[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 104 (Monday, June 23, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H5820-H5824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1630
RAW SEWAGE OVERFLOW COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend
the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2452) to amend the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act to ensure that sewage treatment plants monitor
for and report discharges of raw sewage, and for other purposes, as
amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2452
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 ``Sewage Overflow Community
Right-to-Know Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1362) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(25) Sanitary sewer overflow.--The term `sanitary sewer
overflow' means an overflow, spill, release, or diversion of
wastewater from a sanitary sewer system. Such term does not
include municipal combined sewer overflows or other
discharges from a municipal combined storm and sanitary sewer
system and does not include wastewater backups into buildings
caused by a blockage or other malfunction of a building
lateral that is privately owned. Such term includes overflows
or releases of wastewater that reach waters of the United
States, overflows or releases of wastewater in the United
States that do not reach waters of the United States, and
wastewater backups into buildings that are caused by
blockages or flow conditions in a sanitary sewer other than a
building lateral.
``(26) Treatment works.--The term `treatment works' has the
meaning given that term in section 212.''.
SEC. 3. MONITORING, REPORTING, AND PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF
SEWER OVERFLOWS.
Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1342) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(r) Sewer Overflow Monitoring, Reporting, and
Notifications.--
``(1) General requirements.--After the last day of the 180-
day period beginning on the date on which regulations are
issued under paragraph (4), a permit issued, renewed, or
modified under this section by the Administrator or the
State, as the case may be, for a publicly owned treatment
works shall require, at a minimum, beginning on the date of
the issuance, modification, or renewal, that the owner or
operator of the treatment works--
``(A) institute and utilize a feasible methodology,
technology, or management program for monitoring sewer
overflows to alert the owner or operator to the occurrence of
a sewer overflow in a timely manner;
``(B) in the case of a sewer overflow that has the
potential to affect human health, notify the public of the
overflow as soon as practicable but not later than 24 hours
after the time the owner or operator knows of the overflow;
``(C) in the case of a sewer overflow that may imminently
and substantially endanger human health, notify public health
authorities and other affected entities, such as public water
systems, of the overflow immediately after the owner or
operator knows of the overflow;
``(D) report each sewer overflow on its discharge
monitoring report to the Administrator or the State, as the
case may be, by describing--
``(i) the magnitude, duration, and suspected cause of the
overflow;
``(ii) the steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, or
prevent recurrence of the overflow; and
``(iii) the steps taken or planned to mitigate the impact
of the overflow; and
``(E) annually report to the Administrator or the State, as
the case may be, the total number of sewer overflows in a
calendar year, including--
``(i) the details of how much wastewater was released per
incident;
``(ii) the duration of each sewer overflow;
``(iii) the location of the overflow and any potentially
affected receiving waters;
``(iv) the responses taken to clean up the overflow; and
``(v) the actions taken to mitigate impacts and avoid
further sewer overflows at the site.
``(2) Exceptions.--
``(A) Notification requirements.--The notification
requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C) shall not apply
a sewer overflow that is a wastewater backup into a single-
family residence.
``(B) Reporting requirements.--The reporting requirements
of paragraphs (1)(D) and (1)(E) shall not apply to a sewer
overflow that is a release of wastewater that occurs in the
course of maintenance of the treatment works, is managed
consistently with the treatment works' best management
practices, and is intended to prevent sewer overflows.
``(3) Report to epa.--Each State shall provide to the
Administrator annually a summary of sewer overflows that
occurred in the State.
``(4) Rulemaking by epa.--Not later than one year after the
date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator,
after providing notice and an opportunity for public comment,
shall issue regulations to implement this subsection,
including regulations to--
``(A) establish a set of criteria to guide the owner or
operator of a publicly owned treatment works in--
``(i) assessing whether a sewer overflow has the potential
to affect human health or may imminently and substantially
endanger human health; and
``(ii) developing communication measures that are
sufficient to give notice under paragraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C);
and
``(B) define the terms `feasible' and `timely' as such
terms apply to paragraph (1)(A), including site specific
conditions.
``(5) Approval of state notification programs.--
``(A) Requests for approval.--
``(i) In general.--After the date of issuance of
regulations under paragraph (4), a State may submit to the
Administrator evidence that the State has in place a legally
enforceable notification program that is substantially
equivalent to the requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and
(1)(C).
``(ii) Program review and authorization.--If the evidence
submitted by a State under clause (i) shows the notification
program of the State to be substantially equivalent to the
requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C), the
Administrator shall authorize the State to carry out such
program instead of the requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and
(1)(C).
``(iii) Factors for determining substantial equivalency.--
In carrying out a review of a State notification program
under clause (ii), the Administrator shall take into account
the scope of sewer overflows for which notification is
required, the length of time during which notification must
be made, the scope of persons who must be notified of sewer
overflows, the scope of enforcement activities ensuring that
notifications of sewer overflows are made, and such other
factors as the Administrator considers appropriate.
``(B) Review period.--If a State submits evidence with
respect to a notification program under subparagraph (A)(i)
on or before the last day of the 30-day period beginning on
the date of issuance of regulations under paragraph (4), the
requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C) shall not begin
to apply to a publicly owned treatment works located in the
State until the date on which the Administrator completes a
review of the notification program under subparagraph
(A)(ii).
``(C) Withdrawal of authorization.--If the Administrator,
after conducting a public hearing, determines that a State is
not administering and enforcing a State notification program
authorized under subparagraph (A)(ii) in accordance with the
requirements
[[Page H5821]]
of this paragraph, the Administrator shall so notify the
State and, if appropriate corrective action is not taken
within a reasonable time, not to exceed 90 days, the
Administrator shall withdraw authorization of such program
and enforce the requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C)
with respect to the State.
``(6) Special rules concerning application of notification
requirements.--After the last day of the 30-day period
beginning on the date of issuance of regulations under
paragraph (4), the requirements of paragraphs (1)(B) and
(1)(C) shall--
``(A) apply to the owner or operator of a publicly owned
treatment works and be subject to enforcement under section
309, and
``(B) supersede any notification requirements contained in
a permit issued under this section for the treatment works to
the extent that the notification requirements are less
stringent than the notification requirements of paragraphs
(1)(B) and (1)(C),
until such date as a permit is issued, renewed, or modified
under this section for the treatment works in accordance with
paragraph (1).
``(7) Definitions.--In this subsection, the following
definitions apply:
``(A) Sewer overflow.--The term `sewer overflow' means a
sanitary sewer overflow or a municipal combined sewer
overflow.
``(B) Single-family residence.--The term `single-family
residence' means an individual dwelling unit, including an
apartment, condominium, house, or dormitory. Such term does
not include the common areas of a multi-dwelling
structure.''.
SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE.
(a) Purpose of State Revolving Fund.--Section 601(a) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1381(a)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' the first place it appears; and
(2) by inserting after ``section 320'' the following: ``,
and (4) for the implementation of requirements to monitor for
sewer overflows under section 402''.
(b) Water Pollution Control Revolving Loan Funds.--Section
603(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1383(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' the first place it appears; and
(2) by inserting after ``section 320 of this Act'' the
following: ``, and (4) for the implementation of requirements
to monitor for sewer overflows under section 402''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) and the gentlewoman from Virginia
(Mrs. Drake) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
General Leave
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on
H.R. 2452.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow Community Right-To-Know
Act, offered by my colleague on the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Mr. Bishop, is an important commonsense proposal to
enhance the monitoring and public notification of sewage spills.
I applaud Mr. Bishop's work to raise the public's awareness of sewage
spills and for his tenacity in bringing together relevant stakeholders
on this issue to work through potential differences and produce the
fine product under consideration today. I also applaud the work of our
colleague, Mr. LoBiondo, for his efforts in supporting and advocating
for H.R. 2452.
Public notification of sewage overflows is an important topic that
has not received the attention it rightly deserves. During committee
hearings on this legislation last summer, the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment received testimony on the overwhelming extent
of the problem of sewage overflows. According to the Environmental
Protection Agency's own numbers, the frequency and volume of annual
sewage overflows is staggering.
For combined sewage systems, EPA estimates that 850 billion gallons
of raw or partially treated sewage is discharged annually into local
waters. For separate sanitary sewer systems, EPA estimates that 23- to
75,000 of these sanitary sewage system overflows occur each year in the
United States, discharging a total volume of between 3 and 10 billion
gallons annually.
Worse still is the fact that these sewage overflows can be laden with
potentially harmful chemicals, pathogens, viruses, and bacteria and
often wind up in local rivers and streams, city streets, parks, or, in
unfortunate cases, directly into people's homes.
These statistics further emphasize the importance of investment in
our Nation's water-related infrastructure. For too long our communities
and citizens have been waiting for us to renew our commitment to
meeting the water-related infrastructure needs of this country. While
the House of Representatives strongly approved legislation to reinvest
and rebuild and replace our failing and outdated waste-water treatment
infrastructure and sewers, we have faced continued opposition from this
administration investing in our Nation's infrastructure.
I remain hopeful that we will be able to send legislation to the
President this year that will meet the water-related needs that we all
know exist and are necessary to ensure the economic and environmental
health of our Nation.
However, in the interim, we need to make sure that the public is
aware of sewage levels to give the individuals the opportunity to stay
out of harm's way. It makes no sense for sewage agencies to know where
and when overflows are occurring but to avoid making this information
readily available to the public. This type of practice defies common
sense. Equally troublesome are agencies that lack sufficient monitoring
technologies or programs to alert them to the presence of sewage
overflows.
The legislation under consideration here today is an essential step
in protecting the public's health and environment from the dangers of
sewage overflows. H.R. 2452, the Sewage Community Right-to-Know Act, is
a commonsense approach to enhance the monitoring and notification of
sewage overflows to protect human health and the environment. It is
also an approach that can be achieved without significant burden to
States and local governments. Monitoring and providing public
notification on sewage overflows provides the greatest opportunity to
avoid direct contact and potentially harmful pollutants as well.
Facilities' rapid responses to overflows in order to minimize the
potential harm to the environment, this legislation amends the Clean
Water Act to ensure that all publicly owned treatment works incorporate
enhanced monitoring notification and reporting requirements into the
existing permits for those systems under their operational control.
Under this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency is given 1 year to issue regulations to define the parameters
for monitoring and notification to be carried out by the publicly owned
treatment works. Following completion of this rulemaking, all publicly
owned treatment works are required within a defined time period to
incorporate the monitoring and notification criteria from the
rulemaking into the existing clean water permits.
However, to help minimize potential paperwork concerns, this
legislation allows owners and operators to incorporate the enhanced
monitoring provisions in their existing permits as such permits come up
for periodic renewal modification.
To enhance the availability of public information on sewer overflows,
H.R. 2452 requires the enhanced notification requirements to take
effect 30 days after completion of the rulemaking. The legislation
under consideration today is slightly modified from the version that
was reported favorably from the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure on May 15 to address a few technical and transitional
concerns that were unresolved before the committee markup.
In addition, the bill under consideration today provides a mechanism
for States with active notification programs to petition EPA for the
ability to carry out the existing notification programs provided that
these programs are determined to be functionally equivalent to the
national standard for State notification programs called for in this
legislation.
I commend the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Boozman, and
the ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Mr. Mica, and my Chair, Mr. Oberstar,
[[Page H5822]]
for working in a bipartisan fashion to resolve all the outstanding
issues related to this important legislation.
Let me conclude by thanking the following organizations for their
efforts in reaching the compromised language that is under
consideration today: The American Rivers, the National Association of
Clean Water Agencies, the Water Environment Federation and the
California Association of Sanitation Agencies. The hard work and
willingness of each of these organizations made it possible to reach
this agreement and to bring forward this important bipartisan
legislation.
Madam Speaker, I submit the following for the Record.
June 23, 2008.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. John Mica,
Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Tim Bishop,
Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Frank LoBiondo,
Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, and
Representatives Bishop and LoBiondo: On behalf of our members
and supporters across the nation, thank you for reporting
H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act.
Our organizations strongly support this legislation and
applaud your efforts to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
By requiring public notification, H.R. 2452 could protect
millions of Americans from exposure to untreated sewage
spills that could make them sick. This first line of defense
is critical as hundreds of billions of gallons of raw and
partially treated sewage are dumped into our streams, rivers
and lakes every year. Many American are unaware when a sewage
spill occurs in the local waterways where their families swim
and play.
The bacteria, viruses and parasites found in untreated
sewage can cause severe symptoms including gastrointestinal
problems, infection and fever, as well as heart, liver or
kidney failure, arthritis and even cancer. By requiring the
public to be notified when sewage spills threaten their
health, we can help Americans protect their families by
avoiding contaminated areas until the threat has passed.
Thank you again for your hard work on this important
legislation. We look forward to working with you to see this
bill enacted into law this Congress.
Sincerely,
Eli Weissman, Director of Government Affairs, American
Rivers; Christy Leavitt, Clean Water Advocate,
Environment America; Tiernan Sittenfeld, Legislative
Director, League of Conservation Voters; Nancy Stoner,
Director, Clean Water Project, Natural Resources
Defense Council; David Jenkins, Government Affairs
Director, Republicans for Environmental Protection;
Angela Howe, Legal Manager, Surfrider Foundation.
Paul Schwartz, National Policy Coordinator, Clean Water
Action; Shawnee Hoover, Legislative Director, Friends
of the Earth; Corry Westbrook, Legislative Director,
National Wildlife Federation; Will Callaway,
Legislative Director, Physicians for Social
Responsibility; Debbie Sease, National Campaigns
Director, Sierra Club.
____
California Association
of Sanitation Agencies,
Sacramento, CA, June 23, 2008.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. John Mica,
Ranking Republican, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica: On behalf
of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA),
I write in support of H.R. 2452, which would address the
important issue of reporting and notification for sewer
overflows. This legislation represents the culmination of a
collaborative approach involving wastewater treatment
operators and the environmental community. We appreciate the
committee's willingness to address CASA's concerns.
CASA understands that the legislation has been amended to
address one of our major concerns, which relates to
longstanding California requirements for notification of
regulatory authorities and the public in the event of a sewer
spill that threatens public health or the environment.
Specifically, the amendment provides a delegation process so
that existing state notification programs designed to inform
the public of health threats emanating from sewer overflows
will not be supplanted, provided EPA determines that the
programs are substantially equivalent to the federal program.
This is vital to avoid inefficient and potentially confusing
duplication of effort. Further, this amendment will allow
POTWs to target their limited resources to fulfilling their
responsibilities as first responders when spills occur.
Second, we understand that the committee report clarifies
that satellite collection systems are not subject to the
provisions of the bill. This is important because many
regional POTWs do not manage these upstream systems, and have
no authority for spills that occur from facilities outside
their jurisdiction.
There is one provision in the amended bill that has given
rise to a new concern. This new provision is designed to
ensure that the notification provisions of the bill will be
implemented in a timely matter. However, as written, there is
no mechanism for informing permittees of their new, fully
enforceable obligations, which appears to be at odds with
basic due process rights. We hope that as Congress considers
the bill that this matter can be further reviewed and
addressed prior to final passage.
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to work with the
committee on this important legislation.
Sincerely,
Kamil Azoury,
President.
____
National Association of
Clean Water Agencies,
Washington, DC, June 23, 2008.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Rayburn
House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. John Mica,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Tim Bishop,
House of Representatives, Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica and
Representative Bishop: The National Association of Clean
Water Agencies (NACWA) appreciates your ongoing leadership
on, and commitment to, clean and safe water in the United
States. As the leading advocacy organization representing the
nation's public wastewater treatment agencies, NACWA has been
working diligently with your staff and with American Rivers
to come up with a common-sense bill to establish a
consistent, national framework for monitoring and reporting
sewer overflows. The result of this effort is the Sewage
Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act (H.R. 2452) being
considered by the House today. The bill goes a long way to
address the needs and concerns of NACWA's public agency
members, and we appreciate the hard work and good faith you
have shown in helping craft this language.
NACWA, however, must share the bill and accompanying report
with its Board of Directors before indicating whether it can
offer its support for the legislation. We expect to have a
decision on that matter this week. Again, thank you for your
leadership on this issue.
Sincerely,
Ken Kirk,
NACWA Executive Director.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow
Community Right-to-Know Act.
Our Nation has nearly 23,000 miles of ocean and gulf shoreline along
the continental United States, 5,500 miles of Great Lakes shoreline and
3.6 million miles of rivers and streams. Public confidence and the
quality of our Nation's waters is important to every citizen of this
Nation, but it is also critical to industries that rely on safe and
clean water.
To improve the public's confidence in the quality of our Nation's
waters and protect public health and safety, Representatives Bishop and
LoBiondo introduced H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-
Know Act. Sometimes, especially during wet weather, sewage systems can
leak or overflow. This can be caused by inadequate design or capacity
or by breaks in the system of pipes that are often old and in need of
repair.
H.R. 2452 requires the publicly owned treatment works develop and
implement a feasible monitoring program that is reasonably able to
detect the occurrence of an overflow or leak in their sewer systems in
a timely manner and to notify the public and health authorities
whenever a release would threaten public health and safety.
The Environmental Protection Agency is to develop regulations to help
local utilities implement these monitoring and notification
requirements starting 180 days after these regulations have been
issued. EPA or the States, as the case may be, are to incorporate these
monitoring and notification requirements into local utilities' Clean
Water Act permits on a rolling basis as their permits come up for
renewal.
This should provide for the orderly implementation of this program
and minimize the need to reopen utilities' permits. To minimize
burdening local
[[Page H5823]]
utilities with duplicative notification requirements, States that have
substantially equivalent release notification programs in place may
seek EPA's approval to implement the State's notification program
instead of the requirements under H.R. 2452. The bill authorizes the
use of State revolving loan funds to help communities pay for this
monitoring and notification program.
Under this program, EPA and local utilities must define the
appropriate amount of monitoring to reduce risk and reasonably protect
human health. However, they need to be careful not to unwisely use up
funds that are meant to address the very infrastructure problems that
are causing the release of sewage in the first place.
I congratulate Representatives Bishop and LoBiondo on sponsoring this
bill. The public has a right to know when their waters are threatened
by sewage release. So I encourage all Members to support this bill.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2452,
the ``Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act''. Let me begin by
congratulating our Committee colleague, the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Bishop), for introducing legislation to provide common-sense
standards for public notification of both combined sewer overflows and
sanitary sewer overflows. This well-thought-out legislation will be a
welcome addition to Federal efforts in protecting public health as well
as the natural environment.
The most reliable way to prevent human illness from waterborne
diseases and pathogens is to eliminate the potential for human exposure
to the discharge of pollutants from combined sewer overflows (``CSOs'')
and sanitary sewer overflows (''SSOs''). This can occur either through
the elimination of the discharge, or, in the event that a release does
occur, to minimize the potential human contact to pollutants.
Unfortunately, Federal law does not provide uniform, national
standards for public notification of combined and sanitary sewer
overflows. Notification of sewer overflows is covered only by a
patchwork of Federal regulations, State laws, and local initiatives
aimed at limiting human exposure to discharges.
Potential human exposure to the pollutants found in sewer overflows
can occur in a variety of ways. According to the Environmental
Protection Agency (``EPA'), the most common pathways include direct
contact with sewer discharges in recreational waters and beaches,
drinking water contaminated by sewer discharges, and consuming or
handling contaminated fish or shellfish. However, humans are also at
risk of direct exposure to sewer overflows, including sewer backups
into residential buildings, city streets, and sidewalks.
In October 2007, in my own Congressional district, basements and city
streets across the city of Duluth were flooded with sewer overflows
that resulted from massive rainstorms in the Lake Superior basin. The
Western Lake Superior Sanitary Sewer District reported at least seven
major sewage overflows in its service area, with reports of numerous
additional backups into local streets and basements.
Similarly, earlier this month, heavy rains in the Midwest and
flooding along the Mississippi River system resulted in a significant
overload to the sewer systems and treatment works, and resulted in the
release of untold gallons of untreated or partially treated sewage into
the homes and street of communities along the Mississippi River system.
As families are starting to return to their homes, they are in need of
information on any health risks from coming into contact with
potentially contaminated waters.
The cost of eliminating CSOs and SSOs throughout the nation is
staggering. In its most recent Clean Water Needs Survey (2000), EPA
estimated the future capital needs to address existing CSOs at $50.6
billion. In addition, EPA estimates that it would require an additional
$88.5 billion in capital improvements to reduce the frequency of SSOs
caused by wet weather and other conditions.
Upon being elected Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, I made it a priority to renew the Federal commitment in
addressing the nation's wastewater infrastructure needs.
In March 2007, the House approved two bills reported from the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure--H.R. 720, the ``Water
Quality Financing Act'', and H.R. 569, the ``Water Quality Investment
Act''--to reauthorize appropriations for the construction, repair, and
rehabilitation of wastewater infrastructure, including measures to
address CSOs and SSOs.
H.R. 720 authorizes appropriations of $14 billion over four years for
the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which is the primary source of
Federal funds for wastewater infrastructure. H.R. 569 authorizes
appropriations of $1.7 billion in Federal grants over 5 years to
address combined sewers and sanitary sewers. Both bills are pending
before the United States Senate.
However, even with significant increases in Federal, State, and local
investment, it is likely that sewer overflows will continue. In the
event that a release does occur, the most effective way to prevent
illness is to provide timely and adequate public notice to minimize
human exposure to pollutants.
H.R. 2452, the ``Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act'',
amends the Clean Water Act to provide a uniform, national standard for
monitoring, reporting, and public notification of sewer overflows. This
legislation, which was approved by the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure by voice vote, will strengthen the monitoring and public
notification requirements of the Clean Water Act to encourage increased
awareness and public notification of overflows in an expeditious
manner.
The bill under consideration this afternoon is a slightly modified
version of this legislation as reported by the Committee. The bill, as
amended, makes a few technical and clarifying changes to the bill, as
well as addresses a few transitional issues on the implementation of
this Act.
The framework of this amendment was developed jointly by the majority
and minority Members of the Committee, it consultation with the
National Association of Clean Water Agencies, the Water Environment
Federation, the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, and
American Rivers. I appreciate the hard work by all parties to help move
this common-sense legislation to increase public awareness of combined
sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows.
Again, I applaud Mr. Bishop for introducing this common-sense
legislation to ensure that our citizens are made aware of the potential
public health threats caused by sewer overflows. I urge my colleagues
to join me in supporting H.R. 2452.
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the residents of
eastern Long Island, I would like to commend Chairman Oberstar,
Chairwoman Johnson and Congressman LoBiondo for their leadership and
unwavering dedication to clean water issues. I would also like to thank
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee staff for their hard
work and commitment to advancing this legislation to the full House
today.
Madam Speaker, the EPA estimates that sewer overflows discharge
roughly 850 billion gallons of raw or partially treated sewage annually
into local waters. These discharges, laden with potentially harmful
chemicals and pathogens, often end up in local rivers, lakes, streams,
and the ocean.
In response, the Transportation & Infrastructure Committee has taken
appropriate measures to restore the federal commitment to our Nation's
wastewater infrastructure. In the 110th Congress, we have passed the
Water Quality Financing Act, authorizing funds for the State Revolving
Fund; and the Beach Protection Act, to carry out coastal recreation
water quality monitoring and notification programs. Today, we take our
commitment to water quality one step further by passing the Sewage
Overflow Community Right-to-know Act.
As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure:
The best way to avoid human health and environmental concerns from
sewer overflows is to ensure that they never occur in the first place.
However, even with significant increases in investment, sewer overflows
will continue to occur. Therefore, it is imperative that we provide the
public with comprehensive and timely notification of sewer overflows.
We need to make sure that the public is aware of sewer overflows to
give communities the opportunity to protect themselves.
It makes no sense for operators of local sewer systems to know where
and when overflows are occurring, but not to promptly notify the
public. Notification of sewer overflows will help the public avoid
direct contact with potentially harmful chemicals and pathogens, and it
will facilitate rapid response to overflows in order to minimize the
potential harm to the environment.
Accordingly, the Bishop/LoBiondo Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-
know Act provides for the monitoring, reporting and public notification
of sewer overflows from Publicly Owned Treatment Works by requiring
POTWs to institute and utilize programs to alert operators to
overflows, notify the public within 24 hours of discovery of an
overflow by an operator, and notify public health officials when human
health is endangered.
The bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency establish
criteria to guide POTWs in assessing whether a sewer overflow has the
potential to affect human health and developing communication measures
to ensure the public is notified. The bill also establishes a process
for EPA to determine if a State's existing notification program is
substantially equivalent to, or better than, the requirements
established in this bill, and should be allowed to continue.
[[Page H5824]]
This bill is a result of hard work by several organizations who
believe that Americans deserve clean, safe waters. Without their many
insights this legislation would not have been possible. Therefore, I
would like to thank American Rivers, the National Association of Clean
Water Agencies, the Water Environment Federation, and the California
Association of Sanitation Agencies for the countless hours they have
given to refine the bill's language to ensure that public health and
the environment are protected.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this
commonsense legislation, and I again thank my friend and colleague, Mr.
LoBiondo, for his leadership and support in authoring the bill.
Mr. LoBIONDO. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2452,
the Sewage Overflow Right-to-Know Act.
Last year, nearly 250,000 gallons of partially treated sewage leaked
from the Asbury Park, New Jersey, sewer treatment plant into the
Atlantic Ocean threatening beach goers for miles down the shore. It was
the result of a broken pipe that went undetected for over 6 hours.
Fortunately, no one got sick and the environment did not suffer any
long term consequences. But that is not always the case.
The EPA estimates approximately 900 billion gallons of untreated
sewage enter our waterways each year, sickening nearly 3.5 million
people annually.
That is why I was pleased to join with Representative Bishop to
introduce H.R. 2452, the Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act.
This commonsense legislation will help keep the public safe from
waterborne illness by requiring sewer operators to put in place
monitoring systems to detect overflows and to promptly notify the
public in the event of an overflow. While some States and localities
have strong notification programs in place already, the majority do
not. Establishing a minimum standard for public notification is the
right thing to do.
H.R. 2452 makes sewer operators eligible for existing grant funds and
loans to help defer the cost of implementing monitoring and
notification programs, and it provides flexibility to States that
already have these critical programs in place.
I want to thank the National Association of Clean Water Agencies and
American Rivers for working with Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member
Mica to make improvements to this legislation. The bill before us today
represents a good compromise between all interested parties.
I want to thank Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, Chairwoman
Johnson, and Ranking Member Boozman for their assistance and support. I
also want to thank Jon Pawlow on Mr. Mica's Staff, Ryan Seiger on Mr.
Oberstar's staff, and Mark Copeland on Mr. Bishop's staff for their
tremendous effort. I urge all members to support this common-sense
measure.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I raise in support of H.R. 2452, the
Raw Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act. Sewer overflows
present serious threats to the environment and to human health. Our
crumbling wastewater infrastructure has resulted in an increasing
number of sewage spills, most commonly through combined sewer overflows
and sanitary sewer overflows.
As this Congress works to reauthorize the Clean Water State Revolving
Fund and improve our wastewater infrastructure, it is essential that
our constituents receive prompt notification when a spill occurs. H.R.
2452 provides a national Standard for such notification and permits the
use of Clean Water State Revolving funds for publically-owned treatment
works to monitor their infrastructure for spills.
In California, we have an existing notification process that is the
most aggressive in the Nation. I applaud Chairman Oberstar and his
staff for recognizing the existence of State notification programs and
ensuring that duplication of State and Federal standards does not
overburden local sanitation officials. In this bill, States like
California may operate their own notification program if the EPA
certifies that it is substantially equivalent to the Federal program.
I would like to include a letter from the California Association of
Sanitation Agencies that expresses full support for H.R. 2452. I
commend Mr. Bishop and Mr. Oberstar for their hard work on this
legislation, and urge my colleagues to support the Raw Sewage Overflow
Community Right-to-Know Act.
California Association of
Sanitation agencies,
Sacramento, CA, June 23, 2008.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. John Mica,
Ranking Republican, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica: On behalf
of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA),
I write in support of H.R. 2452, which would address the
important issue of reporting and notification for sewer
overflows. This legislation represents the culmination of a
collaborative approach involving wastewater treatment
operators and the environmental community. We appreciate the
committee's willingness to address CASA's concerns.
CASA understands that the legislation has been amended to
address one of our major concerns, which relates to
longstanding California requirements for notification of
regulatory authorities and the public in the event of a sewer
spill that threatens public health or the environment.
Specifically, the amendment provides a delegation process so
that existing state notification programs designed to inform-
the public of health threats emanating from sewer overflows
will not be supplanted, provided EPA determines that the
programs are substantially equivalent to the federal program.
This is vital to avoid inefficient and potentially confusing
duplication of effort. Further, this amendment will allow
POTWs to target their limited resources to fulfilling their
responsibilities as first responders when spills occur.
Second, we understand that the committee report clarifies
that satellite collection systems are not subject to the
provisions of the bill. This is important because many
regional POTWs do not manage these upstream systems, and have
no authority for spills that occur from facilities outside
their jurisdiction.
There is one provision in the amended bill that has given
rise to a new concern. This new provision is designed to
ensure that the notification provisions of the bill will be
implemented in a timely matter. However, as written, there is
no mechanism for informing permittees of their new, fully
enforceable obligations, which appears to be at odds with
basic due process rights. We hope that as Congress considers
the bill that this matter can be further reviewed and
addressed prior to final passage.
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to work with the
committee on this important legislation.
Sincerely,
Kamil Azoury,
President.
____
Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I have no further
requests for time, and I ask for support of this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2452, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to amend the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act to ensure that publicly owned treatment
works monitor for and report sewer overflows, and for other
purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________