[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 200 (Wednesday, December 19, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H10288-H10291]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT ACT
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 7279) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to provide
for an integrated planning process, to promote green infrastructure,
and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 7279
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
Improvement Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Municipality.--The term ``municipality'' has the
meaning given that term in section 502 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1362).
SEC. 3. INTEGRATED PLANS.
(a) Integrated Plans.--Section 402 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(s) Integrated Plans.--
``(1) Definition of integrated plan.--In this subsection,
the term `integrated plan' means a plan developed in
accordance with the Integrated Municipal Stormwater and
Wastewater Planning Approach Framework, issued by the
Environmental Protection Agency and dated June 5, 2012.
``(2) In general.--The Administrator (or a State, in the
case of a permit program approved by the Administrator) shall
inform municipalities of the opportunity to develop an
integrated plan that may be incorporated into a permit under
this section.
``(3) Scope.--
``(A) Scope of permit incorporating integrated plan.--A
permit issued under this section that incorporates an
integrated plan may integrate all requirements under this Act
addressed in the integrated plan, including requirements
relating to--
``(i) a combined sewer overflow;
``(ii) a capacity, management, operation, and maintenance
program for sanitary sewer collection systems;
``(iii) a municipal stormwater discharge;
``(iv) a municipal wastewater discharge; and
``(v) a water quality-based effluent limitation to
implement an applicable wasteload allocation in a total
maximum daily load;
``(B) Inclusions in integrated plan.--An integrated plan
incorporated into a permit issued under this section may
include the implementation of--
``(i) projects, including innovative projects, to reclaim,
recycle, or reuse water; and
``(ii) green infrastructure.
``(4) Compliance schedules.--
``(A) In general.--A permit issued under this section that
incorporates an integrated plan may include a schedule of
compliance, under which actions taken to meet any applicable
water quality-based effluent limitation may be implemented
over more than 1 permit term if the schedule of compliance--
``(i) is authorized by State water quality standards; and
``(ii) meets the requirements of section 122.47 of title
40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of
enactment of this subsection).
``(B) Time for compliance.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(ii), the requirement of section 122.47 of title 40, Code
of Federal Regulations, for compliance by an applicable
statutory deadline under this Act does not prohibit
implementation of an applicable water quality-based effluent
limitation over more than 1 permit term.
``(C) Review.--A schedule of compliance incorporated into a
permit issued under this section may be reviewed at the time
the permit is renewed to determine whether the schedule
should be modified.
``(5) Existing authorities retained.--
``(A) Applicable standards.--Nothing in this subsection
modifies any obligation to comply with applicable technology
and water quality-based effluent limitations under this Act.
``(B) Flexibility.--Nothing in this subsection reduces or
eliminates any flexibility available under this Act,
including the authority of a State to revise a water quality
standard after a use attainability analysis under section
131.10(g) of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or a
successor regulation), subject to the approval of the
Administrator under section 303(c).
``(6) Clarification of state authority.--
``(A) In general.--Nothing in section 301(b)(1)(C)
precludes a State from authorizing in the water quality
standards of the State the issuance of a schedule of
compliance to meet water quality-based effluent limitations
in permits that incorporate provisions of an integrated plan.
``(B) Transition rule.--In any case in which a discharge is
subject to a judicial order or consent decree, as of the date
of enactment of this subsection, resolving an enforcement
action under this Act, any schedule of compliance issued
pursuant to an authorization in a State water quality
standard may not revise a schedule of compliance in that
order or decree to be less stringent, unless the order or
decree is modified by agreement of the parties and the
court.''.
(b) Implementation of Integrated Plans Through Enforcement
Tools.--Section 309 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1319) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(h) Implementation of Integrated Plans.--
``(1) In general.--In conjunction with an enforcement
action under subsection (a) or (b) relating to municipal
discharges, the Administrator shall inform a municipality of
the opportunity to develop an integrated plan, as defined in
section 402(s).
``(2) Modification.--Any municipality under an
administrative order under subsection (a) or settlement
agreement (including a judicial consent decree) under
subsection (b) that has developed an integrated plan
consistent with section 402(s) may request a modification of
the administrative order or settlement agreement based on
that integrated plan.''.
(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives, and make publicly available,
a report on each integrated plan developed and implemented
through a permit, order, or judicial consent decree pursuant
to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act since the date of
publication of the ``Integrated Municipal Stormwater and
Wastewater Planning Approach Framework'' issued by the
Environmental Protection Agency and dated June 5, 2012,
including a description of the control measures, levels of
control, estimated costs, and compliance schedules for the
requirements implemented through such an integrated plan.
SEC. 4. MUNICIPAL OMBUDSMAN.
(a) Establishment.--There is established within the Office
of the Administrator an Office of the Municipal Ombudsman, to
be headed by a Municipal Ombudsman.
[[Page H10289]]
(b) General Duties.--The duties of the Municipal Ombudsman
shall include the provision of--
(1) technical assistance to municipalities seeking to
comply with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and
(2) information to the Administrator to help the
Administrator ensure that agency policies are implemented by
all offices of the Environmental Protection Agency, including
regional offices.
(c) Actions Required.--The Municipal Ombudsman shall work
with appropriate offices at the headquarters and regional
offices of the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that
a municipality seeking assistance is provided information
regarding--
(1) available Federal financial assistance for which the
municipality is eligible;
(2) flexibility available under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act; and
(3) the opportunity to develop an integrated plan under
section 402(s) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
(d) Information Sharing.--The Municipal Ombudsman shall
publish on the website of the Environmental Protection
Agency--
(1) general information relating to--
(A) the technical assistance referred to in subsection
(b)(1);
(B) the financial assistance referred to in subsection
(c)(1);
(C) the flexibility referred to in subsection (c)(2); and
(D) any resources developed by the Administrator related to
integrated plans under section 402(s) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act; and
(2) a copy of each permit, order, or judicial consent
decree that implements or incorporates such an integrated
plan.
SEC. 5. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE.
(a) Definition.--Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1362) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(27) Green infrastructure.--The term `green
infrastructure' means the range of measures that use plant or
soil systems, permeable pavement or other permeable surfaces
or substrates, stormwater harvest and reuse, or landscaping
to store, infiltrate, or evapotranspirate stormwater and
reduce flows to sewer systems or to surface waters.''.
(b) Green Infrastructure Promotion.--Title V of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating section 519 as section 520; and
(2) by inserting after section 518 the following:
``SEC. 519. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PROMOTION.
``(a) In General.--The Administrator shall promote the use
of green infrastructure in, and coordinate the integration of
green infrastructure into, permitting and enforcement under
this Act, planning efforts, research, technical assistance,
and funding guidance of the Environmental Protection Agency.
``(b) Coordination of Efforts.--The Administrator shall
ensure that the Office of Water coordinates efforts to
increase the use of green infrastructure with--
``(1) other Federal departments and agencies;
``(2) State, tribal, and local governments; and
``(3) the private sector.
``(c) Regional Green Infrastructure Promotion.--The
Administrator shall direct each regional office of the
Environmental Protection Agency, as appropriate based on
local factors, and consistent with the requirements of this
Act, to promote and integrate the use of green infrastructure
within the region, including through--
``(1) outreach and training regarding green infrastructure
implementation for State, tribal, and local governments,
tribal communities, and the private sector; and
``(2) the incorporation of green infrastructure into
permitting and other regulatory programs, codes, and
ordinance development, including the requirements under
consent decrees and settlement agreements in enforcement
actions.
``(d) Green Infrastructure Information-sharing.--The
Administrator shall promote green infrastructure information-
sharing, including through an internet website, to share
information with, and provide technical assistance to, State,
tribal, and local governments, tribal communities, the
private sector, and the public, regarding green
infrastructure approaches for--
``(1) reducing water pollution;
``(2) protecting water resources;
``(3) complying with regulatory requirements; and
``(4) achieving other environmental, public health, and
community goals.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Gibbs) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
General Leave
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 7279.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am here today to express strong support for my bill,
H.R. 7279, the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act, and ask my
colleagues to join the bipartisan coalition that worked on this
legislation to pass it.
I introduced this bill to help codify into law a useful tool our
communities should have at their disposal called integrated planning.
Integrated planning provides flexibility for communities when they are
confronted with the realities of managing wastewater and stormwater
systems. Cities and other municipalities are charged with delivering
those water utility services to their residents.
Those same municipalities face the challenges of regulatory mandates
from the Environmental Protection Agency for wastewater and stormwater
systems. They also face the rising costs of these mandates, which can
become severe financial burdens in repairing or replacing aging water
infrastructure.
These financial burdens ultimately fall on the ratepayers: the
residents of those municipalities, many of whom cannot afford dramatic
and immediate increases in their monthly bill. Without flexibility and
the ability to prioritize projects so public health and environmental
benefits can be maximized, local governments may be forced into costly
consent decrees.
Integrated planning helps communities sequence their water projects
to meet regulatory or safety obligations more affordably. Cities can
use integrated planning to focus on projects that will actually deliver
safe and affordable water utility services rather than simply focusing
on regulations and red tape.
The Water Infrastructure Improvement Act also creates an important
position inside the EPA, the Office of Municipal Ombudsman, to assist
municipalities in implementing Agency policy and ensuring local
governments are adhering to their responsibilities under the Clean
Water Act while utilizing integrated planning.
This bill enjoys bipartisan support in Congress and support from the
National Association of Clean Water Agencies, the U.S. Conference of
Mayors, the National League of Cities, the American Public Works
Association, the National Association of Counties, and the National
Association of Regional Councils.
The Water Infrastructure Improvement Act offers a way forward for our
communities to take a comprehensive approach to repairing or replacing
outdated water systems, to delivering clean and sustainable water
services, and to keeping it affordable for the ratepayers and
taxpayers.
We all tend to get wrapped up in the headlines of the day. The
nonstop calls for outrage dominate cable news, and partisan differences
grab everyone's attention. Because of that, the American people very
rarely hear or see the real bipartisan work on issues important to
their everyday lives like easy access to safe, affordable, and
efficient water utilities.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from California (Mrs.
Napolitano) for her work on this issue. This is an example of the many
issues in Congress that affect the lives of all Americans and that find
bipartisan support, yet fly under the radar.
I strongly urge my colleagues to join me, Mrs. Napolitano, Mr. Latta,
Ms. Fudge, Mr. Chabot, and Mrs. Bustos in passing the Water
Infrastructure Improvement Act so America's municipalities and their
residents can maintain access to safe water.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7279, the very
bipartisan, as my colleague was saying, Water Infrastructure
Improvement Act.
Let me first start by thanking the primary sponsor of the bill, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gibbs), for his great cooperation on this. Let
me say that it was a pleasure doing it, and I associate myself with his
remarks. It is very bipartisan and something that we all agree on that
needs to happen for the people of this Nation to finally reach a
bipartisan agreement on this
[[Page H10290]]
very important issue after more than 4 years.
This legislation codified the concept from the Obama administration
known as integrated planning that can assist communities in meeting
their requirements under the Clean Water Act, while maintaining their
obligation to achieve improvements in local water quality.
EPA's integrated planning framework provides communities with a
voluntary opportunity to prioritize local clean water investments with
the greatest benefit to human health and the environment. This is
incredibly important to communities in my congressional district, as
well as many others, as they meet the challenges of the Los Angeles
County MS4 stormwater permit, and also across the Nation.
To be clear, the integrated planning is not about diminishing
communities' existing obligations under the Clean Water Act; rather, it
provides an opportunity for communities to work with Federal and State
regulators to optimize their clean water infrastructure investments.
The sad reality is that, until the Federal Government increases its
investment under the Clean Water Act, communities will still struggle
with affordability challenges. We can and must do better.
First, we need to reauthorize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund,
known as SRF, and I am hopeful that this is one of the first things we
will accomplish next year on, again, a very bipartisan basis. We passed
similar reauthorization of the drinking water program by voice vote in
September. Now is the time for a similar effort to protect local water
quality.
Second, we need to address the cost of water and sewer services to
these households with the least ability to pay. No hardworking American
family should be forced to go without water and wastewater services
simply because their local rates are too high. Clean water is a basic
human right.
Yes, utilities should be able to recover the costs necessary to
upgrade their local systems, but when those costs disproportionately
affect individual households, we can and must do much more to help
struggling families afford these basic services.
That will be another issue I hope this next Congress will address in
the coming year: protecting our Nation's clean water and making it
affordable for all American families.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta).
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Ohio,
for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7279, the Water
Infrastructure Improvement Act.
Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have worked on legislation to
give our Nation's communities more flexibility to comply with costly
regulations in regards to their wastewater infrastructure improvements.
In each Congress since 2008, I have introduced legislation that
addresses these issues and provides relief to our local communities.
I have heard from many villages, towns, and cities across my district
over the years that struggle to meet wastewater and stormwater
improvement demands. This legislation is a key step to build on the
work I have previously done to provide relief to our constituents by
allowing them to more effectively and efficiently meet their specific
water needs.
{time} 1615
There are billions of dollars worth of water, wastewater, and
stormwater infrastructure needs in the State of Ohio. It is critical to
provide communities with the ability to meet their obligations in a
more cost-effective manner.
This legislation will codify the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Integrated Planning Framework and provide additional tools and
flexibility for communities to comply with mandated wastewater
infrastructure improvement projects.
This is important because it allows municipalities and clean water
utilities to decide how best to spend their limited resources.
Integrated planning allows communities to allocate funds in a targeted
manner, allowing them to focus on the most effective water quality
improvements.
Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank my colleague Representative
Gibbs, as well as Representatives Chabot, Napolitano, Fudge, and Bustos
for working together to get this bipartisan piece of legislation
passed. I will continue to work with my colleagues in both chambers to
ensure that this bipartisan bill reaches the President's desk in order
to help improve our Nation's water infrastructure and protect the
ratepayers.
I urge all my colleagues to support this measure, and, again, I thank
my colleague for introducing the legislation.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in very strong support of H.R.
7279, the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act.
I want to thank Congressman Gibbs as well as Congressman Latta, who
just spoke previously, Congresswoman Fudge, and a number of others with
whom we have been working, literally for years now, to move forward
integrated planning and provide more flexibility for local communities
to meet clean water standards.
The legislation that we are working on and that we have been involved
in here, I think, is critical for communities like mine--Cincinnati,
Hamilton County--and communities all over the country.
I want to say a special thanks to Hamilton County Commissioner Todd
Portune, who is a Democrat, and County Commissioner Chris Monzel, who
is a Republican, in my district. We have been working in a bipartisan
manner on this for quite some time now. Commissioner Portune brought
this to my attention a number of years ago as Hamilton County dealt
with the EPA consent decree that they had entered into many years ago
that has literally crippled the sewer system and has caused dramatic
price increases for the ratepayers, hundreds of thousands of whom are
my constituents.
Commissioner Portune helped to craft the early versions of this
legislation, and he and Commissioner Monzel have continued to fight to
push this legislation across the finish line.
Oftentimes, when I see Todd Portune back in my area, he will bring
this up to me and encourage me. We have been in this together for a
long time now, and Commissioner Monzel as well. I, again, especially
want to thank Congressman Gibbs for pushing this for many years now. I
am so glad that we are actually finally getting there.
The legislation that we are considering today will authorize the EPA
to work with local communities on integrated clean water plans that
incorporate flexibility and innovative approaches. It will also allow
integrated plans to be used to modify administrative orders or consent
decrees, and it will allow compliance schedules that are longer than
the current permit periods, if the jurisdiction meets its State water
quality standards.
That is the important thing. We want more flexibility to give local
communities the ability to deal with their problems in a way that makes
sense in that community. The problems that New York City has are very
different from what a rural Mississippi district or my district,
Cincinnati, would have. They are all a bit different.
What we are saying is that you still have to meet those high
standards that the EPA sets for clean water. We want our people to
drink clean water, but we should give those different communities more
flexibility so that they can do what makes sense in their particular
community and then save the ratepayers their hard-earned tax dollars.
That is what this is all about, maintaining the high standards that
we have, but doing it in a way that allows for more flexibility; the
local communities can act according to what is in their best interest.
Together, these commonsense proposals represent a critical first step
in addressing this issue as we continue to work on further financial
capability guidance so that communities can meet clean water standards
in a fiscally responsible manner.
I, again, want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their
leadership on this and for moving this bill
[[Page H10291]]
forward. I thank all of the Members who have played a part in this
process. It has been a long time coming. A lot of people have worked
very hard on this, and I just want to thank all of those who have done
this in a bipartisan manner. I would love to see this House work this
way even more. We will see.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, first of all, our respective staffs for
working together on this. They did a great job, and they did an awful
lot of work on it.
Mr. Chabot is right; it has been a long time coming. I have been on
the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment more than 20 years,
and this is something that came up over 10 years ago that EPA was
forcing California restrictions. And California has the strictest rules
on air and water.
So this is really an efficient way of being able to help California
and other States deal with it.
This bill before us is a very good first step toward ensuring the
protection of our Nation's rivers, lakes, and streams and deserves our
very strong support.
We have worked with cities, mayors, water agencies, sanitation
districts, environmental groups, as well as our colleagues on the other
side on this legislation. We are aware of no opposition--none--to this
bill.
We thank all stakeholders for their input and support throughout this
process.
However, it is my hope that early in the next Congress we can return
to the House floor with similar bipartisan legislation to address the
funding needs and affordability concerns we discussed earlier. Only
then can we say we have delivered on our responsibility to provide
clean, safe, and affordable water to all American families, including
Native Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to, again, thank my colleague from California, Mrs.
Napolitano, for all her help on the other side of the aisle to make
this a very bipartisan bill. It is a very commonsense bill.
The key to this that I think needs to be mentioned and emphasized is
it gives our local communities flexibility and also encourages all
levels of government to work together--the Federal EPA, the State EPA,
and the local municipalities--to solve the problems they have at the
ground level.
Also in this bill, there is a provision that requires that the new
position, the EPA ombudsman, in at least 2 years report back to
Congress, the T&I Committee, about what happened with the integrated
planning, the specific projects, and review that and see if it needs to
be tweaked or not. We will see how it works.
It is very important, working together. You see communities that have
been under court orders, court decrees, and they can't get to where
they need to get to, and this bill gives them that flexibility and that
common sense.
Everybody wants to do the right thing, and this will help them do
that and to be working with the EPA in a partnership.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R.
7279, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gibbs) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 7279.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
____________________