[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 105 (Thursday, July 15, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5969-S5970]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CARDIN:
  S. 3602. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to direct the 
Secretary to establish a comprehensive program to control and treat 
polluted stormwater runoff from federally funded highways and roads, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce legislation 
that will help prevent millions of gallons of pollution from entering 
our Nation's precious water resources. The season we are in makes my 
legislation particularly timely. Spring is one of the wettest times of 
year, and with every Spring shower polluted stormwater runoff washes a 
myriad of chemicals pollutants, sediment, debris, oil and grease, and 
other contaminates from our Nation's roads and highways into our lakes, 
rivers, streams, bays, and coastal waters.
  Stormwater is the nation's largest source of water pollution. While 
rain itself contains air pollution particulates that are deposited in 
every drop, most stormwater pollution is picked up on the surface and 
carried off as runoff. Stormwater washes contaminants like oil, grease, 
heavy metals, nutrients, asbestos, sediments, road salts and other de-
icing agents, brake dust, and road debris from the millions of miles of 
America's roads and into storm drains that discharge into nearby 
waters. Almost all of this polluted stormwater is discharged without 
any treatment.
  When rain falls on these hard, impervious surfaces it often has no 
where to go but down the channels created by curbs and retaining walls, 
into storm drains and into the nearest natural water body. According to 
research compiled by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric 
Administration's, NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center, the U.S. is 
covered by more than 112,600 square kilometers of impervious surfaces. 
That is a space larger than the State of Ohio. With 985,139 miles of 
federal aid highways stretching from every corner of the country, 
polluted highway runoff is no small problem facing our nation's waters.
  The effects of polluted stormwater runoff are real. For example, the 
Anacostia River--Washington's ``other'' and often forgotten river--can 
be seen from the Capitol Dome as it flows out of Prince George's 
County, Maryland, and into the District and on to its confluence with 
the Potomac. Runoff from within the 176 square mile watershed of the 
Anacostia, most of which is in Maryland, but also includes the east 
side of DC and the entire Capitol complex, all makes its way into the 
Anacostia. The stormwater that enters the Anacostia is extremely 
polluted from the thousands of acres of road surfaces that cover the 
watershed, which exacerbates the incidence of combined sewer overflows 
and has impaired the Anacostia for many years. It is no coincidence 
that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has found the Anacostia's bottom-
feeder catfish to have the highest incidence of liver tumors than any 
other population of catfish in the country. The cause of the tumors are 
the high levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a by-product of 
fuel combustion, that come from vehicle tailpipe emissions and are 
deposited on the road and in the air and then washed into the river 
with every shower or thunderstorm.
  This is not a problem unique to Maryland or the Chesapeake Bay 
region, nor is it a problem unique to urban environments as opposed to 
rural environments. Polluted runoff is a problem that affects any 
watershed where impervious paved road and highway surfaces have altered 
the natural hydrology of a watershed. Over time, Federal highway policy 
has come to recognize the drastic impacts highways and surface 
transportation can have on the environment and on water quality. Title 
23 of the U.S. Code states: ``transportation should play a significant 
role in promoting economic growth, improving the environment, and 
sustaining the quality of life'' through the use of ``context sensitive 
solutions.'' The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, 
ISTEA, authorized using transportation enhancement funds for 
``environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway 
runoff.'' It's important to note, however, that this is just one of 12 
types of eligible enhancement projects and only 1.1 percent of 
enhancement project funds have gone toward environmental mitigation 
projects since 1992.

  In 2008, at the request of the House Transportation & Infrastructure 
Committee, the Government Accountability Office issued a report 
examining key issues and challenges that need to be addressed in the 
next reauthorization of the transportation bill. That report 
highlighted the clear link between transportation policy and the 
environment. Taking a policy approach to require that the planning, 
design, and construction of highways are done in an environmentally 
responsible manner, with an eye toward mitigating the water quality 
impacts highways have on our Nation's water resources, will help 
address this issue and better meet our Nation's transportation goals. 
This legislation also helps advance the October 5, 2009, Executive 
Order affirming that Federal policy and Federal agencies shall 
``conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse, and 
stormwater management; eliminate waste, recycle, and prevent pollution; 
and leverage agency acquisitions to foster markets for sustainable 
technologies and environmentally preferable materials, products and 
services.''
  The approach my legislation takes to mitigate polluted highway runoff 
is through the implementation of a minimum design standard, developed 
by the United States Department of Transportation, that requires the 
maintenance or restoration of the pre-development hydrology of a 
Federal-aid highway project site. This same approach was made law by 
the Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007 for the development of 
new Federal buildings and facilities.
  My bill would require that all significant Federal highway projects 
must be planned and designed ``to maintain or restore, to the maximum 
extent technically feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the 
project site with regard to the temperature, rate, chemical 
composition, volume and duration of flow'' of stormwater. This would be 
achieved by approaches that avoid and minimize alteration of natural 
features and hydrology and maximize the use of onsite pollution control 
measures using existing terrain and natural features.
  My bill also recognizes that geography and other physical 
characteristics of the land may not always allow on-site treatment of 
polluted highway runoff. When conditions are impracticable my 
legislation would allow for an ``appropriate off-site runoff pollution 
mitigation program'' within the watershed of a Federal-aid highway 
project site that can protect against the water quality impacts of the 
project.
  The Clean Water Act requires that we protect the waters of the United 
States. As with most pollution abatement strategies, preventing 
stormwater pollution is cheaper, more effective, and easier to 
implement than trying to clean up and remediate the problem after the 
contamination has occurred.
  Not addressing stormwater pollution at its source just kicks the 
proverbial

[[Page S5970]]

can down the road for someone else's attention. When water resources 
are contaminated by polluted highway runoff, mitigating the pollution, 
which is a preventable discharge in the first place, should not be the 
responsibility of local governments, wastewater treatment facilities, 
or drinking water utilities.
  Water pollution has many sources and our Nation's highways produce a 
tremendous volume of contaminated stormwater. Time and time again, 
experience has taught us that addressing pollution at its source is the 
most effective means of abating pollution. It is time we applied this 
principle to our Nation's Federal-aid highways. I urge my colleagues to 
support my legislation and help move our country closer to meeting the 
goals of the Clean Water Act and the goals of our national 
transportation policy.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3602

       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 ``Safe Treatment of Polluted 
     Stormwater Runoff Act'' or the ``STOPS Runoff Act''.

     SEC. 2. FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY RUNOFF POLLUTION MANAGEMENT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 3 of title 23, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 330. Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management 
       program

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management program to 
     ensure that covered projects are constructed in accordance 
     with minimum standards designed to protect surface and ground 
     water quality.
       ``(b) Project Approval.--The Secretary may approve a 
     covered project of a State under section 106 only if the 
     State provides assurances satisfactory to the Secretary that 
     the State will construct the project in accordance with the 
     minimum standards described in subsection (c).
       ``(c) Minimum Standards.--The following minimum standards 
     shall apply to the construction of covered projects to 
     maintain or restore, to the maximum extent technically 
     feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the project site 
     with regard to the temperature, rate, chemical composition, 
     volume and duration of flow:
       ``(1) Avoid and minimize alteration of natural features and 
     hydrology and maximize use of pollution source control 
     measures that utilize existing terrain and natural features 
     and reduce chemical introduction to reduce creation of 
     pollution on the project site.
       ``(2) Maximize capture of highway runoff pollution on the 
     project site through pretreatment and treatment, including 
     environmental site design techniques and other control 
     measures that promote evapotransporation and infiltration.
       ``(3) Prevent any remaining highway runoff pollution not 
     addressed under paragraphs (1) and (2) to the maximum extent 
     practicable by implementing one or more of the following 
     control measures selected through a watershed-based 
     environmental management or equivalent approach:
       ``(A) Pretreatment and treatment of runoff with appropriate 
     control measures on the project site.
       ``(B) Discharge of highway runoff pollution directly to an 
     off-site control measure under the control of the State with 
     documented capacity to provide functionally and 
     quantitatively equivalent management of runoff pollution to 
     that required to achieve the minimum standards of this 
     subsection for the design life of the project.
       ``(C) If the control measures in subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
     are found impracticable based on site conditions or other 
     appropriate factors, and an appropriate off-site runoff 
     pollution mitigation program is in place, contribution to a 
     mitigation program that will produce functionally and 
     quantitatively equivalent management of runoff pollution to 
     that required to achieve the minimum standards. Under this 
     subparagraph, priority shall be given to off-site control 
     measures that address the impacts of runoff pollution to 
     waterways that are listed as impaired in the same or adjacent 
     8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code as the project site.
       ``(d) Guidance.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Secretary, with the 
     concurrence of the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, shall publish guidance to assist States in 
     complying with the requirements of this section.
       ``(2) Contents of guidance.--The guidance shall include 
     guidelines for the establishment of State processes and 
     programs that will be used to assist in managing highway 
     runoff pollution from covered projects in accordance with the 
     minimum standards described in subsection (c), including--
       ``(A) guidance to help States integrate the planning, 
     selection, design, and long-term operation and maintenance of 
     control measures consistent with the minimum standards in the 
     overall project planning process;
       ``(B) creation of a watershed-based environmental 
     management approach to assist projects in achieving 
     consistency with the minimum standards;
       ``(C) guidelines for the development and utilization of 
     off-site runoff pollution mitigation programs to achieve 
     compliance with the minimum standards; and
       ``(D) provisions for State inspection, monitoring, and 
     reporting to document State compliance and project 
     consistency with this section.
       ``(e) Limitation on Statutory Construction.--Nothing in 
     this section shall be construed to affect the applicability 
     of any provision of Federal, State, or local law that is more 
     stringent than the requirements of this section.
       ``(f) Reporting.--The Secretary shall require each State to 
     report annually to the Secretary on the highway runoff 
     pollution reductions achieved for covered projects carried 
     out by the State after the date of enactment of this section.
       ``(g) Definitions.--In this section, the following 
     definitions apply:
       ``(1) Control measure.--The term `control measure' means a 
     program, structural or nonstructural management practice, 
     operational procedure, or policy on or off the project site 
     that is intended to control, reduce, or prevent highway 
     runoff pollution.
       ``(2) Covered project.--The term `covered project' means a 
     project carried out under this title for--
       ``(A) construction of a new highway or associated facility;
       ``(B) construction of a Federal-aid highway runoff control 
     measure retrofit; or
       ``(C) construction of a significant Federal-aid highway 
     improvement.
       ``(3) Federal-aid highway runoff control measure 
     retrofit.--The term `Federal-aid highway runoff control 
     measure retrofit' means the installation or modification of a 
     control measure for highway runoff pollution serving a 
     Federal-aid highway or associated facility originally 
     constructed before the date of enactment of this section.
       ``(4) Highway runoff pollution.--The term `highway runoff 
     pollution' means in relation to a Federal-aid highway, 
     associated facility, or control measure retrofit projects one 
     or more of the following--
       ``(A) a discharge of sediment, metals, bacteria, chemicals, 
     nutrients, or oil and grease in runoff; or
       ``(B) a discharge of peak flow rate, water temperature, and 
     volume of runoff that exceeds predevelopment amounts 
     generated from a Federal-aid highway, associated facility, or 
     control measure retrofit project that violates the water 
     quality standards of the receiving water set by the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 125 et seq.) and 
     related State programs.
       ``(5) Significant federal-aid highway improvement.--The 
     term `significant Federal-aid highway improvement' means the 
     rehabilitation, reconstruction, reconfiguration, renovation, 
     or major resurfacing of an existing Federal-aid highway or 
     associated facility that disturbs 5 or more acres of land.
       ``(6) Watershed-based environmental management approach.--
     The term `watershed-based environmental management approach' 
     means an approach under which--
       ``(A) the selection of solutions that prevent or minimize 
     the environmental impact of an individual project is made 
     within the broader context of the environmental protection 
     and restoration goals of any watershed that drains the 
     project site, rather than selecting solutions solely based on 
     site level considerations; and
       ``(B) priority consideration is given to--
       ``(i) protection of drinking water supplies;
       ``(ii) protection and restoration of waterways listed by a 
     State as impaired in accordance with section 303(d) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d));
       ``(iii) preservation of aquatic ecosystems and fisheries; 
     and
       ``(iv) cost-effective expenditure of Federal funds.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The provisions of this legislation 
     will be effective and applicable to construction of Federal-
     Aid Highway projects as defined in subsection (g)(2) 1 year 
     after enactment.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 3 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

``330. Federal-aid highway runoff pollution management program.''.
                                 ______