[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 156 (Wednesday, December 7, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H11120-H11122]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENT

  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1721) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
reauthorize programs to improve the quality of coastal recreation 
waters, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 1721

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

     SECTION 1. COASTAL RECREATION WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND 
                   NOTIFICATION.

       Section 406(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1346(i)) is amended by striking ``2005'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 8 of the Beaches Environmental Assessment and 
     Coastal Health Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 877) is amended by 
     striking ``2005'' and inserting ``2011''.

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


                             General Leave

  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Tennessee?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1721 to extend the 
authorization of appropriations for Clean Water Act programs aimed at 
improving the quality and safety of our Nation's recreational coastal 
waters. Beaches are a very important part of American life. Each year, 
over 180 million people visit coastal waters for recreational purposes.
  This activity supports over 28 million jobs and leads to investments 
of over $50 billion each year in goods and services nationally. Public 
confidence in

[[Page H11121]]

the quality of our Nation's waters is important not only to each 
citizen who swims, but also to the tourism and recreation industries 
that rely on safe and swimmable coastal waters.
  To improve the public's confidence in the quality of our Nation's 
coastal waters and to protect public health and safety, Congress passed 
the Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000, 
commonly called the BEACH Act, in the 106th Congress.
  Under the BEACH Act, the EPA has been developing new water quality 
criteria to protect human health from disease-causing pathogens, and 
States are updating their water quality standards for recreational 
coastal waters to incorporate these more protective critical.
  The EPA also has been making grants to States to help them implement 
programs to monitor beach water quality and to notify the public if 
water quality standards are not being met.
  H.R. 1721 reauthorizes the current level of funding for these 
programs. This includes $30 million annually through fiscal year 2011 
for the EPA to make grants to help them implement their coastal waters 
monitoring and public notification programs.
  H.R. 1721 will help protect public health and safety and continue to 
improve the quality of our Nation's recreational coastal waters that 
are so very important to the economies of our coastal communities.
  I certainly want to congratulate our colleague, Mr. Bishop, on 
sponsoring this bill, and I urge all Members to support this very 
worthwhile legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 
1721, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  First I would like to begin by thanking Chairman Young and Ranking 
Member Oberstar for their support, their leadership and their hard work 
in moving this important and bipartisan legislation through the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and on to the House floor 
today.
  In addition, I am deeply grateful for the support and contributions 
of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the chairman of the Water 
Resources Subcommittee, and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie 
Bernice Johnson), the subcommittee's ranking member, for their 
steadfast support and commitment to America's coastal environment.
  Mr. Speaker, as the distinguished subcommittee chairman has just 
explained, H.R. 1721 reauthorizes grants under the Beaches 
Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000 known as the 
BEACH Act through fiscal year 2011. The record shows that the BEACH Act 
has been a proven success for 35 coastal States and U.S. territories. 
It goes a long way towards maintaining pristine coastline, and is a 
critical component of preserving our Nation's environment and 
sustaining the tourist economies of our States.
  As someone whose district on Eastern Long Island is almost completely 
surrounded by beaches, I know that American families expect and deserve 
clean water for their enjoyment, and in some cases, their businesses, 
such as tourism and the fishing industries. Indeed, beach-going 
Americans deserve pristine waterways to enjoy with their families, and 
we need to protect these areas for future generations.
  By fully funding the water quality monitoring and notifications 
grants established under the BEACH Act of 2000, we can assure the 
American public that preserving healthy shores is a priority of our 
environmental agenda.
  Over the past 5 years States have made great progress in creating 
monitoring plans and putting them to good use. The most recent EPA data 
on beach closings and advisories indicates that only 4 percent of beach 
days were lost in 2004 due to closures triggered by bacteria 
monitoring. This is a significant improvement from past years.
  In addition, the number of beaches we monitor has more than tripled 
from about 1,000 in 1997 to more than 3,500 in 2004.
  One of the strongest economic forces along America's coast is 
tourism. Obviously, vacationers, visitors and beachgoers who enjoy the 
sea certainly do not want to visit beaches that are closed. I am 
confident, therefore, that this program will continue to be supported 
by both sides of the aisle and in both Chambers.
  I look forwarding to working with the Senate to advance this bill in 
order to ensure the BEACH Act's reauthorization without delaying or 
interrupting the important coastal preservation programs it funds.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation is good for the environment, is sound 
public policy, and continues a critically important program necessary 
to preserve one of our most precious and beloved natural resources.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
Duncan) for his support and for the fine work of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1721, 
legislation to reauthorize the BEACH Act. I thank Mr. Bishop for his 
vital leadership on this important measure. I also want to thank 
Chairman Young, Mr. Duncan, and Ranking Member Oberstar for their 
efforts to bring the BEACH Act to the floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, America's beaches are our national treasures. They are 
an important part of our heritage. They are environmental assets and 
economic assets. We want to keep them that way, and that is exactly 
what this measure will do.
  This vital legislation provides State and local governments with 
grant money to monitor pathogen levels off their shores, and to notify 
the public when those pathogens levels are above acceptable levels. 
Pathogens, we all know, can cause illness when people are exposed to 
them through swimming or consuming fish from contaminated water.
  It is absolutely essential that we continue to fund these programs so 
that States and localities have the resources that they need to protect 
recreational users from dangerous levels of bacteria, viruses or 
parasites off their shores. When people go to the beach, including the 
981 square miles of coastal waters in New York, it should be pleasant 
and it should be safe. That is why this bill is so vitally important. I 
urge my colleagues to support the reauthorization of the BEACH Act to 
ensure that we protect Americans from potentially toxic coastal water.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I will simply close by saying that this is a 
very strong bill for the environment. It is a bill that is important to 
thousands of cities, towns and small communities along the coast of 
this country. Not every bill that claims to be for the environment is 
really a good bill because some of them drive up prices and destroy 
jobs and hurt the poor and lower income and working people, but this is 
a pro-environment bill that helps sustain and even creates jobs. I do 
not know of any negatives with this bill. I think it is something that 
all of our colleagues can support. I urge its passage.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H.R. 1721, a vital 
measure to reauthorize appropriations for coastal recreation water 
quality monitoring and notification grants through 2011. Originally 
passed in the BEACH bill in 2000, this program was added to the Clean 
Water Act to require states with coastal areas, including those in the 
Great Lakes region, to adopt minimum standards for water quality, test 
recreational beach waters, and notify the public when test levels prove 
unsafe.
  In 1999, before the BEACH bill became law, only eleven states tested 
their waters and reported to the public when there was a presence of 
bacteria and viruses. Human contact with such waters, especially in the 
elderly and very young, can result in gastrointestinal disorders, 
respiratory diseases, and ear, nose, or throat infections. These 
bacteria and viruses are typically the result of polluted stormwater 
and runoff, overburdened sewage treatment facilities, and 
malfunctioning septic systems. Ignorance was not bliss, ignorance was a 
serious health hazard. While we must certainly do more to eliminate 
these pollution sources, until they are eliminated, we must test 
recreational waters and adequately inform those who might be at risk 
from them.
  Poor health conditions from contaminated waters adversely affect 
those who live by

[[Page H11122]]

coastal waters and those who travel to the shore. According to the 
latest reports from the Travel Industry Association of America, 109.5 
million travelers visit the beach per year. Over 36 percent of those 
tourists stayed for a week or longer, and 41 percent of the travelers 
were children--those who could most be adversely affected by 
contaminated waters.
  Mr. Speaker, I applaud the efforts of our Committee colleague, Mr. 
Bishop, in proposing this important legislation. As the representative 
of the northern part of the Long Island Sound, the gentleman is well 
aware of the importance of clean beaches and public notification of 
potential health exceedances for residents and visitors to the Sound. I 
commend the gentleman's hard work in reauthorizing funding for this 
program.
  I support this reauthorization and I urge my colleagues to let ``a 
day at the beach'' continue to be a pseudonym for recreational 
relaxation and enjoyment, not a risk of pollution and ill health.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, as one of the original authors of the BEACH 
Act five years ago, I rise in support of H.R. 1721 and thank my friend 
from New York, Mr. Bishop, for working to move this legislation 
forward.
  The BEACH Act of 2000 took major steps towards improving water 
quality testing and monitoring at beaches across the country, which is 
critical to protecting the health of beachgoers. The Act had three 
provisions: requiring states to adopt current EPA water quality 
criteria to protect beachgoers from getting sick; requiring the EPA to 
update these water quality criteria, developed in 1986, with new 
science and technologies to provide better, faster water testing; and 
providing grants to states to implement coastal water monitoring 
programs.
  The bill before us extends the authorization for appropriations under 
this third provision, which expired at the end of this fiscal year, 
until 2011. This is an important step because every coastal state now 
has a beach water monitoring program that relies on federal grant 
funding. However, we need to realize that there are still outstanding 
issues in the implementation of the other portions of the BEACH Act 
that merit Congressional involvement.
  In particular, EPA was to have completed new water quality criteria 
by October of this year to make sure that all Americans can feel safe 
swimming at the beach without worrying that they will get sick. My 
office has spoken extensively with EPA about this, however, and it 
seems that this will likely not be completed until 2011. EPA is 
spending nearly a decade studying water testing methods, waiting to 
collect data on freshwater beaches before even beginning to test marine 
beaches.
  This delay, likely due at least in part to insufficient funding from 
the Administration and this Congress, has prevented EPA from helping 
communities implement rapid water testing methods that could shorten 
the time for beginning and ending beach closures from two days to 
merely a few hours. Such an improvement would provide much greater 
protection to beachgoers and help shore economies by avoiding 
unnecessary closures.
  I intend to work with my colleagues here and with EPA to improve the 
implementation of the original BEACH Act and keep our coastal waters as 
clean as possible. In the meantime, I am pleased to see the House 
extend the grants program through this bill.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). The question is on the 
motion offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1721.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________