[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 15, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H2759-H2761]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OCEAN POLLUTION REDUCTION ACT II
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 587) to modify permitting requirements with respect to the
discharge of any pollutant from the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment
Plant in certain circumstances, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 587
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 ``Ocean Pollution Reduction
Act II''.
SEC. 2. SAN DIEGO POINT LOMA PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any provision of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.),
the Administrator may issue a permit under section 402 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) for a
discharge from the Point Loma Plant into marine waters that
requires compliance with the requirements described in
subsection (b).
(b) Conditions.--A permit issued under this section shall
require--
(1) maintenance of the currently designed deep ocean
outfall from the Point Loma Plant with a discharge depth of
not less than 300 feet and distance from the shore of not
less than 4 miles;
(2) as applicable to the term of the permit, discharge of
not more than 12,000 metric tons of total suspended solids
per year commencing on the date of enactment of this section,
not more than 11,500 metric tons of total suspended solids
per year commencing on December 31, 2025, and not more than
9,942 metric tons of total suspended solids per year
commencing on December 31, 2027;
(3) discharge of not more than 60 milligrams per liter of
total suspended solids, calculated as a 30-day average;
(4) removal of not less than 80 percent of total suspended
solids on a monthly average and not less than 58 percent of
biochemical oxygen demand on an annual average, taking into
account removal occurring at all treatment processes for
wastewater upstream from and at the Point Loma Plant;
(5) attainment of all other effluent limitations of
secondary treatment as determined by the Administrator
pursuant to section 304(d)(1) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1314(d)(1)), other than any
requirements otherwise applicable to the discharge of
biochemical oxygen demand and total suspended solids;
(6) compliance with the requirements applicable to Federal
issuance of a permit under section 402 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, including State concurrence consistent
with section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1341) and ocean discharge criteria evaluation
pursuant to section 403 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1343);
(7) implementation of the pretreatment program requirements
of paragraphs (5) and (6) of section 301(h) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311(h)) in addition
to the requirements of section 402(b)(8) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 1342(b)(8));
(8) that the applicant provide 10 consecutive years of
ocean monitoring data and analysis for the period immediately
preceding the date of each application for a permit under
this section sufficient to demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the Administrator that the discharge of pollutants pursuant
to a permit issued under this section will meet the
requirements of section 301(h)(2) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311(h)(2)) and that the
applicant has established and will maintain throughout the
permit term an ocean monitoring program that meets or exceeds
the requirements of section 301(h)(3) of such Act (33 U.S.C.
1311(h)(3)); and
(9) to the extent potable reuse is permitted by Federal and
State regulatory agencies,
[[Page H2760]]
that the applicant demonstrate that at least 83,000,000
gallons per day on an annual average of water suitable for
potable reuse will be produced by December 31, 2035, taking
into account production of water suitable for potable reuse
occurring at all treatment processes for wastewater upstream
from and at the Point Loma Plant.
(c) Milestones.--The Administrator shall determine
development milestones necessary to ensure compliance with
this section and include such milestones as conditions in
each permit issued under this section before December 31,
2035.
(d) Secondary Treatment.--Nothing in this section prevents
the applicant from alternatively submitting an application
for the Point Loma Plant that complies with secondary
treatment pursuant to section 301(b)(1)(B) and section 402 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1311(b)(1)(B); 33 U.S.C. 1342).
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Biochemical oxygen demand.--The term ``biochemical
oxygen demand'' means biological oxygen demand, as such term
is used in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
(3) Point loma plant.--The term ``Point Loma Plant'' means
the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant owned by the City
of San Diego on the date of enactment of this Act.
(4) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of
California.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Rouzer) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.
General Leave
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on H.R. 587.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia?
There was no objection.
{time} 1245
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the city of San
Diego in support of H.R. 587.
The City of San Diego,
San Diego, CA, June 14, 2021.
Hon. Scott Peters,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Peters: On behalf of the City of San
Diego, I am writing to you in support of the Ocean Pollution
Reduction Act II (OPRA II) H.R. 587.
OPRA II is the product of a decades-long regional
collaboration and will deploy advanced technology to purify
recycled water. Additionally, this legislation is critical to
implementing the comprehensive Pure Water San Diego program,
which will provide a reliable, sustainable source of drinking
water while simultaneously reducing treated discharge to the
ocean by nearly 50 percent. This bill delivers certainty and
provides a more streamlined process to comply with
regulations, provided the City meets stringent water
recycling milestones.
Under OPRA II, the City of San Diego must demonstrate that
its Pure Water program is able to produce 83 million gallons
of water a day, nearly one-half of the City's water supply
demand by 2036. Over the same period, the program is expected
to reduce treated discharge from the Point Loma Wastewater
Treatment Plant, which will be continuously monitored and
subjected to ongoing research efforts by academic, local,
state, and national entities.
The City of San Diego is grateful for your leadership on
this important legislative effort.
Sincerely,
Todd Gloria,
Mayor,
City of San Diego.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 587. The
legislation, introduced by Representative Scott Peters, clarifies that
the city of San Diego, California, can utilize the standard Clean Water
Act National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit process to
continue operation of the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant with
alternative standards.
The legislation, which provides regulatory accountability and
consistency to the city, has the support of surrounding localities,
local public works departments and water districts, as well as local
nongovernmental and environmental organizations.
Currently, the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant applies for and
receives a waiver under the Clean Water Act to discharge wastewater
with less than full secondary treatment, the baseline requirement of
the Clean Water Act. The facility qualifies for the waiver by meeting
certain criteria and must renew its application every 5 years.
As part of a long-term effort, the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment
Plant is working to reduce its discharges to coastal waters. This
effort involves water recycling and will redirect a portion of the
facility's discharge. However, the facility's discharges to coastal
waters will never be eliminated.
To be clear, this legislation is not a waiver of all the requirements
of the Clean Water Act, and the facility will need to comply with the
other requirements of the act.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 587, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROUZER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, H.R. 587, introduced by Congressman Peters from
California and others from his home State, is a bipartisan bill that
aims to make permanent a regulatory exemption under the Clean Water
Act. This exemption allows certain wastewater treatment facilities
seeking to discharge to the ocean to apply for permit modifications
that offer alternatives to the Clean Water Act's secondary treatment
standards.
These alternative standards must be met every 5 years during the
normal permit renewal period. This permit renewal process is lengthy,
complex, and costly.
The city of San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant has
been operating under this regulatory exemption for well over two
decades.
The objectives of this bill are worthy and a win-win for the city and
the environment.
Madam Speaker, the bill will help ensure that San Diego has long-term
certainty for its water supply and will save the city millions of
dollars and protect regional ratepayers from billions in new costs by
providing this regulatory certainty while preserving applicable
standards.
Madam Speaker, I support this legislation, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
Mr. PETERS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I introduced the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act II, or
OPRA II, for three reasons: one, to ensure that the Point Loma
Wastewater Treatment Plant's waiver process is fair and efficient; two,
to further reduce the facility's pollution output to the ocean; and
three, to increase our region's freshwater supply.
The city's proposed wastewater recycling plan, the Pure Water
Program, will guarantee the region's water security and further reduce
the amount of wastewater that flows into the ocean from the plant.
OPRA II requires that the city of San Diego demonstrate that the Pure
Water Program can produce 83 million gallons of freshwater a day by
2036. This is an estimated one-third of the entire city's drinking
water needs. Over the same period, the program is expected to reduce
treated wastewater flows from the Point Loma plant by over 100 million
gallons.
This bill replaces the complex and expensive secondary treatment
waiver application with a simpler process, as long as the city meets
stringent water recycling milestones.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. ROUZER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, H.R. 587 would support the water recycling and
conservation efforts of the city of San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater
Treatment Plant by making permanent its longstanding regulatory
exemption under the Clean Water Act.
Madam Speaker, this is a good bill, and I urge support of this
bipartisan legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H2761]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 587.
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. PERRY. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this motion
are postponed.
____________________