. This amendment is necessary to undo 
that harm.
  Mr. Chairman, I am particularly concerned that the report 
accompanying this bill would prohibit EPA from removing contaminated 
sediments from rivers and lakes, even where such removal has been 
thoroughly studied and is the correct response. Contaminated sediments 
pose huge risks to human health and the environment.
  Mr. Chairman, we all know that there are two sites that drive this 
issue every year--the Hudson River and Fox River--which are both 
heavily contaminated with PCBs.
  This broad language will stop or delay cleanups not only at these two 
sites, but also at 26 other sites in 15 states. It is time to stop 
interfering with EPA protecting human health and the environment, and 
support the Hinchey-Waxman amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I also am deeply troubled by language in the bill that 
would prevent EPA from spending any money to advance the process of 
developing and implementing the program for Total Maximum Daily Loads, 
or TMDLs.
  The TMDL program is the final phase of the Clean Water Act. It is the 
mechanism by which we will fulfill the promise made to the American 
public in 1972 to make the Nation's waters fishable and swimmable.
  The opposition to the TMDL rule is badly misguided and fueled by an 
unwillingness to achieve water quality in a fair and timely manner. The 
TMDL process is the most effective, most rational, and most defensible 
way to achieve water quality. Let me describe it.
  First, states identify those waters where the water quality standards 
that the states developed are not being met.
  Second, states identify the pollutants that are causing the water 
quality impairment.
  Third, states identify the sources of those pollutants.
  Finally, states assign responsibility for reducing those pollutants 
so that the waters can meet the uses that the states have established.
  We have made great improvements in water quality through the 
treatment of municipal waste and industrial discharges. But these point 
sources are no longer the greatest source of impairment. Nationally, 
the greatest problem is nonpoint sources, and now, nearly 30 years 
after the Clean Water Act, it is time for the states to get all sources 
of pollution to be part of the solution.
  Mr. Chairman, while the TMDL process may be complicated in its 
execution, it is the most fair and efficient way to clean up the 
Nation's waters. The TMDL rule is not a perfect rule. Many have 
criticized it, including some in the environmental community. However, 
the majority of the environmental community supports going forward. The 
Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies supports going forward. I 
am attaching letters that demonstrate this support. I hope that EPA 
does in fact move forward, and that the harmful language in the bill is 
eliminated.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support for the Hinchey-Waxman amendment and 
submit the following communications for the Record.

                                                    June 19, 2000,
     U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative. On behalf of the organizations listed 
     below, we are writing to you in strong opposition to an anti-
     environmental rider on the FY 2001 VA-HUD appropriations bill 
     regarding the Clean Water Act's TMDL program, which may go to 
     the House floor as early as today. Our organizations have 
     consistently opposed all anti-environmental riders, and we 
     urge you to oppose this and other such anti-environmental 
     riders on appropriations bills this year.
       The section of the VA-HUD Sub-Committee report, under EPA-
     Environmental Programs and Management, attempts to use a 
     rider to interfere with EPA's rulemaking process and guidance 
     on the Clean Water Act. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) are 
     part of the Clean Water Act's strategy for attaining and 
     maintaining water quality standards in polluted waters. They 
     require that states identify all sources of pollution that 
     impair the uses of waterbodies, such as drinking, swimming or 
     aquatic habitat. Once identified, the TMDL process is a way 
     to ensure that responsibility for reducing the pollution is 
     fairly allocated. The conservation community considers this 
     rider an attack on a key opportunity under the Clean Water 
     Act to clean up our nation's waterways. Furthermore, we have 
     serious concerns about Congress' interference with the 
     rulemaking process with a rider.
       Moreover, Committee report language encourages EPA to 
     revoke a Clean Water Act guidance document issued by the 
     agency's

[[Page E1120]]

     Region IX related in part to the TMDL program that is deemed 
     by the Committee to be too ``stringent'' for the business 
     community. The Committee's intervention on behalf of 
     polluters and the States to prevent a strong TMDL program by 
     discouraging regional offices from adopting guidance to 
     implement the law is an anti-environmental attack on the 
     Clean Water Act. The Region IX guidance at issue is a 
     clarification of long-standing Clean Water Act legal 
     requirements.
       The provision of the proposed TMDL rule which has generated 
     the most controversy is the silviculture provision. In 
     response to industry and congressional concerns, the U.S. EPA 
     last week announced that the TMDL rule that is expected to be 
     finalized this summer will not include this provision.
       We believe the TMDL program of the Clean Water Act offers 
     the best opportunity to clean up our nation's polluted waters 
     comprehensively and equitably. We urge you to uphold the 
     interests of the Clean Water Act and the value of the TMDL 
     program by opposing this rider.
           Sincerely,
       Elizabeth McEvoy, Center for Marine Conservation.
       Ted Morton, American Oceans Campaign.
       Daniel Rosenberg, Natural Resources Defense Council.
       Paul Schwartz, Clean Water Action.
       Steve Moyer, Trout Unlimited.
       Rick Parrish, Southern Environmental Law Center.
       Ann Mills, American Rivers.
       Jackie Savitz, Coast Alliance.
       Norma Grier, NW Coalition for Alts to Pesticides.
       Jim Rogers, Friends of Elk River.
       Jennifer Schemm, Grand Ronde Resource Council.
       Steve Huddleston, Central Oregon Forest Issues Committee.
       Mick Garvin, Many Rivers Group, Sierra Club.
       James Johnston, Cascadia Wildlands Project.
       Asante Riverwind, Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project.
       Mettie Whipple, Eel River Watershed Association, Ltd.
       Bill Marlett, Oregon Natural Desert Association.
       Elizabeth E. Stokey, Organization for the Assabet River.
       Pepper Trail, Rogue Valley Audubon Society.
       Ed Himlan, Massachusetts Watershed Coalition.
       James S. Lyon, National Wildlife Federation.
       Nina Bell, Northwest Environmental Advocates.
       David Anderson, Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
       Barry Carter, Blue Mountain Native Forest Alliance.
       Daniel Hall, American Lands.
       Bruce Wishart, People for Puget Sound.
       Ric Bailey, Hells Canyon Preservation Council.
       Mary Scurlock, Pacific Rivers Council.
       Francis Eatherington, Umpqua Watersheds, Inc.
       Hillary Abraham, Oregon Environmental Council.
       Karen Beesley, Nurse Practitioner.
       John Kart, Audubon Society of Portland.
       Mr. Benson, Association of Northwest Steelheaders.
       Maria Van Dusen, Massachusetts Riverways Program.
       Glen Spain, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's 
     Associations.
       Pine duBois, Jones River Watershed Association.
       Michael Toomey, Friends of Douglas State Forest.
       Ellen Mass, Friends of Alewife Reservation.

                                  ____
                                  

                                                    Association of


                               Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies,

                                    Washington, DC, June 16, 2000.
     Re municipalities support EPA's revised TMDL program.
     Hon. Robert A. Borski,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.

       Dear Representative Borski: In August 1999, EPA released 
     proposed regulatory revisions to clarify and redefine the 
     current regulatory requirements for establishing Total 
     Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) under the Clean Water Act (CWA) 
     Sec. 303(d). Recognizing that the proposed rule has undergone 
     some significant changes in the past year, the Association of 
     Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) supports EPA's efforts 
     to revise the existing TMDL program, as well as its schedule 
     for finalizing the revisions by June 30, 2000.
       AMSA anticipates that the final rule will be a major 
     improvement over the existing TMDL program, which has 
     traditionally focused solely on controlling point sources, 
     i.e., municipalities and industry, rather than developing 
     comprehensive solutions to the nation's water quality 
     problems. During the past 30 years, point sources of water 
     pollution--wastewater treatment plants, industry, and 
     others--have met the challenges of the Clean Water Act to 
     achieve our national clean water goals. The investment in 
     wastewater treatment has revived America's rivers and 
     streams, and the nation has experienced a dramatic resurgence 
     in water quality. However, according to the U.S. 
     Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 40 percent of our 
     waters remain polluted--largely by nonpoint source pollution. 
     The situation will not improve until we include all sources 
     in the cleanup equation.
       EPA's revised rule is expected to encourage the development 
     of implementation plans for TMDLs that provide a ``reasonable 
     assurance'' that all sources of pollution, point and 
     nonpoint, will be addressed as part of a cleanup plan. 
     Development of implementation plans will ensure that the 
     regulated community and the public have an opportunity to 
     review and understand how the regulatory agencies will 
     respond to local water quality problems. Implementation plans 
     will also help to ensure that municipalities, which hold many 
     of the nation's existing discharge permits, are not forced to 
     remove increasingly minimal amounts of pollutants from their 
     discharge at significant expense, while the major pollution 
     contributions from uncontrolled sources remain unaddressed. 
     Implementation plans, while requiring extra time and 
     resources to develop, will encourage holistic solutions that 
     will meet water quality goals, and will likely save billions 
     of dollars nationwide by ensuring proper expenditure of 
     limited local resources.
       In addition to ensuring more involvement from all sources 
     of pollution, EPA's revised rule is also expected to improve 
     the existing TMDL program in several other areas including:
       Improved ability for the regulated community and the public 
     to review decisions by state and federal regulatory agencies 
     to include or exclude waters on TMDL lists--Currently, this 
     lack of protocol has led to the listing of many impaired 
     waters based upon outdated or very limited data, with very 
     little ability for public input or review. Requirements to 
     develop and follow these protocols will help to ensure that 
     TMDLs are properly developed using technically-based, 
     scientific approaches, which are supported by data of 
     adequate quality and quantity.
       Allowing new or expanded discharges on impaired waters--
     Current regulations at 40 CFR Part 122.4 effectively prohibit 
     new discharges to impaired waters during TMDL development. 
     EPA's revised proposal should provide more flexibility for 
     new dischargers, or the expansion of existing discharges 
     during the 8 to 15-year TMDL development process by allowing 
     new or increased discharges where adjustments in source 
     controls will result in reasonable progress toward 
     environmental improvements. Given that 40,000 waters are 
     currently on EPA's impaired water list, this flexibility is 
     critical if we are to allow for the continued economic 
     viability and growth of our nation.
       Providing more realistic deadlines--The existing TMDL 
     program is currently being driven by the courts, with 
     extremely ambitious schedules and deadlines for developing 
     and implementing TMDLs. These deadlines will likely result in 
     poorly developed TMDLs based on little or inadequate data, or 
     grossly simplified TMDLs that fail to address costly 
     implementation issues. EPA's revised rules are expected to 
     allow up to 15 years to develop TMDLs, which will provide a 
     more realistic timeframe to develop and analyze the necessary 
     data needed to properly develop adequate TMDLs.
       While AMSA still has some concerns with EPA's revised rule, 
     we do believe that the program revisions will provide greater 
     clarity concerning the roles and responsibilities of all 
     stakeholders in the TMDL process, and would make significant 
     improvements in our efforts to improve the nation's water 
     quality. We therefore urge you to oppose any legislative 
     efforts that may interfere with EPA's ability to issue and 
     implement its comprehensive TMDL program revisions.
       If AMSA's staff or member POTWs in your home state can 
     assist you in any way, please call me at (202) 833-4653. 
     Thank you for your consideration of our request.
           Sincerely,
                                                         Ken Kirk,
                                               Executive Director.

     

                          ____________________