[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 176 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H10186-H10193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       WATER INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AND RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT ACT

  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill

[[Page H10187]]

(H.R. 3178) to authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to provide 
funding to support research, development, and demonstration projects 
for the security of water infrastructure, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3178

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Water Infrastructure 
     Security and Research Development Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) the term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency;
       (2) the term ``research organization'' means a public or 
     private institution or entity, including a national 
     laboratory, State or local agency, university, or association 
     of water management professionals, or a consortium of such 
     institutions or entities, that has the expertise to conduct 
     research to improve the security of water supply systems; and
       (3) the term ``water supply system'' means a public water 
     system, as defined in section 1401(4) of the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f(4)), and a treatment works, as 
     defined in section 212 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1292), that is publicly owned or principally 
     treating municipal waste water or domestic sewage.

     SEC. 3. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM SECURITY RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator, in consultation and 
     coordination with other relevant Federal agencies, shall 
     establish a program of research and development activities to 
     achieve short-term and long-term improvements to technologies 
     and related processes for the security of water supply 
     systems. In carrying out the program, the Administrator shall 
     make grants to or enter into cooperative agreements, 
     interagency agreements, or contracts with research 
     organizations.
       (b) Projects.--Awards provided under this section shall be 
     used by a research organization to--
       (1) conduct research related to or develop vulnerability 
     assessment technologies and related processes for water 
     supply systems to assess physical vulnerabilities (including 
     biological, chemical, and radiological contamination) and 
     information systems vulnerabilities;
       (2) conduct research related to or develop technologies and 
     related processes for protecting the physical assets and 
     information systems of water supply systems from threats;
       (3) develop programs for appropriately disseminating the 
     results of research and development to the public to increase 
     awareness of the nature and extent of threats to water supply 
     systems, and to managers of water supply systems to increase 
     the use of technologies and related processes for responding 
     to those threats;
       (4) develop scientific protocols for physical and 
     information systems security at water supply systems;
       (5) conduct research related to or develop real-time 
     monitoring systems to protect against chemical, biological, 
     and radiological attacks;
       (6) conduct research related to or develop technologies and 
     related processes for mitigation of, response to, and 
     recovery from biological, chemical, and radiological 
     contamination of water supply systems; or
       (7) carry out other research and development activities the 
     Administrator considers appropriate to improve the security 
     of water supply systems.
       (c) Guidelines, Procedures, and Criteria.--
       (1) Requirement.--The Administrator shall, in consultation 
     with representatives of relevant Federal and State agencies, 
     water supply systems, and other appropriate public and 
     private entities, publish application and selection 
     guidelines, procedures, and criteria for awards under this 
     section.
       (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 90 days before 
     publication under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall 
     transmit to Congress the guidelines, procedures, and criteria 
     proposed to be published under paragraph (1).
       (3) Diversity of awards.--The Administrator shall ensure 
     that, to the maximum extent practicable, awards under this 
     section are made for a wide variety of projects described in 
     subsection (b) to meet the needs of water supply systems of 
     various sizes and are provided to geographically, socially, 
     and economically diverse recipients.
       (4) Security.--The Administrator shall include as a 
     condition for receiving an award under this section 
     requirements to ensure that the recipient has in place 
     appropriate security measures regarding the entities and 
     individuals who carry out research and development activities 
     under the award.
       (5) Dissemination.--The Administrator shall include as a 
     condition for receiving an award under this section 
     requirements to ensure the appropriate dissemination of the 
     results of activities carried out under the award.

     SEC. 4. EFFECT ON OTHER AUTHORITIES.

       Nothing in this Act limits or preempts authorities of the 
     Administrator under other provisions of law (including the 
     Safe Drinking Water Act and the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act) to award grants or to enter into interagency 
     agreements, cooperative agreements, or contracts for the 
     types of projects and activities described in this Act.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Administrator to carry out this Act $12,000,000 for each 
     of the fiscal years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.
       (b) Availability.--Funds appropriated under subsection (a) 
     shall remain available until expended.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Boehlert) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) will 
each control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).


                             General Leave

  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislate days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and to include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 3178.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3178, the Water Infrastructure Security and 
Research Development Act, or WISARD, as we call it, authorizes the 
Environmental Protection Agency to provide assistance for research and 
development of anti-terrorism tools for water infrastructure 
protection. The Committee on Science has worked hard to bring forth to 
this House a bipartisan broadly supported bill that responds to the 
growing threats facing our country's drinking water and wastewater 
systems.
  Mr. Speaker, fences, guards dogs, and bottled water are not a 
sustainable approach to water infrastructure security. That is why my 
colleagues and I, with the help and support of water management 
agencies, State and local officials, engineering companies, and experts 
in the scientific community introduced and advanced the legislation 
before us today. H.R. 3178 is an important first step in ensuring that 
we have the research and development our country needs to combat 
biological, chemical, physical, and cyberterrorist threats today, 
tomorrow, and into the future. It focuses on not just short-term 
research needs, but also intermediate and, importantly, long-term 
needs.
  Just as it took the greatest scientific minds and technological 
advances to win World War II and the Cold War, the success of America's 
new war will be measured not only on the battlefield, but also in the 
laboratory. H.R. 3178 is a big step down that path. The WISARD bill 
will help us identify and assess vulnerabilities, enhance our 
prevention and response measures, and ensure long-term security.
  The testimony we received from experts in national security, water 
management, and scientific research confirmed the compelling need for 
this bill. While there are certain immediate actions we can take to 
increase the security of our water supplies, we cannot lose sight of 
the longer-term questions and opportunities involving technologies. 
H.R. 3178 responds with a focused research and development program to 
help answer the necessary questions and develop the technological 
solutions in collaboration with EPA's public and private partners.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is just one example of the Committee on 
Science's efforts regarding terrorism since September 11, 2001. We have 
held hearings and moved bills relating to cyberterrorism and 
information technology. We have had detailed hearings on bioterrorism, 
exploring issues of anthrax decontamination, how clean is clean and how 
coordinated is coordinated in terms of the Federal response. We have 
also looked at the interoperability issues and the interdependence of 
water systems and other critical infrastructures, such as 
telecommunications, energy and transportation. H.R. 3178 builds upon 
this record.
  I should also explain that the text of this bill is essentially the 
text of H.R. 3178 as approved by the Committee on Science on November 
15, 2001. We made additional clarifications and revisions after 
consultation with committees expressing a jurisdictional interest in 
the bill.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to particularly thank the gentleman from

[[Page H10188]]

Washington (Mr. Baird) for his leadership, and the 46 other cosponsors 
who have helped shape and advance this legislation. My colleagues on 
the Committee on Science, including the ranking minority member the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), and the chairman and ranking minority 
members of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) 
respectively, approved H.R. 3178 unanimously on November 15.
  I also want to thank the chairman of the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young); chairman of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. 
Tauzin); and the chairman of the Committee on Resources, the gentleman 
from Utah (Mr. Hansen), for their suggestions and cooperation in 
clarifying some of the bill's provisions.
  Mr. Speaker, at this point, I enter into the RECORD background 
materials on H.R. 3178, including the exchange of correspondence 
between the Committee on Science and the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

                          Purpose of the Bill

       The purpose of H.R. 3178 is to authorize the Environmental 
     Protection Agency (EPA) to provide assistance for research 
     and development of technologies and related processes to 
     strengthen the security of water infrastructure systems.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

       Federal, state and local governments have spent tens of 
     billions of dollars to build the nation's drinking water and 
     wastewater treatment infrastructure. In the coming decades, 
     tens of billions more will be required to maintain that 
     infrastructure and meet the needs of a growing population. 
     What has become clear in recent years and, even more so after 
     the September 11, 2001 attacks, is that while the nation's 
     water infrastructure provides safe and plentiful water to 
     more than 250 million Americans, the system was not built 
     with security from terrorism in mind.
       How can the nation respond successfully to this new and 
     daunting challenge? Success will depend on, among other 
     things, focused and sustained research to: (1) Assess 
     potential physical, chemical and cyber vulnerabilities of the 
     system, (2) develop techniques for real-time monitoring to 
     detect threats, (3) conduct research on mitigation, response 
     and recovery methods, and (4) develop mechanisms for widely 
     disseminating and sharing information. H.R. 3178 directly 
     addresses these needs by specifically authorizing water 
     system infrastructure research and development projects and 
     by authorizing funding to carry out this important work.


                          water infrastructure

       Approximately 170,000 ``public water systems'' provide 
     water for more than 250 million people in the United States. 
     The Safe Drinking Water Act defines public water system as 
     ``a system for the provision to the public of water for human 
     consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances, 
     if such system has at least 15 service connections or 
     regularly serves at least 25 individuals . . . and includes 
     collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities 
     used primarily in connection with the system.'' Environmental 
     Protection Agency (EPA) regulations recognize two primary 
     types of such systems: (1) ``Community water systems,'' which 
     provide drinking water to the same people year-round; and (2) 
     ``non-community water systems,'' which serve people on a less 
     than year round basis at such places as schools, factories or 
     gas stations.
       There are approximately 16,000 municipal sewage treatment 
     works, servicing 73 percent of the U.S. population. Privately 
     owned treatment systems, including septic tanks, serve the 
     remaining population. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (also known as the Clean Water Act) defines treatment works 
     as ``any devices and systems used in the storage, treatment, 
     recycling, and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial 
     wastes of a liquid nature . . . including intercepting 
     sewers, outfall sewers, sewage collection systems . . . and 
     any works that will be an integral part of the treatment 
     process.''


               threats to drinking and wastewater systems

       Physical threats to drinking water systems include 
     chemical, biological, and radiological contaminants and 
     disruption of flow through explosions or other destructive 
     actions. Like wastewater treatment systems, drinking water 
     systems may also be at risk because of on-site stockpiles of 
     chemicals that could create fire, explosion, or other 
     hazards. Cyber threats are an increasing concern, given the 
     automated, remote-control nature of most drinking water 
     treatment and distribution systems. Systems are also 
     dependent on other critical infrastructure systems such as 
     energy, telecommunications, and transportation. For example, 
     a water treatment plant that depends on daily deliveries by 
     truck of aluminum sulfate, chlorine, or other chemicals needs 
     an emergency operations plan if such deliveries are 
     interrupted. In recent years, most attention has focused on 
     threats to drinking water systems, particularly to water 
     storage reservoirs.
       Wastewater treatment facilities have received increasing 
     attention after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Like drinking 
     water plants, they face physical and cyber threats and other 
     vulnerabilities due to their dependence on other critical 
     infrastructures. Particular attention has also focused on the 
     large volume of liquid chlorine, sulfur dioxide, and other 
     toxic chemicals that may be stored or in use at sewage 
     facilities and the potential for an explosion to create a 
     toxic cloud that could threaten employees and surrounding 
     communities. In addition, some research has occurred with 
     respect to alternative treatment systems and chemicals (such 
     as chlorine bleach or sodium hypochorite in lieu of liquid 
     chlorine).


                      security reports and actions

       There has been increasing, though still limited, attention 
     to infrastructure security in recent years. In response to a 
     1995 Congressional directive, President Clinton established a 
     Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, which 
     issued an October 1997 report, ``Critical Foundations, 
     Protecting America's Infrastructures.'' The report addressed 
     various infrastructure systems, including water, and 
     recommended greater cooperation and communication between 
     government and the private sector.
       In May 1998, President Clinton issued President Decision 
     Document 63 (PDD-63), which included the goal of protecting 
     the nation's critical infrastructure from intentional 
     physical and cyber attacks by 2003. Plans by key federal 
     agencies to meet this goal were to be in place by late 1998. 
     The report identified water supply as one of eight 
     critical infrastructure systems requiring attention, 
     specifically focusing on the 330 largest community water 
     systems that each serve more than 100,000 persons. PDD-63 
     designated EPA as the lead federal agency for interacting 
     with the water supply sector.
       EPA responded in late 1998 with a ``Plan to Develop the 
     National Infrastructure Assurance Plan: Water Supply Sector'' 
     to address water infrastructure security. In June 2001, EPA's 
     Inspector General issued a report that credited EPA with 
     achieving a fast start on its efforts, but criticized the 
     agency for missing many important milestones it had set for 
     developing critical infrastructure protections. After the 
     report, and again after the September 11 attacks, the pace of 
     EPA's efforts has accelerated.
       To date, EPA has entered into a partnership with the 
     Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) and the 
     American Waters Works Association (AWWA) to reduce the 
     vulnerability of water systems. AWWA's Research Foundation 
     has contracted with the Department of Energy's Sandia 
     National Laboratories to develop vulnerability assessment 
     tools for water systems. EPA has also received appropriations 
     (e.g. $2M in FY 01) for projects with Sandia to pilot test 
     physical vulnerability assessment tools and develop a cyber 
     vulnerability assessment tool. Additional actions (e.g. 
     upgrading security technologies and developing real-time 
     monitoring technologies) on a variety of important security 
     related issues have yet to be completed.
       PDD-63 also called for the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
     (FBI) to establish a National Infrastructure Protection 
     Center to provide information sharing and analysis and to 
     coordinate with and encourage private sector entities to 
     establish Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs). 
     AMWA volunteered to be the Water ISAC coordinator. The 
     purpose of the Water ISAC is to provide to water managers 
     early warnings and alerts about threats to the integrity and 
     operation of water supply and wastewater systems.
       While various federal agencies are conducting research on 
     water-related security issues, the January 2001 report of the 
     President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection 
     characterized ongoing water sector research efforts as 
     relatively small with a number of gaps and shortfalls. Four 
     major areas for further research are identified: (1) Threat/
     vulnerability risk assessments; (2) identification and 
     characterization of biological and chemical agents; (3) 
     establishment of a center of excellence to support 
     communities in conducting vulnerability and risk assessments; 
     and (4) application of information assurance techniques to 
     computerized systems used by water utilities.
       Various drinking water system managers and researchers have 
     identified priority areas for research, including: (1) 
     Assessment of physical vulnerabilities including disruption 
     of flow and contamination by chemical, biological, or 
     radiological agents; (2) cyber vulnerabilities including 
     process control equipment, Supervisory Control and Data 
     Acquisitions (SCADA) systems, and other information systems; 
     and (3) vulnerabilities associated with interdependencies 
     with other critical infrastructure sectors such as energy, 
     telecommunications, transportation, and emergency services. 
     Specific research needs include: vulnerability assessment 
     tools; technologies and processes for protecting physical 
     assets and information and process control systems; training, 
     education, and awareness programs; information sharing tools; 
     demonstration projects; real-time monitoring and detection 
     systems; and response and recovery plans.

[[Page H10189]]

                                SUMMARY

       Together, the various studies, plans and recommendations 
     highlight significant gaps in research and development 
     projects and shortfalls in funding for such research-related 
     activities. More importantly, they provide a roadmap for 
     actions in the short, medium and long term. H.R. 3178 
     directly addresses these gaps by providing a broad framework 
     for water system infrastructure research and development 
     projects and by authorizing funding to meet such needs.

                          Summary of Hearings

       The Committee held a hearing on ``H.R. 3178 and Developing 
     Anti-Terrorism Tools for Water Infrastructure'' on November 
     14, 2001. Four witnesses presented testimony: Mr. James 
     Kallstrom, Director of the Office of Public Security, and a 
     former official with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
     described some of his experiences with terrorism and the 
     importance of water infrastructure security. He testified on 
     New York State's strong support for H.R. 3178 and reinforced 
     the importance of building the technological prowess needed 
     to anticipate, prevent, and respond to terrorist attacks.
       Dr. Richard Luthy, Professor of Civil Engineering, Stanford 
     University and Chair, Water Science and Technology Board, 
     National Research Council, provided an overview of 
     vulnerabilities facing water systems and areas for further 
     research and development. In his support for H.R. 3178, he 
     pointed out that dams, aqueducts and pumping stations are 
     especially vulnerable to attack, including cyber attacks. He 
     emphasized that while there are real physical threats to 
     water systems from chemical or biological contamination, 
     there are also important psychological and economic 
     consequences from perceived or minor contamination. He 
     recommended that steps be taken to enable early detection of 
     threats or contamination, and to explore opportunities for 
     interconnectedness or redundancies in and among water systems 
     to address a failing in one part of the system.
       Mr. Jeffrey Danneels, Department Manager, Security Systems 
     and Technology Center at Sandia National laboratories, also 
     provided an overview of water system vulnerabilities and 
     described current and proposed projects by Sandia 
     National Laboratories to increase water infrastructure 
     security and develop vulnerability assessments. He 
     testified first to the dramatic funding challenges faced 
     by the nation's communities to maintain and build new 
     drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in the coming 
     years. In this context he described how less than one 
     percent of the water flowing from most urban drinking 
     water systems is consumed as drinking water. Because the 
     remainder goes to other uses (such as fire fighting, 
     flushing toilets, etc), he suggested that H.R. 3178 
     support research on prospective water system design 
     improvements that could have profound benefits. In 
     supporting H.R. 3178, he urged members to ensure that the 
     bill addresses short- medium- and long-term threats and 
     appropriate responses to them. In particular, he 
     recommended that H.R. 3178 support the following efforts; 
     security risk assessment methodologies, new security 
     technologies, real-time monitoring supervisory control and 
     data acquisition, and advanced treatment technologies.
       Mr. Jerry Johnson, who oversees the District of Columbia's 
     water distribution and wastewater treatment systems, and 
     represented the Association of Metropolitan Waster Agencies 
     (AMWA) and the American Water Works Association Research 
     Foundation (AwwaRF), described the need for additional and/or 
     improved information, technologies, and practices to 
     strengthen the security of water systems. He conveyed the 
     strong support of the water infrastructure community for H.R. 
     3178 and highlighted a variety of ongoing infrastructure 
     security related research among federal agencies and the 
     water infrastructure community. He also depicted numerous 
     areas requiring further research, including: (1) An 
     assessment of potential contaminants; (2) development of 
     portable assessment tools, such as miniature liquid chemical 
     laboratories and a gas chromatograph on a silicon chip; (3) 
     nanoelectrode analysis technologies; (4) DNA chips; and (5) 
     other technologies to assure rapid assessment and response to 
     chemical or biological threats.

                           Committee Actions

       On October 30, Congressman Sherwood Boehlert, joined by 
     Congressman Baird and several other members, introduced H.R. 
     3178. On November 14, 2001, the Science Committee held a 
     hearing on the bill.
       On November 15, 2001, the Science Committee considered the 
     bill. Chairman Boehlert offered an en bloc amendment, which 
     was adopted by voice vote. The amendment made the following 
     changes: (1) Clarified that eligible research organizations 
     include state and local entities and that entities have 
     expertise to conduct water security research; (2) broadened 
     the definition of water supply system to include source 
     waters such as streams and aquifers and also aqueducts and 
     other facilities to convey water from the water source; (3) 
     clarified that funding arrangements include grants, 
     cooperative agreements, interagency agreements, and 
     contracts; (4) clarified that vulnerability assessment 
     efforts included research, development, and demonstration; 
     (5) specified and clarified that, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, research projects should meet the needs of water 
     systems of various sizes and that award recipients should be 
     geographically, socially, and economically diverse; (6) 
     clarified that dissemination of information and the results 
     of research under the Act are to be on an appropriate basis, 
     considering the sensitive nature or potentially sensitive 
     nature of such information and research results; and (7) 
     added a savings clause that nothing in the Act limits or 
     preempts EPA authorities under other laws such as the State 
     Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act.
       The committee favorably reported the bill as amended, by 
     voice vote, and authorized staff to make technical and 
     conforming changes as necessary.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


                               SECTION 1

       Provided short title.


                               SECTION 2

       Defines the terms ``Administrator,'' ``research 
     organization,'' and ``water supply system.'' Research 
     organizations include national laboratories, state and local 
     agencies, universities, and water management associations. 
     Water supply systems include drinking water and wastewater 
     facilities.


                               SECTION 3

       ``Water Supply System Security Research Assistance''--
     subsection (a): Directs the EPA, in conjunction with other 
     relevant agencies, to establish a program for the research 
     and development of technologies and related processes to 
     increase the security of water supply systems. In carrying 
     out the program, EPA is to make grants or enter into 
     cooperative agreements, interagency agreements, or contracts.
       Subsection (b) Projects--provides that awards may be used 
     to: (1) Conduct research related to or develop technologies 
     and related processes to assess physical and information 
     systems vulnerabilities; (2) conduct research related to or 
     develop technologies and related processes for protecting 
     physical assets and information systems; (3) develop programs 
     to appropriately disseminate the results of research to 
     increase public awareness of threats to water supply systems, 
     and to help managers of water supply systems respond to 
     threats; (4) develop scientific protocols for physical and 
     information systems security at water supply systems; (5) 
     conduct research related to or develop real-time monitoring 
     systems related to chemical, physical, and radiological 
     attacks; (6) conduct research related to or develop 
     technologies for the mitigation, response to, and recovery 
     from biological, chemical, and radiological contamination; or 
     (7) carry out other research, development, and demonstration 
     activities EPA considers appropriate.
       Subsection (c) Guidelines, Procedures, Criteria--(1) 
     Requires EPA to consult and coordinate with various entities, 
     including water supply agencies, in developing guidelines, 
     procedures, and criteria for applications and the selection 
     of awards.
       (2) Requires EPA to transmit to Congress proposed 
     guidelines, procedures, and criteria at least 90 days before 
     finalizing such proposals.
       (3) Directs the EPA to ensure, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, that awards are provided to a wide variety of 
     projects to meet the needs of water systems of various sizes 
     and to geographically, socially, and economically diverse 
     recipients.
       (4) Requires, as a condition of receiving an award, that 
     research organizations have in place appropriate security 
     measures regarding entities and individuals carrying out 
     activities under the award.
       (5) Requires the appropriate dissemination of the results 
     of activities carried out under the award.


                               SECTION 4

       ``Effect on Other Authorities''--provides that nothing in 
     the Act limits or preempts authorities of the Administrator 
     under other provisions of law (including the Safe Drinking 
     Water Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act) to 
     award grants or to enter into interagency agreements, 
     cooperative agreements, or contracts for the types of 
     projects and activities described in the Act.


                               SECTION 5

       ``Authorization of Appropriations''--authorizes $12 million 
     for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006 for EPA to carry 
     out the Act and requires that such funds remain available 
     until expended.

                          Additional Comments

       The Committee encourages the Administrator to make full use 
     of scientific peer review procedures, the Science Advisory 
     Board, and other appropriate entities, to help ensure the 
     wisest, most cost-effective use of federal and non-federal 
     funds. In carrying out this Act, which authorizes scientific, 
     environmental, and energy-related research and development 
     activities, the Administrator should consult and coordinate 
     with other agencies, including the National Science 
     Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, and the Department of Energy.
       The definition of ``water supply system,'' including the 
     terms defined in section 1401 of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     and section 212 of the Clean Water Act, should be construed 
     broadly.
       In carrying out section 3(a) and (c), the Administrator 
     should consult and coordinate with the Director of the 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology. Such 
     coordination is particularly important for any EPA

[[Page H10190]]

     research projects, as described in subsection (b)(4), 
     relating to the development of scientific protocols. The 
     purpose of subsection (b)(4) is to foster the development of 
     scientific protocols for security-related technologies; 
     nothing in the paragraph should be construed to affect or 
     relate to EPA's regulatory activities or programs. Activities 
     under subsection (b)(7) include the provision of financial 
     and technical assistance for dissemination of research 
     results.
       The Committee directs the Administrator to ensure an 
     appropriate balance among short-, medium,-, and long-term 
     research and development activities. Throughout the 
     Committee's deliberations on H.R. 3178, witnesses and Members 
     consistently emphasized the importance of looking at more 
     than just immediate- and short-term needs. Accordingly, this 
     legislation emphasizes and lays the foundation for a longer-
     term, focused program of research that can provide answers to 
     the most basic questions in water security.
       The Administrator should ensure that awards are made for a 
     wide variety of projects to meet the needs of large, medium, 
     and small water supply systems. Awards should also be 
     provided to recipients from different geographic areas and 
     with different social or economic backgrounds. For example, 
     where appropriate, the Administrator should consider research 
     organizations that are historically black colleges and 
     universities, institutions that serve Hispanic and other 
     minority populations, and institutions that serve rural 
     communities.
       Water sources and water systems vary widely in the 
     differing regions of the United States in how they obtain, 
     store and deliver water. In testimony before the Committee on 
     November 14, 2001, Dr. Richard Luthy highlighted how unique 
     water resources and facilities (such as impoundments or dams, 
     aqueducts, rivers, groundwater, etc.) require different 
     solutions to protect them. It is the intent of the Committee 
     that funds provided in this bill should be made available to 
     researchers familiar with the challenges posed by the unique 
     circumstances of differing regions. EPA should give serious 
     consideration providing funds under this Act to the numerous 
     state regional centers of excellence for water research.
       The Committee believes that dissemination of research 
     results and related information to water managers and other 
     officials, including the public, should be only on an ``as 
     appropriate'' basis. EPA should determine the appropriateness 
     of such dissemination, in close consultation with the FBI and 
     other agencies with expertise in national security matters. 
     The Committee recognizes there is a difficult, but important, 
     balance required between distributing information on 
     infrastructure vulnerabilities and potential or developed 
     solutions on the one hand and withholding sensitive or 
     classified information on the other. Accordingly, the 
     Committee directs the Administrator and recipients of 
     awards under this Act to work together closely to ensure 
     that potentially sensitive information is obtained, 
     disseminated, and used only under secure situations with 
     safeguards in place.
       Among options to be considered under section 3(b)(7) should 
     be: research and development of innovative technologies 
     capable of reducing reliance upon the centralized 
     purification of water to potable quality. Such innovative 
     technologies should enable distributed or on-site water 
     treatment or water recycling. The goal of such technologies 
     is to make water supplies more secure from deliberate 
     disruption or contamination by increasing redundancy while 
     improving purity, isolation, reliability and availability.
       EPA should also consider research and development projects 
     involving the effectiveness of alternative materials, 
     processes, and technologies for reducing the quality of toxic 
     or hazardous materials maintained on site at facilities for 
     use in the treatment of water and wastewater.
                                  ____


 H.R. 3178--The Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development 
                              Act (WISARD)

       Supporters Include the Following: American Council of 
     Engineering Companies; American Society of Civil Engineers; 
     American Water Works Association; American Water Works 
     Research Foundation; Association of California Water 
     Agencies.
       Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies; Association 
     of Metropolitan Water Agencies; National Association of 
     Counties; National Association of Water Companies; National 
     Society of Professional Engineers; and the Water Environment 
     Federation, State of New York.
                                                    U.S. Congress,


                                  Congressional Budget Office,

                                Washington, DC, November 16, 2001.
     Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
     Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
     prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3178, the Water 
     Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act.
       If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
     pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Susanne 
     S. Mehlman (for federal costs), who can be reached at 226-
     2860, and Elyse Goldman (for the state and local impact), who 
     can be reached at 225-3220.
           Sincerely,
                                               Steven M. Lieberman
                                   (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
       Enclosure.

     CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE, November 16, 2001.

 H.R. 3178: Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act

[As ordered reported by the House Committee on Science on November 15, 
                                 2001]


                                SUMMARY

       H.R. 3178 would authorize the appropriation of $60 million 
     over the 2002-2006 period for the Environmental Protection 
     Agency (EPA) to provide new grants to research organizations, 
     including state and local agencies, to carry out projects 
     aimed at improving the protection and security of water 
     supply systems, such as protection from biological and 
     chemical contamination. The bill would not affect direct 
     spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures 
     would not apply.
       H.R. 3178 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
     mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
     (UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, and tribal 
     governments.


                ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

       The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 3178 is shown in the 
     following table. The costs of this legislation fall within 
     budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                               -----------------------------------------
                                  2002     2003    2004    2005    2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
 
          Authorization Level       12       12       12      12      12
            Estimated Outlays        5       10       12      12      12
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           BASIS OF ESTIMATE

       For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be 
     enacted before the end of 2001, that the full amounts 
     authorized will be appropriated each fiscal year, and that 
     outlays will occur at rates similar to previous funding for 
     EPA's Science and Technology programs. CBO estimates that 
     implementing H.R. 3178 would increase spending subject to 
     appropriation by $51 million over the 2002-2006 period.
       Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.


              intergovernmental and private-sector impact

       H.R. 3178 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
     mandates as defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on 
     state, local, and tribal governments. The bill would benefit 
     state and local governments by establishing a grant program 
     for research institutions, including public universities and 
     state and local agencies, to improve the protection and 
     security of public water supply systems. Any costs associated 
     with the grant program would be considered a condition of 
     aid.


                         PREVIOUS CBO ESTIMATE

       On November 16, 2001, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
     S. 1593, the Water Infrastructure Security and Research 
     Development Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee 
     on Environment and Public Works on November 8, 2001. The 
     bills are similar but our cost estimate of S. 1593 reflects 
     additional spending provisions in that bill.
       Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susanne S. Mehlman 
     (226-2860); Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: 
     Elyse Goldman (225-3220); and Impact on the Private Sector: 
     Jean Talarico (226-2940).
       Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
     Director for Budget Analyis.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                Washington, DC, December 14, 2001.
     Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
     Chairman, Committee on Science, Rayburn House Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Boehlert: I am writing with regard to H.R. 
     3178, the Water Infrastructure Security and Research 
     Development Act.
       As you know, Rule X of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives grants the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
     jurisdiction over public health and quarantine. Under this 
     authority, the Committee on Energy and Commerce Committee has 
     jurisdiction over the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the 
     construction, operation and maintenance of ``public water 
     systems'' as defined in the Act. As ordered reported, H.R. 
     3178 authorizes EPA to undertake certain specified activities 
     concerning the regulation, design, and operation of public 
     water systems (including treatment techniques used, 
     monitoring activities, operational processes and both 
     internal and external information systems), among other 
     things, and therefore the bill falls within the jurisdiction 
     of the Energy and Commerce Committee. I understand that you 
     are making changes to H.R. 3178 as ordered reported that may 
     lessen, though not eliminate, the jurisdictional interests of 
     my Committee in the bill.
       I recognize your desire to bring this legislation before 
     the House in an expeditious manner. Accordingly, I will not 
     exercise the Committee's right to a referral. By agreeing to 
     waive its consideration of the bill, however, the Energy and 
     Commerce Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 
     3178. In addition, the Energy and Commerce Committee reserves 
     its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill 
     that are within its jurisdiction during any House-Senate 
     conference that may be convened on this or similar 
     legislation. I ask for your

[[Page H10191]]

     commitment to support any request by the Energy and Commerce 
     Committee for conferees on H.R. 3179 or similar legislation.
       I request that you include this letter as part of the 
     Record during consideration of the legislation on the House 
     floor.
       Thank you for your attention to these matters.
           Sincerely,
                                            W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                         Committee on Science,

                                Washington, DC, December 14, 2001.
     Hon. W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin,
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Rayburn House Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Tauzin: Thank you for your letter of December 
     14, 2001, regarding the Commerce Committee's jurisdictional 
     interest in H.R. 3178, the ``Water Infrastructure Security 
     and Research Development Act,'' with amendments.
       The Science Committee appreciates you not seeking a 
     referral of H.R. 3178 and appreciates your cooperation in 
     moving the bill to the House floor expeditiously. I concur 
     that your decision to forego action on the bill will not 
     prejudice the Commerce Committee with respect to its 
     jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 3178 or on similar or 
     related legislation. Additionally, I recognize your right to 
     request conferees on H.R. 3178 or similar legislation for 
     those provisions that fall within the purview of the 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce. I will include a copy of 
     your letter and this response in the Congressional Record 
     when the House considers the legislation.
       Once again, thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                             Sherwood L. Boehlert,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                                Washington, DC, December 17, 2001.
     Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert
     Chairman, Committee on Science, Rayburn House Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to review 
     H.R. 3178 on behalf of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure before the filing of the report by the 
     Committee on Science.
       The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has a 
     valid claim to jurisdiction over H.R. 3178, both as 
     introduced and as amended. This legislation authorizes the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to 
     award grants for the development of technologies, processes, 
     protocols, and monitoring systems for the security for 
     treatment works, as defined in section 212 of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act. Security measures are component 
     of operation and maintenance. The Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure has jurisdiction over the operation and 
     maintenance, as well as construction, of treatment works. 
     Accordingly, the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure has jurisdiction over EPA grants awarded to 
     develop security measures for treatment works. As you know, 
     this topic was a topic covered in an October 10, 2001, 
     hearing held by the Water Resources and Environment 
     Subcommittee on ``Terrorism, Are America's Water Resources 
     and Environment at Risk?''
       The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
     recognizes the importance of this legislation. In view of 
     your desire to move H.R. 3178 to the floor in an expeditious 
     fashion, I do not intend to seek a sequential referral of 
     H.R. 3178. However, this should in no way be viewed as a 
     waiver of jurisdiction and the Transportation on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure reserves the right to seek 
     conferees in the event that this legislation is considered in 
     an House-Senate conference.
       I look forward to working with you on this bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Don Young,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                         Committee on Science,

                                Washington, DC, December 17, 2001.
     Hon. Don Young,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Young: Thank you for your letter of December 
     17, 2001, regarding the Transportation and Infrastructure 
     Committee's jurisdictional interest in H.R. 3178, the ``Water 
     Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act,'' with 
     amendments.
       The Science Committee appreciates you not seeking a 
     referral of H.R. 3178 and your cooperation in moving the bill 
     to the House floor expeditiously. I concur that your decision 
     to forego action on the bill will not prejudice the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure with respect to its 
     jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 3178 or on similar or 
     related legislation. Additionally, I recognize your right to 
     request conferees on H.R. 3178 or similar or related 
     legislation for those provisions that fall within the purview 
     of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. I will 
     include a copy of your letter and this response in the 
     Congressional Record when the House considers the 
     legislation.
       Once again, thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                             Sherwood L. Boehlert,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to begin by complimenting the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Boehlert). He has shown his commitment to our Nation's security and to 
a bipartisan manner of governing this committee. He has held hearings 
on a number of issues pertaining to terrorism, and the bill we are 
considering today, the water security bill. Chairman Boehlert has 
always lead our committee in a bipartisan manner, and I think it is a 
credit to his leadership that this bill has been so well crafted and 
brought to the floor in such a timely manner.
  In the aftermath of September 11, our citizens have been more 
cognizant and more diligent than ever in trying to protect themselves 
and their neighbors against terrorist attack.

                              {time}  1500

  I believe it is a fundamental responsibility of our government to 
make sure we help those citizens in that effort. The bill we will vote 
on today will provide the means necessary to ensure the water we drink 
is safe from terrorist threats. It will also benefit the public by 
providing much-needed research on the various aspects of the water 
protection, such as endocrine disrupters and arsenic standards.
  After September 11, we realized how much more we should have done to 
bolster airport security. Fortunately, with the legislation we are 
considering now, we are given a chance to protect our water supply 
before it is seriously threatened.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert); the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the ranking member; the staff of the 
Committee on Science for their hard work on making this bill a reality, 
especially Ben Grumbles, who has worked tirelessly in making this a 
technically sound bill; Mark Harkins for his support and advice; and my 
own staff member, Brooke Jamison, for her hours of service to the 
people of my district.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this important 
piece of legislation, and I commend the chairman for his leadership.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) is 
interested in ensuring that areas of particular vulnerability, such as 
water systems in the National Capital region, receive appropriate 
attention when EPA is selecting research-related projects. I appreciate 
the gentleman's interest, and also the interest expressed by all of the 
cosponsors of this legislation, but most particularly, once again, the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird). He has been there from the 
beginning, and I appreciate that cooperation.
  Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3178, the 
Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act.
  There are approximately 170,000 ``public water systems'' that provide 
water for more than 250 million people in the United States. There are 
also approximately 16,000 municipal sewage treatment works, servicing 
73 percent of the U.S. population. The Federal, state and local 
governments have spent tens of billions of dollars to build the 
nation's drinking water and wastewater treatment infrastructure. In the 
coming decades, tens of billions more will be required to maintain that 
infrastructure and meet the needs of a growing population. What has 
become clear after the September 11, 2001 attacks, is that the nation's 
water infrastructure system was not built with security from terrorism 
in mind. Physical threats to drinking water systems include chemical, 
biological, and radiological contaminants and disruption of flow 
through explosions or other destructive actions.
  The Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act 
directly addresses the need to protect our nation's water supply 
systems. The legislation authorizes $12 million per year for the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from fiscal year 2002 through 
2007. The money would be used to provide grants to public and private 
non-profit entities to conduct research, development and demonstration 
projects. Projects could include efforts to prevent, detect or respond 
to physical and cyber threats to water supply or wastewater treatment 
systems.
  Sandia National Labs has been working on the safety and security of 
water supplies for

[[Page H10192]]

several years. Sandia-developed technologies could make it possible to 
have real-time monitoring of water systems for chemical or biological 
contaminants within 3 to 5 years. We need to step up the pace and use 
the work developed in New Mexico to protect the 170,000 ``public water 
systems'' around the country.
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Science Committee 
and an original cosponsor of this bill, I rise in strong support of 
H.R. 3178, the Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development 
Act.
  In October, as the Anthrax scare was at its zenith, I held two town 
hall meetings in my district. The first question at each one revealed 
the serious concerns of my constituents about the safety of their 
water. They wanted to know if the water that they use every day to 
cook, to bathe, and to clean would be protected from being used to 
deliver chemical or biological weapons.
  Each one of us relies upon the cleanliness and purity of our water 
supplies and upon the appropriate treatment of our sewage. But, since 
September 11th, we've become acutely aware that the things we take for 
granted could easily be threatened by terrorists who want to do us 
harm. Our water supplies, simply because they reach every one of us 
every day, top that list.
  Last month, a Richmond, Virginia newspaper did a security check of 
its own at three area drinking water plants. What they found gave great 
reason for concern to Richmond City residents. A reporter and 
photographer were able to walk right through the front gate of the 
City's facility, wander around for about an hour each day for a week, 
and have access to the water supply. Similar surprise inspections at 
neighboring county facilities, Mr. Speaker, were thankfully less 
alarming.
  The legislation we consider today will help the people of Richmond 
and elsewhere to ensure the long-term safety of our water. It provides 
$60 million in grants over the next five years to identify threats and 
respond to them. Similar legislation is before the Senate, and we 
should move quickly as a Congress to approve this initiative to give 
every American peace of mind when turning on the tap.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this important bill.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3178. As 
an original co-sponsor of this legislation, I want to thank Science 
Committee Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Hall for bringing this 
issue forward and I strongly urge my colleagues to pass this important 
piece of legislation. H.R. 3178 authorizes $12 million per year for 
research and development programs related to securing the water supply 
funded through grants from the Environmental Protection Agency. These 
limited research funds are a reasonable and measured response to a 
pressing need.
  Protection of our nation's water supply is in our vital interest. 
Since the attacks of September 11th, we have had to question the 
vulnerability of many of our critical infrastructures to deliberate 
attack. Fortunately, the water supply community was already at work and 
had established many collaborative relationships between local, state, 
and federal agencies as well as various national associations. However, 
despite the formal structures for cooperation and teamwork that already 
exist, there are many unanswered questions and a great need for 
additional resources.
  Physical destruction of a water system could deprive a population of 
its essential water supply, as well as cause secondary effects such as 
the inability to ensure sanitation or provide fire protections. In 
addition, loss of water to manufacturers or other business could have 
serious consequences on local economies. Deliberate contamination is 
also a threat. While it is generally believed that the large volumes 
and treatment protocols provide some assurance, this matter still 
requires thoughtful analysis. Small quantities of toxic chemicals, even 
if not directly harmful, could cause problems. The contamination does 
not have to have any short term effects; a water system could be 
rendered unusable merely by elevating the amounts of lead, cyanide, or 
arsenic to unacceptable levels. Even introducing taste or odor may be 
sufficient to incite panic.
  To combat these threats, we need to develop new technologies and 
rethink the way we are managing our water supply. Real time monitoring 
of a wide number of contaminants is something that should be 
considered. Changing our delivery system and increasing the 
interconnectedness of our supply may be in order. Separation of the 
water we consume from water for general purposes like washing our 
clothes or our car may be necessary to keep additional safeguards 
affordable. All these ideas will require significant changes to our 
infrastructure and need to be carefully considered.
  In short, we have a lot of work to do. We do not fully understand all 
of the threats, nor do we know what the proper policy response should 
be. But we do know we need to address these shortcomings and answer the 
hard questions about how to secure our water supply. The bill puts us 
on the path by providing the research with the necessary support. It is 
an important first step and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3178, ``the 
Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act.''
  As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, I 
am well aware of the need to improve our water infrastructure security.
  I held a subcommittee hearing on this subject a month after the 
horrific events of September 11th. The subcommittee received testimony 
from representatives of drinking water and wastewater operators, as 
well as EPA and a security expert from Sandia National Laboratories. 
All the witnesses agreed that more information about terrorist threats 
and how to protect against them was needed.
  I appreciate the interest of the Chairman of the Science Committee in 
promoting research in this area. I also appreciate his interest in 
developing additional security tools that can be used by drinking water 
and wastewater operators.
  My subcommittee has jurisdiction over the operation of wastewater 
treatment works, including security measures. But, I was pleased to 
work with the gentleman from New York on H.R. 3178 to avoid any delay 
in floor consideration and I look forward to continuing these efforts 
in a House-Senate conference.
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, in the wake of the attacks of 
September 11th, Americans have begun in earnest to critically look at 
the security of our nation's infrastructure. Indeed, unanticipated 
failures of electrical power or water supplies could have devastating 
and long-term effects on a region's economy, safety and security. The 
security of infrastructure is of particular importance in the National 
Capital region.
  I rise today to applaud your efforts, Mr. Chairman, with regard to 
this important legislation. In the years to come I believe that this 
legislation will prove to be a significant first step in the nation's 
efforts to develop models for critically important water system 
security technologies and procedures.
  However, I also rise today to direct your attention to the importance 
of ensuring that water systems in highly vulnerable areas, or areas 
that serve a large number of federal facilities, are given greater 
funding priority by the Environmental Protection Agency.
  In response to the September 11th attacks and the heightened security 
in the region, the Fairfax County Water Authority in my district has 
had to begin developing a number of critically important physical 
security enhancements and practices in order to better protect the 
region's water supply.
  The Authority is particularly sensitive to the threat of electrical 
power outage by potential terrorist attack. For instance, the failure 
of commercial power for a period of even three hours would render the 
public water supply for the 1.2-million users in the Fairfax County 
Water Authority service region virtually useless. The Fairfax County 
Water Authority is currently studying the feasibility of constructing 
an on-site state-of-the-art power generation complex capable of making 
the Authority self-sustaining, even during periods of reduced power or 
blackouts.
  Staff at the Authority has a long and solid record of responding to a 
wide variety of operating conditions in the treatment and distribution 
system. These actions, however, have been in response to slowly 
evolving external pressures or isolated component failures. To improve 
staff skills in thinking through its response plan, and identifying 
communications, command, control and information issues during a period 
of sudden attack (or perceived attack) on a water system, the Authority 
is also developing a holistic crisis, rapid response staff training 
workshop.
  Both the study and the workshop could be used as tools for water 
providers throughout the nation.
  It is my fervent hope that when deciding water infrastructure 
security awards, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency will take into account the region or service area's 
vulnerability of or potential for forced interruption of service. 
Indeed, i believe that no one would disagree with the notion that the 
Administrator should consider a water system's importance to national 
security and the operation of government.
  This is especially true in my district. The Fairfax County Water 
Authority's service area covers many critical federal facilities. Some 
of the largest of these facilities include: Ft. Belvoir U.S. Ary 
Reservation, Ft. Belvoir Proving Grounds; Dulles International Airport; 
facilities of the Central Intelligence Agency; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (Harry Diamond Laboratories); Dulles Mail Distribution Center; 
U.S. Navy Family Housing; U.S. Coast Guard Information Systems Center, 
training facilities, and housing; Facilities of the General Services 
Administration; Facilities of the U.S. Department of State; and, Office 
space and warehouses for the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission.

[[Page H10193]]

  It is my fervent hope that this bill will help ensure funding for the 
Fairfax County Water Authority next year.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3178, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to 
authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to provide funding to 
support research and development projects for the security of water 
infrastructure.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________