[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.
____________________