[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 31 (Friday, March 9, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2119-S2121]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 503. A bill to amend the Safe Water Act to provide grants to small 
public drinking water systems; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have spent a great deal of time, as we 
should, focusing on President Bush's tax cut. There are some 
differences that have been noted on numerous occasions. My point is, 
there are many other issues about which we need to be engaged.
  Yesterday in the Environment and Public Works Committee, we did some 
very good work. We reported a bill out of that committee dealing with 
brownfields. The Acting President pro tempore, who is presiding, was a 
cosponsor of that legislation last year. It is very important 
legislation. It will allow the cleanup of about 450,000 sites that now 
are blighted sites, most of them in city centers--where there may have 
been a dry cleaner there before, or there may have been some business--
and there may be some toxic substances in the ground.
  This legislation will allow the cleanup to go forward. It will allow 
these places to become productive.
  We have already identified, for example, in Nevada, some 30 sites 
that need to be cleaned up, producing hundreds of jobs and millions and 
millions of dollars on the tax rolls. We did this. It shows that we can 
do things on a bipartisan basis.
  The subcommittee is run by Senators Boxer and Chafee. They work very

[[Page S2120]]

well together. There was bipartisan support for this legislation. I am 
very proud of what the committee did.
  I hope, with the schedule that we have, we can have this on the 
floor, and we can pass this out of here, and send it to the House, 
within the next month. It is good legislation.
  Mr. President, communities in Nevada and nationwide are facing a 
crisis in their ability to provide clean, affordable drinking water to 
the public.
  Dramatic population growth in some areas of the country has only 
increased the demand for more drinking water.
  At the same time, standards are being adopted by local, State, and 
Federal governments to assure the safety of drinking water supplies.
  Because of this, communities all across the country are facing the 
need to install, upgrade, and replace their drinking water 
infrastructure. That is why I and Senator Ensign are introducing the 
Small Community Safe Drinking Water Funding Act.
  However, the cost of putting this infrastructure in place is 
staggeringly high. The Environmental Protection Agency has recently 
estimated that to meet the Nation's needs, our communities' drinking 
water infrastructure will require an investment of more than $150 
billion over the next 20 years.
  While communities of all sizes face the crisis in drinking water 
infrastructure, the greatest burden is on small communities.
  For example, the per-household cost for water infrastructure 
improvements is almost four times higher for small systems than for 
large ones.
  One reason for this disproportionate impact is that small public 
drinking water systems are so numerous--representing nearly 95 percent 
of all systems. It is that way in Nevada and most western states.
  In my home State of Nevada, the percentage is even greater. Upwards 
of 98 percent of public drinking water systems in the Silver State are 
small systems.
  Also, because small communities lack the tax base and economies-of-
scale of larger communities, they typically incur much higher per-
household costs in upgrading their drinking water infrastructure 
improvements.
  In Nevada alone, small communities will need to invest hundreds of 
millions of dollars over the next 20 years in drinking water 
infrastructure.
  The dilemma faced by small communities has been highlighted recently 
by EPA's new drinking water standard for arsenic.
  Arsenic is a naturally occurring contaminant that impacts drinking 
water supplies in Nevada, and other States throughout the west and 
northeast.
  The public health threat posed by arsenic in drinking water is well-
established by scientists.
  Despite the public health need, many small communities will find it 
extremely difficult to finance improvements needed to meet the arsenic 
standard.
  This is because EPA estimates that compliance with this standard will 
increase annual household water costs in communities of less than 
10,000 people from between $38 to $327--an increase in water costs 
roughly 10 times greater than for communities with more than 10,000 
people.
  In Nevada, we have very few communities of more than 10,000. We have 
Las Vegas, Reno, Henderson, Sparks, Elko, Carson City. This has a 
tremendous impact in Nevada.
  Due to these costs to small communities, some have called for the 
standard to be rolled back. In fact, the Bush administration has held 
up the implementation of the regulation, and is currently considering 
whether or not to nullify it.
  A roll-back of the new arsenic drinking water standard would be a 
serious mistake.
  The old drinking water standard for arsenic had not been revised in 
over 55 years.
  In 1999, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the scientific 
data on arsenic and urged EPA to implement a lower, more protective 
standard as quickly as possible.
  The new EPA arsenic standard--the one currently under review by the 
Bush Administration--was set at the very level as the standard adopted 
by the World Health Organization almost a decade ago.
  Undoing EPA's new arsenic standard would deny millions of American 
families access to safe drinking water.
  Rolling back this standard is simply the wrong way to ensure clean, 
reliable, and affordable water to all Americans.
  The right way to address the new arsenic standard, as well as the 
crisis this country faces with its drinking water infrastructure, is 
for the Federal Government to provide a helping hand to communities to 
meet their drinking water needs.
  Take my home State of Nevada for example. The city of Fallon, a 
small, rural community in the northwest part of the State, has been 
wrestling with high levels of naturally-occurring arsenic in its public 
water supply for decades. When I served in the State legislature in the 
1960s, this was a problem. It still is.
  Despite the difficulties involved in solving its arsenic problem, the 
city is not asking for a roll-back of EPA's new arsenic standard.
  On the contrary, the city very much wants to meet the new standard so 
that it can provide safe drinking water to its citizens.
  What the city needs, in order to accomplish this, is our financial 
help. It is a national problem, and we should help.
  I should add, even though there is naturally occurring arsenic in the 
water in Fallon, it may have been exacerbated by a Federal project, the 
first Bureau of Reclamation project in the history of the country, in 
1902, when it sent water from the Truckee River into Churchill County. 
It may have raised the arsenic level higher than it would have been 
otherwise.
  Currently, the primary source of Federal assistance for local 
drinking water projects is the EPA's Drinking Water State Revolving 
Loan Fund.
  This fund--which I, along with others on the Senate Environment and 
Public Works Committee, helped add to the Safe Drinking Water Act when 
it was amended in 1996--has been an overwhelming success.
  Since its inception, the Fund has allowed States to provide more than 
1,200 low-interest loans totaling over $2.3 billion for upgrading and 
installing drinking water systems.
  However, many small and disadvantaged communities are left out of the 
State revolving fund program.
  Many of these communities do not attempt to participate in the 
program because they lack the financial resources to meet the terms of 
loans.
  Although we added a provision to the act in 1996 allowing loans to be 
subsidized for disadvantaged communities, a significant number of 
States have not taken advantage of it.
  Therefore, many small, cash-strapped communities receive little or no 
financial assistance form the Federal Government, at a time when they 
are faced with costly improvements to systems like that of Fallon, NV.
  Today, I and Senator Ensign introduce a bill to address the needs of 
communities that face the greatest difficulties in ensuring clean 
drinking water for their residents.
  It will ensure that our Nation's small, disadvantaged communities 
have access to the financial help they need to provide safe, reliable, 
and affordable drinking water.
  This bill, the Small Community Safe Drinking Water Funding Act, 
accomplishes this goal by establishing a program to provide almost $750 
million annually to Indian tribes and States, so they can make grants 
to public water systems that serve small communities.
  I would like to highlight several key aspects of the bill:
  First, the Small Community Safe Drinking Water Act provides 
substantial flexibility to States.
  Each State choosing to participate in the grant program will receive 
an allocation of money from EPA, based on the drinking water 
infrastructure needs of that State.
  The State can then distribute this money as grants according to the 
State's own prioritization of communities' needs.
  Second, the act streamlines the workload associated with a new grant 
program by taking advantage of procedures already in place through the 
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program.
  The identification of communities in most need of grant support is 
coordinated with the annual ``Intended Use Plans'' already required of 
States by the State revolving fund.

[[Page S2121]]

  States can also administer grants through the same agencies that 
currently administer State revolving fund loans.
  Third, the drinking water treatment needs of Indian tribes and 
Alaskan native villages are addressed through a $22.5 million EPA-
administered grants program modeled after the one established for 
States.
  This money will be targeted, in the form of grants, to those small 
communities determined to be in most need of drinking water system 
improvements.
  Finally, the act ensures that small, disadvantaged communities 
receiving grants have access to technical assistance through non-profit 
organizations.
  These organizations have established relationships with small 
communities, as well as a solid track record in helping these 
communities to solve their drinking water problems.
  These organizations will be able to assist small communities to plan, 
implement, and maintain the drinking water projects funded through 
grants.
  Nevada's small communities are facing a drinking water infrastructure 
crisis.
  These communities, and other small communities nationwide, confront 
increasing demand for clean, reliable, and affordable drinking water.
  But it is simply too costly for small communities, alone, to address 
this water infrastructure crisis.
  They need a financial helping hand from the Federal Government.
  The bill I and Senator Ensign are introducing today will provide this 
much-needed Federal helping hand.
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this important legislation and work 
with us to see that it is swiftly enacted.
                                 ______